Infidel – Ayaan Hirsi Ali.  Infidel is one of the most powerful books I have ever read.  It is about Ali’s path from Somalia to the United States, with time spent living in Kenya, Saudi Arabia, Ethiopia, Germany and the Netherlands in between.  Without giving away too much of the book, Ali was born into the Somali clan system and was raised as a devout, conservative Muslim.  She faced incredible hardship during her life including living multiple war zones, abusive parents, female circumcision, forced marriage, an internal struggle with her religious beliefs, death threats and so much more.  Her story is so incredible that if it were written for Hollywood, you would think it was fake.

A little background.  When the Dutch filmmaker Theo Van Gogh was butchered by an Islamic extremist in broad daylight in the Netherlands, the terrorist stabbed a 5 page note to Van Gogh’s chest.  The note was addressed to Ali and included a fatwa, or holy order, calling on Muslims to kill her.  The books tells Ali’s life story that lead to this horrific conclusion.

While reading the book, I found myself questioning how anyone could believe in cultural relativism, especially if they read Ali’s story.  I see cultural relativism as a continuum.  On one end is the people who say “our values are right, other values are wrong.” The other end is people who say “all cultures are equal, we must respect their practices, as their values are as good as ours.” I’ve gone back and forth along the cultural relativism continuum for a long time now, but after reading Ali’s book, I am falling much farther toward the first end of the spectrum.  I think that my reading of cultural relativism is now something like this: I can understand why people have the values that they do in different countries, but I believe that there are universal human rights and truths that everyone should adhere to.  For example, I can understand how someone born in the rural, tribal hinterlands of Somalia could believe that female circumcision is the right thing to do, but I don’t believe it’s wrong to try to stop the practice.

I’m probably not doing a good job of explaining myself here, but I believe that Infidel is one of the most interesting books of the 21st century and potentially one of the most important.  I highly recommend Infidel.

Three Cups of Tea – Greg Mortenson and David Oliver Relin.  After reading Infidel, I dove right into Three Cups of Tea.  I had never heard this story, but after reading the book, came away inspired.  Three Cups of Tea is about Greg Mortenson’s quest to build schools and improve the quality of life for children, especially girls, in rural Pakistan and Afghanistan.

In 1993, Mortenson, an American, failed at summiting K2, arguably the world’s most difficult mountain to climb.  Mortenson got lost climbing back down to civilization and wandered into Korphe, a tiny mountain village in Northern Pakistan.  He was sick, tired and lost, yet the impoverished Muslim villagers nursed him back to health and gave him amazing hospitality.  After living with the villagers for about seven weeks, Mortenson was able to go back home ot the United States.  But before he left, he agreed to return and build the villagers a school to educate their kids, especially their girls.

Fast forward to 2009, Mortenson has built over 130 schools and countless clean water projects, women’s centers and self improvement facilities in rural Pakistan and Afghanistan.  His schools have educated over 55,000 children in an area where America is not all that well liked.  Mortenson has succeeded in helping these children by sheer personal grit, determination and amazing perseverance.  He has spent years in Pakistan and Afghanistan, braving some of the most dangerous places in the world, in order to help children get an education.  He believes that books, not bombs, will make the world a safer place in the future.

Mortenson is now one of my personal heroes because he has done so much good, without any official mandate.  Mortenson is a charity entrepreneur.  He has gone into an area that had a huge need and filled it as best as he could.  I truly believe that Mortenson deserves a Nobel Peace Prize and believe he will get one within my lifetime.  If you want to be inspired and read about one of the most amazing people on this Earth, read Three Cups of Tea.  I can’t recommend a book any more highly.

SPOILERS: After reading Infidel and Three Cups of Tea back to back, I really wanted to hear what Ali and Mortenson would think about each other.  By the end of Infidel, Ali believes that Islam needs to have a reformation because many of the core tenants of Islam advocate violence, oppression of women and a “backward” outlook toward the word.  She does not seem to believe that there are moderate Muslims, only religious Muslims and secularized Muslims.  The does not seem to believe in the concept of the “silent majority.” These ideas are completely understandable if you lived in her shoes and lived the life that she did.  They may even be completely correct, but I am not so sure.

