Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: Famous US skaters' reaction to ladies event 2014 Sochi.

  1. #1
    On the Ice
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Posts
    36

    Famous US skaters' reaction to ladies event 2014 Sochi.

    http://q.usatoday.com/2014/02/20/soc...tner-reaction/

    Thought it would be interesting for people to see that it is not only the "crazy Yuna fans/bots" that thinks the scores were inflated in Russia.

  2. #2
    Rinkside
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    11
    Only Russians would think the placements are fair. It is so obvious that Russia bought these medals. Adelina will forever be known for her rigged OGM. Hahahaha!!!!!!!

  3. #3
    Custom Title
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    904
    Do we need multiple threads on basically the same subject?

  4. #4
    Tripping on the Podium sowcow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Montreal, Que
    Posts
    57
    .
    From the article: Brennan: American skating insiders question Sochi judging:


    Judges from the United States and South Korea, as well as two other Western judges, were not chosen by draw to work the women's long program after being on the women's short program panel the night before.
    "[The 4 judges] were not chosen by draw to work the women's long program..." ??


    Wow ... Christine Brennan is really trying to make something out of nothing with this piece of literary word-wizardry! I'm sure it has nothing to do with the grammatically correct version not fitting the ominous tone of her article...

    "[The 4 judges] were not ̶c̶h̶o̶s̶e̶n̶ ̶b̶y̶ ̶d̶r̶a̶w̶ drawn to work the women's long program..."





    ~~ Grammar 101 ~~



    It is possible to: be chosen by draw; not chosen, or not drawn;
    But impossible to: be not chosen by draw (since it is always the case that if you are drawn, you have been chosen).


    Even manipulating the phrasing to try to give meaning to the sentence leaves you with either:
    "[The 4 judges] were, not chosen by draw, to work the women's long program..."
    Meaning: these 4 judges were chosen (NOT by draw or lottery, but by some other means) to work the women's long program; OR

    "[The 4 judges] were not chosen, by draw, to work the women's long program..."
    Meaning: these 4 judges were chosen (by draw or lottery); and their prize for being "chosen" was to NOT work the women's long program.


    Of course neither statement is factually correct.





    ~~ Self Reality Check ~~


    I often find Ms. Brennan's work to be overly sensational; so perhaps I am being too nit-picky here in my criticism? Surely similar grammatical errors have been made before? if so, it's likely just coincidence it appears in the article.

    Well, apparently not ...


    Previous uses of the term (source: Google search)
    ....... "not chosen by draw" …... 1
    "not chosen by a draw" 2
    "chosen by draw" 94,400
    "chosen by a draw" 2,050,000



    Ms. Brennan is only the 2nd person in {Google search} history to ever pen the term "not chosen by draw". Even if we open it up to include the term "not chosen by a draw", Ms. Brennan still finishes in the historical 4th spot!

    Millions of examples using the 'affirmative' connotations, yet only 3 previous uses ever of the negative...?? It seems an unlikely 'accidental' coincidence after all!

    Long live sensationalism!
    .

  5. #5
    Keepin' it real gsk8's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Posts
    3,210
    Thread already exists here.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •