Why I'm not voting - yet!
It’s General Election Day here in the UK – and
I am not going to vote!
This is not some misguided protest – it’s simply that the election has been
postponed in our constituency - sadly because of the death of one of the candidates. Who knows what the situation will be by the time we get to vote on 27 May, in
the first by-election of the new parliament?!
Even so, it feels
decidedly strange not to be voting today – I almost feel guilty about it! As an adult,
I can’t remember an election day (of any sort) when I haven’t voted. But it’s good to know that, unlike many around the world, I will get my opportunity.
I am by temperament and tradition
a Labour supporter – sadly a rare breed in this part of the world – so any reflections I have need to be read with that in mind. But here are a few things that have struck me about the Election Campaign just finished.
I suspect that the
Prime Ministerial debates on TV (the first in UK history) have had a marked effect on the outcome of the election. They have certainly focussed media coverage even more closely on
the party leaders and their
styles, rather than on the
substance of policy.
However the remarkable fact is that, in spite of all the efforts of parties and their managers,
the polls have remained static. The one exception to that is, of course,
the striking improvement in Liberal Democrat ratings after the first TV debate – from which point it seems we have genuinely had
a 3 party contest.
Most remarkably, in spite of a
tame media, the Conservative leader
David Cameron’s previously unassailable lead in all opinion surveys not many months ago has now
dwindled to the point where he
may not even command a majority in the new Parliament.
The spectacle of the
Conservative Party campaigning on “Change” has seemed to me to be one of the
sick jokes of this campaign!
The clue is in the title, people: they’re Conservative! Cameron has been outflanked – why did he ever agree to the debates? – by Liberal Democrat leader
Nick Clegg, who actually
does propose
real change: including a much-needed change to our voting system.
Instead of coherent policies, Mr Cameron and his party are content to trot out a load of
hackneyed rubbish about the “evils” of “Big Government” which they contrast with an ill-defined, back-of-the-envelope sketch of a “Big Society”. This is
another sick joke to those of us who remember the leader who shaped the modern Conservative Party, Margaret Thatcher. Mrs Thatcher famously declared
“There is no such thing as society” and
governed on an “everyone for themselves” basis which laid much of the foundation for the grotesque conduct of today’s bankers.
The fact is that without the actions of “Big Government”, skilfully and courageously led by
Gordon Brown,
our banks would have failed and our economy gone down into a brutal Depression, taking the lives and life-chances of many, many people with it.
The Tories “hands off” approach to the banking crisis would have been truly disastrous – and yet now they tell us that Government is the problem!
But, as Mrs Thatcher’s pal Ronald Reagan would no doubt have said, there I go again! I have become a bore on these topics during the campaign –
ask my wife!
In the absence of a Labour Government, which really does seem to be beyond any reasonable expectation, my hope is that as a result of this election
a true progressive coalition will emerge:
a Government willing to govern for the good of the many and not the few. And, please, a Government determined to
change our dreadful electoral system – which it seems will be discredited still further by
any of the likely outcomes of today’s election.
I’d certainly vote for that on 27 May, if it were on the ballot paper!Labels: Media, Politics, Rant
Couldn't resist!
Sorry, I just couldn't resist pointing out that England's alleged "wicket-keeper" Matt Prior conceded 35 byes in the West Indies' First Innings of the current test.Yes, 35 byes.(Dropped at least one vital catch too)."Is this a record?" you ask. Well, not quite. But as the BBC's Oliver Brett points out:"When Frank Woolley gave up 37 byes in a Test innings, not only did he don the gloves at the grand old age of 47, he was deputising for the injured Les Ames!"Rather puts Prior's ineptitude in its proper context, doesn't it?Anyone but Read?Labels: Cricket, Rant
Take it as Read (pun intended!)
