The Return of Zumoman

Well, the title of the post says a lot - I have returned. From what? Why was I off this week? Well, three philosophy papers and 16 pages of research for history kind of got me bogged down. So bogged down in fact, that I'm now sick. I never know how to feel when this happens. Should I be angry because I finally have some time to relax and I'm now sick or should I be grateful that I didn't get sick while I had to do all of my work? Obviously the latter, but I can't escape a little bit of the anger as well. But fortunately for my readers (or perhaps unfortunately), being sick offers me little to do other than sit at my computer and write blog posts!

First, a little football. The first legs of the round of 16 were played mid-week, and to be honest, nothing really all the unexpected happened. Bayern Munich are virtually already through after clobbering Sporting Lisbon 5-0. The Spanish sides did rather badly (0-1-3). The highlight of those results being Real Madrd's 0-1 defeat to Liverpool - a header from the little Israeli, Yossi Benayoun, in the last 10 minutes giving Liverpool a 1-0 lead to take back to Anfield and a precious away goal. I think the psychological consequences could be even more significantly beneficial to my teams. Madrid have been catching up to Barca in the league - having won their last nine fixtures, and Liverpool have been slipping further back of Man Utd. The confidence boost for Liverpool and the new doubts for Madrid are great.

While I'm on the topic of Liverpool, there's been more good news out of Anfield today. Rick Parry, the chief executive who insists upon being in control of transfers, has announced he will be resigning at the end of the season. Part of the delay in Rafa Benitez signing a new contract has been related to Benitez's desire to be in full control of transfers. Parry's resignation should open the door for Benitez to finally sign the new contract - yay!
I managed to catch that game and the Barca game as my mini-breaks this weeks. Barca looked good up front, but couldn't find more than one goal in what should have been a much higher scoring affair than the 1-1 draw it was with Lyon. Lyon went up 1-0 inside the first ten minutes after Valdes misjudged a free kick from Juninho who I'm convinced wasn't even trying to score. Then Lyon should have been up 2-0 30 seconds later as Benzema was one on one with Valdes. Benzema shot tepidly wide, but Pique almost managed to redirect it into the net - scary moment for the big Spanish defender. Barca grabbed the initiative and were the better side for most of the rest of the game, but could only manage to equalize off a corner - a diving header from Henry after Marquez had deflected the ball across the box. There's an absolutely fantastic picture of the celebration; I encourage you to check it out: http://soccernet.espn.go.com/gallery?id=622233&index=13&cc=5901.

For some non-football stuff... Paul Krugman had a column today that didn't predict the end of the world as we know it - first time in months... The column revealed his support for Obama's budget, explaining how much more transparent it is than Bush's budgets. Of note is also that it looks ahead 10 years instead of 5, addresses global warming, and changes the graduation of the tax system. So, thanks Paul for dispatching with your pessimism. And thanks Obama for beginning to take serious problems seriously.

I'd like to talk a little bit about the United States and its self-perception. For the sake of this discussion I will be using the term "Usamerican" in place of "American." This will hold for future columns as well. When I first heard this term, I was dumbstruck - thinking it another ploy by the rest of the world to take pot-shots at aMERica! The more I thought about it, however, the more I realized how ethnocentric it is for us to call ourselves Americans. Are Brazilians not also Americans? What about Guatemalans? It seems obvious that the term American reflects an ethnocentric sense of self.

As I offer some criticism of the United States again, I hope you will not think me to be "anti-Usamerican." I'm really not. I just find it healthy to point out flaws in our thinking. This one has struck me recently: despite being the world's dominant power for only 65 years (since the end of WWII), we perceive a certain inevitability about it - that it was almost meant to be and will always be! How ludicrous!

In looking at any type of historical analysis, no civilization spends forever as the world's dominant one. If we look at the dominance of "Western" civilization (1500-present), we see that it is characterized by relatively short periods of individual dominant powers. Italy (1500-1600), The Netherlands (1600-1688), Britain (1688-1880), Germany (1880-1945), United States (1945-Present). These are, of course, general outlines, not historical fact, and should be contested if someone feels they misrepresent the history of "Western" hegemons.

The question is why Usamericans, having been the dominant power for at most 65 years, feel this sense of entitlement to it. We deserve it. It is our destiny. These are not only the maxims of the people, but of our government as well - not just the Republican administration that left, but the Democratic administration that came in. Maybe it is a rhetorical vote-grubbing tool, but if there is an element of belief on the part of our current administration that the period of Usamerican hegemony will continue indefinitely, this is highly disconcerting. For it would mean that the administration would do anything in its power to maintain Usamerican hegemony.

As the United States continues to lose power - and it will - the harder the administration attempts to hold on to it, the more violence will be justified in the name of the United States. We cannot allow this to happen. None of the transitions of power on a worldwide scale have ever been peaceful. We must learn from the past and not allow this one to be as violent. If it is, it may well be the end of the world - quite literally.

So of course, I have just criticized Paul Krugman for his pessimism, but I myself have offered a rather pessimistic view of the future of the world. I will say, however, that I do not believe our end to have come just yet. China is not yet ready, and we are still very strong economically and militarily. It will be some time in this century, though, when the shift of power occurs. We must be ready to relinquish it peacefully, not bring the entire world down with us.

Off

Zumoman is off this week.

Sunday Morning Football, Vol. 5

So I’m sitting in my dorm room early on a Sunday afternoon, and, per usual, (except for someone making odd cat noises somewhere in the dorm), following the day’s football action and bringing it to you.

First, the big results from yesterday:

Aston Villa 0 Chelsea 1 - Expected really. The Premier League was always going to sort out with the best teams at the top, and let's be realistic, Chelsea are a better team than Villa.

Arsenal 0 Sunderland 0 - Well, I can't say the same about this result. What has happened to Wenger's side? Eduardo is now back from his long-term absence and Arshavin has fitted in nicely to the side, but a nil-nil home draw against Sunderland! A win from Everton today, and Arsenal will be in danger of falling to sixth. Unthinkable!

Middlesbrough 0 Wigan 0 - Nobody cares.

Man U 2 Blackburn 1 - The only thing significant about this is that Man U lost their clean sheet record. Of course, Vidic's and Edwin van der Sar's are still intact because they weren't on the field when Santa Cruz scored for Blackburn.

Real Madrid 6 Real Betis 1 - They're both royal sides, right? Well, Betis looked more like a mid-table segunda side - at least in the first half. They didn't need to play the second. The game was over, and there were no goals for the last 45 minutes. Yeah, that's right. It was 6-1 at halftime.

Barcelona 1 Espanyol 2 - Despite the fact that Espanyol are in relegation territory, Barca (for the third straight year) failed to win the home fixture of the Barcelona derby match. Cross-town rivals Espanyol proved too much, and it certainly didn't hurt to have Keita sent off in the first half. I haven't seen the tackle yet, but it better have been incredibly flagrant, or the pundits will be screaming injustice once again. The significance: the gap between 1st place Barca and 2nd place Madrid has gone from 12 to 7 points in two weeks. All you people who said the title race was over, think again. Barca need to pick it up NOW, if they want to avoid perhaps the worst collapse in La Liga history.

