Chiefs Mid-season Report 2019

Chiefs back into the play-offs or stroll to the Super Bowl?

Could this be a tale of two halves?

As the Chiefs head for their bye week, it's a good idea to take stock.

First the record : the boys in red stand at 7 and 4 - just a half game ahead of the Raiders and, having whumped on the Chargers - as usual, they are seemingly well placed to win the AFC West. But the journey has not been without incident nor lacking in drama.

Looking at the losses there is an easy pattern to discern. Losses to the Colts, Packers and Texans were hard enough to take and the loss to the Titans smacked more of a team on the slide than one on the way to the Super Bowl. 

Commonality can be found in the almost complete inability of the Chiefs to even slow down the opponents run game much less stop it. It has been one step up and two down for most weeks. Couple that with the injury to St Patrick and a perfect storm is on the horizon.

With five games left four of them are winnable. And, in order to finish as Division winners they will need to beat the Raiders at Arrowhead and even if they lose to the Patriots at Foxborough they will only have to beat the Bears and finish the season by embarrassing the Bolts at home in the last game to stroll into the post-season.  The problem is the NFL becomes more and more competitive and less predictable with every passing day.

The problems are there for all to see. More opaque are the solutions.

My thoughts : we must get a run game and I mean a real run game - not the collection of has - beens and no-hopers they currently employ.  Mahomes providing the bulk of the running game is a recipe for disaster.

On defence, the Chiefs have flattered to deceive on many occasions. They give up a ton of yardage and then make a play to hold the opponents to a field goal. The pass-rush has been better lately, but the run defence sucks – and sucks bit time!

What about the remaining opponents?

From Arrowhead Pride: "The bye week is a good time to get a glimpse at how the rest of the NFL is playing — especially this late in the season. The Chiefs have five remaining opponents, and all but the Los Angeles Chargers are playing on Sunday. You already know about the Raiders and the Patriots. The Chiefs will face the Denver Broncos and Chicago Bears Weeks 15 and 16."

On paper, the remaining schedule doesn’t look too forbidding.

Unfortunately, as already noted, the game ain’t played on paper – it’s gridiron football and as the season get towards the end the emphasis starts to ratchet towards the run game (on offence particularly, but also on defence). Both areas are great causes for concern - if not panic stations.

The Play-offs

Again from Arrowhead Pride: "We all know which teams are the most likely to be contending against the Chiefs in the championship round of the AFC play-offs. But it’s also important to consider which teams the Chiefs could face in the early stages of post-season play.

It’s hard to truly believe in the 7-3 Buffalo Bills — but that doesn’t mean they are a team to overlook. They play great defence — especially against the pass — and can make enough plays with the offensive playmakers on their roster. Second-year quarterback Josh Allen will have another chance to prove himself in this Week 13 match-up against a tough Denver defence.

We should also keep an eye on the 5-5 Pittsburgh Steelers, 5-5 Tennessee Titans, 4-6 Cleveland Browns and the 4-6 Jacksonville Jaguars."

As Thanksgiving approaches the Chiefs have a lot to be thankful for and a ton of things that may stick in the throat like week-old turkey sandwich. Of course, so do most other teams. My gut feeling is that the game next week against the Raiders at Arrowhead will determining how the season progresses. Win and we stroll into the play-offs: lose and we start building for next season by getting a real running back and a better than sub-par defence.  It's all to play for.

Brexit v The Civil War

Boris Causes Train Wreck?

We live in strange times. We may agree that parallels with the American Civil War may seem over - dramatic and inflated, but can we be sure that this is so?

A house divided against itself cannot stand.

I do not expect the Union to be dissolved -- I do not expect the house to fall -- but I do expect it will cease to be divided. - Abraham Lincoln

Honest Abe knew better than he said. The print media is awash with rumours of a general election as the only way to make Brexit progress. Problem is the heavyweights of the opposition parties are not really biting on this foul - tasting option. And Boris has no real prospect of conning MP s into voting, turkey - like for a Christmas poll. So, he blusters and fumes whilst the electorate snoozes.

Meanwhile the EU has agreed an extension, of unspecified length. Sort of.

Fortunately for Boris never say never can be consigned to the dustbin. Without batting an eyelid, Jeremy Corbin has seen the light, or has been on an unscheduled visit to the middle East for a Damascene moment not including his Hamas pals, as he has agreed to an early general election. Parliament is currently arguing about the date. It will be early December - almost certainly.

Hang on the masses cry, what happened to the fixed term parliament act?

Answer - Parliament just votes to ignore it-when it suits them - which is pretty much whenever they like. Clear? I thought not.

The background : David Cameron had an election which he failed to win, but he did persuade the Liberal Democrats to join in a coalition so he could govern. Part of the price he had to pay was the fixed term parliament act which specified that there has to be a general election every five years. The Liberal Democrats were thereby assured that he couldn't pull the rug on them when he thought he could get away with it. So far so good.

Eventually another election duly rolls around and, in no small measure owing to their penchant for climbing into bed with the Tories - along with Dave's promise to hold a referendum on membership of the EU, the Liberal Democrats got all the blame for the crap that happened and none of the credit for anything good. They got slaughtered at the polls and Cameron got an unexpected overall Tory government. One result of which was the EU referendum of 2016. Having promised the vote in order to blind-side the loonies led by Nigel Farage, poor David had little choice but to deliver.

It remains to be seen whether Boris may inherit the whirlwind sown by Cameron. For, we wait to see what Nigel will do. I suspect that the Tories must have had a nod and a wink from the Brexit party to the effect that some sort of election pact is going to be available. Maybe a clear run for Nigel and some of his cronies to swap membership of the EU parliament for tacit Tory support in some constituencies? Who knows? Update: the Brexit party has had their launch and Nigel has offered Boris a deal as I predicted. The Tories are currently saying not on your Nelly. Can they sustain this position? It all depends on the polls, if they start to slip Nigel may be back in the game. The campaign is only five weeks - that's five times longer than the old adage "a week is a long time in politics". Watch this space.

Why does Mal say this is most likely? Simples : I can't see how else a Brexit majority can be conjured after the election. The diatribe from Boris and his new best buddy Nigel will be that if the voters support Labour, the Liberal Democrats or anyone else they will get no Brexit at all or Brino at best.

This could work for Boris and he's a gambler at heart.

The house divided may be closer than we think.