So in Tim Ambrose England has found yet another "wicket-keeper" who can bat but can't keep wicket! And what do you know? He used to play for Sussex!Even the BBC's Jonathan Agnew - so quick to discard Chris Read after the Australian debacle - had to admit, after an underwhelming day against New Zealand:"England squandered the many chances and opportunities that came their way - they should have finished the match. "Of the eight New Zealand batsmen to appear in this innings, all but three gave a chance of some sort – a couple were very difficult, but three, in particular, were easy."One of those was a stumping chance to Tim Ambrose off Monty Panesar."Ambrose, in fact, had a poor day behind the stumps, missing a second, more difficult leg side stumping, and a catch standing up to Paul Collingwood. Clearly, he needs time to settle in, but I fear that many more like this will reopen the great wicket-keeping debate yet again."You think?!But you know what? I am so totally bored by now with England's "Anyone but Read" policy, that I will simply refer you to my previous remarks about Matt Prior ... England supremo Peter Moores coached him at Sussex too.Labels: Cricket, Rant
Rowan Williams starts a debate
As it happens, I was watching "The West Wing" last night - the episode late in Season One entitled "Let Bartlet Be Bartlet". In it, the President's staff urge the President to try and shape the public agenda, rather than playing safe and shying away from unpopularity. Chief of Staff Leo McGarry puts it this way:
"We're going to raise the level of public debate in this country, and let that be our legacy."
Couldn't help thinking about that in the context of the hysterical knee-jerking which has followed Archbishop Rowan Williams' interview and lecture about the Law and Faith Communities ...!
The level of public debate in this country is subterranean!(See "What did the Archbishop actually say?")Labels: Church, Media, Politics, Rant
It's "I told you so" time!
No prizes for guessing then that I am returning to the subject of England's wicket keeper!You will recall, gentle reader, that in my capacity as cheerleader for Nottinghamshire 'keeper Chris Read, I asked a pertinent question regarding the new coach's favourite, Matt Prior (see "So Prior can bat ...")The question was "Is he an England wicket-keeper?"Well, not only do we now know that Prior is a poor 'keeper, his batting career has taken much the same course as that of his predecessor Geraint Jones. Like Jones, Prior began with an impressive century but has since done little or nothing with the bat; and as his batting has deteriorated, the spotlight has eventually illuminated how truly mediocre he is as a wicket-keeper at Test level.Naturally, as with Jones before him, it's not Prior's fault. What was he going to say when they invited him to play for England? "Well, thank's a lot, but I don't really think I'm good enough!" ? But he isn't good enough, as discerning Read-fans suspected all along.And now the unfortunate Prior has broken his thumb. So who's next? David Graveney and his selectors [whatever happened to that post-Ashes-debacle review? Graveney's still there, in spite of everything ...] have come up with the answer! Having repeated their previous policy of the coach's favourite - Peter Moores used to be Prior's coach at Sussex - they've switched to the captain's favourite - they have chosen Phil Mustard. Mustard happens to keep wicket for one-day captain Paul Collingwood's county of Durham.Now I don't know anything about Mustard. The reports of his selection - as yet just for the one-day tour - point to his batting average of 49.61 in one-day games this season. There's no assessment of his ability as a wicket-keeper, of course. Chris Read has a one-day average for Notts this year of 51.85 by the way, but it may be that the more telling comparison is between Read's average in first-class games this year of 55.16 and Mustard's mere 25.75.Of course, you would expect me to drone on about Ready, wouldn't you. But Graveney's "Anyone but Read" policy is alive and well. No doubt he hopes that captain Collingwood's judgement in wicket-keepers is better than his choice of pre-match relaxation! I ought perhaps to refrain from asking the obvious question about a player called Mustard - but, particularly as a wicket-keeper, we will need to find out if he cuts it!!Labels: Cricket, Rant
Parting shots
Prime Minister
Tony Blair has given
a remarkable speech analysing the effect of today’s media culture on modern public life. It is thoughtful and reasoned: the sort of thing a politician can only say nowadays when he is on the point of retirement! As he himself says, “I know it will be rubbished in certain quarters. But I also know this has needed to be said.”
The speech really repays reading in full [here]. But these are just a few of the things that particularly struck me.
[Blair quotes, my emphases]
“My principal reflection is not about ‘blaming’ anyone. It is that the relationship between politics, public life and the media is changing as a result of the changing context of communication in which we all operate; no-one is at fault - it is a fact; but it is my view that the effect of this change is seriously adverse to the way public life is conducted; and that we need, at the least, a proper and considered debate about how we manage the future, in which it is in all our interests that the public is properly and accurately informed.”
