#if he can prove victorious in A Game with outside factors such as humans then he can prove hes not

[moeblob]

Look, I just think it's VERY funny and on brand that I thought of an entire premise of colorful characters for half the cast and immediately drew the only one void of color.

[jellyfisharesatan]

Okay so I've spent the last three days almost exclusively playing portal 1 and 2, and I've so many thoughts.

First off, portal 2 is literally a perfect sequel. Expands on the first game not only in terms of game play, but also lore. There's a huge amount more game to play, and a far stronger element of exploration to the game, which adds to the out of the box thinking the game loves to promote. Portal 1, while I love it, really just sets up the basic idea of how to use portals and boxes, it's portal 2 that truly goes ham, not only expanding on these two basic elements, but also inventing more complex materials to work with.

Portal 1 also has very scarce lore; Rattmans caves, Glados having killed everyone else in the facility, and the sentience of the turrets/companion cube being the main few points. In comparison, portal 2 is chock full of a story that is paced beautifully.

Second, the theme of loneliness in the story is so heart wrenching when you think abt it for more than a second. Portal 1 is lonely in the sense that (as far as you know), you are completely alone in a testing facility because of a recently gone-rogue AI. (Yes ik Rattman is in fact alive throughout the first game but there's no way for the player to know this given that he never physically appears. It's only through the comics that we learn abt him properly).

But portal 2 drives the loneliness factor to the Max. Not only are you still trapped in the place you fought so hard to escape, you are now in a future you don't recognise. You're fighting to escape more on principle than anything else by now, because what is there to escape to? The outside world isn't your home anymore, nowhere is. The closest thing you have left is a testing facility in which you will certainly be killed if you stay too long.

You have no one truly on your side, ever. Wheatley is the closest the game ever comes to giving you an actual companion, and he immediately betrays you the first chance he gets. You're forced to work alongside your worst enemy, knowing she will probably destroy you immediately upon victory over Wheatley. Even when she doesn't, you only survive because of her mercy, she could easily have killed you a thousand times over, as the final few scenes of the game prove.

And then there's Cave and Caroline. A lonely man who's dying voice has been left to play through the abandoned salt mines turned testing facility. His original work lies discarded, centuries of science rest destroyed in layers all the way up to the surface.

Caroline is held in your hand most of the way through the salt mines, though neither you or her have any way of realising this until halfway through. Caroline, one of the few humans Cave loved, has become inhuman in his death, through his orders. Caroline doesn't even remember herself, let alone the man who preserved some level of her essence.

One thing I think portal 1 does better is the way in which the structure of the testing chambers emphasise your loneliness. The windows through which you are so clearly meant to be observed, the abandoned mad man's dens hidden in the walls. The absence of people is felt to keenly

Third, the expansion of the relationship between Chell and Glados in portal 2 is so profound. Portal 1 establishes that Glados hates your guts, but she's clearly intrigued by you in a way she just cannot let go of. So many of her decisions are irrational regarding you. Yes, it is built into Glados to want to test, but portal 2 proves that she can build robots capable of doing so, and was in the process of doing just that even in portal 1. Keeping you around to test on is inviting problems to her doorstep, and she does it anyways. And even after you attempt to kill her, her final act before collapsing herself is to preserve you in a cryo chamber rather than destroy you.

And portal 2 makes it even more clear that Glados is drawn to Chell in a way she cannot help or deny. She keeps Chell around to test on even after she's proved herself to be a borderline unstoppable nuisance, she attempts to spend her precious few facilities to talk to you while in potato form, and again, she doesn't kill you at the end, but let's you go.

Her insults in this game have a clearly fond edge to them, and her greeting of you when you both meet again is so full of emotion.

Fourth, the continued theme of AI intelligence is so fascinating. The oracle turret, the defective turrets, Wheatley, and all the funky weird little cores at the end are such fascinating additions to the game. The first portal introduced the concept of the turrets (and potentially companion cubes) being sentient, but didn't do much with it apart from making the turrets creepy (and also hauntingly sad) with their limited dialogue. But portal 2 opens up so many new pathways by making exceptions to this in the previously mentioned defective and oracle turrets. Even Wheatley is a fascinating addition, he's so full of personality in a way that is diametrically opposed to Glados.

Fifth, the continued presence of Rattman and his obsession with Chell is so haunting, especially if, like me, you only read the comics after playing both games. I thought this man was still alive until fairly recently when first playing the game, and some of the artwork by him at the start of the game does seem to imply this.

Just. Ugh. Portal strings together the bare bones of narratives so perfectly. The history of every character is so long and completely not fleshed out, all we ever see is the briefest glance of any of them. We see the most of Chell and Glados, but even then it's clear we're meeting them after a long life filled with god knows what. Perfect

Anyways. No one's gonna read this, let alone see it, but I needed to get this out and document it somewhere so here I am

[astersofthesky]

Reasons why I ship LawLight

It's been a year since I last watched Death Note and up to this day, it still remains on my TOP 5 FAVORITE ANIME (alongside Attack on Titan, Daiya no Ace, Gintama, and the Inazuma Eleven franchise).

Be as it is, the ship between L and Light holds a special place here in my heart. And today I want to talk about the reason why I am head over heels for this painstakingly beautiful ship.

For a quick heads-up. "LawLight" is a non-canon ship pair from Death Note. The two person involved are Yagami Light also known as "Kira" and the Great Detective L otherwise known as Ryuuzaki. I believe that their trope belongs to the enemies to lovers. They are also the most famous ship for the said fandom.

I admit that I am a certified fujoshi. So when scenes like walking together under falling sakura leaves, going to a cafe for their date to confirm their suspicions about each other's identity, and was even CHAINED 24/7 were shown, I can't help but ship them despite the fact that they are LITERALLY TRYING TO KILL AND CATCH EACH OTHER.

Actually for me, what makes this ship so appealing is their cat and mouse chase. A criminal and a detective. The spark and sexual tension apparent in their battle of wits. Who shall fall first? Who shall emerge victorious? And I firmly think that this dynamic between them is also one of the biggest factors why this anime/manga became such a success.

In the eyes of a shipper, some of their interactions are seen as a potential fuel to lit a burning flame called romance. Another thing, they also complement each other.

Why? Well, let's look at Yagami Light first.

Light used the notebook to alleviate his boring mundane life. Because of his high IQ, normal things don't ellicit excitement for him. Also, always hearing about everyday crimes, his strong sense of justice tells him to rid the world of this disgusting humans who continue to cause chaos for the world. So, immediately grabbing the death note as an opportunity to make his ideals a reality, KIRA IS BORN.

Of course, no matter how good the intention is. Taking lives is still a murder. And the fact that Light wanted to take advantage of the situation to become GOD OF THE NEW WORLD, it's true essence is slowly turning into selfishness. Just like any ordinary case, the police have taken interest, no, it's more accurate to say that they were FORCED to take interest. With no more cards to play, the worldwide police decided to ask help from their trump card. Yes, the world's greatest detective L.

Hiding in a single gothic letter and synthetic voice, Light had found his other half. The yin to his yang. Why you ask?

It's simple. L is the only person who can match his intelligence. Who can see through his barrage of lies and alibis. He was the only one who doubted him, the only one who almost sent him to his doom.

He was the ultimate obstacle Light needed to overcome. Because of this thrill, of this danger, Light found true challenge. Other than the joy of killing criminals for his dream, battling with L brought an unexpected bliss deep within his soul. Because of L, his once dull world had been painted with complicated colors. L is the only one who can understand Light.

