Hallo all.
At the moment I'm really quite busy. As well as other stuff, I've just started writing my thessertation (my name for this project which 50% of people say 'thesis', other 50% say 'dissertation) which is very scary and very difficult. However, I'm cracking along well, and I'm very satisfied with the 13 words I've put down so far.
What this means though is that right now I don't have an awful lot of time to ponder, research, and then write blog posts. And there was you thinking I just put down any old shit - oh no, a lot of effort goes into TRAROTL. Admittedly, 75% of that effort is from Val Duncan (who's annoyingly quiet at the moment). Nevertheless, I thought I would just throw something out there, as I'm such an awful attention-seeker.
Have you met any "famous" people? I have, and I enjoy telling Dan all about my meetings with the illuminati (not entirely sure that's the right word) often, which drives him mad. Particularly as he can only counter with "Some West Brom player handed me some exam results once." An anecdote so bad, I've honestly forgotten who it was.
Anyway, in the spirit of this thread: http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=925567 here's who I've met. I'll try and remember them all, but I know I won't.
FOOTBALL
Peter Schmeichel - alright.
Roy Keane - dickhead.
Paul Scholes - quiet.
Ruud van Nistelrooy - alright.
Kieran Richardson - flirted with my step-sister.
Ole Gunnar Solskjaer - a true gent.
John Hollins - nice.
Gary Stevens - okay, bit surly, but then I did interrupt him having lunch with his son so forgiven.
GOLF
Rory McIlroy - top, top fella.
Colin Montgomerie - as you'd expect. Let's just say that.
Thomas Bjorn - bit surly, but managed to sign an autograph whilst carrying a golfbag and smoking, which impressed me.
Darren Clarke - physically imposing.
Paul McGinley - legend.
Paul Lawrie - bit miserable.
DARTS
Adrian Lewis - top, top fella. Called me "ducky".
Gary Anderson - top, top fella. Legend.
Phil Taylor - alright. No more, no less.
Raymond van Barneveld - dickhead.
Tony O'Shea - top fella.
Alan Warriner-Little - nice man.
Gary Mason - alright, but scary. You may want to wiki him to find out why I was shitting myself a bit meeting him.
Steve Beaton - a gent.
Kirk Shephard - surprisingly nice.
Mervyn King - alright.
Colin Lloyd - top fella.
ASSORTED OTHERS
Will Greenwood - legend.
Helen Chamberlain - lovely, lovely, lovely.
Nicholas Parsons - utter dickhead. I literally hate him.
Matt Smith (from ITV Sport, not Dr Who) - alright.
Tino Martinez - far too good looking.
I can't remember any more. Ever met a celebrity? Leave a comment if so!
Thursday, 3 March 2011
Wednesday, 23 February 2011
A Musical Interlude
I don't know about you, but sometimes I hear a piece of music - normally on an advert - and think "Blimey, I KNOW that....but I don't know what it's called, or who it's by." This is, naturally, a bit frustrating. Most of the time, for me, it's classical music, as I wouldn't know my Ludwig van Beethoven from my Ludwig Wittgenstein.
So, I thought I would try and remedy this - to try and expand my musical library a little. After doing a lot of Shazaming (ignore that if you don't have an iPhone), a bit of digging, a bit of Googling and Youtubing, I found quite a few of these pieces that had annoyed me for years, and bookmarked them. However, as I have nothing else to blog about, I thought I'd share them with you all.
If you're a nerd like Dan, chances are you'll look at all of these videos and think "Well, I knew that." Well, bully for you, but I didn't, and it may be that others don't either. If I've helped out one reader by doing this, I'll be delighted. And if you don't recognise any of these at all (I'd be surprised) then don't despair - Val Duncan will write another stupid letter soon and I'll go back to my usual bloggyness.
Until then however, let's have some music!
Good luck getting that last one out of your head!
So, I thought I would try and remedy this - to try and expand my musical library a little. After doing a lot of Shazaming (ignore that if you don't have an iPhone), a bit of digging, a bit of Googling and Youtubing, I found quite a few of these pieces that had annoyed me for years, and bookmarked them. However, as I have nothing else to blog about, I thought I'd share them with you all.
If you're a nerd like Dan, chances are you'll look at all of these videos and think "Well, I knew that." Well, bully for you, but I didn't, and it may be that others don't either. If I've helped out one reader by doing this, I'll be delighted. And if you don't recognise any of these at all (I'd be surprised) then don't despair - Val Duncan will write another stupid letter soon and I'll go back to my usual bloggyness.
Until then however, let's have some music!
Good luck getting that last one out of your head!
Wednesday, 16 February 2011
The Curious Case of Justin Bieber
Hello again. Thanks for coming back!
The other day I was reading a magazine and eating a piece of pork pie (without piccalilli, sadly) when my eyes fell on something I found fascinating. It was this simple sentence: "The most Googled person in the world is Justin Bieber."
I slowly put down my heavenly piece of pastry and meat, and pondered something. You see, I had absolutely no fucking idea what Justin Bieber is all about.
I'm serious. Oh, I know WHO he is. I'd recognise him if he walked past me in the street - although I wouldn't give a toss - but I had no bally clue as to what he calls his profession. Film star? Singer? Nickelodeon child sensation? Comedian? Nobel Prize winner? Usually, this wouldn't bother me. Even though I'm "only" 24, I fully understand and appreciate that modern culture is whizzing past me at a rate. I'm very comfortable not knowing what a Miley Cyrus is, or who The Wanted are, or what exactly the point of Lady GaGa is. But Bieber bothered me, because to be the most Googled person on the planet you surely have to have something about you. Right?
