Από τα μεγαλύτερα upsets της Αμερικανικής αθλητικής ιστορίας. To Crooked Timber σχολιάζει μια ενδιαφέρουσα συζήτηση από τους σχολιαστές του παιχνιδιού.
AIKMAN: So you’re saying you prefer hockey because it’s more ambiguous than football with regard to player substitutions and less ambiguous with regard to goals?
BUCK: Exactly, for all available meanings of “exact.” … And I’ll add that when hockey did experiment with a hard-and-fast rule, the so-called “crease rule” that disallowed a goal even if an attacking player had a skate lace in the crease but had no effect whatsoever on the play, the result was a disaster, and the NHL abandoned the rule after the infamous Buffalo-Dallas “no goal” debacle of 1999.
AIKMAN: Interesting point. But you’re still wrong about Wittgenstein, and I’m going to ask Howie Long what he thinks after the game.
BUCK: You go right ahead and do that. Howie’s got my back on this one.
0 Responses to “Wittgenstein and the Supreme Bowl”