How did we get into this farcical situation that anyone not winning is a permanently condemned loser?
Logic: Every ‘win’ by one must create a ‘loss’ for all others.
Specialist subject the ‘bleedin’ obvious’.
Australia lose the Ashes. Ergo Ricky Ponting must step down as Captain and half the team be replaced.
Chelsea lose to Wolves. Therefore question marks over the future of manager Carlo Ancelotti . And then there’s West Ham, Liverpool, Aston Villa and…… any other team you care to mention unlikely to walk away with a glittering prize.
There can be, in any sport, only one winner. So why are the rest automatically condemned to public oblivion?
Presumably, 19 Premiership football managers MUST be sacked come May 2011. Let’s face it, they’re all losers.
Then there’s the failed World Cup 2018 bidders from Belgium, the Netherlands, Portugal & Spain. They all lost (as did England). So the whole damned bunch of them, obviously, must fall from grace and/or on their swords.
The irony of this 21st Century phenomenon is that it comes after a couple of decades of ‘progressive thinkers’ in the late 20th Century convincing us that nobody should be labeled a loser – a prize for all; everyone can have a degree (in any subject, it appears); incompetence is not a valid a reason for losing your job (you were badly trained by your boss, surely).
Yet those clutching hollow trophies for finishing 15th or worse from when they were young are probably among those so quick to condemn others, now, for finishing only…..second.
It’s not only in sport where the pendulum has swung to ‘win it all or lose it all’ .
Watching Sir Alan Sugar point the finger of fate at failed apprentices may make riveting viewing but surely breaks almost every employment law ever passed.
All ‘losers’ are left to skulk away, as darkness falls, forever condemned as fired failures.
It is perhaps worth mentioning that ‘winners’ owe everything to losers. Without them, they wouldn’t have won anything.