Facebook Instagram Linkedin X Youtube
Home Blog Page 10967

‘Endo’ bill hurdles Senate on third reading

THE SECURITY of tenure bill passed the Senate on third and final reading Wednesday, Sen. Emmanuel Joel J. Villanueva said.

Mr. Villanueva, who chairs the Senate’s labor, employment and human resources committee, said in a statement that Senate Bill 1826 hopes to address “endo” — an employment practice that denies workers a pathway to permanent employment status and the associated benefits.

It passed by a vote of 20-0.

“Our workers have suffered because of the evils of endo, a practice that corrupts the dignity of labor,” said Mr. Villanueva, the bill’s principal author.

“We listened to the concerns of various stakeholders and took these into account… We believe this measure protects the interests of all parties concerned.

The bill rules out the following practices which it classifies as labor-only contracting: the provision by a job contractor of workers it recruits and places; the performance by contract workers of core industry tasks; the company where workers are assigned, or the contractee, has direct control and supervision of the workers supplied by the contractor.

It also classifies workers as either regular, probationary, project and seasonal .

“The provision trims down the employment arrangements and addresses the current practice of misclassifying employees to prevent them from obtaining regular status,” he said.

Mr. Villanueva said he hopes to get the bill past bicameral conference committee in the time remaining for the 17th Congress.

PEZA sites and their registration requirements

Recently, the Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR) carried out mission orders authorizing revenue officers to conduct tax mapping operations that required them to inspect taxpayers’ premises within a specified area and to evaluate compliance with rules and regulations on registration and bookkeeping, particularly on the issuance of sales invoices or receipts, among others.

Those that were greatly affected by the inspections were project sites or offices of entities registered with the Philippine Economic Zone Authority (PEZA) whose registration and bookkeeping were done either: (1) in consolidation with their head office; or (2) through another project site, located within the same area as the project site being inspected and therefore, under the jurisdiction of the same district office of the BIR.

For PEZA purposes, a project site or office is an additional building or facility which is located separately or independently from an original or existing project location. There may be several PEZA projects in one building or facility but generally, the whole building or facility is considered one project site or office.

A question now arises as to whether these project sites or offices are required to be registered separately even if their head offices are already registered in the same district office of the BIR.

Let’s revisit the rules and regulations issued by the BIR on the matter.

Section 3 of Revenue Regulations (RR) No. 07-2012 defines a “head office” as referring to the declared specific or identifiable principal place or head office of the business as stated in the articles of incorporation or, in its absence, the place where the complete books of accounts are kept. It is the fixed place of business, whether rented or owned, and whether or not the products/services being sold are actually located or displayed there.

A “branch,” on the other hand, is a separate or distinct establishment or place of business where sales transactions are conducted independently from the head office. It may include either: (1) a sales outlet or establishment situated in another location or address other than at the head office; or (2) a “facility” with sales activity.

The RR went further to define a “facility” as one which may include, but is not limited to, a place of production, showroom, warehouse, storage place, garage, bus terminal, or real property for lease with no sales activity. In other words, a facility may or may not have sales activities.

Under the RR, a facility shall be registered as a branch if sales transactions or activities are being conducted there. Otherwise, no BIR registration is required.

Since most of the project sites or offices of PEZA-registered entities have sales activities, it follows that a separate branch registration must be secured for each project site or office even if their head offices are already registered in the same district office of the BIR.

There may be several PEZA projects in one building or facility but for BIR purposes, each additional building or facility apart from the head office, must have a separate branch registration.

At a minimum, the project site or office must secure or comply with the following separate from its head office: (1) Taxpayer Identification Number (TIN) or branch code for each site; (2) Payment of annual registration fee; and (3) BIR Certificate of Registration for each registered site.

Incidentally, one of the standard requirements of the BIR before issuing a separate registration is the submission of a Mayor’s Permit from the local government unit (LGU) concerned. As a general rule, however, all PEZA-registered enterprises entitled to incentives such as the income tax holiday, 5% gross income tax, and tax and duty-free importation are exempted from securing a Mayor’s Permit from the concerned LGU.

Thus, unless there is an existing Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) between PEZA and the respective LGU requiring the application for a Mayor’s Permit and the payment of regulatory fees, submitting the Mayor’s Permit during the application for BIR registration may be dispensed with. Currently, PEZA has existing MOAs with six cities in Metro Manila (Pasay, Pasig, Parañaque, Makati, Taguig and Quezon City).

With the mandatory requirement of securing the BIR registration of PEZA project sites or offices, another question comes to mind — are they also required to maintain separate books of account and to issue separate receipts and invoices?

Apart from the requirement under the PEZA law of having distinct and separate books of account for each registered project, Revenue Memorandum Circular (RMC) No. 29-2019 requires that books of account, whether manual, loose leaf or computerized, shall be used and kept at all times in the place of business of the taxpayer. Place of business, in this case, shall include project sites and offices registered separately as branch offices.

As to receipts and invoices, RR 18-2012 requires that a separate Authority to Print (ATP) for principal and supplementary receipts and invoices be secured for both the head office and its branches. For the head office, all receipts and invoices used in the business premises must reflect the TIN and address of the head office, while those used by the branch must reflect the branch code and its address.

PEZA-registered entities must be cognizant of the requirements and conditions that must be complied with under the law. As the saying goes, “An ounce of prevention is better than a pound of cure” — lest one is caught unaware during a BIR tax mapping exercise and assessed penalties for violating the rules and regulations.

The views or opinions expressed in this article are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Isla Lipana & Co. The content is for general information purposes only, and should not be used as a substitute for specific advice.

 

John Paul M. Vargas is a Senior Manager at the Tax Services Department of Isla Lipana & Co., the Philippine member firm of PricewaterhouseCoopers global network.

john.paul.m.vargas@pwc.com.

Making democracy work after elections

The recent elections were quite unusual. The near total shutout of the opposition, the staggering losses among political dynasties and the emergence of millennial-elected leaders are just among the remarkable results we are seeing from the unofficial results. As expected, these unofficial results are already being contested. The mysterious failure of the Comelec transparency server gave new meaning to the word oxymoron. Failures of both voting machines and memory cards were reported in record numbers. Yet the Comelec and PPCRV assess the elections to be within the normal range of acceptability.