Update, we vote on 12 Dec. As I predicted, Nigel has whimped out and done a deal with Boris. The Brexit Party will not put up candidates in constituencies where the Tory candidate is a Brexiteer. So, Boris should win. He's the bookies favourite. We'll see!

Presidential Angels

The better angels of their nature

We live in strange times. Seemingly lost in the Brexit conundrum, are the reactions of our closest ally and object of the special relationship. President Trump's pronouncements on the subject have been, in general, unhelpful and misleading. He has fallen into the classic trap of promising the UK a great free trade deal, but never saying how or when this may be accomplished. We are left wondering about this course of action.

Having just returned from state side, I was struck by the general lack of knowledge and informed debate from both the US government and the American general public. Except for promising a great deal the President seems unwilling or unable to comment sagely or give an informed opinion.

So we are left with Boris challenging Members of Parliament to basically back me or sack me, by insisting his deal is the only one in town.

We find that President Trump has, to his discredit, failed to make any real attempt to understand the real issues that underpin Brexit. Glib pronouncements are not required. They may be readily found in the media. "In part, this distance from the United States reflects well-justified wariness of the Trump administration. British leaders have, by now, learned not to trust Trump vapourware. Through the early part of 2017, Trump and Trump-administration officials again and again promised 3rapid progress toward a post-Brexit free-trade agreement. Trump told British reporters at the Hamburg G20 in July 2017: “We”—meaning the United States and Great Britain—“have been working on a trade deal which will be a very, very big deal, a very powerful deal, great for both countries, and I think we will have that done very, very quickly.” There was a time when pro-Brexit politicians and pundits believed and relied on those words, but that time is long gone. " - Atlantic magazine.

Now, it seems, the President has lost interest or moved on to more pressing matters. Donald Trump has said it would be “terrible” if Boris Johnson’s Brexit plan was blocked – making the comments hours after an historic ruling against the prime minister by Britain’s top court.

"Appearing alongside Mr Johnson on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly in New York, the US president through his support behind his determination to leave the EU.

Meanwhile the UK staggers on towards some sort of Brexit, oblivious to the reality that a free trade deal with the US has receded so far as to make the Andromeda galaxy seem closer.

Brexiteers are right to point out that the US is by far the UK's largest market after the European Union. What they cannot say is how to square the Donald's America First mantra with a comprehensive free trade deal. To the outside observer, these seem mutually exclusive propositions. Squaring this circle is at the heart of the Brexit debate insofar as it applies to the special relationship."

And, the pace of the debate is supercharged by the self - imposed Halloween deadline set by Boris. While Rome burns Boris fiddles with the numbers in Parliament, and thinks that he can push the legislation through in record time and with little or no scrutiny. Miracles do happen. Had he not so alienated the DUP it might even work. Crunch time is here. Again!

And at the bar of public opinion meanwhile there is no real appetite for just muddling on in the hope that, Micawber-like, something will turn up. Following a Pyrrhic victory Boris faces a real dilemma : should he keep trying or throw in the towel and go for a general election? Cannons to the right of him, and left and in front. Where will he turn?

Who knows?

One thing seems sure - the President has lost interest, has other fish to fry and may be further distracted by troubles on the home front.

Bon appetite.

The Age of Shoddy, Shady, Sanguine, Sangfroid or maybe Shitty

Musings

We are constantly being told that we live in the most blessed era. We live long and prosper. We enjoy good health well beyond the three score and ten we were promised. Each human carbon unit currently infesting the planet enjoys unprecedented advantages. Average life expectancy is at levels undreamed of by even our grandparents.  In terms of numbers we are indisputably the most successful sentient species on the planet. We stand on the backs of giants in terms of technology and science. We are the masters of all we survey. We go where no man has gone before. We decide who or what lives or dies on this planet, and we do it without much thought most of the time.

Take for example, the present crisis in the Amazon.  The Brazilian farmers - aided and abetted by the Brazilian government are happily chopping down the rain forest or setting fires to clear the land.  They hope to grow crops for cash or raise beef for earning valuable hard currency. The owners of this hard currency are aghast. The climate change Gestapo are on the streets of London, Paris and Berlin marching vociferously towards their perceived Armageddon whilst taking a break for a Big Mac at lunch-time.  Their hubris knows no bounds.
I watched an interesting program about antibiotics just the other day.  By Today the government's Chief Scientific Officer is on television warning of the coming disaster of biblical proportions.  As pathogens become more resistant to our drugs, we may soon see steep rise in illnesses we thought were gone. Science races to find new drugs which can postpone our demise for some time.  How long? No-one really knows.

Mean-whilst we moan and groan every time the price of petrol, natural gas or electricity goes up.  Yet deep down in places where we choose not to look, we know that these are finite resources. When I was at school in the 60’s, we were told unequivocally that all the oil would run out before the year 2000.  Needless to say, that didn’t happen. So, when similar predictions are made today, is it any wonder the general populace treats them with scepticism? We are a most selfish species. As individuals we may make token gestures in terms of re-cycling or riding a bike instead of using our car, but we will not make drastic changes to our lifestyle on the whim (or word) of self-proclaimed experts.  They may be right, but they may be wrong. Result, we do very little. And, even if we did, how could we convince the Brazilian farmers that they must continue to live in poverty so we can feel quite secure in our air-conditioned condo or gas guzzling limo? Logic will not suffice. Nor threats. Nor appeals to their better nature. 

Meanwhile back in the real world the Brexit saga just keeps on giving. I really wanted to write about other things, but there is seemingly no escape. The other problems pale into insignificance. Boris keeps trying to call the shots but is clearly either deluded or just incompetent. Your choice. Answers on a postcard to SW1. Evidence is building that the PM is in the middle of a mental crisis or aberration. Riveting best describes watching the news.  I've actually stopped watching Steve Smith flail the hapless England bowlers to all parts and switched to the BBC Parliament channel. It's better than any soap opera. It's just so difficult to keep up! Today not only has Bonking Boris lost four votes on the trot in the commons, but also he's lost his brother Joe who has resigned from the government and also his seat in parliament. So Boris troops off to the Yorkshire Police Academy, makes a dog’s dinner of a speech, causes mayhem and a police cadet to faint, slopes off back to London and continues to insist that he has everything under control. 

