Zach Rebackoff's Blog
August 29, 2021
To Shoot or Not To Shoot
All the world's population has a decision: What's yours? Mine was easy from day one. I thought that my decision would be universal, but I was wrong, miserably wrong.
Who knew that some of my fellow humans would believe that the Covid vaccine would allow the government to track your lives, that the vaccine includes a microchip? Newsflash-the government already does, in multiple forms. How about this one? The vaccine is magnetic! Sure, we'll all be sucked directly into the MagLab DC Field Facility in Tallahassee, FL, or Los Alamos National Lab. Ya' know what I ask them? What the fuck?
Apparently, all these illusionists believe they're smarter than Dr. Fauci, or that Fauci and his fellow scientists are all in on the swindle. And the doctors as well as the nurses are in on it too. The facts are right in front of the skeptics, and either they choose to ignore them or are too ignorant to understand them. Those vaccinated, and that do contract the virus, or the variant, will develop a mild case, similar to the flu. Those that contract the virus that have not been vaccinated are in danger of dying. What part of that is hard to understand, even for those dopes amongst us?
Then there are those that fall into the "I don't want the government telling me what to do" clan. What? Uh, did you pass a government mandated driving test for your license? Did you fill out a form to receive the government's Social Security check? Medicare? Student loans? Do you depend on the TSA? Police and Fire Departments? Again I ask—What the fuck?
When I first became aware of this phenomenon, that is that people were unwilling to take the vaccine, I thought it was because they were under the Trump syndrome. But no, it's not just the Trump nuts. The group includes those outside his "magnetic field." I was sent a video that showed a man, Sean Brooks, standing in front of an Ohio School board audience and flat out claiming that those who took the vaccine would be dead within six months to five years. Not that they might, or that it's probable, but it was definite! In the video, Sean Brooks claims that he is a doctor with a PHD from Oxford, although he hesitates before fluently stating the university’s name from which he graduated (there is more than one in Oxford). Brooks also claims that he has written 48 publications, including 23 books and has studied health, medicine, anatomy, and physiology for approximately 21 years. Despite his claims, there appears to be very little information about Sean Brooks online and there are no proven records of him working in the field of medicine as a doctor. A fuckin' crackpot.
As for those of us that are not Scott Brooks, and have yet been vaccinated, I urge you to reconsider. No name calling, no disparaging. The best insulation that the world has thus far come up for this epidemic is the vaccine. Not enough evidence yet that there's no harmful short or long term effects? I see. Hmm. Does the worldwide number 4,495,679 register? How's that for evidence? Well, you might retort, some could die from accepting the vaccine. I suspect that's true; aberrations are inclusive in everything and are everywhere. Have you stopped going on a plane? Riding in a car? Crossing the street? Listening to reason?
Who knew that some of my fellow humans would believe that the Covid vaccine would allow the government to track your lives, that the vaccine includes a microchip? Newsflash-the government already does, in multiple forms. How about this one? The vaccine is magnetic! Sure, we'll all be sucked directly into the MagLab DC Field Facility in Tallahassee, FL, or Los Alamos National Lab. Ya' know what I ask them? What the fuck?
Apparently, all these illusionists believe they're smarter than Dr. Fauci, or that Fauci and his fellow scientists are all in on the swindle. And the doctors as well as the nurses are in on it too. The facts are right in front of the skeptics, and either they choose to ignore them or are too ignorant to understand them. Those vaccinated, and that do contract the virus, or the variant, will develop a mild case, similar to the flu. Those that contract the virus that have not been vaccinated are in danger of dying. What part of that is hard to understand, even for those dopes amongst us?
Then there are those that fall into the "I don't want the government telling me what to do" clan. What? Uh, did you pass a government mandated driving test for your license? Did you fill out a form to receive the government's Social Security check? Medicare? Student loans? Do you depend on the TSA? Police and Fire Departments? Again I ask—What the fuck?
When I first became aware of this phenomenon, that is that people were unwilling to take the vaccine, I thought it was because they were under the Trump syndrome. But no, it's not just the Trump nuts. The group includes those outside his "magnetic field." I was sent a video that showed a man, Sean Brooks, standing in front of an Ohio School board audience and flat out claiming that those who took the vaccine would be dead within six months to five years. Not that they might, or that it's probable, but it was definite! In the video, Sean Brooks claims that he is a doctor with a PHD from Oxford, although he hesitates before fluently stating the university’s name from which he graduated (there is more than one in Oxford). Brooks also claims that he has written 48 publications, including 23 books and has studied health, medicine, anatomy, and physiology for approximately 21 years. Despite his claims, there appears to be very little information about Sean Brooks online and there are no proven records of him working in the field of medicine as a doctor. A fuckin' crackpot.