The tragedy of Philippine politics is that we equate democracy with elections. This doesn’t make sense. Elections happen every three years or so while democracy should be an ongoing national project. We are a democracy only on paper. The Constitution states that: “The Philippines is a democratic and republican State. Sovereignty resides in the people and all government authority emanates from them.” In truth, most Filipinos do not participate in the democratic project as they should. For all intents and purposes, we are a quasi-feudal society. Power is controlled by a few business and political families while the rest content themselves in participating in the fiesta-like atmosphere of the elections while choosing to be absentee citizens thereafter.

Citizen absenteeism starts at the barangay level. I remember more than a decade ago when our barangay captain called an assembly to discuss the growing drug problem in our neighborhoods. Drug “sessions” in certain households and surreptitious transactions in the middle of the night had become an open secret. I was happy to attend the assembly and was impressed by the number of early attendees and the many seats reserved for the event. As it turned out, less than 10 percent of the seats filled up during the whole assembly. Many people seemed to think that the drug problem was just not worth their time.

FREEPIK.COM

I’m not surprised that drug distribution and use are at such an alarming level. Neither am I surprised that so many people have, and continue to, put their faith on an authoritarian approach to the problem. The Senate election results seem to endorse the President’s bloody approach to the drug issue. People are willing to sacrifice fellow Filipinos as collateral damage for action on the problem – any action at all as long as they don’t have to be involved. But this mentality is exactly the problem: the belief that complex social issues will be solved by political leaders without the close and extensive engagement of the citizenry. Filipinos seem to think that governance is a spectator sport.

Some would claim engagement with governance issues through social media. Indeed, Filipinos are a dominant presence in social media. But is this the kind of engagement necessary for developing democratic institutions and achieving our collective dreams as a nation? The level of discourse is notoriously shallow in social media and often filled with so much vitriol that people resort to blocking others who post opposing opinions. The recent Pew Research Center’ “Mobile Technology and Its Social Impact Survey 2018” reported the Philippines as scoring highest among 11 emerging countries where social media users block someone online due to political opinions.

What citizens need to do more is to make their elected officials know their views on issues of the day and to make them accountable for the promises they made during the elections. This is where the Filipino’s penchant for avoiding confrontation gets the better of him. When I ask my MBA students to let their congressmen know their views on current legislative issues, they recoil in horror, as if I had just asked them to jump off a cliff. The concept of talking to their representatives in Congress is so alien to them. They explain that they don’t want to be singled out or exposed to retaliation because of a complaint or negative feedback. I advise that they can always begin with positive feedback.

During a class session, I projected the list of congressmen on screen from http://www.congress.gov.ph and asked a student to identify his representative. I then asked him if there was any initiative of his congressman that he was happy about. I dialed the number of the representative’s office and asked for the Chief of Staff and gave the positive feedback, with the student’s mouth agape. The Chief of Staff was quite happy to receive the feedback and asked for any suggestions for the congressman. I said that I was calling for a constituent and that the latter would be in touch. I told the student that the ball was in his court.

It’s great that we love participating in elections. But the real substance of democracy begins after the winners are proclaimed. The real work is in debating fellow citizens in a civil way while making our politicians accountable to us as the people.

 

Dr. Benito L. Teehankee is the Jose L. Cuisia Professor of Business Ethics and Head of the Business for Human Development Network at De La Salle University.

benito.teehankee@dlsu.edu.ph

Criminally tainted candidates

Our Marian pilgrimage group had just checked in on Sunday night at the Grand Hotel in Assisi, the town of St. Francis, after whom San Francisco, California and Pope Francis are named, when we tuned in to CNN. Fareed Zakaria, one of the network’s more incisive commentators, had a very interesting special report about the recently-concluded elections in India, the results of which had started to come in. According to him, as many as 40% of the candidates are facing criminal cases and up to 29 have criminal records. Zakaria, who is Indian-American, said this was not unusual in Indian political contests. Although not necessarily proven guilty, these candidates have gained notoriety for their unlawful – or, at least, legally questionable – public behavior, but that hasn’t stopped them from “courting” the voters.

In fact, a blurb for the report reads, “In court today, courting voters tomorrow.” And another quipped, “Law breaker today, law maker tomorrow.”

I thought that sounded familiar. Just like the Philippines, I told myself. What clinched this perception was the rest of the report. These tainted candidates usually win.

Yes, indeed, just like the Philippines.

Zakaria hypothesized that the reason for the political anomaly in India is the caste system and the fact that the rich are able to do anything they want, including controlling politics, because the poor can’t or don’t care to do anything about it.

Well, that may be a hypothesis in India, but that is a harsh reality in the Philippines. The rich and powerful own and can buy anything, including the poor and their votes. They can also buy the vote counters and those tasked with protecting the ballots.

Not surprisingly, the results of the senatorial race, which officially concluded yesterday, could have been copied from the Indian political playbook.

Actually, the similarity between the Philippines and India is replicated in many Third World countries. Even in the US where elections are generally clean, vote-buying happens, although Americans use a euphemism: “lobbying.”

If Zakaria had cast a wider net in fishing for facts and political trivia, he could have found out that the Philippines has had a more “liberal” or “tolerant” or blind-as-a-bat attitude towards criminally-tainted candidates.

Does anyone still remember – or care to remember – that President Ferdinand Marcos, First Lady Imelda Romualdez Marcos, their children Ferdinand “Bongbong” Jr. and Imee, and high officials in the Marcos government were forcibly ejected from Malacañang and whisked out of the country by the United States just ahead of the rampaging EDSA One revolutionaries?

Well, Imelda ran for president and pulled in an impressive number of votes in the 1992 elections. She subsequently ran for Congress and has been serving in the Lower House, first as a representative of her home district in Leyte and then as a congresswoman for Ilocos Norte. Bongbong easily won a seat in the Senate in 2010 and, but for Comelec magic (according to his supporters), should have become the vice-president in the last presidential polls in 2016. Now Imee appears to have clinched her senatorial berth. And between their return from exile in Hawaii and the present, the Marcoses have pretty much controlled all the juicy positions in their home province of Ilocos Norte (this, aside from the fact that the Romualdezes also control Leyte or at least Tacloban politics).

Of course, the precedent was set by the elder Marcos when he was convicted and then acquitted for the alleged killing of a political enemy. In fact, when Marcos, then a congressman, ran for senator in the 1959 mid-term elections, he was portrayed in the Liberal Party campaign video reviewing for the bar exams behind bars. He topped the exams and the senatorial contest as well.

It’s highly possible that if Marcos had survived his illness and had been allowed to return to the Philippines and also allowed to run for president again (or at least for congressman), he could have won.