“We devote reams of space to debating why there is so much cynicism about politics and public life. In this, the politicians are obliged to go into self flagellation, admitting it is all our fault. …
And, believe it or not, most politicians come into public life with a desire to serve and by and large, try to do the right thing not the wrong thing.
My view is that the real reason for the cynicism is precisely the way politics and the media today interact. We, in the world of politics, because we are worried about saying this, play along with the notion it is all our fault.”
“They [the media] are not the masters of this change but its victims. The result is a media that increasingly and to a dangerous degree is driven by ‘impact’ Impact is what matters. It is all that can distinguish, can rise above the clamour, can get noticed.
Impact gives competitive edge. Of course the accuracy of a story counts. But it is secondary to impact. It is this necessary devotion to impact that is unravelling standards, driving them down, making the diversity of the media not the strength it should be but an impulsion towards sensation above all else.”
“The audience needs to be arrested, held and their emotions engaged. Something that is interesting is less powerful than something that makes you angry or shocked. The consequences of this are acute.
First, scandal or controversy beats ordinary reporting hands down. News is rarely news unless it generates heat as much as or more than light.
Second, attacking motive is far more potent than attacking judgement. It is not enough for someone to make an error. It has to be venal. Conspiratorial. …
Third, the fear of missing out means today's media, more than ever before, hunts in a pack. In these modes it is like a feral beast, just tearing people and reputations to bits. But no-one dares miss out.
Fourth, rather than just report news, even if sensational or controversial, the new technique is commentary on the news being as, if not more important than the news itself.
So - for example - there will often be as much interpretation of what a politician is saying as there is coverage of them actually saying it. In the interpretation, what matters is not what they mean; but what they could be taken to mean. …
In turn, this leads to a fifth point: the confusion of news and commentary. Comment is a perfectly respectable part of journalism. But it is supposed to be separate. Opinion and fact should be clearly divisible. The truth is a large part of the media today not merely elides the two but does so now as a matter of course. ...
The final consequence of all of this is that it is rare today to find balance in the media. Things, people, issues, stories, are all black and white. Life's usual grey is almost entirely absent.
‘Some good, some bad’; ‘some things going right, some going wrong’: these are concepts alien to today's reporting. It's a triumph or a disaster. A problem is ‘a crisis’.
A setback is a policy ‘in tatters’. A criticism, ‘a savage attack’. NGOs and pundits know that unless they are prepared to go over the top, they shouldn't venture out at all.”
“I do believe this relationship between public life and media is now damaged in a manner that requires repair. The damage saps the country's confidence and self-belief; it undermines its assessment of itself, its institutions; and above all, it reduces our capacity to take the right decisions, in the right spirit for our future.”
[Quotes end - do
read the speech!]
As you will probably know,
I tend to go on a bit about the media - and here I go again:
In my view, the media are making public life an arena into which fewer and fewer people will wish to venture – at least for the motives we would all hope our public figures would hold. The
all-pervading, sneering cynicism which is the “default setting" in our media is
warping our society beyond recognition.
It used to be said that we get the government we deserve. Nowadays, increasingly,
we get the government our media allows us. The standard of political thought and debate, and essentially the level of engagement by most people with politics and public life
is now so low that I'm afraid
our disease of cynicism may be terminal.
Labels: Media, Politics, Popular Culture, Rant
A new era for England cricket?
You won’t be at all surprised to hear that I have a few thoughts on the current position regarding the
England Cricket Team!
Naturally I am
more than pleased to see the back of
the execrable Duncan Fletcher and his bizarre selection policies. But I fear that with the arrival of
Peter Moores as coach, in fact,
very little has changed. Witness the sudden inclusion of Sussex players in the squad – amongst whom, of course, the latest wicket-keeper to be preferred to Chris Read. (Moores used to be the Sussex coach).
Incidentally – what’s going on there?
