O is for...

Providing you haven't been on the planet Zog for the last few months, you'll know that tomorrow sees the start (well, opening ceremony) of the 2012 summeria Olympia down in Londinium (Apologies for the stupid names but I'm terrified of LOCOG suing me for some copyright infringements).

So much has been scribbled by so many about these Games that there's not much point in me rambling on about the same old topics, and to be honest it's too hot to be sitting inside at a computer banging on. So, I'm going to try something a little different. Apologies for those of you interested in my thoughts about the largest McDonald's in the world being at the Olympia village (LOL) or who I think should light the Olympia flame (Redgrave) but...it's pictures time!

Because quite frankly if there's one thing in this world that I love, it's a photo booth. Ever seen anyone look good in their passport photo? No you haven't, and that's why I love them - for us ugly people, they really are a fantastic leveller. No make-up plus no smiling plus a harsh white background? Why, those conditions make even the most beautiful women in the world look....plain.















See?

Here's a few photos I've found on http://www.london2012.com/athletes of either famous athletes or members of Team GB looking odd/silly/confused. For some of them, if they didn't have their name underneath their picture, I'd have really struggled to recognise them. Seriously, see how many you can get without cheating.

(I mentioned earlier about copyright laws. Truth is, I've no flipping idea whether I'm allowed to put these photos on here or not, but as I've seen them elsewhere I'm going to chance my arm. See you in the courtroom guys!)

ANSWERS

1) Ana Ivanovic
2) Kelly Smith
3) Chris Froome
4) Yohan Blake
5) Elena Baltacha
6) Michael Phelps (!)
7) Jessica Ennis
8) Victoria Azarenka
9) LeBron James
10) Queen Victoria Pendleton
11) Marcos Baghdatis
12) Andy Roddick

However many you got, just take a moment to consider that Roddick has had sex with Brooklyn Decker more times than we've had Prime Ministers. Not bad for a guy who looks like he works at a gas station in Arkansas.

Enjoy the Olympias, humble and law-abiding citizens!

No Future, No Future, No Future For You

Finishing university was a surreal experience. For several years I've had books sitting by my computer, paper with notes scribbled on all over the place, thoughts whizzing round my brain about the current assignment, or the next one, or the next module. And then...it all stopped. I clicked "Save Post" on the on-line forum I was to use for my final assignment, my post was duly saved, and then....nothing. No fanfare, no celebrations, no round of applause. I sat at my computer and, to be honest, struggled a bit to take it all in.

One month later and I'm the "proud" owner of a 2:2 in English and Creative & Professional Writing. I'll take it, but I know I could have done better. I have nobody else to blame for not doing as well as I possibly could have done, though, so I learn from the experience(s) and I move on with life. No complaints from me about anything. Of course, "moving on" entails that it's time to enter a new period of my life - to get out of the comfort zone I've been in and ramp it up a notch.

I know I have a lot of catching up to do. I remember watching an interview with the darts player Phil Taylor once, after he had lost a match. The man has won absolutely everything in the game (several times over) and he's a multi-millionaire, but after his defeat he was berating himself. I'm paraphrasing, but his attitude was "That wasn't good enough. I've got too comfortable, and these guys are coming back at me now, and it inspires me. I'm not scared, or worried - I'm inspired, to work even harder, practice even longer, and stay at the top". At the time I thought he was bonkers - just like I do when I see the multi-millionaire Michael Schumacher still risking his life every fortnight in a racing car - but over the past few weeks I've begun to see exactly what he meant. I see a friend of mine, with his nice car, new flat and decent job, and rather than feel bitter or jealous or anything negative, I feel like it's a kick up the backside, a shot in the arm. As I told a(nother) friend the other night - "I'm trying to be excited about my future, not scared of it. I've spent too long being anxious about things."

A journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step, however. For all my excitement and positivity, four years of uni and no part-time job has seen the bank balance dry up quite spectacularly. I would say "God knows what I've spent it on" but deep down we all know where it's gone - on books that I'll never get round to reading/can't read but make me look cultured when put on my bookcase. My reasoning behind this tactic is to one day have this conversation:

Fit girl: "Wow, look at your collection! Madame Bovary!"
Me: "What a cad Flaubert was eh?" *laughs falsely*
Fit girl: "Pride and Prejudice! Wuthering Heights! You're SO cultured! I'm really turned on - can we have sex right now?"
Me: "Sounds reasonable. Let me just move Lee Sharpe's autobiography off the bed first."

