|
Post by Kahloke on Mar 18, 2014 11:20:22 GMT -8
|
|
Neil
Voyager
Posts: 7,196
|
Post by Neil on Mar 19, 2014 21:41:02 GMT -8
I always find it kind of creepy and vaguely unsettling how internet powers track our interests. Earlier, I watched a video that Mr Horn posted of a landing craft that serves Savary Island. Now, when I check into You Tube, what is suggested for me? Tons of landing craft videos.
I know I should be used to this kind of anonymous familiarity that something has with my computer, but still...
|
|
|
Post by Starsteward on Mar 20, 2014 6:14:53 GMT -8
I always find it kind of creepy and vaguely unsettling how internet powers track our interests. Earlier, I watched a video that Mr Horn posted of a landing craft that serves Savary Island. Now, when I check into You Tube, what is suggested for me? Tons of landing craft videos.
I know I should be used to this kind of anonymous familiarity that something has with my computer, but still... That information you just posted Neil is just another freaky reminder that 'Big Brother' really is here! and I agree it leads one to wonder just what "they" really know about aour viewing habits.
|
|
Neil
Voyager
Posts: 7,196
|
Post by Neil on Apr 12, 2014 23:42:36 GMT -8
We hear a lot these days about the apathy of voters, and how democracy is on a downhill slide because of people not participating. But maybe the problem is that people are tired of the old dynamic- NDP vs Liberal provincially, or the perpetually third place NDP vs the federal Liberals and Harper Voldemorts.
Today, Kitimat residents turned out 75% strong to say no to Enbridge. The folksy Janet Holder, and the megabucks Enbridge messaging that never ends did not impress the cantankerous north coasters. Those folks just must not know what's good for them. I suspect that our most prominent Kitimat member did little to advance the corporate cause.
|
|
|
Post by WettCoast on Apr 13, 2014 12:26:28 GMT -8
Today, Kitimat residents turned out 75% strong to say no to Enbridge. The folksy Janet Holder, and the megabucks Enbridge messaging that never ends did not impress the cantankerous north coasters. Those folks just must not know what's good for them. I suspect that our most prominent Kitimat member did little to advance the corporate cause. We like the natural environment here and want to keep it that way. We do not want to put it at what most would consider excessive risk. We don't like our ordinary local people who are part of the group 'Douglas Channel Watch' being referred to as foreign-funded enviro-radicals & enemies of Canada, something which has been done all to often by Harper, Joe Oliver & other leading Con artists. The 'No' vote was expected; I'd have been happier if it was 80% No.
|
|
|
Post by Mike C on Apr 20, 2014 9:13:03 GMT -8
I am on my way down to visit the Tokitae on what we in Vancouver call "TokiDay"; unfortunately our Amtrak engineer has stopped for pizza about four times now. Strange.
Happy Easter, no matter how you choose to celebrate today.
|
|
|
Post by Blue Bus Fan on May 4, 2014 11:30:33 GMT -8
May the "fourth" be with you.
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on May 10, 2014 7:44:28 GMT -8
35 years ago today, Danny Gallivan said "...Lafleur,coming out rather gingerly on that right side."
If you recognize that phrase, you know what this day is about.
If not, and if you like epic moments in sports history, then I recommend this well produced mini documentary.
|
|
|
Post by WettCoast on May 10, 2014 9:57:49 GMT -8
35 years ago today, Danny Gallivan said "...Lafleur,coming out rather gingerly on that right side." If you recognize that phrase, you know what this day is about. If not, and if you like epic moments in sports history, then I recommend this well produced mini documentary. Thanks Mr. Horn for taking me back to that time. I used to watch the NHL back in those days. I might watch again if Montreal makes it to the final in July? As for the late Danny Gallivan, he was in my opinion simply the best hockey play by play announcer of them all, past or present.
