Mediaboss Marketing

TORONTO -- A kilt-wearing Calgary humorist Will Ferguson urged attendees at the star-studded Scotiabank Giller bash to raise a glass in honour of his craft Tuesday night as he captured the $50,000 prize for his novel "419."

"I'd like to raise a toast to the written word," the bearded Ferguson said as he accepted the award, pulling a flask out of the sporran attached to his Highland tartan outfit.

"So. Thanks. Ladies and gentlemen: To the written word. And finally, to answer the question you're all wondering -- yes I have something on underneath!"

Ferguson, 48, is widely revered for such comedy chops, having won the Stephen Leacock Memorial Medal for humour writing three times.

But his Giller-winning novel (a Viking Canada publication) takes on a serious tone as it focuses on an email scam in Nigeria, where a woman is searching for the culprits behind her father's death.

The mystery follows his previous historical novel, "Spanish Fly," about con artists in the 1930s.

Writing two books about scammers has made Ferguson "very, very paranoid," he admitted.

"The more you write about cons, you start to see them everywhere," he said after nabbing the Giller. "It's like when your wife's pregnant and you see pregnant women everywhere, it's the same idea."

Clearly, penning more serious work hasn't caused Ferguson to lose his satiric edge, which he attributes to his Irish mother.

Earlier in the night, when asked about the lavish praise the Giller judging panel has heaped on "419," he quipped: "I think that means they suspect I have incriminating photographs of (them), which I don't."

Continued here:
A jubilant Will Ferguson wins Giller prize, raises toast to written word

By Neil Ashton

PUBLISHED: 18:45 EST, 31 October 2012 | UPDATED: 10:30 EST, 1 November 2012

The events that unfolded at Stamford Bridge on Sunday evening have created an unprecedented fissure in the English game, with a football club and match officials at loggerheads over alleged racist language.

The claim that Mark Clattenburg called John Mikel Obi a 'monkey' has shocked a sport that has been scarred by racist disputes for over a year.

NEIL ASHTON looks behind the allegations and conjecture to establish if there is any concrete evidence for Chelseas claim against the referee.

THE OTHERS IN THE LOOP

ALL four officials are able to hear each other speak thanks to a Swiss earpiece system. The sound is of digital quality and background noise is cut out. Earpieces for the four of them cost 2,900.

SIMON LONG - Assistant referee

MIKE JONES - fourth official

MICHAEL McDONOUGH - Assistant referee

See the original post:
Mark Clattenburg race row: Did referee use the word 'monkey' at John Obi Mikel? Truth

By Neil Ashton

PUBLISHED: 18:45 EST, 31 October 2012 | UPDATED: 10:30 EST, 1 November 2012

The events that unfolded at Stamford Bridge on Sunday evening have created an unprecedented fissure in the English game, with a football club and match officials at loggerheads over alleged racist language.

The claim that Mark Clattenburg called John Mikel Obi a 'monkey' has shocked a sport that has been scarred by racist disputes for over a year.

NEIL ASHTON looks behind the allegations and conjecture to establish if there is any concrete evidence for Chelseas claim against the referee.

THE OTHERS IN THE LOOP

ALL four officials are able to hear each other speak thanks to a Swiss earpiece system. The sound is of digital quality and background noise is cut out. Earpieces for the four of them cost 2,900.

SIMON LONG - Assistant referee

MIKE JONES - fourth official

MICHAEL McDONOUGH - Assistant referee

Read this article:
Mark Clattenburg race row: Did referee use the word 'monkey' at John Obi Mikel?

A word about those defensive metrics October 30th, 2012, 11:21 am posted by JEFF FLETCHER, OCREGISTER.COM

Since the Gold Gloves are coming out later today, we are certain to hear a whole lot about what a farce they are. Well hear how the managers and coaches are terrible judges because they dont use UZR, while the traditionalists will say the sabermetrics guys should close their laptops and watch a game.

Really, both sides are wrong.

First, there is no question that managers and coaches do a poor job at this. Ive been around when the ballots come out, and it goes like this: Coaches sit at a table and say to each other Third base? Who won last year? Oh, hes good. Or else Im voting for Player X. Hes made a couple great plays against us. Coaches just dont see enough of their opponents to make informed judgments about defense. I will accept as the gospel their opinion of their own players defense, because they see them every day, but not what they think of opponents they see a few times a year.