With my funds standing at precisely £0 and being unemployed I knew I had no choice but to go down to the Job Centre and sign up for JSA. I didn't want to - still don't, to be honest - but when you tell your brother that he can't have a book from his school's book fair because they're too expensive and you wonder how exactly you're going to pay for your mum's birthday present/Father's Day gifts/the tooth filling at the dentist/meal and drinks out with mates etc you realise that you don't have a great deal of choice.

I signed on. It makes me feel awful doing so, but my friend tells me "that's what it's there for" and my parents agree with me doing it so it's got to be done. As I am 25+, I get £71 a week, paid fortnightly, so I won't be buying an iPhone5 any time soon but for things I'll need - envelopes and stamps, printer cartridges, clothes for interviews - it is a help. As part of receiving JSA I have to trundle down to the Job Centre every fortnight, and once a month I have to meet with my personal advisor, who I met for the very first time today.

What an appalling woman, quite frankly. One minute after I sat down she told me that my degree was "useless", because employers don't care, they want work experience instead, and as I haven't worked since starting uni I wasn't likely to get any interviews anywhere either. She then pointed out that I'm allowed to look for the jobs I want to go for for about 13 weeks, at which point I will have to start applying to be a cleaner/work at McDonalds/retail instead - anything I can get, basically. My previous office experience - where I worked really hard over two years for minimum wage in a shitty, boring job I didn't really care for - wasn't much use either, because I didn't use SAGE, I didn't get an AAT qualification. In short, I'm fucked.

My favourite exchange between us was this little beauty:

Her: "On my screen here it says you'd be interested in being a librarian or working in a library."
Me: "Yes, that's correct - like I said, I'm not fussy, because I know the job market is tough and I can't afford to be picky, but when I chatted with your colleague last time it was something we put down on the screen because it is certainly something I'd like to do, I'd jump at the chance to do it to be honest."
Her: "Yeah, well, we have a bloke who first came here eight years ago wanting to be a librarian - he's still here. You won't get a job in a library."
Me: "Oh."

Followed by this one:

Me: "I was wondering, for graduate jobs - are there any specific websites that you guys use, or recommend to me? I've looked on your website but those jobs aren't perhaps too suitable for my qualifications, and I've been warned about using the commercial sites such as Reed, Monster etc"
Her: "It's not difficult to type in 'graduate jobs' into Google - have you not done that? Look, I'll do it now." *turns screen round*
Me: "Sorry, yes, I meant any specific sites that the Job Centre can recomm...
Her: "See, look here - Google, there's 10 pages of results come up when I type 'graduate jobs' in."
Me: *loses the will to live*

All that positivity that I was talking about earlier - all of it that I was trying to build up disappeared in roughly three minutes. I'll tell you now - being told that the degree you've worked for over several years isn't worth the paper it's printed on isn't much fun. Still, at least I didn't accumulate over £20k worth of debt for it, eh?

Don't get me wrong - I'm not thinking for one moment that a guy with a 2:2 from Wolverhampton University is going to jump into a job worth £50k a year within a matter of days. But to do things properly -  work hard, get A Levels, work hard, get work experience, work hard, finish a degree - and just be sneered at....it isn't easy. I've never called myself a "good guy" but I don't think I'm a bad dude. I'm not a benefit cheat. I haven't faked a back injury or fathered six children to get more benefits that way. Yes, I am at home and get to wake up when I want, but let me tell you a little secret - it ain't much fun. Sure I can spend my days reading and masturbating but I like to think there's more to me than that.

The other day my Gran told me how lucky I was - 25, newly graduated, life ahead of me. Today a portly woman from the Job Centre told me that I'm a bit useless, I should be ashamed that I've spent a few years in higher education and not the workplace, my degree counts for shit and I'll be lucky to get an interview anywhere any time soon.