He is his enemy.

He is his Equal.

He is his captor.

The same goes for L.

Being the number 1 detective in the world, I bet that cases has become repetitive for him. With his astounding deduction skills, he could immediately solve a case while eating his favorite sweets. Thus the appearance of Kira is a mystery for him.

A highly difficult game for him to solve and win. As he said himself, he is childish and he hates to lose. So in order to win, he's given away his identity. He steps out of his shadows and approached Kira himself. Maybe it's a call for responsibility, a call for justice, or a call for his pride, whatever his reason is, he's willing to risk his life.

When he made contact with Light, he had realized that Light is the only other person who can see through him. His trials, his tests. Light never fails to amaze and surprise L. He had even considered him his successor, even though he only used it to test Light, with the latter quickly grasping the subtle accusation.

He is his enemy.

He is his captee.

He is Equal.

No one knows if their relationship had gone beyond detective and a criminal. If they ever had a genuine conversation. One without lies and hidden intention.

A talk as L and Light.

Looking at a watcher's perspective. A single particular scene showed a glimpse of their relationship. The rooftop and foot massage scene who fueled a lot of LawLight shippers.

"The bells are unusually loud today." - L

At the rooftop, L had asked Light if he had ever uttered a truth once in his life. With Light regaining his memories, L knows that this attempt is futile, yet he still tries. And maybe, even held a little hope that Light would surrender himself.

Light on the other hand, as expected caught the meaning of his question, within that short silence, he contemplated his answer even if it's just for mere seconds. But because Light had already steeled his resolve, he chose to lie.

He had already made a choice.

And that is to kill L.

And L himself knows it.

At the stairs, an intimate scene between them is shared. Both are drenched in the rain, then L suddenly offered a foot massage to Light. For non-shippers, they say that it's a Bible reference.

But for people like me, it's simply nothing but a bittersweet moment where for once, emotions are stirred and shared.

The atmosphere, their longing stares.

Light drying L's hair.

The exchange of words.

It truly is a very painful and touching picture.

"It will be lonely isn't it? You and I will be parting ways soon".

L is known for not showing his true emotions. Yet in here, he bares everything. From the way he looks at Light and that slight curve on his mouth, like he's very regretful of something. Maybe it's because he wasn't able to personally give him the verdict or it can also be what ifs and what would they have become if they didn't meet in this kind of circumstances.

On Light, he looked shock and somewhat sad. They say it was an act, but the knowledge of his arch-nemesis soon dying, the one who has been with him since this "chase" started, the one being who gave him thrill and pushed him to his limits, the one who for months, was chained with him 24/7, the only one who could stand as his equal, the one who made him feel, losing that person will surely give you mixed emotions, and I believe that the sadness there is genuine, even though it had been overshadowed by his delight for victory.

It was only a for a short moment but for once, they've dropped all facades as they face each other as L and Light, not Ryuuzaki and Kira.

After L's death, Light is shown to have lose some of his sanity. I've read in a site before telling that L was the one who's holding his ground. And with him gone, with the thrill of danger gone, Light suddenly found himself at loss. He spent months trying to rid of his enemy. His disappearance had caused a void in his heart.

I remember a certain scene where Light imagined L sitting at his usual chair. His eyes were dead and devoid of color. That's where he also started to lower his guard down. For him, L is his only formidable opponent, his other half. He is his equal. It proves with the appearance of Near, where Light says that he's far inferior to L. That he doesn't deserve to wear his mask.

Light had come to respect L.

In Light's final moments, he sees L. A hallucination some says. But they're missing a point here.

The fact that L showed up, either his soul or an imagination, means that he had become an important figure to Light. Maybe he was thinking what L said during the times that they are wearing the chains.

"As long as we are wearing this chains. You and I are bound to share the same fate. If you die, I die." - L Lawliet

Yes, the chains are gone, physically. But because Light had allowed L to become an important piece of his life, he had secured the chain for L to held him captive for as long as he's alive...and if you let your imagination wild, even after death.

This are the reasons why I fell in love with this ship.

They're both broken.

One is blinded by power.

One had secluded himself from the outside world.

Their chase will never be forgotten. A game that only the two of them understood knowing from the beginning that they will never achieve a happy ending. This painful and bittersweet ship will go down in history.

[junker-town]

Kentucky being good is disorientating and really fun

The Wildcats haven’t been this good in years, so let’s all enjoy it.

Hello, it is 2018 and the Kentucky Wildcats are actually good at football! If you’re just checking into the college football season, or maybe been out of the country and disconnected for a few months, I am here to tell you that the Wildcats being good at football is very real indeed.

Some fun facts!

Kentucky is 4-0 for the first time since 2008. That was 10 years ago!

The Wildcats are nationally ranked for the first time since November 2007!

They’re all the way up to No. 14 in S&P+, which gives them a 15 percent chance of hitting 11-1!

Shout out to Kentucky’s game notes for providing these:

They’re 2-0 inside the SEC for the first time since 1977!

UK has two straight wins against then-ranked opponents for the first time since winning five straight in 1976-77.

The 28-7 win over No. 14 Mississippi State was the largest margin of victory for UK against a top-15 team since 1973, when the Wildcats beat then-No. 14 Tulane, 34-7.

The Wildcats’ offense is led by junior running back Benny Snell, Jr., one of the country’s most entertaining players.

You may not have known his name if you weren’t paying attention to the SEC over the last couple of years, but you should. Over four games, he’s rushed for 540 yards and seven touchdowns so far.

Against Mississippi State, he rushed for 165 yards and four touchdowns — and broke Randall Cobb Jr.’s school TD record (38) in the process. He’s also just 872 yards away from breaking Sonny Collins’ all-time UK rushing record of 3,835 yards from 1972-75. He’s the first player in UK history to have four touchdowns twice in a career.

At 5’11, 223 pounds, he’s got the frame and the consistency to be fed for the long haul during games. He’s been a human highlight reel all season, pin-balling his way upfield and making it look easy:

He’s even got his own website — SnellYeah.com, started by UK as a subtle start to a Heisman campaign for Snell.

Here’s UK blog A Sea of Blue on Snell’s case for the trophy:

If you take a look at [Boston College RB] AJ Dillon, who is on the Heisman watch list, and compare his season stats to Snell’s, you will see no reason why Benny shouldn’t be on that list. Dillon has 491 yards (122 per game) and has scored four TDs to go along with four receptions for 25 yards and a TD.

Benny, on the other hand, has 540 yards (135 per game) and has scored seven TDs to go along with three receptions for 15 yards. The biggest difference is Benny is doing this against SEC teams that are ranked in the top 25.

Snell has been a 1,000-yard rusher in each of his first two seasons as a Wildcat and is currently on pace to rack up 1,620 yards this season.

I know wins play a big factor in who wins the Heisman, and for years, Kentucky has never been able to tally enough wins for a player of Heisman caliber to win the trophy. However, Kentucky is 4-0 with a team that is talented enough to get to that 9-10 win range.

“I’m going to let that just be in the air,” Snell said. “It is what it is. My play speaks for itself. That’s all I can say.”

Even the blocking is fun to watch!

My colleague Bud Elliott broke this down excellently, including quarterback Terry Wilson’s ability under center while running the Wildcat:

Here, Kentucky is in a standard wildcat look. RB Snell is receiving the snap. But look at who is running the jet action. It’s Wilson, the QB! You don’t see many QBs act as the jet motion man in wildcat (or any) packages. But Wilson has the speed to play receiver in the SEC if he’d wanted to, so defenses must respect him as the motion man.