|
|
|
Post by Starsteward on May 10, 2014 21:35:29 GMT -8
35 years ago today, Danny Gallivan said "...Lafleur,coming out rather gingerly on that right side." If you recognize that phrase, you know what this day is about. If not, and if you like epic moments in sports history, then I recommend this well produced mini documentary. Thanks Mr. Horn for taking me back to that time. I used to watch the NHL back in those days. I might watch again if Montreal makes it to the final in July? As for the late Danny Gallivan, he was in my opinion simply the best hockey play by play announcer of them all, past or present.
|
|
Neil
Voyager
Posts: 7,196
|
Post by Neil on May 10, 2014 22:37:05 GMT -8
No advertising on the boards, no pounding music ordering fans to put their hands up in the air, and, most amazingly, fans were trusted to make enough noise after goals without eardrum shredding horns covering up their cheering. What a bizarre concept. How did hockey ever survive back then?
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on May 10, 2014 22:55:33 GMT -8
No advertising on the boards, no pounding music ordering fans to put their hands up in the air, and, most amazingly, fans were trusted to make enough noise after goals without eardrum shredding horns covering up their cheering. What a bizarre concept. How did hockey ever survive back then? And no whining and flopping by the players, just playing hard. That Montreal 5 on the Lafleur goal was pretty special: Lemaire, Shutt, Lafleur, Savard, Robinson. A far cry from the diluted 30-team league that we have today.
|
|
Koastal Karl
Voyager
Been on every BC Ferry now!!!!!
Posts: 7,747
|
Post by Koastal Karl on May 17, 2014 22:01:24 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Jun 5, 2014 9:00:42 GMT -8
For the war historians out there, here are some personal messages for June 5th:
"The dice are on the table"
"It is hot in Suez"
------------------------
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Jun 8, 2014 16:35:51 GMT -8
Who is going to be following the FIFA 2014 world cup? - and who do you want to see win or do well ? ------------ I have no strong allegiances. I'd like to see England do well, for history's sake (1966 is too long ago, re their most recent title). I'd like to see a South America team (other than Brazil) do well. I'd like to see a developing-world or third-world team do very well and win. -------------- I graduated from high school in 1986. The 1986 world cup in Mexico was Canada's one and only appearance in the tournament. For Canada, here is the TV schedule for the matches. FIFA TV HERE
|
|
Neil
Voyager
Posts: 7,196
|
Post by Neil on Jun 8, 2014 20:15:16 GMT -8
Who is going to be following the FIFA 2014 world cup? - and who do you want to see win or do well ? ------------ I have no strong allegiances. I'd like to see England do well, for history's sake (1966 is too long ago, re their most recent title). I'd like to see a South America team (other than Brazil) do well. I'd like to see a developing-world or third-world team do very well and win. -------------- I graduated from high school in 1986. The 1986 world cup in Mexico was Canada's one and only appearance in the tournament. For Canada, here is the TV schedule for the matches. FIFA TV HEREI suppose that like a lot of people, my first concern is that it's going to come off properly. Stadiums are unfinished and accommodation as well as transportation infrastructure are a concern... not to mention the fact that despite it being 'winter' in Brazil, Manaus and other northern cities are likely to feel like saunas for afternoon games.
The IOC has expressed grave concerns about Brazil's readiness to stage the 2016 Olympics, but FIFA is so utterly corrupt you cannot depend on any sort of honest assessment of where this World Cup's preparations are actually at. One can only hope.
I would love to see a small nation win; that last happened in 1950, with Uruguay. I'll be cheering for England, most likely rather briefly. That's my ancestry. I would also love to see an African side do well. But getting realistic, one must focus on one of the likely winners. I love the flair of the Italians, and the amazing ball control of the Spaniards. The home Brazilians are always entertaining. But really... any World Cup match is usually eminently watchable. The downside is that when you go back to watching MLS, well... what a gong show from the Whitecaps in the second half of yesterday's match against Philadelphia. Still, our soccer team is the only local sports outfit that I have any passion for.
