Salaam Salman

Writers

News that Salman Rushdie is to get a knighthood has been met with mixed emotions. Some elements in the Islamic world have condemned the award outright – a spokesman for the Iranian foreign ministry said that to honour “an apostate and one of the most hated figures in the Islamic world” indicated that Britain supported “the insult to Islamic values”.

I wish I knew enough about Rushdie's work to make a relevant comment. I don't.

What is interesting is the remarks by Jack Straw and Margaret Beckett. Jack thinks Salman's books a bit too difficult to read (and he has a large Muslim population in his constituency); whilst Margaret says she is “sorry” if any offence has been caused.

I think the word I'm searching for is hypocritical. Yes, hypocritical wimps fit rather nicely.

Let's be clear. What debate there should be about an honour for Salman should be about the literary merit of his work. I'd be happy to hear reasoned argument about the quality of his writing. I'd be interested to know about his views concerning the writing process and how he communicates with readers. I'm not really interested in his views about Islam (if he has any).

It is clearly wrong and clearly ill-liberal to denounce Mr Rushdie because one of his books may offend some members of the community. That's what writers do. It's part of their job. It's probably in their job description, somewhere. If not – it ought to be.

This is not the whole story.

Media commentators have queued up to defend Rushdie. Voltaire (a very dodgy Frenchman) has been dutifully trotted out to declaim again - “I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it”. It's all very western liberal politico-correctico. It's all very predictable.

Unfortunately, the powers that be have left out an important part of the argument. We are not free to say whatever we want to. We cannot publish anything we like. We would be extremely foolish – if not criminally insane – to insist that blaspheming against Allah is a really good thing to do. It clearly is not. Nor should it be.

Some have tried to submit that a Christian outcry against Dan Brown and The Da Vinci Code is on a par with Muslim fury over Satanic Verses. They are being foolish or disingenuous. Dan Brown's book, which I have read, is an entertaining mystery story and Jesus' divinity is not questioned by the author. Christians may think it a bit crazy – but even if Jesus did marry and father children it would not affect the basic tenets of their beliefs. My understanding is that Muslims believe that to question the divinity of the Prophet is not only blasphemous but also an act that is prescribed punishment. If that is the case, then it is patently unfair to expect Muslims to forego that part of their beliefs that the rest of us may find offensive.

In a week where the death of Bernard Manning has brought legions of critics out of the woodwork to declare that no only was he not funny but he was also a racist and a bigot, it seems oddly perverse to “defend” Rushdie simply because his racism and bigotry is aimed at people we currently don't particularly like. We are not free to preach racial hatred. We are not free to incite violence against others of a different faith or creed. Therefore; we cannot demand that everyone else follows our lead. We must allow other faiths to judge for themselves what is right and proper. Even is we don't like it.

Mr Rushdie is entitled to be honoured for his writing. He is not immune from being censured by religious leaders. Some Muslim leaders should realise that dragging up the past and re-living old wounds is counter-productive. They simply pander to the prejudices of the right-wing conspiracy theorists.

I really must read The Satanic Verses.

Premiersip Milch Cow

Dodgy Owners.

Definition: milch cow - noun - something or someone that is seen as a source of easy income or profit.

Definition: money laundering - refers to the conversion or "Laundering" of money which is illegally obtained, so as to make it appear to originate from a legitimate source.

Put these two definitions together and you have the Premiership.

The Times says:

Frauds, thieves, tax dodgers and forgers aren’t welcome here

We answer the key questions relating to the 'Fit and Proper Test' that Thaksin will have to pass before taking charge at Manchester City

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/football/premiership/manchester_city/article1970683.ece?token=null&offset=0

The key point in the resume of the Fit and Proper Persons test is (not surprisingly) at the end – where it says:

Has anyone failed the Fit and Proper Persons Test yet?

Not yet.

So, it's all window dressing? Pretty much – in my view.

Disregarding Roman Abramovich and other big-time Russian crooks, the very dodgy Glaser family who now own (with a hefty mortgage) Manchester United and an assortment of Icelandic wide-boys and an Egyptian conspiracy theorist – what cannot be in doubt is the opportunity for money corruption in football.

Here's a plan, some bean counter says, take the money you have, go to England and buy a football club; the government will welcome you with open arms. No-one will question where the money came from, no-one will ask about dodgy-finance – as long as you appear to be a milch cow to the idiots who inhabit the terraces and you make a few (perfectly legal) contributions to political parties – you should have no problems. And, you will be welcome to stay in England as long as you like. And you can effectively launder your money – if needed – under the relatively free guise of becoming a patron of a football team. Bottom line – this is a win-win situation.

What about the Premier League? Spokesman, Dan Johnson, told BBC Radio Five Live, “We have a fit and proper person test which is based on objective criteria, there is a schedule of offences which does also reflect any offences that someone has been prosecuted for overseas as well. It is a tricky one because he hasn't been prosecuted for anything yet, and also we are a football competition.”

Translation: as long as you have not been prosecuted for wrong-doing – it's none of our business and we will do nothing.

What would happen if he was found guilty of the charges he is facing? Dan says, “That is something we would have to look at.”

Nice one, Dan. In other words, even if Mr Shinawatra is found guilty in a Thai court of wrong-doing the Premier League may decide that this does not disqualify him from owning a team. After all, I can hear them say, what sort of court is a Thai court? Can't trust those Wogs anyway! This guy is bringing in lots of money – who cares where he got it!

Somebody should. And, someone should require that all Premiership clubs are PLC's with on-one allowed to own more than 10% of the shares. Simple. No need for checks that aren't checks on Asian criminals.

Works for me.

Woeful West Indies

It's just not cricket!

Song lyrics – to the tune of “Rare Old Times”:

Raised on runs and wickets,

Heroes of renown,

The passing tales and glories,

That once was Kingston Town,

The hallowed balls and wickets,

The haunting children's' rhymes,

I remember West Indies cricket,

In the rare old times.

