I Hate Cell Phones

I was sitting home in my comfy chair watching the Yankee/ Twin game last night and low and behold the camera seeks out a shapely gorgeous blonde. What a sight....every red blooded American male dream.

But it stops there. She's on a "cell phone" talking to Suzie or Lizzy about who knows what. Head down gabbing away like she's hearing the latest sale items at Bloomingdale's.

It's then that it hits me. Whenever they show one of these dizzy broads board beyond tears sitting at a sports event that they could hardly care being at, they need to take a hot line drive to the kisser. That should wake them in a New York minute as to why they're there.

What Do Senators Do?

Quadrennially, numerous senators throw their hat into the presidential race. The word quadrennial can mean either every fourth year or lasting for four years. For many senators, the latter definition seems more apt. They run, threaten to run, recover from running or advise someone else who's running (i.e. travel to interesting places). And yet, these are people with current jobs and, I assume, current responsibilities. But they have no qualms traipsing around the country while accepting the full-time guaranteed salary and benefits and pensions they receive as US Senators.

Connecticut voters in particular have to be confused by the presidential-wannabe-with-no-chance meanderings of Sens Dodd and Lieberman the past few years. Each moved out of state for a while. Lieberman to New Hampshire. Dodd to Iowa. Each may or may not have returned. Who knows and how can you tell. The other day for example, Lieberman was seen in Mexico with Senator Obama. Did he call in sick? Did I miss the memo?

All the while, Dodd may have been at lunch in Washington renegotiating the mortgages on his houses. But who'd know? Senators report to no one.

Several times during the Obama - Clinton cross-country lovefest, each was seen back in Washington to participate in a vote or to make a speech. Nice gesture, but hollow. How engaged could they possibly have been in the debate and the topic leading up to the vote? Their fly-ins make a mockery of the debates and discourse that are supposed to be a core element of being a Senator.

Or is it that the job of a US Senator not full-time? Has the wanderlust of Lieberman, Dodd, Obama, Clinton, McCain etc demonstrated the utter lack of necessity for having full-time Senators? Or any Senators? Let's face it, in midst of this historic economic meltdown, the only thing that kept the Senate's attention was Roger Clemens and Spygate.

Double Fault: Get Rid of the Second Serve

The Roger Federer - Rafael Nadal match will go down as one of the greatest in tennis history. It could have been improved with a rules change.

To anyone watching, the level of play was as great as ever seen, regardless of the circumstances. Given the circumstances - Wimbledon and a changing of the guard at the top of the sport - the two best players in the world put on a tremendous performance.

The defending champion - as great and classy as any player in history - put up a magnificent fight. When faced with match points, Federer conjured up some of his most sublime shots. After losing the first two sets, Federer seemed the better player, but just barely. And when it appeared that Nadal might, just might, crack under the rejuvenated Federer's relentless pressure in the fourth and fifth sets, the Spaniard translated some of his most creative clay-court shotmaking to the slick grass of Wimbeldon. He earned his championship through high-level play and relentless energy.

But as great as it was, the match underscored one of the most fan-challenging aspects of tennis. The length of late-in-major matches often undermines the brilliance of the play. Federer and Nadal dueled for almost five hours. Add in the rain delays, and the match lasted almost 6. In fact, since there are no lights at Wimbledon Center Court, the final point was played in near darkness, a situation not immediately apparent to the audience watching on television due to the ability of cameras to pick up ambient light. It's conceivable that the match could have been suspended, to be continued the next day.

A solution to the challenge of interminably lengthy tennis matches is relatively straight-forward. Eliminate the second serve. No other sport allows a do-over the way tennis does. In fact, there was a time that tennis was dying as a result of the Ivan Ivaniseivic's of the world (the 1980's version of Andy Roddick). Smash and volley tennis was boring to watch and hard for the average fan to enjoy. There was little drama and long periods of what amounted to inactivity. Thank goodness Andre Agassi came back to demonstrate that it was possible to return 120+mph serves. But even at this year's Wimbledon, players ole'd serves knowing that, with two chances, they'd probably win their own.

The risk-reward of a single serve means that the server has to choose to go for an all-out smash or hit a somewhat safer offering. It also means that the returner has every reason to believe he can break his opponent at any time. Without having to wait for second serves, matches will have more action, possibly be shorter and probably have more drama.