Mortenson’s story seems to prove otherwise and provides signs of hope.  Although he is kidnapped by the Taliban and threatened by some religious Mullahs, the vast majority of people he meets are devout Muslims that are good people.  They are clearly not secular and are very religious, but do not have any problem with an infidel like Mortenson.  In fact, many of them are willing to put their life on the line to protect him.  Additionally, these rural Pakistani and Afghani Muslims are willing to educate their girls and the girls are willing to learn.  Mortenson’s example of how education can help people break free of poverty is incredibly powerful and I think Ali would agree that what he is doing is amazingly important.  I would love to be a fly on the wall if the two of them would ever have a candid conversation.

Soccernomics – Simon Kuper and & Stefan Szymanski.  Soccernomics is nowhere near as heavy as the previous two books, but is still very interesting.  Kuper is the author of Soccer Against the World, another book I read this summer, and is back at it again.  Soccernomics is the Moneyball of soccer.  The authors try to bring statistical analysis to the pitch, just like Michael Lewis did in Moneyball.  The authors tackle why England always seems to fail at major tournaments, which countries overachieve and underachieve and who will be successful in the future.

My favorite part of the book is the section about Olympic Lyon, currently one of the most successful clubs in Europe.  Just like Moneyball, the authors show why Lyon can be such a good club with limited resources.  Lyon goes against conventional wisdom and is incredibly active in the transfer market.  They have a stable front office and only buy players who are between 20 and 22 and are among the top 2-3 players in their country or are Brazilian.  Once the players sign with Lyon, the club spares no expense to help the players adjust to living in Lyon and French culture.  I found it amazing that other clubs, even the richest in the world (Chelsea, Man U, Real Madrid etc) don’t do this.  They simply sign the player and hope he is able to adjust.  Third, Lyon sell players as soon as they show any sign of deterioration and never try to sign center forwards, as they are the most over valued players in the transfer market.  If you liked Moneyball or like European soccer, Soccernomics is the book for you.

Note: If you are interested in donating to Greg Mortenson’s charity to build schools in Central Asia, check out the Three Cups of Tea website.

                          

It was no wonder that Belichick was universally slammed by pretty much everyone after his decision to go for it from his own 30 yard line in the 4th quarter last night’s Sunday night game against the Indianapolis Colts.  Here’s the situation.  The Patriots were winning by six points with a little over two minutes to go.  The Patriots faced 3rd and 2 from their own 28.  A first down in this situation wins the game.  The Colts defense stopped the Patriots on 3rd down, forcing a 4th and 2.  Instead of punting, Belichick ordered his offense back out onto the field to go for it.  They didn’t get it and Peyton Manning drove the Colts 28 yards for the game winning touchdown.

It’s obvious that the Patriots should have punted and forced the Colts to go 70 yards to try to win the game, right?  To steal a line from Lee Corso, not so fast my friend.  Belichick is way ahead of the curve.  According to research by David Romer at UC-Berkely, NFL teams punt way too often.

The Patriots convert first down from 2 yards out 76% of the time (ESPN’s stat from Sportscenter).  This stat means that by going for it, the Patriots had a 76% chance of winning the game.  Belichick only had to think that his defense would give up a touchdown to Peyton Manning and the Colts offense at a lower rate for it to be a good decision.  Manning had already driven the Colts to three 75+ yard touchdown drives in under two minutes in the game.  Belichick made the decision to go for it and this time it did not pay off, which brings me to why I love watching him coach a game.

Coaches in all sports, but especially football, almost always play it safe and go with conventional wisdom.  I’ve written about the lack of innovation in football before, mostly relating to play calling.  Last season I came up with a hypothesis:

I think it is because coaches fear being fired for not just doing poorly, but doing poorly a different way.  If coaches go with the conventional wisdom and fail, they will not be criticized as harshly as if they experiment and find new ways to fail.  If they succeed, like Mike Martz’s high-flying pass offense for the Rams called “The Greatest Show on Turf,” they are given some credit, but when the same coach experiences a minimal decline, he is criticized more harshly than a conventional coach.  For example, when Martz decided to pass in a late game situation, just like he had during other times in the game and failed, he was roundly criticized.  If he had run and failed, the players would have been criticized for not executing.   There is no upside for innovation here.