Sevilla 1 Atlético 0 - Makes me happy. Málaga now have the chance to move into sixth (Europa cup territory), and with Deportivo and Valencia playing the late game today, more points will be lost by their competitors for that place. It is, however, too late for Sevilla to make a title run. They're still 16 points adrift. More than anything else, I think this reveals just how good Madrid are (and I'm no Madrileño). That they have been able to keep pace with Barca is incredible. They don't have the goal difference, but they're getting close and points, and that's what counts. They have a tricky away fixture at Espanyol next week, so let's hope the same Espanyol side that played Barca shows up.

Then this morning's results...

Fulham 2 West Brom 0 - West Brom are going down - definitely. They have been at the bottom of the table for I don't even know how long. I know they're not that far down there, but they're staying there.

Liverpool 1 Man City 1 - I had the pleasure of listening to a streaming radio broadcast of this game. Unfortunately, it was a typically Liverpool experience. They were incredible in the final 15 minutes, equalizing, and then testing Shay Given on a number of occasions. The problem is why they didn't play like this for the first 75 minutes. When they attack, they do it brilliantly. The sense of urgency exhibited by the players is awe-inspiring. That they do not play like this consistently can be attributed to nothing other than the manager's lack of inspiration. He might be the best tactician in the world, but Rafa must get his troops inspired for each and every clash. I don't think he should go, but I think he needs to work on his personnel management.

Finally, for some editorializing:

I can't wait until David Beckham retires. Granted, maybe we'll stop getting the entertaining homo-erotic phone calls between Sven and DAVid on Special 1 TV (I encourage all football fans to check out puppet Jose Mourinho's satires of the footballing world), but then we can get real footballing news instead of some transfer saga about how Beckham might stay at Milan. The only other person who garners this type of media attention is Ronaldo, and he's the best footballer in the world. For someone who might be around the 100th best footballer in the world, the type of media hype Beckham gets is just preposterous.

In an interesting sales pitch from both Hull City and ESPN, ESPN the Magazine has agreed to track Hull City's progress throughout the rest of the season as the try to avoid relegation. After sitting the European places for some time, Hull have been on miserable form lately, having not won in I don't even know how many games. With a number of difficult fixtures left, I would expect them to go down at this point, despite being 6 points or so clear of relegations and sitting in 13th place. Their form of late has just been so bad, and the competition so staunch, that I fear for their fate. That being said, I really wouldn't mind seeing them stay up, especially at the expense of one of the traditional Premier Leaguers like 'boro or Newcastle. I find it interesting that ESPN finds Hull City the team to market to Americans? Granted, we love a great underdog story, but we like underdogs who win, not underdogs who fail. If Hull go down, it’s not like anyone in the US is going to pay attention to them next year. And even if they stay up, the chances are that they’ll go down next season. On the chance that it succeeds in some sense (Americans becoming followers of Hull City), Hull has a vast market to gain. None of the English sides, as of yet, have marketed intensely in this country. And if Hull do manage to make themselves America’s team, it will only serve to increase popularity for football in this country. I couldn’t be upset with that.

Málaga have won. This moves them temporarily up to 5th (a draw for Valencia in the late game against Deportivo would see Valencia reclaim the 5th spot). At worst, however, Málaga will end the weekend in 6th place, with the juices of European football moistening their (and my) lips.

Everton, despite being up a man for the entire second half, failed to capitalize on the opportunity to stuff Newcaslte. They will remain four points off of Arsenal for 5th place.

Until Next week…

Saturday Afternoon Cycling

I write a lot about football, and I was almost tempted to write my Sunday Morning Football column on Saturday afternoon today, as all the week's biggest footballing action from Spain took place today. What I realized was that I would probably just write another football column tomorrow, so I'll save you the trouble of having two football columns to read and instead, write about cycling today.

The Amgen Tour of California (AToC) has been going on for the past week. It's the biggest cycling event in the United States, with many of the world's best riders traveling to (not-so) sunny California. Levi Leipheimer has won back-to-back AToCs and currently leads this year's as well. (In the meantime, he finished 3rd at the Tour de France, 2nd at the Vuelta a España, and won a bronze medal in the Individual Time Trial [ITT] at the Beijing Olympics - not too shabby.) Until the return of Lance Armstrong this year, one could not have questioned Leipheimer's status as the best American cyclist. Armstrong is, however, working as a domestique (an assistant in cycling lingo) for Leipheimer at the AToC this year.

After spending four hours in the library this afternoon, I decided I needed to take a break from work, so upon returning, I went to www.velonews.com (no they're not paying for this advertising) to check out the AToC. The stage was in progress, so I decided to read the live commentary. I must say, it's a heck of a lot better than the football commentary from soccernet.com.

Anyway, it sounds like quite the exciting stage. The first half of the stage was uphill. I group of ten got out in front, including some of the big names: Hincapie, Vande Velde, and Frank Schleck. The stage is currently in its closing stages as the group of ten attack, counter-attack, and counter-counter-attack inside the last 8-10 miles.

I can't understand why cycling isn't more popular in this country. I think the reason is that it doesn't have a lot of complex rules. If we look at "America's game(s)," they all have lots of ridiculous rules. Baseball is just absurd, but its replacement as America's sport, American football, certainly has a great number as well. Perhaps in this country, we just feel the need to make our sports ridiculously complex. The most European sports (football, tennis, and cycling), are all relatively simple games. The "American" sports, baseball, American football, hockey, and basketball, all have a great many rules. (I have, of course, conveniently excluded rugby from the list of European sports to aid my argument that they are usually rather simple.)

The other reason why I think cycling is not more popular here is its "disruption" to everyday life. When a cycling race passes over certain roads, they must be closed for a number of hours that day. Americans are so intent on getting this and that done that we find any inconvenience to be unacceptable. The French, in contrast, love the Tour de France. They beg it to come through their little villages, for it brings with it revenue from fans who stop there to watch the beautiful colors of the peletón streak by at 40km/hr. So what if they can't get to the city's market that day. It can wait until tomorrow. We American don't have that patience.

So I'm done generalizing now. Obviously, I have totally stereotyped the American people and our country's culture. Sorry 'bout that - well, no I'm not. But don't take it as fact. It's not. It's just my overly-critical opinion. Check in tomorrow for Sunday Morning Football. There's already lots to talk about from today.

Thrasymachus, the Tough-Minded Realist

In the 17th century, when philosophy re-emerged as an important field of study in Western society, philosophers looked to Ancient Greece for inspiration. Much of the writings of 17th century philosophy relied heavily on influences of the prolific Greek thinkers, in particular Plato and Aristotle.[1] In looking at the philosophy of Ancient Greece, it is notable that the tough-minded subjectivists, represented throughout the discourse of modern philosophical thought, had no standing in the philosophical community of Ancient Greece. Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle, the three biggest figures, all believed in essences of things and some form of objective Truth.[2] The subjugation of subjectivist thinking to the margins of philosophical thought in Ancient Greece can be seen clearly in the dialogue between Socrates in Thrasymachus regarding justice.

