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?

Good Grief

I wasn't watching Spurs v Bolton last Saturday because, to be perfectly honest, once my team have gone out of the FA Cup I find it difficult to care a great deal about it. Instead I was lying on my bed dossing around - as per usual - just before I was due to go out and get some dinner. With a few minutes to spare, I thought I would check Twitter on my phone, and that's when I was made aware of what was going on down at White Hart Lane.

Roughly thirty tweets about Fabrice Muamba later and I was scrambling for the remote control, desperately trying to remember what channel the game was on, what channel number ESPN was on. Something had happened, and I wanted to see it. Before we go any further - reflecting on events, I'm struck by how odd that thought process is. I'm the first to chastise people for slowing down at car crashes, but here I was - effectively doing the same thing. Something had happened to Bolton midfielder Fabrice Muamba, but rather than being content and saying "I don't need to see that" I took the exact opposite view. The funny thing is, I don't even know why I did it. It doesn't make any sense, really, the only real excuse being that something out of the ordinary was happening and to effectively "be there" was the best way to be informed of the situation.

I didn't think Fabrice Muamba was going to survive. In fact, I was sure of it. I didn't say it - either out loud or on Twitter, but I thought it, and I bet one of you lot reading this did too. On Saturday evening there was an agonising wait as nobody knew anything - the only information flying around was that he was being taken to hospital and that they'd tried resuscitating him on the pitch but that hadn't worked. As football fans, we've been here before of course - Marc Vivien-Foe and Miklos Feher being two notable examples - and the vast majority of the time with incidents like this the end result isn't good. After I had had my dinner I put Sky Sports News on and sat in front of the television waiting for the announcement that was surely about to be solemnly read out live on air. Thankfully, it never came. At the time of writing, Fabrice Muamba is still in intensive care but he's showing signs of improvement and the prognosis is good...better than what it was at the time, anyway.

Whatever the long-term effects for Fabrice Muamba after his collapse last Saturday, his plight has inspired a debate about grief, one which for some peculiar reason Manchester United fanzine 'Red Issue' has decided to stick an oar into. Their opinion is based on what they term as "Dianaification" and it's all about the faux grief and the mass hysteria that society tends to jump to immediately after something like this happens. I know what they're saying, and I'm inclined to agree with them - I was in France when Princess Diana was killed, and when I think back I'm always grateful that I was there and away from all the madness/nonsense that was ensuing back here over her death. So I'm sympathetic towards their argument, but that doesn't mean I'm overly impressed with the cover for their latest instalment:

A lot of their ire on this subject is directed towards Twitter, and that's understandable. As a medium, Twitter encourages instantaneous response, as well as encouraging people to write stuff that gets them noticed. Therefore a rather odd game of grief "one-upmanship" can start to take place on there, as people compete to express how sorry they are about the situation that's unfolding rather than waiting to see what happens or simply saying nothing at all and keeping their counsel. Then there's the Twitter bandwagoners. I don't know who settled on #pray4muamba but they got a trending topic out of it, and the other day I saw a celebrity RT an account specially set up to express their sorrow at Muamba's plight. Now to me that's all very odd, and it all backs up the point 'Red Issue' are trying to make. It's a decent one, in my opinion.

Except.

I struggle to understand the thinking here. OK, I'm not naive - Red Issue is getting a lot of publicity on the back of this one - but as a Manchester United fan this front cover bewilders me. We could go three points clear at the top of the Premier League tonight, there's ALWAYS something to talk about when United are concerned, and they run with....this?! I don't get it, and I'm left wondering why they need a sledgehammer to crack a walnut. Being anti-faux grief is fine - and I agree - but this smacks of the 15 year old jumping up and shouting something deliberately provocative just to be "edgy" and impress his sniggering mates.

One of the great things about being a human - and one of the worst, for that matter - is the experiencing of emotions. Happy, grumpy, anxious, terrified, upset, elated etc etc - we've all felt those things at one point in our lives. Grief is another. We can't suddenly stop people from feeling it - whether the people they're grieving over are related and personal to them or not - and I wouldn't want people to stop feeling it either. I don't know about you but I wouldn't want to live in a world where Dunblane happens and everyone just shrugs their shoulders and ignores it. I thought Jade Goody was a largely terrible person, truth be told, but when she died I felt sad for her family and for her children who will now grow old without having their mother with them. I also felt so desperately sad for Fabrice Muamba and his family last Saturday night when he collapsed and I was sure he wasn't going to make it.

