What Can I Say..?
October 16, 2011 § Leave a comment
Sound broadcast was scratchy.. distant.. listening through a heap of crowded frequencies.. off the spot just a teeniest and.. what you hear is all you get.
So yes, through the traffic and noise I just about heard the game Sunday. Likewise Saturday. That being the first semi-final of 2011’s Rugby World Cup whose challenge matched program of 20 or so national teams in New Zealand was headed to the final next Sunday at Eden Park in Auckland.
Games Wales vs France; a parfait of NZ vs Australia following the next night.
Folks don’t need me to restate what happened.. judging from subsequent broadcasts the whole darn world would know all by now. So I’ll say it this way: the final shall be between a team which bested its opponent on the night, and a team which did not.
Emboldening the bester’s fans to the point of utterly predictable success whilst leaving the other team intact with its unpredictability.
As for post-match commentary I’ll admit to incredulity at one remark. Was that really the neat sports reporter I once met at his home on a summer’s Saturday afternoon? Back then ‘boot on the throat’ – Milz & Abu Ghraib language – would not have entered his head. So why now, K! What changed?
To the bold I say: be aware the King’s Indian Defense
Came across it recently when Patterson/Gross prologued a commercial fiction with a father teaching his son across the board how a commanding white center wasn’t all it was cracked up to be when the crux was chess endgame.
What that has to do with commercial fiction is a matter of cleverness, and/or style. In the prologue we can be sure its presence is to set the tone. Perhaps also method. To a plot’s fruition.
To the curious, as yours truly, my initial thought related to self-promotion as American covers aimed at international readership are wont to do. Likely a promo of Grandmaster Reshesky’s bishop variation in the King’s Indian. On reflection I decided no, the book’s talk of blocking a queening pawn’s play being too far-fetched. Americans do enjoy sharp plays and tactical advantages, but they hate losing[ witness secret*** TPP documents ] and such exchanges as real middle games produce run out 50/50 win/loss. To wit, too many unknowns to go figure outcomes.
*** known only unto themselves. For, as the lore goes, what is worth more than gold—why tis a secret n’er told!
But what of other openings: Classical with Benoni, Grunsfeld? ‘Hypermoderns’ ? Mebbe a set piece—Tal had a couple o’ big ones in strategy-leaning plays.
None, I now suspect: more a statement: author’s statement: that one can undermine commanding or fortress positions and level the playing field, as it were, by having one’s opponent come to you.
In which, and certainly an intrigue in the Judge and Jury title, the command undermined itself. Not least in the sloppiness of so-called support. As the means to stun and nullify a constant threat was resolutely applied.
What Can I say..? To answer my own question: cool it kiwis. it aint over till it. is. over.
Your team is deserving.. of you too.