I was raised on the great West Indies team of the 80's. At that time it was almost impossible to imagine anybody beating them. Haynes and Greenwich to open; Richie Richardson; Sir Vivian Richards – not to mention the bowlers – Malcolm Marshall, Michael Holding, Colin Croft, Joel Garner – the list is almost endless.

It was – and remains – almost impossible to imagine anyone beating them.

How sad to see how the mighty have fallen. England have completed a white wash, winning the test series 3-0. What is worse is the manner of the winning and, more importantly, the losing.

Facts are a good to average England team have trounced as poor a test side as can be imagined. Some of the West Indies greats must be sick at what they have witnessed. What has gone wrong?

First, the organisation and politics involved in selection have crippled the team even before a ball was bowled. It is hard not to feel sorry for Darren Ganga who came expecting to play second fiddle to the experienced and respected Sarwan, only to be thrust into the limelight with no support from the management or the rest of the team. Watching him struggle with the bat and the leadership was painful. What's worse, he seemed to get no help from his team-mates. There is an agenda there, but who knows what it was?

Except for Chanderpaul, the batsmen were just boys waiting to be slaughtered by the English pace attack. Some of them are not good enough to play in a county side, much less an international one.

The bowling was worse. Nothing appeared to be planned and no bowler attempted to do anything to trouble the English batsmen. Is there really no West Indian spinner? What, no-one? Is Ramdin really the best wicket-keeper in the Caribbean? Seems a nice lad – but cannot bat and is only adequate with the gloves. Are there no pacemen left in the West Indies? Except for Fidel Edwards the rest are all medium pace journeymen. Is this really all the West Indies can produce? Why?

There seems to be no talent coming through. What talent there is heads for American sports as fast as they can run, catch or throw. That's where the money is and who can blame them. All the Curtley Ambroses are playing basketball and the Courtney Walshes are on the baseball diamond. Any big, strong lads from the islands are at U.S. universities on football scholarships.

Can nothing be done? Probably not. The next generation of WI cricketers are already lost. We may see the day soon when they will struggle to beat anyone. In 25 years they may be playing in the ICC tournament for non-test playing nations.

What a tragedy.

Saturation Point

Overkill or What?

Well. Here we are in June. The middle of June. Still we suffer from football overkill. Papers are full of “non-stories” about the Stevens Inquiry into bungs.

Best comment I heard today was a commentator on Sky News who make the case that supporters just couldn't care less. If their manager or officials of the club have been a bit naughty in transfer deals – so what?

As long as the club is doing well – who cares? Yes, that's how low we have sunk.

Why should supporters care what skulduggery has gone on in the past to secure the services of overpaid, overpriced players at their club? Disregarding the moral dimension, they should care because as long as vast sums “disappear” in shady deals there is less chance of holding the clubs to account for their shabby treatment of supporters. Tickets overpriced? Too bad. Delia's dinners not up to scratch? Tough luck!

Simple scenario: if the club chairman thinks this or that player will make all the difference (rarely the case); what incentive is there for him to play by the rules and above board? None. Conversely, what incentive is there for him to involve the club in shady deals with other clubs, their officials or football agents? Many. Chances of getting caught? Almost nil. Lord Stevens is after the agents – not the clubs.

Bottom line: nothing of substance will change.

What is more irksome is the endless non-stories about football that populate the local press. Today is a good example. The back three pages are devoted to football. The lead story is the “non-story” about non-allegations by Lord Stevens about non-transgressions by some mangers at some football clubs. What a great story!

Lest anyone forget – four pages in are stories about Youssef Safri (a player of very little talent capped by a country of players with very little talent) who happens to be a NCFC player. The story is no story, just an ambling amusement of rambling by Safri about what he hope to do next season. Hopefully, though he forgets to mention it, his hopes include promotion to the Premiership. Instead we are treated to his estimation of the footballing prowess of Zimbabwe! The remaining stories on that page consist of the usual non-story transfer news and the sickening report that the grokles at Norwich are queuing up to part with their cash to get scarce season tickets! Sick?

Finally five pages in is the news that Beefy is to get a knighthood. There is some news of international cricket six pages in – but there are no reports about local teams, local players, or local leagues. Staggeringly shocking!

Make me PM. Get rid of Gordo. I'll ban football except for amateur matches. After all – that's where it started!!

Bean Counters

Crazy Finances

The Government is expected to announce today that the NHS has made a surplus of more than £500 million in the past financial year after an aggressive drive to reduce spending by health trusts. - The Times

On Sky News this morning:

Eamon, “Can you tell us, is the NHS a service or a business?

Patricia, “It's a service, but actually it must be business-like.”

Why can't we get a real debate about NHS finances? One that focuses on the real issues. One that tells the truth about how the service is financed. A debate that is not led by the bean-counters agenda.

Could someone tell us how the NHS can go from being in debt – to the tune of millions – to having a surplus – all in the space of a few weeks? It's just a nonsense.

The truth is no-one knows what the real financial situation of the NHS is because the bean-counters make the rules, change the rules and (seemingly) change the rules for changing the rules. Only the great British public could be flannelled by such a blatant misuse of power, language and logic.

So, when the media reports about a Primary Health Care Trust being “overspent”, what does that really mean? It means that they have exceeded their budget. Who made the budget? The government. What criteria have the government used to set the budget? No-one knows. Have they tried, as you and I would have to do, to match the income of the NHS to the expenditure? Who knows?

There is no meaningful measurement of NHS income. All the money from National Insurance contributions simply ends up at the Treasury. Only a proportion of this is for the NHS, some should go for unemployment, some for pensions, and so on. What is the exact sum allocated to the NHS in a year – on which a budget could sensibly be based? Who knows?

In the absence of an income statement, there is no NHS budget. Never has been. The NHS budget is simply what the government says it is. Unless the public can understand this the politicians can simply make up numbers. The result? In any one week you get stories about expensive new drugs bankrupting the NHS juxtaposed with the story about NHS budget surpluses.

