I don't know which aspect of this case depresses me more; the fact that a fifteen-year-old mother was attacked in a busy, well lit Lancashire street by a gang of at least six other girls, or that at the time of the attack, the victim was pushing her 14 month-old child in its pram.
Because on any reading of the victim's situation, she must have given birth aged fourteen and given the human gestation period, it is entirely possible - indeed probable - that her child was conceived when she was only thirteen years old.
As a nation, we are surely going to Hell in a handcart; God help us.
Showing posts with label Incredulity. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Incredulity. Show all posts
Thursday, February 17, 2011
Sunday, January 16, 2011
Ex-PC Mark Kennedy courts the press...
Whatever your views about the rights and wrongs of using 'undercover' police officers to infiltrate environmentalist groups bent on 'direct action' (and for what it's worth I would be very disappointed in them if they weren't), you may agree with me when I observe that for a man supposedly living 'in fear of his life' after he was exposed as such an officer, Mark Kennedy has hardly acted as he might have been expected to if his fear was genuine.
On what do I base that assertion?
Well call me old-fashioned, but agreeing to have your photograph taken (after transforming your appearance back to what most people would refer to as 'normal') and printed in a national Sunday newspaper is hardly the action of a man fearful of an imminent lethal attack, is it?
Either that, or he's an imbecile.
And by the way; has anyone else noticed his rather startling resemblance to the late Marty Feldman?
On what do I base that assertion?
Well call me old-fashioned, but agreeing to have your photograph taken (after transforming your appearance back to what most people would refer to as 'normal') and printed in a national Sunday newspaper is hardly the action of a man fearful of an imminent lethal attack, is it?
Either that, or he's an imbecile.
And by the way; has anyone else noticed his rather startling resemblance to the late Marty Feldman?
Wednesday, December 15, 2010
The sacking of Sam Allardyce: a clear injustice...
Hot (or as hot as it comes these days at the Throne) on the heels of my previous post about the replacement of Chris Hughton as manager of Newcastle United with the managerial luminary who is Alan Pardew, comes the dismissal of Sam Allardyce as manager of Blackburn Rovers.
Geographically speaking, the Rovers are my nearest Premier League football club and I know a great many people who support the club and who have done so since before Uncle Jack Walker rescued them from lower-league oblivion and turned them into the Champions of England.
Similarly, I often read the Lancashire Telegraph, the local newspaper, which reports extensively about the club.
Having done so, I have to say that Sam's sacking has gone down with the vast majority of Rovers fans like a pork pie would at a bar mitzvah, not just because they thought it was unjust (which it most certainly was, of which, more in due course), but because of the timing.
We are now just three weeks away from the opening of the transfer window on 1st January and the club's new owners, Indian millionaires Venky's, who have said they will spend up to£5m during that four week period, have appointed the club's number three coach - who most fans have never heard of - as caretaker manager. Who is he going to attract to the club?
They are in grave danger of turning the club - for which they paid out £42 million - into a national laughing stock before they've owned it for a month.
Anyway, in attempting to justify their sacking, Venky's have suggested that they wanted "a younger and more energetic appointment" to take the club forward.
Right, let's have a look at that, shall we.
Sam Allardyce is currently fifty-six years of age. Sir Alex Ferguson, unarguably the most successful manager of recent times, will be sixty-nine on New Year's Eve, Arsene Wenger, no stranger to success, is sixty-one and both Harry Redknapp, who is being spoken of as the next England manager, and Roy Hodgson are sixty-three; Sam is a relative strippling by comparison with them all. And let's remember, it was only a couple of days before his dismissal that Fabio Capello - who is of pensionable age - suggested Allardyce (or Redknapp) as the next England manager!
Frankly, that claim is rubbish and I think Venky's know it; they were just clutching at any straw they could to justify their unjustifiable sacking of a man they clearly intended to dismiss at their earliest opportunity, despite having promised to give him the time he needed to prove himself. in the end, they gave him about three weeks and four games, two of which were won and two, including the derby at Bolton last Sunday, were lost.
All of which brings me me back to my assertion that the sacking was unfair.
