Replies

Hmmm ...

Here’s the problem with that style of basketball play — the girls aren’t learning basketball skills, just mobbing skills. That IS what the opposing coaches claimed and they were right. It ends up being a style of play that is boring to watch. Basketball would not survive, for being so boring. Yeah, it’s NOT a rule, and yeah it occasionally can be and has been exploited. And it’s REALLY SAD that the opposing coaches didn’t adapt — although the one team did — ALSO “OUTSIDE THE BOX” but in a more common way of being outside the box in such games — they got the Judge to tilt the game radically towards them. Why didn’t Mr. New Yorker writer appreciate THAT as wonderful innovative gamemanship, eh?

It is also interesting that SOCCER is played that way — every part of field is in play. And Americans (including me, who once played semi-pro) think it is boring, for the most part. IT IS! It has little structure. Americans LOVE very structured games. Football, Baseball — extremely structured. And Basketball — also structured.

I DO NOT AGREE with the thinking behind this article. Washington was a brilliant leader, and not some fop who wanted an army for the sake of wearing a fancy officer’s uniform. A rebel, guerrilla army is like a dust storm — untamed, here and gone. Not a sustaining army.

In the end WE, the USA, did indeed win the Viet Nam war. We won Tet, and we won the long war — or rather will. One evidence is that the ChiComs invaded Viet Nam and Viet Nam 180’d them and then some. Yes, they say they are commie, but that’s a “legacy” commie, as time will tell. We won because we impregnated them with our cultural ideals and mores of liberty.

Yet, we ourselves were getting sick then, and here we are today in a bad bad way. I expect we are at or close to a low point (maybe second order — first order some to go), but the moment is turning, we have a good chance to get healthy. And when we do we will find an American style Viet Nam there as well.