In the conversation between Thrasymachus and Socrates regarding the nature of justice, we see an example of the conflict between a subjective and an objective temperament in looking at the world. Before Thrasymachus enters the conversation, Socrates has successfully convinced Polemarchus (and the others in attendance) that Polmarchus’s definition of justice, “[giving] to each what is owed to him,”[3] is flawed. Thrasymachus is angered by the discussion between Socrates and Polemarchus, for he believes that Socrates has used his traditional rhetorical genius to twist the arguments of Polemarchus, without attempting to answer himself.[4] Due to his dissatisfaction with the previous discussion, Thrasymachus proposes a new definition: “I say justice is nothing other than what is advantageous for the stronger.”[5] Thrasymachus’s general argument here is that justice is a volatile idea; it is ever-changing. He believes that to say there exists some pre-ordained ideal of justice is completely ludicrous. Rather, he believes that those people in power consistently change our ideas about justice to fit their needs.

In the ensuing dialogue, Socrates directs the conversation away from the main focus of Thrasymachus’s argument, thereby not confronting it directly. Instead of choosing to argue with the idea that justice is different in different places, Socrates instead chooses to question whether or not rulers know what is in their best interests.[6] There are two ways of looking at this digression from the serious question at hand. The first is that Socrates simply doesn’t realize the big picture of the topic. I find this unlikely. Socrates wasn’t an unintelligent guy. But if he did grasp the larger picture, it must mean that he intentionally drifted away from this topic. Socrates is then using the same technique for which he criticized the sophists in The Apology![7] Since Socrates’ argument against Thrasymachus’s original claim leaves much to be desired, we must examine for ourselves whether or not his claim that justice is subjective is valid.

If justice were universal, as Socrates seems to think[8], it would remain the same throughout time and space, and so we would have similar concepts of justice today as we did hundreds of years ago. Additionally, we would have the concepts of justice in the United States that exist in the rest of the world. It does not require an in-depth analysis to see that this is clearly not the case. For example, let us take the United States of 1787 and the United States of today. In 1787, an American of African descent constituted 3/5 of a person. Today that same person counts as one American. At that time, women were not allowed to vote. Now if one suggested that women should not have the right to vote, he would be decried in the name of justice. But let us also take a contemporary example. Suppose we say that the concept of justice changes with time, but that at any given time, there is a particular idea of justice that obtains universally. Yet in Pakistan today, the government allows a specific treatment of women which would be found totally unacceptable in the United States. Pakistani men, after divorcing their wives, return to the home of their former wives and throw hydrochloric or sulfuric acid on their ex-wives’ faces to make them so undesirable that they will never be able to remarry.[9] When we read this, we are struck by the severe sense of injustice about it. These women have done nothing wrong (in most cases) yet are punished mercilessly by their former husbands. Yet many Pakistanis do not see this as some glaring injustice. Clearly then, we see that Thrasymachus’s ideas about the dependence of justice on the views of those in power (men have more power than women in Pakistani culture) have significant validity when applied to the real world.

We see, then, that despite the potential validity of Thrasymachus’s argument, Socrates does not take him seriously, thereby relegating his subjectivist opinions to the margins of philosophical thought. Socrates is able to convince others that Thrasymachus is wrong simply by confusing Thrasymachus with his rhetorical tricks. What is missing is a serious dialogue about the validity of subjectivism. That Plato, through the voice of Socrates, entirely ignores this point of view, as represented by Thrasymachus, reveals a glaring weakness in his philosophical approach.

[1] René Descartes, The Discourse on Method and Related Writings, trans. By Desmond M. Clarke, (London: Penguin, 2003), xv.
[2] Marvin Perry, An Intellectual History of Modern Europe, (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1992), 15-18.
[3] Plato, The Republic, 331e.
[4] Ibid, 336b – 336e.
[5] Ibid, 338c.
[6] Ibid, 339c-339e.
[7] Plato, The Apology, 21b – 22a.
[8] Reference earlier citation.
[9] Nicholas Kristoff, “Terrorism That’s Personal,” The New York Times, November 30, 2008, sec. WK.

Birthday Bemusement

So, as many of you know, yesterday was my birthday. I thought I'd take a blog post and reflect on some of the interesting tidbits from the day. Please feel free to stop reading whenever you get bored.

First of all, I will say that I sincerely appreciated the birthday wishes from everyone. It was nice to be able to check facebook every 30 minutes and have had someone new (or several new people) post on my wall. It made me feel loved, so well done friends! To those of you who didn't write me a lovely birthday note, what the hell is wrong with you?!!!! No, I'm just kidding. It becomes so overwhelming I don't even remember who said "happy birthday" and who didn't. (Don't let that deter you from posting next year, however.)

The highlight of my day was definitely the (assumed) senility of my grandmother. In the morning, after breakfast, I checked my mail and I had a birthday card from her. I opened it, and lucky me, it contained money! Then later on in the day, I had another card from her, and lo and behold, it also contained money! As it turned out, she just didn't want to send all the money in one card in case it got lost or stolen or something, but I just assumed she forget she had sent the first one, so sent a second one. It brought some amusement thinking about that.

Some people are very critical of celebrating birthdays. Why should you celebrate something you don't have any sense of accomplishment about? I sometimes float towards that way of thinking, but when it's my birthday, I always think about how nice it is to feel special for a day. And it really is. Why shouldn't we be allowed one day per year to celebrate ourselves? It was lovely walking around campus and hearing "happy birthdays" from everyone.

And today, I got another treat because it is RA appreciation day, meaning I get to celebrate myself twice in two days!

And because it's me, I find it difficult to post without a little bit of football news. So the surprise of the day (no, not that Man U kept their 9th? consecutive clean sheet against Fulham) was that Deportivo lost 0-3 at AaB Aalborg from Denmark in the first leg of their UEFA Cup tie. Quite shocking really, given Deportivo's form in La Liga. The Scandanavian teams do have a history of performing surprsingly well in European competition. I seem to remember Norweigian side Rosenborg getting two results against Chelsea last year in the group stages of the Champion's League, but my memory could be misserving me.

Public Affairs Symposium

As much of my readership is no doubt already aware, I have spent a great deal of time over the past semester planning for Public Affairs Symposium. After our first two events have come and gone, I thought it a good idea to reflect some on what has been said so far.

I had the honor of being introduced by President Durden on Sunday night. That was a truly wonderful experience for me. To be introduced by someone one looks up to so much is an absolutely beath-taking experience. It was a further honor to be given the opportunity to introduce the guests for the evening, Danny Glover and Felix Justice. Both provided what I would characterize as wonderful and enlightening performances. Felix's recitation of a Martin Luther King, Jr., (notice the correct punctuation) speech sent chills down my spine at points. It was absolutely inspirational. Glover's sketech about Langston Hughes was equally insightful and interesting, yet I think the fact that MLK is more widely reknowned provided Justice with more easily inspiring material. Both were, however, fantastic, and the question and answer session revealed their intelligence in addition to the acting abilities.

Perhaps because it is more recent, or perhaps because the global consequences were even greater, the content of tonight's lecture from Immaculeé Ilibagiza provided even greater opportunity for inspiration. To say that she didn't disappoint is the understatement of the century (it'd be a bit like saying the stock market had an off year). Many devoutly religious figures have an heir of "I know better than you," but Miss Ilibagiza had a clear understanding the the road to spiritual sanctitude is an individual one, not one communicated didactically. Furthermore her religious espousals contained no necessity for Christendom, but rather, simply peace with God as the paramount aspect. Additionally, there was a young girl in the audience who had been adopted from Liberia, and had apparently been through a similar cirumstance to Miss Ilibagiza. In conversation, Immaculeé went up into the audience to give her a hug - a truly generous gesture coming not from the desire to be well-received but rather from genuine sympathy and love.

There are those few people we meet in our lives who are so at peace with themselves that we can find few ways to disturb them. Perhaps it takes an experience as drastic as Miss Ilibagiza's to make us truly comprehend the beauty of every day. On the other hand, perhaps we can come to appreciate this beauty by learning her story and understanding how little time we truly have.

From a purely self-centered standpoint, I have felt gratified returning to my room each of the past two nights, knowing that I had helped contribute to the planning of two great programs. A thank you to our guests and the rest of the committee is in store. You have all been fantastic! When the events come together as well as they have the past two nights, it is absolutely wonderful to synethesize the ideas of each of the speakers. I hope the rest of the college community has had the same opportunity, as I have, to recognize some of the common themes of incivility and disrespect. When we forget that we are all humans, that is when we allow for disrespect. Thus, my belief in the Electric Chain of Humanity has been validated.

It is my sincere hope that tomorrow night goes well as well. Thanks to everyone who has attended!

Sunday Morning Football, Vol. 4

This has been the most stressful weekend I can remember in a long time, so I don't have much time (lucky you).

I had a serious conflict of interest in one of the La Liga games yesterday. Málaga was playing Valencia. As you know, I've been consistently rooting for Málaga this season. Hoping to be there next year (finishing the application today), I naturally want them to be in the most advanced competition they can. Champion's League is a dream, but the UEFA Cup (Europa Cup now), is a legitimate possibility. Yet two of my biggest fantasy team performers are David's Villa and Silva. Since Silva has come back from injury, he and Villa have formed a prolific partnership up top with some combination of Vicente/Mata/Joaquín/Angulo on the wings. So I was torn between what I was rooting for.

In the end, I probably got almost the worst scenario. Villa did score one, but it would have been better for me if Silva had (fewer other people have Silva), and it wound up in a draw. A draw for Málaga is a good result against one of the higher clubs. Villarreal also got only a draw today vs. Santander (Cazorla scored for my fantasy team - yay!), so Málaga are keeping pace. With the inconsistency of Atletico, and the deterioration in form of Sevilla, Valencia, and Villarreal, it looks like Málaga may have a real shot! How exciting!

The bad news. Barca dropped points for only the fourth time this season - a 2-2 draw against Betis. The odd thing is that, being down 2-1 at halftime, Guardiola decided not to bring on Messi! Excuse me? 1) He's on my fantasy team, too, so he definitely should have been brought on. No wait, that's number 2. Number 1 is - HE'S THE BEST FREAKING PLAYER IN THE WORLD WHEN YOU NEED A GOAL. WHY THE HELL ISN'T HE ON THE PITCH? As it were Eto'o (also on my fantasy team) provided the 2 goals to bring the score level again. A 2-2 draw isn't an awful result against in-form opponents, but with Madrid winning 4-0 today against Gijón, and the gap down to 10 points, some Barca fans may feeling not quite so invincible anymore. A shock to the system at this stage of the game isn't necessarily a bad thing.

And as an "I told you so" for all those people who wondered why on earth Juande Ramos was hired at Madird, they've won 8 in a row, completely distancing themselves in the battle for second (unless it's turning into a battle for first once again). He's a fantastic manager, and now that it has come about his warning of Tottenham's sale of Keane and Berbatov, hopefully he will be recognized as such. Maybe Liverpool could get him... No, I'm still on the Rafa bandwagon.

The most interesting game of the day, however, was by far the Almería - Valladolid encounter. It must have been a pretty physical affair. 11 cards were handed out in total. Valladolid stormed out to early lead, bagging 2 goals inside the first 25 minutes, but they couldn't extend the advantage any more in the first half, and halftime came and went at 2-0. Almería got back in the game shortly after the 60th minute a goal from Crusat, but 2 minutes later, Bruno was sent off for what can only have been a horrendous tackle (straight red card) on Pedro León, scorer of one of Valladolid's goals from a ridiculously far out free kick in the first half. Even being a man down, Almería managed the equalizer six minutes later through Kalu Uche, who just can't stop scoring at the moment. But it was only another 8 minutes after that when Uche himself was sent off for fighting, and Almería were down to 9 men. That wouldn't stop them either! Negredo (damn him - he's on everyone else's fantasy team) scored just one minute after fellow forward Uche's sending off. Not to be totally shown up in the card department, Valladolid left-back Victoriano Nano was sent off for a second bookable offense. Valladolid couldn't press the 10-9 man advantage, however, and the game ended 3-2. I can't wait to read the match report. 3 sendings off! How bizarre!

Until next week...

Stupid English, Vol. 3 - Internet Vernacular

Like many people of my generation, I am a facebook user. Facebook says that it's for "social networking" - whatever that means. I think all that "social networking" is is a nice way of hiding the fact that all facebook really does is act as a tool for procrastination. People sending messages, chatting (the most recent facebook upgrade to make it serve AIM's purpose as well), and going to pages of different groups.

I'm particularly disenchanted with this last practice. People form groups on facebook about the stupidest things. "Join this group because...", "My phone died and I need numbers", "This is a psychology project. Please join!", "1 gazillion strong for ______", etc., etc., etc. So I'm not really in too many groups. There is one, however, which I find immensely important: "Students Against Internet Vernacular."

Not only does SAIV have an appropriate acronym - in reference to our language, it also serves a valuable purpose - providing students who are incredibly put off by the LOLs, OMGs, WTFs, Ks, BRBs, and my personal favorite the ROTFLMAOs, a medium to vent their frustrations. (As an aside, I was once mercilessly made fun of for not knowing what ROTFLMAO stood for. Any idiot knows that it means "Rolling on the floor laughing my ass off." And for my generationally advanced readers, no, this is not a joke. That's actually an internetization which people use.)

So what is my vendetta against internet vernacular? Does this deteriorating diction negatively impact society? Why should any of us be remotely concerned that acronyms are taking over our speech? Well, some people aren't. Some people say "J-K" in everyday conversation. I always prefer, "that was a joke." - it's nice and condescending. So it is a little condescending, but maybe that's the point. These acronyms take any meaning out of the language. When you can type LOL in .4 seconds, you don't have to think about whether or not you're actually laughing out loud. And additionally, because it it's over the internet (or in a text message), the other person will never know!

I see this as part of the political correctness bandwagon that has consumed society and taken any passion out of our language. We can no longer speak passionately about anything for fear of offending someone. We use these internetizations as a way of diluting the language - of hiding our meanings. I think "LOL" really means, "Hah! What a stupid comment, but I'll type 'lol' to be polite so he doesn't suspect that I thought it was a stupid comment." Well, when you type that to me, I'm judging. I'm thinking, "Well, he thinks that my comment was stupid." Either that or "he's so apathetic that he couldn't bother to come up with a further addition to the conversation."

So please, the ideological background for political correctness has gone far enough. Let's not let it dilute our language further through the use of these superficial frivolities. Own your language. Demand precision in your language. Forget LOL and ROTFLMAO. And make your language mean something.

Silly Quote

A colleague of mine has this quote inserted at the bottom of every e-mail she sends:

"Be more concerned with your character than with your reputation. Your character is what you really are while your reputation is merely what others think you are."