So, I decided to go delving, and put my findings on here to a) show everyone how in touch I am, and b) to hopefully help you out if you're stuck with a Bieber fan (called a "Belieber" I believe).
I started, like every student would, with Wikipedia. The oracle of truth told me that Justin Drew Bieber was born in Ontario, Canada in March 1994. He put up videos of himself on video website Youtube, where he was spotted by a chap called Scooter Braun who quickly became his manager. Justin Bieber is now classed as a "pop-R&B singer". So I then decided to listen to some of his songs.
I loaded up "Baby" - which Wiki tells me is his most famous song on the hit parade - on Youtube, to find it's been watched over 463 MILLION times. Just think about that for a moment. The record is featuring someone called "Ludacris", who clearly has a problem with spelling. Sadly, I have a problem with the song, as (perhaps predictably) it is dreadfully shit. I then gave "One Time" (217 million views) a whirl. It isn't much better.
Judging by those two songs, Bieber is standard "teeny bopper" fare - he's a rosy cheeked little scamp that girls love, his songs are shallow and un-intelligent and he peddles out "love" songs even though he does not understand the true meaning of the word. The reception he receives from his female audience is not unusual - the world has seen it with the Osmonds, David Cassidy, David Essex, a young Michael Jackson and so on. But "Bieber Fever" seems so much more prominent, so much more aggressive and even disturbing. Lily Allen once had a laugh about him on her Twitter page, which meant that when it became public that she had lost her baby, a few "Beliebers" felt the need to repay the compliment in a slightly unacceptable manner.
What's the deal with this kid? I'm not too sure, but I have a theory. As mentioned at the start, Bieber is essentially where he is because of the internet. In the days of David Cassidy for example, girls went hysterical over him, but there was no place for them to pour out their emotions. They could have his poster on his wall, they could tell their friends on the playground, they could go to his concerts. That was about it. With Bieber, these nuts now have a way to express their (crazy) feelings - it's all the Bieber nonsense on Twitter, it's Facebook, it's all the fan websites, it's the reason for the 'most Googled' crown. Why do "hardcore" Bieber fans get unbelievably precious, aggressive and hostile? It's because they seemingly think they are "his biggest fan", and they must do/say things which reflect this. Death threats to Selena Gomez? She happens to know Bieber - this cannot continue!
Away from Bieber, there is a bigger link here - that of the cult of the celebrity. When I see people reading magazines such as "OK" and "Hello" I feel a wave of anger, followed by a bigger wave of sorrow and depression. Let's take a look at Digitalspy's front page - for this website, these things count as news:
"Bleakley 'turned down Brits invite'"
"Agron: 'Nicks visit makes Glee cast cry'"
"Neeson: 'I ran away from Richardson death'"
"Emma Watson 'growing hair for career'"
and so on. That last one is particularly galling - the idea that the length of Emma Watson's hair is anything to do with anyone on the planet except herself is just really, really sad. And you can ignore it, but you know full well in the next issue of "Heat" there'll be paparazzi pictures of Watson sporting slightly longer hair, and probably a "celebrity stylist" analysing the look and declaring judgement on it.
I love Twitter. Honestly, I think it's fucking great, but the downside to it is how it does allow people to indulge in all this celebrity nonsense. Francesca "Frankie" Sandford is a member of girl band The Saturdays (who I like, I'll admit) and I'm currently perusing the recent tweets that others have sent her. It's a bit depressing, and awfully needy. There's loads of tweets asking her to follow this random person back (she won't, understandably), a few from blokes telling her they love her, a few asking her to add them on their BlackBerry (seriously), one saying "I think I'd die if you replied to me Frankie!!" (you wouldn't, grow up) and one saying "the things I would do to meet Frankie". I have no problem with anyone tweeting/replying her, or any other "famous" person, but it really should be something worthwhile*. I daren't look at people's tweets to Bieber.
I've written more than I intended to and I'm as bored as you are, so let's wrap it up. Do I feel sorry for Justin Bieber? In a way, I do. Yes, he has money and fame etc, but I imagine his life to be one enormous pressure cooker, and I think it's unfair to heap all of this bullshit on him when he's 16. He goes along with it, of course, because I'm sure it beats going to school and being "ordinary" - and men in suits force him to go along with it, but in the long run I think it's extremely dangerous. Earlier on I mentioned how his songs are shallow - I think it's because he hasn't had a life. All the time that "Bieber fever" rages, he never will.
* I'm conveniently forgetting the projects that Dan and I run on Twitter every summer when I say that.
The other day I was reading a magazine and eating a piece of pork pie (without piccalilli, sadly) when my eyes fell on something I found fascinating. It was this simple sentence: "The most Googled person in the world is Justin Bieber."
I slowly put down my heavenly piece of pastry and meat, and pondered something. You see, I had absolutely no fucking idea what Justin Bieber is all about.
I'm serious. Oh, I know WHO he is. I'd recognise him if he walked past me in the street - although I wouldn't give a toss - but I had no bally clue as to what he calls his profession. Film star? Singer? Nickelodeon child sensation? Comedian? Nobel Prize winner? Usually, this wouldn't bother me. Even though I'm "only" 24, I fully understand and appreciate that modern culture is whizzing past me at a rate. I'm very comfortable not knowing what a Miley Cyrus is, or who The Wanted are, or what exactly the point of Lady GaGa is. But Bieber bothered me, because to be the most Googled person on the planet you surely have to have something about you. Right?
