Wednesday, 27 July 2011

People Who Buy Their Train Ticket With A Card Need Their Heads Kicked In

Update 2015:
The Opal Card certainly fixed this problem in Sydney. It doesn't actually stop the people described below being fuckwits, but does remove one avenue for them to impose their fuckwittery on the rest of us.
Original Article:
Don’t you just want to bash people who use a credit card to buy their train ticket when there is a queue of twenty people behind them?
The queue is long, but it’s moving smoothly as everyone just forks over the cash and takes their ticket until … dickwad asks for a weekly ticket and pays by card. Usually said dickwad takes double the time of a competent person to complete this task as well.
It’s even worse when there are separate queues for two ticket windows and some cretin who hasn’t heard of the internet is holding up the other one with a dozen inane questions about which ticket does what.
What is so difficult about buying your train ticket with cash? It’s not like these people try to go through the barrier and then realize their ticket is out of date: they know beforehand they need to buy a new ticket that morning. I can understand a few people genuinely forgetting until they were walking down the escalator, but for most of these selfish pricks, it’s a conscious choice, which is why bashing them should be legal.
What are they buying? Almost always a weekly or fortnightly. Is it too much to expect someone to have the foresight and consideration to withdraw $50 from the ATM the day before? Who walks around with fuck all money in their wallet anyway, except for kids and losers?
Why do you need to use a card?
It’s for the points”. Really? What’s that worth to you? 30c? Battler.
I didn’t bother to go to the ATM. I’ll just use EFTPOS”. So you have the money in your account, you just couldn’t be bothered getting it out yesterday, even though you’ll need to get money out today because there’s none in your wallet? Ignorant fuckwit.
I only have enough cash for necessities like lunch until pay day, so I’m putting everything else on my card”. Are you fucking serious? How old are you? 18?
Ironically, most of these people probably whinge about government services, queues in banks, traffic jams and any number of other logistical problems which are caused by the same behaviour and could be vastly ameliorated by punishing the selfish and stupid.
At many of the larger stations, there is a barrier system, with a single queue approaching multiple windows, like at the airport or a bank. This largely solves the problem as long as there are at least three open ticket windows; there is a significant chance of a pair of fuckwits holding up both of two windows, but little chance of getting three such people all at once. 
However, this system is only used in peak hour, the barriers removed too early and almost always as one ticket window is shut. Why not leave at least one row permanently in place? It’s not like it’s getting in the way of something incredibly important.
More useful to the public would be a more effective deterrent to the dickheads: a cash or Paypass only window, where lengthy enquiries were not allowed.
Put big signs up: Card payments and enquiries these windows only. Cash and Paypass only at this window. Strictly enforce the enquiries rule ie. people can ask simple questions: “What ticket do I need for a weekly which will take me to Parramatta but also let me catch buses?”, but anything more complex is directed to the enquiries window.
If the person trying to ask ten questions in the cash queue abuses the ticket seller for directing them to the enquiries counter, I’ll bet the ticket seller will get some vocal support from the queue behind.
Put a system like this in place and watch the decrease in card use and consequent decrease in waiting times as the self absorbed arseholes become the only ones having their time stolen, by other self absorbed arseholes.
If you public transport employees want respect and more than a 2.5% pay rise, then show some understanding of the needs of the public your job it is to serve and start making some sensible decisions.
Update:
Some stupid bitch bought a $7 ticket with a card the other day, while holding a $10 note in her hand!
She was of course right in front of me in the only queue. She took out the $10 note, then asked the ticket seller if she could use a card. He told her the ticket was only $7 (Yes, good, just give her the ticket), then said: "But you can use your card." (Gaahhh! You fucking cretin!)
"Don't", I said.
She just turned around and looked at me, then used her card.
As she was getting her ticket, I said: "That's right love, it's all about you isn't it? You just hold everyone else up."
She pulled the type of really stupid face only someone with a double digit IQ could pull and said: "Have a nice day", to which I replied: "Fuck off, you stupid, selfish, ignorant bitch."
She didn't have much of a response to that. I heard a small intake of breath behind me, but I wasn't interested.
I said to the ticket guy: "Mate, she had the cash in her hand. Don't tell her she can use a card and take five times as long." He actually apologised.
You may think I was a bit aggressive, or even misogynist because it was a woman.
As if I wouldn't have said the same thing to a man.
Selfish, ignorant people need to be told. She probably won't do it again.