EDSA Two saw President Joseph “Erap” Estrada ousted and then “punished” with a rest-house arrest (a variation on the usual hospital arrest reserved for people in power). But even while still “incarcerated,” his wife, Dr. Loi Ejercito, ran for senator and won. His two children Jinggoy Estrada and JV Ejercito also won Senate seats.

After Erap was “pardoned” by President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, he ran for president and garnered more votes than Manny Villar in spite of the latter’s humongous campaign chest. Then he ran for mayor of Manila and won.

Well, it looks like luck has run out on the Ejercito-Estrada political dynasty. Erap lost the Manila mayoralty and both his sons failed to make it back to the Senate.

It’s really no surprise that Jinggoy Estrada ran for senator in spite of a pending plunder case. What is surprising is that he lost.

However, another senator similarly accused and “jailed” for plunder, Ramon “Bong” Revilla Jr., has not only succeeded in gaining “acquittal,” he has recovered his Senate seat in the recent election.

Not to be outdone in the spectacle of criminally-tainted candidates is former president Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo who, despite being “punished” with hospital arrest by President Benigno Aquino III, ran for Congress and won. Although she will be out of office by the new, 18th Congress, don’t count her out of the race for prime minister, if her allies succeed in amending the Constitution, or even Queen, assuming that President Rodrigo Duterte has no plans to be King or Emperor or Dictator.

In Philippine politics, the rules and the law are meant for bending. Otherwise, how could my friend Romy Jalosjos have won as congressman while serving time in Muntinlupa?

In fact, the cloud of moral turpitude does not seem to affect the political fortunes of the rich and powerful in the Philippines.

So what can one expect from elections in which criminals usually win? Invariably, a government run like the Mafia and where most officials are involved in the rackets.

There are, of course, idealistic candidates and public servants who remain clean. These do-gooders eventually lose their seats.

Quips one pundit: “These do-gooders are giving Philippine politics a bad name.”

 

Greg B. Macabenta is an advertising and communications man shuttling between San Francisco and Manila and providing unique insights on issues from both perspectives.

gregmacabenta@hotmail.com

Live fast, die faster

I believe that safety should be everybody’s concern. Thus, ensuring public safety should always take priority over individual rights with respect to matters like mode of transportation. Much like smoking, people can choose to smoke, there is no law against that. But that smoking privilege is limited – or regulated by government – mainly to protect public health.

Adopting and enforcing certain standards – whether via industry or government regulation – will help particularly in curbing practices of some business that may be unintentionally putting profit ahead of worker safety by prioritizing logistical efficiencies. They should be flagged down for perpetuating a business model that put their people – and the public – in harm’s way.

Take the case of the food delivery business, where the “commitment” to fast and on-time delivery may be putting people at risk. A business model where a rider is paid per delivery, for instance, motivates a rider to do more deliveries in a day. But, in doing so, he or she may be inclined to take shortcuts, violate road and motoring rules, and ride recklessly.

And, assuming the validity of the argument that one behaves according to the way one is “measured”, then in a business that rewards a worker mainly for exceeding the guarantee of “on-time” delivery and penalizes delays, the worker may be more likely to take risks and probably disregard safety as long as he or she delivers on the “on-time” commitment.

I cannot exactly blame the riders. It is easy enough to say that everybody on the road should have discipline. However, if delivery people are not properly trained on what to do and how to do their work, and unless strict standards are applied in the conduct of their work, then there will always be the risk of lapses. I believe employers should be held responsible in this regard.

The way it works, at least for one popular food delivery group, is that if you own a bicycle or a motorcycle, or can borrow one, then you are practically all set to go to work. Submit requirements, pass some tests, and you are off. In fact, to test their system, I tried to apply as a rider. I went to the company’s portal, and was asked if I had either a bicycle or a motorcycle.

I first pretended to have a motorcycle, and then put in my name, date of birth, and mobile number. I was then directed to another web page that advised me to visit the company’s office and to bring with me a barangay clearance, a tax identification number, and the registration papers of my motorcycle. I was not asked if I had a valid motorcycle driving license. When I pretended to have a bicycle instead, the same details were required, less the registration papers. Also, a rider is required to have his own mobile phone. And, I believe, there are training rides for newbies.

The enticement? As a rider, you get to see new places, and that you can work full- or part-time. Also, that you can make as much as Php 120 per hour, and that all tips you receive you get to keep. You can earn as much as Php 40 per every order you deliver, and, of course, the more deliveries, the higher the income.

All good, right? All proper and legal? Perhaps a pay rate higher than minimum wage? Assuming Php 120 per hour and eight hours daily, then one can make as much as Php 960 daily, right? It seems to be a great opportunity for people looking for work, so what am I concerned about it? Well, because I see their delivery people on my city’s roads every day, and almost always, they are counterflowing or disregarding traffic lights and other road and motoring rules.

By counterflowing, for instance, they put not only themselves but also other motorists in harm’s way. Moreover, counterflow obstructs or slows traffic flow. Worse, in case of accidents, despite the fact the counterflowing is a violation, any bodily injury to the rider can still be a liability for the other party in the accident. Worse, the food delivery company may have no legal obligation to assist a rider who gets into an accident as a result of the rider’s negligence, recklessness, or a traffic violation.

Do these riders violate knowingly? I don’t know. Do they realize they are violating traffic rules by going against traffic? Maybe. Is their employer aware that they are violating traffic rules? Probably not. Are they motivated to ride perhaps recklessly just to make more deliveries and thus earn more for the day? Certainly. Profit is the very reason they ride, and speed is the only consideration that matters. Safety is out the window. Now tell me, who should be responsible? The rider or the employer?

Earlier this month, I chance upon the Facebook post of motoring journalist Ira Panganiban. He detailed how two delivery motorcycles from a popular food chain “were having a wonderful discussion side by side along Lubiran Road this morning, blocking traffic…[And] when overtaken, they had the gall to run after [overtaking] motorists and harass them.” Who is responsible? The riders or the food company that employs them?

I remember a case study in graduate school regarding a popular coffee chain that claimed their baristas were the best in the industry. And this was because their baristas – people who make coffee – undergo rigorous and intensive training prior to deployment to outlets. But, when asked how long the barista training took, the reply was about nine hours. Now you tell me, can we consider nine hours of training rigorous and intensive?

