Can someone create a poll that might mean something?

Why is it so difficult to write a proper poll? I am going to pick on ESPN, but I see this all over the place. Right now on ESPN.com, the poll question on the main page is "Will you watch the Belmont Stakes if Rachel Alexandra does not race?" There are then two choices - Yes and No.

The point of the poll is to try to gage what the impact of Rachel Alexandra's absence might have on viewership of the race - so just having two answers, yes and no, leaves out one (possibly large) category - those people like myself who couldn't care less about horse racing, and are not going to watch whether Rachel Alexandra or any other horse races.

This isn't asking too much, to just have what ESPN has is simply being lazy. This is a question that has three rather obvious choices choices - Yes, I will watch even if the horse does not race; No, I will not race if the horse does not race; and I will not watch either way. Nice, simple poll, that will yield some sort of meaningful result.

Isn't that the goal? A. Yes. B. No. C. Don't I have something better to do than to nitpick meaningless poll questions.

Or something that is slightly more important than a horse race, on CNN.com at the moment, the poll question is "Do you agree with President Obama's selection of Judge Sonia Sotomayor to be the next U.S. Supreme Court justice?" The poll has two possible choices - yes and no. The poll forces people to make a decision, instead of adding a third option, "Not sure," or "Haven't had a chance to make up my mind," or "Prior to this morning, I had never heard of Judge Sonia Sotomayor, so give me some freaking time to form an actual opinion if you really want an informed result."

Is This Really a Talent Worthy of its Own TV Show

Ok, so I do not watch the show, but I do see the commercials for The Millionaire Matchmaker on Bravo. Every time I see a commercial I get angry because the woman could not be more annoying, rivaling the annoyance level of the woman in the Progressive Insurance commercials. For anyone who does not know, this is a show about a woman who has made a career (and then the tv show) about her business where she finds dates and spouses for millionaires. Wow, what a skill? I mean who wants to date millionaires? It must be so difficult to find people willing to want to be with someone who can guarantee their financial security for their life time, their childrens' lifetime, and maybe even their childrens' childrens' lifetimes, with plenty to spare on extra houses, cars, jewelry, and more material items than I can even imagine. Where do I sign up to get that job? What is the training - find a single millionaire, walk the person into a restaurant or a bar, and announce, "Hey, does anyone want to date a millionaire?" When all the hands get raised, you then tell the millionaire to pick one. Must be back-breaking work. Get a real job that takes a skill to be proud of, and then maybe it would be worthy of a television show - how about instead of The Millionaire Matchmaker, we find someone who is The Goofy Looking-Short-Poor Matchmaker. Give that person a show, because that would be a talent that might be worth watching.

You are ruining sports

I love sports, but there are so many things happening now with professional sports that make it difficult to maintain that love. Yesterday I found one more - idiot super-sensitive fans courtesy of Ernest Provetti. Ernest and his son were sitting courtside for Game Four of the Celtics-Magic series. After Glen Davis hits the game-winning shot at the buzzer, a shot that saved the Celtics from going down three games to one, Davis races up court to go celebrate with the rest of his teammates. Along the way, he bumps into Ernest's son. I watched it happen live, and in the back of my head, I said, I guarantee some idiot is going to make a big deal out Davis bumping into that kid. And of course I was right, as waiting to be just that idiot the day after the game were both Ernest and naturally ESPN.

Ernest sent the league an e-mail and made sure the local newspaper found out. Ernest calls Davis, "a raging animal," and demands an apology. He believes players are not allowed to cross the out of bounds line and step off the court, writing, "The NBA makes it clear [that players are not to] cross the sideline. If I cross that line, the NBA will take away my tickets. It's a double standard." A double-standard? Hey Ernest, go f*ck yourself. I don't really think players can't cross that line - how do they get to their bench if they can't cross the line? Players can't go into the stands. That is it. Players can't intentionally push, shove fans.

People like Ernest here, and ESPN for jumping on the story and talking about it throughout the day yesterday, are ruining sports. I am just sick of stories like this, people intent on getting their names in the paper at the expense of sucking all the fun out of sports. Ernest - do you like sitting courtside, just inches from the bench and all the action? Well keep complaining, because you know what will happen next time you or a similar moron complains - the NBA will make sure no one gets to sit that close anymore. If you want to sit that close to the action, there is a chance for some minor interaction with a player. Emphasis on the word minor. Deal with it Ernest (and any idiot who agrees with him). No one was hurt, no one was pushed down. It was not intentional. Davis hit probably the biggest shot of his career, and was excited. It was a great reaction to see, and this guy had to try to ruin it.

And you know what ESPN, and the papers that covered this - just because some moron complains, it doesn't mean you have to waste time and space covering it. Why not just ignore this moron? Is that freaking possible? Are there any sort of standards anymore on what is, and what is not news? Or is it simply that we are too stupid to decide, and if someone complains, we are just sheep and have no choice but to report on it?

As of now, neither the NBA nor the Celtics have apologized, and I hope they do not. I'd love it if someone would tell Ernest to shut the hell up, but for now, I'll be satisfied with the silence.

I guess you could do that too. But why would you want to?

Watching ESPNNEWS last night, along the bottom scroll was this, "Follow ESPNNEWS on Twitter." I am not really into Twitter, but I have no problem with it. It seems more of a way to follow celebrities than your friends. But regardless. Does a person really need to go to Twitter to follow ESPN anything? How about this ESPN, "Follow ESPNNEWS on ESPN.com." They already have their own web site. I am pretty sure plenty of people go there and know about it.

Here is something I like - Mike Reiss' Football Notes

The Boston Globe's Mike Reiss wrote this in the Sunday Boston Globe -

Everyone is covered
What is it about Brett Favre and his seemingly annual flirtation with retirement or returning to play that turns media coverage of the NFL on its head? Last Thursday, a reporter from NFL Network delivered a live report from Favre's front lawn in Hattiesburg, Miss., and told viewers, among other things, that he watched Favre's wife leave to run errands. Left unsaid was that Favre was one of the NFL's worst quarterbacks down the stretch last season.

Well said, Mike. Well said.

Dumb Yankee Fans, Even Dumber Yankee Jerseys

It goes without saying that I hate the Yankess and Derek Jeter and Yankee fans, but what really drives me crazy is Yankee Fans with Jeter jerseys who feel the need to put his name across the top (or any Yankee player), like these two idiots pictured above. Needless to say, it really makes me angry when I see a picture of a couple with their matching dumb Yankee jerseys. I know these two are huge fans who love the Yanks, but in case Ruth and Dimagio above haven't noticed, the Yankees don't have last names on their jerseys. That the Yankees have stuck to the same simple, distinctive uniforms is one of, if not the only, things I like about the Yankees - this stands in stark contrast to what has become of the Red Sox, who this year are rolling out different uniforms depending on what time of day a game is being played (accompanied by entire notebooks in the paper the next day devoted to what uniform and uniform accessories the Red Sox were wearing the night before).