Anyone But Read is, we know, the established policy, which Moores is only continuing. But
even I have to admit that
Paul Nixon (given the sort of extended run in the team always denied to Chris Read)
actually did very well for England in the World Cup. He was one of the
very few in the squad to emerge with any credit.
So, of course, he is dropped!!
The reason I say that little has changed is simple –
David Graveney is still Chair of Selectors. It was
Graveney who
cravenly allowed Fletcher to subvert selection procedures to install his favourites;
Graveney who presided over the
fiasco of the winter Ashes tour and World Cup – and
Graveney who continues in post.
How can selection improve?
Equally worrying is the precipitate manner in which Moores was drafted in to replace Fletcher. No less an authority than
former England captain Mike Brearley has
expressed serious doubts about this. He questions both the speed and wisdom of the appointment, saying
“there can have been no proper search.”
Brearley continues,
"However good Moores is, there was no time to advertise the job, and it is not right for such an important job to be handed out without proper competition. We should have had more rigorous discussion and careful thought about what this new coach's role will be, and in what sort of a set-up."
What sort of set-up? Why, the traditional one
long suspected in England cricket! Brearley confirms what we have
always really known:
"I question the manner and timing of [Moores'] selection as England head coach.
His selection smacks of favouritism."
Not so
very different from Duncan Fletcher and the "old" regime then!
Labels: Cricket, Rant
Cameron moves to the Left
Just in case anyone was in any doubt about the
quality of political reporting and analysis in the UK, here is the
latest political story:
Tory leader David Cameron has changed his hairstyle!!The BBC analyses the implications
here.
Amongst the
profound insights the Corporation brings us is this:
"Several commentators noticed the change on Wednesday and had come up with their own theories for it. Some thought it was an attempt to look more masculine, but others said a left parting was more feminine.
"Daily Mail sketchwriter Quentin Letts said image was important to voters and told the BBC: 'Cameron seems to be changing direction - which is of course a very good metaphor for what he's doing with his party.' "But a spokesman said of Mr Cameron's change: 'There is no political significance in his decision to do so.'"Naturally the
Daily Mail had to be involved somewhere - good to know that "newspaper" is keeping up its standards!
The BBC report ends by
sonorously informing us that a recent photo of Mr Cameron appeared to show
his first grey hairs!
Is it any wonder, given this quality of media coverage of the political issues of our day?!! Any serious politician, or
anyone who cares for the quality of our democracy would be
tearing their hair out!Labels: Media, Politics, Rant
AABR policy no surprise to Newell
I was wondering when
Nottinghamshire's Director of Cricket Mick Newell would comment on England's treatment of his wicket-keeper. Here are his comments ... I actually think he has been quite restrained!
Newell slams England selectors(from the
Notts CCC website), my emphases added.
Mick Newell has strongly criticised the England hierarchy after Chris Read was left out of the England squad for next month’s World Cup.
The 28-year-old wicketkeeper ended last season as England’s number one behind the stumps, but
coach Duncan Fletcher axed him for the start of the Ashes in favour of Geraint Jones.
Jones’ lack of form eventually led to a recall for Read, only for the selectors to then call up 36-year-old Leicestershire stumper Paul Nixon for the CB Series.
Nixon has now been named as first choice for the World Cup, with
Read returning home without being given a chance to prove his case for selection. Newell said: “
It is no surprise at all that Chris has not been picked when you consider the way the winter has gone for him.
“
His treatment has been appalling from the moment he was
dropped at the start of the Ashes tour without even getting the chance to play in a warm-up game. If they didn’t want him there, then why take him?
“
I don’t think he will ever get back into the side under Duncan Fletcher, but if a different coach comes in, then you never know.”
The BBC has
this interview with Newell, which adds a little more to the saga. Most revealing is this (my emphases):
"Chris wasn't given any chance to compete this winter. The man-management of him has been poor. ... He was told
two weeks before the first Test in Australia that he wasn't going to be in the side. But if that's the case,
how has he got any opportunity to compete for a place?"Everyone would agree he's not only the best wicket-keeper in England but right up there in the top two or three in the world. But
I just don't think Fletcher rates him as a cricketer and doesn't want him in the team. "
Newell's summary:
"The whole thing has been made very difficult by the way it has been handled and that has been down to Duncan Fletcher."
