The Fringe Is Coming...

The venues are slowly appearing across the city. The banners are going up. The temporary structures are being built. Not long to go now.
Earlier today at Socrates Cafe we discussed whether tradition had any place in the 21st century and 'what if we didn't think'. A good attendance and some interesting discussions. I was reminded of the first topic later on with the conclusion of the First Ashes Test Match between England and Australia. Rather like the tennis, cricket now has recourse to electronic appeals, and like tennis those are limited to a certain number of unsuccessful challenges. In this case two per match. Although in theory the umpires can independently ask for clarification on some issues, but not all, which is a little odd. Anyway, earlier in the match the English batsman Stuart Broad was given not out by the umpire when it seemed clear he should have been. Trouble was by then the Australians had used up their appeals and could do nothing about it.
Some people claim he should have 'walked' - in a throw back to another era when the gentlemanly ethics of the game (its traditions) would require a player to confess to a transgression and declare himself out. However such actions have long ceased to be a part of the professional game, and given the Australians' reluctance to 'walk' in such circumstances it did seem a little hypocritical for them to criticise the England player for not doing so.
Interesting to ponder though the nature of sport, that is a contrivance and a product of its rules. And the rules include the means of enforcing them. If the on-field adjudicators, in this case the umpires, don't see something and a player gets away with it, is it cheating, or is it only cheating if you get caught? Anyway this controversy was further heightened at the conclusion of the match as the Australian tail-end batsmen took them way closer to their run target than anyone had thought possible, only to fall short when the last batsmen was given out, having previously been given 'not out' by the umpires. England used an appeal of their own to the electronic systems and got the decision over-turned in their favour.
All sports evolve, and the use of the various electronic replays is still relatively new, but it does seem a shame that the final outcome of a sporting contest can be determined by reference to computer screens off the pitch rather than in the decisive action on the field of play.
Or maybe I'm too much of a traditionalist?
Also watched the Bastille Day stage of the Tour de France - more tradition, in the 100th version of the race - finishing on top of Mount Ventoux. The British rider Chris Froome, already leading the race, extended has lead over the rest of the peleton with a great stage win. He is riding for the Sky team that took Bradley Wiggins to the first British win in the Tour last year. With Wiggins unable to defend his yellow jersey, Froome looks a good bet to win it this year, although there are still some tough days in the Alps to go.

Reading my post of a year ago, I shall try not to be too disheartened that I still haven't completed the first draft of the Paris book... But I am disappointed in myself.