Mopaga

A story of "ordinary" madness.

Three Aces: review, video, song!

I liked it, although with a few reservations. I’ll give it a 3 just to stay balanced. Isn’t it an exaggeration to call Norton a wardrobe? In the movie, he was "in better shape" than usual, but nothing that really suggested the build of a football player or a wrestler :) Aside from that, a nice and concise review.

@Stoopid: the "excusatio non petita" seems legitimate to me, given that it’s rather common to slap a double 1 (with the exception of super-doubloons like "Death Magnetic") on a reviewer who dared to speak well of a character/album that 95% of users would have instead panned, regardless of what they actually wrote and how they wrote it. Sometimes it almost seems like one has to justify certain tastes that don't measure up to the average reader's expectations, as if apologizing for potentially upsetting their sensibilities. I think the balance in judgment has been the reviewer’s luck, because if the score had been even one point higher, a furor would have likely erupted. As if a certain artist (who isn't Marco Carta or similar, on whom doubts are totally justified) can't make an album rated 4 out of principle. In short, even though I'm not a fan, I don't see why someone like Masini, who indeed has a unique voice and can play an instrument, shouldn't (or couldn't) have released an album beyond expectations.

@Il Losco: Of course, the "theory" applies to everything: with frequency, the risk always increases. The more times you pass under a dangerous structure, the greater the likelihood that a piece could fall on your head (if all goes well). It's a pity that a football match, in itself, should not represent a "natural" risk factor, one of those that should normally be anticipated - like a car accident, for example - except for the possibility of a heart attack on the field or in the stands.

And to think that I also have a thing for the number 7... damn it!

I take you at your word; after all, I've only commented based on what I knew. The cases of Raciti and Sandri have been the most striking lately, and in both instances, setting aside the instrumentalizations, I believe the responsibilities are quite evident. I understand your bitterness about the fact that two different measures were taken (at least on the footballing front, because on the criminal side I think it's right for Spaccarotella to serve his sentence); from our point of view, their lives really mattered equally. However, the State always holds the upper hand, so its "reasons," whether legitimate or not, will always prevail. I believe that, deep down, the ultras know this; in fact, I've heard of some groups that organized strictly to ensure that there were no clashes of any kind in a high-risk match, precisely to avert any potential outcry or disciplinary measures. It's as if to suggest that after all, the State is mistaken, or at least exaggerates. It's a pity that, as soon as the spotlight dims on the current case, this common-sense tactic gives way to the usual dehumanizing politics of the pack, and the same old mentality of treating the ball as a pagan god to which a victim must be sacrificed now and then. You just have to wait for the right occasion; human nature can be so predictable sometimes... This leads me to reflect on the fact that this common sense is merely functional to the circumstances, just to please everyone and make fools of ourselves, and that there's very little that's genuinely human left in football (from the billions swirling around at the top among sponsors and various scheming, to the mercenaries who play only to get more women). I know I'm pessimistic.

I wanted to say: with all the beautiful situations in Naples, this situation is almost paradoxical. Forgive the verbosity :)

I'm skipping a step because I'm really not well-informed enough to discuss the measures taken by the State or any potential "counter-information" that the press might provide, especially since I'm neither a political nor a football militant; therefore, the issue only interests me up to a point. In any case, it wouldn’t be surprising if state authorities tend to hide their shortcomings in this regard, or if the press crafted a case to seek out a scapegoat. This, however, doesn't justify many of the attitudes that ultra fans have displayed over the years. There have been many big words since the death of Vincenzo Spagnolo (even from those who should guarantee safety), yet similar cases of violence have not been lacking. It’s too convenient to "repent" later to save face and give a semblance of credibility to clean and peaceful fandom. The ultras show up regularly every Sunday at the stadiums, and the risk of their behaviors repeating is constant; it’s just a matter of hitting the "right" match. In the case of Napoli fans, two weights and two measures have often been applied (in the sense that we received the toughest measures); that said, the launch of firecrackers was indeed present, and measures had to be taken. If the incident with the Railways stirred up a lot of clamor without genuinely verifying how things went, it is clear that the response was more driven by prejudice, which the Neapolitans (alas) have done very little over the years to prevent from becoming rooted even in institutions. On the Raciti/Sandri case, we would be here for a long time, so I’ll try to be brief. These are two tragedies, two human lives of the same value that have been cut short. However, the contexts are different: Raciti was killed while doing his duty against thugs who, for a ridiculous derby, turned a city upside down, in a case of urban guerrilla warfare that had no precedents in recent years. Whatever measures were taken, the intention was to make it clear once and for all (not that it worked) that football cannot and must not be in the hands of criminals, and that it is inconceivable for a sporting event to turn into a barbaric invasion of the host city; because in that case, I believe the law enforcement officers have every right to intervene, if nothing else, to protect people and property that have nothing to do with the match. Therefore, if in such circumstances someone among civilians and police ends up losing their life, it is entirely normal to be angry. Taking football away from those who live for it thus becomes an extreme attempt to act as a deterrent (as if to say: since you’re so stubborn, if you want the good stuff, you have to behave well!). In the case of Sandri, however tragic, there is only one responsible party, an officer who, for no apparent reason, had the recklessness or intent to shoot at waist height. The individual, the officer, should be punished, as is right. Stopping the league would have been excessive for me, because frankly, I don't worry about being shot every time I meet a police officer on the street or at the stadium. Even if 100 police officers were to turn against 10 fans, you couldn't stop the league, because, despite the unforeseen and unjustified escalation, their presence isn’t aimed at viewing the match (like for the fans), but at ensuring the safety of those present. Thus, seriously punishing those responsible in this case is the only possible solution. Imagine, at times I've tried to put myself in the shoes of a police officer, and I thought it would bother me a bit that every Sunday there has to be a deployment of law enforcement outside and inside the stadium to keep in check 20,000 sheep who can't watch a football match without causing disorder. With all the great situations in Naples, it’s almost paradoxical.

Telespalla, at least as far as I'm concerned, here we’re not making an apology for the State or the press, because imagine if we didn’t know the conditions we are in. However, it seems a bit forced to use the frequent misdeeds of organized fans as a shield, along with the rare occasions on which they distinguish themselves through honorable actions (which is nothing exceptional; it should be the "norm," but here in Italy, we are used to being amazed by the ordinary). Speaking of Atalanta, for example, I seem to remember that on the day of Gabriele Sandri's death, Atalanta fans were making quite a racket with the plexiglass barriers in their stadium. I doubt it was Father Alvaro and his faithful. For the sake of fairness, let’s move on to the (my) Neapolitan fanbase. "Our" ultra leader goes in and out of jail as if it were a hotel, and some time ago I got to know (under circumstances that have nothing to do with football) a member of a minor group of Neapolitan fans who boasted about always being on the frontlines in case of "fights," and when he couldn't attend a match in person, he would sit in front of the TV wearing a shirt that said "Boia chi molla" (I saw this personally) just to recreate the atmosphere. Then there are all the suspensions we've received on the field in the last few years, which are fairly well-known in the scene (although I haven’t set foot in San Paolo since Napoli was still in Serie C). I have no doubt that you could be, if you had the chance, a model ultra, and that would also be a point of honor for you. But allow me to say that you would belong to a peaceful minority that the press would still struggle to identify, used as it is to looking for big numbers. Not to mention that with belonging to such an extreme group as the ultras (I say "extreme" because they declare themselves ready to do anything for the team), you might compromise even your strongest moral principles.