Shumpty’s Punt: BTC Cup Day

May 10, 2013 By in Shumpty's Punt Tags: , , Leave a comment

The first weekend of the Brisbane Winter Carnival beckons tomorrow at Eagle Farm. It is always easy to tell: I had to go to three different newsagents before I could pick up my best bets this week and I have been asked by a staff member for some tips before she heads to the track.

I have had a look at the form and here are my selections for the day at the Farm:

Race 1: I’m Cool (Number 10) each way.

Race 2: Hooked (Number 3)

Race 3: Purfectress (Number 5)

Race 4: Dusty Gold (Number 6) each way.

Race 5: Lucky Lucky Lucky (Number 9) each way.

Race 6: Quintessential (Number 3)

Race 7: Buffering (Number 1) Best Bet of the Day

Race 8: Mishani Warrior (Number 12) Bit of value in the last for the “Get Out Stakes”. each way.

A word of thanks

May 1, 2013 By in Shumpty Speaks Tags: , Leave a comment

Just a short note to thank you are all for reading shumpty77.com last month. April was the most popular month in the history of this little blog.

It is obvious what you like to read: rugby and cricket were the most popular topics particularly my piece about Robbie Deans. I am, obviously, going to be continuing to write about those topics as I am about the various societal and person issues I comment on.

I hope you keep enjoying the blog.

As always, if you have any questions you can email me on shumpty77@mail.com

Thanks again.

Cheers,

Stephen

The Sick Day Corollary

April 30, 2013 By in Shumpty Speaks Tags: , , Leave a comment

I have been off sick from work today and have taken a sick day. As I have sat here undertaking a cross between dozing, answering emails, racing to the bathroom and watching Skyfall again on DVD I have been pondering a quote from, of all shows, Fat Pizza being “Come on Dinkums, who do you know that actually takes a sick day when they are sick?” The character of Paulie in Fat Pizza has a point, albeit one not as overt as the one in the quote.

I do not know whether it is a quintessentially Australian thing nor whether it is a male thing but it strikes me that both “camps” have a distinct abhorrence to taking a sick day when they are actually sick. I know that during my first career I either had to be under sedation, anaesthesia or locked out of the building to not come to work when I was sick. My theorem at the time was a mixture of not wanting to seem weak and because I thought I was so vital to the operation of my firm that I just could not miss a day.

To say that I have learned the error of my ways in this new career would be an understatement. When I am unwell I take a sick day. To be clear: I do not mean when I have a sniffle or a scratchy throat here; I mean when I am unable to see out of my right eye because of a migraine or, like today, when I am having significant balance problems coupled with a vomiting.

So that is that and I have learned a valuable lesson about looking after myself … BUT is that really all of this topic that requires discussion? It is in the second line of this post that holds the answer. I have spent a large part of today answering emails and, it is easier to say, actually working. So that begs the question: am I actually just working from home today or am I convalescing in the hope of returning to work tomorrow?

Therein lies what I think is a new corollary about the taking of sick leave: even when we (and here I am referring to those of us in professional services or any vocation that provides one with a smart phone) are on sick leave we are still working. Smart phones, tablets and secure log ons from home computers all make us still contactable and, if we allow ourselves to be, still working. I make no criticism of my employer here: it is my choice to sit on my lounge juggling my two iPads and answering my iPhone. Indeed, I tell myself, I will not be sufficiently relaxed to actually let myself heal without keeping my eye on work and engaging with my staff and other stakeholders who form part of my daily work so in fact doingthis work is an important part of my day off.

Much has been written about the so called “crackberry” syndrome. I am unsure as to whether I am a sufferer in the true sense because I am simply using the ability to check my emails as a self destressing mechanism. I do not propose to traverse all of the issues that surround the said syndrome.