He screams that he wants a General election, but none of the opposition parties believe he is genuine. They vote just before the prorogation to stop Bojos disingenuous call for a general election. Parliament simply will not allow a disorderly Brexit. They may not allow any Brexit at all. 

(I digress to gloss over the embarrassing departure of the Ashes to the antipodes) 

Meanwhile the parliamentary shenanigans may prove to be a very clever plan, even worthy of Baldrick, on behalf of the prime minister. By effectively shutting down the house, Boris now has time on his hands to wander about Europe trying to get a deal. He will be unencumbered with the necessity of having to report to parliament. Certainly this is the view of many members of the public. I hope they are right and fear that they are wrong. We will have to wait until mid-October to find out. 

It's a real leap in the dark for Boris and the people. What it does highlight is the glorious revolution of 1688. While the Americans were busy forming a more perfect union and the French avidly employing madam guillotineguiteem Britain was basking in the self-serving glow of smugness at avoiding such inconveniences as real democracy. Hence we are at the mercy of the idiosyncrasies of an ancient legislature. The danger is Boris may win the day but lose his honour and soul in the process. Returning to the French revolution, one may recall the immediate cause celebre was a prorogation of the estates general by a government in order to avoid the risk of power passing to the people. This directly led to the tennis court and the refusal to disperse. And we all know where that led. 

These points are at this moment being debated in the commons. They will be voting on issues which may embarrass the government, but which are unlikely to be of any use to the people who are intent on influencing or changing government policy. 

Perhaps my vanity knows no bounds? String theory holds neither answers nor terrors for me. I would much rather know that our immortality is confirmed. It's not. We may fall victim to our own stupidity? We may proceed to the end of time measuring out our lives in coffee cups?

But what if we are not? What if we never pass this way again. Fact: our memories are not immutable. Our legacy is not guaranteed. For our collective sanity we assume that after we are gone our brethren go on and on. But this is not necessarily so. Perhaps the dinosaur gazing with little or no comprehension at his and his kinds imminent demise as it streaked and smoked across the sky thought they would go on for more millennia and was amazed that this was proved to be not so. We were the beneficiaries. What if we are not so fortunate? Imagine the nearby super nova which kick-started our planet should do the reverse. Our ever steady sun may blow and eight minutes later we no longer exist. Not only that. We never existed. 1984 has become fact. There is no evidence.

There's a thought. And not a pleasant one either. 

Post Brexit Brexit?

Will we have a Brexit at all?

Who knows?

Bonking Boris is currently touring France and Germany hoping Macron or Merkel will throw him a life line or at least a crumb of comfort.  Upon returning he didn’t actually achieve much - not in terms of concrete proposals.

Parliament are revolting. Corbin is flexing his very puny muscles. The Lib-Dems sense real opportunities. In a dark place where we hate to look, lies Nigel Farage.  Behind him lline Nicola Sturgeon and Arlene Foster. Canons to the right of him, canons to the left of him volley and thunder. Into the valley of death rides Boris.

Oddly, throughout it all Boris remains cheerfully optimistic.  Those around him, like Mchael Gove (supposedly in charge of Brexit preparations), James Cleverly (supposedly in charge of organising the Conservative party) and an odd assortment of others (including Home Secretary Priti Patel - (was there ever a more mis-aptly named politician?) mouth the Brexit platitudes.

Duckspeak.  May I suggest, dear reader, that you dig out your well-thumbed copy of Orwell’s 1984 and bone up on Duckspeak.  I suspect it will become more and more accurate in describing the reactions of our current crop of politicians the closer we get to the proverbial cliff-edge.

(I only left this piece for four days and, guess what?  It’s all gone belly-up - again.)

Boris has now decided to prorogue Parliament in an effort to stop MP’s from interfering with his plans.  This was probably in response to many of the opposition parties meeting just the other day to play how they can prevent the “no-deal” Brexit -  which is the central plank in his government. The Speaker is outraged. Jeremy Corbin is outraged. Boris is amiably suggesting this is just a plan to get more legislation through.  He fools no-one. He is scared S***less that MP’s will flex their collective muscles and insist that he does a Brexit deal with the EU. That, he knows, would be the end of his exit strategy and the end of his Premiership.  Unfortunately, so do the EU negotiators. Therefore they do nothing. They are certainly not going to ride to Boris’ rescue. The Queen has now become involved. Will she, should she, must she grant Boris the prorogation he asks for?  No-one knows for sure, but it is very likely she will have to do as her PM asks. Any way it is sliced it smells and smells rank.

What is to be done?  No-one actually knows.  There are as many plausible options as fleas on a dog’s back.  Perhaps in another four days I will be back with an addendum which will update the options and choices available.  Perhaps not.

Confusing, but interesting, times, though I expect the public (whose fault this mess really is) may be so annoyed as to echo Brenda from Bristol’s lament, of oh no not another election!  Difficult to see any other way out?  

Except for the large spanner thrown into the clashing gears by Nigel Farage’s Brexit party. If Boris manages to get a deal that isn’t a “no-deal”, they promise to fight every seat in a General Election.  In those circumstances it seems impossible for Boris to win.

Happy Days.

Chiefs Prospects 2019

Sharpen the tomahawks!

Let’s start with last season, which ended spectacularly with an agonising loss to the Pats.

From last year:

Mahomes will make mistakes – all rookies do. How many and of what sort will decide the season.

(I got this one spectacularly wrong! No-one expected St Patrick to be quite as good as he was. He carried the team to spectacular heights with some truly memorable plays. He did make a few mistakes but hardly anyone remembers them!.

Offence

The wide-outs are: Tyreek Hill (speed to burn who scares the pants off defenders), Demarcus Robinson (don’t like him, never did, hope I’m wrong), De’Anthony Thomas (again speed to burn), Sammy Watkins (brought in specially to be the number one target – did little in pre-season to justify the huge contract), Chris Conley (always liked him – hoping for a break-out year), and Marcus Kemp (unknown quantity). There should be enough weapons here for Mahomes to score touchdowns. Running backs: Kareem Hunt (spectacular rookie season, can he keep it up?, Spencer Ware (returning now fully fit – we’ll see), Damien Williams (unknown quantity – probably a special teamer), and Darrel Williams (ditto) Don’t forget RB’s are the QB’s best friend. If a run offence can be generated to help Mahomes – great. If not he just becomes cannon fodder. Anthony Sherman is the fullback and has been for years, Dependable and great on Special Teams.