It's difficult to know who to believe, or where to turn, but I know one thing - I'm going to try my damnedest to prove one of those women wrong, and it ain't the mad Irish one now living in Greater Manchester. The challenge has been very much accepted.

From Russia with Love

Huge thanks to Twitter pal Curtis (@Curtos07) for this doozy. It is strangely comforting to see that bad, thoughtless, terrible journalism isn't limited to the United Kingdom. Shame on you, Paul Sullivan! You have shamed your fine country of Canada with this one:

 http://metronews.ca/voices/just-saying/261050/beauty-is-whats-behind-your-next-raise/

Let's analyse this baby in full FJM (firejoemorgan.com) style!

================================================================

When Maria Sharapova won the French Open on Saturday, it was another victory for the Beautiful People.

Loved their second album. Their third - and final - album "Mongoose Overdrive" left a lot to be desired however. No real surprise they split up after that one.

Sharapova, all six-foot-two of her, is gorgeous.

She is. Oooh, I'd really like to kiss her!

But then, so are a lot of tennis players these days. 

Right!

Somewhere along the line, right at Anna Kournikova, perhaps, it became important for female tennis players to be beautiful as well as talented.

This is a load of bollocks, quite frankly, and it serves as a warning as to all the nonsense that's still to come in this one. First off, there's been loads of beautiful tennis players gracing the courts down the years - a few that spring to mind were around before Anna Kournikova swung a racquet around in anger. The Kournikova reference is just lazy. But that isn't really the point, here.

"Important to be beautiful as well as talented"?

Eh...not really. I mean, yes, beautiful tennis players will rake in more $ when it comes to modelling etc - let's not be naive on that one - but to pretend that a professional sportsperson should place as much importance in their appearance as they should harvesting and using their talent is just a bit pathetic, quite frankly. I bet Petra Kvitova really regrets not doing as many photoshoots as Maria Sharapova does when she wakes up every morning and sees the Wimbledon trophy on her mantelpiece.

Partial list: Daniela Hantuchova, Sabine Lisicki, Vera Zvonareva, Lucie Safarova, Maria Kirilenko, Simona Halep, Tatiana Golovin, as well as the aforementioned Kournikova and Sharapova.

This is one of the most blatant and shameless "Shit, I need to fill my word count for this piece" tactic I've ever seen. Simply listing women you fancy. Good work sir, good work.

Kate Upton. Kelly Brook. Jessica Alba. Scarlet Johansson. Zooey Deschanel.

Wow this is a fun game!

Apparently, it doesn’t hurt if you’re eastern European either.

Bit racist, no?

One honest BBC producer has admitted that “babes and Brits” get the centre-court treatment at Wimbledon while less attractive players have to grunt it out on the outer courts.

I don't understand this paragraph, at all. Whether you take "centre court treatment" in a literal way or not, it still doesn't make any sense. Literally - well, a BBC employee would have no say whatsoever on which court a player plays on. The "Brit" bit isn't true, because Andy Murray plays on centre court not because he's British but because he's normally seeded somewhere between #2 - #5 in the competition. Don't think we'll be seeing Elena Baltacha on there anytime soon. As for the "babes" bit - Ana Ivanovic regularly wins the "sexiest tennis player" award and the last time I recall her playing on Centre Court was back in 2009 when she played Venus Williams. That might not be right, as my memory isn't the greatest, but I sure can recall her playing a lot of matches on the small, outside courts these past few years.

Non-literal way? Well, that then doesn't fit with "have to grunt it out on the outer courts" and it's still wrong. The Williams sisters have got an awful lot of attention the past decade or so, yet I don't see them in FHM's Top 100 List. Anyway, let's move on, I'm boring myself.

But that’s the way of the world. If you’re gorgeous, you’re golden.

Daniel Hamermesh, a professor at the University of Texas in Austin and author of Beauty Pays, estimates that, in a lifetime, a bad-looking person can earn $230,000 less than a good-looking person, all other things being equal.

I'd really love to see the science behind that claim.

The truth about looking good is out there.

In the job market: Attractive people get more job recommendations, are considered more qualified, more likely to succeed, more likely to be hired, paid more, promoted more and less likely to be fired.

