The National Basketball Association of America is on the home stretch of the regular season. The teams are playing their last remaining games. For those trying to make the play-offs because they are still within the vicinity of the eighth place, each playing date is crucial. On the other hand, those that are certain of clinching the top places in the standing are trying to solidify their hold in order to make sure that they have decided advantages in the play-offs. In all of these last few games, match ups are important.
By match-up, I mean the concerted efforts of teams and coaches to put their best player or players against the best of their opponents. If the pairing is not on a player-to-player basis, (because their best materials play different positions) match up also means the attempt to compensate the performance of one great player by the performance of the other team's best man.
Let's take as an example, the game last Thursday between Miami Heat and Orlando Magic. Simply because Mr. Erik Spoelstra, the coach of Miami, has part Filipino blood running in his veins, it is my obvious favorite team. His best player is, without doubt Dwayne Wade. In the game, he had some time guarding his counterpart in the Magic line-up, Vince Carter. Because they both carry the leadership in their teams, specially the scoring loads, their match-up is great.
Last Thursday also, I wrote about the ideal scenario of holding debates among the candidates for the May elections. I then emphasized the encounter of candidates for local elective positions in virtual match-ups. The mental jousts should give us the opportunity to discern whether the incumbent councilors who are seeking fresh mandates deserve our new vote of confidence. I suggested then that the re-electionists point to an ordinance they approved in their 2007-2010 term that they can claim as their best product.
In the debate, the administration should put their best man forward for him to convince us, the voters, that indeed, the ordinance of their choice, is a quality piece of local legislation. From the ranks of the opposition, they should put up their best bet to contest the claim of the incumbents. I then suggested the match-up of both good lawyers, Atty. Edgardo Labella of BOPK versus Atty. Fritz Quiñanola of KUSUG.
Let me cite some more match-ups. BOPK can put up Hon. Augustus Pe and KUSUG can match him up with Engr. Danilo Fernan. We will not burden them with all-encompassing propositions couched in motherhood statements. They can debate specifically on the issue that this administration has successfully attended to the needs of the mountain barangays. Hon. Pe, who keeps a stock farm in the mountain barangay of Paril and who may, at times, be seen visiting it in the air-conditioned comfort of his government vehicle, is supposed to be the most knowledgeable councilor on this subject. Engr. Fernan will also be good match-up.
Two lawyers may compose the third match-up. Atty. Sisinio Andales, of the BOPK, a compadre of mine, can square it off with KUSUG bet Atty. Raymond Garcia. Because Atty. Andales is the barangay captain of Pahina Central where the Cebu City Medical Center is located, he is the best mind to wrestle with the opposition on the proposition that the city has provided our constituents with a good hospital service. Naturally, Atty. Garcia will attempt to show to the Cebuanos that this is where this administration is a woeful failure.
Of course, people may think that these suggested topics of debate are ranged against the administration of His Honor, Cebu City Mayor Tomas R. Osmeña. I do not mean to favor the challengers with issues that are perceived weaknesses of the present administration. If the administration is confident with other topics, let them propose and we will request the opposition to oblige, if only to help us, the electorates, in deciding our eventual choices.
Whatever topics there may be, let the civic clubs organize the debates soon. That will be their contribution to making Cebuanos vote intelligently.