Monday Moan 47

Loons?  What a ridiculous idea

So, Lord Feldman (apparently, Conservative Party Chairman) is supposed to have described Conservative Party activists as ‘mad, swivel-eyed loons’. The comment is alleged to have been made to journalists and concerned the Party’s kamikaze descent into madness over Europe.

For non-Conservatives this is a wonderful time, watching them get worked up over a series of issues that have been left bubbling away beneath the surface for many years.  Europe is the best example, of course, with former Ministers lining up on either side of the debate to criticise the way the Party is going.

Of course, the idea that swivel-eyed loons are the exclusive preserve of local Conservative Associations is, clearly, nonsense – according to my research into Jeremy Hunt , Michael Gove and David Mellor.

Some people are beginning to wonder whether the flames of unrest are being fanned by sections of the media more interested in a story than any balanced reporting. For example, the BBC decided to lead its main News programmes yesterday with extensive coverage of the delivery of a letter to 10 Downing Street by a group of 34 Conservative Association chairmen and former chairmen, complaining about same-sex marriage. Rather less prominence was given to the separate letter, signed by more than 100 Conservative activists, calling on the Party’s MPs to back the same-sex legislation.

I suspect Alex Salmond is behind all this.  After all, which Scot wouldn’t vote for independence from the rest of the UK once UKIP becomes the largest party in England?

Heard on the bus ……

Sometimes, just listening to other people can be as entertaining a way of spending time as reading the newspaper or listening to music. 

For example, travelling on a bus in one of our significant seats of learning at the weekend, I had the pleasure of listening to a young lady talking to two others who appeared to be her parents.  I really wasn’t eavesdropping – it was impossible not to hear her.  A loud and, in all honesty, what can only be described as one of the most irritating voices I have ever heard, forced its way into my consciousness when it was describing how the lady in question had failed to be offered a job despite the fact that she had been told she had “interviewed well”.  Nothing to do with her voice, I am sure.

Then displaying all the intelligence that she had, no doubt, brought to bear in her interview, she explained how the interview had taken place in “Bulgaria, that posh bit of London”, and wondered whether if you rode a ‘Boris-bike’ in London you were allowed to use the pavements rather than the roads.

Can’t for the life of me think why she didn’t get the job.

Arsene Wenger – Miracle Man

‘Honest’ Harry Redknapp told the Match of the Day audience last October (see Moan 20) that Arsenal were rubbish, would finish beneath Tottenham, and that it would be a miracle if Arsenal qualified for the Champions League this year.

Well, ‘Honest’ was about as right as he always is.  His prediction that Tottenham would finish above Arsenal was one he has made every year since I can remember – and it was wrong yet again. In fact, it is now so long ago since Arsenal last finished below Tottenham that you have to begin to question whether the law of averages really does exist.  When was it?  1994-95 – the same year that Blackburn Rovers were the champions and Wimbledon finished in the top half of the Premier League.  So long ago.

The debate will continue over whether Arsene Wenger can ever again turn Arsenal into serious title challengers, but in an era when money may become less of a key to success and when Manchester United have to learn to live without Alex Ferguson, you never know.

Can you read between the lines?

One of the simple pleasures of life is to enjoy the countryside and marvel at all that nature conjures up each year.  Our annual trip to enjoy the bluebells in the Ashridge Estate yesterday delivered its usual quota of awe and sheer enjoyment at the marvellous display of colour that these small flowers bring.

However, I am slightly worried that my eyesight is deteriorating.  Some of the footpaths were closed, but try as I might to read between the lines, I could not see anything on the notices about the closures that said that this did not apply to unsupervised children, or to adults who just wanted to take a ‘nice’ photograph of their companion sitting amongst the flowers.

What is it about people that they can blithely ignore rules or requests like these?  Are these the same people who think that the ban on using your mobile phone whilst driving doesn’t apply to them,  or that prohibitions on parking in a disabled bay or on a yellow line are meant for everyone else?  

Selfish and arrogant individuals, all of them. But don’t challenge them, unless you are prepared to be subjected to abuse, verbal or perhaps worse.

Monday Moan 38

It all depends on your perspective

When I heard the story about Nani being sent off at Old Trafford the other night in the Manchester United v Real Madrid game, I initially assumed that it was one of Wayne Rooney’s more agile conquests who had managed to evade security in order to remonstrate with him about failure to pay his debts, or something similar.

