the hog Posted October 13, 2007 Report Share Posted October 13, 2007 "Maybe the women achieved what they really wanted: publicity." This is a pretty offensive comment. How can you impute motives to anyone? I think an apology is in order. Firstly, I wrote "maybe". I did not state that they did. Secondly, if publicity is not what they wanted, why did they think it was necessary to show the sign? Publicity in my world is: I want to make it public. That was exactly what they did! Nothing offensive at all as I see it. Roland Well, some people feel very strongly about Bush. By the way you said, "maybe they achieved what they wanted", not maybe they wanted publicity - there is a big difference in meaning. The former means they wanted publicity and maybe they achieved it. Anyway, back to the important issue. Congratulations Harald! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
han Posted October 13, 2007 Report Share Posted October 13, 2007 Anyway, back to the important issue. Congratulations Harald! Agree! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Halo Posted October 13, 2007 Report Share Posted October 13, 2007 Really interesting Bermuda Bowl. Free speech is just that and nothing at all to do with Bridge ethics, etiquette or any other excuse for gagging people. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fred Posted October 13, 2007 Report Share Posted October 13, 2007 By the way, in theory one of the responsibilities of team's NPC (non-playing captain) is to make sure that the players behave themselves in a manner that is acceptable to the National Bridge Federation in question and that they follow the rules of the tournament itself. I can tell you as a person who has been on both sides that, in practice, this often amounts to trying to ensure that the players don't get caught when they do something stupid :rolleyes: So don't be totally surprised if the team's captain (Gail Greenberg - someone who I happen to be very fond of) is singled out for "punishment". Evidently and not surprisingly, Gail was a fine NPC throughout the play itself, but I am guessing that the USBF will believe that she failed them at the closing ceremonies. (I am assuming Gail knew what was going on). Fred GitelmanBridge Base Inc.www.bridgebase.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keylime Posted October 14, 2007 Report Share Posted October 14, 2007 (edited) I am quite happy for both South Africa and Norway in their successes. I have opened a bottle of fantastic Virginia wine to celebrate. A job well done. With regards to the political statement, I have no public opinion (if you want to know, message me - I have much to say about this) - but do feel that there will be repercussions forthcoming for the members of the team. Edited October 14, 2007 by keylime Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonottawa Posted October 14, 2007 Report Share Posted October 14, 2007 As has been stated by others, if the sign had been political in nature but reflected a less controversial message, such as 'End Poverty' or 'Stop the Genocide in Darfur', I can't imagine it would have been condemned or even questioned by anyone. Unfortunately, because of approximately 6 years of overwhelming bias and propaganda in the US mainstream media, what should be an equally obvious and uncontroversial message has become controversial. To NOT speak out against this administration would be evidence of a far greater lack of patriotism, or at the very least of colossal ignorance. Brainwashed naysayers notwithstanding. Wingnuts will vilify the Dixieberg Chicks. Cowards will waffle. I applaud them for their courage. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonottawa Posted October 14, 2007 Report Share Posted October 14, 2007 Speaking of inappropriateness and the USA 1 Venice Cup team ... Did this issue get resolved satisfactorily? http://stacyjacobs.com/2007/10/11/bbo-commentary Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pokerbids Posted October 14, 2007 Report Share Posted October 14, 2007 I cannot imagine that this discussion is coming down to the fact now that posters at award cermonies perhaps should be allowed but the words should be better. Maybe I am old school on this - Its a ceremony. You represent your country. Why do anything controversial . any sign - end poverty, end land mines. end or start anything. It just expresses lack of grace, form, etiquette, good manners and everything else my parents taught me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uday Posted October 14, 2007 Report Share Posted October 14, 2007 I don't have a public opinion on the actual incidents referenced here but the debates are better than the ones on TV :rolleyes: Congratulations to Norway for such a strong performance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike777 Posted October 14, 2007 Report Share Posted October 14, 2007 Interestingly I saw no Chinese team show a poster saying they did not vote for Hu, President of China. Given all the Chinese teams playing, you would think at least one of them voted for the other guy/gal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nickf Posted October 14, 2007 Report Share Posted October 14, 2007 What confirmation do you have that the whole team was involved? The photos I have seen show that it was only Rosenberg who held the poster, and the poster was about 5 times the size of a postage stamp. Maybe WE DIDN'T VOTE FOR BUSH refers to her and her husband? fwiw, I think holding up a political message was inappropriate, irrespective of the sentiment. I