Today, I found out that this hypothesis has a name, via the Freakonomics blog:

If his team had gotten the first down and the Patriots won, he would have gotten far less credit than he got blame for failing. This introduces what economists call a “principal-agent problem.” Even though going for it increases his team’s chance of winning, a coach who cares about his reputation will want to do the wrong thing. He will punt, just because he doesn’t want to be the goat. (I’ve seen the same thing in my research on penalty kicks in soccer; it looks like kicking it right down the middle is the best strategy, but it is so embarrassing when it fails that players don’t do it often enough.) What Belichick proved by going for it last night is that 1) he understands the data, and 2) he cares more about winning than anything else.

It takes a leader to be willing to go against the grain, even when he knows that he will be excoriated by his peers.  He could have taken the easy way out.  If he did, today’s headlines would most likely read “Patriots defense no match for Peyton Manning and the Colts.”  Instead, we have “Colts make Pats pay for Bill’s unusually dumb decision.”

I think that this problem helps explain why big companies are slow to innovate.  They face the same problem.  Mid-level employees face the same problem as NFL coaches.  If they simply keep their heads down and do what 99% of the other workers would do, they will get credit if they succeed, but face much less criticism if they fail.  Most corporate cultures punish failing in a new way much more than failing the same old way.  If a mid-level employees actually do something innovative and it works, many times they are given less credit than they deserve.

I think this problem helps explain why startups are able to innovate much faster than big companies.  If big companies want to innovate faster, they need to empower their employees to go against the grain and make tough decision.  They need to actually mean it.  Companies need to view a failure for what it is, a failure, rather than get caught up in how the person failed.  This is not to say that someone who decides to pull the corporate equivalent of going for it on 4th and 20 from their own 5 yard line shouldn’t be criticized.  As long as the decision has a reasonable chance of success, they should be applauded for their innovation, rather than criticized for thinking outside the box.

                          

It seems like I hear about another story like this every day and I can’t seem to figure out why.  When the Internet first starting becoming popular in the late 90s, it was not uncommon to hear about people being fired for looking at porn at the office, buying illegal items over the Internet or trying to meet up with underage children.  I chalked that up to stupid people bringing their shady offline behavior to the Internet and not understanding that the Internet is basically public.   I figured that people did not realize that pretty much anyone could find out about what they were doing since the Internet was new.

Fast forward to 2009.  It’s been a decade since people started to become familiar with the Internet.  Everyone in the United States should have heard hundreds of these stories in the last ten years.  It wouldn’t surprise me if most Americans know at least one person personally who has done something stupid online that has led to adverse consequences.  Why does it continue to happen and why are people who slap videos up on YouTube shocked when they are discovered?  Why do people have a sense of anonymity and privacy with the Internet, when in reality, the Internet is probably the least private place in the world?

Why do underage drinkers post pictures of themselves on Facebook for the police or school officials to find when they would not post those pictures on their lockers?  Why do teens send nude pictures of themselves to their classmates over their cellphones or on Facebook when they would never give pass around a hard copy?  Why do grown men go to chat rooms and try to proposition children and go to meet them, even after the popularity of Chris Hansen’s To Catch A Predator, when they would never approach a child on the street (or even on the phone) with the same advances?  Why do people post rants on their Facebook or Twitter pages when they would never put the same information into a newspaper or say it to the person’s face?  Why do people do illegal things and post them on Youtube or Facebook video when they would never send them to their local news station?  Why do people post all sorts of things online that they would be mortified to do in real life?  Why are they shocked when they are caught?

I truly don’t understand it.  They have to know better.  They have to have seen examples of people getting into trouble for posting things online.  I cannot figure out why people have a sense of anonymity online when in reality it is the exact opposite.

I think about 20% of the people who do these types of things are just stupid.  They are equivalent to the guy who walks into the grocery store and waits for an employee to walk by, then shoves a frozen turkey under his coat.  They just don’t get it.  There is another 5-10% of people who just want to be “YouTube famous” and will post just about anything to be popular.  There is no helping these people.

My hypothesis for the rest of the population is that people who are posting these types of things online are generally alone, in their office or their home, and are lulled into a false sense of security.  They think that they are alone at home, so how can anyone else see what they are doing?  I don’t think that they are crying out for help or trying to get caught.  I think there is something about the isolation that is caused by computers and the internet that gives people the idea that they being private and careful, when in fact, it is the exact opposite.  They view the Internet as their own personal world, without regard to the rest of the people who happen to inhabit their virtual world as well.