 

It was only later that I realised my mistake and that the furore was about someone being sent off for a trivial offence at Old Trafford and that this had affected the result of the game.  Now, so many players have found themselves on the wrong end of dubious refereeing decisions at Old Trafford over the years that this hardly constituted news, except that in this case, unlike almost every other, it was a Manchester United player who had been sent off and not a visiting player.  Now that really is unusual!

 

How instructive was it to read the comments of former United players on this episode?  Well, Roy Keane, not one usually associated with being on the side of the angels, thought the referee was right - "I think the referee has actually made the right call. Everyone's upset about it and it's slightly unlucky, but it's dangerous play. Whether he meant it or not is irrelevant. It's dangerous play - it's a red card. You have to be aware of other players on the pitch. Does he think he's going to have 20 yards to himself? "  

 

On the other hand, Paddy Crerand, (for younger readers, he played for Manchester United from 1963-1971 and has since found himself unable to say a bad word about the club and has refused to have surgery for the removal of the red and white blinkers he was given as a leaving present)  apparently thought that "Roy Keane was in a minority of one. Not one person said it was a red card except Roy. Why do we not talk about the 99.9% of people who said it wasn't a sending off.”

 

Warming to his theme he added, “Why are we talking about Roy Keane - because he played for Manchester United? Well, let me tell you something. I played with Manchester United, I played in a European Cup final, Roy didn't. The referee was wrong."

 

If you want objective analysis devoid of personal bias or animosity then don't bother calling Paddy Crerand.  If you want old-fashioned vitriolic nonsense, then he's your man.

 

 

 

 

Vicky Pryce – taking it well

According to many in the media, the Liberal Democrats have been rocked by ‘sensational claims’ that Vicky Pryce, ex-wife of Chris Huhne and now failed plotter and convicted liar, confided in them two years ago.  According to that unbiased bastion of objectivity, the Daily Mail, this was “a nightmare for a party still reeling from sexual harassment allegations”.

 

It seems that Pryce has now claimed, in previously undisclosed emails to a journalist, that she told some important people in Liberal Democrat circles that her husband had done some bad things.

For example, she says she mentioned that Huhne had ‘behaved badly’ and said to others that there might be a scandal about to break over Huhne. That, it seems, is the substance of the 'sensational claims'.  Wow.

 

Pryce has admitted to a campaign of leaks and planted information designed to get back at Huhne for his treatment of her when they were married.  She has been, to all intents and purposes, a woman on a mission to exact what she thought would be delicious revenge.

 

For such an apparently intelligent woman it is amazing that she did not think through the likely consequences of her actions.  Had she done so then surely she would have realised that they were likely to see her go to prison as well as him?  And given this background, why is the UK media so keen to peddle other allegations made by her, in a crude and transparent attempt to drag as many people as possible into her ugly and spiteful world?

 

With any luck she will be sentenced today to a spell in jail, where she can reflect on her foolish pursuit of revenge and we can be spared from having to read any more about her.

 

 

 

Bolshie at the Bolshoi

The story of the acid attack on Sergei Filin, the Bolshoi ballet’s artistic director is full of some deliciously over the top diva-esque intrigue.

 

Bolshoi soloist Pavel Dimitrichenko has been in court this week and has admitted paying someone to attack Filin, but only to beat him up and not to throw acid in his face.  Sub-plots abound, with most of them seeming to involve Dimitrichenko’s girlfriend Anzhelina Vorontsova or her teacher and mentor Nikolai Tsiskaridze who was, apparently, none too pleased that Filin was given the top job rather than him.

 

I am not yet convinced that this is anything other than an elaborate hoax being played on us by the Russian media.  The story is almost unbelieveable and the casting questionable.  The biggest clue to the subtefuge, however, was to be found in the ‘court’ scene last week. Look at the person playing the part of the policeman guarding the suspect – nothing more than a camp ballet dancer in an unconvincing disguise, I think. 

 

 

 

Celebrate success

Arsene Wenger and his Arsenal team have been slated in the media this year for another season of failure.  Things are looking black for Wenger and the club. They face another season without a trophy. It is also possible that for the first time under his managerial reign – 16 consecutive seasons so far - Arsenal might not finish above Tottenham in the league. That really would be a mark of failure.  The crowing that comes from Tottenham fans on the rare occasions that they have managed to beat Arsenal during that time has been in stark contrast to the utter silence, indeed the complete invisibility, of those same fans on other occasions.  If they are to have a moment of triumph then goodness knows how they will manage to control themselves.  Enjoy it while you can, would be my advice.