(What a difference a year makes. Hunt is gone – courtesy of his own inability to either tell the truth or behave himself. Personally I think the Chiefs were too hasty to throw him to the wolves. Yes, he was the author of his own demise but was there not a way to rehabilitate him? We will never know. He’s now at the Browns. I hope he does not come back to haunt us. The result is that we will now see a running back by committee type offence. I did say that a quality back is the QB’s best friend. For Mahomes’ sake I hope whoever is on the field produces. Still, don’t like Robinson. Never did. Full stop. Sherman remains. Excellent. Damien Williams is the running back – ish. Carlos Hyde is a proven if unspectacular performer. Tremon Smith is in the mix. So is Darwin Thompson. I am not impressed. What was our strength now seems to be ordinary at best. The good news is the O-line is intact and may even be improved. A healthy Sammy Watkins is joined by Tyreek – fresh from his brush with the law – and rookie Mercole Hardman. Mahomes may throw 60 touch down passes to this bunch!)

Defence

The real weakness of the team last season. Therefore an overhaul was needed and was duly undertaken.

In come Spagnolo and a 4-3. Out goes the 3-4. Chris Jones is joined by Frank Clark (big bucks and he may well be worth it) Alex Okafor also joins this revamped group. The linebackers were very poor last year. I predict they will move up to at least poor this season. Great. The secondary looks thin and lacking in talent across the board. I better be wrong or it could be a long season – a very long season. The pundits are thinking that the Chiefs over-achieved last year thanks to Mahomes. They may be right – but we were an off-side penalty away from a Super Bowl appearance! Good things are coming out of the training camp about Kpassagnon (a puzzle wrapped up in an enigma). If we get four good down linemen who can stop the run and provide some kind of pass rush, the skies the limit.)

I’m loving the morons who are insisting the Chargers are the team to beat in the West. I bet Andy Reid is as well. We own the Chargers. Philip Rivers is mostly past it. We will win the AFC West again. Pundits again think the schedule is tough. So it should be we were so close to the big prize last year.

From last year:

Prediction time: the pundits are all over the place. Some even see a Super Bowl season. I all goes well they win 10 games. Super well – 11 and the Division Champs. Super bad – 8-8 and no-where.

My money is on 10-6 but I have no real faith in it.

We find out a lot tonight as they take on the Charger (many folks favourites for the division in game one). Ask me after this one! (we won!)

2019 prediction: We win the AFC West again we get to the Super Bowl and we may even well win it.

Presidential Hubris

One More Time – or You’re Fired

David Owen – one of the original Gang of Four - writes on 28 October that “Trump floats above us all on a double bubble of narcissism and hubris.”

Nothing like a bit of understatement!

David examines the President’s fitness for office. Speculation was that Trump suffers from NPD (narcissistic personality disorder). He quotes Allen Francis, emeritus professor of psychiatry at Duke University who commented that the President “May be a world class narcissist, but this doesn’t make him mentally ill.”

It is for the voters, of course, to make the distinction – which to me seems like saying “this guy ain’t wrapped too tight, but he’s not exactly nuts!” A great comfort. One wonders what you have to do to become unable to discharge the office?

What should be a strength for the President, Owen sees as a difficulty. He maintains that Trump the President has set out to fulfil the promises that Trump the candidate made. He goes on, “most Presidents deliberately change in office. Trump has not (I suspect the voters may see this as a strength). Could this be akin to Mein Kampf? Hitler told the world what he was going to do, but no-one was taking him seriously or even listening!

David muses: “he has no intention of losing touch with the frustration, anger and feelings of those people in the Rust Belt who voted him into office.” Sound familiar? It should, it’s straight out of Mein Kampf. Don’t forget, a large proportion of the German people voted for Hitler because he: blamed all their problems on foreigners (Jews) – sound familiar?: appealed to their sense of national pride and unity (build the wall) – it’s them against us!: and whipped up the crowds with simplistic, reckless and nationalistic rhetoric (never was a term more descriptive or inappropriate!). Does this mean that Trump is a fascist and undemocratic? No – he’s just close to it.

David analyses: Trump want s controversy – thrives on it – and is not a team player. ( I did read a fascinating article about how he cheats at golf – regularly and obviously. Apparently the Secret Service are complicit in kicking his ball back on to the fairway!)

The President is a deal-maker. That’s what he does. His stance on Korea is a good example. He’s looking for a deal and using all the tools he learned on The Apprentice to get one.

David is genuinely perplexed that Trump generally escaped scrutiny and comment on his business dealings. He attributes this to his reputation as a businessman being artificially boosted by The Apprentice and a troubling tendency for the voters to assume a successful businessman (by what ever measure you care to put forward – don’t forget as President he foregoes his salary!) might do a better job than the Obama/Clinton professional politicians. The voters may well be right.

A word on the voters. It has always struck me as the most difficult job in politics is to say to the voters: sorry, you idiots, you got it wrong. You are just too stupid to vote! (a far cry is our modern democracy which is very different from the ancient Athenians' democracy. All citizens in Athens could participate directly in the government. ... In Athens, citizens gathered together to discuss issues and vote on them. Each person's vote counted, and the majority ruled. Therefore, try telling millions of voters that they are too stupid to know what they were doing! Not a vote winner! (Same goes for Brexit on this side of the pond. Everyone knows that the Brexit vote was won by the ill-mannered, unwashed, ill-tempered, gormless, smelly masses in the same ill-judged, nationalistic, ill-favoured constituencies that Trump appealed to in the Rust Belt – but you cannot go on TV and tell the voters they are stupid – makes no difference if the facts bear you out.)

David’s peroration: “the history of besieged presidencies is, in the end, the history of hubris, of blindness to one’s faults, of deafness to warnings.”

Perhaps Trump is not Hitler in disguise but another comic book character:

Who knows what evil lurks in the hearts of men? The Shadow knows. The Shadow is a fictional character created by Walter B. Gibson, one of the most famous of the pulp heroes of the 1930s and 1940s. Born Kent Allard he assumed various identities for his crime fighting work, most notably that of Lamont Cranston.

Trump’s shadow looms over all and may not end with the next election for his hubris knows no bounds.

The American Dream?

America Edging Closer to Civil War?