So, I decided to go delving, and put my findings on here to a) show everyone how in touch I am, and b) to hopefully help you out if you're stuck with a Bieber fan (called a "Belieber" I believe).
I started, like every student would, with Wikipedia. The oracle of truth told me that Justin Drew Bieber was born in Ontario, Canada in March 1994. He put up videos of himself on video website Youtube, where he was spotted by a chap called Scooter Braun who quickly became his manager. Justin Bieber is now classed as a "pop-R&B singer". So I then decided to listen to some of his songs.
I loaded up "Baby" - which Wiki tells me is his most famous song on the hit parade - on Youtube, to find it's been watched over 463 MILLION times. Just think about that for a moment. The record is featuring someone called "Ludacris", who clearly has a problem with spelling. Sadly, I have a problem with the song, as (perhaps predictably) it is dreadfully shit. I then gave "One Time" (217 million views) a whirl. It isn't much better.
Judging by those two songs, Bieber is standard "teeny bopper" fare - he's a rosy cheeked little scamp that girls love, his songs are shallow and un-intelligent and he peddles out "love" songs even though he does not understand the true meaning of the word. The reception he receives from his female audience is not unusual - the world has seen it with the Osmonds, David Cassidy, David Essex, a young Michael Jackson and so on. But "Bieber Fever" seems so much more prominent, so much more aggressive and even disturbing. Lily Allen once had a laugh about him on her Twitter page, which meant that when it became public that she had lost her baby, a few "Beliebers" felt the need to repay the compliment in a slightly unacceptable manner.
What's the deal with this kid? I'm not too sure, but I have a theory. As mentioned at the start, Bieber is essentially where he is because of the internet. In the days of David Cassidy for example, girls went hysterical over him, but there was no place for them to pour out their emotions. They could have his poster on his wall, they could tell their friends on the playground, they could go to his concerts. That was about it. With Bieber, these nuts now have a way to express their (crazy) feelings - it's all the Bieber nonsense on Twitter, it's Facebook, it's all the fan websites, it's the reason for the 'most Googled' crown. Why do "hardcore" Bieber fans get unbelievably precious, aggressive and hostile? It's because they seemingly think they are "his biggest fan", and they must do/say things which reflect this. Death threats to Selena Gomez? She happens to know Bieber - this cannot continue!
Away from Bieber, there is a bigger link here - that of the cult of the celebrity. When I see people reading magazines such as "OK" and "Hello" I feel a wave of anger, followed by a bigger wave of sorrow and depression. Let's take a look at Digitalspy's front page - for this website, these things count as news:
"Bleakley 'turned down Brits invite'"
"Agron: 'Nicks visit makes Glee cast cry'"
"Neeson: 'I ran away from Richardson death'"
"Emma Watson 'growing hair for career'"
and so on. That last one is particularly galling - the idea that the length of Emma Watson's hair is anything to do with anyone on the planet except herself is just really, really sad. And you can ignore it, but you know full well in the next issue of "Heat" there'll be paparazzi pictures of Watson sporting slightly longer hair, and probably a "celebrity stylist" analysing the look and declaring judgement on it.
I love Twitter. Honestly, I think it's fucking great, but the downside to it is how it does allow people to indulge in all this celebrity nonsense. Francesca "Frankie" Sandford is a member of girl band The Saturdays (who I like, I'll admit) and I'm currently perusing the recent tweets that others have sent her. It's a bit depressing, and awfully needy. There's loads of tweets asking her to follow this random person back (she won't, understandably), a few from blokes telling her they love her, a few asking her to add them on their BlackBerry (seriously), one saying "I think I'd die if you replied to me Frankie!!" (you wouldn't, grow up) and one saying "the things I would do to meet Frankie". I have no problem with anyone tweeting/replying her, or any other "famous" person, but it really should be something worthwhile*. I daren't look at people's tweets to Bieber.
I've written more than I intended to and I'm as bored as you are, so let's wrap it up. Do I feel sorry for Justin Bieber? In a way, I do. Yes, he has money and fame etc, but I imagine his life to be one enormous pressure cooker, and I think it's unfair to heap all of this bullshit on him when he's 16. He goes along with it, of course, because I'm sure it beats going to school and being "ordinary" - and men in suits force him to go along with it, but in the long run I think it's extremely dangerous. Earlier on I mentioned how his songs are shallow - I think it's because he hasn't had a life. All the time that "Bieber fever" rages, he never will.
* I'm conveniently forgetting the projects that Dan and I run on Twitter every summer when I say that.
Thursday, 10 February 2011
Insanity
Apologies for two blog posts in a row about letters in my local paper - next blog post might be about Justin Bieber!!!! - but I just cannot ignore these two letters. Quite simply, friends, I think it's fair to say we've hit the jackpot. These two letters contain a level of sheer unbelievableness not seen since my old friend J Wendy Slark, (whatever happened to Slarkie? She disappeared altogether. I'm worried - it has been a particularly cold winter) and I know you'll love them.
I'll start with the slightly less offensive one.
With reference to letters claiming there is no evidence that bringing back the death penalty stops murders.
Those letters would be correct. The other day I found this site: http://www.tdcj.state.tx.us/stat/executedoffenders.htm
which makes for sobering reading. It's a list of people executed in Texas, and along with their information it lists their Last Statement. Have a quick look at that site - it's absolutely incredible, if that's the right word.
The thing that really jumps out at me however on that site is the length of the list - over 450 names, the first being in 1982, the last a few months ago. The last being a murderer, by the way. Death penalty stops murders happening? Hell, not in Texas.