also think it should be the npc, in particular, who should bear most of any blame, or punishment, if any is meted out. nickfsydney Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrdct Posted October 14, 2007 Report Share Posted October 14, 2007 Speaking of inappropriateness and the USA 1 Venice Cup team ... Did this issue get resolved satisfactorily? http://stacyjacobs.com/2007/10/11/bbo-commentaryIf a player turns up 16 minutes late for a segment of a knock-out match in a world championship they deserve whatever ridicule anyone can come up with. Perhaps Stacy Jacobs was watching a different table to the one I was at, but when the issue came up for discussion at my table the following was said: "Walddk2: The question is whether the Americans can afford the 11 IMPs they were fined in the previous setbrolucius: Tell us more.Walddk2: Late arrival of one player, 16 minutesbjacobs: We are talking the Venice Cup here?brolucius: Wow!Walddk2: 5 minutes free of charge, then 1 IMP per minute after thatkit: does the 14 IMP lead include the penalty Roland?Walddk2: That I don't knowbrolucius: You need a good girlfriend to make such a delay worthwhile.barnets: :rolleyes:bjacobs: Schiffer, minimumkit: this is the venice cup DavidWalddk2: Well, there is no law against having girlfriends in the Venice Cup" All seemed pretty benign to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike777 Posted October 14, 2007 Report Share Posted October 14, 2007 Do you have a link to photo? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrdct Posted October 14, 2007 Report Share Posted October 14, 2007 As for the player's themselves, keep in mind that they were INVITED to play in this tournament. When one accepts such an invitation it is simple and common courtesy to respect the rules of the host. The players have a similar responsibility to the USBF (who they are representing and who are paying at least some of the bills). If they don't like the USBF's rules then they should not have agreed to follow them in the first place. I don't know if the WBF and/or USBF even have rules that cover this. If they don't now you can bet they will soon :rolleyes:I'm in furious agreement with Fred. I would go further to say that this incident is an embarrassment for the game. I'm sure most NBOs have codes of conduct dealing with these sort of things, for example from the CBF Code of Conduct (my emphasis added): "2. Representatives of the CBF shall conduct themselves at all times in a fair and responsible manner.3. Representatives shall refrain from comments or behaviours that are disrespectful, offensive, abusive, racist or sexist. In particular, behaviour that constitutes harassment or abuse will not be tolerated by CBF.4. During the course of all activities and events, CBF representatives shall avoid behaviour that brings the CBF or the game of bridge into disrepute, including but not limited to abusive use of alcohol and non-medicinal use of drugs." I'd be surprised if the USBF didn't have something similar. The other thing that these ladies probably should've taken into account is that China is not a place where free speech is practiced and making political statements can and does get a lot of people (including foreigners) into hot water from time to time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nickf Posted October 14, 2007 Report Share Posted October 14, 2007 http://www.fahrer.com.au/images/pic01.jpg nickfsydney Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cascade Posted October 14, 2007 Report Share Posted October 14, 2007 I don't have a public opinion on the actual incidents referenced here but the debates are better than the ones on TV :rolleyes: Congratulations to Norway for such a strong performance. This sounds like one of my understatements. Winning the Bermuda Bowl is indeed a Strong performance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
helene_t Posted October 14, 2007 Report Share Posted October 14, 2007 The bulletin does not contain the word "Bush" AFAICS. The photo posted by Nick is from his own site. I really don't understand this concept of "representing your country". Obviously Todd and I are with a small minority here, but it is really alien to me. They may have formal obligations towards their bridge federation and their sponsors, but towards their "country"? The concept is not even meaningful, let alone valid in this context. As an employee I would sometimes say that I represent my employer, but only during payed hours, and even then not necessarily. Maybe if they were obliged to carry t-shirts with the name of a sponsor I could understand that said sponsor would appreciate decent behavior during t-shirt hours with TV coverage. I may be biased by the fact that I happen to agree with their sentiment, and especially that I can sorta understand that some Americans feel compelled to make public statements in response to all the stupid "it is your fault" remarks they receive from us non-Americans. Suppose one of the Dutch players shouted "I didn't vote for the gay marriage" while receiving his bronze medal. If I were a Team Oranje officical I would probably instruct him not to do that again next year, but talking about punishment ..... maybe I'm overestimating my own neutrality. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike777 Posted October 14, 2007 Report Share Posted October 14, 2007 The bulletin does not contain the word "Bush" AFAICS. The photo posted by Nick is from his own site. I really don't understand this concept of "representing your country". Obviously Todd and I are with a small minority here, but it is really alien to me. They may have formal obligations towards their bridge federation and their sponsors, but towards their "country"? The concept is not even meaningful, let alone valid in this context. As an employee I would sometimes say that I represent my employer, but only during payed hours, and even then not necessarily. Maybe if they were obliged to carry t-shirts with the name of a sponsor I could understand that said sponsor would appreciate decent behavior during t-shirt hours with TV coverage. I may be biased by the fact that I happen to agree with their sentiment, and especially that I can sorta understand that some Americans feel compelled to make public statements in response to all the stupid "it is your fault" remarks they receive from us non-Americans. Suppose one of the Dutch players shouted "I didn't vote for the gay marriage" while receiving his bronze medal. If I were a Team Oranje officical I would probably instruct him not to do that again next year, but talking about punishment ..... maybe I'm overestimating my own neutrality. Helene...I may miss some of your comments....but let me put it this way. Do you owe your country of birth any duty...any duty at all? I will rephrase.....do you owe your country of birth/adoption a duty/debt greater than your very life? Assume...yes.........then what would you do? At the very least understand those who feel the answer is yes.......... If you have felt nothing..nothing is more important than you...than at least try and understand people who think their life is less important than....... Assume you owe it nothing...then what would you do? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoTired Posted October 14, 2007 Report Share Posted October 14, 2007 I hope what I read was wrong. I did not read all the posts, but if true: I am embarrased by the actions of the woman's team. Injecting partisan politics into bridge competition is disgusting. It reminds me of how the Russians would boycott chess tournaments and certain players for political reasons. How Arab states would boycott Israeli chess players. The whole thing reeks. KEEP POLITICS OUT OF SPORTING AND GAMING EVENTS I hope the ACBL never invites any of the players involved to another championship. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Codo Posted October 14, 2007 Report Share Posted October 14, 2007 Being a little late to this, I agree with the older guys and Justin that the price giving ceremony is no place for any political statement. Okay in reality this is a little more complicated: YOu are surely allowed to say: I love my country, it enables me to win this great tournement and I love China because they are so nice hosts. I mean nobody blames you for waving your or the hosts flags. If you forbid all political statements, this must be forbidden too. And if you allow this, where is the border? Tricky. But- just watching the picture- my guess is, that this was no political statement at all. I would guess it was a kind of joke, mabye as a response to all others (Players, officals, etc.) who wanted to tell the american team that they do not like Bush and all the things he did wrong? Maybe it was just because shew was tired to be atttacked as an American just because of her president and that was meant as a funny reply? If I am right, then it was a bad joke, but a serious: "Don´t do this again", will be more then enough. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jkljkl Posted October 14, 2007 Report Share Posted October 14, 2007 The bulletin does not contain the word "Bush" AFAICS. The photo posted by Nick is from his own site. I really don't understand this concept of "representing your country". Obviously Todd and I are with a small minority here, but it is really alien to me. (snip) Helene...(snip)I will rephrase.....do you owe your country of birth/adoption a duty/debt greater than your very life? Assume...yes.........then what would you do? (snip) My sympathy goes to the Helen camp and since south africa did so well in the Bermuda Bowl ... Ek eet my brood en drink my wyn,en hou my harten van goede rein.(N.P. Van Wyk Louw) ciao stefan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paulg Posted October 14, 2007 Report Share Posted October 14, 2007 I see this behaviour as childish, inappropriate, insensitive and arrogant. They are also wrong. They did vote for Bush. Or is this not the USA team? Paul Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aberlour10 Posted October 14, 2007 Report Share Posted October 14, 2007 Congratulations for Team Norway and all BBO members from this country :P Photo album from the Closing Ceremony... http://www.pzbs.pl/wyniki/2007/zagranica/b.../f08/index.html Robert Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hrothgar Posted October 14, 2007 Report Share Posted October 14, 2007 They are also wrong. They did vote for Bush. Or is this not the USA team? Huh... I guess elections work differently over in Scotland. Here in the US, the person with the most votes generally wins the election. I can personally attest that I did not vote for the chimp in either presidential election, and yet there he is... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erkson Posted October 14, 2007 Report Share Posted October 14, 2007 My first feeling : Rats Off A Sinking Ship. What if Bush had not been defeated in Irak ? My second feeling : They are so arrogant that they imagine that somebody somewhere cares about whom they vote for. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.