Wildcat double right

In this case, it’s just window dressing. Kentucky is running split zone. The blitzing nickel safety and defensive end react to the jet motion and take a wide path. They are quickly washed to the outside by right guard Stallings and right tackle Asafo-Adjei.

But defense is Kentucky’s real claim to fame.

The UK defense is ranked seventh (seventh!) in both scoring defense and opponent-adjusted S&P+, holding opponents to just 13.3 points per game, along with 280 yards per game. Senior linebacker Josh Allen already has 25 total tackles on the season, and leads the team with three sacks.

Speaking of Allen — no, not the quarterback — he’s got his own UK-ran website, too! This one’s DraftJosh41len.com, with his number, 41, to differentiate between him and the Buffalo Bills QB.

.@JoshAllen41_ came back for a reason. You’re seeing that reason on Saturdays. #GetUp https://t.co/qvKgYmjAyV pic.twitter.com/0kUDOGVZg3

— Kentucky Football (@UKFootball) September 24, 2018

These guys aren’t just fun on the field.

Put some respect on their name. pic.twitter.com/9t9mbDbtZR

— SEC Network (@SECNetwork) September 23, 2018

Snell has been having some fun with Photoshop this season — he tweeted this after his team beat Florida in Week 2:

WATCH HOW YOU SPEAK ON OUR NAME. pic.twitter.com/LGPzTEFdoT

— Mr SNELL YA LATER (@benny_snell) September 9, 2018

Before the Mississippi State game, Bulldog running back Kylin Hill had a choice response to Snell’s prediction for the game:

Kylin Hill: 4 carries for 14 yards Benny Snell: 25 carries for 165 yards and 4 touchdowns. pic.twitter.com/n9Csas8mSf

— Stu Hammer (@Stuart_Hammer) September 23, 2018

So Snell responded after the win with yet another animal ‘shop:

I SPEAK FACTS. #bbn pic.twitter.com/tpI62Yks7i

— Mr SNELL YA LATER (@benny_snell) September 23, 2018

Wildcat linebacker Kash Daniel added the following:

Kash don’t care about Mississippi State pic.twitter.com/RYxE3mqbdT

— Ben Roberts (@BenRobertsHL) September 23, 2018

Kentucky just wants to prove everyone wrong this season, and I can’t wait to see them try and do just that.

For quite a long time, UK has been the doormat of the SEC and didn’t exactly measure up anywhere nationally. Some telling numbers, via Bill Connelly:

Historical average. In college football, what you’ve been is most likely what you will be. Since the end of World War II, Kentucky’s average S&P+ ranking is 52nd. Over the last 25 years, it’s 67th.

Recruiting average. The caliber of recruits you can attract also sets a bar of sorts. Going back to 2002, UK’s average class has fallen in the 54th percentile, equivalent to about a No. 56 ranking.

So tip your cap to sixth-year head coach Mark Stoops — really no one predicted his team would be 4-0 right now. And it’s fun as hell to watch, too:

We like this team. A lot. pic.twitter.com/rOrsxpjuHL

— Kentucky Football (@UKFootball) September 23, 2018

Watch Out, @UKCoachStoops! #BBN #GetUp pic.twitter.com/4aKZrBrJAU

— Kentucky Football (@UKFootball) September 9, 2018

Everyone loves to see a team come back from a long drought without success — how much did we love the Chicago Cubs winning the World Series? Or the Philadelphia Eagles in the Super Bowl last year?

It won’t be easy for Kentucky — the Wildcats still have to face South Carolina, Missouri, Georgia, Texas A&M, and rival Louisville — but if UK keeps playing the same way it has been, this could be quite the season.

[angrycollectordaze-me-blog]

Paper代写：The blue hotel

本篇paper代写- The blue hotel讨论了小说《蓝色旅馆》。《蓝色旅馆》是克莱恩的著名短篇小说之一，小说的情节围绕一个纸牌游戏展开，主要刻画了身份背景不同的男性形象，其中瑞典人的形象是最深入人心的。《蓝色旅馆》中的瑞典人怪诞的行为和纸牌游戏中与他人的冲突是导致他死亡的直接原因，这既是一个性格悲剧，更是社会环境所酿成的苦果。本篇paper代写由51due代写平台整理，供大家参考阅读。

Stephen klein is called pioneer of American naturalistic novels. He created a series of images of ordinary people with his unique naturalistic writing techniques, revealing the cruelty of war, the poverty of American underclass, the rampant violence and other themes. In 1893, street girl Meiji was called the first naturalistic novel in American literature. The novel "the red medal of valor" established his unshakable position in the American literary world. The short story blue hotel is also one of its popular works. Novel creation in crane traveling after the western United States, the plot is simple, depicting the are different little background, such as the old farmer, swedes, east, cowboy, hotel owners and gamblers. They seem to be simple-minded, gambler, drunkard and irrational, but they are trying to survive in the harsh conditions of the American west in a mask of armed ego.

Mask is an ancient dramatic expression technique, which first appeared in ancient Greek tragedy. Nowadays, it usually refers to the social mask people may wear. The personality mask jung refers to elevates people's social communication mode to the theoretical level. ", he thought, the personality mask is a complex system between individual consciousness and society, on the one hand can make the individual some exact impression to others, on the other hand to hide the true nature of the individual." It can also be said that the personality mask is the role played by the individual in accordance with the requirements of the society, and it is the side that the individual shows publicly. On the face of it, the bizarre behavior of the swedes in "hotel blue" and the conflict with others in card games were the immediate causes of his death. It is not hard to find that this is not only a character tragedy, but also a result of social environment. It is the irreconcilable contradiction and conflict between his personality mask and his real self in the actual environment that causes these tragedies.

The Swede was different from the others as soon as he appeared. When he entered the hotel, everyone else washed their hands in cold water, except him, who was cautious and trembling. When the others made brief pleasantries with the people around them, he was the only one who remained silent and suspicious. But while they were all absorbed in the game of CARDS, he laughed coldly and heartily, lest anyone should kill him. He then accepted an invitation to play poker with others. In the same way, when playing CARDS, his performance is very bizarre, and sometimes he shouts hysterically, which indicates that he is extremely frightened. Suddenly, he cried out, "I think someone wants to kill me!" He was taken away from the game by his boss. But when he came back from the game, he spoke in a tone of arrogance, looked aggressive and aggressive. When he found out that jonny was cheating, he was even more persistent in pestering him, and the two began to wrestle. Things got worse and worse, and the scuffle soon turned into a fight. In this struggle, the swedes' eyes were "as fierce as a lion" and "as fierce as a bull", very frightening. When jonny was defeated, he was more like a proud cock, strutting and laughing.

Jung believed that we wore the personality mask with ourselves and our role in society, who am I to tell the outside world, we use personality mask to ideal self, in order to maintain our hypocrisy and cowardice. The swedes disguise themselves as arrogant and fierce, trying to hide their fear and panic with hysterical Shouting and fighting, and their personality masks are extremely inflated. However, if the personality mask is too artificial, it will produce symptoms of mental disorder, such as irritability and loneliness. The excessive panic and mania of the swedes are the manifestations of the inflated personality mask. This led him to sacrifice the other components in personality, seriously affected the mental health and normal social interaction, and made him the strange environment in the blue hotel in the isolated position.