It is a sure fact that when the murderer is sentenced to the death penalty they cannot come out and commit another crime. This is not revenge, it's justice.
Oh, aren't you funny. And witty. For anyone wanting to be a humourist, let be break this sentence down for you:
"Death penalty means they're dead, innit? Can't murder anyone then can they, because they've been murdered themselves LMAO."
I abhor the death penalty. If it did come back - and it might under this Government, y'know - I'll be on the first flight out of here. Not because I'd be particularly worried about my welfare (I'm not scheduled to murder anyone for a while, bar Val Duncan) but because I think it's appalling, hypocritical, misguided, barbaric and has the potential to cause all manner of problems. I present my case a bit more eloquently here: http://theriseandriseoftimlovejoy.blogspot.com/2010/08/green-mile.html
In that blog post I admit how terrified I am at the prospect of there being a referendum on the Death Penalty. Thick cunts like you, GM Phillips from Ironbridge, fuel my fear.
Staggeringly, out of the two letters I'm putting up here for you to read, that one is the least offensive. This next one is....well, it's the motherload.
The writer of the letter "Victory for Gay Rights" should hang his/her head in shame. Just because the law now says homosexuality is accepted, the reality is that it is man's law. But when compared to God's law (which never changes) it is still wrong.
I think I've read that paragraph six times now. I still can't quite believe it.
It is clear man is exchanging truth for a lie. If this were not so, then why would the following verses be included in the Bible?
The Bible is a bucketload of shit, okay?
According to the Bible it is a sin to:
Get a divorce
Have sex before marriage
Accuse someone
Be angry
Feel anxious
Have an argument
Show arrogance
Complain
Drink
Be disobedient
And, of course, to be homosexual.
If we're taking the Bible verbatim, we're ALL fucked.
"Because of this, God gave them over to sinful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnat...
Actually, you know what?
I'm not even going to type out the rest of the quote. I do not care. If you desperately want to read it, apparently it's Romans 1:26-27, although in the index you'll find it under "more shit".
Name and address supplied says if there is a God, he would love everyone.
I find discussions and opinions about God so futile and unnecessary. Is there a God? I don't know, neither do you. There is no evidence to suggest there is, there's no evidence to prove there isn't. Whatever you think about God, whatever your religion, I wish people would just shut up and go about their lives in a nice, positive manner regardless. And if you really need a 'holy' old book to tell you what's right or wrong, then sort yourself out.
I just wonder how mankind could fulfil God's command to procreate if it were not through man and woman?
This is all just too little. It is too clumsy, too futile, too unintelligent, too insane to even comment on. It is also the end of the letter.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_animals_displaying_homosexual_behavior apologies for the wiki link, but that page is interesting reading. Some people are gay. Some animals are gay. Get the fuck over it.
Congratulations Trevor Mytton from Shrewsbury. You've made the list.
I'll start with the slightly less offensive one.
With reference to letters claiming there is no evidence that bringing back the death penalty stops murders.
Those letters would be correct. The other day I found this site: http://www.tdcj.state.tx.us/stat/executedoffenders.htm
which makes for sobering reading. It's a list of people executed in Texas, and along with their information it lists their Last Statement. Have a quick look at that site - it's absolutely incredible, if that's the right word.
The thing that really jumps out at me however on that site is the length of the list - over 450 names, the first being in 1982, the last a few months ago. The last being a murderer, by the way. Death penalty stops murders happening? Hell, not in Texas.
It is a sure fact that when the murderer is sentenced to the death penalty they cannot come out and commit another crime. This is not revenge, it's justice.
Oh, aren't you funny. And witty. For anyone wanting to be a humourist, let be break this sentence down for you:
"Death penalty means they're dead, innit? Can't murder anyone then can they, because they've been murdered themselves LMAO."
I abhor the death penalty. If it did come back - and it might under this Government, y'know - I'll be on the first flight out of here. Not because I'd be particularly worried about my welfare (I'm not scheduled to murder anyone for a while, bar Val Duncan) but because I think it's appalling, hypocritical, misguided, barbaric and has the potential to cause all manner of problems. I present my case a bit more eloquently here: http://theriseandriseoftimlovejoy.blogspot.com/2010/08/green-mile.html
In that blog post I admit how terrified I am at the prospect of there being a referendum on the Death Penalty. Thick cunts like you, GM Phillips from Ironbridge, fuel my fear.
Staggeringly, out of the two letters I'm putting up here for you to read, that one is the least offensive. This next one is....well, it's the motherload.
The writer of the letter "Victory for Gay Rights" should hang his/her head in shame. Just because the law now says homosexuality is accepted, the reality is that it is man's law. But when compared to God's law (which never changes) it is still wrong.
I think I've read that paragraph six times now. I still can't quite believe it.
It is clear man is exchanging truth for a lie. If this were not so, then why would the following verses be included in the Bible?
The Bible is a bucketload of shit, okay?
According to the Bible it is a sin to:
Get a divorce
Have sex before marriage
Accuse someone
Be angry
Feel anxious
Have an argument
Show arrogance
Complain
Drink
Be disobedient
And, of course, to be homosexual.
If we're taking the Bible verbatim, we're ALL fucked.
"Because of this, God gave them over to sinful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnat...
Actually, you know what?
I'm not even going to type out the rest of the quote. I do not care. If you desperately want to read it, apparently it's Romans 1:26-27, although in the index you'll find it under "more shit".
Name and address supplied says if there is a God, he would love everyone.