Clearing out my desk and having a general tidy-up, I uncovered an article by Niall Ferguson from last October. (You seriously mean you have not tidied your desk since last October?) Before anyone puts me in the Pigpen stockade, I must point out that I have done some tidying – just not enough to get to the bottom of the pile. (aside) I remember when I was a hard-working teacher, the Head sometimes would come into my room – take one look at my desk (piled high with exercise books, bits of paper and the detritus of a hard day at the chalk-face) and comment on the untidy look of my desk. At such times he would, unwisely in my view, comment that in his office his desk was always immaculate. I simply could not avoid pointing out that the nature of his desk simply showed that he did not have enough work to do. I managed to do so with such good humour as to avoid being trash-canned.

I digress.

Niall was arguing that there is a kind of cultural war being fought on social media. He goes on, “Of course the culture war is no more of real war that the trade war with China.” He goes on to relate that in the news at that time was the fact that pipe-bombs had been sent to some of the President’s most vocal critics.. Clinton, Obama, Soros and DeNiro to name but a few. A Florida man, Cesar Sayoc, 56, was arrested. His van was covered with pro-Trump bumper stickers including one reading “CNN sucks”. “Trump owns this” declared a normally sober Washington correspondent. Ferguson did not agree - pointing out that a direct causal relationship between the two acts is just silly.

That people on both sides of the political divide use hyperbole and inflammatory language is not at issue. The do – on both sides of the Atlantic. And, social media simply amplifies the opportunities to do so. Both alt-right extremists and left wing nutters are more than capable of inflaming any otherwise inconsequential situation. But, leading to a civil war?

Ferguson contends that scaremongers who fantasise that all left-leaning Americans may emigrate to Canada (far too cold!) and right-wing gun nuts may secede from the Union rather than submit to even modest Second Amendment reform are over-stating the case.

He reflects: the historian Victor Davis Hanson has warned that we are “at the brink of a veritable civil war” and, therefore, we all need to pay attention. His comments are designed to warn reasonable voters of the dangers of extremism.

His historical analysis quoting the 1850’s (When congressmen routinely entered the House and Senate armed with pistols and swords and “The Caning of Charles Sumner, or the Brooks–Sumner Affair, occurred on May 22, 1856, in the United States Senate, when Representative Preston Brooks, a pro-slavery Democrat from South Carolina used a walking cane to attack Senator Charles Sumner, an abolitionist Republican from Massachusetts, in retaliation for a speech given by Sumner two days earlier in which he fiercely criticized slaveholders, including a relative of Brooks. The beating nearly killed Sumner and it drew a sharply polarized response from the American public on the subject of the expansion of slavery in the United States. It has been considered symbolic of the "Breakdown of reasoned discourse" that eventually led to the American Civil War.”) - Wikipedia

Niall goes on: “the most troubling analogy I heard last week was between the 2020 Presidential election and that of 1860. Lincoln was in a four-way race in 1860. If a center-ish, say Ohio Governor Katich runs on a third-party ticket and the Democrats nominate a progressive (say) Sanders or Harris and if Trump seeks re-election (almost a certainty) we could have a somewhat similar situation.

The parallels are not comforting. The 1860 election simply confirmed that there was no way to reconcile the two polar opposites. The issue of slavery had made them irreconcilable. Lincoln’s election simply brought the situation to it’s logical end.

You may argue that there is no single issue like slavery to unite behind in today’s culture war. But, the person who drew Niall’s attention to this was none other than Steve Bannon.

Nuff, said?

Football - A Nonsense

It’s a Funny Old Game

Grabbed an article from the Sunday Time (the seat of all knowledge) about football, or soccer, or association football whichever you prefer.

It’s been lying around on my desk for so long I’ve lost track of the date, but on the reverse side is a report of the Leeds Utd v Sheffield Wednesday match won by Leeds 1-0 – which, BTW is the most common score in any football match (the final tally was most often 1-0, proof,that soccer was as low-scoring as suspected. This result has occurred in more than 30,000 games — 16 percent of the total. Other common scores: 2-1 (about 27,000 games), 2-0 (about 22,000) and 1-1 (about 22,000). All highly interesting for stattoes but significant?

Back to the article: it begins with an injunction for anyone who wants to bet on Man Utd to beat Barcelona to progress to the s/f of the Champions League – on paper a fairly unlikely outcome (they lost 4-0 on aggregate).

The best odds from the bookies were 13/2. The true odds surely must be at least 10-0. After all, as the article says, Barcelona were a much better team, Man Utd have never beaten Barcelona in the Nou Camp and Manchester had lost 4 of their last five games. So, the bookies were right but the odds were a nonsense!

The reason football is so popular, so our author says, is down to two things, One: the system of reward in the game and two the influence of luck, good fortune or downright daft things happening.

The article insists that because the goals are so scarce when one does come along it rewards the fan for his patience. “It’s not like basketball, where they score every few numbing seconds or cricket where you wait five days to celebrate your draw.”

Correct. But the author has drawn all the wrong conclusions!

What he sees as defects in the aforementioned games are really their strengths.

He goes on: “the remarkable thing about football is that winning, statistically, takes about 50% ability and 50% luck – and you do not as mast managers insist on saying make your own luck. It just happens evenly distributed across all football teams.”

Chris Anderson and David Sally, in their book The Numbers Game – Why Everything You Know About Football is Wrong, collated stats that show that in a league game a poor side (no explanation of how to judge a poor side) will win 46% of the time against a much better team (again objective criteria missing). It is very different in rugby, basketball, baseball and American football. In those sports the better side has up to an 80% likelihood of winning. The longest odds for the favourite are always in football.

So. our author contends: the important reason why the game is so compelling. . . predictability goes out of the window. .. . we cannot be absolutely sure that our own team will get thumped when they play the league leaders, the way we could be sure if were supporting a basketball team.

This is just silly – even the league champions in basketball lose plenty of games.

The peroration: the authorities want the element of chance minimised so that the outcome of a game might genuinely be a reflection of brilliance versus mediocrity (and this is somehow a bad thing?) And we do this via the introduction of VAR, so that we can be sure that accident and chance are minimised. What if the thing the authorities are trying to get rid of is the main reason we all keep watching?

The entire premise of this article is just wrong. Even in the sports he mentions there is a large amount of chance.

I give as an example: The KC Chiefs having been outplayed for the whole of the first quarter v the New England Patriots dragged themselves back into the play-off game to draw even after normal time. Predictably they lost the toss and lost the overtime game. At the end of regulation time they would have won had not one of their players lined up in an off-side position. KC fans were, of course, disappointed and despondent, but able to accept the defeat as the loss was the fault of the Chiefs players and not some chance occurrence.