In the courts: Juries think physically attractive people are less likely to be guilty. Attractive people get lower bail, lighter sentences and smaller fines. Except maybe not Luka Magnotta. But imagine how much trouble he’d be in if he was really ugly?

In school: Attractive people get better grades.

On Facebook: Attractive people are more “friended” than ugly people.

Sex: Attractive people get more dates, have more sex and even have more orgasms.

The really tragic thing about this article is that it could have been written with an interesting and thought-provoking take on this matter. Attractive people do better in life blah blah - why? What does that say about society? Does society need to change, to stop being so vain? Sadly we know Paul Sullivan isn't going to do this, seeing as he spent a good paragraph telling us which tennis players he'd like to have sex with.

OK, too much information, perhaps. Good thing I’m attractive.

Hoho. By the way - remember this piece being about Maria Sharapova winning the French Open? No, me neither.

Did I mention that generally, men tend to overestimate their good looks? Women go the opposite way. More than eight out of 10 hate the way they look in a mirror. 

Can't help thinking that you should either use "eight out of ten" OR "8 out of 10" rather than mashing the two.

One study showed women see themselves as fatter after eating a single chocolate bar. It would have to be a 35,000-calorie chocolate bar for that to be true.

Hamermesh (whose wife thinks he looks average) finds that 70 per cent of people agree on what’s attractive most of the time. It has to do with symmetry. The more symmetrical you look, the more attractive you are. Jug ears are out.

Well, if we combine that with all the guff you've provided us with above, that means Gary Lineker will never, ever be successful in his media career, right?

So that “beauty is in the eye of the beholder” stuff is fine … just as long as you’re beautiful.

Have a nice day, and if possible, stay away from mirrors. They’re bad luck, in more ways than one.

I am going to have a nice day because I've just decided that I'm never going to read your writing ever again.

Euro 2012

OMFG! Football! EURO 2012! Eng-ur-land!

That's right kids, another major international football tournament is upon us already, so I may as well continue my tradition of incorrectly predicting what will happen and noting it all down on here so you can all laugh at me afterwards. After a fine Premier League season and a thoroughly entertaining Champions League campaign, we're going into this one with enthusiasm and excitement - albeit for the tournament itself and not England's chances. More on them later.

Some quick predictions for you then. I'll use the structure that the Grauniad uses here:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/blog/2012/jun/07/euro-2012-guardian-predictions

FINAL


Germany v Spain

I'm sold on the Germans this year, I really am. I thought they were sensational at the World Cup of two years ago, the best team there, but just ran out of fizz when they needed it the most. With the experience of that campaign under their belts, I like their chances. Spain? Jam packed with quality, of course, but David Villa's absence is a blow and they can't keep on winning these things. What a fantastic final this would be, and I reckon Germany would just sneak it.

Germany 2-1 Spain

TOP SCORER


One name springs to mind immediately, but I have a feeling he'll be Top 5 but not the #1 goalscorer. So I won't go for Robin van Persie on this one, but I will go for Mario Gomez. A lot of that is based on my "Germany to win" prediction so we'll see, but I do fancy him to bounce back from a rotten Champions League final and bang in a few.

PLAYER TO WATCH


A number of people spring to mind here. Close to home, I think this tournament could see the emergence of Alex Oxlade-Chamberlain as a real player. He's so much better than Walcott it's untrue, and searing pace + a brain = trouble for defenders. Further afield, I really like Cabaye of France, and I hope he can play for his national team like he does for Newcastle. Mario Balotelli is of course always very watchable - will it be triumph or despair for the maverick Italian? What about Fernando Torres - can he get back to this best? From my tip Germany there's Toni Kroos, Mario Gotze and Thomas Muller, all quality young players. I'm not sure how much they'll play, but the Spanish duo of Santi Cazorla and Fernando Llorente are both fun to watch despite having thoroughly different styles.

ENGLAND


The squad isn't as terrible as some are making it out to be, but it is still difficult to see England winning this one. The first match against France will tell us a lot. A win, and the momentum will carry you through towards being group winners. A draw, and suddenly you're a bit worried about topping the group, but still content you can qualify from it. A defeat, and you're facing Sweden who you've never beaten in a major tournament before followed by Ukraine who are a poor side but are at home and haven't had to travel all the way from Poland for the match, and you're beginning to sweat a bit.