Maybe Fletcher is finally going to find the guts to actually exclude Chris Read from selection - or maybe the England Selectors are going to find the guts to take back responsibility for the selection of the team.
But no ... that ship sailed with the departure of Read's staunch supporter
Rodney Marsh - who, after all, knows a bit about wicket-keeping! And as an Aussie, he knows a bit about winning too!
Labels: Cricket, Rant
ABR policy confirmed!
This from the
BBC Sport website, on England's squad:
"Paul Nixon is the only wicket-keeper in the 15. [Chair of England Cricket Selectors, David] Graveney said that
if necessary Andrew Strauss or Ed Joyce could take the gloves."
As both Strauss and Joyce are specialist batsmen, this, in fact, represents
a refinement of the "Anyone but Read" policy. The policy, enunciated by the Chair of Selectors, is now
"
Absolutely anyone but Read!"
Labels: Cricket, Rant
Anyone but ...
So
Paul Nixon has been selected as England's only wicket-keeper in the Cricket World Cup. I am bound to ask "
Why?!"
Consider the following statistics from
cricinfo.com:
England Career (one-day internationals)Player/ Matches/Runs/Highest Score/Average
Nixon 10/ 104/ 49/11.55
Read 36/300/30*/17.64
Jones 49/815/80/24.69
The natural conclusion from this evidence is:
if you want a
world-class wicketkeeper who can bat, pick
Chris Read;
if you want a
batsman who is a barely competent 'keeper standing back, pick
Geraint Jones.
Nixon is neither Read nor Jones!
He is however
Duncan Fletcher's latest choice as England wicket-keeper! As the Americans say: "Go figure!"
One would be hard pressed to figure out
Fletcher's selection policy at wicket-keeper -
particuarly if one were Jones or Read!
As recently as the beginning of England's
disastrous tour of Australia, Fletcher was
lauding Jones as the best man for the job. This at least had
the virtue of consistency, since Fletcher had given Jones an extended run in the side, despite his lack of success.
Then the coach
generously allowed
Read his
customary 2 games (in a completely demoralised team, at the end of an Ashes series which had already been lost).
Then he plucked
Nixon from a career in county cricket - with the
singularly underwhelming results chronicled above. And many of those innings were played from No 8 in the order, whereas Jones and Read had batted at 7.
But
Nixon it is for the World Cup. Again:
"Why?!"The
inescapable conclusion is the one posted by a contributor to a BBC cricket forum a few days ago:
Fletcher's policy regarding the selection of England's wicket-keeper is in fact
very simple:
"Anyone but Read".Well, I now have a similar view regarding the post of England Cricket Coach:
"Anyone but Fletcher!"Labels: Cricket, Rant
Nice try, Mr Graveney!
David Graveney, the chair of England's cricket selectors, says that critics of his coach,
Duncan Fletcher, should apologise after
England's one-day series win over Australia and New Zealand.
Is he joking?! (Decide for yourself
here)
Mr Graveney
may kid himself, but he
doesn't kid me! However welcome, a win in a money-spinning one-day series
in no way makes up for
England's totally abject 5-0 defeat in the Ashes Tests. Messrs Graveney and Fletcher have presided over a tour in which the
shortcomings of
their preparation and selection policy were
cruelly exposed, and in which the Ashes were not just lost, but
tamely and pitifully surrendered.If that doesn't make David Graveney and Duncan Fletcher apologetic, then nothing will!
Labels: Cricket, Rant
Obsessive, moi?
Now the England "cricket" team, fresh from
losing heavily to Australia in the Ashes series,
loses heavily to Australia in a 20-20 game. I see that the
usual selection policy has been applied - Chris Read has had his customary
2 matches and is dropped
again!Do tell me if I'm getting boring on this subject ....
Labels: Cricket, Rant
From the bizarre to the ridiculous
Time to review the England cricket coach
Duncan Fletcher's decision to install
Geraint Jones as England's wicket keeper for the current Ashes tests against Australia.