So am I a "grief junkie"? I don't think so. I hope not. It's not my intention to be one, anyway. Nevertheless, I don't like Red Issue's front cover. We don't know Fabrice Muamba, but feelings such as compassion, empathy and love towards our fellow man ain't terrible ones, all things considered. I hope he gets better soon, and I hope Red Issue go back to what they know best - Manchester United.

Bill Murray

Something quite extraordinary has happened. I know I blogged yesterday, but this is too amazing to just leave for a week or so, so here it is - the full story, hot off the press.

Earlier today I was here, in my room, enjoying a nice cup of tea and browsing Twitter when my Dad shouted that the postman had just been and there was something for me. That's usually a phrase that sends a chill down my spine, to be honest. If it's not the latest catalogue from The Book People, or the latest issue of United We Stand, it's probably bad news. Who do I owe money to this time? As I walked down the stairs, here's the conversation I had with my father:

"Have you entered a poetry competition?"

"What? No, of course not."

And that was the truth. I hate poetry. It's rubbish, and I hate it even more when it doesn't rhyme. There was no chance of me ever entering a poetry competition, but here was Dad handing me an envelope with "World Poetry Movement" plastered on the front of it, a message of "POSTMASTER: PLEASE RUSH! CONTEST RESULTS ENCLOSED." just above the slot where you can see the address.

I laughed. Clearly spam, although I admired the way they had got my name and address and had sent something all the way from Utah to the UK. Back in my room, I went to throw the letter in the bin, but I found I couldn't. I was curious - OK, it was spam, but let's at least have a look at it. So I opened it.

AND THEN THE ENVELOPE EXPLODED!

I jest. Nothing blew up, but I was surprised to see several pieces of paper and one smaller envelope in my hand once I had ripped open the packet and wrenched out everything from inside it. (If you ever want a laugh, watch me open an envelope. I'm not one for subtlety.) Putting the other stuff down for a moment, I unfurled (great word) the letter that came with it. I'm not going to recite it all to you, but the bits in bold you're about to see are the highlights:


Dear Patrick,


After carefully reading and discussing your poem,


I've not written a poem.

our Selection Committee has certified your poem as a semi-finalist in our International Open Poetry Contest. Your poem has been automatically entered into the final competition.


Very kind of you, but there's clearly a mistake here. I don't write poetry. I don't like it. Except maybe the poetry of Ogden Nash.

As a semi-finalist, you now have an excellent chance of winning one of the 116 cash or gift prizes - including the $1,000.00 Grand Prize. 


Well why didn't you say?! You now have my complete attention.

And that's not all....


It isn't?!

Patrick....


Yes?!

Imagine your poem featured on a page by itself in a beautiful coffee-table edition!


OMFG!!!

In celebration of the unique talent that you have displayed, we also wish to publish your poem in what promises to be one of the most highly regarded collections of poetry we have ever published....


STARS IN OUR HEARTS (Library of Congress ISBN 978-1-60880-123-7)


Published......Library of Congress.....unique talent........

Before going any further, Patrick, let me make one thing clear...


Yes?

your poem was selected for publication, and as a contest semi-finalist, on the basis of your unique talent and artistic vision.


So not only "unique talent" but "artistic vision"! This is GREAT but, alas, it is spam. I haven't done a poem.

However, regarding the publication of your poetry, you must proofread your poem, which appears on the enclosed Artist's Release. Please carefully review your poem for typographical errors and make any necessary changes.


Alright, I'm binning this thing now, load of bollo...what?

your poem, which appears on the enclosed Artist's Release.


Hey hey hey what is going ON here?!

So I threw the letter down and scrabbled around amongst the other nonsense attached to find the "Artist's Release" form. Once I found it, I sat down on my bed and laughed. A lot.

Because many, many months ago - think it was last September - a Facebook friend had posted something on her wall which had a picture of Bill Murray attached. Now Bill Murray is, in my opinion, a genius, so it caught my eye. It was a link to a competition:

"Write a Bill Murray poem and you could win $1,000! Enter the Bill Murray Contest to win. 116 prizes to be awarded in this poetry contest."

I'm not a poet - as you might have guessed by now - but I do enjoy writing stupid little verses in the style of E.J.Thribb, the resident poet and obituarist over at 'Private Eye' magazine, so as I had nothing better to do I scribbled down a few lines of nonsense and then took a "screen grab" to show my friend. I didn't think, for one second, that I had filled in my name and address and clicked "submit", but I must have done. So, without any further ado, ladies and gentlemen I present to you my 5 minute nonsensical poem on Mr William Murray:

O Tempora! O Murray!


William James Murray!
A name never to be said in a hurry
I'd definitely buy him a curry
William James Murray.