I wonder if this is the height of the problem and history will look back at 2003-2009 as the crazy years when people were naive about the Internet, posting whatever they wanted and doing whatever they wanted, without regard to the consequences.  It could also go the other way, where everyone becomes desensitized to the stupid things people do online, but I do not think so.

Help me understand.  What’s your hypothesis as to why people slap pictures on Facebook and videos on YouTube that can get them in trouble? Why do so many people have a sense of anonymity online?  Will it continue?

                          

Soccer Against the Enemy- Simon Kuper.  Kuper is an English journalist who covered soccer at the start of his career, moved to finance and economics but got bored and moved back to soccer.  This book is similar to Franklin Foer‘sHow Soccer Explains the World: An Unlikely Theory of Globalization, one of my favorite books from last year.  Kuper travels around the world attending soccer matches right after the fall of the Berlin Wall.  Each chapter could stand alone as a short story, but they flow together well enough to create a narrative about soccer around the world.  My favorite chapter in the book was the one about Dynamo Kiev, the biggest and most successful club in Ukraine.  Dynamo has turned into a huge business, not just a soccer club.  Any foreign company that wants to do a joint venture in Ukraine tried to partner with Dynamo for tax reasons and because everyone in Ukraine knew Dynamo and would be more likely to support the project.  It’s interesting to see how sports teams become bigger parts of an economy and become “Més que un club” or more than a club, which is FC Barcelona‘s motto.  If you like soccer, check out this book.

The 4-Hour Workweek – Tim Ferriss.  I had skimmed this book a year ago, but had not gotten a chance to read it carefully.  Whatever you think of Ferriss, the book contains so some worthwhile time management skills, business strategies and ideas that make you reexamine your lifestyle.  Ferriss tells the story about how he went from an office job where he worked many hours per week to creating a product that lets him travel the world and only requires him to work as little as four hours per week.  I agree with his ideas that “mini-retirements” should be spread out throughout life, rather than working your entire life to retire when you are in your 60s and I enjoyed hearing how he has used the new global supply chain to launch a product with minimal up front costs, but he lost me with his story about how he won a gold medal at the Chinese National Kickboxing Tournament and has a world record in Tango.  While Ferriss comes across as a bit of a loner who believes that the ends justify the means in pretty much all facets of life, it would be a mistake to completely dismiss the book because of the arrogance of the author.  I’m confident that if you read the book, you’ll find at least a few of his ideas worthwhile.

A Pint of PlainA Pint of Plain: Tradition, Change and the Fate of the Irish Pub – Bill Barich.  I started this book because I had just gotten back from a week in Ireland, visiting, among other things, a few Irish pubs.  The book is about Barich’s attempt to find a traditional Irish pub to be his “local.”  The book starts off well, but is pretty slow and delves too much into each pub’s individual history for my taste.  His chapters on how Ireland has changed in the last 5-10 years as a result of globalization are interesting, but the most interesting take away from the book was his stat that bars in the UK that change formats to and Irish pub see 3x greater turnover than from before the format change.  There is something powerful about the Irish pub that makes it successful all over the world.  I wouldn’t bother reading this book.  Instead, check out your local Irish pub or go take a trip to the real thing in Ireland.

                          

Yesterday, I made the trip down to Chicago to see the US soccer team take on Honduras in a World Cup Qualifier at Soldier Field.  It was the first time the US had played a qualifier in Chicago, mostly because the US Soccer Federation is worried that Chicago would not give the US a home field advantage, as there are many immigrants in the Chicago area.   It turns out that they were right, but the US still was able scratch out a 2-1 come from behind win, just about guaranteeing the US a spot in South Africa 2010 with five more qualifying matches to go.  I would guess that at least 35,000 of the 55,000 fans in attendance were sporting el bicolor (white and blue stripes), and it seemed like even more, as the Hondurans knew how to cheer and make noise. There is nothing more intense than attending a well played international soccer game.  

I went to the 2006 World Cup in Germany and have yet to find another sporting event that matched the passion, enthusiasm and national pride of the fans.  I’ve been to some great Badger football, basketball and hockey games, Packer games and Brewer games, but none matched the intensity of even the Costa Rica vs. Ecuador game in the group stage of the World Cup.  The feeling that I had singing the National Anthem in Nuremberg 2,000 or so other Americans was electric and unforgettable.

