Archive for the 'Fun' Category

Feb 05 2010

Twitter chose my soccer team for me

Published by the deckchair guru under Fun

Over the past 48 hours, I conducted a little ’speriment. I used Twitter to make a decision for me, and I have sworn to abide by its verdict.

You see, I’ve never really been all that big a fan of soccer, or The World Game (SUE ME SBS!) and so have never had a team to follow. In other sports I have teams (Carlton in AFL, Storm in NRL, Brumbies in S14, Vic in everything else) and I like following someone.

Enough. It was time to find a team and jump on board!

A few people I follow on Twitter are huge soccer fans and seem really quite passionate about their team and results and 0-0 draws after 90 minutes (NOTHING HAPPENED! DON’T YOU WANT A REFUND?!) and so on.

Joining the dots, I devised an evil scheme:

I would put it to a vote and let Twitter choose my team. And I would fall in behind the result.

For a 24 hour period, I invited people to vote for their teams and I’d support the one with the most votes. It started slowly at first, but more votes piled in, until the end of the 24 hour period…

I HAD A 6-WAY TIE!

6 teams had been voted for, by six people. Get the maths of it (and low voter turnout)? Six people said their team, and they were all different!

Rather than call for a run-off and further embarrassing vote numbers, I put the names of each team onto a scrap of paper, then into a semi-clean lunch container where they were shaken and shaken. I then asked a work colleague to choose a sticky note at random.

The verdict… I am now an Arsenal fan.

The gunners, yeah! I don’t know much about them, so I did some digging and came across a recent blog entry from Nick Hornby. I like his passion for his team, and so I feel ok about supporting them now.

My thanks to the tweeps who voted in my poll:
@cherriemoore
@Heath_Eddy
@PostProdEditor
@MrTHill
@clubwah
@euaneggs

Let’s go Gunners!

Bookmark and Share

4 responses so far

Sep 18 2009

Hitler critiques the All-Australian team

Published by the deckchair guru under Fun

Humerous response to the AFL All-Australian team, which never leaves everyone happy.


Bookmark and Share

No responses yet

Jul 27 2009

Stephen Fry does cricket. And wins.

Published by the deckchair guru under Fun

What a hoot!

Cricket Speech Presented at Lord’s 14th July 2009

Thursday, July 16th, 2009

Thank you ladies and gentlemen, thank you very much indeed. It is an honour to stand before so many cricketing heroes from England and from Australia and at this, my favourite time of year. The time when that magical summer sound comes to our ears and gladdens our old hearts, the welcome sound of leather on Graham Swann.

I have been asked to say a few words – well more than a few. “You’ve twenty minutes to fill,” I was firmly told by the organisers. 20 minutes. Not sure how I’ll use all that time up. Perhaps in about ten minutes or so Andrew Strauss would be kind enough to send on a a physio, that should kill a bit of time.

Now, many of you will be wondering by what right I presume to stand and speak in front of this assembly of all that is high and fine and grand and noble and talented in the world of cricket, and to speak too in this very temple of all that is historic, majestic and ever so slightly preposterous and silly in that world? I certainly can’t lay claim to any great cricketing achievements. I can’t bat, I can’t field, I bowl off the wrong foot. That sounds like a euphemism for something else, doesn’t it? “They say he bowls off the wrong foot, know what I mean? He enters stage left. Let me put it this way, he poles from the Cambridge end of the punt.” Actually as a matter of fact, although it is true in every sense that I have always bowled off the wrong foot. I have decided, since Sunday, to go into the heterosexual breeding business. My first three sons will be called Collingwood Fry, Anderson Fry and Monty Fry. That’s if their mother can ever get them out, of course. But back to the original question you so intelligently, if rhetorically, asked. If I can’t play, what can I do? I can umpire, I suppose, after a fashion. A fashion that went out years ago around the time of those two peerless umpires, perhaps some of you are old enough to remember them, Jack Crapp and Arthur Fagg. I remember them. I remember them every morning, as a matter of fact: Crapp and Fagg. Though now, sadly, the law says we can no longer do it in public places. And I believe that may even apply to smoking too. Anyway. We were on the subject of why I’m speaking to you. I don’t play. I’m not even a cricketing commentator, journalist or writer. I suppose the only right I have to be amongst you, the cricketing élite, might derive from my being said to represent, here in the Long Room, all those who have spent their lives loving the game at a safe distance from the square. It is love for the game that brings me here.

In the forty-five years that I have followed cricket, I have seen it threatened from all sides by the horrors of modern life. The game has been an old-fashioned blushing maiden laid siege by coarse and vulgar suitors. A courtship pattern of defence, acceptance, capitulation and finally absorption has followed. When I started watching, A. R. Lewis played for and captained England as an amateur. The game could never recover surely, from being forced, against the will of many of those who ran this place, being forced to become solely a professional sport? I am just old enough to remember too the Basil D’Oliveira affair in all its unsavoury nastiness: the filth of racism and international politics was beginning to stain the pure white of the flannels. The one-day-game appeared, shyly at first. The balance of bat and ball, essential for cricket to make any sense as a sporting spectacle, became threatened, everyone agreed, by the covering of wickets which would privilege batsman, and then that necessary equipoise was threatened the other way by the arrival of extreme pace and the pitiless bouncer. The look and style of cricketers was apparently forever compromised by helmets and elastic waisted trouserings hideous to behold. Cane and canvas pads were replaced by wipe clean nylon fastened by Velcro. Kerry Packer arrived and sowed his own blend of discord. The continuing rise and mutation of one day cricket caused panic from Windermere to Woking as white balls and coloured pyjamas threatened the sanity of Telegraph readers everywhere. Rogue South African tours caused alarm and frenzy. Pitch invasions marked an end of the days when schoolboys could lie on their tummies by the boundary-rope filling in a green scoring book, until they got bored which they inevitably did, all except the speccy swatty ones who were laughed at and are now running the world. The rest of us were too busy asking the man in the Public Announcement tent to put out a message for our lost friends Ivor Harden, Hugh Janus, Seymour Cox and Mike Hunt. One turbulent decade began with John Snow getting barracked and bombarded with tinnies and ended with batsmen getting bounced and sledged. Cameras and microphones got closer and closer to the action to overhear the insults and demystify the bowling actions. The art of spin had disappeared, for ever, some believed. Cricketers wives wrote books about the overseas tours. Reverse swing seemed to arrive out of nowhere : “Not only does he bowl off the wrong foot. They say he swings it the other way.” Ball tampering became a matter of dinner party chat from Keswick to Canterbury . Clever 3-D images were painted on the grass round about the long stop area advertising power generation companies no one had ever heard of. Advertising was not only to be seen on the grass, but on the clothes, Vodafone and Castlemaine were stitched bigger and brighter on the shirts than the three lions and the wallabies and that mysterious silver feather that Kiwis seem so unaccountably fond of.

The county game was rent asunder into leagues and divisions that no one really understands; the politics and governance of cricket, with its contracts and coaches, its bloated fixture lists and auctions of broadcasting rights caused hand-wringing too, though many would rather it were neck-wringing.

Meanwhile, drugs, drinking binges, embarrassing text messages and other scandals continued to erupt like acne on a teenager.

South Africa returned to the fold as other countries entered the club of test playing nations. Kenya, Zimbabwe and Bangladesh.

Two of those speccy boys who used to score at the sidelines got their revenge, their names were Mr Lewis and Mr Duckworth.

To the dictionary of acronyms and initials were added ODI, T-20 and IPL. Power plays and baseball style pinch-hitters were swept in. The old lady of cricket was getting a right duffing up.

Yet, amazingly, none of these changes, professionalism, the covered wickets, helmets, day-night games, confirmed the dire prognostications of those who believed each one might hammer a stump into cricket’s fragile heart. For this same period of my cricket watching life saw some of the greatest matches in the game’s history. The 1981 and 2005 Ashes series, the Tied Test; a new aggression and boldness of stroke play that no one could disapprove of. Scoring rates went up and great batsmen emerged: Lara, Tendulkar and Ponting amongst many others. And miraculously, to keep the game balanced, Warne and Murali showed that far from being dead, spin bowling was supremely alive; even providing a new ball in the form of the doozra. Huge crowds and rising popularity in fresh territories confirmed cricket’s health. Levels of fitness and standards of fielding rocketed. And all the while, the game’s greatest expression, the 5 Day Test Match, led the way, providing the greatest entertainment, the most excitement and the deepest commitment from the players. All those mournful predictions had come to nothing. The greatest of games had triumphed again.

But now, now, in the age of the internet, just as the great, great players of the past ten years have one by one started to play their farewell matches and leave the field for ever, hideous new forces have been at work. The newly emerged South Africa became mired in scandal, intrigue and misery as the new disease of spread-betting lived up to its name and spread, spread like cholera through a slum. Grotesque emails from professional umpires hit the headlines; allegations of systematic cheating and match-fixing have become commonplace, a dismal and lamentably organised Shop Window for international cricket, its 2007 World Cup seemed to lay the game low: an incomprehensible and dreadful tragedy in the death of Bob Woolmer its ghastly and unforgettable legacy. As if that weren’t enough we were more recently treated to the embarrassing spectacle of cricket’s governors cosying up to a Texan fraudster with a helicopter and a bigger mouth than wallet.