Pause... Pause again... Scratch head with puzzled look on face... Mutter, "huh," under breath.

I mean, the idea's great right? You want to develop your character. It's "more important" than your reputation. So, would you like to know my opinion on this? You're still reading... Well, even if you don't want to, too bad. This is philosophically idealistic bull-shit.

First of all, character is totally subjective. Imagine that you think yourself a kind person, but everyone else in the world thinks you're a heartless, miserable bastard. I am reminded of a famous quote by Emerson - one which reveals this mentality's ignorance. "Be it what it may, it is ideal to me, so long as I cannot try the accuracy of my senses." Essentially, as long as I don't look to see if there's any evidence to the contrary, I can believe whatever I like.

Well, let's come down from la-la land and think about the importance of a reputation for a minute. If people believe you to be a certain way, then they are more likely to see your actions in that particular light instead of in some other light. Imagine someone who is known to be a very good musician. He takes some unusual liberties with a piece of music. Instead of saying, "He turned that lovely piece of music into dog-drool!" we might say, "I would never have thought to take those liberties. What an interesting interpretation."

Addtionally, we are not defined solely by who we think we are. Other people's perceptions of us undoubtedly enter into our conception of self. To suggest that we should see a hierarchy here seems naive. Both are important, and both fulfill useful functions. Our sense of character may act as a sense of fulfillment while our reputation may make people think highly of us. Other people thinking highly of us will then influence our sense of self-worth, which will change our character. The two are interrelated.

Uplifting Rain

The grayness permeates everything in February,
Like the smell of curry it remains, ubiquitous,
The depression seeps everywhere,

Into our lives it innocuously arrives,
With the silent power of a cougar,
It strikes to the bone,
Paralyzing every motivation,

Then the rain comes,
Crusading and cleansing,
Ironically offering the world a new light,

Some see rain as halting happiness,
I see rain as vanquishing vapidity,
It cuts through the mist,
To uplift our minds,
And lift up the corners of lips,

A smile now illuminates the world,
Joy is radiant; love lives once more,
And a new day is born,
All through the smell of a February rain.



Please excuse my humble attempt at poetry. It is not a field in which I am well-versed or have any particular talent.

My Masculinity, and Pragmatism in Identity Formation

I frequently reject social constructions of what it means to "be a man." I simply don't like the idea that being a man means going to the gym so you can look like Paul Giamati... I mean Brad Pitt, sorry; displaying as much emotion as Keanu Reeves; and walking around with a sense of self-importance the size of Donald Trump's (it's actually been estimated that his sense of self-worth tops the Empire State Building for tallest facade in New York City). Regardless, I just don't like these generalizations very much.

Yet there is one area in which I consider myself like "most men." This is in my love of sports. I don't love all sports, and I tend to love different ones from the stereotypical men in this country, but I love them nonetheless. Football is clearly at the top, but I also enjoy watching/following cycling, tennis, the olympics, and auto racing - primarily open-wheel (IRL and Formula 1). I also thoroughly enjoy playing competitive sports.

Many psychologists find that men use competition, especially in sports, to attempt to prove how masculine they are, and I must admit that in observing my actions of the past weekend, I, too, have fallen into this category. In our first indoor co-ed intramural football game, we played very well (better than our opponents), but due to some injustices (their last goal went through the side netting) and missed chances (especially on my part), we lost 6-5. I was livid - absolutely livid. Our opponents treated us like shit (trash-talking, and some refusing to shake some of our hands at the end), but I also succumbed to the pettiness of trying to my profusion of testicular fortitude (to put a totally ineloquent concept eloquently - I hope).

I am usually able to keep a pretty good lid on things, but whether due to the inadequacy of my own performance on the field (I did, however, manage a bicycle kick on target) or the great sense of injustice in losing unjustly to classless bastards, I was totally out of control. What I said is irrelevent, although not particularly vulgur for male college standards, but the fact that I descended to this level is significant.

So far, this has probably sounded like an apology of sorts. And while I am sorry for the fact that other people had to put up with my acrimony, I can't call this an apology, for I don't regret my actions. (I see regret as a necessary part of an apology. An apology means, "I regret my actions. I wish I had done 'x.' And I promise to try not to do 'x' again in the future.") So I don't offer an apology in the formal sense of the term. Part of the reason is that there was something strangely liberating about going off on people who deserve it.

Since I have been at Dickinson, I have tried not to offend people. I have tried to build an image. I think I have succeeded in being perceived as an intelligent, caring, respectful person. I promise that this conduct will not enter other aspects of my life, but I think (for now at least) that I will continue to let my passions fly on the competitive sports field. After all, this is the one area afforded men to be emotional in our society. If I reject the notion that men should be afforded exclusively the sports realm for emotional release, but rather should be allowed emotional expressivity in other aspects of life, this should not preclude me from allowing myself to be emotional about sports.

So why have I chosen to share this particular anecdote from my life? Well, in part, it has been on mind a lot because it something so out of the ordinary for me, but additionally, I believe it illuminates something about identity formation in general.

I believe that frequently, when we think about who we are and who we want to be, we find it necessary that there be some congruence between who we are in the various aspects of our life. We say, "I want to be a nice person," and in expressing this desire, "always" is implied, for a nice person isn't nice sometimes, but always. We have the idea that if I am mean today, I cannot be a nice person. I believe this notion not only naive, but also totally unworkable.

William James, one of the foremost scholars of Pragmatism (in the philosophical movement sense of the term), identifies that the pragmatist is willing to take the best of both worlds in order to form a more perfect conception of what is true. When he refers to both worlds, he is referring to the Empiricist and the Rational world. Insofar as the result of believing this or that to be true produces a positive result and is not contradictory to others of our beliefs, any belief is acceptable. (As a note of clarification, this does not allow for an outright rejection of evidence because it does not fit what we believe.)

I see identity formation drawing on the best of a variety of worlds. What can be a positive character trait in one circumstance in one situation can be a negative trait in another situation. Living by some rules-based system of who you should be simply makes no sense, for you cannot possibly account for all the possible scenarios in which it might be beneficial for your identity to be slightly different. Furthermore, the idea that we have some static identity is totally ludicrous. I have taken that as an assumed point of agreement. This way of looking at identity allows me to be shy in some circumstances , outgoing in others, caring in some, emotionally detached in others, embracing of society's norms for men in some, rejecting of society's norms for men in others, etc., etc., etc. And all of these have their benefits.

Our general system of rules which tells us that we must always be nice, or that we must always express similar character traits for fear of betraying ourselves is absurd. We have aphorisms like the golden rule because they provide a general guideline for how it is best to behave in most situations. Rules based systems are generally absurd. Take for example one of the ten commandments, "thou shalt not kill." Now imagine the famous thought experiment in which there is a train car going down a hill and it is headed towards a group of five people who can't get out of the way. You, however, have the opportunity to throw a switch to get the car to go down a different path where there is only one person. You are incapable of throwing the switch because you operate in a rules based system in which saving five people requires the killing of one.