I find discussions and opinions about God so futile and unnecessary. Is there a God? I don't know, neither do you. There is no evidence to suggest there is, there's no evidence to prove there isn't. Whatever you think about God, whatever your religion, I wish people would just shut up and go about their lives in a nice, positive manner regardless. And if you really need a 'holy' old book to tell you what's right or wrong, then sort yourself out.
I just wonder how mankind could fulfil God's command to procreate if it were not through man and woman?
This is all just too little. It is too clumsy, too futile, too unintelligent, too insane to even comment on. It is also the end of the letter.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_animals_displaying_homosexual_behavior apologies for the wiki link, but that page is interesting reading. Some people are gay. Some animals are gay. Get the fuck over it.
Congratulations Trevor Mytton from Shrewsbury. You've made the list.
Friday, 4 February 2011
Valedictorian Duncan
It's Val Duncan. It's The Shropshire Star's letter page. You know the drill as well as I do.
Tony Blair
Bliar. Remember, the man lies about everything. I actually bumped into him the other day, nice man. I asked him what he got for Christmas. He told me some nice socks, but after he had walked into the cafe, Cherie told me it was actually boxer shorts. The crazy fucker just can't help himself!
was once quoted as saying it was a shame the UK was so small.
He was lying.
Obviously we didn't fit his vainglorious idea of being the big statesman on the world stage.
This is all just so depressing. I'm not Tony Blair's biggest fan, but whether you like him or not, he is yesterday's news. There are so many things to talk about at the moment - Egypt, the future of universities, the coalition, cricket spot-fixing, financial problems, Manchester United sweeping their way to a 19th league title, Korea. There is so much to discuss, with Tony Blair involved in precisely none of them.
Nevertheless, this is Val Duncan we're dealing with here. We have to be careful - she can wrong foot us at any given moment. Let's be on our guard.
We once had high standing because we had pride and achievements that far outclassed our land mass, but Blair couldn't see that. He gave away our pride and achievements, our history and our ancient laws and liberties for the dream of playing a bit part in Brussels and he came unstuck.
Yes, did you hear about this? Tony Blair gave our history away a few years back. I noticed it when I browsed a textbook in my brother's classroom the other day - apparently Winston Churchill didn't exist, and the Battle of "Britain" (remember Britain? Lol.) is now the Battle of Myanmar.
Bill Shakespeare is now Swedish, and wrote most of his work in the very first IKEA store, apparently. It's all fascinating stuff.
He took an independent country that gave the world some of the greatest inventions known to man and turned it into an over-populated, bankrupt island tagged on to the bottom end of Europe.
Yeah, that's something I noticed in a geography book - we're now at the bottom of Europe.
I get the feeling that you're a bit cynical about this, so let me just photocopy the map that was in the book and then find a way to pop it up on here. You'll be shocked....hang on, just copying it over....
Didn't believe me, did you?
With his bloated ego and lack of intelligence Blair couldn't see that he had thrown away a chance to stand with the greatest statesmen of all time by representing one of the most unique islands on the planet.
I hate this (bloated) sentence for two reasons. Firstly - whatever you think of him, Blair does stand as one of the greatest statesmen of all time. No, really, he does - and that isn't based on opinion. The simple fact is he can justifiably claim that based on three things:
1) He was Prime Minister of an important and storied nation.
2) He won 3 General Elections, which makes him tied-2nd in the all-time list in G.E. wins.
3) He served for 10 consecutive years, putting him 6th in the all-time list in that regard.
(Mind you, I'm getting my info from Wikipedia, so I may be wrong there. Walpole probably only hanged around five minutes.)
Secondly, I hate the bit about Britain being "one of the most unique islands on the planet". Maybe I'm over-analysing this, but surely, by their very nature, every fucking country is unique? Australia is not Swaziland, and Sweden is not Chile. No two countries/islands/places are the same. Perhaps similar, but never the same.
Am I over-analysing? Let me know if I am. I have better things to do then get annoyed at this idiot, and better uses of my time.
We gave the world police, underground trains, public parks, the jet engine, the internet, the light-bulb, the computer, radar, powered flight and a host of other things.
Britain gave the world lots of great things, I have to agree. As I'm generous, I'm ignoring that the first public park was in Seville, the first police force was created by Louis XIV in France, and the origins of the internet are debatable and complicated, though I take the Berners-Lee point.
Now Cameron, Clegg and Miliband are more Blair clones who can't see what they truly represent. They are selling us into political obscurity. They see no further than their own egos and they throw away the greatness within their grasp. There is nothing as sad and dangerous as an ego the size of an elephant, resting on the shoulders of weak politicians.
End of letter. You're wrong, Val. I'd wager there's elderly people out there who lap up every single letter you write - who believe it, because you say so, and so does The Daily Express.
Joseph Goebbels was good at what you do, and he summed it up nicely: "If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it."
Now that's sad and dangerous, Val.
Tony Blair
Bliar. Remember, the man lies about everything. I actually bumped into him the other day, nice man. I asked him what he got for Christmas. He told me some nice socks, but after he had walked into the cafe, Cherie told me it was actually boxer shorts. The crazy fucker just can't help himself!
was once quoted as saying it was a shame the UK was so small.
He was lying.
Obviously we didn't fit his vainglorious idea of being the big statesman on the world stage.
This is all just so depressing. I'm not Tony Blair's biggest fan, but whether you like him or not, he is yesterday's news. There are so many things to talk about at the moment - Egypt, the future of universities, the coalition, cricket spot-fixing, financial problems, Manchester United sweeping their way to a 19th league title, Korea. There is so much to discuss, with Tony Blair involved in precisely none of them.