I confidently predict that the bean-counters will continue to drive the debate. After all, it's in their interest, not ours, for the issues to be presented in budgetary terms. That's their business. They will continue to shift paper clips from one side of the desk to another and publish statistics.

It's sad that the government simply abdicates its responsibilities to the very people they should be holding responsible.

Former Norwich Loan Players/Stars

FNLP/S

I knew it!

It was only yesterday that someone told me that because David Bentley had been selected for the England football team the EDP would have the usual “Former Norwich Loan Player/Star” (FNLP/S) story.

And they did.

Am I the only one who finds this sort of gormless pandering to the divots who populate the seats at Carrow Road completely pointless? Surely I can't be? Can I?

There it was on page 48. Headline: Bentley included in Pearce's squad Article: Former Canries (could someone explain what Canries are? - why can't the EDP employ some old-fashioned sub-editors?) loan star David Bentley has been included in the England U21 squad for the European Championship finals in Holland.

Could someone explain to me what this had to do with anything?

David Bentley has never been a local player. He has never even been a player contracted to Norwich City Football Club. Why are we reading this drivel in the local paper?

The variation to this story is when Peter Crouch is chosen for the England senior squad. Headline: Former Norwich City Loan Star Crouch in England Squad. What complete tosh! Why not just stop reporting nonsense about football? Why not?

If they did they might avoid the despairing headlines they managed to come up with today. In the morning: Marshall turns up the heat. City target demands transfer. In the Evening News: City see Marshall bid turned down.

Only by reading the respective stories is it apparent that there is no story here at all. The morning news is simply speculating that NCFC might like to sign David Marshall, who was on loan at Norwich this season,. The afternoon paper speculates that negotiations between the clubs are on-going.

In other words – there are no real developments and no real news. So, why are they printing this?

I conclude that in the absence of any real story – why not make one up.

Might sell a few papers (Norwich fans are stupid enough to buy the paper just because NCFC is mentioned in the headline!). Meanwhile, the sports writing staff can go to the pub instead of trying to cut through the drivel and find a real story to write about.

Shame.

Extradition

Crazy - or What?

I'm afraid the illogical news media are at it again.

News that the Russians probably had something to do with the murder of Alexander Litvinenko is not exactly news. The finger of suspicion has been firmly pointed at the Kremlin since Litvinenko's death in London. What makes this story so annoying is the typically parochial way the UK media are focussing on the lack of an extradition arrangement with Russia – despite the fact that Andrei Lugovoy could be prosecuted in Russia for this crime – if sufficient evidence exists.

So, where's the illogicality?

The Enron Three, that's where.

How so? Read on.

Three British bankers are set to be extradited to the United States over charges related to the Enron scandal, following a High Court decision which could have far-reaching consequences for UK extradition law.

Lawyers for the three men tried to block the request by arguing that the Serious Fraud Office should investigate the case.

But Lord Justice Laws ruled the case "has very substantial connections with the United States and is perfectly properly triable there", saying it would be "unduly simplistic to treat the case as a domestic English affair".

Shami Chakrabarti, director of Liberty, said the decision was "nothing short of a disgrace" and the trio were being traded like "sacks of parrots".

Mark Spragg, who acted as solicitor for the three men, spoke of the consequences of the court's decision.

He said: "This judgement means that no UK person or body has to decide which country should prosecute an alleged offence involving more than one country." - The Telegraph

Paraphrasing: we can't let anyone else have anything to do with deciding where to extradite our citizens and (even in the USA) the “foreigners” can't be trusted to organise a trial or dispense justice.

I think this is the same as the Russian position.

Sources in the Office of the Prosecutor-General pointed out that under their constitution they did not extradite their own nationals. They should be tried, if anywhere, in Russia.

There is no bilateral extradition treaty between Britain and the Russian Federation; and although in 2001 the federation signed up to the extradition arrangements under the 1957 European Convention on Human Rights, it retains the opt out that it need not extradite its own nationals. - The Times

Yep, that's what I thought – that is the Russian position.

So, how can the media get outraged when British criminals (alleged) are extradited to the USA to stand trial and then start a media feeding frenzy of astronomical proportions when Russian criminals (alleged) are not extradited to the UK to stand trial?

Anybody ever heard of logic?

Headingley

Test Cricket

England go into the second test against West Indies still smarting from the draw at Lords. At least they should be.

Given all the advantages in the match: a big first innings score; four centurions; helpful conditions for the bowlers; England should have easily wrapped up a win in three days. Instead, the Windies did an excellent job of derailing the England pace attack – so much so that it was Monty Panesar who looked most likely to swing the game England's way.

There is a lot of nonsense in the press about how “unlucky” England were not to have bagged an early series win. The fact is: the bowlers were not really up to scratch.

Bowlers win test matches. Batsmen get all the headlines, but bowlers win test matches. The opposition must be dismissed twice and England never looked capable of doing that. Of course, they were unfortunate to have lost Matthew Hoggard. Bowling with one short is no fun and can be a nightmare. Even though he found it difficult to get the ball to swing from the right areas, Hoggy's loss was a real blow; for it simply heaped more pressure on an already fragile Steve Harmison.

Steve faces problems that eclipse those of “fragile” cricketers from a bygone age. He is constantly in the media spotlight. The first bad ball he bowls is analysed minutely from a physical and mental standpoint. He is branded by the media as a “bit flaky in the head” and therefore all his problems are immediately brought into focus by the lens of the TV camera. This is unfair and probably untrue. Fact is he had an exceptional year in the Ashes win and has struggled to repeat that form. Whether or not he can become again a match-winner is problematical. He needs help from the other bowlers.

Flintoff is out. No help there.

Plunkett shows promise, sometimes. He is unlikely to win you a match, even at Headingly. Collingwood is really a batsman, and I question whether or not he's good enough at that!

So, some bowler or bowlers will have to be drafted in. Who? Nobody immediately springs to mind. Mahmood has been tried – perhaps he'll get another go. Sidebottom has been drafted into the thirteen – plenty of Headingly experience. Whoever is chosen they are unlikely to put the fear of God into the Windies batsmen.