So finally, let me conclude this hulk of a blogpost. I acted irrationally and rudely on Sunday at a sporting competition. This was the result of my embrace of emotion in the sports realm - something that is traditionally valued by society. At the same time, I am rejecting the notion that I have to follow all of society's rules about how men should behave. I have no issues crying at a good movie (I suggest Planet Earth [that was a joke - sorry if you cried during that, mom]). As I explained, the pragmatic approach teaches us that we may accept what is good from some systems while rejecting what we don't like, so long as our acceptances and rejections do not contradict others of our established beliefs. This may seem totological, but it is too often overlooked in modern society.

Sunday Morning Football, Vol. 3

A week of mixed fortunes at Liverpool: It was a week of ups and downs at Liverpool. After beating Chelsea last weekend with two goals from Fernando Torres in the dying minutes, Liverpool succumbed midweek to Everton in the FA Cup. This meant that out of three matches with Everton in the space of two weeks, Liverpool had drawn two and lost one - an absolutely unacceptable result against local rivals. Then this weekend again, it was Fernando Torres the hero, as he came on as a substitute to set up the equalizer and score the winner at Pompey. Draws by Chelsea and Arsenal (Man U. are tied at halftime) have further increased the range at the top of the table.

This emotional roller-coaster of sorts is typical of Liverpool and its romanticization (see earlier post). Last weekend, everyone assumed Liverpool were in it to win the title again after having ruled the Reds out only a week before after a miserable January. Yet midweek, suggestions of Benitez's firing were rampant again after Liverpool stuttered weakly out of the FA Cup. The headline yesterday evening elucidates the mentality at the club now: "Torres Saves Benitez." That a manager could be sacked for finishing second in the league and taking his team to the knockout stages of the Champion's League is absurd, but I suppose we should be used to this insanity. After all, Avram Grant led Chelsea to second in the Carling Cup, Premier League, and Champion's League and was still fired at the end of last season.

Let's hope successive league wins coming late in games will help to jump-start Liverpool into more inspiring results. They must keep winning to make sure that if Man U slip up, they will be there to win the league.

Interesting Tidbits from Today's Action: I've been following soccer online (through ESPNsoccernet.com's gamecast system), and yet I have never seen any possession numbers as lopsided as I am seeing right now. Currently in the Villarreal - Numancia game Villarreal have possessed the ball for a whopping 89% of the game. Any spread beyond 70-30 is extremely rare, and I can never remember seeing anything in the 80s. What is perhaps even more remarkable is the fact that the game is tied at 1. Truly amazing. After Sevilla dropped 3 points yesterday, Villarreal know they must capitalize on this opportunity to pick up points, and anything other than three at home against minnows Numancia would be highly disappointing.

Southewst from there, Málaga are having an interesting time of things. After going down 2-0 to Almeria, they made two substitutions at halftime (bringing on Duda was big), promptly scored 1 goal, picked up 4 yellow cards in 7 seven minutes, and now have scored a second, levelling the score at 2 apiece. I left for a minute and came back and it's now 3-2 Málaga.

Back outside Valencia, Villarreal have made the possession pay off (It's dropped to only 88%). The introduction of Robert Pires and Santi Cazorla spurred on Italian-American Giuseppi Rossi to grab his second of the afternoon. And Numancia have taken off their top scorer... Strange. As an American, it's difficult to like Giuseppi Rossi. He was born in this country to Italian parents. He grew up playing in the youth systems and academies here. Yet he has now declared for Italy. It must be how the Ghanaians fell about Freddie Adu.

In a game that has absolutely no consequences for the top of the table, Espanyol are tied with Getafe at 1. What is of note however, is that Espanyol, already the "dirtiest" team in La Liga, have picked up 3 yellow cards and 1 red so far in the game. The lead the league with 77 discipline points (that's not a good thing - 1 point for a yellow card and 2 for a red). Not wanting to be outdone, holders of second place in the disciplinary competetion Mallorca are trying to keep up. They must have gotten wind of the Espanyol game and decided they too had to have a player sent off. Enrique Corrales has just been sent for an early shower. And they have now picked up their third yellow card as well. I guess those 5 discipline points won't be enough for Espanyol to stretch their lead after all. There must be some correlation between discipline and success because these two teams sit 19th and 20th in the league table.

Málaga, Atletico, and Villarreal all pick up 3 points. That's 8, 7, and 5 in the table respectively. Málaga and Atletico will leapfrog Deportivo who could only muster a draw against bottom dwellers Mallorca. This leaves Málaga in 7th, one spot out of European competition. I'm still dreaming!

Man U did go on to win against West Ham, taking them back to the top of the table over Liverpool. The coming games will be important, as they will reveal whether United will run away with the league or whether it will be close to the end.

Until next week...

New Design

As you most likely noticed, I have redesigned the blog. New color scheme; new font; new sizing. Please let me know what you think. Beteter? Worse? Who gives a shit?

Happy weekend!

Who's the Bigger Ass-Hole, Vol. 3

This week, on "Who's the Bigger Ass-Hole," we'll be exploring some ass-holes from The Office: Dwight Schrute vs. Michael Scott. I know what you're thinking, "Is it really that important to analyze the tendencies towards rectal-opening behavior of two television characters?" Absolutely not, but hell, I'm bored, and you're reading this, so you can't have anything that important to do, so we'll just run with it. If you're really upset, you can blame my father; it was his suggestions (I think a good one, however. [Record it in your diary dad; I said you did something good.])

Michael - he's the boss. That automatically gives him + 17 ass-hole points. After all the stuff was stolen from the office following his carelessness in leaving it unlocked, he held a fundraiser to get people from the office to auction off things they could make to other members of the office. The highlight was supposed to be Bruce Springsteen tickets, but he never actually had them. He thinks he's better than everyone else, despite being an absolute idiot. He's a jerk to Toby, despite the fact that Toby has never done anything to him.

Dwight - He had sex with a woman who was engaged to another man. Then he tricked her into marrying him by hiring a German minister to conduct the services and telling her to say "I do" while he "pretends" to be the groom so that the actual groom can see what it will look like. Additionally, when nobody took his safety presentation seriously, he lit a fire in the office to show them the value in listening safety instructions.

I think the answer to the question of who the bigger ass-hole is is largely dependent on your perceptions of the incident involving Stanley's heart attack. On the one hand, it was directly caused by Dwight because it happened as everyone was trying to get out of the office during his "fire drill." On the other hand, the stress from being around Michael was readily apparent, so could be attributed to the long-term cause. Whoever is more at fault is probably the bigger ass-hole.

Another way of answering would be to think about who you'd rather spend a weekend with. I mean, with Michael, you might die due to his stupidity (or bad taste in music). But with Dwight, he might do something like slashing your tires because he thought it would get your attention. Or he might put a racoon in your car. Or he might have sex with your husband - I mean wife - I mean... well he might have sex with your husband too. Who knows? It's Dwight, right.

So I'll let you decide who the bigger ass-hole is. As Jose Mourinho would say, "Do it to me on the comments." As always, I want you to weigh in. Last week it seems that Ronaldo trumped Robinho in the quest for being the bigger ass-hole. Will it be Diwght or Michael - you tell me.

Stupid English, Vol. 2

In preparation for the Public Affairs Symposium event in ten days when Danny Glover and Felix Justice will play the roles of two important civil rights activists, we, today, looked over the pamphlet describing this event, along with the other two. There was a discrepency over comma placement surrounding the name of the activist portrayed by Felix Justice, Martin Luther King, Jr.