And this brings me to my point regarding food delivery and riders. How well are the riders trained for the work? How are they evaluated and compensated? How much company resources are devoted to preparing them and ensuring their safety as delivery people? What systems are in place to ensure public safety and riders’ strict compliance with road and traffic rules?

If one is to attend a motorcycle riding academy, the cost is about Php 4,000 for three sessions of theory and nine sessions of practical application. Each session takes about 90 minutes. You get a certificate for completing the course. Before the academy accepts a student, there is an evaluation — they ask the student to ride a bike around a small circuit, twice via pedal and twice via electric bike. And they require a medical certificate for students 50 years old and above.

How many delivery riders of today have undergone some form of training through a certified school or academy? Should a similar academy be put up for bicycle riders as well? Given current practices, and the competitive business environment, are we encouraging a food delivery business model that put riders and the public in harm’s way? Should we leave things as they are? How many motoring or traffic accidents in a year involve motorcycle and bicycle delivery services? How many related injuries and deaths so far? All for a fistful of pesos to the rider and a quick meal for us in 30 minutes or less?

 

Marvin A. Tort is a former managing editor of BusinessWorld, and a former chairman of the Philippines Press Council.

matort@yahoo.com

Can we have your opinion?

By Tony Samson

A REGULAR SEGMENT in the news involves an interview of the “man (or woman) on the street”. This everyman opinion is supposed to reflect the common sentiment of the populace on the news of the day, like the integrity of the election process, the impact of a water shortage, or the safety of public transport.

What is the particular bias of the interviewee, plucked out of a rally? Is the sound bite representative of the expressed opinion? How was the selection made on the subject to feature for the news? And how was the interviewee to be featured chosen, the only one with time on his hands?

We are often asked for an opinion on a variety of topics with little regard for: a) Expertise on the subject matter; b) Personal knowledge or involvement in the incident being asked about; c) The value of whatever is said on the subject; or, d) Any relevance of the opinion on how the situation is perceived.

Soliciting and offering of opinions have multiplied with the advent of social media and chat groups.

With alacrity, even absent any valid basis, we bravely give an opinion whenever it is required. What about an honest refusal? “Sorry, I have no opinion on that subject. I just don’t know enough about it to give any intelligent perspective.” Most times, we sail through uncharted waters and give ideas regardless of their ability to float.

It is perhaps in preparation for this constant social quiz that we endeavor to keep up in the new plague of FOMO (Fear of missing out). We see movies in some film festival to be able to reply, when for an opinion — It’s aimed at the school market for obligatory history lessons on the Philippine revolution and how factions lead to executions of heroes.

We read books to be current and give one-line reviews: it’s not his best work. Non-readers are safe as far as being solicited for their views. Literary opinions are rare in any social gathering, including book launches. A snappy repartee of not having read a particular book (or any book at all) is seldom ground for social ostracism. It’s perhaps the reader who needs to be on guard — oh, so you think you’re literate.

The social sin is not being the last to know, but not having any opinion to offer.

In the case of the professional observer and columnist, being opinionated is not considered derogatory. It’s part of the job description. Otherwise, the opinionated person who does not have access to media, supplies views which others can freely quote. On any topic, say the mind-conditioning of surveys on leading candidates, views are swiped from a ready inventory of opinions in the market which fit all ideologies and loyalties.

Bloggers, even with huge followings, do not need do any research. They write a journal of their activities in their blogs: what happened to me today which you should pay attention to. They parlay the “slings and arrows of outrageous fortune” into a comment worth uploading. The coffee at a food chain has a fly learning the breaststroke. There are too many billboards. They report rude bus drivers and motorcycles that cut across their lanes.

Anything is fodder for the once-popular person trying to insert herself back into the news cycle, even on such conventional wisdom as the usefulness of being wealthy, especially when you get sick and need to be treated abroad.

To be prized is an individual who refrains from offering an opinion, feeling unworthy of inflicting his views on others. Asked about his impression of a person, such an unbiased individual will only shrug and dig into his salad niçoise. Of course, he is sure to be boring company.

Still, there are designated individuals who call publicly televised briefings with media, specifically to be asked for positions on the issues of the day. Here, opinions are not only solicited but noted down and parsed for subsequent reporting. So, when asked about matters like hospitalizations, incursions on contested shoals, the infringement on the rights of fishermen, the patented smirk accompanying the non-reply leaves much to be desired — I have no opinion on that matter. Next question please.

 

Tony Samson is Chairman and CEO, TOUCH xda.

ar.samson@yahoo.com

Northport Batang Pier tear down Alaska Aces

By Michael Angelo S. Murillo
Senior Reporter

THE Northport Batang Pier sailed to their first win in the Philippine Basketball Association Commissioner Cup after defeating the Alaska Aces, 103-81, in their debut outing on Wednesday at the Ynares Center in Antipolo City.

Getting solid contributions from various sources, Northport steadily tore down Alaska as it made its way to the victory while sending the Aces (1-1) to their first defeat in the midseason PBA tournament.

The Batang Pier had early control of the match, with Sean Anthony and Robert Bolick leading the charge.

They raced to a 28-21 lead in the first 12 minutes before creating further separation at the half, 51-42.

In the third period, Northport continued to maintain control despite a spirited attempt by Alaska to inch its way back as import Prince Ibeh made his presence felt on the offensive end.

The Batang Pier held a 67-53 lead midway into the frame.

But Alaska kept itself within striking distance the rest of the quarter, towed by rookie Jesper Ayaay, narrowing the gap to just nine points, 75-66, heading into the final canto.

With the outcome of the match still up for grabs, the two teams came out of the fourth swinging and looking to seize momentum and control in the homestretch.

Much what they had been doing all game long, the Batang Pier would beat the Aces to the punch, pushing their lead to double-digits once again, 89-74, with under six minutes to go.

From there it was all Northport, padding its lead to as much as 24 points, 103-79, and eventually booking win number one.

Mr. Anthony led the Batang Pier with 22 points to go along with six rebounds and four assists.

Mr. Ibeh had 19 points and 13 rebounds and Mr. Bolick also finished with 19 markers.

For Alaska it was import Chris Daniels who led with 21 points and 13 boards with Mr. Ayaay and Simon Enciso adding 10 points each.

“Credit to the guys for stepping up in the absence of Stanley Pringle. We have a quick turnaround till our next game and hopefully we clean some things up in our game,” said Mr. Anthony, named player of the game.

Mr. Pringle missed Northport’s debut outing because of injury (foot) while Alaska chose to sit out guard Chris Banchero because of back issues.