As for those of us that are not Scott Brooks, and have yet been vaccinated, I urge you to reconsider. No name calling, no disparaging. The best insulation that the world has thus far come up for this epidemic is the vaccine. Not enough evidence yet that there's no harmful short or long term effects? I see. Hmm. Does the worldwide number 4,495,679 register? How's that for evidence? Well, you might retort, some could die from accepting the vaccine. I suspect that's true; aberrations are inclusive in everything and are everywhere. Have you stopped going on a plane? Riding in a car? Crossing the street? Listening to reason?
To Shoot or Not To Shoot
All the world's population has a decision: What's yours? Mine was easy from day one. I thought that my decision would be universal, but I was wrong, miserably wrong.
Who knew that some of my fellow humans would believe that the Covid vaccine would allow the government to track your lives, that the vaccine includes a microchip? Newsflash-the government already does, in multiple forms. How about this one? The vaccine is magnetic! Sure, we'll all be sucked directly into the MagLab DC Field Facility in Tallahassee, FL, or Los Alamos National Lab. Ya' know what I ask them? What the fuck?
Apparently, all these illusionists believe they're smarter than Dr. Fauci, or that Fauci and his fellow scientists are all in on the swindle. And the doctors as well as the nurses. The facts are right in front of the skeptics, and either they choose to ignore them or are too ignorant to understand them. Those vaccinated, that do contract the virus, or the variant, develop a mild case, similar to the flu. Those that contract the virus that have not been vaccinated are in danger of dying. What part of that is hard to understand, even for those dopes amongst us?
Then there are those that fall into the "I don't want the government telling me what to do" clan. What? Uh, did you pass a driving test for your license? Did you fill out a form to receive the government's Social Security check? Medicare? Student loans? Do you depend on the TSA? Police and Fire Departments? Again I ask- What the fuck?
When I first became aware of this phenomenon, that is people were unwilling to take the vaccine, I thought it was because they were under the Trump syndrome. No, it's not just the Trump nuts. The group includes those outside his "magnetic field." I was sent a video that showed a man, Sean Brooks, standing in front of an Ohio School board audience and flat out claiming that those who took the vaccine would be dead within six months to five years. Not that they might, or that it's probable, but it was definite! In the video, Sean Brooks claims that he is a doctor with a PHD from Oxford, although he hesitates before exactly stating the university name from which he graduated (there is more than one in Oxford). Brooks also claims that he has 48 publications, including 23 books and has studied health medicine, anatomy, and physiology for approximately 21 years. Despite his claims, there appears to be very little information about Sean online and there are no proven records of him working in the field of medicine as a doctor. A fuckin' crackpot.
As for those of us that are not Scott Brooks, and have yet been vaccinated, I urge you to reconsider. No name calling, no disparaging. The best insulation that the world has thus far come up for this epidemic is the vaccine. Not enough evidence yet that there's no harmful short or long term effects? I see. Hmm. Does the worldwide number 4,495,679 register? How's that for evidence? Well, you might retort, some could die from accepting the vaccine. I suspect that's true; aberrations are inclusive in everything and are everywhere. Have you stopped going on a plane? Riding in a car? Crossing the street? Listening to reason?
Who knew that some of my fellow humans would believe that the Covid vaccine would allow the government to track your lives, that the vaccine includes a microchip? Newsflash-the government already does, in multiple forms. How about this one? The vaccine is magnetic! Sure, we'll all be sucked directly into the MagLab DC Field Facility in Tallahassee, FL, or Los Alamos National Lab. Ya' know what I ask them? What the fuck?
Apparently, all these illusionists believe they're smarter than Dr. Fauci, or that Fauci and his fellow scientists are all in on the swindle. And the doctors as well as the nurses. The facts are right in front of the skeptics, and either they choose to ignore them or are too ignorant to understand them. Those vaccinated, that do contract the virus, or the variant, develop a mild case, similar to the flu. Those that contract the virus that have not been vaccinated are in danger of dying. What part of that is hard to understand, even for those dopes amongst us?
Then there are those that fall into the "I don't want the government telling me what to do" clan. What? Uh, did you pass a driving test for your license? Did you fill out a form to receive the government's Social Security check? Medicare? Student loans? Do you depend on the TSA? Police and Fire Departments? Again I ask- What the fuck?