Nevertheless, this is Val Duncan we're dealing with here. We have to be careful - she can wrong foot us at any given moment. Let's be on our guard.
We once had high standing because we had pride and achievements that far outclassed our land mass, but Blair couldn't see that. He gave away our pride and achievements, our history and our ancient laws and liberties for the dream of playing a bit part in Brussels and he came unstuck.
Yes, did you hear about this? Tony Blair gave our history away a few years back. I noticed it when I browsed a textbook in my brother's classroom the other day - apparently Winston Churchill didn't exist, and the Battle of "Britain" (remember Britain? Lol.) is now the Battle of Myanmar.
Bill Shakespeare is now Swedish, and wrote most of his work in the very first IKEA store, apparently. It's all fascinating stuff.
He took an independent country that gave the world some of the greatest inventions known to man and turned it into an over-populated, bankrupt island tagged on to the bottom end of Europe.
Yeah, that's something I noticed in a geography book - we're now at the bottom of Europe.
I get the feeling that you're a bit cynical about this, so let me just photocopy the map that was in the book and then find a way to pop it up on here. You'll be shocked....hang on, just copying it over....
Didn't believe me, did you?
With his bloated ego and lack of intelligence Blair couldn't see that he had thrown away a chance to stand with the greatest statesmen of all time by representing one of the most unique islands on the planet.
I hate this (bloated) sentence for two reasons. Firstly - whatever you think of him, Blair does stand as one of the greatest statesmen of all time. No, really, he does - and that isn't based on opinion. The simple fact is he can justifiably claim that based on three things:
1) He was Prime Minister of an important and storied nation.
2) He won 3 General Elections, which makes him tied-2nd in the all-time list in G.E. wins.
3) He served for 10 consecutive years, putting him 6th in the all-time list in that regard.
(Mind you, I'm getting my info from Wikipedia, so I may be wrong there. Walpole probably only hanged around five minutes.)
Secondly, I hate the bit about Britain being "one of the most unique islands on the planet". Maybe I'm over-analysing this, but surely, by their very nature, every fucking country is unique? Australia is not Swaziland, and Sweden is not Chile. No two countries/islands/places are the same. Perhaps similar, but never the same.
Am I over-analysing? Let me know if I am. I have better things to do then get annoyed at this idiot, and better uses of my time.
We gave the world police, underground trains, public parks, the jet engine, the internet, the light-bulb, the computer, radar, powered flight and a host of other things.
Britain gave the world lots of great things, I have to agree. As I'm generous, I'm ignoring that the first public park was in Seville, the first police force was created by Louis XIV in France, and the origins of the internet are debatable and complicated, though I take the Berners-Lee point.
Now Cameron, Clegg and Miliband are more Blair clones who can't see what they truly represent. They are selling us into political obscurity. They see no further than their own egos and they throw away the greatness within their grasp. There is nothing as sad and dangerous as an ego the size of an elephant, resting on the shoulders of weak politicians.
End of letter. You're wrong, Val. I'd wager there's elderly people out there who lap up every single letter you write - who believe it, because you say so, and so does The Daily Express.
Joseph Goebbels was good at what you do, and he summed it up nicely: "If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it."
Now that's sad and dangerous, Val.
Tuesday, 25 January 2011
Gray Keys
14:53 Hello all. I have come to the university library, with the aim of doing thesis research and meeting at least three different lecturers. Which is why I'm now going to do a blog entry about Richard Keys and Andy Gray - at least, I am, after I've gone and got some lunch. I am starving. "Brb!" as the kids would say...
15:15 Chicken baguette and Lucozade orange. "Brb!"
15:29 So, where we we? Ah yes.
By now I assume you've all read/heard about this - Sky Sports presenter Richard Keys and his cohort (and former footballer) Andy Gray were caught on tape, before a game they were broadcasting, saying derogatory things about a woman called Sian Massey who was an official that day. Since the initial stuff however there's been some more fuel added to the flames, with more comments from Gray and a dash from resident prick Andy Burton:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/competitions/premier-league/8281056/Andy-Burton-dropped-by-Sky-Sports-over-Sian-Massey-conversation-with-Andy-Gray.html
I have mixed feelings about all of this, so let's tackle the initial comments first of all.
The Premier League is massive. It's awash with multi-millionaire players and managers, multi-billionaire chairmen, huge egos, huge clubs, huge stadiums and huge profits, all of which is nicely stirred together by Sky and all their power and money to create a monolith which has suppressed the rest of English football for 20 years. With this in mind, the idea that an official - in this case Sian Massey - would be chosen to run the line in a Premier League match without knowing the offside rule is worse than stupid. It's mindless, moronic nonsense which underlines just how much of a "big boys club" football still is, and it's a direct insult to her and her profession. Before I carry on however, BREAKING NEWS!
16:23 News come through that Andy Gray has been sacked. Blimey. More on that a bit later once I've had time to get my head around it.
Anyway, yes. The comments made by Keys and Gray absolutely stink - not just because of how unbelievably misguided they are, but because they are a representation of the prevailing attitudes that sadly still exist in football. Take homosexuality, for example. It's almost impossible to say how many homosexual men there are in England, but I think we can safely say that statistically, there should be at least 1 homosexual out of all the footballers who play in the Football League. Yet there isn't. Not a single openly gay footballer, and the only one I can think of who did "come out", Justin Fashanu, killed himself a few years later due to the prejudice that was destroying his life. There is no openly gay footballer currently in the Football League, presumably because they are terrified about how fellow players and fans would react. I don't blame them.