Klein's description of the scene sets a heavy tone for the novel. Outside the blue hotel is a solitary prairie, where snowstorms have been raging, a frightening sight, and violence was rampant in the western United States. Swedes before to the western United States in the region there is a bias, think at that time still stay in the wilderness, in the western United States has not been development period, and affected by the natural environment, but his heart was filled with fear. This reaction comes from his fear of the unknown things or people, which triggers the psychological defense mechanism and makes him unconsciously enter a different state of mind from the real human nature. It can be said that the tragedy of the Swedish people's fate, in addition to the reasons for the expansion of their own personality masks, is mainly due to social and environmental factors.

The fear and grotesque behavior of the swedes made the rest of the hotel very unhappy with him. When he could not suppress our fears, loudly shout out someone to kill him, others still absorbed in play CARDS, not to what he said society, even think this is crazy behavior. While playing the card game, the swedes saw that there was a dark side to the game, but the easterners did not support him when he rescued his partner, the Oriental. When the swedes decided jonny was cheating, no one was on the swedes' side, although everyone else knew. He was deeply isolated and felt a strong sense of threat, and his fear was reinforced. It can be said that the swedes at this time were completely isolated from the small society of blue hotels as an outsider. To defend themselves and to prove their bravery, the swedes resorted to violence. As a result, he reverted to his previous timid stance and became fierce.

When the Swede won the battle against jonny, he wanted to show himself and win the support and approval of others. Unfortunately, he failed again and even lost his own life. After the swedes left the blue hotel, they trudged through the storm and found a hotel. He walked with his head held high in the tavern, and spoke with a ferocious fierceness. In addition, he took a hard drink of whiskey and asked the gambler to drink with him. Likewise, the gambler ignored him, not to mention the victory he had just won in the fight. The indifference of the gambler to the swedes rekindled his anger, which led him to force the gambler to drink, and he was eventually killed by the gambler. At the end of the novel, the Oriental's words are thought-provoking. The easterners believed that the swedes were responsible for their deaths and should bear the main responsibility. Gamblers were merely accomplices. What the Oriental said tells the real cause of death of the Swedish people's tragic ending. His environment and the conflict between the swedes and others have contributed to this tragedy.

要想成绩好，英国论文得写好，51due代写平台为你提供英国留学资讯，专业辅导，还为你提供专业英国essay代写，paper代写，report代写，需要找论文代写的话快来联系我们51due工作客服QQ：800020041或者Wechat：Abby0900吧。

[zeroviraluniverse-blog]

Codes, and politics: what the aftermath of the bust-ups tells us

Visit Now - http://zeroviral.com/codes-and-politics-what-the-aftermath-of-the-bust-ups-tells-us/

Codes, and politics: what the aftermath of the bust-ups tells us

Allan Border was angry. His team had just failed by a couple of wickets to conjure victory over the West Indies at the Gabba, and now he was informed that thanks to the newish ICC code of conduct and network of match referees, he needed to face a hearing in front of Raman Subba Row to answer a charge of dissent. Border had stood at the non-striker’s end when Damien Martyn and Greg Matthews both fell lbw to Curtly Ambrose late on day four, and when a Merv Hughes appeal against Richie Richardson was turned down by Steve Randell, he said something like “you were giving lbws yesterday, why aren’t you giving them today?”

Fewer than 12 months after he refused to take the field in Adelaide upon hearing of his longtime deputy Geoff Marsh’s omission from the Test team, Border had another “captain grumpy” moment and chose to skip the hearing. What followed were hurried communications between Subba Row and the ICC president Colin Cowdrey in England, resulting in Border being fined half his match fee (AUD 2,000) rather than being banned for the next Test, in Melbourne. Amazingly, when Border was again charged with dissent in the series’ final match at the WACA, another referee, Donald Carr, gave him only a reprimand. So much for repeat offenders.

Twenty-five years later and the Kagiso Rabada saga has many of the same elements: misbehaviour, politics, and questions of consistency. Only this time the code and its enforcers have been through two decades or more of various scrapes and arguments, and in the place of Border’s “captain grumpy” there is a South African team with a mounting sense of victimhood where disciplinary matters are concerned. On the other side of the ledger is an Australian team with a bad reputation on the field but a better one in terms of negotiating the human side of the code: dealing with umpires and match referees, and getting feedback about interpretations. While one side plays to the gallery, the other works the match officials’ room.

For the Australians, the origins of this approach can arguably be traced back to “Monkeygate”, the fraught summer of 2007-08 when Harbhajan Singh was charged with racially vilifying Andrew Symonds, found guilty, and then subject to an Indian team appeal against the charge that led – via a foul-up of Harbhajan’s prior-offences record – to the bowler sidestepping a ban. It is difficult to overestimate how much that episode changed Australian attitudes, both from the players towards their administration and also from the team and their management to the ICC code and its enforcement.

“Australians… have become very much the minority in terms of where they see the line being drawn, and so on the field of play seem to expect that other teams are supposed to have their lines crossed in silence on the premise that it is all part of the game”

Since that time, the Australian team has been on an individual journey in terms of on-field behaviour; attempting a less hostile approach for some years before being given more licence by Cricket Australia’s Board and management in in 2013. But they have also evolved a sense of letting the umpires and match referees decide what behaviour is appropriate and what is not. It is from here that the now hackneyed concept of “the line” has grown, for in Australian eyes it is judged not by the players themselves but by the umpires, in much the same way as “line” decisions about run-outs and stumpings are to be judged by the umpires. In this there can also be seen a far more traditional Australian attitude: umpires are there to make decisions, walking is for the English.

Unchanged by the Harbhajan affair is the Australian team’s strong association with stepping over everyone else’s line, wherever it may be drawn in the minds of opposing teams, on a regular basis, and drawing increasingly common bouts of retaliation. When the subsequent retaliation goes over either the Australian line – as was the case with Quinton de Kock and David Warner – or the ICC’s, then the response is something like “oh, no, I’m perfectly justified to react, because that’s my line”.

An intriguing element about the way the Australians see the line is that they have become very much the minority in terms of where they see it being drawn, and so on the field of play seem to expect that other teams are supposed to have their lines crossed in silence on the premise that it is all part of the game. Those from a more removed vantage point, ESPNcricinfo’s Sharda Ugra among them, have recognised that Australia’s cricketing culture now sits outside the norms elsewhere, raising the question of whether it is they who should now conform.

Conformity, though, is very much at the core of the way Australia deals with any instance of being charged under the code of conduct. By repeatedly insisting that the umpires and the ICC are responsible for deciding where “the line” is drawn, they have become duty-bound to accept the umpire’s decision, and by extension the match referees’. In the words of the coach Darren Lehmann: “From my point of view we’ve had no issues with it in the past. We normally put up our hand and move on and that’s just the way it’s been. They give you a charge overnight and you make a decision from there, and that’s how it’s been since I’ve been involved anyway. Each country to their own really on that one.”

Since 2011, in fact, the Australians have only once challenged a charge: when both Mitchell Johnson and Ben Stokes were charged with making deliberate or inappropriate physical contact on the field in Adelaide in 2013. The match referee presiding at the time was none other than Jeff Crowe, who agreed to overturn the charge after a pair of separate hearings.