Group winners or runners up, however, it's a stretch imagining England beating the likes of Spain, Germany et al in the knock-out stages. It could very well be QF and out, once again.

MOST LOOKING FORWARD TO


Germany, Holland and Spain playing good football. Danny Welbeck to do well and gain a whole world of confidence in time for next season. Ireland to do well, and have fun whilst doing it. Mario Balotelli to do...something. The French to spontaneously combust again.

LEAST LOOKING FORWARD TO


The lingering threat of hooliganism and racism. The inevitable fall-out when England lose. The endless Ferdinand/Terry questions immediately after Terry slips on his arse and costs England a goal. Poland and Ukraine being bloody awful and really not warranting their places in the tournament.

Enjoy the tournament, fellow soccerball fans!

The One Where People Wrote Letters...

...into The Shropshire Star and I responded to them in my own unique and daft way.

================================================================

Money can't buy me love The Beatles sang, but it can buy you football's Premier League title.


Everybody tells me so, Can't buy me love, No, no noooo

Join in everyone!

Manchester City have spent hundreds of millions of pounds over the last two years, more than the rest of the Premier League put together. 


Yes.

But even then they needed the help of the referee on the last day of the season to beat a poor Manchester United side to the title by the smallest amount possible, goal difference.


I've not seen a single United supporter - of which I am one - blaming the referee in the City game up until now. Joey Barton thoroughly deserved to be sent off, simply for being Joey Barton.

City fans should make the most of it because when a team is made up of players who only come because of the huge wages and nothing else, they soon get fed up as we have seen with one or two of their players this season. The saddest thing for City fans is, even though they won the league, they are still the second best club in Manchester and will remain so for many years as they don't have the rich history behind them that United do.


About 10 years ago this would have been the wet dream of all letters for me, but now that I'm past the age of 15 I just find this all so thoroughly sad. As much as I disliked the events of the Premier League's final day, it was a fun season and I look forward to the two Manchester clubs battling it out again next season, and as much as I disliked the events of the Premier League's final day, it's only a game. Nobody died.

United were the better side overall


Debatable.

as they won more points against the rest of the league than City did. If United had won the two derby matches they would have finished 12 points ahead of City which proves the point.


If I...

Lived in London
Had loads of money
Was incredibly good looking
Owned a sports car
Was a professional athlete
Was the most charming and charismatic man on the planet
Was as intelligent and learned as a brain surgeon

then I could have sex with Kelly Brook! Yay! This is a fun game!

Here's another one for you - IF Jonny Evans hadn't been sent off in the first derby match, and IF Ferguson had started Antonio Valencia in the second derby match....well, who knows, but we can do the "If" bollocks all day long.

P.R. Jones
Oswestry


Those grapes are mighty sour!

================================================================

A word now from the lovely Emyr Davies. I've typed up a few of Emyr's letters for this blog in the past, and I always enjoy reading them. Emyr is evidently an elderly chap who uses the letters page of The Shropshire Star to describe events/adventures that have taken place in his youth, and more power to his elbow, I say. The reason why I enjoy his letters is because - bless him - they rarely make much sense. However, rather than being cruel and laughing at him, I find his letters a welcome relief from all the xenophobia, homophobia, bigotry and religious nonsense which is usually printed on these pages, and long may his pen have ink in it.

During National Service with the RAF in 1951, I was walking through Shrewsbury late in the evening when all of a sudden two Military Police (Red Caps) men (lance corporals) jumped out on me from the shadows. Fear set in for a few minutes as one Red Cap accused me of 'walking like an old farmer.'


All of a sudden two civilians in trilbies emerged. One stated: "Are these so-and-sos causing you trouble, mate?"


The Red Caps let me go. "Take care," one said.


I have often wondered were those two civilians really sergeants or colour sergeants in the Military Police or just civilians who had done National Service like me?


It's true, I stoop a little through reading a good bit, and have bought a brace to help my posture but it would be nice to see the Red Caps back on Britain's streets again! Our bobbies need help and during 1939-45 there were Army, Navy and RAF police around, plus those big American Red Caps, too, some black men with truncheons.


