Since pretty much, well, everyone is staring glassy-eyed at their TVs this weekend as the glory and spectacle of the Olympics unfolds in high-definition tape-delayed fabulousness, I figured they’d make a pretty decent topic for this week’s debate.
Ah, but what to debate? I suppose I could ask whether or not anyone believes our fair city, Cincinnati, might have hosted the Games of the XXX (that’s 30th to you an me, Russ) Olympiad as impressively as London seems to be doing so far. After all, a decade or so ago there was quite a push to host these very games right here. But then, I’m not sure how great a debate that would turn out to be. In fact, I suspect that would’ve gone over like a whoopee cushion in Sister Mary Catherine Francis’ religion class. Which is to say, it might have been amusing for a second, and then instantly become one of those “cricket-chirping” moments.
Which, I pretend is not a common thing around these parts. Let me have my happiness.
Luckily, then I realized yesterday while the Puddinpop watched the US women’s indoor volleyball team take on the Chinese (which, to their credit, actually appeared, yanno, female), that there are two, count ‘em, two forms of Olympic volleyball: indoor and beach.
Really, is this necessary? I mean, besides the participants and their parents, does anyone really care about this much volleyball? One version of any sport is acceptable, of course, even obligatory to some degree. But two forms of volleyball? Really?
So, let’s pretend that we could only have one form of Olympic volleyball. The question in that case, then, becomes, which one do we actually care about?
Olympic Volleyball: Which is better, indoor or beach?
And, let’s try to keep it clean, okay?
And, of course, there’s a corresponding poll:
If you ask me, though, I know people like Beach Volleyball, but it’s hard not to look at the Olympic Committee with a bit of an, “Oh, you buncha dirty, old committee members” expression when you see something like this.
*Side Out, 1990