For a few weeks, we see the world's game at its finest.
|
|
|
Post by paulvanb on Jun 8, 2014 21:17:36 GMT -8
Go Belgium!
|
|
Neil
Voyager
Posts: 7,196
|
Post by Neil on Jun 11, 2014 21:20:23 GMT -8
One more pre- World Cup note...
Monday's Globe & Mail had a look at the legacy of the last World Cup in South Africa. That country has been left with mammoth stadiums that no one uses and which cost a fortune to maintain. Cape Town had an existing stadium that could have been improved, and it would have greatly benefitted the poverty stricken black community that surrounded it. But FIFA mandated a new stadium, with one official saying that "A billion television viewers don't want to see shacks and poverty". The new stadium is rarely used- local clubs can't afford the rent, and concerts are rare. Built for $600 million, it is losing $6-10 million a year, with no prospect of improvement. Next scheduled event: a concert in April of next year. A total of $1.8 billion was spent on building and renovating six stadiums, with the final cost a ten fold expansion of first estimates, partly due to corruption and collusion among construction companies who knew that the government had to pay, or lose the games.
FIFA officials are also being charged with corruption and payoffs over the ridiculous awarding of the 2022 World Cup to Qatar. So, yes... I'll be watching this year's tournament, but I'll be keeping in mind the heavy price that host countries pay to Sepp Blatter and company for the prestige of holding the world's premier single sporting event. No wonder Brazilians have taken to the streets, even though in the end, they'll give in to their DNA and watch as well.
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Jun 12, 2014 10:51:14 GMT -8
One more problem with the FIFA World Cup: - the trophy is not a cup.
That's like naming the Denman Cable ferry "Neil's Paddlewheeler." Illogical.
|
|
|
Post by Scott on Jun 13, 2014 13:02:43 GMT -8
Can anyone tell me why they need more than one stadium, if there are only 3 games per day and none of them overlap in time? Wouldn't 2 do? Three at the most? Brazil has built (or refurbished) 12 stadiums and spent over 11 billion dollars for a 3 week event. This could be done for a lot less.
- John H
|
|
Neil
Voyager
Posts: 7,196
|
Post by Neil on Jun 13, 2014 14:21:44 GMT -8
Can anyone tell me why they need more than one stadium, if there are only 3 games per day and none of them overlap in time? Wouldn't 2 do? Three at the most? Brazil has built (or refurbished) 12 stadiums and spent over 11 billion dollars for a 3 week event. This could be done for a lot less. For one thing, the World Cup is played on grass, and it would be impossible for two stadiums to endure the wear and tear of so many games. In that astonishing Dutch dismembering of Spain today, I noticed how chewed up the grass was in front of one of the goals... and that's just the first game. Check out tomorrow's game in Manaus between Italy and England- the field looks dreadful- extremely poorly prepared.
FIFA likes host countries to have six stadiums for games. The logistics of housing all the teams, fans, personnel and press in one city would be daunting, and most countries do best by spreading the World Cup money out. Twelve stadiums, in Brazil's case, is indeed ridiculous, especially since some of them are nowhere near ready.
|
|
|
Post by Low Light Mike on Jun 14, 2014 16:40:16 GMT -8
I wonder if BC Ferries management is watching World Cup matches, and is thinking of using the referee's spray-can, to paint a line to keep the crowd of WCFF photographers back and out of the way.
|
|
Neil
Voyager
Posts: 7,196
|
Post by Neil on Jun 17, 2014 22:34:56 GMT -8
Still on the World Cup, in a tournament that has so far produced many memorable moments, the latest being today's heroics from the Mexican keeper, Ochoa (no, not as in Queen of Ocoa, ferry fans...), but unfortunately, none as yet from the oddly out of sorts Brazilian team. They just don't give any sign that they could possibly win this thing.
I couldn't help but notice that in the final Rangers-Kings game, the one for all the marbles, they actually had to play that canned admonition for the fans to "MAKE SOME NOOIIISE!!". The Stanley Cup final game. And yet the least compelling World Cup match between teams that Brazilian fans probably care little about seems to be a noisome affair from beginning to end. There is simply no comparison in importance, sappy Tim Hortons ads to the contrary notwithstanding.