But the other comments that have surfaced today, from Gray and touchline reporter Andy Burton, I feel are different. You can see them in the link above, but the summary is essentially this:
Andy Burton: "Female linesman today, bit of a looker according to Steve the cameraman. He says she's alright...not sure I trust his judgement though."
Andy Gray: "No I wouldn't."
Crew Member: "Female assistant Andy - any good?"
Andy Gray: "Nah. I can see her from here."
As much as I hate Andy Burton (and I do) and as deplorable as Gray's previous comments were, I struggle to feel any anger or fury over this interchange whatsoever. In this instance, neither are attacking the woman in regards to her job, instead it's a general comment about attractiveness which 99% of blokes indulge in. I want to share with you all now a private conversation my friend Dan (Hi Dan! *waves*) and I had last night. I'm going to set it out just below here, in full, without any edit, and then I'll discuss it after:
Dan: "Pretty German girl in our class *swoons* i'd smash her wall etc"
Me: "Ask her if you can put your frankfurter in her Munich tunnel."
Dan: "Just made me snortlol on the bus. Not that the idea is laughable though. Not with me on the case"
Me: "It is laughable. More like a cocktail sausage isn't it?"
Dan: "Nein."
Me: "Nein mm? Sounds about right."
Ignore all the clichéd and stereotypical penis banter (a phrase I thought I'd never write) towards the end, and focus on the stuff at the beginning. Is that wrong? Is it wrong for Dan and I to make a few "Carry On" esque comments just for cheap laughs? I don't know - maybe it is, but I bet we're not the only blokes on the planet who say stuff like that in private. In fact, I know we're not - because Andy Gray and Andy Burton have displayed similar tendencies as shown above. As much as I hate Burton, I'm surprised he's been suspended, and almost feel a tad sorry for him.
Gray hasn't been suspended, he's been sacked, and since that breaking news we've since found out that his dismissal is the result not just re. Sian Massey, but also an incident last December involving colleague Charlotte Jackson.
Good. It's time football emerged from the dark ages, a time Andy Gray still dwells in. I believe Richard Keys will be going too, and again I fully endorse that decision. Get in James Richardson, or Mark Bolton, or Ben Shepherd, get in a young and enthusiastic co-commentator, and try and kick-start a new era for Sky Sports football coverage. Try and kick-start a less prejudiced game. It helps to start at the top.
18:25 Right, time to do some thesis research. Just after I go and get some dinner...
15:15 Chicken baguette and Lucozade orange. "Brb!"
15:29 So, where we we? Ah yes.
By now I assume you've all read/heard about this - Sky Sports presenter Richard Keys and his cohort (and former footballer) Andy Gray were caught on tape, before a game they were broadcasting, saying derogatory things about a woman called Sian Massey who was an official that day. Since the initial stuff however there's been some more fuel added to the flames, with more comments from Gray and a dash from resident prick Andy Burton:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/competitions/premier-league/8281056/Andy-Burton-dropped-by-Sky-Sports-over-Sian-Massey-conversation-with-Andy-Gray.html
I have mixed feelings about all of this, so let's tackle the initial comments first of all.
The Premier League is massive. It's awash with multi-millionaire players and managers, multi-billionaire chairmen, huge egos, huge clubs, huge stadiums and huge profits, all of which is nicely stirred together by Sky and all their power and money to create a monolith which has suppressed the rest of English football for 20 years. With this in mind, the idea that an official - in this case Sian Massey - would be chosen to run the line in a Premier League match without knowing the offside rule is worse than stupid. It's mindless, moronic nonsense which underlines just how much of a "big boys club" football still is, and it's a direct insult to her and her profession. Before I carry on however, BREAKING NEWS!
16:23 News come through that Andy Gray has been sacked. Blimey. More on that a bit later once I've had time to get my head around it.
Anyway, yes. The comments made by Keys and Gray absolutely stink - not just because of how unbelievably misguided they are, but because they are a representation of the prevailing attitudes that sadly still exist in football. Take homosexuality, for example. It's almost impossible to say how many homosexual men there are in England, but I think we can safely say that statistically, there should be at least 1 homosexual out of all the footballers who play in the Football League. Yet there isn't. Not a single openly gay footballer, and the only one I can think of who did "come out", Justin Fashanu, killed himself a few years later due to the prejudice that was destroying his life. There is no openly gay footballer currently in the Football League, presumably because they are terrified about how fellow players and fans would react. I don't blame them.
But the other comments that have surfaced today, from Gray and touchline reporter Andy Burton, I feel are different. You can see them in the link above, but the summary is essentially this:
Andy Burton: "Female linesman today, bit of a looker according to Steve the cameraman. He says she's alright...not sure I trust his judgement though."
Andy Gray: "No I wouldn't."
Crew Member: "Female assistant Andy - any good?"
Andy Gray: "Nah. I can see her from here."
As much as I hate Andy Burton (and I do) and as deplorable as Gray's previous comments were, I struggle to feel any anger or fury over this interchange whatsoever. In this instance, neither are attacking the woman in regards to her job, instead it's a general comment about attractiveness which 99% of blokes indulge in. I want to share with you all now a private conversation my friend Dan (Hi Dan! *waves*) and I had last night. I'm going to set it out just below here, in full, without any edit, and then I'll discuss it after:
Dan: "Pretty German girl in our class *swoons* i'd smash her wall etc"
Me: "Ask her if you can put your frankfurter in her Munich tunnel."