 

But before everyone gets carried away with their perceived failures, let’s remember that no matter what happens this week in the second leg of their tie against a dominant Bayern Munich, Arsenal have survived longer in the Champion’s League this season than any other British team.  OK, not the most stirring of achievements, and some might argue that this is just a quirk of the fixture list, or that Nani has given them a helping hand, but Arsenal fans won’t care.  When you are starved of success then you make the most of the little things.  Just ask Tottenham fans.

 

Monday Moan 28

I-paper gets me mad again ....

In Moan 9 I questioned Amol Rajan’s approach to others as being aggressive and unnecessary.  He accused others of various character defects in sweeping assertions, themselves open to serious doubt.  Now, having read the I-paper again, I see he’s still at it – maybe he’s always like this?  Certainly he’s got a 100% record whenever I have read his pieces.

 

This time he takes to task those who oppose the legalisation of drugs in the most immoderate of language. A Government spokesman’s response to a Select Committee’s report on drugs policy is dismissed by Rajan as “possibly the stupidest thing said by any public servant this year”.  Not content with that offensive remark he continues that the spokesman’s next words were “belched” by a “historically illiterate and possibly teenage buffoon”. Nice.  The “buffoon’s” crime appears to have been to say that drugs destroy lives and blight communities.  Apparently, according to Rajan, this will “enrage any right thinking person”, since it is “utterly ignorant of the lessons of the past century”.  Rajan considers that the ‘War on drugs’ is “the most disastrous policy error in the history of mankind” and the spokesman’s statement “oozes the kind of base morality common in theocrats”.

 

Rajan is well into his stride now, and next asserts that “it is very, very clear to anyone who can open their eyes”, that whole nation states are dissolving because of “idiotic prohibition” and that any parent who thinks that criminalising drugs helps to protect their children has “absolutely no idea about the society, let alone the world, you live in.”

 

Apparently, we should all take note and our lead from Portugal, where decriminalisation has reduced drug consumption and crime.

I have no idea whether Portugal offers a good model for the future.  But I know that Rajan’s hectoring, dismissive, aggressive, patronising, and insulting form of writing is most definitely not a good model for others to follow when it comes to constructing a persuasive argument. Rather the opposite, since his style will surely, to borrow from his own invective, enrage any right thinking person since it is utterly ignorant of the rules of common courtesy and public behaviour.

Should we really beat ourselves up?

In the same copy of the I-paper as the one mentioned above, Simon Kelner writes a piece on some of the issues arising from the sad death of Jacintha Saldanha, the nurse who took her own life after being taken in by the Australian radio station pranksters.

Mercifully, Kelner eschews the approach adopted by Amjol Rajan and instead writes a thoughtful article in which he suggests that you and I must take the blame for the suicide because we were all in the joke through our wicked, voyeuristic delight in people being exposed as stupid, cruel or eccentric.  He cites Big Brother as his only evidence for this sweeping assertion.

He then asserts that we are all to blame because of our insatiable appetite for royal news.  Moving swiftly along from this most suspect of statements, he then suggests that the public was culpable rather than the News of the World and its journalists for the whole phone-hacking scandal, because it revels in tales of scandal and misbehaviour, without thinking how those stories are unearthed.

 

Hang on a minute!  Simon Kelner was Editor of The Independent between 1998 and 2011. How typical of a journalist to try to absolve all of his profession and shift the blame elsewhere.  It’s all the public’s fault, and the journalists are merely writing what the public demands. I don’t know about you, but I find this analysis to be lacking in any kind substance - more like a child denying any responsibility for its actions, whatever the evidence there for all to see. 

 

As a member of the public that Kelner accuses, I deny any responsibility. I have never suffered from an insatiable appetite for royal news, I do not crave tittle-tattle about anyone, or demand that the human failings of high-profile people be exposed, and I have never delighted in anyone being exposed as stupid, cruel or eccentric. 

 

No, I want to read the news.  I would happily buy a publication that was able to provide that service free from any of the other things Kelner accuses us of 'forcing' journalists to do. 

Is that too much to ask of a newspaper?  Apparently it is.

