St Johns Ravenscourt School - Eagle Yearbook (Winnipeg, Manitoba Canada)

Page 62 text:

' J MtM A Hockey BACK ROW: Mr. Stewart, D. Donahue, B. Knowlton, S. Shandro, G. Thomas, J. Schoemperlen, M. Gardner, G. Swartz, D. Nicholson. FRONT ROW: G. Thrasher, M. Castling, D. Spaith, M. Payne, D. Mitchell, S. Searle, A. Wiswell, L. Jacklin. ' Bamlm ' 2 Hoduif Statistically, this has not been a very good year for the Bantam B’s. The team, in 12 games, has a record of 2 ties and 10 defeats. We tied Winakwa 3-3 and Tuxedo 2-2. We lost to St. Boniface three times; our best showing was 4-3. We also lost 3 games to Trans- cona, 2 to Tuxedo, and 2 to Windsor. One of the ties and several of the losses stemmed from goals in the last 30 seconds by various opponents. The high scorer on our team was Doug McMurray. All concerned have enjoyed the season immensely, and we hope to have greater success next year utilizing some of the tech¬ niques we have learned and practiced this year. Many thanks are due for the time and effort put out by our coach, Mr. Bredin and our manager, Mr. Wellard. BACK RO W: Mr. Glegg, A. Kiddell, D. Riley, J. Barnes, D. Edwards, M. Milne, K. Turchen, J. Lawrence, Mr. MacKenzie. FRONT ROW: J. Boult, H. Malcolmson, J. Beech, R. Briggs, B. Beaton, J. Saunders, M. Hammond, R. Richardson, S. John¬ son. This year has been disappointing for all concerned. The team began the year full of high hopes and aspi¬ rations. An exhibition game ended with the team de¬ feating Fort Gary which, in Playground A”, beat us 8-0. The team never realized its potential. In every game certain players stood ou t, but never the entire team. In some games our potential showed itself, but these games were either against far superior teams or the flashes of brilliance wore off. A unified team effort was all that was needed to make this year our best. On behalf of the entire team I should like to thank Mr. Stewart for unbegrudgingly relinquishing his spare time to enable our team to function. Inclosing I would like to say to all the next year’s Senior B’s,” better luck next time.” BACK ROW: Mr. Bredin, C. Von Vegesack, J. David, B. Gardiner, R. Woodhead, J. Styffe, D. McMurray, Mr. Wellard. FRONT ROW: J. Hutchingson, P. Squire, M. Lewkin, R. Mc- Knight, J. Bredin, M. Menzies, R. MacDonald. ‘Tlaqqwjtd A Hockaf The Playground A Hockey Team did not have a good season as far as winning is concerned. We did not win a single game on the ice; our two wins coming by default over an even weaker team than ours. There were however several close decisions. David Edwards must rank as the most improved player, as a hard-hitting, thinking defenceman and a strong skater. Other players who did well were Allan Kiddell, who was beginning to think on the ice, and Rodney Briggs, who was always tenacious on attack and defence, well supported by Derek Riley and Simon Johnson. The Turchen — Malcolmson — Milne line improved considerably in the latter part of the season. John Beech and Jeff¬ ery Boult showed signs of turning into good players, and John Saunders should be useful in Playground A again next year. John Lawerence, Michael Hammond and John Barnes worked hard, although all three need to learn to akate better, so that they can concentrate more on the puck and the game, and less on staying upright. Boyd Beaton played some very good games in goal, and with the consistency that comes from practice can turn into a good reliable goal-keeper. If this team will really work at practice on their skating and stick-handling, and make sure of getting fit before the season starts they should do much better in the Bantam B League next year. 58

Page 64 text:

THOUGHTS FOR AN AFTERNOON Sir death, I will not try to fight The splendour of the holy light, Which shines through the night, And doth declare my fateful plight. While wandering lonely through the wood And listening to the birds, I heard the voice of god but could Not understand the words. The lily is the foot of God, Which is implanted in the sod. But soon this holy flower goes To be replaced by the rose. Sandy Chown — form IV SPAGHETTI EATING; AN ART WITH A FUTURE? It seems that the noble art of eating spaghetti de¬ velops with age. When you are still in a high chair Mummy cuts up the spaghetti into little pieces for easier eating and you eat in on a spoon. No fun at all when she sits by and tells you to eat up your worms. When you are between five and ten a new method is discovered. One end of a long piece of spaghetti is stuck in your mouth and then sucked in vigorously causing yourself and others at the table to get covered with greasy tomato sauce. So Mummy makes you cut it up and eat it slowly. When you are over ten a gour¬ met specialist says that the proper and sophisticated way to eat spaghetti is to use two utensils, a fork and a spoon and to put the fork on the spoon and wind the spaghetti onto the fork. All very confusing! Just as you are perfecting this method Mummy returns from Italy and tells you that you are doing it all wrong and that just a fork should be used. So you try this and either you wrap the whole plate of spaghetti onto the fork or just before the spaghetti is in your mouth it falls with a splat onto your plate. Either way you get frustrated and cut if up and eat it on a fork, slowly. Inevitably, very soon all the commercial makes of spaghetti will come reddi-kut” for all ages, and back we go to the high chair. Sandy Chown — form IV FAIR PLAY fair is foul” foul is fair” There are at least two ways of seeing this saying from the bard. On the one hand we can take it that Shakespeare is showing that fairness and foulness are relative to the mind that sees them. The perfect example is a bullfight — is it primitively cruel or a noble art? On the other hand the citation can be seen as a denial that the categories of fairness and foulness exist at all. Take the bullfight again. It would be logical for some¬ one seeing the contradictions in opinion over this sport to conclude that the element of the fairness or foulness lies more with the observer than the observed. That is, the bullfight in itself is neither fair nor foul. These two ways of seeing the witches ’ statement are obviously closely tied. The conclusion of the first, that the bullfight is both fair and foul, leads directly to the second, that the terms are not very applicable in this case. The problem with the line of thought is that man in his society needs some standard of fair play. He can¬ not admit the lack of some objective method of deter¬ mining the fairness” of such anti-social acts as murder, rape and larceny. In our society the contradiction between the need for a standard of fair play and the lack of such a stand¬ ard in the acts themselves is resolved through the use of laws in themselves. For us, these provide a basis for fair play. But does this mean that the laws in courts, not being dependent on some objective good” are arbi¬ trary. I believe that the answer is that they are not arbi¬ trary precisely because they grow out of the idea that fair is foul.” That is, the central idea behind our system of laws, of determining fair play, is that man does not have an objective standard to work with in this area. For example; our parliament is not restricted to one party. The verdict in our courts is given by twelve people, all ordinary citizens. And the verdicts of these courts based on the laws of that parliament are always subject to appeal. The result is that our standards and judgement of fair play are hammered out by different people with different opinions. The arbitrariness, the black and whiteness of an objective standard is therefore awarded and that is justice, that is proper fair play, because, as has been shown, such an objective standard does not exist. When it is held to exist, as in Communism, the result is slavery. Clive McEwen 60