Contrast this with a match I remember well: European Cup Final 1975 - Bayern Munich went into the match as favourites, because they were the reigning champions. Watched by a crowd of 48,374, Leeds had the best of the opening exchanges of the match and had two appeals for a penalty kick turned down by the referee Michel Kitabdjian. Bayern suffered two injuries in the first half to defender Björn Andersson and striker Uli Hoeneß, following strong tackles by Leeds players. A Peter Lorimer goal for Leeds in the 62nd minute was disallowed, when Billy Bremner was adjudged to be offside. Franz Roth scored in the 71st minute for Bayern and Gerd Müller extended the lead ten minutes later, to secure a 2–0 victory for Bayern.

It was Bayern's second consecutive victory in the competition, although they failed to retain their Bundesliga title, finishing in 10th place. Riots by the Leeds fans during the match led to UEFA banning the club from European competition for four years, although this was reduced to two years on appeal.

The riot was the direct result of the Leeds fans sense of injustice. Their team had out-played the opposition. The very thing that the article praises directly caused the riot. Notwithstanding that many football fans – particularly in the 70’s and 80’s were then and may remain first class morons – the sense of the basic unfairness of the game was the major factor in the riot. Basketball, rugby and NFL fans do not riot – chiefly because they know the rules of the game are designed so that the best team wins most of the time. Upsets do happen and everyone loves an underdog but the burning sense of injustice is avoided when your team is beaten fair and square by the better team.

The odd thing is that football is moving towards the 21^st century – albeit very slowly. Those seemingly more hide-bound games like cricket and rugby have adopted technology as a way to make the game fairer.

Football is way behind and were it not for the seemingly endless propensity for the fans to tolerate any manner of nonsense it would have been dragged screaming and kicking into the modern era.

More idiots like our author do not help.

Brexit - Smexit

A truly great Brexit

I read a great article the other day explaining why Brexit is just around the corner.

Unfortunately it was all complete nonsense. Then a very nice chap appeared on the news explaining how he was campaigning to protect EU citizens rights followed by another bright spark telling us that a lot of EU citizens could not vote in the recent elections because the UK government had not bothered to organise it properly.

Great confidence has been engendered.

It's sometimes hard not to scream at the TV.

I could not understand why the chap who was so concerned about EU citizens rights was not foaming at the mouth and railing at the government, the opposition, the European court of human rights, uncle Tom cobley and all and sundry other numpties.

He should find out who set the parameters for voting in the European referendum. What an odd election that was.  As well as I can remember the franchise included the people of Gibraltar, any Irish citizens who cared to turn out and citizens of the UK. Excluded were a large number of EU citizens normally resident in the UK and citizens of other countries who are normally resident, pay tax and national insurance, and receive benefits.

Having found out, he should be button-holing them instead of hobnobbing with the BBC.  

There was neither any sense of fair play or good sense in deciding the qualification to vote in the EU referendum. So, who did decide?

Google it!

I did - and it turns out it was none other than spreadsheet Phil.

What it doesn't tell us is why the franchise was so restricted.  

Surely, anyone who fulfills the above criteria should have had a vote.  Otherwise it is just ridiculous to keep mouthing duck--like the platitudes about the 17.4 million who voted to leave. Only if the vote is fair, honest and decided by the majority of people resident in the UK is it a real referendum.  

It was not.  

So, now we are chuntering along with no chance to leave on any terms except those negotiated by Theresa May.  No matter how the bakers dozen of leadership candidates tries to spin it - it is, as she often said, the only deal on offer.

What’s left to do?  Only a general election is likely to allow any progress.  But, the Tories are scared to death of the voters. And, with good cause after they were slaughtered by the Brexit Party in the Euro elections.

With no prospect of an election we stagger on to Halloween.  Woe, Woe and Woe again.

Car Parks

Damn the Chelsea Tractors - full speed ahead!

In the news: Pensioner backed into wife while trying to get out of parking space.

Sounds funny, but it’s not. Poor old chap had to get in the car from the passenger side because there was not enough room to open the driver’s door. 

Accident ensued when he inadvertently started the car whilst it was in reverse – narrowly missed his wife and crashed into a parked car behind him. Ho! Ho!

Except it’s not quite that simple.

Readers everywhere in the UK are now remembering similar situations.

Why?

The main reason is because supermarkets, among others, try to cram in as many spaces as possible. In general there is not enough space allowed between cars. Now, add the Chelsea Tractors into the mix and you have a perfect storm of inadequate car parking space leading to car-park rage, dinged wings, smashed mirrors, unreported accidents and possible death my misadventure – or negligence.

I see this everyday when I go to Roys of Wroxham. Take two 4x4’s park them with an empty bay between them, stand back and watch the mayhem develop. No-one can open their door in this scenario. Tempers flare. Strange manoeuvrers ensue. Contortionists limber up.

Oddly, most of the opprobrium is usually heaped on people who park in disabled spaces illegally – or in the Parent and Child bays without a child in sight.

The real culprits are the planners who allow such a squeeze by the owners/operators and the lack of planning by the supermarkets. They do their customers no favours by cramming in extra spaces which cannot be used.

Solutions: special slots for Chelsea tractors, light vans and other wide vehicles; simply make the bays larger, even if this means you have less parking slots.

Put the customer first.

Dragging Clouds

Science or Pseudo-Science

I’m not very good at maths. This is odd for I have off-spring who have degrees in Mathematics and Physics. Some part of the genome has passed me by. My old man was quite good at arithmetic. He could add up someone’s milk bill on the fly and get the answer – always erring on the side of the larger amount, I believe.

I only preface this piece in order that no-one says, “This is dead easy, you fool!” (They may say that anyway)

So we have gravity. I understand the Newtonian theory of gravity (the one with the apple). Gravity is directly proportional to the mass of two objects and inversely proportional to the distance between them. Seems fairly straight-forward. Some odd bits arise. When you jump in the air you are attracted to the earth and soon find yourself back where you started. What people find harder to compute is that the earth is also attracted to you – but because the earth is so much more massive than a person, the earth still comes up to meet you - it is just too small to measure.