If you are a soccer fan, or even if you only casually follow the sport, make a point of going to a World Cup Qualifier or Gold Cup Match if there is a game in your area.  The fans are into the game, Sam’s Army is singing and chanting and the opposing fans are playing drums and blowing horns.  It’s an amazing atmosphere and mostly friendly, but I was disappointed by some Americans, mostly drunk college kids, in the crowd who yelled things like “go jump back across the border” or “go back to mexico” at Honduran families.  Its unoriginal and dumb and I wish more people would have told them to stop. In the US, sports and politics don’t usually mix.  

To me, the coolest part of the game  was that most of the Honduran fans were clearly immigrants to the US, spoke English, and were still proud of where they were born.  Many of the  Honduran fans sang the US National Anthem and joined in the cheers of USA, USA, USA after the game, but wore Honduras shirts and cheered intensely for Honduras during the game.  The woman in front of me made it very clear that while she was cheering for Honduras, she “loved the USA” and “cheered for the US” whenever they weren’t “playing Honduras.”  One of the most amazing parts our country is that immigrants assimilate into society and love the country, unlike many European countries where immigrants are shuttered in slums by de facto segregation.  It was also cool to see most Hondurans telling their own fans to stop throwing empty cups over the second deck in the second half when they were upset with a call.

In other parts of the world, soccer and politics mix all the time.  Ivory Coast’s qualification to the 2006 World Cup stopped their civil war.  Iran’s qualification to the 1998 World Cup caused massive celebrations, alcohol fueled parties and women throwing off their veils, that some thought might be the spark that overthrew the government.  When Iran beat the US in France ’98, the entire country rushed into the streets to celebrate.   A 1969  riot during an El Salvador and Honduras World Cup Qualifier caused la guerra del fútbol, the soccer war, that claimed over 2000 lives.

Iran is back in the news as it tries to qualify for the 2010 World Cup in South Africa.  On Friday, the Financial Times featured an article ahead of Iran’s must win Qualifier against North Korea that claimed the Soccer Result Could Affect the Iranian Election.

Some argue that failure to qualify – Iran needs to win its remaining three fixtures over the next 11 days to be guaranteed a place at next year’s World Cup finals in South Africa – could damage the re-election hopes of Mahmoud Ahmadi-Nejad, the president. “The government of Mr Ahmadi-Nejad has shown it would like to make the best use of sports in politics and failure in football will surely have negative impacts on his votes,” said a senior reformist politician. The comment might be seen as wishful thinking by a government opponent but it is echoed by a fundamentalist politician, sympathetic to Mr Ahmadi-Nejad: “The results of these football matches might shift a significant number of votes from one candidate to another.” In an election expected to be close – and where Mir-Hossein Moussavi, the rival reformist candidate, is said to be gaining support – that could be significant.

Iran was banned by FIFA from international competition for a few weeks back in 2008 because the President fired the head of the Football Association and appointed a political hack.  After Ahmadinejad backed down and brought the old FA head back, Iran were allowed to continue to compete. This story put me in the awkward position of rooting for North Korea to do something good for a change, in hopes that Iran miss out on the world cup and throw the horrible Ahmadinejad out of office in favor of a more reform-minded alternative.

In Saturday’s qualifier in Pyongyang, Iran and North Korea played to a 0-0 draw, leaving Iran on the outside looking in.  Iran need to win both of their next two games in order to qualify and hope that North Korea and Saudi Arabia do not do well.  It will be interesting to see how the next few weeks shape up in Iranian soccer, as well as politics.

                          

I started the game at 530 and heard a few rumbles of thunder in the far distance, but did not see any lightning. We played the entire first half, and I still had not seen any lightning. During halftime, there was a quick burst of heavy rain and the skies got darker. Still no lightning.

Twelve minutes into the second half, out of nowhere, BAM!!! There was a flash of light, with a huge clap of thunder seemingly simultaneously. A parent on the sideline fell to the ground and his umbrella that had been planted into the ground flew away from him. Three players fell to the ground, shocked either by the lightning or just the loud bang. My assistant referee, who was about 10 yards from the guy who was hit, felt the electricity and I felt buzzed for over an hour.

