Saturday, December 31, 2005

A fragment of omniscience

A reflection of the Omniscient: living long enough to understand one small concept in one small way. Who'd have thought a hockey tournament could bring me to this place?

Some call it politics, some call it bias, conflict of interest, unfair, injustice.

A player on our team took offense at the penalty-worthy actions of an opposing player which seemed to repeatedly escape the discipline of the referee's whistle and threatened the safety of one of our team members. As a good team player, he defended his team mate by delivering his own view of discipline. No injury occurred.

The rule applied to our player by the ref was for a suspension. One game. Today I received an email indicating "The current rule book (read: established by committee) is not clear" (read: it only requires one game). The email continues: "Mr. So and So, Director of Operations" for the city hockey association (read: one person) "has ruled" (note the authoritative tone) that this penalty henceforth will carry "an automatic TWO game suspension." Mr. So and So's son plays on the opposing team.

My fragment of understanding?
Scum rises to the top of the pond. It is better to blog than to reply.
"Vengeance is mine, I will repay says the Lord."


  1. "As a good team player" ...hmmmmmmmmmmm. I rather think you and I might come down on opposite sides of this debate :)

    We really need to do coffee soon! This trading comments on blogs thing is fine, but really - how many blocks apart are we???

  2. I have no beef with the penalty to our player. My beef is with conflict of interest meddling to change/increase the punishment when one's own child is affected (just because he can).

    I'm around all next week. I want to see your book.

  3. Oh, and btw, the primary point is that I decided NOT to overreact. (Small victories).

  4. Yes and I applaud the primary point :) sorry if that wasn't clear!!!