When I first became aware of this phenomenon, that is people were unwilling to take the vaccine, I thought it was because they were under the Trump syndrome. No, it's not just the Trump nuts. The group includes those outside his "magnetic field." I was sent a video that showed a man, Sean Brooks, standing in front of an Ohio School board audience and flat out claiming that those who took the vaccine would be dead within six months to five years. Not that they might, or that it's probable, but it was definite! In the video, Sean Brooks claims that he is a doctor with a PHD from Oxford, although he hesitates before exactly stating the university name from which he graduated (there is more than one in Oxford). Brooks also claims that he has 48 publications, including 23 books and has studied health medicine, anatomy, and physiology for approximately 21 years. Despite his claims, there appears to be very little information about Sean online and there are no proven records of him working in the field of medicine as a doctor. A fuckin' crackpot.
As for those of us that are not Scott Brooks, and have yet been vaccinated, I urge you to reconsider. No name calling, no disparaging. The best insulation that the world has thus far come up for this epidemic is the vaccine. Not enough evidence yet that there's no harmful short or long term effects? I see. Hmm. Does the worldwide number 4,495,679 register? How's that for evidence? Well, you might retort, some could die from accepting the vaccine. I suspect that's true; aberrations are inclusive in everything and are everywhere. Have you stopped going on a plane? Riding in a car? Crossing the street? Listening to reason?
August 18, 2021
The Electronic Eye and Sports
Who wants it? Raise your hands. Hmm, looks like quite a few hands in the air. You sure about that?
MLB players are never quite pleased with the call on close pitches. The TV's vertical box, super-imposed over the strike zone, appears to be the most accurate piece of information that's come along since the implementation of instant replay. From all accounts, the strike zone's linear confines offer clear evidence if a pitch is in or barely touches (or outside) the zone, which includes the pitch's depth through the zone. That all said, the pitch that would, in my opinion, cause hitters the most grief, is the pitch that the catcher snares near the ground; that pitch that shows that it indeed sailed through the linear zone, completely in or barely, but appears to everyone on the planet that it was a ball.
If there's not a question of the equipment's accuracy, then what's the problem? A strike's a strike, right? A ball's a ball, no?. If that's the case, why not use the camera to call half-swings? If the bat breaks the plane, it's a swing, right? While we're at it, why not have the technology utilized to make all the calls? Ya know what, let's have the cameras make all the calls, in all the sports! How's that for solving the officiating dilemma?
Once that's complete, let's do away with errant throws, missed baskets, poor goal tending, fumbles, interceptions, etc. Let's just eliminate all human imperfection in sports. Then, we'll all be happy, right? Nothing to complain about. No what ifs, no would've, could've, should've. Well, of course, there would be no home runs, no wild throws, no diving catches, no kick-saves, no 99-yard run-backs, no interceptions, no reason to watch. There would be no officials to blame, for anything, because there would be only perfection. With all the players playing perfectly, there might be one little problem: No team would win. No team would lose. Remember, in this scenario, every player plays optimally. How could Jacob deGrom strike anyone out if the hitter is perfect? How could he be perfect if deGrom is perfect?
You must see now, no one's perfect. Hence, officials aren't perfect. Even electronic video games cannot play at perfection. Sure there are officials that are less talented than others, just like there are .240 hitters that are in the lineup with .300 hitters. You want your cake and eat it too? You can. You can purchase it, not expect it.
MLB players are never quite pleased with the call on close pitches. The TV's vertical box, super-imposed over the strike zone, appears to be the most accurate piece of information that's come along since the implementation of instant replay. From all accounts, the strike zone's linear confines offer clear evidence if a pitch is in or barely touches (or outside) the zone, which includes the pitch's depth through the zone. That all said, the pitch that would, in my opinion, cause hitters the most grief, is the pitch that the catcher snares near the ground; that pitch that shows that it indeed sailed through the linear zone, completely in or barely, but appears to everyone on the planet that it was a ball.
If there's not a question of the equipment's accuracy, then what's the problem? A strike's a strike, right? A ball's a ball, no?. If that's the case, why not use the camera to call half-swings? If the bat breaks the plane, it's a swing, right? While we're at it, why not have the technology utilized to make all the calls? Ya know what, let's have the cameras make all the calls, in all the sports! How's that for solving the officiating dilemma?
Once that's complete, let's do away with errant throws, missed baskets, poor goal tending, fumbles, interceptions, etc. Let's just eliminate all human imperfection in sports. Then, we'll all be happy, right? Nothing to complain about. No what ifs, no would've, could've, should've. Well, of course, there would be no home runs, no wild throws, no diving catches, no kick-saves, no 99-yard run-backs, no interceptions, no reason to watch. There would be no officials to blame, for anything, because there would be only perfection. With all the players playing perfectly, there might be one little problem: No team would win. No team would lose. Remember, in this scenario, every player plays optimally. How could Jacob deGrom strike anyone out if the hitter is perfect? How could he be perfect if deGrom is perfect?
