Hey there, time traveller!
This article was published 13/1/2020 (374 days ago), so information in it may no longer be current.
Working the refs
Re: Jets deserve better (Letters, Jan. 7) and Questionable calls (Letters, Jan. 8)
Over the past few days, the Free Press has published a number of letters critical of NHL officials, particularly those working at Winnipeg Jets games.
I have to agree that the level of officiating in the NHL, and for that matter the NBA and NFL, is grossly inconsistent game to game and often period to period or quarter to quarter. One hopes that all things even out after a season, but I doubt it.
I found it amusing to hear the commentary during the games about poor officiating at the world juniors. Admittedly, there the linesmen were missing obvious off-sides, but as far as the calls the referees made, the consistency was no better nor worse than at the NHL level.
One has to wonder why the refereeing is like it is? Are the referees still trying to "manage the game" rather than call it by the rulebook? If they clamped down at the start, most of the players would adjust. Is it the two-ref system, where one thinks the other will make the call and neither does? Is it simply the person and their capability? Is it the better TV coverage and we see more of the miscues? Are there outside influences affecting the decisions?
Some referees seem to always be mired in controversy. Has the league looked at the timing of calls and their influence on outcomes versus the betting point spreads? There is a stat for everything in hockey as there is in baseball.
Perhaps it is simply the fact that there is no consequence for incompetence just as there is little discipline for flagrant violations by a small group of individuals.
Oil central to Iran’s recent history
After three decades of news consumption, I still have yet to come across a mainstream news outlet that notes how one of the main reasons the Iranian Revolution occurred was due to foreign oil companies, notably those of the U.S. (but not outright excluding Canada or major European nations), exploiting their resources. I understand that it was a profit-losing lesson learned by the oilmen CEOs that they would never allow to happen to them again, by way of accessing always-willing domestic political, thus military, muscle.
If the relevant oil companies were/are against Iran, then likely so are their elected governments and usually, by extension (via mainstream news media), so are the citizens.
Frank Sterle Jr.
White Rock, B.C.
I have a problem with the direction our city appears to be taking in converting Winnipeg into a bicycle-friendly community.
I have no problem with bicycles roaming the streets in the suburbs. I do, however, have a major problem with the city, without consultation, using my tax dollars to reduce infrastructure in the city core to accommodate a small core of lobbyists.
If I wish to use my snowmobile on a trail, I must buy a licence, buy insurance, and buy a trail pass. The bicycling lobby community seems to think it is entitled to free and dedicated access without contributing a cent.
My recommendations for all bicyclists using the downtown core are as follows. One, they must be licensed. Two, all must carry insurance. Three, all must purchase and display a trail pass.
I would also recommend all bicycles be banned from the downtown core in winter from Oct. 30 to April 30.
They are a hazard in winter for all concerned.
Medium not the message
Re: Society can be controlled through its means of communication (Jan. 9)
What Isaac Nahon-Serfaty says is quite true. Marshall McLuhan’s "the medium is the message" is nonsense. And McLuhan did try to retract it by saying that what he really meant was that "the medium is the massage." He was simply trying to say, after Harold Innes, that the choice of medium has an effect on what you can communicate. For example: a picture is worth a thousand words.
But can you blame him for being muted in his retraction, since spouting nonsense had made him an international intellectual celebrity with interviews in Playboy, a bit part in a Woody Allen movie, and even a Heritage Minute on television?
Time for Saskatchewan
Re: Is it time for change on time change? (Jan. 9)
A little clarification on Saskatchewan’s current time handling is needed. In the editorial it is stated Saskatchewan "abandoned the practice in 1966...and remains on Central Standard Time year-round". In fact, Saskatchewan in 1966, and prior, did make the regular time change from Mountain Standard Time/Mountain Daylight Time on a regular basis.
In the fall of 1966, after being on MDT all summer, Saskatchewan switched back to MST for one week, then switched back to MDT for a week and, finally, back to MST for the winter.
Back then, I was operating a small weekly newspaper and in January 1967, I wrote a lengthy article spelling out in detail all of the benefits remaining on "fast" time year-around. Included was a mail-in ballot as to the reader’s preference — MST/MDT or Central Standard Time year-around. Sixty-six per cent of the respondents were in favour of CST all year.
One copy of the paper was regularly delivered to the reading room of the province’s legislature. In March the government at the time did announce that in the spring when time changed again, the eastern two-thirds of the province would be on Central Standard Time year-around and the western third had the option to switch back and forth between the two times as in the past. Years later, Central Standard Time was adopted for the entire province.
Interesting, since Saskatchewan is openly accused of not being "with it"!