Kagiso Rabada celebrates a wicket with his team-mates Associated Press

When the Australians do have a question to raise about the code’s application or process, they are careful not to do it in the context of a hearing. There was enormous angst within the Australian camp around the dissent charge brought against Smith the day after Josh Hazlewood had been charged for his reaction to a failed lbw decision referral against Kane Williamson in Christchurch in early 2016. But it was not publicly evident in Smith’s acceptance of his charge and fine, and instead conveyed privately to the ICC after the tour’s conclusion. In the minds of match officials, these things add up.

A major difference between Johnson/Stokes and Rabada/Smith was that the former did not follow a dismissal. This exception rather proves the rule as far as Australian interaction with the ICC code: the team manager Gavin Dovey seeks to build co-operative relationships with match referees, the coach Darren Lehmann sits on the ICC’s cricket committee, and the longtime chief executive James Sutherland has never so much as uttered a syllable in public criticism of the code. Contrast this with the former Cricket South Africa chief Haroon Lorgat, standing in open defiance of the code alongside Faf du Plessis after his ball tampering charge was upheld in Adelaide in 2016.

If South Africa mess up in a cricketing sense, the captain often walks into the post-match press conference to accept responsibility for a mistake. But when it comes to the code of conduct, there is now a long record of South Africa denying wrongdoing or questioning the merit of the charge. This pattern had its most outsized example between the second and third Tests in Australia in late 2016, when du Plessis was charged for altering the condition of the ball by the use of a mint.

At a memorable appearance on the MCG outfield, Hashim Amla fronted the television cameras with the entire South Africa squad behind him. As an illustration of a siege mentality it lacked only the drawbridge. The subsequent appeal left many to scratch their heads about the grounds on which recourse could be sought, given what the laws of the game state about foreign substances. But there was a sense of preserving honour to it all.

South Africa’s players and management are extremely proud of their success, particularly so given the numerous historical, economic and cultural disadvantages they have had to cope with relative to Australia in particular. The sport is not, as in Australia, the No. 1 in the land, having to compete with the unassailable popularity of football and the Afrikaaner loyalty to rugby.

“If South Africa mess up in a cricketing sense, the captain often walks into the post-match press conference to accept responsibility for a mistake. But when it comes to the code of conduct, there is now a long record of South Africa denying wrongdoing”

Money is tight – the best players in the national team are paid nowhere near their Australian equivalents, and hold-ups to the T20 Global League have cost not only money but the job of Lorgat. Pitches and cricket grounds are of high quality, a huge contributing factor in the national team’s continued success, but there are plenty of facilities now in need of upgrades, where they exist at all. At the same time, the growing pains of transformation have tested many within the system, even as its rightness has been underlined by the emergence of Rabada himself. In maintaining such a strong on-field record in spite of all these obstacles, the ICC’s disciplinary process has come to be seen as another challenge to be surmounted.

Before “mintgate” was even a glimmer in the minds of controversialists, Rabada had been the dominant bowler in the first Test of the series in Perth, before playing a supporting role to Vernon Philander and Kyle Abbott in Hobart. In the third, a day-night match in Adelaide, Rabada proved a threat to debutant New South Welshman Nic Maddinson, who after scratching around for 11 balls could do nothing when the 12th sped and swerved past his bat to knock out the stumps. Rabada turned and offered him some fruity advice on the way off, in an instance that did not attract censure at the time from the match referee Andy Pycroft, largely because the umpires did not hear what had been said to Maddinson. It was, however, noted for the future: umpires became more aware of what to look for. There was no indication that South Africa did likewise.

The Adelaide Test occurred a few months after the introduction of a demerit points system for repeat breaches of the ICC code. With its introduction came an expectation from match officials that there would be more hearings and appeals, quite simply because one of the criticisms of the old system was that players simply signed up for whatever the referee gave them because a ban had been avoided. There were instances of players repeatedly breaching the code in different clauses without any real escalation and penalty.

Referees sometimes looked at individual cases more dimly because of the player’s record, but in the case of a level 1 offence the player in question needed to offend in the same area three times in a year to merit a ban: Warner’s change from “the bull” to “the reverend” followed one such instance, but they were truly few and far between. Instances of a player being banned for a single offence were rarer still: Dinesh Ramdin was docked two matches for claiming a catch from a ball that clearly bounced in the 2013 Champions Trophy, but criticisms of why this was so, when so many batsmen stand their ground after being caught behind, arguably warded off other such decisions.

David Warner is engulfed after helping to run out AB de Villiers Getty Images

Players and teams alike viewed the code as something of a joke, necessitating the formulation of a system that had greater consequences. The designation of offences has not differed much under the new system, but their consequences have shifted greatly. So as Rabada kept adding consistently to his rap sheet for send-offs, the demerits mounted up. He was duly banned in England for an offence – swearing at Ben Stokes after dismissing him – more or less identical to that incident for which he avoided sanction against Maddinson, and continued to tally up the points. In Durban, he was warned by the umpires after sending a volley Warner’s way upon his second-innings dismissal, but went on to further send-offs and the physical brush with Smith in Port Elizabeth. So when Crowe ruled against Rabada, he was addressing not only a pattern of behaviour but implementing a system now devised to stamp just this out.

South Africa, though, have continued to see inconsistency and hypocrisy. Among the most telling lines from du Plessis was in revealing part of Crowe’s modus operandi for not banning Warner after his stairwell confrontation with de Kock. “The match referee said there are bigger things to play for here, that’s why he didn’t want to ban Davey Warner,” du Plessis said. “Because he wants him to play the rest of the series. I just said I would like the same to apply to KG [Rabada].”

On a public commentary level, this is equivalent to political populism, ignoring the two players’ relative disciplinary records and playing up to the Australians’ poor on-field reputation. Similarly fanciful was floating a concept of defining different degrees of physical contact in cricket and assigning penalties accordingly. Cricket, of course, has never been a contact sport.

But du Plessis did follow up with something a little more pragmatic when asked about why the team had taken to challenging, if not outright appealing, most code of conduct verdicts they are presented with. “Our strike rate is 0% at the moment with trying to challenge these cases – it will probably stay at 0%,” he said. “I don’t think there is a big turnover when it comes to [challenging] these things.

“If there is inconsistency in the application of the ICC code, old or new, then it is no more so than the application of law in different courts, by different judges, in different countries and jurisdictions”

“It’s so difficult to always be consistent because there will always be different interpretations. An umpire sees Test cricket as a game of playing hard and he lets a few things go, and then you get umpires that are much more by the book and they look at every single incident. That’s why it’s about trying to let the game play on, let cricket be the main focus.”

If there is inconsistency in the application of the ICC code, old or new, then it is no more so than the application of law in different courts, by different judges, in different countries and jurisdictions. As Subba Row himself said in 2005: “It is a question of judgement. There isn’t anything written down and one match referee’s judgement may be different from the other. Just as it happens in court, no two judges give the same decision, although they have the same set of guidelines. You have to take a view; that’s your job.”

In appealing the Rabada decision, South Africa are seeking a different judge. But the question of his guilt or otherwise will be put to the test of an appeal process that seldom rules in favour of the charged. Since the Harbhajan matter in 2008, James Anderson and Ravindra Jadeja have been the only two players to have their charges thrown out, when the Australian Gordon Lewis ruled neither man had a case to answer over their corridor fracas at Trent Bridge in 2014. Perhaps Rabada’s advocate Dali Mpofu had that in mind, even as he told South Africa’s Times that the case had wider consequences at stake. “I do believe this is an important case for all South Africans and has implications for our shared project of nation-building,” he said. “We should all wish Kagiso luck for Monday.”

