Jennifer Jones loses her lead and invites us to pose some sticky questions
Hat tip to an anonymous reader (yes, we actually have readers!) for pointing out this article , documenting Kathy Gauthier's departure from Jennifer Jones' team. A different sort of blog might speculate on other issues around this news story, but our very sophisticated reader poses some fascinating questions, varying from the technical to the profoundly philosophical.
His first question is somewhat procedural, but brilliantly works its way into the nooks and crannies of the rule-making process.
1. For the Scott, she needs somebody from her own province (whatever that means) -- or does she? Since she can compete as "Team Canada" does that mean that she can pick from anywhere? And what about the Olympic trials?Now I promise to try to find all these rules but would be happy for a commenter to answer.
His next question flits between profound ethical concerns, contract law, and the pragmatic problems of leadership.
2. Can she poach a lead from another qualified team? Do these players have contracts? If they operate on loyalty, how far down will Jones have to go to find a replacement player?Again I am not sure what the rules are. Comments?
His final question delves into the philosophy of identity. What, exactly, IS "the Jennifer Jones team"?
3. The Jennifer Jones team has qualified for the Olympic trials. How many players could she lose/substitute before the team would lose that status?It reminds me of the claim that each of us is now a different collection of cells from what we were at some time in the past. So why do we feel we are the same creature that we were back then? Hmm - because there is no completely reductionist definition of what I think I am. Or at least I am not just the set of cells that form my body. But what about her team?
Now that there is no curling to watch on television, and there are fewer places to play (for those who do), I am very pleased this blog has weighty issues to address.