A new kind of bitterness has entered some quarters of the game as ex-players become commentators, columnists and journalists and begin to turn on their erstwhile teammates, dispraising the current players, pouring scorn on their technique and deprecating their tactical nous. We have video of course and can see that these pundits know what they were talking about: historical archive reveals that Boycott, Botham, Gower, Atherton, Willis, and Hussein were never out playing a false shot, never shuffled across, never missed a captaincy trick, never dropped a catch, never posted a fielder in the wrong place and never bowled off line or off length in the entire course of their careers.

The benefits and the drawbacks of broadcast technology bewilder us. Hotspots and Hawkeye, referrals and replays, umpires have never been more pressured and exposed and greater more seismically structural questions have never been asked about the meaning and spirit of the game. The rewards are greater, the stakes are higher, the price of failure more public and humiliating.

So a hundred years on from cricket’s Golden Age of C. B. Fry here is another Fry, searching for a way to toast a game that appears to have become … well, toast.

We could choose to believe that and retreat into memories of an apparently innocent and gilded past. We could wash our hands of it all, or we could choose to continue to believe in the game. Not necessarily in its administrators, nor even its players, though most of them in all divisions of the game are proud and gifted. We could choose to have faith in cricket. I for one do truly believe that the game itself, as first played by shepherds in the south of England, the game that spread to every corner of the world, the supreme bat and ball competition, the greatest game ever devised, will continue to provide unimagined pleasures, that true drama will once more come centre stage, booting into the wings the tragedy and farce we have witnessed over the past decade in particular. There will be new scandals of course: that you can depend upon. Undreamt of debacles, imbroglios, furores, brouhahas, crimes, rows, walk-outs and embarrassments are waiting around the corner, quietly slipping the horseshoe into the boxing-glove and preparing to give the goddess Cricketina a sock in the jaw. But new geniuses, new historic last ball climaxes, new unimaginable heights of athletic, tactical and aesthetic pleasure await us too. It is up to the players to believe in the game and the cricketing administrators to believe in the players. But most of all it is up to us to keep the faith and be unashamed, be proud of our love of cricket. Here, in the very place that is so often called cricket’s Mecca, cathedral and temple, is the place for us all to pledge that faith. I do so happily as I raise a glass in toast, on behalf of cricket lovers everywhere to Andrew Strauss in his Benefit Year and his wonderful Team, to Ricky Ponting and his fine tourists and to cricket itself. For, to misappropriate Benjamin Franklin, Cricket is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy. So then: raise your glasses, to Strauss, England, Australia and cricket.

© Stephen Fry 2009

Fry’s website

Bookmark and Share

No responses yet

May 21 2009

Should you forward that email?

Published by the deckchair guru under Fun

should-you-forward-that-email

Bookmark and Share

No responses yet

Apr 05 2009

Beyond Twitter

Published by the deckchair guru under Fun, Tech

Bookmark and Share

No responses yet

Mar 21 2009

Twouble with Twitters

Published by the deckchair guru under Fun

I’ve gotten into the whole Twitter thing recently. This video is a funny take on the whole caper:

Bookmark and Share

No responses yet

Mar 14 2009

Forrest Gump in 1 minute

Published by the deckchair guru under Fun

One of my favourite moves ever is Forrest Gump. I stumbled across this the other day and thought it was pretty funny, so I share with you:

Bookmark and Share

No responses yet

Feb 28 2009

Don’t ask a woman for directions!

Finally, the proof is in!

Women really are worse at reading maps than men. But before men get all high and mighty, it’s also been proven that men are hopeless at finding keys.

New research into which side of the brain men and women use has helped explain age-old theories – and arguments – about the differences between the genders, The Daily Telegraph reports.

More here.

Bookmark and Share

No responses yet

Feb 21 2009

Obama’s Elf

A clever little thang.

Bookmark and Share

No responses yet

Feb 01 2009

the deckchair guru is a pretty good deckchair guru

Great article at SMH:

Singular third person: how Matthew Hayden became a perfect PRAT

Sacha Molitorisz
January 31, 2009

For a short while now, something has been missing. Life has lacked some vital ingredient. Fortunately, I’ve identified what it is.

It’s Matthew Hayden referring to Matthew Hayden as Matthew Hayden.

Since the Queenslander retired from cricket earlier this month, a vacuum has appeared in Australian sport. Suddenly no elite Aussie sportsperson remains who consistently refers to themselves in the third person.

“People still remember how the young Hayden would poke grimly round his front pad,” Hayden once said of himself, seemingly living his whole life as an out-of-body experience. “Matthew Hayden was created in India in 2001,” he said more recently, meaning Matthew Hayden turns eight some time this year.