Slightly surprising end to that one, Emyr!

Mr Emyr Davies
Wrexham


D'aww, I love Emyr, and wish he was my Granddad. Like I said, he's a tonic when compared to all the other letters about the EU, "the immigrants", Tony Blair and the TV programme 'Crossroads'.

Of course, that last one is just me having a laugh. Nobody has ever penned a letter to The Shropshire Star about 'Crossroads', obviously, and I doubt anyone ever will.

================================================================

I feel compelled to write in reaction to Ben Bentley's review of the programme 'Unforgettable Noele Gordon.'


Unforgettable, isn't he? I thought that 'House Party' was juvenile nonsense and obviously 'Deal or No Deal' is just randomness and luck, but I do like that programme where he gives Christmas presents to sick kids. What a nice man!

Proof-reader: "That's Noel Edmonds."
Me: "So it is. Who the FRICK is Noele Gordon then?"
Proof-reader: "Dunno. Apparently she's unforgettable though."

I am angry at the disrespectful and misinformed way he described Miss Gordon's Crossroads.


Of all the things to be angry about, this is right up there.

The programme was not pantomime. The sets only wobbled in the very early days, alongside those of Coronation Street. And to say it made Neighbours look like a million-dollar Spielberg production was absolutely ridiculous.


I hope this guy signs up to Football365 Forum one day and writes stuff like this. He'll be absolutely buried in the avalanche of "He's seething!" replies he'd get.

It's true though. This guy is properly seething, or #seething if you like Twitter and hashtags and all of that nonsense.

Crossroads was at times inspiring, sometimes very moving, and a great comfort to the elderly, and those living on their own, who regarded Meg Richardson as their friend.

This is all rather odd, isn't it?

Crossroads and Noele Gordon are still missed by a great many people. How dare anyone criticise either of them?

Bob Oakley
Shrewsbury

I happen to think Crossroads was a load of ol' shite, Bobby boy. What you gonna do? You come at the King, you best not miss!

================================================================

One final letter for now, this one coming from the master of short, snappy nonsense Allan Tucker from Oswestry!

After the President of France Francois Hollande's first cabinet, we still dont know his attitude to nuclear weapons, nor to nuclear power.

Allan Tucker
Oswestry


I started compiling a list of other irrelevant things we don't know Francois Hollande's opinions on yet but I got bored after the 784th thing and so deleted it. Instead let me take this moment to phone the new French President and congratulate him on his election!

(picks up phone, presses an unnecessary amount of buttons very quickly)

President of France Francois Hollande (PoFFH): "Allo?"

Ewar: "Bonjour Monsieur Hollande! Je m'appelle votre ami Ewar!"

(I don't know French but Google Translate tells me that's right)

PoFFH: "Who?"

(I've given up on the French)

Ewar: "I know you are very busy sir but I wanted to ask you about your preference when it comes to biscuits!"

PofFH: "Who iz theeez? 'Ow did you get theeez number?"

Ewar: "I like chocolate hobnobs, particularly with a cup of tea, but I also like custard creams. You?"

PoFFH: "I do not have ze time for this inane chatter, be off with you!"

Ewar: "Alright, fine. One final thing, sorry - you don't happen to know who Noele Gordon is, do you?"

(Phone gets slammed down)

What a nice man.

Until next time bloggerheads!

So Long, Farewell

This blog post is intended to be a bit of catharsis I need to "throw out there" in order to get over last night's awful Manchester derby and the choking away of the 2011/12 Premier League title. Before I get onto all that however, I want to talk to you a little about a man called Mariano Rivera.

Mariano Rivera is a pitcher who plays for the New York Yankees. He is called a "closer" - which basically means that if the Yankees have a lead going into the final inning, it is his job to "close" the game out and stop the other team scoring a tying run - and he's been doing this job since 1995. Mariano Rivera is also very, very, very, very....(wait for it)....VERY good. If you don't like/know about baseball you'll just have to take my word on this one, but I assure you that Mariano Rivera is jaw-droppingly good and a certain Hall of Famer.