And so, with the strength of England's batting and the West Indies reluctance to gamble by playing an extra bowler, best bet is another draw. What! At Headingley? Yep. That's my tip for the day. With some dodgy weather forecast for the weekend, I'd get down to Ladbrookes and get money on a tame draw. Or, I'd wait to see the result of the toss. England win the toss and bowl, possibly bet on England. Windies bowl, bet on draw. Looks that simple.

Last word to the West Indies press:

“The West Indies batsmen, as much as they may be willing to fight again, should find England's bowling too good for them at Headingley.” - Jamaica Gleaner

Fighting Cocks

Imperial Arrogance

Watching the media's coverage of the tragic disappearance of Madeleine McCann on the Algarve is made all the more poignant by the crass parochialism of the media. I'm almost sick with anger at their treatment of the Portuguese authorities and their insinuation that the British police would have done everything different and much better.

The disservice to Britain's oldest allies is a tragedy almost on the same scale as the little girl's disappearance.

A Portuguese spokesman said:

"Some details of the investigation cannot be brought to the public because of the law," Mr Sousa told a frustrated group of British journalists. "Things are not equal in the legal system in Portugal and in the UK. It's not your fault and it's not my fault.”

The British media have construed this as unacceptable. The idea that the Portuguese police should or must carry on their investigation exactly as it would be done in the UK is so arrogant as to rival Goering's boast that if bombs ever fall on Berlin, you can call me Meier. Mistakes can be made in any police investigation, but to characterise the Portuguese as incompetent is a travesty. Why? Because the Duke of Wellington says so, for starters!

Wellington called his Portuguese allies this “Fighting Cocks” during the Peninsula Campaign which eventually led to Waterloo and the defeat of Napoleon. His estimation of the quality of the soldiers from Portugal was undiminished by hardship and occasional defeat. The Iron Duke had no hesitation in placing his Peninsular veterans in the forefront of the fighting against the French.

No doubt the Duke is currently spinning madly in his tomb to think that the press – who so roundly praised his allies 200 years ago could be so ungrateful.

It seems a British disease to assume that British police, British government, British courts, British culture and British justice is the gold standard against which all others must be measured and found to be wanting.

Any objective assessment of foreign justice will confirm that things are, indeed, done differently in other places; but, different does not always mean inferior.

It is the height of arrogance for the media to characterise the Portuguese authorities as incompetent simply because they are foreigners! They may have made a mistakes – but the catalogue of errors in British police investigations, trial, sentences, etc. should temper any criticism of foreign customs.

Poor old Wellington would be distraught in the extreme.

Flok

Have found a very interesting new web browser called Flok.

Perhaps it stands for "Flog you too, buddy!"

It may be more obscure, and therefore even more secure, than Firefox.  It is supposed to be the "bees knees" for posting photos to a blog - but I have yet to figure it out!

When I know what I'm doing, I'll let you know!!

Bill's Place

CPRE?

That Good 'Ol Boy, Bill Bryson, has been selected at the Chair of CPRE, the Campaign for the Protection of Rural England. That Bill Bryson sure takes some beating!

Like me, Bill isn't even English, though he has lived here for many years and has an English wife. Also, he lives in rural Norfolk. His new job? Protect rural England. From what? From people. If I meet him on Wymondham High Street, I may have to give him a good smack and remind him of a few unpleasant truths.

Number one. England ain't Iowa. He instinctively knows this for he says, "You are very lucky to have so much. Iowa is the same size as England, but I would struggle to find six places to show you. Here you have a wealth of beautiful places. You have taken them too much for granted."

Poor old Iowa – bit short-changed there Bill!

What Bill has neglected to tell you is that the population of Iowa is just under three million. Yes, that's three million in a whole state the size of England.

A CPRI (Campaign for the Protection of Rural Iowa) is not needed. In fact, a campaign to get anyone from England to visit Iowa might be more in order. Folks here go to Florida in the summer (mad as a June Bug!), or trek off to shop in NYC (voted the worst place in the world in my official self-centred poll), or head for California (which, as everyone knows, is not really a part of the U.SA. at all!). No-one goes to Iowa, or Missouri, or Kansas. And, it's not because there isn't anything there to see or do. It's because it's in the middle. Planes don't fly there.

Therefore, the CPRE is charged with an impossible task. How to squeeze the 60 million people of the UK into an area the size of Iowa without causing damage to the countryside?

Pretty good trick if you can do it!

Bill's solution? Bugger the people, just make sure the litter they produce is dealt with in an efficient and environmentally friendly way.

Bill old buddy, you can afford to be cavalier with the countryside in Iowa. Here – it's a bit different. England suffers from a shortage of housing. No matter how many are built, there are never enough. It's a bit like the South Sea Bubble that never bursts. So, the NIMBY's have held sway in rural England since the Conquest. (NIMBY – not in my back yard – which in England means not anywhere, since the back yard in question encompasses the whole of the rest of the country!)

What we need is a CPPHN (Campaign for the Protection of People's Housing Needs). Getting folks to pick up their litter is a worthwhile project for Bill to sponsor. When he tries to balance the need for affordable housing in our rural areas with the NIMBYs chronic short-sightedness, he may find the leadership of the CPRE a bigger challenge than he imagines.

Good luck 'Ol Boy – you may need it.

It's a Funny Old Game

Creased up recently when I spied with my little eye a letter to the Editor in the EDP from a fellow Wroxham-ite, a Mr Potter of Hartwell Road (that's the posh part of Wroxham for you out-worlders) writes under the title: This boring game should be banned.

Although the accuracy of his assertion is questionable, his sentiments are to be applauded. Brian believes that football is a minority sport which enjoys an enhanced reputation chiefly die to the employment requirements of the nation's football journalists.

I sympathise. I've been banging on for ages about the pathetic standard of journalism surrounding football in the local press. Brian's advice to families to keep their children away from football matches if they want them to grow up to be decent citizens is hard to argue with.

Two anecdotes to illustrate the point. Charlton Athletic versus Colchester United at the “old” Valley was the first professional match I ever saw live. Students of the “funny old game” will know that the Valley could hold 100,000 spectators on the massive old terraces. There were only about two thousand of us present for a mid-week Division Three match.

What struck me was the language of the players. We are all used to lip-reading the antics of the foul-mouthed pros paraded on out TV's every week. In person, with only a few bored spectators between you and the players, the language bordered on the criminal. I thought, “What kind of a game is this where the object seems to be to out-filth the opponents and officials?” It's still the same today.

And, over my garden fence, my next door neighbour, who attends most of the Wroxham F.C. matches, recounted a football moment that illustrates the sort of people who play. Apparently, in a recent reserve team match, one of the Wroxham youngsters was smacked in the mouth by an opponent. Broke his jaw and removed a few teeth. Referee was trying to sort out a fight somewhere else on the pitch and didn't see anything. Luckily the referee's assistant did. Young lad is going to sue said thug. So he should. Hope he goes to jail. But, of course, the real problem is the game itself. Brian from Hartwell Road says that “ a few hundred thousand obsessed morons and drink fuelled idiots make the game a real pain in the butt”. Hard to argue with that.

Descent people don't go to football matches.

Brian reminds us that football started in the Middle Ages as a game for local ruffians in the streets of English villages. Not much has changed then.

I like his comment that football is boring and repetitive. He contends that for most of the game nothing much happens. Hard to argue with that.

When Brian insists that more people go to museums at the weekend than attend football matches, I presume he means professional matches. Otherwise he is telling “stretchers” (I'm sure you'll remember “stretchers” - that's what Mark Twain attributed to Huckleberry Finn as a replacement for lies – Huckleberry insisted he never lied – he just stretched the truth sometimes!) Perhaps Brian is a Twain scholar.

I like Brian's style and substance. His peroration that football is likely to die a well-deserved and early death - were it not for the obsequious attentions of the media - is a consummation devoutly to be wished.

The real solution is down in the grass roots. Why parents allow children as young as eight to play football is a mystery to me? Yes, let them kick a ball, but organise them into leagues, have cup competitions and endless fitness sessions? It's madness. So's the game.

Rooney, Woods and Petersen

Spoiled Brats?

What sounds like a rather high-class firm of solicitors from South Kensington is, in reality, a disturbing bunch of spoiled brats and poor role models.

We live, for better or worse, in a society where hype is not just important – it is everything. Disregarding the talent required to be a top sportsman, what is important is a good press. Some talent is good, but you don't really have to keep it up – a few good performances will do – then you can take it easy, for the media will continue seek you out and build you up. The result? Spoiled brats.

Rooney is a classic. More than Beckham he appears to have difficulty in stringing two sentences together. He has a face like the north end of a south-bound skunk. His only “talent” is on the football pitch. Unfortunately, he has forgotten what he is famous for. And, he is increasingly being “found out” by opponents. Instead of trying to compete with him on the pitch the opposition finds it far easier to wind him up. He spends most of the game arguing with either the officials, the opponents or both. He leaves little time to actually play football. Only Sir Alec Ferguson seems able or willing to get him top concentrate on football and keep his mouth shut. In Europe, or wearing an England shirt he is a liability. He is a talented muppet.

Tiger has lost the plot. Watching him “lose” the Masters reminded me of his character flaws. He is so universally acknowledged as the greatest golfer ever that he has begun to expect that the golfing gods will do exactly what he wants. When they don't, he pouts, cries, gazes plaintively at the heavens and throws his clubs about. Watching him fling his putter into the air on the sacred Augusta greens makes me wonder if anyone else did it would the members ban them? There are many less illustrious clubs where he would not be welcome.

It's a strange world when the best rapper is a white guy, Eminen, and the best golfer is a black guy, Tiger. Some of Tiger's petulance is the result of the media hype which he has begun to believe as gospel. He will win many more majors. I wish he was a better role model for young golfers and young people in general. The temper tantrums have no place in golf. I'd like to see more black people in golf. Maybe then Tiger wouldn't feel so “me against the rest”. In any event Tiger is only half-black. He's Asian on his mother's side.

Petersen has been reading too many of his acolytes press reports. He is a talented player. It's been rumoured before that he is not a “team player”. I'm beginning to think this is the case. He plays for Kevin, not the team. Yesterday was a good example. When the England innings stalled on the way to something near 300 – which might have been a winning score – our Kev decided that his quest for a one-day hundred must take precedence. A favourable position was thrown away as he pushed and prodded painfully to his century.

Likewise like our other two heroes, he has perfected the incredulous look when he is out. Commentators comment on his arrogance when batting. Less arrogance in his demeanour might not go amiss.

It's a shame when three talented sportsmen lose the plot. Let's hope they find it.

World Cup Woes

Surrender Anyone?

Cricket fans are a forgiving lot. Most are realists when it come to England's chances in the World Cup. Discounting the media-hype which surrounds almost all international sport now-a-days, knowledgeable fans will realise that the team is just not very good, or, perhaps just not good enough.

Nevertheless, it is important if any progress is to be made to understand why and where improvements need to be made. England have more professional cricketers than any other nation. This can be a blessing. It can also be a liability when selecting teams.

The fact is England seems to be the only country who picks a specialist one-day squad and ignores the Test team. Yesterday's defeat to Sri Lanka abjectly illustrates this policy.

All morning the news was afloat with rumours that Andrew Strauss would be recalled to the team as opener. Ed Joyce had failed and failed again. Strauss is a proven Test opener who “suffered” some very bad umpiring decisions and some “unlucky” dismissals in the one-day series against Australia. Joyce was his replacement and had only amassed a few decent scores. Pretty much a no-brainer there. Strauss to be recalled – Joyce to be dismissed. What happened? Nothing. Whoever was spreading the Strauss recall rumours ( maybe it was his Mum? ) shut up. Joyce played. Scored a few. Got out.