Dan: "Just made me snortlol on the bus. Not that the idea is laughable though. Not with me on the case"
Me: "It is laughable. More like a cocktail sausage isn't it?"
Dan: "Nein."
Me: "Nein mm? Sounds about right."
Ignore all the clichéd and stereotypical penis banter (a phrase I thought I'd never write) towards the end, and focus on the stuff at the beginning. Is that wrong? Is it wrong for Dan and I to make a few "Carry On" esque comments just for cheap laughs? I don't know - maybe it is, but I bet we're not the only blokes on the planet who say stuff like that in private. In fact, I know we're not - because Andy Gray and Andy Burton have displayed similar tendencies as shown above. As much as I hate Burton, I'm surprised he's been suspended, and almost feel a tad sorry for him.
Gray hasn't been suspended, he's been sacked, and since that breaking news we've since found out that his dismissal is the result not just re. Sian Massey, but also an incident last December involving colleague Charlotte Jackson.
Good. It's time football emerged from the dark ages, a time Andy Gray still dwells in. I believe Richard Keys will be going too, and again I fully endorse that decision. Get in James Richardson, or Mark Bolton, or Ben Shepherd, get in a young and enthusiastic co-commentator, and try and kick-start a new era for Sky Sports football coverage. Try and kick-start a less prejudiced game. It helps to start at the top.
18:25 Right, time to do some thesis research. Just after I go and get some dinner...
Friday, 21 January 2011
Football - Bloody Hell
Everything you are about to read is true, which is what makes this so bloody wonderful and brilliant. It's my favourite football story of all time, and to be honest I can't believe I've not put it up on here before. I will now try and explain it as clearly as I can, although it's not easy. Turn off your music, stop eating, and read carefully...
It is the Shell Caribbean Cup, and it is 1994. Barbados are playing Grenada, and the scenario at the beginning of the game is relatively simple - Barbados need to win the game by at least 2 goals, but if after 90 minutes the score is tied, there will be Golden Goal extra-time.
The game goes as follows: Barbados take the lead, 1-0.
Barbados score again, 2-0.
Grenada score, 2-1.
There is five minutes left. Grenada are defending like beavers, as 2-1 is fine for them. If Barbados score again however, that's 3-1, and that's good enough for them. They launch attack after attack but just cannot breach the Grenada defence.
And then they stop, and have a think. You see, the organisers of the Shell Cup decided on a completely insane and baffling rule, which went like this - the Golden Goal scored in extra-time counted as double. The 1 goal, counted as 2. You can see where this is going, can't you? In the 87th minute, a Barbados defender deliberately scores an own-goal.
It is 2-2, and means that the game is going to extra-time, and if Barbados can just get 1 goal, that will count as 2, and they will go through - as they need to win by 2 clear goals, remember. So by scoring a deliberate own goal, they have more time and a better chance of winning the game than trying to scramble a goal with 3 minutes left.
But the Grenada players aren't stupid, and they know why Barbados have just smashed in an own goal. And this is where it gets fun - because Grenada now try and score a goal at both ends. This is complicated, but hang with me:
If Grenada a) score a legitimate goal, they win 3-2, and go through.
b) score an own goal, they will lose 3-2, but will still go through.
However, quite hilariously the Barbados players aren't stupid either, and realise this is Grenada's new game plan. So, in the remaining 3 minutes of the 90, they try to keep hold of the ball, make sure the game is played in midfield, and defend both goals. Unbelievably, their plan works.
The game does go into extra-time, and Barbados score the Golden Goal, meaning that the game finishes 3-2, but because of the nonsense rule they effectively win 4-2, and thus go through.
http://www.snopes.com/sports/soccer/barbados.asp
It is the Shell Caribbean Cup, and it is 1994. Barbados are playing Grenada, and the scenario at the beginning of the game is relatively simple - Barbados need to win the game by at least 2 goals, but if after 90 minutes the score is tied, there will be Golden Goal extra-time.
The game goes as follows: Barbados take the lead, 1-0.
Barbados score again, 2-0.
Grenada score, 2-1.
There is five minutes left. Grenada are defending like beavers, as 2-1 is fine for them. If Barbados score again however, that's 3-1, and that's good enough for them. They launch attack after attack but just cannot breach the Grenada defence.
And then they stop, and have a think. You see, the organisers of the Shell Cup decided on a completely insane and baffling rule, which went like this - the Golden Goal scored in extra-time counted as double. The 1 goal, counted as 2. You can see where this is going, can't you? In the 87th minute, a Barbados defender deliberately scores an own-goal.
It is 2-2, and means that the game is going to extra-time, and if Barbados can just get 1 goal, that will count as 2, and they will go through - as they need to win by 2 clear goals, remember. So by scoring a deliberate own goal, they have more time and a better chance of winning the game than trying to scramble a goal with 3 minutes left.
But the Grenada players aren't stupid, and they know why Barbados have just smashed in an own goal. And this is where it gets fun - because Grenada now try and score a goal at both ends. This is complicated, but hang with me:
If Grenada a) score a legitimate goal, they win 3-2, and go through.
b) score an own goal, they will lose 3-2, but will still go through.
However, quite hilariously the Barbados players aren't stupid either, and realise this is Grenada's new game plan. So, in the remaining 3 minutes of the 90, they try to keep hold of the ball, make sure the game is played in midfield, and defend both goals. Unbelievably, their plan works.
The game does go into extra-time, and Barbados score the Golden Goal, meaning that the game finishes 3-2, but because of the nonsense rule they effectively win 4-2, and thus go through.
http://www.snopes.com/sports/soccer/barbados.asp
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)