When Suddenly. . . Nothing Happened

Owners and players. These are the two principal sides in labor negotiations for any major sporting organization. For what it's worth, they are also the principal sides in negotiations involving the National Hockey League. Today, after a lockout that lasted nearly long enough to actually draw attention, NHL players and owners reached an agreement that will result in a shortened season beginning later this week.

Fundamentally, the issue came down--as it usually does--to revenue sharing. What percentage of league revenue goes to owners and what to players. Now, I'm a union guy, so I personally believe the majority of revenue should go to the players--the people who actually do the work that generates the revenue from the people who like to watch. Or, y'know, whatever it is that people do at hockey games. Even if, say, the players were to receive, say, 70% of revenues, that still means that 30 owners would divide 30%, while over 600 players would divide the rest. Of course, in the labor negotiations just concluded, the players were not realistically expecting to receive anything close to 70%; under the terms of the previous collective bargaining agreement, they received something like 57%, and the owners wanted them to receive less.

Now, of course, while the lockout continued, nobody received any revenue, so it would seem to have been in everyone's interest to resolve things as quickly as possible. For simplicity's sake, one could have simply proposed that each side take 50% of revenues and be done with it.

Obviously, this is a thoroughly uninformed opinion. I'm certain many factors must be considered to arrive at a fair and reasonable split. So what WAS the final settlement, after weeks and weeks of stagnation and the loss of millions of dollars and measureless reserves of goodwill?

50-50?

Yeah, that was certainly worth it.

In Which We Once Again Destroy Our Chances of Being Named Ambassador to Canada

Sandwiched between a lengthy article on the Tea Party, and another announcing the political disillusionment and retirement of Senator Evan Bayh, a moderate Democrat from Indiana (about both of which the Solipsist may have more to say tomorrow), was the REAL news of the day: a hard-hitting expose about some really hard hitters. Brace yourselves!

It seems a disproportionate number of Canadian hockey players swing from the left! Of course, what else would you expect from a bunch of liberal pinko "athletes" whose national animal, apparently, is a leaf?!? No firm, manly right-handed stick-swinging for these rough traders of the Great White North! Instead, pansies like Pittsburgh Penguins star Sidney (SIDNEY!) Crosby happily swish away left-handedly at puck and golf ball--yes! their southpaw tendencies infect the club-wielding manliness of golf!--alike.

No one is quite sure why Canadian hockey players are so predominantly left-handed, as the "handedness" of the general population is as ruggedly "right" as in the good ol' U S of A. (Canadians' general lameness seems as good an explanation as any.)

Some will point out that a high proportion of right-handed baseball players also swing--or "bat"-- left. But there's a good reason: The majority of pitchers are right-handed, and it's easier to see the pitches if you bat from the left side of the plate. So, you see? Baseball players swing bats aggressively to fend off bulletlike pitches hurled at their heads! Hockey players are just womping on a helpless piece of rubber, so there's no excuse for--let's face it--acting all left-handed and gay.

Now, if you'll excuse us, we've just received a fax from the starting line-up of the Canadian hockey team. They want to have a word with us in the alley outside the skating venue. No doubt, they want to thank us for our insights and for helping them to see the error of their ways.

NOTE FROM WOS: I want nothing to do with this. Please don't hurt my husband TOO badly--and try not to mess up the "pretty" face.

(Image from The New York Times)