His opening partner, Michael Vaughan, faired little better. Cricketers and commentators all agree that when you are caught down the leg side you are a bit unlucky – particularly with the keeper standing up to a medium-pacer. Unlucky or not that's exactly what happened to Vaughan and his run of very low scores continued. Result? England on the back foot. Vaughan provides his own conundrum. Captaining the side expertly he engineered a gettable Sri Lankan total to chase. His own contribution to the cause was woeful. Unlucky or not.

Ian Bell flatters to deceive. The photo of him standing with his bat well-behind the popping crease and neatly poised a few centimetres above it should be pasted on every school notice board. Watching him bat is like watching a disaster unfolding. He may get a score – but it's not likely. When all that was need was for one top-order batsman to survive most of the innings and get 80 or 90 – he failed again.

Kevin Petersen is supposed to be the number one one-day batsman in the world. Crazy. He does score large hundreds, but mostly when they are not needed. Pressure? Don't think he handles it well. Murali slipped him the doosra, and Petersen lobbed it back to him. I don't like cricketers who behave like footballers. When they make a mistake or choose the wrong shot they should accept it. Petersen nearly cries. Or mutters an obscenity under his breath. Completely unacceptable. He's beginning to look like a prima dona – without the requisite talent and temperament.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: Collingwood is a good county pro. He is neither a Test batsman nor a one-day specialist. If he's the best number five we have in England then it will be a long time before there is any improvement in results.

Flintoff hasn't recovered from the pedalo yips. I remember when he was a batting all-rounder who bowled a bit. Now he bowls but has forgotten the basics of one-day batting. He should be sentenced to watch his dismissal over and over and over. Attempting to slog a slower ball with two runs to your name and your team relying on you to salvage the match makes Freddie look just about as stupid as you can on a cricket pitch.

So it was left to Bopara and Nixon to get England close to the total. I was beginning to wonder what Bopara was doing in the side? I thought he would be bowling – but Collingwood does all that ( fairly ineffectually! ) and he never got a chance. At least he was up for the fight. If he is to make an impact next time around he needs to be bowling and batting. Time will tell if he's good enough.

Nixon will not be around long. He's too old and it that respect it is churlish to begrudge him a few days in the lime light. He did very well, but England should be playing a younger, more long-term keeper. If he was Duncan Fletcher's choice, then Dunc should follow him into honourable retirement.

It's possible that events may overtake my gloomy forecast. I hope so, but I doubt it. After the Aussies hammer us on Sunday, it should just be a matter of a few days before the lads come home.

Some joined-up thinking by the selectors and administrators in time for the next World Cup might not go amiss.

Climate Change Fascists

Who's Counting?

Watching a interview on television about climate change is as easy as turning it on. They are everywhere. Just turn the TV on – rather like buses there's bound to be one on the way. Whether or not it will make any sense of course is more problematical.

Fascists get a bad press. Deservedly. Queuing up to rubbish other folks ideas can be boring. Much easier just to label them or their ideas as fascist and save a lot of time. The climate change messiahs are getting to be bores in this regard. Their tactic: anyone who doesn't agree with their view is either incredibly stupid or on the payroll of the oil industry – and everyone knows what fascists they are.

One charmless chappie was on TV a few days ago arguing that anyone who didn't believe, as a matter of faith, in mankind's responsibility for carbon-based climate change was either a moron or, worse, a dangerous ideologue. These extreme views stifle debate. It's not a numbers thing. Just because many, or most, or a majority of scientists take a certain view does not make it correct. You can't have a vote on scientific principles. Either a theory has merit or it doesn't. Ask Galileo or Copernicus. Their minority of one proved to be the “correct” answer.

What's dangerous about these Ubermenshen is the virulence with which they present their arguments.

There are responsible scientists who genuinely believe that the major factor in global warming is burning carbon-based fuels. Some of them are open to an examination of their theses and a debate on the validity of their evidence. I have no quarrel with them. Their views are genuinely held and have some logical basis.

The climate fascists are in a different league altogether. They will not allow that there can be a debate, much less engage in it. Their language is meant to denigrate and ridicule the ideas they don't agree with. This is not only dangerous but downright evil.

What's so surprising is that so many people are taken in by this pseudo-science. In the name of science (but only climate-change science) only those who parrot the party line are in receipt of the research grants. Only those who think Al Gore is a prophet are allowed to roll the barrel or get their snout in the trough.

Not only is this bad science – it's bad for the future of the planet and the carbon-based units currently infesting it.

Bob Woolmer

Tragic!

“They can't continue when this has happened. The spirit of the Cup is gone and nobody is safe. I feel that the forces at play behind the scenes will stop at nothing to get the results they want - I shudder to think what will happen if India get knocked out by Sri Lanka today.” - comment on the Times web site.

The Woolmer family's very human tragedy is overshadowed by allegations that the darker side of betting and bookmaking may, in some way, be involved in his death.

This is a tragedy for the game.

This is not the first time a betting scandal has been involved in the death of a cricketer. Remember Hansie Cronje? Bob Woolmer was the South Africa coach at the time. So, although Woolmer's death has not been attributed to anyone as yet, the speculation is now focusing on the shady betting syndicates on the sub-continent. Why? Because these sorts will, apparently, stop at nothing to make money by fixing cricket matches.

It's easy to point the finger at the Pakistani players, officials, supporters or bookmakers. It is possible that they were involved in some way. The track record of the cricketers is not impressive. We have just “recovered” from drug allegations regarding two of the best Pakistani bowlers, Shoab Aktar and Mohammad Asif. They were left out of the team, perhaps on the coach's recommendation.

It's not a great leap to imagine that some people didn't agree with that decision. Would such people be motivated to either take revenge on Woolmer, or, even more shockingly, need to make sure he didn't speak out about this issue. Very likely.

It is ungracious in the extreme to suggest that Bob Woolmer had any hand in cricketing sharp practices. Nevertheless, there must be a thorough investigation to ensure that the public will continue to remember him as a fine cricketer, an excellent coach and a very good human being.