The problem is that eyeballs are a bad tool to analyze just about anything on a baseball field, especially when you are talking about small sample sizes. Thats why stats are so handy.

But theres another problem. The stats arent any good either.

A few years ago I was chatting with Kevin Towers, who is one of the most well-rounded GMs in terms of merging the worlds of scouting and modern metrics. We were watching the Giants Fred Lewis, who was an interesting case because the numbers loved his defense, but anyone who watched him couldnt figure out why. I asked Towers about Lewis, and he said that the defensive stats that are out there for public consumption just dont work. Thats why many teams have their own proprietary metrics.

One of the problems with things like UZR is the data going in isnt scientific at all. Many of these defensive stats are generated based on people who sit in the press box with a grid in front of them and they record the spot on the field where the plays are made. But its far from precise. They are simply estimating the location on the field with their eyes, and their accuracy depends on the location of the press box and whether they saw a replay, among other things. And they dont measure how far the player went to get there, so good positioning can masquerade as good range.

But dont worry, the answer is out there. And its coming.

Imagine if the same technology used to track the exact location and speed of a pitch was used to track the exact location and speed of a shortstop. The people who brought you Pitch f/x are working on Field f/x. Its been in development for a few years, so hopefully it wont be long before this data is out there and available.

Continue reading here:
A word about those defensive metrics

The blue and orange finish line is in place in Central Park, no superstorm debris in sight.

Little else is normal with the New York City Marathon.

An online service is needed to view this article in its entirety. You need an online service to view this article in its entirety.

Need an account? Create one now.

kAm%96 4@FCD6 H:== 36 E96 D2>6 D:?46 E96C6 H2D =:EE=6 52>286 3FE 86EE:?8 E@ E96 7:?:D9 =:?6 4@F=5 DE:== 36 2? 25G6?EFC6 7@C CF??6CD 7C@> @FE=J:?8 2C62D]k^Am

kAm$F49 😀 =:76 😕 $2?5JVD 27E6C>2E9 0 5:DCFAE65 EC2:?D[ A=2?6D[ 3FD6D 2?5 76CC:6D[ 7=@@565 3F:=5:?8D[ 3=@4<65 C@25D 2?5

kAm|2J@C |:4926= q=@@>36C8 D2H ?@?6 @7 E9:D 2D :?DFC>@F?E23=6 2?5 5676?565 E96 564:D:@? E@ 9@=5 E96 C246[ :?D:DE:?8 C6D@FC46D H@F=5?VE 36 5:G6CE65 7C@> DE@C> G:4E:>D] w6 ?@E65 %9FCD52J E92E 6=64EC:4:EJ H2D 6IA64E65 E@ 36 C6DE@C65 E@ 2== @7 |2?92EE2? 3J C246 52J[ 7C66:?8 FA QFA 2? 6?@C>@FD ?F>36C @7 A@=:46]Qk^Am

kAmQ%9:D 4:EJ 😀 2 4:EJ H96C6 H6 92G6 E@ 8@ @?[Q 96 D2:5]k^Am

kAmr:EJ r@F?4:= >6>36C s@>6?:4 #6449:2 yC][ 9@H6G6C[ 42==65 A=2?D E@ 9@=5 E96 C246 Q;FDE HC@?8Q 😕 =:89E @7 E96 @?8@:?8 >:D6CJ 2>@?8 C6D:56?ED H:E9 ?@ 7@@5[ D96=E6C @C 6=64EC:4:EJ]k^Am

kAmpD<65 23@FE E96 4C:E:4:D> 7C@> #6449:2 2?5 @E96CD[ }6H *@C< #@25 #F??6CD !C6D:56?E |2CJ (:EE6?36C8 D2:5 2 4:EJ 8@:?8 E9C@F89 2 4C:D:D >FDE 7:?5 E96 C:89E E:>6 E@ >@G6 7@CH2C5] $96 36=:6G6D $F?52J 42? 36 E92E 52J]k^Am

Originally posted here:
NYC Marathon organizers awaiting word from city