What is clear above all else is that both Australia and South Africa have some thinking to do about their conduct in relation to the code. For Australia the conversation should be less about the way they negotiate the ICC’s rules and regulations than how the players wish themselves to be seen to the rest of the world. For South Africa, the team’s perception is far less of a problem than the nuts and bolts of dealing constructively with the game’s governors. If that means starting a conversation about redrawing the code, or reassessing the roles and qualifications of umpires and match referees, then it is one for the ICC committee room.

Their contrasting dilemmas do not recall Border’s early brush so much as the closing exchange from The Mission, a 1986 film about conflict over the colonisation of parts of South America in the 18th century. Discussing the destruction of one Jesuit mission with an emissary for the Pope, sent to decide on whether to close it, the pragmatic local governor states: “We must work in the world, your eminence. The world is thus.” Comes the rueful reply: “No, Senor Hontar. Thus have we made the world… thus have I made it.”

[drubblernews-blog]

New Post has been published on http://drubbler.com/2017/03/19/dymovaya-zavesa-trump-or-endangered-focus-budget/

Dymovaya zavesa Trump, or endangered focus budget

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push();

Ivan Kuznetsov, March 19, 2017, 4:55- REGNUM

Press has always sought to embrace the boundless — talk about all events, large and small, and to please every reader — intellectual and man. This desire is always constrained by two factors: physical limitation that is associated with the format of a publication and a powerful bias delivshee news on “serious and real” and “small and unimportant.” Begun at the dawn of the 21st century the era of the Internet developed from those restrictions did not leave one stone upon another. Modern media can host an unlimited amount of information portals, and seals and celebrities have long eclipsed by the popularity of the gleaming intelligence and emergencies. The struggle of content and form, as the virus spread from philosophy into all spheres of life, in the sphere of mass media ended long ago in favor of the latter.

Before people decided that read, selecting a media and perusing the headlines — alleged concentrates publications, and in fact is merely their signage. Now, being finally convinced culture in the nullity of any of the content, people largely shifted hard and responsible work of its information selection of food at one time or another, whether it is a news aggregator site, application or account celebrities in the social network. These aggregators, unlike MASS MEDIA, do not work with the information as such, they only track the size of the circles branching from the news on the information field. If the news is quite loud, write about it all and it will “float” — fall into the “top” of your favorite website or will be referred to our idol in the glamorous post. And if it is not written all she does not fall into the aggregator, and so it is important. It is this — some amorphous and undefined “volume” in the media was the only factor that determines the fate of the now public information. With no objective scale, of course, does not exist, plays the role of only relative volume. On the lack and cancer news. And vice versa.

it is on such a new and yet to be fully understood by no one field have to play American politicians, each chihom which observe hundreds of lenses and microphones. The rules of the game have changed, is no longer important, will be made public, it is important to as it will be able to submit and what circles go on the water.

For Donald Trump, the eighth week holding the Office of President of the United States, from the beginning of its invasion in American policy success is dependent on ability to handle information and correctly, and, most importantly, at the time of her serve. The last week has been extremely rich loud news, each of which eclipsed less hot, but much more important information. Perhaps it was intended.

at the beginning of the week the role of information noise had to play two themes. Firstly, continued awarding passions around wiretapping Trump, which, according to the new President, his predecessor, Barack Obama. Here stand the hefty pause and introducing rapid fire the liberal press and even Congress, Trump delicately retreated, saying that from the outset of the learned from the media (and thus, the evidence may not be and speech). Secondly, a meeting was scheduled with Angela Merkel, who was transferred in connection with a snow storm had swept the entire Northeast United States. The storm proved even better Newsmaker than Chancellor.

under the guise of information these events Trump relatively silent “signed a decree, which should allow him to redraw the entire executive branch of American power to suit your needs. In accordance with the Decree, the head of each Ministry or agency must evaluate the subordinate structure it in terms of new policy leadership and put forward proposals for “Optimization”. These proposals will then be summarized, complemented by proposals of the public and the expert community and reported to the President. Publication of the report, the decree is not mentioned. Thus, Trump soon will get a rare opportunity to abolish years old and razrastavshiesja programs, departments, or even Agency and Department, referring to the fact that they themselves acknowledged to be ineffective. He has nothing to lose: professional bureaucrats and so hate it.

the second half of the week was as two peas similar to the first: loud Trump misses concealed his quiet progress. But the slip was at this time where greater. The second immigration Decree, signed with great fanfare last week, was blocked by a court for a few hours before the entry into force. The joy of opponents of the new President on this issue is clear and valid, because this win is an exact copy of the triumph a month ago, when the same way through Federal Court in one State was able to block the first immigration decree for Trump. Seemingly, the host of the White House whether too cocky, or simply stupid, again with the acceleration swooped on the same rake. Be that as it may, Trump hastened to take the next step. Right on the day of the lifting of the Decree, while the MEDIA have been busy collecting comments and victorious related publication, Trump submitted to Congress a draft budget for the year 2018, which sharply reduced funding for international programs (both the State Department and on environmental topics), and increased spending on the army, Navy and law enforcement agencies. News of the day, it’s no longer was and followed intelligence read only, so that the broad masses will likely notice nothing.

at the end of the week meeting with Angela Merkel and loud, but devoid of any of the content of the story with a handshake, proved to be very handy to save Trump opponents from unpleasant feelings that they might experience after learning that dear to their hearts attribute hegemony — tune, under which you want to dance to get American help — for scrap.

a separate theme this week became America’s relationship with the United Nations. On the one hand, in the case of the adoption of the new United States budget in half would reduce payments to the United Nations, that means a loss of 10% of the Organization’s total budget. On the other hand, America threatens get out of the Human Rights Council, using both informal occasion resolution 2016 year Security against Union Trump Israel. Because human rights and manipulation using them — American Pipit, Board with the departure of the United States would lose any influence. Thus, Trump through his command has both economic and political pressure on long and thoroughly criticised them, without revealing the organization until their wishes regarding what exactly the United Nations must do to earn his favor.

as always in politics, no one sees the whole picture, and outsider knows less than podkovernoj fight. But if the failure of the second migration of the Ordinance has indeed been “programmed”, we can talk about a new phase in the politics of 45-th President of the United States. At this stage, Trump, apparently to make sure the illusiveness grezivshegosja Liberals impeachment, ready to go on a serious reputational loss and even bring political sacrifices to create a docile and efficient State apparatus necessary for reforms in the long term.

Read earlier in this story: split superpower: the media and the political class against voters

If you notice an error in the text, highlight it and press Ctrl + Enter to send information to the editor.

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push();

[junker-town]

12 must-read stories on the Floyd Mayweather-Conor McGregor fight

Floyd Mayweather is fighting Conor McGregor so we can talk about it. Born out of that comes every other reason that the two fighters — a 49-0 boxer known as one of the greatest ever, and a MMA fighter whose grandiose facade may come crashing down over 12 rounds — are inflicting bodily harm upon each other, for sport, in front of an audience of millions, on Saturday. Without us talking about it, there would be no fight. They don’t care about this unless we did first.

Talk about it we have, in bars and on radio shows and to friends and with strangers. There’s so much to talk about! The actual substance of the fight and whether there’s actually anything to it. The morality of these two objectively bad people. The reasons why they’re fighting. Why we should or should not care. Where they came from. We’ve even talked about the people talking about them, and why they did or didn’t talk about them in the right way, and how the act of talking about them is bad, or maybe it’s fine.