Of course, Mariano is now 42, and no man - no matter how talented - can ultimately defeat the sands of time. As good as he is, there's always the worry that Mariano is going to wake up one morning and it's gone. All gone. Here's what Baseball Prospectus 2012 says:

"He can't go on forever, of course, and like Cary Grant retiring from the screen while he still had his looks, let's hope Rivera quits before his famous cut fastball does. The only thing worse than not having him would be seeing him fail."

If I now bring this back round to Manchester United, you might begin to see where I'm going with this one. Ryan Giggs and Mariano Rivera don't have an awful lot in common, but I can't help thinking about both of them today. Whilst the latter keeps on going relentlessly, it might be about time to admit that for the former, his race is run. It isn't easy to say that, and I've written off United players before and they've proved me incredibly wrong, but I really do feel it's the case this time. For a while now we've all been thinking about what impact Giggs can have in the "big games" nowadays, but we've never had the nerve to say it out loud. He isn't the flying left-winger of yesteryear, his body isn't suited to centre midfield anymore and the past season or two he's given the ball away a staggering amount - far, far more than he ever did. Little mistakes have crept in as the clock has kept on ticking, and it's sad. It really is.

Of course, if we're going to look at the Manchester United midfield, we shouldn't stop there. A player by player analysis suddenly throws up some serious problems:

Ryan Giggs - See above.

Paul Scholes - Reserve team coach who came out of retirement (and has done brilliantly)

Darren Fletcher - Won't play again.


Paul Pogba - Gone to Juventus.

Anderson - The least reliable person ever.

Nani - Great, but inconsistent.

Antonio Valencia - Great.

Ashley Young - Unconvinced. Has talent, though.

Michael Carrick - Splits opinion, but I love him.

Ji Sung Park - Love him, but he's old now and as his legs go an incredibly important part of his game goes with them.

Tom Cleverley - Talented, but injured this season and still a kid.

And that's it. Here's football writer Iain Macintosh:

"When the biggest team on the planet is still relying on 1991's breakout player and the reserve team coach, there's a problem, isn't there?"

I'd say that Real Madrid were the biggest team on the planet, myself, but regardless of that - he's correct, and we know what...sorry, who....the problem is. But when you float the club on the stock exchange and let any Tom, Dick or Malcolm with some $ able to take over what do you expect?

This isn't a knee-jerk reaction to last night, and I understand that a football team can't win everything, every year. I'm glad that they don't, to be honest, because gosh that would be dull. I also recognise that I'm very lucky to support the team I do, particularly at a time when we've seen smaller clubs have to fold and start again, or in the case of Wimbledon just suddenly picked up and moved miles away by some businessman.

No, it's not that we won't win anything this season. It's the sense of unease around the place. That we know the manager hasn't got long left. That all the success recently has been in spite of the Glazers, not because of them. That Sir Alex is effectively fighting against the tide. That our friends across the city have overtaken us and are driving off into the distance. That - to quote any amateur historian - every empire crumbles eventually.

I don't know whether you'll blame Glazernomics for this one or not, but last night was not the game for two club legends such as Ryan Giggs and Paul Scholes to be playing in centre midfield together.

The only thing worse than not having them is seeing them fail.

The Undateables

Hallo again.

Truth be told, I'm not one for "soapboxing", especially on here. However, the title of a television programme caught my eye yesterday and it bothered me greatly, so humour me for a few minutes whilst I rant about it and ramble about other stuff that comes to mind.

The programme is called "The Undateables" and it goes out on Tuesday nights, Channel 4. Rather than explaining the concept of it to you myself, here's excerpts from 4's website about it:

"Looking for love can be tricky, but some find it harder than others. Add disability to the equation and it can sometimes seem almost impossible...from a stand-up comedian with Tourettes and a trapeze artist with brittle bones, to a media student with Down's Syndrome, an amateur poet with a learning disability, and a skateboarder with a facial disfigurement, the series follows them as they enter the world of blind dates, matchmakers and speed dating..."The Undateables" explores the realities of looking for love in an image-obsessed world, where too many people make snap judgements based on first impressions - and even consider some to be 'undateable'."


http://www.channel4.com/programmes/the-undateables/4od

The premise for the show itself isn't a bad one necessarily - it's an interesting concept, it's a programme that could be very beneficial and it's a fresh take on all these ghastly dating shows which seem to be popping up everywhere at the moment. So why that title?