You will recall that Mr Fletcher has selected Jones on the basis of his being
"the better package" compared to rival
Chris Read. By this he means that Jones is the better batsman ... (see previous rant
here)
Since I last wrote, England have
played 3 and lost 3 in the 5 match series, and hence have
lost the Ashes in the shortest possible time. Geraint Jones' scores in these 3 tests have been:
19, 33, 1, 10, 0 and
0 - an average of
10.50.
As such, he actually averages
comfortably below spin bowler and
No 11 batsman Monty Panesar - who Mr Fletcher also contends can't bat - but there's another (related) story!
It will be interesting to see
who Fletcher picks to keep wicket in the next Test. Does Geraint Jones get
yet another chance to make some runs? If so, then things really will have gone
from the bizarre to the ridiculous!Labels: Cricket, Rant
Naomi Campbell's palate
Did you happen to see recent reports about model
Naomi Campbell and her
court case? Here is
The Independent's report:
Naomi Campbell to negotiate "palatable" community service"Lawyers for Naomi Campbell, the model accused of assaulting a former maid with a mobile phone, are negotiating with prosecutors in New York in an effort to avoid a trial - and the possibility of a long prison term - in exchange for agreeing to community service.
"But her lawyer insisted that any such task would have to be 'palatable', fund-raising for Aids or cancer research rather than sweeping the streets, as Boy George recently did.
...
"Were [Ms Campbell] to be found guilty of the allegations made against her, she could technically serve up to seven years in prison and then be deported.
"[Her lawyer] declined to offer any details on how the negotiations were going. He did, however, indicate that he was setting conditions on the kind of community service his client would be prepared to do. Sweeping the streets, for example, would be out of the question."
Is it just me?? Setting conditions?!?!
Perhaps such a statement doesn't sound as
outrageous in legal circles as it does to me, but my immediate reaction - not tempered a great deal by the opportunity for mature consideration - is that the authorities should break off any further negotiations and
let matters take their course!I suspect that after a little while
in prison, even Ms Campbell's
discerning palate might
acquire a taste for a little community service!
Labels: Popular Culture, Rant
Bizarre is one word for it!
Firstly, I have to declare an interest: I am a
Nottinghamshire Cricket fan, and have been all my life. Readers therefore need to be aware that
Chris Read plays for Nottinghamshire!
Secondly, it is a while since I have had a
really good rant! So ...
England Cricket coach Duncan Fletcher has announced that
Geraint Jones will again be England’s wicket-keeper for the first Ashes test, replacing
Chris Read. Fletcher states, somewhat enigmatically, that in his view Jones is
“the better package”.
Once again we are being
fed the line that Jones is the better batsman of the two. This is still
in the realms of theory – in practice Jones has proved himself little better than Read, despite having
ample and extended opportunity. No-one (except Jones’ county coach) seriously contends that Jones is the better 'keeper.
What price equality of opportunity? When Jones controversially replaced Read, Fletcher
generously guaranteed him an extended run in the team – a run which in fact extended to
31 Tests. The coach kept his protégé in the team until it was
absolutely impossible to defend his mediocrity (with gloves or bat) any longer.
Commenting at the time, the
BBC Cricket Correspondent Jonathan Agnew expressed a desire for even-handedness:
“It is to be hoped that [Read’s] return comes with the similarly generous guarantee of an extended run that Jones was given in Antigua. “ (Agnew’s article in full is
here)
A vain hope!!
Chris Read has played
2 (yes,
two) Tests before finding himself out of favour with the England hierarchy again – during which he has kept impeccably and scored 38, 55 and 33. Yes, that’s
31 Tests against 2.
Whenever the two players are compared, it is apparent that Fletcher is prepared to
excuse any number of wicket-keeping errors by
Jones, and yet any minor blemish on the part of
Read is magnified as if he were
expected to be infallible. Conversely with the bat,
Jones can do no wrong – even whilst
in reality doing very little of note at all – whilst
Read can score as many runs as he likes and still be
stigmatised as “unable to bat”.
Anyone watching Chris Read’s performances for Notts, and his 2 Test return to the England team, can see just how
ridiculous this
jaded assessment of his batting now is!