You must see now, no one's perfect. Hence, officials aren't perfect. Even electronic video games cannot play at perfection. Sure there are officials that are less talented than others, just like there are .240 hitters that are in the lineup with .300 hitters. You want your cake and eat it too? You can. You can purchase it, not expect it.
To Err is to Umpire
While listening to a recent Yankees vs. Marlins game through the car radio, the Yankees broadcast team of Suzyn Waldman and John Sterling told me (and their hoard of listeners) in dumbstruck voices that the first base umpire missed the call on a routine play at 1st. The umpire ruled a Marlin player safe, although, upon replay review (the call ultimately reversed), the batter-runner was indeed out, prompting the duo to criticize the umpire verbally and sarcastically. Incidentally, they were NOT broadcasting at the game; instead, they were watching from a monitor, at Yankee Stadium, because of Covid protocols. Their first close look was on their monitor, from the telecast’s replay.
“He was clearly safe,” an astonished Waldman exclaimed. “What could he be looking at? It’s right there in front of him!”
“Yeah,” agreed Sterling, the man with perhaps the highest number of erroneous play-by-play calls in broadcast history, “I can’t imagine what he was thinking! Geez!” Hmm, interesting.
In this case, the pot calling the kettle black is not, shall I say, a reach. Do I need to remind both Sterling and Waldman that to err is human? Like when the enthusiastic duo fails to advise their listeners that a substitute has entered the game until perhaps the ball is hit to that sub. Or when one of them conveys that a pitch was called a ball, when in reality the umpire called it a strike, which prompts the mistaken one to correct themselves or be corrected. No harm, no foul. Or when a batter swings, ticks the ball, which subsequently glances off the catcher’s glove, falling harmlessly to the ground; it’s announced as a “foul tip.” NO, IT’S A FOUL BALL. That common erroneous call, by the way, is an everyday blunder throughout both leagues’ broadcast booths. Or, closer to Ma and Pa’s hearts, one of their dear Yankees makes an error. In those cases, they simply advise their listeners that the player made an error and move on—they somehow forget to add the stupefied color commentary: “What? How could he have not caught a simple pop-up? A Little Leaguer makes that play with one hand. What the heck was he thinking?”
The truth is that anyone, even Ma and Pa Pinstripes, makes mistakes. And I do like listening to their entertaining transmission very much; they’re the ultimate Yankee fans. So, why is it that the umpire has to be perfect on day one and then improve? It’s illogical to expect that the umpires will be flawless, even on plays that are open and shut cases. How many times have you heard a broadcaster offer their audience the wrong count? Or the incorrect score? Based on Waldman’s principle, ‘it’s right in front of him,’ broadcast teams should be held to the same standard, if not higher. After all, they don’t have to repeat the count or the score in a blurry instant, under intense scrutiny, and they too have the information right in front of them—a huge scoreboard! The simple and logical explanation is that, like you, Sterling and Waldman, and every moderator, we have lapses in concentration or lose momentary focus.
I’m going to go out on a long limb and say that broadcasters, for the most part, have no idea what it’s like to be on the field of play, under fire, dissecting a level of play that is faster than, well… faster than Jackie Robinson! In fact, almost everyone on the field, in the dugout, or sitting in the broadcast booth cannot be certain of any close call without slow-motion replay. Only since 2008 have the major leagues utilized replay, and back then only on a limited basis; outfield delineation-type home runs and fair or foul home runs. Now, thankfully, almost all rulings, excluding balls and strikes, are reviewable and reversible.
We all make mistakes, even gaffes. Imagine yourself at your job. Now continue to imagine if your lapses in judgment are being televised. Now envision that you are ridiculed, even belittled for your momentary oversights. Should the entire workforce boo and curse you out, like some fans do? Or should the boss televise the entire day, utilizing multiple cameras, then announce and replay said miscue to the entire corporation upon your error? Would that be OK with you? Would your wife, kids, and family be impressed with that level of scrutiny? One might say, well, that’s the umpire’s job—take it or leave it. No, that’s not the job. The job is to arbitrate a professional baseball game. Not included in the job description is to inhale ridicule and beratement.
So, what appears to be “human nature” at sporting events is not quite human nature; humans’ fundamental dispositions and characteristics. Full disclosure? I, too, grumble under my breath when a pitch is called incorrectly against the Yankees, my childhood (and adulthood) heroes. Hey, I’m a fan, too. And, as is human nature, I may want to, borrowing the legendary phrase, “Kill The Umpire.” But I don’t transmit my feelings to tens of thousands, if not millions! It seems almost, dare I say, malicious. Certainly disrespectful, no?