Blackburn Rovers currently stand 13th in the Premier League, five points clear of the relegation zone and just five points behind the Europa Cup placings. Had they beaten Bolton on Sunday, they would have been in seventh place; but that matters not a jot, for the owners had clearly decided Sam would have to go well before the final whistle went at the Reebok.
But that is only half the story. When Allardyce arrived at Ewood Park following the disastrous reign of Paul Ince, the Rovers were in the relegation zone, five points adrift from the pack and staring a return to the Chumpionship squarely in the face.
Allardyce turned that situation round and had the club safe from the drop with two games to spare.
Last season, his first and now only full one in charge at the club, he guided them to a tenth place finish - at least two places higher than he had been tasked by the board to achieve - and he achieved it on a shoestring.
Where's the justice in sacking a man with that record?
All that said, I know that the new owners can do with the club what they will; after all it is theirs, they own it lock, stock and barrel and they are free to sack whoever they want in an effort to take the club forward as they see fit.
But they would be well advised to be cautious, because they could easily antagonise and alienate their core support in England - the ones who actually pay to attend matches - and that will make their efforts much, much harder and could even see the entire enterprise crash and burn, and with it forty odd million pounds of Venky's cash.
It is a less than auspicious start and if the team doesn't win against West Ham United on Saturday afternoon, it will get much worse very soon.
A situation to keep my eye on, I suspect...
Geographically speaking, the Rovers are my nearest Premier League football club and I know a great many people who support the club and who have done so since before Uncle Jack Walker rescued them from lower-league oblivion and turned them into the Champions of England.
Similarly, I often read the Lancashire Telegraph, the local newspaper, which reports extensively about the club.
Having done so, I have to say that Sam's sacking has gone down with the vast majority of Rovers fans like a pork pie would at a bar mitzvah, not just because they thought it was unjust (which it most certainly was, of which, more in due course), but because of the timing.
We are now just three weeks away from the opening of the transfer window on 1st January and the club's new owners, Indian millionaires Venky's, who have said they will spend up to£5m during that four week period, have appointed the club's number three coach - who most fans have never heard of - as caretaker manager. Who is he going to attract to the club?
They are in grave danger of turning the club - for which they paid out £42 million - into a national laughing stock before they've owned it for a month.
Anyway, in attempting to justify their sacking, Venky's have suggested that they wanted "a younger and more energetic appointment" to take the club forward.
Right, let's have a look at that, shall we.
Sam Allardyce is currently fifty-six years of age. Sir Alex Ferguson, unarguably the most successful manager of recent times, will be sixty-nine on New Year's Eve, Arsene Wenger, no stranger to success, is sixty-one and both Harry Redknapp, who is being spoken of as the next England manager, and Roy Hodgson are sixty-three; Sam is a relative strippling by comparison with them all. And let's remember, it was only a couple of days before his dismissal that Fabio Capello - who is of pensionable age - suggested Allardyce (or Redknapp) as the next England manager!
Frankly, that claim is rubbish and I think Venky's know it; they were just clutching at any straw they could to justify their unjustifiable sacking of a man they clearly intended to dismiss at their earliest opportunity, despite having promised to give him the time he needed to prove himself. in the end, they gave him about three weeks and four games, two of which were won and two, including the derby at Bolton last Sunday, were lost.
All of which brings me me back to my assertion that the sacking was unfair.
Blackburn Rovers currently stand 13th in the Premier League, five points clear of the relegation zone and just five points behind the Europa Cup placings. Had they beaten Bolton on Sunday, they would have been in seventh place; but that matters not a jot, for the owners had clearly decided Sam would have to go well before the final whistle went at the Reebok.
But that is only half the story. When Allardyce arrived at Ewood Park following the disastrous reign of Paul Ince, the Rovers were in the relegation zone, five points adrift from the pack and staring a return to the Chumpionship squarely in the face.
Allardyce turned that situation round and had the club safe from the drop with two games to spare.
Last season, his first and now only full one in charge at the club, he guided them to a tenth place finish - at least two places higher than he had been tasked by the board to achieve - and he achieved it on a shoestring.