Suffice it to say though, and getting back to the point of this blog, it makes me wonder whether we have reached a point where, in some industries or professions, the offering of sick leave is meaningless? If, when one is sick, we are still, in effect, working if only to check our emails and respond accordingly why is it necessary to take sick leave? That is still work isn’t it? Or has the connectivity of the work place moved so far that the act of checking emails is considered just a part of life rather than work?

I am not going to lie: there is a part of me that wishes I could turn that part of my brain off that compels me to ensure nothing is in my emails that needs urgent or detailed consideration. As I can not the question remains: should I request sick leave for today or just mark it down as a working from home day?

NRL and ASADA: when did this become about unfairness?

April 29, 2013 By in Shumpty Speaks Tags: , , , Leave a comment

I was listening to the Triple M rugby league show with Matthew Johns, among others, On Sunday afternoon and was more than a little irritated by the statement that ASADA’s proposed questioning of players who are alleged to have taken illegal substances was unfair particularly around State of Origin time. I was also irritated by the statement that the ASADA investigation was unfair on the Cronulla Sharks and that that was a reason for their poor start to the season.

This is not the first time I have heard these comments. Indeed from the rugby league I do watch and the commentary about it that I listen to and read it seems to be the prevailing opinion that ASADA has been grossly unfair in its investigation.

Firstly, I am in no way a defender of ASADA or the Crime Commission. I believe that the report issued jointly by them should have come AFTER an investigation into the use of illegal drugs in sport was finalised. This did not happen and now ASADA is investigating.

Secondly, it must be remembered that ASADA is a federal body investigating the illegal use of drugs in sport. If guilty the users will be suspended and, worse, condemned as cheats and worse still a game will be tarnished for years to come. They have not targeted anyone with malice or forthought, rather they are simply doing their jobs.

The stakes are obviously high and equally obviously ASADA needs to get its investigation right. If there is an allegation that is backed by some evidence then it is obvious that ASADA should, and in fact, must investigate. How is that in any way unfair? If the allegations are false then the players and club are cleared. If the allegations are true then, I repeat, the punishment will be severe.

Surely then those espousing the “unfairness” argument surrounding ASADA’s investigation would want them to investigate in their own time to ensure that: a. they get the investigation right; and b. if the club and players are innocent they are able to declare as much. An elongated investigation assists no one and only adds to the rumour and innuendo surrounding the code, the clubs and the players.

Would similar statements of unfairness be making made if the Sharks had have started the season 7-0 rather than 2-5? I am pretty sure the answer to that is no. There is empirical proof to back this: one only has to look at the conduct of the Essendon AFL club who are 5-0 and have been even more publicly embroiled in the drugs in sport controversy and the ASADA investigation. I mean the Bombers coach has been directly and personally implicated for goodness sake and they have continued to win.

I think the NRL and its players should consider themselves very lucky. In other jurisdictions sportsmen are stood down immediately upon an allegation of misuse of a banned substance made with the due process surrounding the investigation taking place AFTER the “ban” starts. The fact that the Sharks (and other teams’ players) are still able to play whilst under investigation should be seen as a postive for the NRL and indicative that they could be in a much worse position then they are now.

I believe that everyone is innocent until they are proven guilty. I equally agree that due process must be followed. The NRL’s “supporters” of the argument that ASADA is being unfair are seeking to change the rules of engagement by publicly arguing that the ongoing investigation is such. This victim mentality must stop because it is not serving anyone; NRL, players, media and ASADA alike well.

In fact I will go one step further: the NRL and its players MUST stop with its campaign to convince us that this investigation is unfair and they are victims in all of this because, simply, it is not and they are not. ASADA has a job to do and they should be allowed to do it without this unnecessary intervention.

The Social Media trap: “is that tweet / blog about me?”

April 28, 2013 By in Shumpty Speaks Tags: , Leave a comment

I have been pondering this blog post for a while and wondering, on the one hand, am I being stupid and, on the other hand, am I to blasé. Here is the background: in the last week on a more than one occasion something that I have either tweeted or posted in one of my blogs has been read by a follower and a friend as a personal attack on someone. I have re-read over and over the offending posts I see nothing offensive in them and other than the fact that someone has taken offence they “offending” posts are innocuous in the extreme.