It is human nature to think, to eat, to be kind. Is it really human nature to be outwardly and sarcastically critical and publicly offer disparaging opinions? To ostracize? Empathetic, sympathetic, competitive, imaginative, creative, etc., those characteristics are what I call human nature. Sadly, spectator behavior, the raucous and belittling demeanor is common in nature, not, however, human nature.
Think about it. Am I wrong?
“He was clearly safe,” an astonished Waldman exclaimed. “What could he be looking at? It’s right there in front of him!”
“Yeah,” agreed Sterling, the man with perhaps the highest number of erroneous play-by-play calls in broadcast history, “I can’t imagine what he was thinking! Geez!” Hmm, interesting.
In this case, the pot calling the kettle black is not, shall I say, a reach. Do I need to remind both Sterling and Waldman that to err is human? Like when the enthusiastic duo fails to advise their listeners that a substitute has entered the game until perhaps the ball is hit to that sub. Or when one of them conveys that a pitch was called a ball, when in reality the umpire called it a strike, which prompts the mistaken one to correct themselves or be corrected. No harm, no foul. Or when a batter swings, ticks the ball, which subsequently glances off the catcher’s glove, falling harmlessly to the ground; it’s announced as a “foul tip.” NO, IT’S A FOUL BALL. That common erroneous call, by the way, is an everyday blunder throughout both leagues’ broadcast booths. Or, closer to Ma and Pa’s hearts, one of their dear Yankees makes an error. In those cases, they simply advise their listeners that the player made an error and move on—they somehow forget to add the stupefied color commentary: “What? How could he have not caught a simple pop-up? A Little Leaguer makes that play with one hand. What the heck was he thinking?”
The truth is that anyone, even Ma and Pa Pinstripes, makes mistakes. And I do like listening to their entertaining transmission very much; they’re the ultimate Yankee fans. So, why is it that the umpire has to be perfect on day one and then improve? It’s illogical to expect that the umpires will be flawless, even on plays that are open and shut cases. How many times have you heard a broadcaster offer their audience the wrong count? Or the incorrect score? Based on Waldman’s principle, ‘it’s right in front of him,’ broadcast teams should be held to the same standard, if not higher. After all, they don’t have to repeat the count or the score in a blurry instant, under intense scrutiny, and they too have the information right in front of them—a huge scoreboard! The simple and logical explanation is that, like you, Sterling and Waldman, and every moderator, we have lapses in concentration or lose momentary focus.
I’m going to go out on a long limb and say that broadcasters, for the most part, have no idea what it’s like to be on the field of play, under fire, dissecting a level of play that is faster than, well… faster than Jackie Robinson! In fact, almost everyone on the field, in the dugout, or sitting in the broadcast booth cannot be certain of any close call without slow-motion replay. Only since 2008 have the major leagues utilized replay, and back then only on a limited basis; outfield delineation-type home runs and fair or foul home runs. Now, thankfully, almost all rulings, excluding balls and strikes, are reviewable and reversible.
We all make mistakes, even gaffes. Imagine yourself at your job. Now continue to imagine if your lapses in judgment are being televised. Now envision that you are ridiculed, even belittled for your momentary oversights. Should the entire workforce boo and curse you out, like some fans do? Or should the boss televise the entire day, utilizing multiple cameras, then announce and replay said miscue to the entire corporation upon your error? Would that be OK with you? Would your wife, kids, and family be impressed with that level of scrutiny? One might say, well, that’s the umpire’s job—take it or leave it. No, that’s not the job. The job is to arbitrate a professional baseball game. Not included in the job description is to inhale ridicule and beratement.
So, what appears to be “human nature” at sporting events is not quite human nature; humans’ fundamental dispositions and characteristics. Full disclosure? I, too, grumble under my breath when a pitch is called incorrectly against the Yankees, my childhood (and adulthood) heroes. Hey, I’m a fan, too. And, as is human nature, I may want to, borrowing the legendary phrase, “Kill The Umpire.” But I don’t transmit my feelings to tens of thousands, if not millions! It seems almost, dare I say, malicious. Certainly disrespectful, no?
It is human nature to think, to eat, to be kind. Is it really human nature to be outwardly and sarcastically critical and publicly offer disparaging opinions? To ostracize? Empathetic, sympathetic, competitive, imaginative, creative, etc., those characteristics are what I call human nature. Sadly, spectator behavior, the raucous and belittling demeanor is common in nature, not, however, human nature.
Think about it. Am I wrong?
