The Third Dukes

NOTE: This may belong in the main entertainment forum at the discretion of the moderators.

Am I the only one who thinks Brandon Flowers isn't worthy of tying Brian Wilson's bootstraps? C'mon! Wilson and the Beach Boys are LEGENDS! I dare you to listen to stuff like "Surfin USA" and "Good Vibrations" and not instantly like it. Somebody told me You had an ego Bigger than my ego That I had in Febru- Ary of last year You have no potential And now confidential- Ly we all wish you'd shut up and shut up and...

From South Park: "Now now, the Canadian government has apologized for Bryan Adams on a number of occasions." And of course, the string of expletives Cartman reels off right at the end, finishing with the ultimate foul word -- "BARBRA STREISAND!"

Admittedly, I didn't see this match, but I'm sure those who did will tell me if I'm right here. The results just looked VERY strange. Here's the byline: 29th -- yellow card, Spahic 38th -- GOAL, Misimovic, and Bosnia leads 1-0 on the road They then hold this lead for most of the game, seemingly playing the pack-in strategy, when either things get chippy or the ref gets pressured. (Stephen Bennett, before you ask. English? Welsh?) 75th -- yellow card, Damjanovic 81st -- yellow card, Baljic 81st -- yellow card, Grlic 86th -- yellow cards, Halilovic and Albelda (one per team) 87th -- second yellow -> red, Halilovic 90th -- two yellows -> red, Beslija 90th -- GOAL, Marchena, and Spain needs injury time to secure a draw against a 9-man side at home, 1-1. Now, like I said, I didn't watch the game, but I did find it amusing that as the game wound down and it looked like Spain would choke, the referee started booking Bosnian players left and right. Was it for delay of game? I'm willing to accept Halilovic got into it and deserved to be sent off, but Beslija seems like a bit much. Either way, it's amazing to see a group of high-level professionals in Europe implode like that within 15 minutes, picking up SEVEN CARDS at the end of the game. Comments?

"Witness for the Prosecution". Go rent it sometime. I guarantee you that you'll never see the ending coming. I can't even explain it in one line. But it's brilliant.

Okay, gonna rant here, and if my point sounds stupid, just chalk it up to being an American... So I'm flipping through the Yahoo! FIFA World Cup page, and I come across the scoreline of Poland 8-0 Azerbaijan. This strikes me as a little excessive, but then I remember it's hardly out of the ordinary -- the 2002 cup featured 16-0, 19-0, 22-0, and 31-0 shutouts at times, and the finals had Germany trounce Saudi Arabia by the 8-0 result. My question is: why? When the US opened against Grenada at home, they waltzed to a 3-0 victory. I saw the game, and I remember thinking that USA were toying with their opposition -- playing keepaway most of the time, even though it was a two-legged, TOTAL GOALS result. But then it hit me: USA were the superior side, and as such, they didn't need to win by more. What's the point of a blowout if your only reward is... well, if there is no bonus? Compare to Mexico, who blasted Dominica 10-0 "away" (Dominica moved the game to Dallas for more money) and 8-1 at home. Or vice-versa. It all runs together. The point is, Mexico kept right on firing throughout the entire first leg AND the entire second leg. After you're up 12-0 on aggregate, what's the damn point? They're not making a comeback, and if they start putting in a goal or two, you can turn on the style and shut them down again. 18-1 scorelines (even if over two legs) just shouldn't happen. Now, in home-and-home play, it's mildly excuseable, since goals matter. But in group play, it's pretty bad form. (Sidenote: yes, the US posted a 6-0 home win over Panama, and no, I wasn't too happy we didn't stop at 3-0. But after 4-0, I took a more pragmatic approach, and I'll tell you about it later.) What's your reward for winning a game 3-0? Three points. How about if you win 7-0? Still three points. So why run the score up if you gain almost nothing (and lose face) through doing so? I'd rather be a good sport about it. There are two exceptions to this: 1. The goalscorer is a little-used sub. 2. The goalscorer completes his hat-trick. I would never deny anyone the chance to say they got the trifecta in international play; that's the biggest reward a footballer can have. So when the US went up 4-0, I begrudgingly accepted the fifth goal as it completed Eddie Johnson's hat-trick. (The sixth was an own goal; that's their own damn fault. ) But with, say, Poland, the game was over after it became 4-0 at the hour mark. Frankowski then completes his hat-trick to make it 5-0, and the scoreline should stay that way. Poland gains nothing by humiliating Azerbaijan, a team dead to rights in the group. In summary, it's easy to tell when the game is flat-out over and one team is just playing for pride. When you see your opponents have been beaten mentally as well as physically, is it really sporting to twist the knife? Can't you just pass the ball around and let them leave with a scoreline that, while not indicative of your dominance, gives the away side some dignity?

I tried to enter and got told the EWB password is incorrect. Was it changed? EDIT: nevermind. Stupid case-sensitivity...

Artist/band: Elvis Presley Are you male or female: Daddy Don't Cry Describe yourself: Ain't Nothin' But a Hound Dog How do some people feel about you: Suspicious Minds Describe your ex girlfriend/boyfriend: Hard-Headed Woman Describe your current girlfriend/boyfriend: Little Sister Describe where you are: Heartbreak Hotel Describe where you want to be: Crying in the Chapel Describe what you want to be: The Devil in Disguise Describe how you live: It's Now or Never Describe how you love: Teddy Bear Share a few words of wisdom: Now and Then, There's a Fool Such as I

Interesting you mention the staring contest. Now I think I understand the inspiration behind one of the funnier gags Conan O'Brien and Andy Richter had back in the day. Thanks.