My stupid thoughts are for this reason: I keep saying to myself that this is not a big deal, will be a boring blog that no one will read (not much change from the usual there) and really represents a storm in a tea cup.

My blasé thoughts are for this reason: I also keep saying to myself that this might be a bigger deal than I, or anyone else thinks, and there is a whole group of people out there worried sick about a tweet or blog post they have read on there timelines when they really shouldn’t be.

So why then am I writing about it? Well this whole issue this week has gotten me thinking about the vagaries of interpersonal communication and the fact that in the past decade to fifteen years the way we communicate has moved forward at light speed. All the while the human condition and our ability to assume, hypothesis, fantasise and wonder has not changed. As human beings we all have feelings and we are the only real controllers of said feelings.

Social media has swooped in and, coupled with SMS messaging, the time of picking up the phone and calling someone has passed by in the blink of an eye. Therein lies a problem as I see it: in textual form it is impossible to determine with 100% certainty the mood of the person, the “tone” of the message and, indeed, if the message was sent in anger. Social media only enhances the problem: suddenly one is expressing oneself in a public forum to a poultice of people one knows and does not know and none of these followers have any ability to gauge the underlying circumstances of each particular post.

We have all been guilty of this: tweeting / facebooking / SMSing when angry and saying things that we did not mean and, indeed, speaking directly ill of people. These are not the interactions I am talking about here. What I am talking about are the posts that have no intention behind them whatsoever but are read by those who read your posts in a different way. Let’s face it: everyone interprets things differently based as diverse range a qualities as mental state, effectiveness of reading and focus. If a blog one posts is read by say 100 (one day big fella!) people there could be 100 different interpretations some of which could escalate in the readers mind a negative opinion about themself, the writer and even the topic.

I have myself on occasion read a tweet / blog post and thought “is that talking about me?” I generally got a bit miffed at this and often resolved to not talk to said poster for a while. This is precisely what happened to me this week and it is just out and out wrong! The tweets I was reading and agonising over were not about me and nor were the tweets of mine that were read by others to be about them. Yet in all cases a negative impression was made of the tweet / post which lead to a reduction in the repoir between the two parties involved as well as some fairly hefty self loathing.

In all of the cases I advert to above the situation quickly resolved itself but left all parties with a clear understanding that from here on in we will actually talk to each on the phone, or in the case of someone I know only from twitter a direct message enquiry will immediately be made, before jumping to a mistaken conclusion and let our brains run wild.

There is another subset to this issue however that also requires ventilation. It arises in the context of this argument “if you are not too busy to tweet and blog, why are you too busy to reply to me?” This argument is deceptively in the same ball park as the principal problem because the reader and maker of the argument has determined that you are ignoring them because you have not yet replied. There is no simple answer to this one save that, again, surely it is easier to just pick up the phone and communicate than spend hours with negative thoughts festering about the other person’s motives.

Therein lies the principal message of this blog (crikey: I wrote a blog with a takeaway message?!?!): do not let yourself be swept up in the negative thoughts that come from reading a tweet / post that you think is about you or that makes you think that the sender is ignoring you. 99.9% of the time the posting WILL NOT BE ABOUT YOU nor will the person be actually ignoring you. If you are worried a simple enquiry should answer your internal questioning and self doubt. If you do not take that step you could find yourself, like me, unfortunately, at the end of a friendship because the negative thoughts surrounding one’s motives became too difficult to erase.

For the record, one of the two “combatants” in this weeks drama about the “social media trap” will be reading this and know that I am writing it. The other has severed communications. Aside from the use of the facts in issue this blog is not about them and, for safety, is NOT directed at anyone else.

The answer is simple, and I repeat it, NO the tweet / post is not about YOU! If you are in doubt ask the poster and I am sure you will be pleasantly surprised.