Northport next plays on Saturday, May 25, against the NLEX Road Warriors while Alaska takes on the TNT KaTropa also on the same day.

Raptors level East finals

TORONTO — Kawhi Leonard carried the Toronto Raptors through most of the postseason.

However, after Leonard played 52 minutes in Toronto’s double-overtime win on Sunday and was noticeably favoring his left leg, Raptors guard Kyle Lowry said teammates knew Leonard was limited Tuesday and that the rest of them “had to step up.”

The Raptors did, especially Lowry, who scored 18 points in the first half to set the tone and finished with 25 points as the Raptors defeated the visiting Milwaukee Bucks 120-102 to even the best-of-seven Eastern Conference finals at two games apiece.

Game 5 is (Friday) in Milwaukee. The winner of the best-of-seven series will advance to meet the Golden State Warriors in the NBA Finals.

“We have had to rely on (Leonard) so much, and when everybody steps up, it takes the load off him,” Lowry said.

Raptors coach Nick Nurse added of Leonard’s health, “I mean, yeah, we were concerned. I think (Leonard) is fine. I think he’s — you know, he logged a lot of minutes. He’s certainly tired, like a lot of guys in this series are. You know, he looks OK to me.

“I think there’s a number of guys out there that aren’t 100 percent on both sides of the ball. But, again, he’s got tremendous will. He’s got tremendous desire, and there’s one time I was trying to give him an extended rest there, and he didn’t really want it. So he must be OK.”

Leonard contributed 19 points and seven rebounds in 34 minutes.

Norman Powell added 18 points off the bench for the Raptors. Serge Ibaka and Marc Gasol each scored 17 points, and Fred VanVleet had 13 points. Ibaka also grabbed 13 rebounds.

Powell, Ibaka and VanVleet led a strong showing by Toronto’s bench that made the difference.

“I’m going out there and trying to impact the game where I see that I can,” Powell said. “Just take what the defense is giving me and just stay confident in my reads. Just try to follow the game flow. We’re just playing for one another. We were talking to each other on different shots, different reads that are there.”

Khris Middleton amassed 30 points, six rebounds and seven assists for the Bucks. Giannis Antetokounmpo added 25 points and 10 rebounds, and Nikola Mirotic contributed 11 points.

“They did a great job on us defensively,” Middleton said. “They took advantage of some of our defensive coverages and just made shots. For the most part, they got anything they wanted. We’ve got to be better.”

The Raptors led by as many as 16 points during the third quarter and had a 13-point margin entering the fourth.

“I think defensively, just tonight didn’t feel like where we need to be defensively, as good as we need to be,” Bucks coach Mike Budenholzer said. “They got to good spots. They shared the ball. They passed it. They made open shots. They made some high-degree-of-difficulty shots, so that’s a bad combination. They’re making open looks, and then they’re making tough ones, too.”

VanVleet sank a 3-pointer that bounced around the rim several times before dropping in, Ibaka knocked down a free throw, and Powell hit a one-footer to put Toronto ahead by 20 points with 8:35 to play in the game.

The Bucks crept within 14, but Lowry’s layup had the lead at 21 with 3:50 to go. Ibaka’s dunk bumped the lead to 25.

The Raptors led 32-31 after one quarter, and they scored the first nine points of the second quarter to increase the margin to 10.

Middleton’s 3-pointer with 7:08 remaining in the first half trimmed the deficit to five.

George Hill made two free throws to reduce the margin to four with 3:08 left, but Toronto went up by nine on Powell’s 3-pointer with 1:53 left.

The Raptors led 65-55 at halftime with Lowry scoring 18 points. Middleton had 16 first-half points for Milwaukee.

The Raptors led by 13 early in the third quarter on Pascal Siakam’s layup and free throw.

The Raptors had the lead as high as 14 before the Bucks went on a 7-0 surge to cut the gap in half.

Toronto pulled away again, taking a 12-point lead on Leonard’s step-back jumper with 3:15 remaining.

Lowry made two free throws with 1:17 to go, and Toronto led by 15. The Raptors were on top 94-81 after three quarters. — Reuters

Collegiate awards set; Lacuna UAAP athlete of the year anew

By Michael Angelo S. Murillo
Senior Reporter

MEDIA covering the top collegiate leagues in the country are to hold their annual awards on May 27 at the Amelie Hotel Manila in Malate, with the awardees headlined by champion basketball teams Ateneo de Manila University and San Beda University.

Presented by SportsVision and supported by Chooks-to-Go, Amelie Hotel, Northport, World Balance, and AXA Team EDS, the 2019 Collegiate Press Corps Awards is set to gather and fete anew top performers last season both in the University Athletic Association of the Philippines and National Collegiate Athletic Association.

Headlining the awardees are Ateneo and San Beda, which repeated as men’s basketball champions in the UAAP and NCAA, respectively.

The Blue Eagles won back-to-back titles after defeating the University of the Philippines Fighting Maroons and their magical run.

Thirdy Ravena and the rest of the Ateneo men’s basketball team proved to be a handful for the Maroons, sweeping the latter in their best-of-three finals after topping the elimination round with a 12-2 record.

San Beda, meanwhile, won its third straight NCAA title in Season 94 on the lead of veterans and now-pro players Robert Bolick and Javee Mocon.

The Red Lions met the Lyceum Pirates for the second year in a row and the result was the same with San Beda claiming the title via sweep.

The annual collegiate awards are given by sportswriters from print and online outfits covering the UAAP and NCAA.

LACUNA IS UAAP AWARDEE ANEW
Meanwhile, Olympian and champion swimmer Jessie King Lacuna of Ateneo was the recipient of the UAAP Athlete of the Year, his third in five illustrious years with the Katipunan-based school.

In closing ceremonies for UAAP Season 81 at the Mall of Asia Arena on Tuesday, Lacuna got his award for athlete of the year in individual sports, joined by University of Santo Tomas Golden Tigresses volleyball star Sisi Rondina who got hers for team sports.

In the juniors’s division it was basketball player Kai Sotto of Ateneo High School who won for team sports with swimmer Philip Joaquin Santos winning in the individual sports category.

Bestowed once again with the prestigious honor, Lacuna said he is very thankful of the recognition, more so on his final year in the UAAP.

“I’m very thankful for this award. It is such a humbling experience to be given this award once again. Honestly, I wasn’t expecting this. I thought I was just going to receive the MVP award. I’m very happy,” said Lacuna, a graduate of interdisciplinary studies, after receiving his award.