To be fair, Hayden isn’t alone. Indeed, the cricket world is full of People Referring Autobiographically in the Third Person, or PRATPs. (As an acronym, it’s a mouthful. Let’s lose the second “P”.)

The ex-Aussie captain Mark Taylor was a renowned PRAT. “Mark Taylor was one of our best batsmen last summer,” Taylor famously said. “If this season is Mark Taylor’s turn to miss out, so be it.” Presumably he was so detached from himself that he wouldn’t have minded one way or the other.

“Michael Clarke will be fine,” said Michael Clarke, shortly after he was dropped from the Test team.

On another occasion, he said: “I’ll always be Michael Clarke and I hope that I can be successful being me.”

Such versatility: third person and first person in the same sentence!Cricket’s PRATs aren’t just Aussies. “The best thing [for England] is to get Michael Vaughan fit and playing well,” said ex-captain Michael Vaughan, showing that he is equally adept with immodesty and willow.

“Sreesanth’s way is to be aggressive,” said the Indian bowler. “Sreesanth will always remain Sreesanth.”

Very Zen. The sound of one hand clapping itself, you might say.

It makes you wonder. Perhaps Hayden et al have been making some sort of philosophical statement. Perhaps in their peculiar grammar they are eschewing egocentrism and solipsism, promoting instead a profound, noble egalitarianism.

By using the third person, perhaps they are saying that, sure, they may be highly-paid and indulged, but on an intrinsic level they’re just like everyone else.

Or maybe they are revealing something even deeper. Maybe their manner of speaking is a subtle indicator that they ascribe to the Buddhist precept of anatta, which holds that there is no such thing as permanent self.

Or maybe they’re all tools and tosspots. That’s what Mike Atherton thinks.

“When cricketers refer to themselves in the third person, my antennae twitch,” says the ex-England captain.

“It suggests a certain self-regard – talking about themselves almost as if they were describing a person they admire from a distance.”

At this point, I must admit that my daughter used to refer to herself in the third person. She grew out of the habit a year ago, when she was two. So perhaps it isn’t just a sign of arrogance. Maybe it’s also a sign of immaturity.

Apart from cricket and the creche, the trait can be found in rugby league. “The Benji I know plays with confidence,” Benji Marshall said last year.

Taking it all further, his fellow leaguie Greg Inglis refers to himself with only initials. “People say that when big stages come, G.I. comes out, G.I. comes out to play,” he said.

Predictably, boxing is full of it. “I hate that Jeff Fenech,” said the Marrickville Mauler last year, referring to the Marrickville Mauler of yesteryear. “I love what he represented … But I don’t like him.”

Even basketballers dabble.

“This is a such great day in the life of Andrew Bogut, the family of Andrew Bogut,” said Andrew Bogut.

By contrast, the British cyclist Chris Hoy is an island of sanity. “In the past 24 hours everyone has been offering an opinion on Chris Hoy,” remarked a journalist after Hoy won gold at the Beijing Olympics. “But what does Chris Hoy think of Chris Hoy?”

To which the cyclist responded: “Chris Hoy thinks that the day Chris Hoy refers to Chris Hoy in the third person is the day that Chris Hoy disappears up his own arse.”

So, what are we to do? Inspired by Hoy, should we take steps to eradicate PRATs?

In many sports, digital technology is being harnessed to allow decisions to be more closely scrutinised. Video refs and third umpires pore over replays to make determinations – but are third umpires enough? Perhaps it’s time for third person umpires.

That would be one approach. It would, however, be the wrong approach. Because it’s time for us Aussie sports fans to admit how much we love to laugh at the linguistic oddities of sportspeak.

It’s time to ‘fess up to our love of garbled grammar and strangled syntax – which is not just funny, but far preferable to all the bland PR-isms that are becoming increasingly common. In particular, it’s time to acknowledge how much we loved to hear Matthew Hayden talking up Matthew Hayden.

Sure, these competitors with a penchant for the third person may be arrogant, immature and unhinged, but since when have we wanted sports stars who are sane?

There’s something more. My guess is that in the final months of his long, celebrated career, Hayden began referring to himself in the third person less often.

I would suggest that when Haydos became sane, his batting suffered. More research is required, but I’m convinced that PRATs are better at sport.

It is here that our sports development programs are failing us. It’s all very well for coaches and trainers to focus on talent, technique and mental fortitude, but where is the emphasis on grammar? On the turns of phrase that precipitate sporting glory?

We don’t just need an Australian Institute of Sport. We need an Australian Institute of Pronouns for Sporting Greatness.

Only then can there be hope of finding a promising youngster in the mould of Matthew Hayden, a gifted upstart equally adept at winning matches and mangling interviews.

This story was found at: http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2009/01/30/1232818724420.html

Bookmark and Share

No responses yet

Next »