If the opposite is the case, it would truly be a tragedy for the World Cup in particular and cricket in general.

Being Freddy

Being The Fredster Just Got Tougher!

News from the Caribbean is just about all bad. In the wake of the England cricketers' romps in the sea and visits to local bars comes the report of the tragic death of Bob Woolmer. Whereas one event is laughable, the other puts into perspective the role of sport in modern society. Freddie may just be an idiot, but Bob is dead.

Reading the papers, and between the lines, it now appears that Freddie has always been a bit of a bad boy. He has been “spoken to” by the England management on numerous occasions. He has received many “warnings” about his behaviour – and has chosen to ignore them.

It's hard to feel any sympathy for him. As a talented and highly-paid sports star, he really ought to know better. When he reflects on how “demon rum” ruined the careers and lives of Gazza and George Best, he really ought to take stock of the situation and moderate his imbibing. And, I bet Rachel isn't all that pleased with him either.

By the way, where are the Wags?

Little has been seen or heard of the cricket Wags this tour. Maybe they are at home. If so, this is a mistake. Presumably, Freddie might have been in the hotel with the wife and kids instead of pedalling around the Caribbean were that an option. If there are no Wags on the tour – why not? Is this policy? If so, it's the wrong one. Lads left alone with plenty of money and not much to do in the evening are likely to drink too much and get into trouble. This is hardly rocket science. It's a bit sanctimonious for the England officials to climb on a high horse and express disappointment and chagrin from such a lofty height if they have done nothing to obviate the problems of a long tour.

Before the media jump on Freddie's case, which they seem all too ready to do, they might do well to examine the tour arrangements.

Of course, this does not excuse silly behaviour from the team, but it does, perhaps, put it into perspective.

Hopefully, in addition to his public contrition, Freddie might spare a thought for the family of Bob Woolmer. An excellent coach and an excellent ambassador for cricket, he will be missed as well as mourned.

If Freddie's antics shift the focus from the human tragedy that surrounds Woolmer's death then that alone should be reason enough for him to feel guilt and need contrition.

Hopefully Freddie will learn from his peccadillo and become a better person for it. After all, it truly is only a game.

Halvergate Marshes

Not in my back yard!!

The NIMBYs are out in force in West Norfolk. Some enterprising farmer would rather like to cash in on the wind power craze – but his nimby neighbours are not all that keen.

One of the reasons I so like going to Yarmouth is to catch up with the goings-on at Scroby Sands Windfarm; or, as I prefer to call it – Scroby Stands Still Windfarm. This off-shore alternative energy development really takes the biscuit!

There are 30 of the little rascals 3 kilometres off the coast. I love to watch them turning as I drive the last 8 miles down the (otherwise) boring Acle Straight. What a sight. Bountiful energy provided by Mother Nature and not a carbon atom in sight. Bootiful -as we say in Norfolk – at least we used to say bootiful until bird flu arrived at Bernard Matthews.

What's wrong with our brethren out in the Bermuda Triangle that is West Norfolk? Surely they would want to have some of these tourist attractions out in the boondocks? (that's what they are billed as on the Powergen website – tourist attractions in Great Yarmouth – I'm not making this up! ) Apparently not.

The West Norfolk NIMBYs are out in force to put a stop to what should be a real boon to the local tourist economy. How short-sighted can you get?

Then again, perhaps they are not as daft as they appear? Certainly if Scroby is anything to go by, maybe the West Norfolk NIMBy's are on to something. Have you ever counted the number of turbines actually turning as you drive down the Acle Straight? I have never seen them all turning all at once. Never. I must have been to Yarmouth hundreds of times since the turbines appeared and, I repeat, I have never seen them all turning at the same time.

We have been treated to an analysis of the pathetic power output of the Scroby turbines in the local press. Substantially, this is what is really going on at Scroby:

UK government has published its first annual report into the performance of the Scroby Sands wind farm, built off the Norfolk coast.

The report from the Department of Trade and Industry found the 30 V80 2 MW turbine wind farm near Great Yarmouth generated less energy than originally forecast, with capacity on average at 28.9%.

Mechanical defects including the replacement of 27 intermediate-speed and a dozen high-speed gearbox bearings as well as four generators 'significantly' cut production, the DTI report said.

According to the DTI, the problems at the £67m project had 'serious implications for resources, costs and downtime'.

Despite the slowdown, Jason Scagell, director of E.ON UK Renewables, the owners of the site, said the wind farm generated 153Gwh, around 90% of forecast annual output.

'Scroby Sands was and remains a pioneering project from which lessons will be learned,' he added.
Although the wind farm is expected to produce sufficient electricity to power 41 000 homes, last year only 12 000 properties were actually powered by Scroby.

Meanwhile, Scira Offshore Energy Limited is planning to build the Sheringham Shoal wind farm, comprised of 70 turbines, in the Great Wash.

When completed, the firm said offshore wind power could supply up to 176 000 homes with electricity.

The DTI said it had invested £107m in the first round of offshore wind farm development.

OK – call me stupid – but have you noticed that these figures don't add up? You can't reconcile 12 000 homes supplied versus 41 000 homes planned and call it 90% planned output! Even my maths won't let that one go!

Oh yeah, I forgot to mention: this project cost £67 million pounds. I calculate that each of the 12 thousand houses consuming the Scroby-generated electricity should have paid 5500 pounds a year for the privilege of being so renewable. I think I'll pass on that one!

So, now let's build a bigger farm at Sheringham and lose even more money. This is nice work if you can get it.

I've got a better idea. Halvergate Marshes. Why not put the turbines there? There is nothing else there except for a few cows, horses and sheep. I reckon you could put a few hundred on the marshes for a lot less money. Do you think the cows would complain?

Chances of this happening? Virtually none. It makes too much sense, and there is no mileage in interviewing spokespersons for the Coalition Ranged Against Poofy-Power – or as they are acronymly known - CRAP.