Saturday night, we can finally stop talking them. They’ll fight, one will win, and we’ll move on. Until then, with so many people talking about it, you should consume the very best of it.

We curated 12 rounds of stories — boxing term! — and tacked a few equally worthy ones to the end. If you read anything between now and Saturday night, and you haven’t read any of these, allow this to be your one-stop Mayweather vs. McGregor guide.

1st round: Mayweather-McGregor and the death spiral of American sports

(Spencer Hall | SB Nation)

Boxing is American sports’ prized zombie. When it shows up, everyone freaks the hell out and pays attention. It’s horrifying, arresting, contagious, and probably a bad thing for anyone concerned with human life. Hang out around it too much, and it will eventually eat you. Boxing, as a major sport, isn’t exactly alive—but it’s certainly not dead, and when there’s an outbreak people can’t pay attention to anything else.

It’s also one of those sports that can easily break quarantine as a discipline. They can crash all the way over into something else entirely. That something ends up being less like a sport, and more like pure, horrific, and inevitably absurd spectacle.

2nd round: Mayweather vs. McGregor: The complete beef history timeline

(James Dator | SB Nation)

This is where things get silly.

Both Mayweather and McGregor post fake flyers for the fight, which puts gas on the fire. From here the two jab back-and-forth over the possibility of the fight, with the impasse routinely being how much money they would both be paid.

McGregor kept contending that he deserved more money than the fight as offering, while Mayweather poked fun at Conor’s net worth — saying he didn’t deserve being paid more than $2.5 million.

3rd round: You Don't Have To Pick A Side Between Floyd Mayweather And Conor McGregor

(Diana Moskovitz | Deadspin)

And so even though Floyd Mayweather Jr. sucks, and even though he has signed up to spar against horrible people for the two most recent fights of his anyone cares about—Manny Pacquiao, then Conor McGregor—the urge remains. One of them has to be good, right? Or at least less bad? Someone has to be worth rooting for?

No. Not even close. In this case, like before, they both suck.

4th round: Floyd Mayweather's fight-week prep? Hanging at his strip club until the wee hours

(Dan Wetzel | Yahoo Sports)

Some would wonder if hanging out in a gentlemen’s club into the wee hours of the morning is the best way to prepare for a fast approaching fight, but Mayweather laughs that off. He is, as a matter of point, 49-0 in his career heading into Saturday’s bout with Conor McGregor.

There is no one else on earth who knows more about not just what it takes to win, but to never lose.

“Nobody can beat me,” Mayweather says over the din of the club. “Nobody can beat me.”

5th round: True stories of the incredible, unbelievable, unstoppable Conor McGregor!

(Flinder Boyd | Bleacher Report)

Once, before he had a driver's license, (McGregor) persuaded Egan to let him take the wheel of Egan's parents' car. He drove in perfect circles around an industrial park. He flashed his blinker at the optimal time and turned with precision. As long as he was in motion, he was in control. When it came time to park, McGregor hit the gas and made a beeline toward the spot. The car crashed into the wall and smoke billowed into the sky. He had forgotten to hit the brakes.

6th round: Why Floyd Mayweather can still box after beating women

(Soraya Nadia McDonald and Lonnae O’Neal | The Undefeated)

Why does Mayweather remain such a compelling figure despite his repeated and documented instances of domestic abuse? Let us count the ways: There are no publicly available photos showing the evidence of his crimes; there’s no central organization to hold Mayweather and other abusive boxers to account; and there’s an understanding, however contentious, that some boxers are inherently violent, their rage uncontrollable. Furthermore, there’s a long-standing pattern of victims, especially black women, holding their tongues to protect the black men who hit them.

All of those factors leave some fans torn, some indifferent and some completely disgusted. Despite the moral split decision, many boxing fans remain reliable spectators who continue to reward Mayweather with cultural cachet, fame and money, money, money.

7th round: Conor McGregor is still shaped by his Dublin roots as he prepares for his fight against Floyd Mayweather

(Wright Thompson | ESPN The Magazine)

McGregor hit the throttle and roared down the street. Drug dealers scrambled to whatever safety they could find as he sped through the intersection. A wise move in practice for a Crumlin native, but McGregor had underestimated the mania sweeping the projects and the lower-class quarters of Dublin. The dealers didn't want to confront him.

They all had a phone in their hands.

They wanted to take his picture.

8th round: Ballad of an Irish Son

(Shaun Al-Shatti | MMA Fighting)

Owen Roddy shakes his head. This feels like a dream, he says, like none of this is real. He may be the superstar’s striking coach now — or rather, his boxing coach; these are strange times — but that was never the plan. Because when he started, none of this was possible in Ireland. The dream didn’t exist. Mixed martial arts in the country was fiction and the notion of an Irishman vying for the world’s respect was ludicrous. The Irish hadn’t won a single fight in the UFC, much less achieved any measure of genuine success.

But Roddy was the one. He was always the one. He was the one who was going to break through.

9th round: Conor McGregor Is Not A Pioneer

(Oliver Roeder and Brin-Jonathan Butler | FiveThirtyEight)

McGregor isn’t the first superstar to move from the octagon to the boxing ring. One of MMA’s greatest fighters, Anderson “The Spider” Silva, tried the same thing back in 1998. He faced the not-exactly-household-name Osmar “Animal” Luiz Teixeira and after all of six minutes, Teixeira’s pugilistic skills proved too much for fellow Brazilian Silva. To protect him, Silva’s corner threw in the towel in the second round. Silva’s unparalleled genius in the octagon translated into his losing to someone even charitably described as a journeyman boxer; if this is any litmus test of what to expect from McGregor squaring off against Mayweather — one of boxing’s all-time greatest fighters— the current +400 money line somehow doesn’t reflect it.

10th round: Mayweather-McGregor Is the Feel-Bad Fight of the Century

(Bryan Curtis | The Ringer)

Mayweather-McGregor is often compared to Muhammad Ali’s bout with Japanese pro wrestler Antonio Inoki. In terms of horrible watchability, a better analogue is the 1982 title bout between Larry Holmes and Gerry Cooney, which was peddled in the crudest racial terms imaginable. Time magazine paired Cooney and Sylvester Stallone’s Rocky on the cover as boxing’s great white hopes; Cooney spoke of his fondness for the movie Death Wish, in which a white vigilante rubs out the black bad guys. When Holmes, who was the reigning heavyweight champ, complained he was getting the same purse as the challenger, he was called a racist.

Mayweather-McGregor hasn’t yet scraped bottom in quite the same way. But the months of hype have felt equally dismal. George Vecsey’s 1982 column about Holmes-Cooney could run this week with only minor edits. The column was titled “Get It Over With.”

11th round: The Floyd Mayweather vs. Conor McGregor fight is about the green, but also about black and white

(Khaled A. Beydoun | The Undefeated)

With no great white American hope in the ring, and no promising contender on the horizon, boxing is still without what it needs to capture the attention of the coveted white male fan base. McGregor, far more the mixed martial artist than boxer, offers what the sport has long fantasized about: a brash, charismatic showman outside of the ring who not only talks a good game, but delivers by way of victories and the brutal knockouts fans crave. Especially the legions of white male fans who have come to adore him and flock to the UFC en masse to see his fights.

12th round: Conor McGregor's 'movement' training is just another part of the circus

(Spencer Hall | SB Nation)

Maybe most importantly, the advantage McGregor has in using movement training in MMA fights is a psychological one — both for his own psyche and to use against his opponent. Fighters all train, but not all of them have a good handle on tuning their psychological wiring to the exact right frequency before a fight. Some rely on superstition, some rely on habit and routine, but all of them — at least those who aren’t complete head cases in the ring — have something they lean on to tolerate the absurd pressure of what is an inherently absurd situation.