“Season 81 was one of the best seasons for me. It was my final year and I needed to perform. There were a lot of good rookies and I had to take on the challenge,” he added.

He went on to say that he is very thankful of the opportunities he had with Ateneo and the UAAP, and believed he was able to do his part in improving the level of competition and the skills of the athletes in the league.

“Being in the UAAP and Ateneo, as an athlete I put up a high standard I think. As a swimmer you want to lift the competition and I think I was able to do that,” he said.

With Ateneo, he led the school to five titles in men’s swimming and won 35 gold medals and four MVP awards.

Lacuna is now focusing on the Southeast Asian Games happening in the country later this year as a member of the national team.

Ticha Penicheiro: Once a Monarch, always a Monarch

By Michael Angelo S. Murillo
Senior Reporter

WNBA legend Ticha Penicheiro — ALVIN S. GO

MADE a name for herself in Women’s National Basketball Association while playing in Sacramento, guard Ticha Penicheiro shared that those years with the Monarchs were the best years she had in the league and something she still cherishes even now in retirement.

Recently in the country as part of the culminating activities of the Jr. NBA Philippines 2019 program, Ms. Penicheiro, 44, said the Monarchs team holds a special place in heart for providing her with the opportunity to showcase what she could do as a player coming off college, be an All-Star and a champion and, more importantly, inspire people in the community.

And while the Monarchs are no longer in the WNBA, the Portugal native is still hoping that someday a team would rise up again in Sacramento, who she believes deserves a WNBA team.

“It was in 2009 when the team unexpectedly folded. The owners just decided they did not want to invest in us anymore and they wanted to save money. And a lot of people in that area, not just in Sacramento but also in the Bay Area, are still heartbroken and they have pages on Facebook where say they want the Monarchs back,” said Ms. Penicheiro in one of her sessions with media while here.

“And I truly hope that soon we will have a team in Sacramento or the Bay Area so they could go to the games. They are still supporting the league until now, watching the games on TV. But going to the games and watching it live, there is nothing like it, and hopefully one day there is another team out there,” she added.

While with the Monarchs from 1998 to 2009, Ms. Penicheiro was a four-time All-Star and a two-time member of the All-NBA First Team (1999-2000).

She also won a title in 2005 and was recognized as one of the 15 top players of all time in the WNBA back in 2011.

Ms. Penicheiro, who played collegiate ball at Old Dominion University, finished her WNBA career with averages of 6 ppg, 5.7 apg, 3.3 rpg and 1.7 ppg in 454 games.

After Sacramento, she had stops with the Los Angeles Sparks and Chicago Sky before retiring in 2012.

She also played internationally during the WNBA offseason.

In Sacramento, Ms. Penicheiro played with great players like Yolanda Griffith and Ruthie Bolton-Holyfield, who she considers some of the best players that played the game and did a lot to further hone her skills.

“Yolanda is any point guard’s dream. She has amazing hands and you can throw anything to her and she would finish. When you are a point guard, a pass-first point guard like me, you depend on your teammates to look good and she certainly did that for me. She is an amazing rebounder, great heart and competitor. Ruthie is a great shooter much like Steph Curry. Besides being good players they are good people and teammates,” she added.

Adding, “I wish Sacramento did not fold and I would have played my whole career there. I really enjoyed playing there.”

JR. NBA ALL-STARS
Meanwhile, this year’s edition of Jr. NBA Philippines ended last Sunday with the naming of the All-Stars who will represent the country at the first Jr. NBA Global Championship Asia Pacific Selection Camp in Jakarta, Indonesia, in June.

After a series of multi-level selection process, selected were Dianne Camille Nolasco, 14, of Miriam College; Karylle Sierba, 13, of Manuel S. Enverga University Foundation; Mikylla Taborada, 14, Corpus Christi School Cagayan de Oro; Justine Mhyrra Vibangco, 13, Saint Joseph Parish School; and Princess BJ Marie Villarin, 13, De La Salle Zobel for the girls side.

On the boys’ side are Henjz Gabriel Demisana, 14, Bacolod Tay Tung High School; Joshua Minguillo, 13; Zhan Paolo Moreno, 14, Xavier University Cagayan de Oro; Sebastian Roy Reyes, 14, Nazareth School of National University; and Lionel Metthew Rubico, 14, De La Salle Lipa.

Jr. NBA Philippines 2019 was presented by Alaska, with AXA, Gatorade, Globe, Panasonic, Rexona and Vivo as official partners.

Another Magnus show

GRENKE Chess Classic 2019
Karlsruhe/Baden Baden
April 18-29, 2019

Final Standings

1. Grandmaster (GM) Magnus Carlsen NOR 2845, 7.5/9

2. GM Fabiano Caruana USA 2819, 6.0/9

3-4. GM Arkadij Naiditsch AZE 2695, GM Maxime Vachier-Lagrave FRA 2773, 5.0/9

5-7. GM Viswanathan Anand IND 2774, GM Levon Aronian ARM 2762, GM Peter Svidler RUS 2735, 4.5/9

8. GM Francisco Vallejo Pons ESP 2693, 4.0/9

9-10. GM George Meier GER 2628, IM Vincent Keymer GER 2516, 2.0/9

Average Rating: 2724 Category 19

Time Control: 100 minutes for the first 40 moves, then 50 minutes for the next 20 moves, followed by 15 minutes play-to-finish. Thirty seconds is added to your clock after every move starting move 1.

Twenty-one draws in a row. Magnus Carlsen did not take part in the Batumi Chess Olympiad last year and instead participated in the less stressful European Club Cup where he peacefully drew all five of his games. His next event was the World Championship Match in London versus Fabiano Caruana where, for the first time in history, all 12 games were drawn and they had to resort to rapid tie-breaks to determine who the next world chess champion would be. That’s 17 consecutive draws. When at the start of the Tata Steel Tournament in Wijk aan Zee Magnus Carlsen drew his first four games the friendly ribbing escalated and the press was writing about Carlsen forgetting how to win, that he is the new “Leko,” the drawing master. And then came the game with Jorden van Foreest.

Born in Utrecht on 30 April 1999 and raised in Groningen, Van Foreest comes from the noble chess family of Van Foreest. He is the great-great grandson of Arnold van Foreest and great-great grandnephew of Dirk van Foreest. Between the two of them they have 6 Dutch Championships (Arnold: 1889, 1893, 1902; Dirk: 1885, 1886, 1887).