To be clear, what we observe is the effect of gravity not gravity itself. “In theories of quantum gravity, the graviton is the hypothetical quantum of gravity, an elementary particle that mediates the force of gravity. There is no complete quantum field theory of gravitons due to an outstanding mathematical problem with re-normalization in general relativity.” Clear? I thought so!

What science is saying is that we can observe the effects of gravity but we do not really understand how it works. Some science – oh yea!

So, what has this got to do with dragging clouds?

Matter is in three states. Solid (like the Earth), liquid (like the ocean) and gas (like the atmosphere).

So when the solid earth spins on its axis (as it does once in 24 hours) do the ocean and atmosphere follow at the same rate? Common sense and a little bit of science would suggest that the water moves along at a slower rate and the atmosphere at a much slower rate. Imagine it as the solid earth moving and dragging the oceans and air along with it. (Gravity!)

Now what I want to know is: if my theory is correct, what effect does it have on the weather?

When we look at the weather map we see area of high and low pressure. The uneven heating of the earth causes the air to rise (low pressure) in places and fall (high pressure) in other places. This is the main cause of the wind and our ever-changing weather.

But, take the example of a high pressure area centred over the British Isles. In winter this gives us dry and frosty conditions. - in summer dry and warm.

However, the weather map only concerns itself with the pressure. No account is given to the rotation of the earth under the various areas of high or low pressure. Perhaps changes in pressure cancel out the rotational factors or perhaps the rotational factors are so small as to be not very important.

Does the rotation of the earth affect the changes in the weather?

Could someone please explain?

Trump Golf

Commander in Cheat

How Golf explains Trump

Rick Reilly has written this most entertaining book. It’s obstensively about golf. It’s really about politics and Donald Trump.

His thesis is clear: if you cheat at golf you are just a cheat. And the President is a monumental cheater on the golf course.

Most golfers realise that if you take the odd Mulligan along the way it’s not a criminal offence and even your playing partners will not get too upset. All recreational golfers have played with people who simply cannot count their own strokes for toffee. Are they “cheating”? Probably not, they just can’t remember or have a brain-fade. In a competition at your local club these members are well-known and soon find it difficult to find anyone to play with. Problem solved.

Donald Trump is something altogether different.

Rick tell us that at Winged Foot, where Trump is a member, the caddies saw him kick the ball back onto the fairway so often that they took to calling him Pele (the aristocratic Brazilian soccer star).

Trump always tees-off first. (The etiquette is that a coin toss decides the tee order at the first hole and thereafter the winner of the previous hole gains the “honour” at the next hole). If Trump hooks it, he just puts down another ball and counts that as one. He then hops into his cart, tuned to be twice as fast as all the other carts on the course, so he can get off down the fairway and be first to his ball.

Balls hit into the woods or a bunker or in the water appear miraculously on the green (Caddies and Secret Service agents frequently collude to ensure his ball is in the right place).

One player (nameless in this article) even claims he saw Trump play in “invisible” shot. I saw him make a chipping motion from the side of a hill but no ball came up. Then he walked up the hill, stuck his hand in the hole and pulled the ball out. There must have been a ball in his hand the whole time . . . I mean who does that?

Then there is the “Trump Bump” He may shoot a sketchy 77 at noon. On the ride home his score will be a 75, by dinner 72.

According to Trump he has won 18 club championships. This is like an NFL QB winning 18 Super Bowls. On the official rating site where ethics dictates that you post all your scores, Trump has posted just 20 times in 7 years. The result is an astonishing 2.8 handicap. Jack Nicklaus is currently a 3.4.

Trump breaks the cardinal rules of golf. He drives his super-charged cart on to the greens. He doesn’t take off his cap at the end of the round.

The truth is the person in golf Donald Trump cheats the most is himself.

Does any – or all of this matter?

Don’t forget we have had some fairly dodgy individuals inhabit the White House. Forgetting Tricky Dick, Kennedy was a sex-pest and addict, Eisenhower and Roosevelt probably had mistresses. Harding used to hide in a broom cupboard to carry on illicit sex. The list is long and not very edifying.

If Trump chats at golf but is doing a good job, will anyone really care?

We’ll see.

Chiefs EoS Report 2019-20

So Near, Yet So Far Away

Where to start?

Let’s start with the “experts”. I often look in on the VLOG of Colin Cowherd mainly because he offers analysis and not just “facts” - you know facts they are the things that The Donald calls “fake news”.

Fact One: Tom Brady has been sacked nil times in the last 90 snaps. He has been pressured 3 times. This is against the Chargers, Joey Bosa and Co, and the Chiefs, Dee Ford “Mr The Sack Leader”. Watching the Conference Championship game this was more than apparent.

Fact Two: The Chiefs never got close to even moving Brady off the spot. He just had a look and threw the ball away if required. That’s the three pressures accounted for.

Fact Three: In order to win play-off games you can’t be awful at anything – so says Colin. Agree. His analysis: the Chiefs are bad, no worse than that, historically bad on the defensive side of the ball. The Pats had 500 yards of offence. They had 31 first downs. I screamed every time we had them in third and long and could not either stop the run nor defend a pass. End of story.

Analysis of the season must start with the end of the season. The Chiefs won the AFC West and won a play-off game, albeit against a very poor Indianapolis team. Why. Simples, Patrick Mahomes. I was predicting the Chiefs to lose against the Pats. Why? I knew they had no defence and defence wins Championships and Super Bowls. (No wonder the Pats are the early favourites to win in Atlanta – they have a defence – not great one but good enough to stop the Chiefs scoring in the first half.) But, Partick Mahomes (if he stays healthy and injury-free) sets up the team to win next season and for many seasons to come. Can Brady go on forever? No, and when he leaves Mahomes is the next cab on the rank to win and win big and win often.

Back to this season.

The offence

Apart from Mahomes the tribe really missed Kareem Hunt. The back-up is Chad Henne and since he now knows the system there would be no profit in changing (Being a permanent back-up has some advantages – the pay is good and you don’t risk injury) I suspect the Chiefs may draft a QB low down – say Round 5,6 – as a project -after all Tom Brady was a sixth round pick!)

Now, it is not my call to pronounce on Hunt’s well-documented behaviour. However, his “replacement” Damian Williams, is a good serviceable back – but not a three down back. Only Kareem was able to do that and catch passes and make the defence account for him always, and block effectively picking up blitzes. Controversially, I might sign Hunt again. He must serve his time and rehabilitate. Brave, but could be done if the Chiefs are willing to take the flak. And, he would be cheap, very cheap cap-wise.

