Survivor: Philippines...A Low Down Dirty Deal

     WARNING:  The Detroit Tigers are playing in the World Series like the team that trailed the White Sox all season. And Tigers fans from northern Michigan who have been relocated to San Francisco should not be seen in public wearing their brand new American League Champions T-shirts while said champions are getting their asses handed to them a few miles away. It makes us the object of public ridicule or contempt, depending on which kind of Giants fan we encounter. My mood is now spectacularly foul. No one is safe.

     When is a reward not a reward? When it is reduced to the equivalent of a pot full of uncooked rice and haggled over by two old coots (hasbeen Jonathan Penner and hasbeen Michael Skupin). So, what had been a down and dirty old school Survivor challenge ended abruptly with a poorly brokered deal and no clear winners. Just a bunch of losers.

     My disgust is outweighed only by my disappointment. How could Jeff (Probst) allow such an atrocity to occur? Isn't it his job to keep the idiocy in check? *sighs heavily* This season, Survivor had been showing signs of returning to its former greatness--Survivors on the verge of starvation, picnics instead of feasts as rewards, challenges requiring the Survivors to "dig deep"--and then Jeff had to go and enable those slackers to quit mid-challenge. He could have gone for a pedicure instead of refereeing, like he did last season. The result would have been the same.

     Speaking of Jeff...I never know which version of him will show up. Will we get snarky Jeff relentlessly ragging on the terminally lazy (Abi), the hopelessly useless (Katie), the dangerously clumsy (Michael), and the annoying simply because he cannot help himself (Jonathan)? Or will we get compassionate Jeff who helps those incapable of expressing themselves at Tribal Council by translating for them (Katie again) and gently covers the seriously ill with his own outwear (Dana)? Or the version of Jeff that I hope to never see again, the one that is as defeated as the shirkers posing as Survivors this season? For the record, snarky Jeff is my favorite. He pushes those people to be the Survivors that they promised to be and doesn't let them get away with anything.

     Which brings us to the latest Survivor pretender to be kicked off the island by a unanimous vote. Katie considers her current occupation to be former Miss Delaware and she sported hooker hoops in the jungle. Enough said.
     As for the actual Survivors on those tribes...I will get to them next time when I'm, hopefully, a much happier Tigers fan and, consequently, in the right mood to praise those that have earned it.
     Who might I be referring to? Hint: I didn't mention any of them in this post.
     Go Tigers! Please?

Survivor: Philippines...No Superheroes Here

     What is the difference between a superhero and a regular guy?  Apparently, superheroes don't throw hissy fits that would put a preschooler to shame, and regular guys (the narcissistic ones, anyway) get blindsided by their tribe at Tribal Council because they expect to be kept over people outperforming them.

     Russell liked to remind us on a regular basis that he nearly died the last time he played Survivor, and then attempted to prove his readiness to die playing it again by collapsing in exhaustion at every Immunity Challenge. He showcased his incompetence with his ineffectual search for the hidden immunity idol. He labored under the delusion that his "attitude of excellence" entitled him to a victory. *scratches head in confusion* By "attitude of excellence", he wouldn't be referring to his non-leadership skills that led to the dismantling of his tribe, would he? Or is an "attitude of excellence" what causes grown men to smash pots and holler at God when they lose? *shrugs shoulders* Whatever it is, it got his torch snuffed, and gave those of us that don't like vets contaminating our reality game shows a reason to express our delight in ways that we wouldn't want our teenage daughters (the ones that know what a hypocrite is) to know we do.

     Unfortunately, Russell's exit may not be delightful for those that he left behind. I predict that Jeff will be splitting them up and shipping them to separate tribes, where I don't expect them to fare very well, in spite of their impressive resumes, or, maybe, because of them.

     Malcolm's and Denise's best chance of surviving the termination of Matsing would be exile to Kalabaw, where each of them could be seen as a potential ally for either the female alliance or the male alliance (depending on which one of them draws the lucky buff), but will be expendable once the opposing alliance is either weakened or destroyed. The holder of the unlucky buff will be exiled to Tandang, which could be a death sentence. Tandang is where Abi lives.

     Early in the game, RC found the clue to the whereabouts of the immunity idol hidden at the Tandang camp and shared it with Abi. The besties then hid the clue in a mutually agreed upon secret location. Some time later, Abi picked a fight with RC for no discernible reason, threatened RC, shared RC's clue with Pete, found the hidden immunity idol with Pete using RC's clue, and kept the whole thing secret from RC. Pete, seeing an opportunity to create chaos and dissension, retrieved the clue from its hiding place and planted it among RC's belongings, where it was spotted by Abi, who, predictably, came unhinged. According to Tandang's chief betrayer of trust and blabber of secrets, RC broke her trust. Mental health professionals call that projection. Judges call that (combined with the threats) grounds for a restraining order.
     The "outlast" part of this game has a crazy new significance this season. Emphasis on crazy.
     The Tigers won their ALDS last night, so I will be celebrating in the most responsible (good example setting) way currently available to me. You can find me at Barnes and Noble. I will be the one in the classics section, reeking of white chocolate mocha lattes and biscotti. Hope to see you there.

Another Blown Call...Expansion of Instant Replay in MLB Long Overdue

     Memorial Day. Boston. Tigers vs. Red Sox. Bottom of the second. Two outs and a runner on second. Mike Aviles swung with two strikes on him. He missed. It wasn't even close. Tiger catcher Gerald Laird caught the missed ball cleanly. No bouncies. No dropsies. Replays confirm this. Mike Aviles was not called out however. His clean swing was ruled a foul tip by plate umpire Jeff Nelson, and the clean catch wasn't clean because the ball was in the dirt first according to first base umpire Bill Welke. So, what should have been the end of the second inning became a rally for the Red Sox who scored three runs, which, incidentally, was the number of runs that the Tigers lost by that day. All courtesy of bad officiating.
     Jim Leyland, the Tigers manager, wants some accountability. Tiger fans, most of whom are still irate over Jim Joyce's bad call at first base that cost Armando Galarraga his perfect game two years ago today, want what most baseball fans want...Recourse.
     Wish granted. Sort of. While the latest officiating debacle did not instigate next season's expansion of instant replay, it did underscore the necessity driving it and prompted much discussion, as well as speculation, about the specifics of the expansion and how it will impact the game.
     According to ESPN's Jayson Stark, who appeared on the Mike and Mike radio show the day after said debacle, there is a strong possibility that, under the expanded instant replay, appeals of calls pertaining to fair vs. foul balls and caught vs. dropped balls would be decided by a panel of umpires from a central location. It is believed to be a plan that would satisfy its opponents by allowing final determinations to be made by umpires in a system that would create more jobs for them. It would also satisfy arguments that an already lengthy game would be subjected to unnecessary delays since the umpires on the field would remain there while others reviewed the play being appealed. So, the proposed solution to the problem of bad officiating is meant to satisfy the same officials whose inability to make the right calls in obvious situations necessitated an expanded system in the first place? Not exactly the accountability that I think Mr. Leyland was talking about.
     Or necessarily the recourse that the fans were hoping for. Mr. Stark tells us that the expanded system next season will be "introductory" and limited in its scope. It could be further expanded, he says, to cover "all sorts of calls after a year or so" pending successful negotiations. Translation:  A year from now the Tigers will still be getting hosed on the same calls that cost them a game against the Red Sox on Memorial Day and one of their pitchers a perfect game two years ago. BUT they can hope for some fairness the following year, or the year after, should negotiations favor expanding instant replay to include reviewing plays involving clean swings vs. foul tips and runners being called safe when the ball clearly beats them to the bag.
     It's also probably important to note that no amount of expansion of the instant replay will resolve issues involving calls open to interpretation to the satisfaction of everyone. Trapped balls and fan interference, for example, may or may not be ruled correctly initially or on appeal, which makes overturning a correct ruling a distinct possibility. Is it just me, or does it seem like the expansion has the potential to create more problems than it solves? Oh wait. How silly of me. Of course it does. I know this because I see it every fall when Michigan plays football.
     To sum up...It's pretty clear that an expansion of the instant replay is needed, but the expansion being negotiated is insufficient and seems to be tailor made for the people responsible for the mess requiring its solution. Jim Leyland has been preaching "patience" to Tiger fans who had hoped for a better start this season. I guess we're going to need it because, while a sufficient expansion won't solve all the Tigers problems (stranding WAY too many base runners, for example) it would have given them the win that they earned on Memorial Day.
     So, tell us what you think. Are you in favor of an expansion of the instant replay? If so, is the proposed solution sufficient? Or do you want human error to continue to determine the outcome of the game? You've seen it. It's fair game. Let's talk about it.