Jorden is the eldest child of his family and has five siblings: four brothers and one sister. His eldest brother, Lucas (born 2001), became an International Grandmaster in 2019. His sister, Machteld (born 2007), won the Dutch Girls’ U10 Championship at the age of 6 and shared second place in the Dutch Girls’ U20 Championship when she was 9. In 2017, she became the first girl ever to win the Dutch U12 Championship (the Open Division, mostly Boys).

Jorden Van Foreest decided to try out the Sveshnikov Variation against Magnus. Keep in mind that this was one of Magnus’ main weapons in his recent match with Caruana so the chances were high that there is some “residual preparation” left over.

Van Foreest, Jorden (2612) — Carlsen, Magnus (2835) [B33]
Tata Steel Masters 2019 Wijk aan Zee (5.6), 16.01.2019

1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 e5

So far in 2019 Carlsen’s score with White is nine wins and five draws. With Black it is seven wins and 10 draws and out of the 7 wins three came from the Sveshnikov. It has become his most potent weapon.

6.Ndb5 d6 7.Nd5 Nxd5 8.exd5 Ne7 9.c4 Ng6 10.Qa4 Bd7 11.Qb4 Qb8 12.h4 h5

This move has become Magnus’ trademark in the Sveshi. The idea is to follow-up with …e5–e4 and …Ne5 to establish a central strongpoint with dominance over the white squares.

13.Be3 a6 14.Nc3 f5 15.0–0–0 Be7 16.g3 0–0

As he has shown in subsequent games Magnus does not mind giving up the h5–pawn so long as his knight gets its desired outpost on e5.

17.Be2 e4 18.Bd4

White did not like 18.Bxh5 Ne5 19.Be2 b5 20.cxb5 axb5 with lots of compensation for Black but not taking the pawn gets Van Foreest into a worse situation and this time he has no material plus.

18…Bf6 19.Bxf6 Rxf6 20.Qb6

The last chance for Van Foreest to take the pawn.

20…Ne5 21.Kb1 Be8 22.Rd2 Nd7 23.Qd4 Qc7 24.Nd1 Ne5 25.Ne3

White wants to put his knight on f4 via g2, but Black beats him to the punch.

25…f4! 26.gxf4 Rxf4 27.Rg1 Bg6 28.Ka1 Raf8 29.c5 Rxf2 30.Qc3 Qxc5 31.Qxc5 dxc5 32.d6 Kh7 33.d7 Nf3 0–1

Huge material losses follow 33…Nf3 34.Bxf3 (Or 34.d8Q Rxd8 35.Rxd8 Rxe2 36.Rc1 Rxe3 37.Rd7 b5) 34…Rxd2.

Smooth as silk. Nothing spectacular, but this game got the juices flowing again and, as Magnus commented, “since then it’s kind of just clicked.”Magnus won the next game as well, and then all his remaining white games in Wijk aan Zee to finish with the tournament victory a final score of 9.0/13, a performance rating of 2887.

March 30 saw the start of the Vugar Gashimov Memorial in Shamkir, Azerbaijan and Magnus Carlsen was even more impressive. In a 9-round event he finished two points ahead of the next higher-placed with five wins and fourdraws. This was a powerful category 22 and his performance rating was 2988. Take a look at the names of the people he defeated: Vishy Anand, David Navara, Anish Giri, Sergey Karjakin and Alexander Grischuk.

The GRENKE Chess Classic started a mere 10 days after the closing ceremonies of the Gashimov Memorial, and it was a continuation of the Carlsen Show. The world chess champion dominated the event with a score of 7.5/9 and a performance rating of 2990 (!!). It could have been even better, for he had a winning position against Viswanathan Anand but just could not land the finishing blow. Carlsen’s finish of 4/4 though left no doubt as to who is the boss.

Svidler, Peter (2737) — Carlsen, Magnus (2845) [B30]
Grenke Classic 2019 Karlsruhe/Baden Baden (8.3), 28.04.2019

1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Nc3

Svidler didn’t want anything to do with Magnus’ Sveshnikov.

3…e5 4.Bc4 Be7 5.d3 d6 6.Nd2

On its way to e3 via f1

6…Nf6 7.Nf1 Nd7

White’s bishop is too strong on c4 and so this knight makes its way to b6 to destroy it. White now had two ways to preserve his bishop. Either 8.a3 to give it a hiding place on a2 or 8.Nd5 to exchange off the black knight when it reaches b6.

8.Nd5 Nb6 9.Nxb6 axb6

Now Black is planning to harass the c4–bishop with 10…b5 because 11.Bxb5? loses it to 11…Qa5+

10.c3

Ok, now no more check possible on the e1–a5 diagonal. So what does Black do now? Well, due to his pawns on b6, c5, d6 and e5 his dark-squared bishop has no scope so he should play something like 10…Bg5 to exchange it off against its white counterpart, but 10…Bg5 right away is refuted by 11.Qh5, threatening mate on f7 and thus winning the bishop, so first he has to castle.

10…0–0 11.Ne3 Bg5 12.0–0 Kh8

Obviously planning to play …f7–f5.

13.a3 f5

Svidler remarked after the game that he was surprised by this move. I will show you why later.

14.Nxf5

[14.Nd5 is met by 14…f4]

14…Bxc1 15.Rxc1 Bxf5 16.exf5 d5!

Svidler has planned to answer 16…Rxf5 with 17.Bd5! and …Be4 when his bishop gets a strong outpost on e4. The text move escaped his attention.

17.Ba2 Rxf5

Black has seized the initiative and he does not let go of it.

18.Qg4 Rf6 19.f4 exf4 20.Qg5

Not 20.Rxf4? Ne5 21.Qg3 Rxf4 22.Qxf4 Nxd3.

20…Qf8! 21.Qxd5

Forced. 21.Bxd5? is met by 21…Rf5

21…Rd8 22.Qf3 Ne5 23.Qe4

Nothing better. 23.Qe2 Nxd3 24.Rcd1 c4! (pointed out by Svidler after the game) 25.Bxc4? Qc5+

23…Ng4!

Better than 23…Nxd3 24.Rcd1 Nxb2 now White’s bishop gets back into the game with 25.Bb1 g6 26.Rxd8 Qxd8 27.Qe2 Na4 28.Rd1 queen is going to c4 or e5

24.Rce1 Ne3 25.Rf2 Re8 26.Qxb7 g5 27.Rfe2? <D>

POSITION AFTER 27.RFE2

Hereabouts White obviously realizes that he is lost and is just waiting around for Black to make a move. The final attack comes swiftly.