Spencer Ware has out-lived his usefulness along with Charcandrick West -they go.

The O-line has performed admirably this season. Mahomes has rarely been sacked or pressured (always excepting the Pats game) and the run blocking has been good. What, at the beginning of the season was seen as a possible liability has proven to be a real asset. (One dark note: I can’t understand why the Chiefs activated Laurent Duvernay-Tardif only for him to be declared inactive for the Championship game – coaches surely missed that one!)

On the wide-out front Kelvin Benjamin must be signed to a deal. (I believe he is on a one-year contract – once again he was inactive for the most important game, but he must have a future at Arrowhead. He’s a real, proven, big-bodied receiver who will complement Sammy Watkins, Tyreek Hill and one other (not Chris Conley whose time is surely up) Marcus Kemp gets a few snaps, so does Gehrig Dieter. Both are regular special term contributors, but never a third guy in the progression. Demarcus Robinson is not good enough. He goes.

Kelce is the tight end bar injury but a real receiving back-up would be good (DRAFT?)

Antony Sherman is the FB. Great on special teams. He stays. Darrell Williams is a running back. Not needed.

That’s about it for the offence. Not a lot do do there.

Let’s cut to the real problems.

The Defence

The D-line is not good enough (Whoa, Mal we have Chris Jones! Yes, but he is almost alone in being able to pressurise the opposing QB. There is no push in the middle – well-documented against the Pat and the present personnel cannot stop the run. Must be fixed! It will be interesting to see how the Rams fare against the Patriots – they do have personnel that can pressure up the middle.

The LB corps is poorer than weak. We have no inside line-backers capable of stopping the run and helping out in coverage. This may be the one area that absolutely should be an off-season priority!

In the secondary, and very controversially, Eric Berry must go. Again, we have been waiting all season for him to turn up. Then he does and plays very poorly. (I saw him in position to make a play on the ball if only he had turned around during the winning drive.) Clearly he is not healthy enough to justify the mega-mega contract as the Chiefs have given him. With Mahomes taking up a lot of Cap he has to go. The rest of the crew are mostly a project in process. Except for Orlando Scandrick – he’s 31 and not very good. He must be cut.

Chris Cooper:Experience: R: Height: 5-10: Age: 24:Weight: 202 lbs: College: Stony Brook (sorry not sure why he is taking up a roster spot)

Josh Crockett:Experience: R:Height: 6-4: Age: 23 :Weight: 195 lbs:College: Central Oklahoma (sorry, who is this guy? Have I missed something?)

Raymond Davison: Linebacker (on roster, never seen)

Gehrig Dieter:Wide Receiver: Experience: 1 year: Height: 6-2: Age: 25:Weight: 208 lbs

College: Alabama (gets some playing time, so the coaches must like him – special teams only?)

Step Durham:Defensive Back: Experience: R: Height: 5-11: Age: 23:Weight: 194 lbs

College: Georgia Tech (a rambling wreck?)

Dillon Gordon:Offensive Lineman:Experience: 2 years:Height: 6-4:Age: 25: Weight: 322 lbs

College: LSU (a project, a serviceable back-up?)

Justin Hamilton:Defensive Lineman:Experience: 2 years:Height: 6-2:Age: 25:Weight: 315 lbs

College: Louisiana-Lafayette (ditto the above)

Ryan Hunter:Offensive Lineman:Experience: R:Height: 6-5:Age: 23:Weight: 322 lbs:

College: Bowling Green (yet another unknown)

Joey Ivie:Defensive Lineman:Experience: 1 year:Height: 6-3:Age: 24:Weight: 295 lbs

College: Florida (it really is surprising, another unknown)

Tanoh Kpassagnon: Linebacker:Experience: 2 years:Height: 6-7:Age: 24:Weight: 289 lbs

College: Villanova (an enigma wrapped up in a mystery. The Chiefs have been working on him now for two years with no real results. Get on the field occasionally. Time to move on? Answer to the LB problems? Your guess is as good as mine? Could he play inside with his height, reach and weight?

They love Frank Zombo on special teams and as a back-up. Move on, he’s too old.

The above players are on the roster according to the Chiefs web site. I doubt it’s accuracy.

A nice selection of projects or also-rans from the roster. We also have Armani Watts to return - out injured all season. And Dorian O’Daniel a linebacker who the Chiefs are high-on – also injured for the Pats game.

And the big question – can we survive with the present Defensive Co-ordinator, Bob Sutton. Probably not.

Post writing news: The Kansas City Chiefs have relieved Bob Sutton of his defensive coordinator duties, according to the team’s official Twitter account.

Andy Reid is a offensive genius, but he requires the same from a defensive co-ordinator. Let’s be clear, the team’s woes are not Sutton’s fault. He can only work with the players he has. Both Reid and the front office just haven’t given him the tools. He should go and the Chiefs should already have his replacement lined up. End of.

Special Teams

Dustin Colquitt (punter and holder) A great servant of the club. Is it time to get a new punter? He should face real competition next season. Harrison Butker. May be the find of the season. Rarely misses. Should be a fixture for many years to come (BTW I was surprised that both kickers did not distinguish themselves in the NE game. Butt-kicker’s kick-offs were not as long as usual and Colquitt missed a few chances to pin them back. (We’ll ignore the potential game-changing muff by Julian Edelman) Tremon Smith has done well returning kick s and I can see why you don’t want to expose Tyreek Hill very often to the big-hits, so I have no problem with him remaining. He appears nowhere else on the depth chart? Odd?

Coaches

Andy Reid: sad that he can’t find a way to beat Belichick – but still there is no real pressure on him. Eric Bieniemy : Offensive Coordinator – now apparently in great demand and may be the next Head Coach to have trained under Reid – following in the footsteps of Matt Nagy at the Bears and Mike Vrabel at the Titans Good luck to him if he goes. Here’s an interesting fact: the Chiefs employ 26 coaches – that’s about one for every two players on the active roster. I didn’t know that!

Conclusion

Now that the dust has settled, fans can be well-pleased with how the Chiefs have preformed (remember many pundits had them at 9 and 7 for this season). Next year is the fiftieth anniversary of the Super Bowl win against the Vikings. Baring unforeseen disasters I expect the Tribe to win the big one next February.

That’s all folks.