Everyone sprinted to their cars. The players slowly got up and seemed to be ok. The guy who’s umbrella was hit was laying on the ground for a few seconds, and was helped up and seemed ok. We cancelled the game and made sure that everyone was off the field as quickly as possible. We were incredibly lucky and I am happy that nobody was seriously hurt.

I have never been in a situation like that where the first bolt of lightning is right on top of us. Normally there is some warning, but this time there was not. I have stopped many games in my almost 12 years of reffing after seeing lightning in the distance, only to be called a wimp or worse.

As I was leaving the soccer park, I saw another game still being played. I couldn’t believe it. I drove over, laid on the horn and told them that a guy had been hit near us and that “this was stupid and that they needed to get these people out of there.” They stopped and got everyone to their cars.

If you are ever in a situation like this, don’t be afraid to stand up for yourself and get out of the situation. Many people have a macho attitude about lightning and ridicule people who go inside after seeing the first bolt. You can be hit by lightning up to 30 miles away from a storm: If you can see lightning, you can be hit. Its better to be safe than sorry. Get inside and stay safe.

I’ll leave you with a video that should be required viewing for all refs, coaches and parents of youth athletes. It was a professional soccer match in Africa where two players died as a result of a lightning strike. Its in German, but you can see the flash and the aftermath.

                          

LeRoy Butler is probably most famous for inventing the Lambeau Leap while he was the starting safety on some of the great Green Bay Packers teams in the 90s.  Butler is a great example of an athlete who had a successful career and is now trying to make a difference off  the field.  Butler has sponsored the Go Pink Soccer Series in Wisconsin, a series of 88 high school girls soccer games that has raised over $100,000 for breast cancer charities in the last two years.

Butler doesn’t just lend his name to the cause.  Although he is a resident of Jacksonville, Florida, Butler makes appearances at many of the games in the series, signs autographs and makes an event out of the games.  I was fortunate to referee one of the Go Pink Soccer Series games last night where Butler made an appearance (I’ve reffed soccer since I was 12 as a side job).  He happily posed for pictures, signed autographs and talked with the players, fans and refs and seemed to really enjoy himself.  I asked him if he could do a Lambeau Leap into the high school stadium bleachers but he said “he didn’t want to crush anyone.”  He couldn’t have been a nicer guy.

Its great to see an athlete using his celebrity to help out a great cause and enjoy it.  Butler could have been in sunny Florida last night, but he was in wet, windy Wisconsin on a Tuesday night watching a high school girls soccer game and enjoying every minute of it.  It would be great to see more athletes follow Butler’s example.

                          

This is a unique event that will not only generate money for the Reds, but will offer a value add for Reds fans.  Imagine if one of their top prospects hits a home run off of a current major league pitcher.  The fans will have something to look forward to and could have the beginnings of a legend, especially if that player comes up the the majors and stars later in life.

Al argues that the Brewers should implement a game like this before the regular season.  I agree completely, especially if the Brewers sold tickets for $10-20.  They could market it as not only a futures game, but an opening day for true baseball fans, rather than the alcohol soaked event that is the current opening day.  I’d like to see the Brewers and other team continue to innovate on and off the field, as adds to fan interest and team income.

                          

Club Trillion is an exclusive club founded in 2007 by three very handsome and very financially well-off Ohio State basketball players–Kyle Madsen (#15), Danny Peters (#13), and myself. We named ourselves “Club Trillion” because as athletically limited white folk, we found ourselves riding the bench for the Buckeyes. When the time came for us to get in, there would usually only be 1 minute remaining in the game and after sitting down for 39 minutes, we really had no interest in trying to be all that productive. So we devised the plan of trying to get the “trillion” which occurs when we play 1 minute and do absolutely nothing that would appear in the box score, thus making our stat line say 1 minute played followed by a bunch of zeroes. I know what you are saying to yourself right now. You are saying, “That is side-splittingly hilarious. These guys are probably just a comical party waiting to happen.” You are absolutely right.

His post about being stuck in an elevator with some of his teammates is laugh out loud funny as well.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Jared Sullinger, the nation’s No. 2 recruit, has officially signed with the Ohio State Buckeyes (sports.espn.go.com)