Where's the justice in sacking a man with that record?
All that said, I know that the new owners can do with the club what they will; after all it is theirs, they own it lock, stock and barrel and they are free to sack whoever they want in an effort to take the club forward as they see fit.
But they would be well advised to be cautious, because they could easily antagonise and alienate their core support in England - the ones who actually pay to attend matches - and that will make their efforts much, much harder and could even see the entire enterprise crash and burn, and with it forty odd million pounds of Venky's cash.
It is a less than auspicious start and if the team doesn't win against West Ham United on Saturday afternoon, it will get much worse very soon.
A situation to keep my eye on, I suspect...
Labels:
Footy,
hubris,
Incredulity,
who is in charge?
Friday, December 10, 2010
Another own goal, Mr Ashley?
The more I read about the manner in which billionaire Mike Ashley runs Newcastle United Football Club, the more I wonder how he ever became so rich, or having done so, managed to hold on to a significant chunk of his money.
My reasons for making that assertion are many, but are neatly encapsulated by the recent dismissal of Chris Hughton and his replacement as manager by Alan Pardew.
Hughton, the football aficionados amongst you will recall, was the man who took hold of the poisoned chalice which has long been the manager's position at St James' Park, after Newcastle were relegated from the Premier League at the end of the season before last, when no-one else would have touched what was a club in chaos, with a bargepole.
He proceeded, in less than twelve months, in transforming a team with a losing mentality into one which swept all before them in securing immediate promotion back to the financial promised land of the English Premier League; and he achieved it by spending about fifty quid.
Once back in the 'big time', Hughton steered his team to mid-table respectability, whist securing an away win at the Emirates over Arsenal and slaughtering their main rivals Sunderland 5 - 1 in their first encounter of the season. What's more, in doing so, he secured the support of the vast majority of Newcastle supporters; but sadly not that of the one who really matters: Chairman Mike.
Not content with the quietly efficient Hughton's work - and therein might lie his problem - Ashley peremptorily sacked him last week for no real reason other than, as the owner of the club, he simply could.
People saw Martin Jol, the former manager of Spurs, resigning from his position at Ajax and immediately thought he would have been heading for Tyneside to replace the unfortunate Hughton, but no.
Instead, Ashley appointed Alan Pardew, a man of scarcely higher profile than his predecessor, whose claims to fame as a manager include losing the FA Cup Final with West Ham, being relegated with Charlton Athletic and most recently, being dismissed from his role with Southampton, a club which now plies its trade in League One; fully two divisions and a literal world away from the Premier League.
Not only that, but in sacking the hugely popular Hughton, Ashley has also managed to alienate both the dressing room - you know, the room that contains the men who actually go out and play the games - and all but 1.5% of Newcastle fans as well.
I wish Pardew, a decent enough man, as far as I can see, a fair wind and as much good luck as he can get; because despite the five and a half year contact he has secured from the, shall we say Mercurial, Ashley, I think he's going to need it.
My reasons for making that assertion are many, but are neatly encapsulated by the recent dismissal of Chris Hughton and his replacement as manager by Alan Pardew.
Hughton, the football aficionados amongst you will recall, was the man who took hold of the poisoned chalice which has long been the manager's position at St James' Park, after Newcastle were relegated from the Premier League at the end of the season before last, when no-one else would have touched what was a club in chaos, with a bargepole.
He proceeded, in less than twelve months, in transforming a team with a losing mentality into one which swept all before them in securing immediate promotion back to the financial promised land of the English Premier League; and he achieved it by spending about fifty quid.
Once back in the 'big time', Hughton steered his team to mid-table respectability, whist securing an away win at the Emirates over Arsenal and slaughtering their main rivals Sunderland 5 - 1 in their first encounter of the season. What's more, in doing so, he secured the support of the vast majority of Newcastle supporters; but sadly not that of the one who really matters: Chairman Mike.
Not content with the quietly efficient Hughton's work - and therein might lie his problem - Ashley peremptorily sacked him last week for no real reason other than, as the owner of the club, he simply could.