And yet Mr Fletcher continues to extol his favourite – the “better package”!
Mick Newell, Read’s county coach says that the latest decision to eject Read and re-instate Jones after so little time and with so little evidence is
“very bizarre”. [Newell's views reported
here]. His restraint (and Chris Read’s, to date) is to be admired.
Personally, I have always felt that there is more to it than that.
The truth is that
whatever Chris Read does – and he has done
remarkably well by any standard over the past 2 years and more –
Fletcher will never give him credit.
Whilst Duncan Fletcher is the England coach, Geraint Jones is anointed as the favoured son. However badly he keeps wicket, he is always “working hard”, always “improving”, and he only has to get a few runs, very occasionally, to have his England place guaranteed. I’m sure
Fletcher always intended to pick Jones for the Ashes Tests –
whatever Chris Read did with his
token 2 Tests in the interval.
Bizarre is one word for it.The BBC's Martin Gough manages a more balanced assessment than I can
here. His explanation of the "intriguing" selection process, and of Fletcher's role in it, is particularly informative.
Labels: Cricket, Rant
Packer People
You may have noticed a link on the right-hand side of the page to the
Green Bay Packers' Website. You will
not however have noticed any blog entries about the Packers - until now! This is because this season already has all the makings of a
truly terrible one, and it's difficult to know where to start with my comments!
A singularly lacklustre pre-season has now been succeeded by the embarassment of a
26-0 home shutout by our greatest rivals, the
Chicago Bears, in the regular season opener. The response of General Manager
Ted Thompson and his new Head Coach
Mike McCarthy has been underwhelming - signing
troubled WR Koren Robinson (under threat of an NFL suspension for repeated alcohol abuse), the cutting of FB
Vonta Leach, and now the trading of RB
Samkon Gado who, despite doing great things last year, had apparently not managed to pick up Coach McCarthy's new blocking scheme.
On his arrival, McCarthy made much of his desire to work with what he called "
Packer People". Now, I am all in favour of second chances - even though Robinson is on his (2+n)th chance by now. He may become a reformed character and a key part of the Packers' regeneration. After all, QB Brett Favre himself beat addiction to pain-killers to become one of the truly great ones.
But I am bound to ask, with
the cutting of Leach (a model citizen) to make room for Robinson, and now the departure of Gado - for whom no-one (not even Thompson) has an unkind word ...
just what exactly do "Packer People" look like?!It's going to be a very, very long season - and even Ted Thompson may end up feeling the heat.
Labels: American Football, Rant
On Owen Hargreaves
This one a late comment on England's World Cup ... 17 July 06
---
This is
way late, by way of a comment on the World Cup, but ... I wasn't able to watch the
England v Portugal game live and ... well it took me a while to work up the enthusiasm to watch the tape
Lots I could say, but one thing that stands out is that, after his performance out-of-position at right-back, and then his heroic efforts v Portugal,
Owen Hargreaves deserves a written apology from every one of the "experts" in the media who questioned his inclusion in the squad! (Yeah, like he's
ever going to get an apology from those people!)
Well done, Owen Hargreaves! All credit to you!!
Labels: Football (Soccer), Media, Rant
A political resurrection
This one more of a rant ... 21 June 06
---
The re-emergence of former Home Secretary
Charles Clarke in the media is interesting. Only a few months after the pundits and "commentators"
conspired to kill off Mr Clarke and label him as a
failure and a
liability, they are now resurrecting him as a politician gifted with
remarkable insight and
judgement about all aspects of government!
I'm bound to ask - which is he?! Or does that depend on how he suits the media agenda?
Labels: Media, Politics, Rant
Michael Owen's injury
This one was mid-World Cup - 22 June 06
---
Obviously
Michael Owen's injury is a terrible blow for him, and hurts England's World Cup chances significantly, since he is a
world class player. But you can't help but marvel at the attitude of the media pundits and journos.
Having spent so much of their time just recently insisting that Owen is
not worth his place and should be
dropped from the team, they are now wailing and gnashing their teeth and bemoaning the end of the world (cup) because he is out!
Labels: Football (Soccer), Media, Rant