Wednesday, 20 July 2011

Bring Back The Pacific Islanders Rugby Team

How many rugby fans would like to see a combined Pacific Islanders team in the same format as the British & Irish Lions?
If teams tour the Pacific Islands, they would play each of Fiji, Samoa and Tonga separately, but when the Islanders tour Britain and France for example, they would do so as a combined Pacific Islanders side. There is no reason why players from smaller rugby nations like the Cook Islands and Niue shouldn’t be eligible for selection either.
If the touring team played together regularly, it would be a strong side which would play an open, attacking style of rugby. They would be very popular and draw large crowds and thus television revenue which could be used to further develop the game in the Pacific Islands.
The combined side would also be part of a southern hemisphere Five Nations tournament with Australia, New Zealand, South Africa and Argentina.
The concept is not new. In fact a Pacific Islanders team played one test each against Australia, New Zealand and South Africa in 2004. They lost all three matches, but the games were competitive, exciting and drew good crowds. The scores were 14-29, 26-41 and 24-38.
Combined Islanders teams toured Europe in 2006 and 2008, with a single 25-17 victory over Italy.
The venture dissolved due to financial issues and internal disputes, with the Samoan Rugby Union leaving the alliance in 2008. I suspect this failure had more to do with lack of vision, poor financial and political management and inadequate support from the IRB than any inherent unviability of the concept.
Had Australia, New Zealand and South Africa shown some longer term vision and included the Islanders team as a permanent fixture in a Southern Hemisphere Four Nations tournament from 2004, the individual Pacific rugby boards would have been forced to work together and also subject to more financial scrutiny, as well as earning a lot more money.
I reckon the 2006 and 2008 European tours would also have been more successful.
Additionally, the Super 15 tournament might have been improved with the inclusion of Fiji, Samoa and Tonga, obviating the need to create fifth, weak Australian and South African teams.
With Argentina expanding the Tri Nations tournament to four in 2012, maybe it’s time to make it Five Nations and bring back the Pacific Islanders.

Monday, 18 July 2011

Golden Point Wins Should Be Worth Less Than Wins In Regulation Time

Whether or not you like rugby league’s "golden point", you may find the following a reasonable question:
Why are the same number of competition points awarded for a golden point victory as a 50-0 win?
Just a brief explanation for those who don’t know what the "golden point" is:
Formerly, if rugby league games finished with the scores level after the regulation time, a draw was declared and both sides got one competition point each, except in the case of a finals game, where extra time was played.
In 2003, the NRL introduced the golden point system for all matches, regular season and finals. In the event of scores being level after regulation time, the teams play two extra sessions of five minutes each. The first score of any kind in either period wins the game.
For a regular season match, if no team scores by the end of extra time, the game is a draw and both sides get one competition point each. In a finals match, the second period of extra time continues until one team scores.
Since its introduction in 2003, there have been 57 golden point games in the NRL, with Manly beating Parramatta 36-34 in the first one. Of these, only 9 have ended in draws. Slightly under half (27) have ended with a field goal.
The golden point is generally agreed to be a good system for finals matches; certainly fairer to the winner than the debilitating mid-week replay in the event of a draw after 20 minutes of extra time.
Many people think it adds some extra excitement to regular season games and I’m inclined to agree.
What I don’t accept is teams receiving the same number of competition points for a golden point victory as for a comprehensive win.
If you’re going to have two points for a win, then just have the old system of a draw at the end of the 80 minutes.
If you’re going to use the golden point system, make it 4 points for a win in normal time, 3 points for a golden point win, 2 points each for a draw after extra time and 1 point for a golden point loss.
Here’s the ladder after round 24, 2011 ie. at the end of the regular season, with the points under my proposal. I’ve also not given any points for the 2 byes, because that’s just fucking stupid.
2011