I have, of course, given away part of it already, but I have not yet fully revealed how stupid English can be. Let me first explain the rules of comma placement around the suffix, junior. When adding "Jr." after a person's name, one must place a comma after the last name and before the suffix. Additionally if the sentence continues, a comma is required after the suffix is well. For example, "Martin Luther King, Jr., was an important figure in the civil rights movement." I was actually wrong about this. I thought, and still think, that the comma after Jr. is superfluous. Yet this is the rule, and as such, I will abide by it, for it cannot possibly create any confusion.

There is another rule, similar to this one, which does elucidate the stupidity of English. Imagine if Martin Luther King, Jr., had a son named Martin Luther King III (I know, then Martin Luther King, Jr., would be Martin Luther King II, but bear with me). I have already revealed the conundrum. When the suffix is III or XIII, as in King Henry, a comma is not required before the suffix or after. "King Henry XIII had eight wives," is punctuationally correct. Why? Beats the hell out of me. To anyone who doesn't see an incosistency or wishes to explain the reasoning why would be most welcome.

Also, in case you don't believe me, check out this link:
http://englishplus.com/grammar/00000084.htm

Falling Asleep in Class...

A lot of people find history boring. I'm not one of them. I freaking love the subject. I think it's interesting how vowel sounds changed in England in the 15th century; I think it's interesting how Otto von Bismark unified Germany; I think it's interesting how slavery was racialized in 17th century colonial America; I think it's interesting how Stalin industrialized the USSR; etc. But yet, I must say that today's history class put even me to sleep.

How, you ask, could the historically minded Zumoman be put to sleep by a history class? Well, let me begin by saying that we have class in a relative hole in the wall classroom in the basement of the most uncomfortable academic building on campus. Second, the class is for three hours. Sitting in the same tiny room for three hours with a five minute break in the middle isn't exactly the easiest way to learn. And this is just the everyday session. Even with these conditions, I can usually manage to stay awake, but today was truly special.

Each of us researched a famous historian. We were then to present a brief (5-7 minutes) synopsis of the historian's life and contributions to the field of history. The first one or two were all right. Everyone was still getting settled and such, and so everyone was still awake. Starting with about the third person, you started seeing the head bob with a few people. You know, the head falls slowly forward or to the side, then the person realizes he's asleep and the head pops back up, only to repeat the process in the next 30 seconds.

At about the 5th or 6th person it started to get what I would call pretty bad. One guy just put his head down on the desk, and was out cold. A bunch of people had the head in the palm with the elbow on the desk, and most of the rest of the class had the head bob thing going. But I was still going strong. I had managed to procure a piece of gum from a friend of mine, and was doing everything in my power to chew the living daylights out of the gum to stay awake.

Right before our break, a guy who my friend and I had class with before presented. He's an absolutely brilliant student - maybe the brightest of the students in our class, but his way of presenting is very slow and long-winded. We placed bets on how long he would go. I said about 12; my friend said 15. I started my timer. After about six minutes (he was about at the halfway point) I realized that I was the only one who was actually paying any attention (other than one student who I can only assume must be super-human because he was taking furious notes). There were one or two students who managed to keep their eyes open, but they had the totally blank stare thing going on. It really was incredible. But I had managed for over the first half of class! Five minute break.

I felt like a contestant on "Who Wants to be a Millionaire," at a commercial break, going back to splash some water on my face to "keep it real." I had managed what I thought impossible. There were only 3 presentations left to go. Surely, I had done my part. Only one problem - my gum now tasted like moldy jello; it had to go. A bad choice. I went back into the classroom, and 2 minutes into the first session, I had the head bob going on. 4 minutes in, the had my head on my palm with the elbow on the desk. The eyes really were coming and going. I couldn't hold it. I dozed through two of the presentations.

I offer my apologies to any of you reading this whose presentations I may have dozed through. It really had nothing to do with your presentation and everything to do with my lack of gum. Professor, if you're reading this, which I can't imagine, my apologies. It's not a bad class, it was just a bad class. Sitting through that many presentations on, let's be honest, boring stuff, is just insufferable. I still love history, but we have to find a way to make it more exciting.

A Critique of Truth

The notion that there is some Truth in the world (or represented by this world) has been a long and popularly held belief in Western culture. Dating back to the pre-Socratics, Truth-believers have made up a serious constituency of philosophers. It has been called different things: God, the One, Perfection, the Oversoul, etc. Yet in modern times, this traditional belief has come under serious attack. I hope to lay out some of the criticisms of this belief in an Absolute here.

Of central nature to this belief is the fundamental belief that this Truth exists independent of human experience. It is a priori, so to speak. Our everyday experience, however, easily rejects this notion. Our definitions of things are contingent only upon their use or intended use. Think about a water bottle (one happens to be sitting right next to me, making it a handy example). It is only a water bottle because I use it to store water and to drink water from. If I used it to prop up books (as I do with my other "water bottle") it only continues to be a water bottle insofar as it is intended for the aforementioned purposes. To suggest that there is a perfect idea of a water bottle and that all water bottles obtaining in our world are manifestations of this perfect idea (as was common in Ancient Greek thinking) is utterly absurd.

But what does this suggest about the world as a whole? We could reject the idea of perfect ideas of things and still accept some type of Absolutely Real world, but this is also clumsy. Consider a star of David. As noted American philosopher William James wrote, you can treat it, "as a star, as two big triangles crossing each other, as a hexagon with legs set up on its angles, as six equal triangles hanging together by their tips, etc."(Pragmatism and Humanism in Pragmatism). What it is, then, depends upon our perceptions of it.

Modern relativistic and quantum physics supports this conclusion. Einstein's relativity is classicly illustrated by the example of a person on a train throwing a ball up into the air. To the person on the train, the ball goes straight up and down, but to a person observing the train from afar, the ball appears to have traveled in a perfect parabola. In modern quantum mechanics, the measurement of a particular particle compels it to take a specific form. This is the most extreme example of how our idea of some objective Reality is totally flawed. Nature itself is rejecting the notion. She says, "I will fool you, young ignorant scholar. You think that if you measure me, the Reality of the world will be revealed. Hahaha, how naive! I can prove to you that your measurement of me alters the world, for the result would have been different if you hadn't measured." What is real in this circumstance? Our attempt of understanding Reality is naturally thwarted. We clearly then must reject this dogmatic teaching of an Absolute, of a Reality, of Truth. We have many truths, many realities.

Curious Computer Conundrums

While I was sitting at my computer yesterday morning (typing Sunday Morning Football, Vol. 2), McAfee Security Center kept flashing on my toolbar. When I scrolled over the icon, a little window popped up telling me that my computer wasn't protected. I would then click on the icon to open McAfee. Once I opened McAfee, it would tell me "Your computer is not protected!" Right next to that, there would be a button that said "Fix." Once I clicked the "fix" button, it allegedly fixed the problem and told me that my computer was safe once again.

There was only one problem with this whole system - after about 10 minutes, the toolbar started flashing again, prompting the whole series of actions I had taken before. So, I followed the series of steps again, and, as it turned out, again and again and again. It seemed to be a neverending cycle of fixing my computer. While certainly obnoxious, there is something else curious here.