Twee, Bill - What About Cricket?

Bryson Blogs on Baseball

Nothing quite satisfies like a good Bill Bryson book. I know. I've read them all. Imagine my surprise when I found one in the library today that I hadn't read! I thought that I'd read them all, but no. Apparently, I confused Notes from a Big Country with some other one; and, consequently, forgot I hadn't read it. Silly me!

Bill is, of course, not only a very well-know travel writer; but also, the world's most well-known Anglophile – and a “close” neighbour. He lives, nowadays, near Wymondham – bout 20 miles from me. He never pops round for a cup of tea – even though we were neighbours back in the States – he from Iowa; me from Missouri.

Back to Bill's book.

Amidst all the trivia in this book is Bill's critique of cricket; and, correspondingly, his enthusiastic endorsement of that great American pastime – baseball. Summing up: Bill thinks cricket is a bit silly and loves baseball with a purple passion. Perhaps this is explained by his undying affection (quite rightly) for his now-deceased dad who was, by all accounts, one of the great sports writers of America. At least according to Bill he was.

Strange then that Bill never took to cricket. The games aren't that dissimilar. They both use a bat to hit a ball, and they are both obsessed with statistics. The true baseball fan will bore you endlessly telling you Warren Spahn's lifetime E.R.A. and Stan Musial's lifetime batting statistics.

But, you can always tell a true baseball fan – for he will bore you endlessly with: “There’s nothing quite like taking in a game at historic Wrigley Field!” However, before you can get into the Friendly Confines of Wrigley Field you will need Chicago Cubs baseball tickets. Even though Cubs tickets are notoriously tough to find, GoTickets.com has tickets for every game on the 2007 Chicago Cubs baseball schedule. Order your Cubbies tickets now!

Last time I was in the States we had a few days in Chicago and got tickets for the Cubs. My host let their offspring find tickets on the internet and (apparently) he paid an exorbitant amount for them. It was explained thus: some time ago the Cubs sold all the tickets to an agency and the agency charges exorbitant prices for tickets. Still people come to the ball park. You would think they would blame the Cubs for this blatant misuse of the free enterprise system – but, apparently, not.

It was a night game (one of the few at Wrigley) and we spent the pre-game hours in the pub in downtown Chicago. Sensible plan I hear you say. Very sensible as it was raining. The game was delayed – so we decided to stay in the pub. Good plan I hear you cry.

Eventually, we got word from someone at the ball park that they were going to start the game. It was now getting on for 10 pm.! We rushed to the elevated and raced to Wrigley Field. We poured from the train and into the hallowed halls. We found our seats – the game had only just started. Heaven!

Except we discovered that a goodly proportion of the crowd had been in the ball park for some hours, sheltering from the rain under the upper deck and drinking beer. I mean all the beer. They had run out and we not selling any more, either on public health grounds or simply because the vendors were exhausted.

Baseball without beer! Unthinkable!

I did manage to find a few very sorry looking hot dogs.

Four guys sitting not far from us were more drunk than I can ever remember being. They must have consumed most of the missing beer themselves. It turned a bit chilly. We were poorly prepared for cool weather – even though it was now approaching mid-night. Most of our party decided to retire to warmer more liquid surroundings. I stayed on with a buddy until after the seventh-inning stretch. Tradition!

I expect that's the last game I will ever see at Wrigley. Saw my first game there when I was about five. Fifty years had passed, but it was still better than sliced bread.

Cricket's like that, Bill. I'm surprised you never noticed.

Football Fighting

Seconds Out – Round Three?

Arsenal and Chelsea footballers have been brawling again – this time at a reserve team match. Coupled with the fracas at the Inter Milan v. Valencia match we now await Round Three to break out, somewhere.

No doubt, some do-gooders will claim society is tearing itself apart or predict the imminent demise of the national game. Fortunately, neither case is true or likely.

Football is a violent game. Twenty-two athletic men run about trying to kick a ball. Mostly they succeed. Sometimes they kick each other by mistake. Sometimes they kick each other intentionally. That's pretty much inevitable. Perhaps deplorable but almost certainly inevitable.

When they do kick each other, either by mistake or on purpose, they get angry. Sounds reasonable so far. You and I would get angry if someone kicked us. There however the similarity ends; for, if you or I decide to kick or punch or bite or whack over the head with a shoe our assailant, we would find ourselves in court. Footballers don't.

Why you might ask?

Perhaps if footballers were prosecuted for assault there might be less assaults. Certainly it's worth considering.

Clubs and players find themselves in front of the FA Disciplinary Committee instead. This is where the fun starts. If not fun, then, at least, laughs.

Having looked at the referee's report and viewed the video evidence, the FA then dispenses “justice”. Players, managers and clubs get fined. The problem is the fines are not really very expensive. Some money ( nothing like what the players earn! ) maybe, and a few weeks of forced rest. Everyone moves on – until the next time.

Is there a better way? Probably. Could we stop footballers from fighting? Not likely.

So, what's to be done? First, make the players primarily responsible. Second, get some independence into the investigation and punishment process. Third, make the “punishment” fit the “crime”.

Making clubs responsible is really just a cop out. If there is evidence that a club actively or even surreptitiously supports or condones violence by their players, throw the book at them. I doubt this happens. Players lose their tempers and irresponsibly retaliate. Players who are violent to each other should be banned (for a substantial period – months not weeks) and their clubs should not pay them while they are banned. Their salaries could go to support youth football or battered wives.

The FA should not be judge and jury when dealing with violence among the players. An independent body composed of members of the public, serving magistrates, retired judges and ex-professional footballers should adjudicate on appropriate punishments for acts of violence in football.

By removing wages from banned players, some kind of self-regulation just might ensue.

Yesterday's laughable slug-fest between Valencia and Inter Milan would be a good place to start. A UEFA panel will decide what to do with the players who spent quite a long time chasing each other about the pitch trying to hit, kick or otherwise injure or maim.

Whoever said, “It's a funny old game!”