  

Arsene Wenger – “I am not embarrassed”

After last week’s defeat by Division 2 Bradford City Arsene Wenger said that he was not embarrassed. 

Oh really?  Well he should have been.  True, it was only the second time his Arsenal side had been knocked out by lower division opposition in any cup competition in his 16 years in charge – a better record than that of any other team in England. But it came on the back of some really disappointing results in other competitions and when Arsenal were already beyond any serious hope of winning the Premier League title with considerably less than half of the season gone.

Yesterday’s 5-2 victory at Reading was probably a truer reflection of his team’s ability, but needs to be repeated if Arsene is to be able to continue to claim not to be embarrassed.

  

Bradley Wiggins  - Sports Personality Of The Year

Congratulations to Bradley – and congratulations also to all the other sporting stars of 2012 – the year that Britain lost its tag as a gallant loser.

 

I don't want to overplay my role in this sporting triumph, but can it really be just a coincidence that in Moan 8 I predicted that Wiggins would win SPOTY unless some Olympian did something exceptional this year?  Is it credible to believe that, having read this, Wiggins did not understand the message I was giving him?  No, much more likely is that he saw the wisdom of those words, recognised the danger, and decided that he would be the one to do something exceptional.  This was the cause of him adding an Olympic title of his own to his victory in the Tour de France, thus building his case for the SPOTY title. 

A true champion - no thanks necessary. 

Monday Moan 26

Lord Leveson – did he fail to read the script?
The Leveson Inquiry seems to have been going on for ever, but in the way these things work it did not actually take that much time.  The problem was that it was heavily featured on the television, mainly because there were so many high-profile witnesses (i.e. newsworthy people) and because the coverage provided a fabulous opportunity for the non-Murdoch owned media to gloat over the discomfort of Rupert and his empire.

Leveson published his report last week – all four volumes and around 2,000 pages of it – and within what seemed like minutes we had firm opinions on what it contained, including later the same day the Prime Minister saying that he was not minded to accept the fundamental recommendation of Lord Leveson for statutory under-pinning of a new system of self-regulation.

Nobody should be surprised at how quickly positions taken for or against the recommendations. Very few people ever bother to wait to read such a report, consider what it says and then form a view as to the merits of its proposals.  Unfortunately, life isn’t like that and so we cannot expect our politics to be any different.   People know what they want, what they agree with and what they oppose – very few of them are open to persuasion, let alone to taking a fresh look at their own views (prejudices) and seeing if they stand the test of independent analysis.

So, let me reveal one of my own prejudices.  Any time Shami Chakrabarti, Director of pressure group Liberty, speaks on a subject I am immediately likely to find what she says irritating.  I know, it shouldn’t be like that, but then she shouldn’t keep saying such irritating things, should she?  In this case, she was one of six Assessors appointed to the Leveson Inquiry but she has come out against the legal underpinning recommendation because, she says, it would violate the Human Rights Act (oh no, not that again!) - "A compulsory statute to regulate media ethics in the way the report suggests would violate the act, and I cannot support it." 

Now I confess that I have not read the whole document – one of the many benefits of having retired from my previous full-time employment.  But I cannot easily shake old habits and so I have read the Executive Summary of the Report.

So, for those who have neither the time nor the inclination to plough through the Leveson Report, what did it actually say on this subject?  Here’s the summary:-

The press, operating properly and in the public interest is one of the true safeguards of our democracy. As a result of this principle … the press is given significant and special rights in this country … with these rights, however, come responsibilities to the public interest: to respect the truth, to obey the law4 and to uphold the rights and liberties of individuals … principles  proclaimed and articulated by the industry itself (and to a large degree reflected in the Editors’ Code of Practice). (paras 5 and 6)

 … there have been far too many occasions … when, chasing the story, parts of the press have acted as if its own code, which it wrote, simply did not exist. This has caused real hardship and, on occasion, wreaked havoc with the lives of innocent people. (para 7)

Not a single witness has proposed that the Government or Parliament should themselves be involved in the regulation of the press. I have not contemplated and do not make any such proposal. (para 12) I consider that what is needed is a genuinely independent and effective system of self-regulation. (para 51)  In order to give effect to the incentives that I have outlined, it is essential that there should be legislation to underpin the independent self-regulatory system and facilitate its recognition in legal processes. (para 70)