To be honest, I always had a sort of bizarre feeling about the guy, in that he seemed full of himself when I read his stuff (mainly the stuff he did for ESPN). But he was also a breath of fresh air, in that very few people had the guts to call things only as they saw them. I try to do the same... I fail, but I try. We'll miss ya, Rube. Thanks for the memories.

I said Tampa Bay will go because it was only with the Cup run that anyone there gave a damn. Florida has four major sports, but they're pro football, college football, high school football, and celebrity watching. This helps the Heat (Shaq) and the Magic (Francis/Hill combo), but hockey and baseball have NEVER been viable in the Sunshine State. Might as well do away with them.

If this should go in the other thread, mods may move it, but I figured it was different enough. I'd be interested in hearing your thoughts.

As far as other letters, "B" may not have the depth of others, but with the Beatles and Beach Boys... man, that's like the Ruth-Gehrig of bands in this game. Food for thought.

For sale: Vintage Italian guns. Never fired. Dropped twice. Happy now?

Buffalo/Giants - Super Bowl XXV. No turnovers all game, the Bills an unstoppable team, but Parcells holds the ball for 40 minutes and neutralizes them. And Scott Norwood having to make the toughest kick of his life. Such a great game, it spawned a U2 music video (albeit 11 years later). ManU/Leverkusen - CL Semifinal, second leg. CLEARED OFF THE LINE! CLEARED OFF THE LINE! Unbelievable last few minutes as you just waited and waited for the Man U to sneak through until the final whistle. USA/Mexico - WC 2002, playoff. And if you don't care, I'm sorry. This was the game that made my British football friends sit up and take notice that the USA were actually, y'know, pretty good. St.Louis/New England - Super Bowl XXXVI. Just the perfect comeback from the horrors of 9/11, with a team named the Patriots displaying selflessness and heart to overcome the odds and win at the last second. You couldn't have scripted this. And yes, I'm overreacting. Duke/Kentucky - 1992 NCAA Tournament, quarterfinals. Considered the best game in NCAA Tournament history by many. Laettner goes for 30 points and misses 0 shots all night in a 104-103 game decided on a full-court play and buzzer-beater. Sent Duke to its second straight national title and kept Pitino off the winner's stand for another four years. So many lead changes, so many key shots... just crazy.

Landon Donovan's goal vs. Mexico in WC02. The exclamation point that signalled the USA had made it to the upper group of nations. It was the capper of a 2-0 victory that sent us to the quarters, our best result in forever. Not so much the goal itself as the sheer euphoria over what it meant for US soccer. I watched it live (at like 4:30 AM!) and loved it.

Shut up, English whingers. You wanna talk about getting screwed? There is only one ultimate example of it. Jester called it -- 1972, USA v USSR. Now, since just about everyone here (myself included) hadn't been BORN yet, let me call up this book called the Sports Hall of Shame and paraphrase their explanation. Okay, so it's USA down 49-48 to the USSR with time running out. There's a loose ball at midcourt, and Doug Collins gets it, ready to go untouched for the winning hoop. Only he's fouled. No problem; the refs call it. He makes both shots, and the US is up 50-49 with :03 to play. Which is where the trouble starts. The Soviets try the full-court pass, but it's deflected out of bounds with 1 second left, and fans storm the court, thinking they've witnessed an instant classic. Meanwhile, the USSR coaches are demanding a timeout, and the Brazilian referees are trying to clear the court. Enter the president of FIBA, who is most definitely not an Olympic official. He orders the referees to grant the Soviets their timeout. Which they get with 1 second on the clock. No, of course he had no right to do this, but the man was an iron-fisted FIBA ruler, and the referees feared for their jobs. So, one more try, right? Inbounds, last-second shot, off the iron no good and the Americans win. Only here comes the FIBA president again, saying the timeout should have been granted with three seconds on the clock. Again, he is not an official of the Olympics, nor is he wearing the referee's outfit. He's basically nullifying the referee's decision here. So the Soviets will get the ball from their baseline FOR THE THIRD TIME, and with three seconds left. He then talks to the officials about the rules of the game. Now, stop and think for a moment. Can you imagine the uproar if David James or Richard Wright or whoever the English keeper is saved the Cup-winning penalty against Argentina and Sepp Blatter ordered a retake? Twice? That's essentially what happened here. Then what if Blatter called aside Hugh Dallas or K.M. Nielsen and told them what was and wasn't a foul? You'd want Blatter fired -- or shot. Anyway, back to 1972: Tom McMillan goes to defend Ivan Yedeshko's inbound pass the same way anyone does. Only this time, the referee whistles him for delay of game and orders him to back up. When McMillan does, Yedeshko hurls it the length of the court -- well, sort of. See, Yedeshko's foot was on the line, which is a violation that should have been a turnover. The referee is looking right at Yedeshko and "somehow" misses the call. Meanwhile, at the other end, Aleksander Belov is camped in the paint -- wait, that's another violation. See, in international play at the time, the 3-second count started when the ball was given to the player out of bounds. Belov waited for almost 5 seconds and no call was made. So Belov goes up to get the pass, surrounded by Kevin Joyce and James Forbes of Team USA. Belov shoves both men to the ground before going up to get the ball. Again, anyone watching the action at this end -- including the referee -- would have called it a foul. Except the referee didn't call it a foul. (Gee, wonder why.) With no defense, Belov coasted in for a layup to win the game 51-50. The US protested the result of the game, and rightly so. But the five-man IOC Protest Committee denied it 3-2. The three nations voting in favor of the Soviets were Poland, Hungary, and Cuba. The Commies stuck together. The US had to settle for the sliver medal -- but to this day, not one member of that team has claimed his medal. They all feel they did not earn silver; they earned gold. If you read about it and watch it, it's hard to disagree. Top THAT, footy fans.