Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Entertainment/2012 September 11

= September 11 =

2007 cover version
I'm well aware of the 2001 version of We Are Family (song) done to benefit the victims of 9/11. But wasn't there a 2007 version of the same song to benefit the victims of Hurricane Katrina?142.255.103.121 (talk) 02:22, 11 September 2012 (UTC)
 * There was a benefit concert named "We Are Family" which might have included the song. Various dead links in Google searches for "We are family hurricane Katrina" suggest there was a cover of the song at the concert as well.  Dismas |(talk) 02:50, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

Why isn't anything mentioned in the article about the song?142.255.103.121 (talk) 03:56, 11 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Because not everything that has ever happened can be documented at Wikipedia, some choices need to be made on what to include in an article, and what not to include. This is based mostly on the existence of reliable sources which contain information.  Since the search by Dismas doesn't turn up much in the way of source material, there's not much justification to include it in the article.  -- Jayron  32  05:14, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

"The Witcher: A Game of Imagination" tabletop RPG
I'm looking for the exact release date of the tabletop RPG "The Witcher: A Game of Imagination". Nicholasprado (talk) 04:02, 11 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Assuming you mean the Polish RPG, the game seems to have been released in 2001, according to rpggeek.com See  for info on the original Polish-language version.  There is also a Witcher wikia page, which covers the books and the games, located here.  I don't know if they have more information there.  -- Jayron  32  05:10, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

Players removing their tops in football
If Brandi Chastain were to do her famous shirt-removal celebration these days, would she get booked?

My understanding is that removing one's top during the game (such as in a Goal celebration) is a bookable offence. (It has the potential to delay the re-start of play). However, removing one's top in a "victory celebration" (by the winning team's players after the final whistle blows - usually only done in finals) seems to be tolerated by referees - at least with male players.

In Brandi's case, she had just kicked the winning penalty in a penalty shootout, ergo play was now over, thus no rule was broken, it would seem. Am I correct?

Can someone clarify the rules? Would a female player these days likely get away with "doing a Brandi" at the sounding of the full-time whistle? 58.111.230.117 (talk) 07:54, 11 September 2012 (UTC)


 * With regard to removing one's shirt, The Guardian's excellent You Are The Ref quotes former referee Keith Hackett: "The laws are clear: "A player must be cautioned if he removes his shirt or covers his head with his shirt," and players must not display "slogans or advertising". There are very rare occasions when you could use common sense on this – such as the recent example when referee Darren Deadman rightly allowed Billy Sharp to display a T-shirt tribute following the death of his son – but as a rule it cannot be left to individual officials to make value judgments on political or personal slogans." Note that the laws use 'him' and 'his' to mean a footballer of either gender.
 * On the question of fouls after the game, the Laws of the Game state that "The referee has the authority to take disciplinary sanctions from the moment he enters the field of play until he leaves the field of play after the final whistle." Thus if a player removes their shirt at any time after the game whilst the referee is still on the pitch, they can expect to receive a yellow card. - Cucumber Mike (talk) 08:09, 11 September 2012 (UTC)
 * (Clarifying) I should say, though, that the above is the letter of the law. It's common for players, after the final whistle, to remove their shirt and swap with other players. This is accepted practice, and normally tolerated by referees (using the discretion mentioned above). But such discretion is down to individual referees and would depend on the situation - a player who rips off his shirt immediately after the final whistle, displays a political slogan and runs over to fans in an aggressive manner would most likely receive less discretion than a player who calmly takes off his top to swap with his boyhood hero as they walk down the tunnel. - Cucumber Mike (talk) 08:16, 11 September 2012 (UTC)


 * As A slight aside I've been reliably informed (my friend is a football referee) that the reason for the booking is that the sponsors who pay for advertising on the jersey of the player pay to have their name showing when a camera zooms in on that player... If it was acceptable to allow the players remove their jerseys and thus remove the sponsor's logo, then there would be less financial input in the game... I would love to be able to supply a source for that, but as I said that comes from a cerified referee... gaz hiley  13:10, 11 September 2012 (UTC)
 * But the rule about players not taking their shirts off came long before sponsors began advertising on shirts. --Viennese Waltz 07:40, 12 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Maybe... Fifa to ban removal of shirts in 2003 says "The law was relaxed a couple of years ago...". It continues "Football is televised worldwide and Muslim countries find it offensive to see bare chests. The rule will also please sponsors who have been unhappy that their names are not always visible as the cameras follow a jersey-less goalscorer." However, this fan blog discounts the religious theory, "given that Redwan Kalaji of Al-Ittihad removed his shirt in celebrating scoring the winning penalty at this month's AFC Cup Final in Kuwait, in full view of 60,000 fans, millions of TV viewers and various Asian and FIFA football dignitaries..." Alansplodge (talk) 22:44, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

Is it theoretically possible to win an F1 championship without winning a single race?
The closest to this happening is with Mike Hawthorn (1958) and Keke Rosberg (1982) who won the driver's championship despite winning only one race over the course of the season. But under the curent points system (25 for a win, 18 for 2nd, 15 for 3rd, etc.) unlikely as it is, is it possible to win the driver's championship despite not winning a race? If so, what are the odds of it happening? Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 10:09, 11 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Of course it's possible, if those who do win races don't get sufficient points from the races they don't win. The odds are impossible to calculate as it would depend on the fortunes of other drivers. --Michig (talk) 10:22, 11 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Here's a possible scenario for how such a thing could happen: Alonso finishes second in every race of the season, scoring (18*20)=360 points. Sebastian Vettel wins the first ten races, then breaks his leg and is out for the rest of the season. He finishes on (10*25)=250 points. Meanwhile, Lewis Hamilton wins 3 races and finishes third in the other 17. He scores (3*25)+(17*15)=(75+225)=330. The remaining 7 races are won by Jenson Button, who finishes 4th in the rest of the races. He scores (7*25)+(13*12)=(175+156)=331.
 * The final positions are:


 * It's a little unlikely, maybe, but definitely possible. I also think it should be possible to work out the odds of this happening - you would need to determine every possible permutation of 24 drivers over 20 races (including retirements) that gives a championship winner with no race wins. It might be difficult, but it should be possible, given an evening with a spreadsheet and a supply of red wine. - Cucumber Mike (talk) 11:09, 11 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Realistic odds would depend on a lot of factors and not be precisely defined. If you imagine a scenario with random independent results in each race then it's very unrealistic and would give wrong odds. There will be good drivers and teams who tend to place a lot above average. This increases the chance that the overall winner will win races. In 2010 the winner had an average of 256/19 = 13.47. A 3rd place gave 15 points. In 2011 the winner had an average of 392/19 = 20.63. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:08, 11 September 2012 (UTC)
 * If no one else participates, or they all forfeit or get disqualified. Marketdiamond (talk) 12:56, 11 September 2012 (UTC)
 * That wouldn't work Marketdiamond - the one driver left un-forfeited would be promoted to first in that circumstance, so does not fit the OP's question... gaz hiley  09:32, 12 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Gazhiley your right in most circumstances I think, it would be a combination of all those though was my original thinking but your right under any of those circumstances there would still be a way you would finish first thus negating the OPs circumstance. Marketdiamond (talk) 15:58, 12 September 2012 (UTC)