It's been observed how much more entertaining this World Cup has been than the last one in South Africa. And it has been. But a significant part of the difference is... no vuvuzelas in Brazil. The South African fans destroyed the television appeal of their games with the incessant blowing of one note plastic horns. Cheering, singing, and chanting were all undermined or completely drowned out by a monotonous buzzing. I can't imagine what they were thinking, and I suppose FIFA was terrified to ban the awful things, lest they commit some egregious act of cultural disrespect.
The TV broadcasts have been extremely well done. I've enjoyed the fan close ups; the agony and ecstasy, and all that. The play by play has been exemplary, especially John Helm. Tomorrow morning, the Australians get served up to Robin Van Persie, Arjen Robben, and the rest of the Dutch team that smoked the Spaniards. Might not be a pretty sight for the Socceroos. Then we get to see if Spain can redeem itself against the plucky Chileans. I'm betting they will.
The challenge, for me, is limiting myself to the first two games of the day. Wonderful stuff, and only every four years. I suppose that's the magic of it.
|
|
|
Post by Starsteward on Jun 18, 2014 5:31:16 GMT -8
Watching the World Cup of Soccer every four years, while jam packed with memorable moments, always rips the scab off the "where's Canada" question. The men's team ranked 110th in the world is beyond a national disgrace but hopefully the ship will be turned around over the next few years and we might see Canada qualify and contend in 20_ _ ? All is not lost however, next year..2015 let's get behind our great women's national team!
|
|
Neil
Voyager
Posts: 7,196
|
Post by Neil on Jun 18, 2014 21:27:59 GMT -8
Watching the World Cup of Soccer every four years, while jam packed with memorable moments, always rips the scab off the "where's Canada" question. The men's team ranked 110th in the world is beyond a national disgrace but hopefully the ship will be turned around over the next few years and we might see Canada qualify and contend in 20_ _ ? All is not lost however, next year..2015 let's get behind our great women's national team! I try not to think about the Canadian men's side when I'm watching the World Cup.
But since you mentioned it, I was looking at an account of Canada's only World Cup foray, in '86. A good part of the perspective was that of Bobby Lenarduzzi, who of course put a rather positive spin on things. The reality was that Canada was the only team out of 24 in that tournament to not score a goal. Lenarduzzi said that coach Tony Waiters was haunted by the spectre of another World Cup minnow, El Salvador, who had been scored on ten times by Hungary in the '82 tournament, and Waiters decided that given Canada's lack of pure playmaking ability, a very conservative opportunistic approach was best. I recall lots of falling back and defending, punctuated by long, ridiculously hopeful punts up field, in the forlorn expectation that there might be someone on the end of them in a Canadian shirt. Canada actually didn't look too bad against France, but that was about the best you could say.
Since then, things have gotten much worse. Yes, we're ranked 110th. Iceland, a country with a population about the same as metropolitan Victoria, is sixty spots ahead of us.. Fercryinoutloud, Palestine, which doesn't even have universally recognized borders, is sixteen ahead. Panama scored eight times against us at the end of the qualifying rounds. We can't score against Mauritania. Coaches come and go, and the Canadian Soccer Association seems utterly clueless as to how to build a national program. Starsteward, I don't think you or I will live to see a Canadian team give a decent account of itself in a World Cup tournament... I wouldn't even bet on qualifying. There just has been zero progress- in fact, there's been serious regression- since '86.
But, as you say, there are our women. Tonight, a very young side lost by a penalty to the Germans. We're probably not really contenders for the women's World Cup, but we're in the discussion. We can host next year's tournament with little fear of embarrassment on the pitch... other than the fact that those pitches are carpets, unacceptable for play in the men's game. But in Canada, you take what you can get, when it comes to the world's game.
And when you've never even been able to dream of the top, you don't have to accept the inevitable fall, as the Spaniards are now dealing with.
|
|