27…g4 28.Rf2 Qh6 29.Qc7 Ref8

Taking the rook out of the e-file so that he can play 30…g3 31.hxg3 Ng4.

30.h3 gxh3 31.g3

[31.gxh3 Rg6+ 32.Kh2 Qxh3+ 33.Kxh3 Rh6#]

31…fxg3 32.Rxf6 h2+ 33.Kh1 g2# 0–1

So far for 2019 Magnus Carlsen has played 31 games with 16 wins and 15 draws, no losses. This is an overall performance rating of 2942. His live rating has ballooned to 2875 and there is already speculation whether he will be the first human being to ever break 2900. As you know the higher you go the infinitely more difficult it is to raise your rating. At present form though Magnus Carlsen looks unstoppable.

 

Bobby Ang is a founding member of the National Chess Federation of the Philippines (NCFP) and its first Executive Director. A Certified Public Accountant (CPA), he taught accounting in the University of Santo Tomas (UST) for 25 years and is currently Chief Audit Executive of the Equicom Group of Companies.

bobby@cpamd.net

Dysfunction

The Lakers haven’t had a good year. In fact, they’ve arguably gone through one of the worst seasons in their storied history — a development made even more shocking in light of the promise it had at the beginning. To be sure, much of their travails can be traced to sheer bad luck; their campaign for their first playoff stint in six years was beset by a rash of injuries to key players, prized recruit LeBron James included. On the other hand, even more is attributable to self-inflicted wounds that showcase their capacity to be their own worst enemies.

Perhaps the writing was on the wall from the outset. Having nabbed James on the very first day of free agency, the Lakers had ample time to construct a roster that banked on the transcendent star’s strengths. Instead of surrounding him with shooters in recognition of his otherworldly playmaking skills, however, they went about signing other ball-dominant players who just so happened to have excess baggage they didn’t need. Still, they persevered, and, at one point early on, benefited from a soft schedule and his transcendent talents to climb to as high as fourth in conference standings.

And then James showed his age for the first time in a 15-year pro career, getting hurt and sidelined just as things were looking up. His inability to take to the court told on the Lakers, who promptly went on a swoon that even his subsequent return could not arrest. No doubt, it stemmed from the mixed signals he sent while he was out, with his trust (or lack thereof) on those around him manifesting in his pronounced pining for fellow All-Star Anthony Davis heading into the trade deadline. Their subsequent failure to nab the fellow Rich Paul client played out spectacularly in public and dampened team morale in private.

James could have healed wounds by words and action in the aftermath, but he wound up wanting on both. Lakers president of hoops operations Magic Johnson then piled on by contending that those whose names became part of trade rumors as the Davis drama was playing out needed to be professionals and accept reality with understanding. And when it became apparent that a postseason berth would remain elusive, they went on tanking mode in an effort to secure better positioning in the rookie draft.

To be fair, the move paid off, with the Lakers bucking the odds and jumping to fourth in the selection sequence. Before then, though, they had to endure the ignominy of Johnson’s abrupt resignation from his position on the very last day of their ill-fated 2018-19 run. He sprung his shocker just before they were to trek to the court for the last time, ensuring that the cloud of uncertainty already enveloping them would extend to the offseason. Meanwhile, they parted ways with Luke Walton and began a protracted search for a new head coach. Absent a new honcho, they resolved to decide by committee and ended up with Frank Vogel, their third choice, after not even presenting Monty Williams with an offer and then lowballing Tyronn Lue.

Still and all, the Lakers strove to stay even-keeled and hopeful that the worst would be behind them. Forget that they opted not to get a new president of hoops operations, as much an indication of their indecisiveness as a reflection of their flawed understanding of the complexities of running a franchise. Unfortunately, Johnson saw fit to give them the finger one more time, appearing on ESPN’s First Take right before Vogel’s formal introduction as their bench tactician and using the opportunity to go scorched earth on them in the name of truth.

In the live program co-hosted by the always-controversial Stephen A. Smith, Johnson professed an undying love for the Lakers, only to proceed to eviscerate them. He enjoined Tim Harris (president of business operations), Joey Buss (head of the G-League Lakers), and Jesse Buss (scouting director) to “stay in that lane. Because what’s happening is there are too many opinions, too many voices and everybody thinks their way is the right way. That’s why you can’t make good decisions because you got six, eight voices and everybody thinks their strategy is the right one. You can’t have that.”

As all and sundry know, Johnson saved his best — or, depending on perspective, worst — for “backstabbing” general manager Rob Pelinka, who, he argued, gunned for his job and did so by disparaging his performance to others in the franchise. That he effectively did the very same thing on First Take in standing for what he deems the unvarnished truth was, of course, lost on him. In any case, the Lakers lost anew. Vogel’s introduction as their new bench tactician was overrun by queries on their evident dysfunction.

And speaking of dysfunction, it was, perhaps, only natural for the Lakers to insist on Vogel’s acceptance of Jason Kidd as assistant coach. Yes, he’s the same soon-to-be Hall of Famer who not too long ago eased out Lawrence Frank from the Nets and then finagled a job from the Bucks — in other words, the exact type of behind-the-scenes maneuvering Johnson accused Pelinka of having done. Looking ahead, observers don’t need a vivid imagination to foresee the jockeying in the sidelines once the Lakers perform below expectations on the court.

True, the Lakers will survive the mess they’re also responsible for prolonging. Their name is nearly as strong as, say, that of the Knicks, who know a thing or two about missteps and less than that about learning from the past. That said, they’re wasting grand opportunities, and how. They may have cap space to lure a star to pair with James and ample assets to swap for another, but their brain trust doesn’t seem prepared to use them well. Their lines of reporting are informal and confusing at best, and not conducive to proper and timely analysis of available options. Little wonder, then, that fans are left crossing their fingers and hoping against hope that the stars will still align, and that all that glitters is truly purple and gold.

 

Anthony L. Cuaycong has been writing Courtside since BusinessWorld introduced a Sports section in 1994.

1...10,96610,96710,968...14,238Page 10,967 of 14,238
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
© 2024 BusinessWorld Publishing.
All rights reserved.
Read our privacy guidelines
Facebook Instagram Linkedin X Youtube