Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Entertainment/2022 May 26

= May 26 =

Late Middle Ages comedy of errors
I'm not sure if this was a book or a short story. The plot is about the English (I think) king getting lost or kidnapped and, somehow or other, ending up in a remote village, where nobody believes him that he's the king, because his portrait on the kingdom's coinage isn't lifelike enough. Does this sound familiar to anyone? 31.217.41.71 (talk) 00:17, 26 May 2022 (UTC)


 * The obvious candidate is The Prince and the Pauper. Alansplodge (talk) 11:39, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Nice try but afraid this isn't it. I'm pretty sure this was in a rural or semi-rural setting, definitely not London and probably not a 19th century book, it was a newer work. 31.217.12.246 (talk) 13:22, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
 * So not A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court? Clarityfiend (talk) 21:54, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Hello, u|31.217.41.71! A late reply, because I've been searching and failing. I certainly encountered either the book (which I'm 95% sure it is, and that it's post-2000) or a sufficiently detailed description of this story that I recognised yours, around 2-6 years ago. I may even have a copy, since I buy (second-hand) books in this sort of genre and don't always get around to reading them immediately. However, I haven't yet remembered enough about it to track it down. If recollection dawns, I'll try to get back to you. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.209.235.54 (talk) 21:01, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks 87.81.230.195, I hope you can track it down. I'll keep an eye on this reference desk. That does sound like thar could be it, something from 2000s in the vein of Doomsday Book or Eifelheim. 31.217.0.88 (talk) 22:15, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
 * So is that Doomsday Book (novel), 1992, and Eifelheim? Both are sci-fi novels set in the 14th century. That hint of the genre might help us search. For what it's worth, it did sound immediately familiar to me, but I can't supply any sort of reference in relation to that. My thought was that I'd seen that plot point mentioned somewhere recently, maybe in a plot synopsis that I'd read. (But that might be pure deja vu with no basis.) I wondered if it might be from a story in a less obvious medium - perhaps a computer game, a children's story, a cartoon episode, a live-action TV episode, or an animated film.  Card Zero  (talk) 01:02, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Pretty sure there's nobody kingly in Doomsday Book. —Tamfang (talk) 00:32, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
 * There's a list of possibilities at TV Tropes: . --Amble (talk) 20:07, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

Better NBA draft pick
From :
 * The phrase, bai lan, which has its origin in NBA games, means a voluntary retreat from pursuing certain goals because one realises they are simply too difficult to achieve. In American basketball, it often refers to a player’s deliberate loss of a game in order to get a better draft pick.

I guess that means the team gets a better draft pick due to having a lower win/lose ratio. Would losing a game on purpose be a coach or management decision, rather than of a player? There must be rules against it, so is the decision never spoken out loud but only communicated to the players through some kind of interpretive dance? Thanks. 2601:648:8202:350:0:0:0:738F (talk) 19:06, 26 May 2022 (UTC)


 * Personally, I'd say yes, that's overwhelmingly a management or ownership decision. There's been some fuss in the NFL lately after Brian Flores was fired by the Miami Dolphins, and then went public with allegations that the team's owner requested that he deliberately lose games in order to improve their drafting position. See the Lawsuit against NFL and teams section of his article. It's not something a player would particularly care about, in my opinion, for a few reasons: they generally can't influence who their team will pick in the draft; the new player is potentially a competitor for their spot; with the various salary caps in place in NBA and NFL, a better player could potentially mean less money available for their own contract extension; not to mention, sandbagging will generally mean sacrificing their own production, meaning they'll have less leverage in contract negotiations. I'd say it's above their pay grade. Buttons to Push Buttons (talk | contribs) 03:22, 27 May 2022 (UTC)


 * Yes, it would absolutely be a coach's/management decision, although as noted above, this can be very controversial, and can itself lead to sanctions from the league who has to sell advertising rights to its televised games, even the shitty ones. For an example when players themselves do it, see Black Sox scandal, also point shaving, match fixing, etc.  When it is done as a deliberate management action, it is often called tanking.  -- Jayron 32 12:32, 27 May 2022 (UTC)


 * The Guardian corrected the article. It now reads:
 * "...it often refers to a team's deliberate loss of a game in order to get a better draft pick."
 * -- Marcus Rugman (talk) 20:45, 12 June 2022 (UTC)