What a man, an icon, a star!
A genius revered wide and far
He can go round in level par
And drive a sexy sports car


Lest we forget, Groundhog Day
When he always woke up, in dismay
Not once did he get stung by a ray
Lest we forget, Groundhog Day.


Now I don't want to do myself down, but if that's ever going to qualify for the final of a poetry contest then I can only assume it was the only entrant. Or...something is rotten in Denmark.

A Google search for "World Poetry Movement" was my first port of call, and it broke my heart to find that when entering those three words into the search engine, the auto-suggestion that flashes up simply says "World Poetry Movement scam". Thanks to Google, I was given a nudge in the right direction as to what all this madness is:

"A good litmus test is to just start typing World Poetry Movement into a google search page and they're already auto-suggesting you add the search term "scam" to your search. 

Seems the "scam" is that about half of all entrants get published, and the only people who really buy the book are those who entered the 'contest', so you don't actually win money and end out a few bucks for buying a book of crummy poetry."

And it is crummy. The three verse poem I wrote in 5 minutes and as a joke ain't winning any awards any time soon. When I investigated the rest of the literature, I realised that chap was correct - so much of it is about buying the book. As someone else notes:

"Unfortunately, it does look like you sent your poem to scammers. You say you don't have to pay to be included in their book, but I'll bet they offer to sell you copies of that "finest" poetry collection at what they claim is a special author's rate, but it's really a ridiculously high price for a worthless book. And if they squeeze some money out of you for the book, they'll probably be back for more. Maybe they'll offer to sell you your own poem engraved on a plaque or printed on a mouse pad. Maybe they'll invite you to pay a huge registration fee and attend a poetry convention. They won't come right out and say so (because that would be illegal), but they'll try to give you the impression that throwing all that money at them will increase your chances of winning some big prize. Don't fall for it."

Not wrong. Just look at the prices of these shitty things!

So, I'm done. I've never dreamed of being a published poet, but I feel slightly crushed by this, quite frankly. Unless...no, it's silly, but....well, let me put it this way. I have three options:

A) I throw all this nonsense in the bin and forget about it
B) I throw most of it in the bin but keep the poem and the letter for future lols
C) I tick the box telling them it's my own work and send that back to them in the provided envelope.

Because option C) isn't going to hurt, right? I'm not giving them any money, and the immature part of me really, really, REALLY likes the idea of someone buying a book full of shit poetry just to see their name in print, only to turn the page and see a verse about buying Bill Murray a curry. If one person in the world saw my poem in that book and laughed...that would make it worth it. However, sending back the form leaves me open to them sending me more nonsense in the future etc.

That's all I can say for now, really. What would YOU do? Any suggestions, drop me a comment on here or tweet me, @Bruno_Di_Gradi. Until next time, poetry fans!

Bacon, Letters, Tomato

It's been an age since I've done one of these, so let's have another whirl for old time's sake. FAO the nutters who write letters into The Shropshire Star - let's be having you.

PS. The first letter featured here is the best letter I've seen for a long, long time.

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

I watched David Cameron on TV asking the people to make him PM.


One sentence in and I'm already confused. David Cameron? "Make him PM"? What the bloody hell has he been doing for the last few years then? Or did this letter get lost in the post?

The alarm bells in my head rang a warning.


You're telling me.

I told people if they made him PM they would be crying. This country is in debt so how can he give India £280,000m annually for four years? 


One thing I've noticed having read these letter pages for an excruciatingly long period of time is just how worked up people get over the whole foreign aid thing. Honestly, it doesn't bother me that much. Yes, tough economic times etc, and I accept that, but I wonder whether people actually stop and think about why governments do these things. Do people really believe they chuck money at other countries just for a laugh? Aside from foreign aid though, the #1 thing that Shropshire Star letter writers get upset by is of course...

Then there is the EU.


Hoorah!

It takes our money which we can put to better use.


By handing it to India!

I don't see other countries queuing to give us money. They say a leader should look after his/her people not take their money and give it away.


Standard letter writing fare, this, but I have good news for you - it's about to get nice and nutty.

Heaven is not a nice place for the rich.


Odd statement. How would you know, for a start? Is there a test at The Pearly Gates? Will I have to empty my pockets?

It is nothing like we are told (sic) or dream it is.


I've no fucking idea what you're going on about, but the question still stands - how would you know?

I know,


Oh?

I died and went there


What?


 - and what I saw?


What?

Poor people are well looked after.


What?

D Edmund-Fitzgerald
Newport


What?

============================================================
This letter isn't as nuts as the ones I usually pick out - particularly in comparison to that one above - but the way it hops around from person to person before talking about a criminal investigation just made me laugh so here goes.