People saw Martin Jol, the former manager of Spurs, resigning from his position at Ajax and immediately thought he would have been heading for Tyneside to replace the unfortunate Hughton, but no.
Instead, Ashley appointed Alan Pardew, a man of scarcely higher profile than his predecessor, whose claims to fame as a manager include losing the FA Cup Final with West Ham, being relegated with Charlton Athletic and most recently, being dismissed from his role with Southampton, a club which now plies its trade in League One; fully two divisions and a literal world away from the Premier League.
Not only that, but in sacking the hugely popular Hughton, Ashley has also managed to alienate both the dressing room - you know, the room that contains the men who actually go out and play the games - and all but 1.5% of Newcastle fans as well.
I wish Pardew, a decent enough man, as far as I can see, a fair wind and as much good luck as he can get; because despite the five and a half year contact he has secured from the, shall we say Mercurial, Ashley, I think he's going to need it.
Labels:
Abuse of power,
choices,
Footy,
hubris,
Incredulity,
own goals
Thursday, September 09, 2010
I would, my friend, Fernando...
According to a lawsuit filed today in America - where else - Britney Spears allegedly 'sexually harrassed' her former bodyguard.
Yeah, right, Fernando; you should be so lucky...
Yeah, right, Fernando; you should be so lucky...
Thursday, August 05, 2010
Kevin Myers and a question for the Guardian...
In this article, the ever excellent Kevin Myers of the Irish Independent, asks the publishers of the Guardian why they saw fit to hire a defeated terrorist warlord to act as a moral arbiter over the actions of the British Army in Afghanistan.
Written with his usual searing disregard for reputations - in this case, those of a dissembling murderer and his naive self-hating paymasters - I think he's got it spot on; but what do you think?
Written with his usual searing disregard for reputations - in this case, those of a dissembling murderer and his naive self-hating paymasters - I think he's got it spot on; but what do you think?
Saturday, June 12, 2010
What has she done to deserve it?
I have no particular antipathy towards Catherine Zeta Jones, but I have to say I'm puzzled by the fact that she has been awarded the CBE in the Queen's Birthday Honours list.
I say that because although Welsh by birth and upbringing, she has lived in Califonia with her American husband since 1996 - more than a third of her life - has two American children and herself effects something of an American accent.
I'm sure she'll be delighted to receive the honour and to take her husband to Buckingham Palace to meet the Queen; but what has she actually done here, in this country, to actually deserve the honour? Because last time I checked, being born in Wales, being attractive and landing a rich husband about the same age as your father, weren't amongst the qualifying criteria; especially for an honour which is only one step down from a knighthood, or in the case of a female recipient, a damehood.
Dame Catherine?
Makes as much sense to me as Catherine Zeta-Jones CBE.
I also note that England's Puritan-in-Chief, Professor Ian Gilmore, has been knighted, too. He may be an illiberal killjoy, but he is also the president of the Royal College of Physicians, and as such his award is understandable and - though I say it through gritted teeth - deserved.
But Catherine Zeta-Jones?
I say that because although Welsh by birth and upbringing, she has lived in Califonia with her American husband since 1996 - more than a third of her life - has two American children and herself effects something of an American accent.
I'm sure she'll be delighted to receive the honour and to take her husband to Buckingham Palace to meet the Queen; but what has she actually done here, in this country, to actually deserve the honour? Because last time I checked, being born in Wales, being attractive and landing a rich husband about the same age as your father, weren't amongst the qualifying criteria; especially for an honour which is only one step down from a knighthood, or in the case of a female recipient, a damehood.
Dame Catherine?
Makes as much sense to me as Catherine Zeta-Jones CBE.
I also note that England's Puritan-in-Chief, Professor Ian Gilmore, has been knighted, too. He may be an illiberal killjoy, but he is also the president of the Royal College of Physicians, and as such his award is understandable and - though I say it through gritted teeth - deserved.
But Catherine Zeta-Jones?
Labels:
Incredulity,
much ado about nothing,
randomness,
s,
The Queen
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