Team
Pts
Wins
GP Wins
GP Loss
Draws
Alt Pts
Melbourne
42
19
0
0
0
76
Manly
40
18
0
0
0
72
Brisbane
40
18
1
0
0
71
Wests
34
15
1
0
0
59
St George
33
14
0
0
1
58
NZ Warriors
32
14
0
0
0
56
Nth Qld
32
14
0
1
0
57
Newcastle
28
12
0
1
0
49
Canterbury
28
12
1
0
0
47
Souths
26
11
2
0
0
42
Easts
24
10
0
1
0
41
Penrith
22
9
1
0
0
35
Cronulla
18
7
0
0
0
28
Parramatta
17
6
0
2
1
28
Canberra
16
6
0
2
0
26
Gold Coast
16
6
1
0
0
23

Under the alternative points, Nth Queensland Cowboys finish 6th and the NZ Warriors 7th, probably a fairer result, considering the Cowboys’ golden point loss to Souths on a very dodgy penalty.
This changes the matches in week 1 of the finals: Manly would play the Warriors and Brisbane would play Nth Qld.
It also would have changed the last round of the regular season. Had Souths beaten Newcastle by more than 17 points in round 24, they would have made the finals, but under the alternative system, Canterbury would have made it.
Would such a system have been too hard to think of?
Well, not for a competent governing body. However, we shouldn’t have expected common sense from David Gallop et al.
Introducing a reasonable idea in principle, then implementing it in a lazy, ignorant way is typical of the David Gallop run joke that the NRL administration has become.
Just look at the salary cap shambles.

Tuesday, 12 July 2011

Cowboy Cameramen Mar Le Tour

Moronic, cowboy cameramen have left their unwanted stamp on the Tour de France for the second time in a few days. The first accident happened a few days ago, when a clown on a motorbike tried to squeeze past the peloton and knocked down Danish rider Nicki Sorensen.
The anger which followed this incident should have been enough to inject a little care into the camera crews’ behaviour. Apparently the reaction from the riders and the tour organisers was not nearly strong enough.
Yesterday in Stage 9, a camera car took out Johnny Hoogerland and Juan Antonio Flecha, two riders in a five man breakaway. They were 35 km from home in a 208 km race. Given the uphill finish, Johnny Hoogerland in particular had a good chance of winning his first ever Tour stage. He had just won both category 2 climbs in this stage and was looking strong.
The camera car was specifically told by the race director not to pass the riders, but deliberately ignored that order. If that wasn’t enough, the driver was clearly not paying enough attention to the road ahead or the cyclists. The car went straight into Flecha as it swerved to miss a tree. Hoogerland then went over Flecha and into a barbed wire fence.
Watch the video to see what an absolutely reckless piece of driving this was. I’m surprised at how muted the commentators’ reaction was.
Because of their injuries, Flecha and Hoogerland finished 16:44 and 16:38 behind the winner, rather than possibly being the winner. They are now placed 80th and 90th respectively in the overall time classification.
Without the fall, they would be 40th and 46th, so they were never going to win the yellow jersey. However, Hoogerland is the leading climber. If he is injured, the accident has possibly cost him this years’ polka dot jersey, prestigious in itself, not to mention the sponsorship dollars.
Additionally, both riders missed out on a sprint for €1,500 only 5 km down the road from the accident.
Banning the camera crew from the rest of the Tour, or even any future Tour is not enough. I think both riders should sue the camera car driver personally, not just his employer. Additionally, the deliberate ignoring of direct instructions not to pass the riders from the race director should be sufficient to cause the police to charge the driver with reckless driving.
These photographers act as if the race is as much about them as about the riders. It is not. The safety of the riders is far more important than a good close up shot.
It is possible to drive within the race and still be respectful of the riders. The team cars manage it, so why can’t the press?
The reason is because too many of the camera crews are ignorant, cowboy dickheads. There are some decent ones, but far too many are the same personality types as the paparazzi who chase celebrities around: selfish, shallow, amoral wankers who make a living feeding off other people’s lives and achievements.
The only language they understand is fear and greed. There obviously have not been sufficiently harsh consequences for similar behaviour in the past. Maybe if the police bring charges, then both riders sue the driver into bankruptcy, it will serve as a lesson to the rest of these fuckwits.
Hopefully both riders will be able to finish the Tour. They deserve respect for just finishing the race, given their injuries were sufficiently serious for them to drop over 16 min on the leaders in just 35 km.
Update:
Johnny Hoogerland finished the tour in 74th place, with 33 stitches in him.
Juan Antonio Flecha finsihed 98th.
It's pretty gutsy to ride 3,500 km after being injured like that.