Harry the people's choice as new England boss?


He's the media's choice, because he can't resist winding his car window down and having a natter with the waiting ensemble.

But hopefully Harry Redknapp is too sharp to take the job that any sensible Premier League manager would run a mile from.


This sentence is really good stuff, in terms of all-round nonsense, but particularly for the phrase "hopefully Harry Redknapp is too sharp" which is something I thought I'd never read. Anywhere.

Daniel Levy has supported Harry all the way through his recent trial and it is not only the chairman of Tottenham who has supported him.


Oh?

Other Premier League managers and, of course, the Spurs fans who have seen Harry raise their football club from near the bottom of the table to where they are now - third in the Premier League - have also been supporters.


The league table thing is a bit of a red herring. When Harry was appointed Spurs were performing dreadfully - true. But nobody expected them to be near the bottom of the table at the end of the season once Ramos was fucked off and Harry came in. Point I'm trying to make - Harry has done well there, certainly, but it hasn't been a messianic rise from the abyss.

Quick note on Harry - he's a good manager. Not a great one, but a good one. He's the perfect man to bring in when the previous manager has ballsed up and fallen out with the players, as Harry knows he can put an arm around them and get them playing for him. Tactically he's not very good, frankly, and as such he's really limited in how far he can take clubs. And of course he does like spending money on players. England manager material? Not for me.

Would he have had that support as England boss or would it have been a case of goodbye Harry?


Funny one that, really. The press love to destroy an England manager, but they also love Harry.

ANYWAY. Get crazy, quick.

The way Fabio Capello was got rid of leaves a nasty taste in the mouth.


It wasn't handled very well, but hey, that's the FA for you.

Why the FA could not be honest and say he was rubbish as England manager as results have not been good enough?


Because that clearly would not be the case. I refuse to believe anyone can justifiably say re. Capello and England that "results have not been good enough". Yes, the defeat to Germany at the World Cup wasn't very good, I'll be the first to tell you that. But this smacks of the horrible "Wahhh he's not English" attitude which morons like to peddle out at every possible opportunity.

The problem with football today is that it is too political. John Terry is perceived as being racist without a thing being proved and what if Mr Terry is innocent? The witch-hunters at the top of the English football will search for someone else to burn at the stake.


In my opinion the FA got that one right, and Capello was wrong, but I'm tired of you now so let's move on.


Mark Norwood
Oswestry


Yes, yes, whatever. Wish these people would stop bigging themselves up, Christ. Just once can we have a few fake names sprinkled onto the letters page? Would an "Ivor Biggun" from Shrewsbury really be so awful?

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

I congratulate the Roman Catholic Bishop of Shrewsbury for his fierce defence of our traditional values.


I think we all know where this one is going.

The Right Reverend Mark Davies has said the Government's plans to legalise same-sex marriage would represent 'nothing less than a seismic shift in the foundations of our society.'


A) Really?

B) Is that a bad thing? This idiot takes this statement as such, but now that I twiddle my thumbs and ponder...in 1950s USA the Deep South was staggeringly racist. Separate facilities for whites and blacks, racist lynchings, public transport issues etc etc. Sixty years on, some people in those areas are still racist, I know, but through the hard work of the Civil Rights movement et al the situation has got better, right? Crude example - down in New Orleans, Louisiana, a black man such as Pierre Thomas plays in their NFL team alongside a white man, Drew Brees, and the vast majority of people don't give a shit. Why would they?

Has there not been a "seismic shift in the foundations of (their) society" then? And has that not actually been a thoroughly positive thing?

The politically-correct bullies and political charlatans such as David Cameron have had their way for far too long.


Place your bets now - pompous idiot, or out-and-out wind up merchant?

Now is the time for the silent majority to stand up for their rights too.


I'll happily bet you £10 that the "silent majority" don't give a shit.

N Pritchard
Shrewsbury


You're going on the list.

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

One final one because I'm tired and want to go and watch the cricket.

What a shame it will be if Mr Salmond succeeds in his ambition to separate the English and Scottish nations.


There's lots of interesting arguments on this one - from both sides of the table. Let's see what John here thinks.

We will no longer be able to go into a pub, or on to a bus or tram without the amusement of being able to listen to a Scottish voice whinging and complaining about anything from the cost of toilet paper, the price of beer to council services. 


Vintage stereotyping!

One thing is certain though, they will no happier with their own government than with that in Westminster.


John Thornicroft
Market Drayton


Without wanting to sound like the cabbie in 'Private Eye' - I met a Scottish person once. Very nice man.

Until next time kids!