Because it can't just be me, surely? It can't just be me that looks at that title and finds it offensive, ridiculous and unnecessary, and think that the advertisements for the programme: http://www.channel4.com/programmes/the-undateables/articles/the-undateables-tv-trails are also thoroughly unhelpful. You've made a programme about single, disabled people and called it "The Undateables"? You've promoted it by highlighting a man's Tourettes and a man clearly floundering in a socially awkward situation? The film "Freaks" came out in 1932 - eighty years on I thought we were past all that. There's just something so horrible about that title - so unnecessarily horrible. I'm not naive - an eye-catching title is what a show needs sometimes, but in this instance it leaves a bitter taste. Before we've even watched the programme, the tone has been set - look at these weirdos! Look at them and laugh! They're "undateable" because they're FREAKS! Funnily enough, the programme itself isn't as bad as I feared it would be, and I'll talk about it in a bit, but the worrying thing for me is how the show is marketed and how that fits in with what we see as "successful" television in this day and age.

Because quite a few shows that pull in big ratings reflect this theme, and they trouble me greatly. I watched "The X Factor" once only to be appalled by what I saw, as a panel of multi-millionaires sniggered at untalented people who have been told constantly by their families that they're talented. I used to like "Britain's Got Talent", as that had an actual point to it rather than simply "earn Simon Cowell a few more quid" but that's going the same way, albeit it doesn't have the laughably awful judge "feuds" that the former has. "I'm A Celebrity"? Isn't it HILARIOUS to see shameless celebrities looking for a route back into showbiz having to endure humiliating tasks? "Big Brother"? An interesting social experiment, the first series. I watched it. But that claim only held for so long, and we need ratings, damnit! Quick, ration their food, encourage fights, increase the bitching! Who goes? YOU decide - based on our extremely dubious editing policy of course!

The worst programme of all is "The Apprentice", a thoroughly hateful sack of shit which I plead with people not to watch every single sodding year. I will never, ever understand how there's people out there who are lapping up a programme that encourages greed, spite, selfishness, hate, blame culture, individualism, the love of money etc. yet then have the gall to complain about "the greedy bankers" who have played with your money. Next economic crisis, don't come running to me with tears in your eyes blaming "capitalism" and "the city", blaming a yuppie cunt in a sharp suit with shit for brains but a nice line in bullshit and self-delusion. Not when 10m of you sit down every Wednesday night to thoroughly enjoy the nightmare that is Thatcher's children squabbling and desperately scrambling over each other to work for a man famous for making technology which is known in the industry as "absolutely fucking shit". I once asked a friend why he watched it, and his reply was "to laugh at all the dick heads on there". Can't help feeling that the joke has worn a bit thin myself, especially when these people are then glorified on prime time television.

That mindless rant brings me back round to "The Undateables". Having been appalled at the title and the adverts, I was going to give it a wide berth, but then changed my mind - if I was going to blog about it I should at the very least watch some of the programme. As I said earlier, it wasn't as hideous as I feared, but the horribly snide "let's laugh at these people" theme still ran through it. I don't know about you, but I find first dates awful enough, never mind a) having Asperger's Syndrome and b) Them being filmed to go along with it. But that was the case here, as we watched a woman walk out on Richard, 37, on what was his first date for twenty years. Sections like this were torturous to watch, and you couldn't help thinking that the makers of this show constantly took the easy way out. Hey, why bother analysing why a perfectly normal man who happens to have Tourettes can't get a date when you can show him struggling to contain his verbal and physical ticks at the end of a long and tiring date instead?

The show did do some things well. Richard, Luke and Penny were given time on screen to show themselves to be decent people who are just a little different from "normal" folk, and the important relationships between Richard and his mother/Penny and her parents were highlighted and handled well. Yet still the uncomfortable aspects of the show lingered in the air, and as it came to an end I was left to think about the show's crass title and these questions - how many viewers watched this solely to laugh at the people involved based on how the show was marketed, and when the fuck is that attitude going to disappear from our society?