The Decision: A few more things you should read

Why I won’t be watching Floyd Mayweather-Conor McGregor fight (Nancy Armour | USA Today)

Floyd Mayweather can trademark 50-0 but never knock out Rocky Marciano's record (James Brady | SB Nation)

A Theory on How Conor McGregor vs. Floyd Mayweather Will Play Out (Mick Rouse | GQ)

Four Ways of Looking at Mayweather vs. McGregor (Nancy Kidder | The Atlantic)

The myth of Floyd Mayweather's southpaw struggles (Mike Chiappetta | MMA Fighting)

7 experts who actually predict Conor McGregor can beat Floyd Mayweather (Kurt Mensching | SB Nation)

All of SB Nation’s Mayweather-McGregor coverage can be found here

[junker-town]

Celtics vs. Bulls, the series where nothing makes sense

There’s always one inexplicable first round series. Meet Boston vs. Chicago 2017.

Take everything you thought you knew, crumple it up, throw it in the trashcan, and set it on fire. Behold the Celtics and the Bulls, a series between a one seed and an eight in which neither team can win on their home floor, not playing any point guards is a reasonable adjustment, and Paul Zipser and Terry Rozier are difference-makers.

This is a series where one can say with a straight face that an injury to Rajon Rondo changed its entire complexion. It’s a series where Gerald Green can start a must-win game. If we are living in basketball’s age of reason, this series has been a satire worthy of Swift. At the very least, it merited a profane Kevin Garnett testimonial delivered to the Celtics before Game 3.

The C’s certainly needed something to rouse them from their nightmare scenario that was punctuated by the ease in which the Bulls inflicted their damage on Boston’s psyche. Some of it was predictable, like the Bulls massive rebounding advantage, and some of it was completely unexpected.

Photo by Maddie Meyer/Getty Images

Role players like Zipser, Bobby Portis, and Nikola Mirotic became prime factors and Rondo returned from postseason exile to be one of the two best players in the series. The other had been Jimmy Butler, which only proved yet again that stars matter in the postseason and the Celtics are short of top-end talent.

If Game 1 was a disappointment, Game 2 was a slow motion embarrassment for the Celtics. Teams that let opening games slip away on their home court are supposed to come out with force. They are supposed to retake control of the series. The C’s did neither. They were scattered on offense and disconnected on defense. They griped with each other and hung their heads. It got so bad that Rondo suggested the Celtics had quit and Avery Bradley didn’t disagree.

Because this is Boston, the reaction was over the top, although not entirely unjustified. Brad Stevens is not on the hot seat and Danny Ainge will still be the decision-maker this summer.

Still, it was accurate to point out after Game 2 that Stevens had as many postseason wins as Fred Hoiberg. Just as it was totally fair to note that Ainge didn’t upgrade the roster at the trade deadline when the Cavs, Raptors, and Wizards all made moves to strengthen their teams. These are the kind of recriminations that come with a collapse as thorough as the Celtics had on Tuesday.

The players were not spared either. Al Horford was barely a factor on Tuesday. He later said that he waits for the game to come to him, which is not what you want to hear from you max free agent big man. Jae Crowder, Marcus Smart, and Bradley were not able to pick up the shooting slack from Isaiah Thomas, who flew home to Seattle after Game 2 to grieve with his family following the death of his sister the day before the series started.

Photo by Maddie Meyer/Getty Images

Thomas was tremendous in Game 1 and then clearly and understandably off his game on Tuesday. That made it very difficult for the Celtics to score and that’s the extent of the analysis here. We use sports as a window into the human condition, but there is no deeper meaning in a senseless tragedy.

Outside the Hub, Celtic schadenfreude was out in force. Draft picks and cap space are wonderful things to have, but they ain’t never scored a point in the playoffs. The future may sound lovely, but the present is tenuous and the present is everything in the postseason. Their lackluster performance reinforced all the negative perceptions associated with a team that has grasped at legitimacy even as it rose in the standings.

The Celtics may have been waiting to be exposed in the playoffs, but what made this so remarkable was that it was the freaking Chicago Bulls making them unravel. The same Bulls that spent a good part of the year bickering in public and private. The same Bulls who needed a late-season push to even get into the playoffs had come together in beautiful harmony. To be fair, even they were surprised to be in this position, and no one really believed they had full control of the series yet.

Against that backdrop, the Celtics were finally the desperate team in Friday’s Game 3. They played with urgency, but they also played with poise and control. Helter-skelter possessions slowed down and resulted in quality looks. When things started to go awry toward the end of the first half, the C’s made a strong push to start the second and sustained a Butler flurry late in the third to emerge with a relatively easy victory.

Stevens’ decision to start Green was shrewd. It allowed the Celtics to start small and stay that way with Jae Crowder logging most of his minutes at the four. The extra shooting helped space the floor and negate some of Chicago’s size advantage, although they still got crushed on the boards.

On offense, a series of staggered screens for Thomas helped unlock Horford, who may have played his best game in a Boston uniform. The shooters finally made shots. Bradley, in particular, was sublime throughout. Their bench units, which had been almost unplayable at times, came through with a huge performance.

The Bulls, meanwhile, looked disjointed without Rondo on the floor. He had been crucial in not only establishing their rhythm on the offensive end, but also disrupting Boston’s timing by overplaying passing lanes. For whatever he’s lost physically, Rondo always did have a beautiful basketball mind and he has the Celtics playbook down cold.

Greg M. Cooper-USA TODAY Sports

“Hated him,” Dwyane Wade said after Game 2 in regards to a question about Rondo, his longtime playoff antagonist. “That hate is that respect. When we played against Boston back in the day, he knew all the plays. He messes up your first option. And then he knows the second option.”

Rondo’s renaissance was only one of several odd developments over the first two games, but it was easily the most important. Hoiberg started Jerian Grant in Rondo’s absence, who was not effective. Hoiberg then turned to Michael-Carter Williams, who was even worse.

The Bulls’ offense was reduced to a series of Butler and Wade drives to the basket, and Butler had one of the worst shooting playoff games of his career. With Rondo out indefinitely with a broken thumb, that may be their best offense the rest of the series. If the Bulls are going to pull this off, Butler has to continue being the best player on the court.

The rebounding is still the thing here. It’s been the Celtics’ fatal flaw throughout the season and it was always going to be a problem during the playoffs. When they have played their best basketball, such as a March win over the Cavaliers, they minimized the damage on the boards. When they have been at their worst, like they have most of the time against the Bulls, they look like kids trying to keep up with adults in a backyard volleyball match.

The Celtics were better in Game 3, but it’s a measure of how bad they’ve been that they could still allow 15 offensive rebounds and 17 second-chance points and call it a successful performance. Still, the effort was there, particularly from the guards who cracked back on box outs and didn’t try to leak out in transition.

So where do we go from here? Who the hell knows. Thomas hasn’t gone off since Game 1. Butler isn’t likely to miss 14 shots again. Literally any outcome short of a James Young podium game on Sunday would be plausible, and neither team should feel secure about their chances by the time the series returns to Boston next week.

There’s always one first round series that stands out from the others in its extreme eccentricities and rapid momentum swings. It just happens to be one where the series doesn’t start until the home team wins a game on their floor.