The legislation would not establish a body to regulate the press: it would be up to the press to come forward with their own body that meets the criteria laid down. The legislation would not give any rights to Parliament, to the Government, or to any regulatory (or other) body to prevent newspapers from publishing any material whatsoever. (para 71)

This is not, and cannot be characterised as, statutory regulation of the press. What is proposed here is independent regulation of the press organised by the press, with a statutory verification process to ensure that the required levels of independence and effectiveness are met by the system in order for publishers to take advantage of the benefits arising as a result of membership. (para 73)

 

Now, if you think all that amounts to a proposal for Government control of the press and the end of democracy in the UK, then please line up behind the Tory part of the Coalition, the phalanx of Tory MPs who apparently still fear to cross Rupert Murdoch, Shami Chakrabarti and others.  If, on the other hand, you think that the press has had enough opportunities to put its house in order, that 8 inquiries in the last 70 years into the way the press operates in the UK suggests that leaving things as they are will mean we’ll be faced with another inquiry before too long, and that what Leveson proposes seems entirely logical, then please form another queue under the banner of ‘Bound to be disappointed’.

 

I won’t be able to avoid a moan for too much longer

After what seems like most of the last few editions,  various readers have asked me why there have been no moans about Arsenal and their decline from title contenders to also-rans.  My response has always been that I don’t like to jump on bandwagons and, anyway, everyone recognises that ‘Arsene Knows’ – he will wave his magic wand and all will be well again.

I still hope that this is true.  I am no longer utterly convinced, however, and so the time is coming ever closer when a moan will be inevitable.

Come on Arsene – get your collection of talented players to perform somewhere near to their abilities, give them a bit of fight to go with their ball-skills.  Beating Tottenham 5-2 every season is simply not enough, if you couple that with abject surrenders to the likes of (no insult intended) Norwich and Swansea.

There – that should be enough to galvanise him and them into action.

 

White legs and a full house

I have just had a fabulous weekend away in one of my favourite places in the UK.  I’m not going to tell you where, since then you’ll all want to go there, but I will say it’s by the coast and the sun shone all day yesterday.  Four hours of walking beside the sea in the cold, fresh and invigorating air made me feel very tired but full of the joy of living.

I managed to attend a concert the previous evening, given by the local choir who have the very great fortune of being able to sing in one of the best concert halls in the country.  The place was all but a sell-out and, from the comments I heard around me during the interval and at the end, everyone thought it was a wonderful evening.  Oh well, satisfy your audience and you’ve done well.  It was a throwback to the English tradition of community choral societies, only transferred to a fabulous concert hall.  Those who know me will perhaps be surprised to hear that my presence lowered the average age of the audience and would have significantly lowered the average age of the choir too, had I been on stage with them.  

I’m glad I went, though.  There was one star of the evening and that was the soprano soloist – her performance made the journey and the cost of the ticket worthwhile, absolutely brilliant.  I really can’t say the same about all the others, including one who seemed to think that having been on TV and been promoted as one of this year’s ‘young things in the classical world’ meant he had arrived.  He hadn’t, at least in any kind of musical sense.

There were other highlights too.  The energetic contribution of the orchestra leader was a constant source of interest.  The lilywhite legs of the cellist were a constant distraction – suggest she wears some black tights next time.  And I’ll never again think bad thoughts about the dress sense of our own choir’s conductor – at least he never tries to look like Gandalf.

 

p.s. to avoid confusion, I should add that the image above is not taken from the actual concert ...........

 

No need to rub it in!

One of the great delights of being out and about is the way that the smell of fresh bread or the look of a cream cake or Danish pastry can lure you into a café so you can then enjoy a relaxing time over a cup of coffee or tea whilst consuming the produce that enticed you there in the first place.

Unfortunately, I had the misfortune to be diagnosed as a coeliac sufferer just over a year ago.  So, no more fresh bread and mouth-watering cakes for me.   I think I have coped quite well, all things considered.  Obviously, I still go into places that sell such enticing foods because my wife needs to eat.  The chances of going somewhere and finding that they offer gluten-free cakes are very slim – and even then those cakes will never be able to compete with the real thing in terms of smell, looks and taste L  But worst of all is to go somewhere to be told by the waitress (also the owner in this case) that “oh yes, we normally do gluten-free cakes but we have run out today”. 

Cruel.  There ought to be a law against it.