Why does McAfee prompt me to click a button to fix something, when that is my only option. Why would I not want it fixed. If McAfee knows the problem and the solution, why should I have to tell it to fix the problem. There is most definitely something confusing about that. Fortunately, this perpetual requirement of me to click a button to fix a problem has not persisted into today (knock on wood).

Sunday Morning Football, Vol. 2

Last week I wrote about Bilbao player Aldekoaotalora Ustaritz. He played again this week, but I'll make the focus of this column something more interesting than a funny name - I promise.

Every week, soccernet.com, my site for football news and scores has someone sitting in a room watching one of the games on television typing commentary about what's going on in the game. My question is, why don't they have it for every game. For the rest of the games, they have these automated responses that go something like, "foul by Nicola Zigic (Racing)" or "Gnegneri Yaya Toure (Barcelona) is shown the yellow card." What I can't believe is that there's nobody who would be willing to sit around, watch a football game, and type commentary for it. I would! I'd do it for free. I mean, I've already said I'm going to be sitting here every Sunday morning watching the scores and the little automated blurbs come in. Of course I'd rather be watching the game and typing the commentary myself. I can't believe that with all the technology we have, they can't have someone off-site doing it.

Anyway, this week I'm fortunate enough to have real commentary for the Liverpool-Chelsea game which is coincidentally taking place at the same time as the bulk of the La Liga fixtures this week. The big news out of Liverpool is that Robbie Keane has been left out of the 18 man squad again - the second game in a row - without having been injured. Benitez just isn't playing him, and won't even include him among the substitutes. Any Liverpool fan knows that Keane is better than David Ngog, so this has led to a lot of speculation that Robbie may be on his way back to Tottenham to have a Tottenham-players-who-left-for-half-the-season reunion with Jermaine Defoe and Pascal Chimbonda. Tottenham must have some brilliant financiers. These guys figured out that they could sell a player who was playing brilliantly, get him to suck at his new club, and buy him back for a reduced price. I wouldn't be surprised if they made 5 million pounds off the whole Robbie Keane ordeal. Who would pay 20 million for him now? I wouldn't (not that I have 20 million pounds).

Well, I haven't written about any of the game action going on, and there's a good reason for that - there hasn't been any!!! The 12 teams playing in Spain plus the 2 in England combined for 4 first half goals, all of which came in the first 10 minutes of the half. This means that for the last 35 minutes, I've had nothing whatsoever to write about. Mascherano and Ashley Cole both got booked in the Liverpool - Chelsea game. The only thing miraculous about that is that they both don't get booked in EVERY game. More to come during the second halves...

GOALS!!! After 40 minutes of goalless football in sevevn games, I now have two goals to write about. How exciting! Actually, neither one of the goals was particularly interesting, and there's now a third equally uninteresting goal. One goal apiece now for Atletico Madrid and Valladolid. Barcelona have gone down against Racing 1-0 courtesy of a Nicola Zigic penalty (no, I did not go back to insert his name earlier in this post because he scored now - highly coincidental). Maybe this means Messi will enter the game - he's been sitting on the bench. Maybe Guardiola thought he could get by without him today. As if on cue, Messi has come on for Sergi Busquets.

LAMPARD'S been sent off!!! What a shame. From the commentary it sounds as if it was a bit of an injustice. As far as I'm concerned, there is never any injustice when it comes to Chelsea players being sent off. In most games, they should be finishing the game with 8 or 9 players, but the referees seem to turn a blind eye to their dissent and reckless tackles. Liverpool must take advantage now. They simply can't give up 2 points at home to 10-man Chlesea. Meanwhile, in Spain, Xavi has equalized for Barca within 6 minutes of Messi's entrance. Good idea Guardiola (and me too)!

The footballing world seems to approve of my blog because it has just provided further evidence as to why I should provide commentary for the matches on soccernet.com. Apparently Ikechukwu Uche just assisted his own goal. I'm not sure how that works - did he pass the ball to himself or something. Most likely, an error in the computer program putting up the stilted commentary. In the Depor - Villarreal game, Lafita has scored his second for Depor. He said earlier in the week that Depor had to win to get their season back on track (they've lost the last three, although it must be said they were all against top 6 teams). Let's see if he can get his hat-trick and seal the deal. Should Villarreal lose, they will be able to refocus on the Champion's League. I wouldn't be surprised (or that unhappy) if they won the whole thing.

Uche has scored again (they have now changed the original goal to being assisted by Romanian Cosmin Contra) and Betis have blown another 2 goal lead. Speculation this week was that this could be the end of Paco Chaporro's reign there. It's looking increasinly likely should they lose, and they're down to ten men as well. Ciao Chaporro - at least it's an aliteration. Depor have scored a third, but it's not Lafita. A win will see Depor leapfrog Málaga and into 7th place, 1 point out of the European places. Unless Atletico lose today, but they are tied with Valladolid right now.

Xavi and Xabi Alonso have each hit the woodwork in their respective games. Unfortunate for the X-men and my two favorite teams.

Goal for Messi! Barca now lead 2-1. Messi, el mágico. And perhaps I spoke too soon about Atletico not losing - Valladolid have just gone up 1-0. Another illustration of the incompetency of the Atletico defense. They gave away a penalty in the 78th minute. You just can't do that!

TORRES!!!! Liverpool must win now. Torres has given them the lead with less than 2 minutes left. 5 minutes of stoppage time! Chelsea certainly cannot complain about that. What an absurd number! Anything over 4 is extremely rare.

Back in Santander, Barcelona have won 2-1 but not before their central defensive pairing of Rafa Marquez and Gerard Pique were sent off. Must have made for a nervy final few minutes, and it could create issues next week with both of them suspended, but they've got the points today and that's all that matters for now. But the other half the city isn't doing so well. Espanyol, already in the midst of a miserable season have just blown a 1 goal lead in the dying stages after their keep took out a Huelva player in the box, got sent off, and conceded a penalty. It's a harsh way to lose, but it does seem to encapsulate Espanyol's season at the moment. With Osasuna's win over Mallorca, those three teams (Espanyol, Osasuna, and Mallorca) will all be tied for last on 17 points. The relegation battle in Spain will be an interesting one. Let's see if Liverpool can hold on...

TORRES again! That'll seal the deal. Torres scored his second after (much to my pleasure) an error from Ashley Cole. That's the game. El niño does it again. Liverpool sit by themselves in 2nd place, and it will come down to the two best teams from the Northwest of England for the title this season. Let's hope this reinvigorates Liverpool's season. You know what they say: "January showers bring February flowers." Okay, well maybe it's not quite like that, but that's what they'll be thinking in Liverpool. If the Super Bowl goes as well as the sports weekend has for me so far, it will have completed one of the most memorable sports weekends in my history.

And for those of you statistics lovers, before the final two La Liga fixtures this weekend featuring Valencia and Sevilla facing two lower clubs, Barcelona's goal difference is +50. If you sum the rest of the postive goal differences in La Liga, those of Real Madrid, Valencia, Villarreal, Atletico Madrid, Sevilla, and Málaga, you get +54. The rest of the teams in La Liga have negative goal difference. Barca have scored 21 more goals than the next best team (Real Madrid) and have conceded 3 fewer than the next best team (Sevilla). Talk about dominance...

Hope you enjoyed my ramblings on the week's football action. Until next week!