Tuesday, 21 June 2016

The EU Referendum: Vote Remain 23/06/16



I have done mountains of research about this question. I have read everything there is to read about this subject and was looking forward to writing an epic refutation of everything the Brexiteers have said. But now it comes to it, I have not the time, energy, or inclination to go as deep into this as I initially intended. So I am going to do this instead:
  •   Shit on the major Brexit arguments, namely law, sovereignty and immigration
  • Explain why the lack of reliable information in this tiresome campaign means it is logical to vote Remain.
I am going to fulfil the above bullet points without referencing any damned politician or economic think-tank. This is about what I know to be true and what makes sense to me. So here goes...

·         LAW  - ‘Too many of Britain’s laws are made overseas by dictates passed down from Brussels and rulings upheld by the European Court of Justice. UK courts must become sovereign again.’
The Brexiteers seems to think that laws are ‘dictated’ to us by unelected bureaucrats in Brussels. This gives the impression that during the entire process of enacting new laws, the people of Europe have no say. This is a factual skid-stain. If anybody cared to look, they would see that no new law can be enacted unless the European Parliament votes for it. Yes, there is a Parliament in there somewhere, and the seats are distributed per country based on their population size. Therefore, British MEP form the third largest contingent in the European Parliament. Furthermore, those British seats are voted on via proportional representation which is more democratic than the system we have for General Elections i.e. First Past the Post. The fact is we are represented in the EU and our representatives vote on everything that affects us and Europe.
                Secondly, the European Court of Justice, like the Council of Ministers, has a representative from each member state so it’s not like any ‘diktats’ don’t have a British hand on them.
                Thirdly, these people superseding UK Courts are judges. JUDGES. They are not tyrants, they are unbiased executors of European Law upon which British and European MEP voted on.
                And lastly, who really cares? Is the preponderance of local courts that important to you? Is the notion of living with (as you have been doing) European laws so terrifying? Nations worthy of the name already abide by numerous international laws, so what’s so repellent about European ones which our representatives voted on? Is it really worth leaving the EU over some law that displeases you personally? In my view, it aint. 

·         SOVEREIGNTY -  ‘The British Parliament is no longer sovereign. With the EU hell-bent on “ever closer union” and further economic integration likely after the euro crisis, it is best to call it quits before ties deepen.
Again, more laughable nonsense. The Brexiteers feed on ignorance so listen up. A few years ago our very own, supposedly redundant Westminster Parliament, enacted the European Union Act 2011. This Act means that any further ‘losses’ of sovereignty to the EU must be confirmed via a referendum. Like the one on Thursday. And given that the people of Britain will certainly vote to stop any loss of sovereignty, we need never worry about losses of sovereignty ever again. When it comes to politics, there is no way the European Parliament (of which we are part) could ever force us to do anything. They would be foolish to try.
                Oh and how is our own Parliament not sovereign when it has given us the opportunity to vote on our membership of the EU? Is some EU institution going to stop us leaving if that be our will? No, so forget about vacuous issues about bloody sovereignty.

·         IMMIGRATION‘Britain can never control immigration until it leaves the European Union, because freedom of movement gives other EU citizens an automatic right to live here.
We could have controlled immigration from Eastern Europe when they joined up, except the memorable Mr Blair decided against using transitional immigration controls which other European countries did. We didn’t bother to employ existing EU-legitimate immigration controls when we had the chance. Because of that, and because the British economy is doing relatively well (while inside the EU) people naturally want to come here.
Who can blame them? Our civil services e.g. policing are relatively uncorrupted by for example, Russian standards; our healthcare is delivered free at the point of usage, every child goes to school till at least they’re 18 and the climate is basically temperate. People here go to work in the knowledge they are going to get paid. We don’t generally live in fear for our lives. We eat, drink, and be merry. Some of us are able to worry more about football than the economic future of our country.
The pressure on our public services, (which many EU migrants work in and pay for) is not based on overwhelming numbers of immigrants injuring themselves and copulating furiously. It’s based on the relative weakness of our economy which can’t pay for the required expansion. Or this government has not chosen to spend enough – whatever take makes sense to you. It’s about us, not them.
But if you insist that it is about them, then answer me this: Are you going to vote to leave the EU because there are too many Poles in that house down Stuart Road? Are you going to leave because you’re afraid of a bunch of Muslims coming over? Remind yourself that there are no Muslim countries in the EU, and that there is no likelihood of such a thing in our lifetimes.
If we in the Western World regard ourselves as particularly blessed, then we should remember that our populations have always been the product of immigration. In these islands we have had Romans come over, then Scandinavian Vikings, Angles, Saxons and Jutes from northern Germany, Normans from Normandy, Indians of all sects from the old Raj, and Africans from the old Empire. Why not a few Poles too? Why deny them what we take for granted?  
  • Because we are having a tough time maintaining public services? Don’t be selfish.
  • Because they are superficially different? Don’t be racist.

And finally, let me explain why it is just plain common sense to vote Remain. 

People have rightly complained that they have not been given enough accurate information upon which to make an informed decision. This is a reassuring trend because it means people do care about this issue and understand that it is likely to be the biggest decision this country will face for generations. 

The awkward thing is this: There are no facts to be had

Leaving the EU is a totally unprecedented event. Given that Britain is doing much better than our EU colleagues, it is somewhat ironic that we are the first to risk exit. So what is a politically sensible person meant to think when there are no points of reference? How are we supposed to think about this portentous issue and make the right decision for Britain when any information we are fed has to be taken with discerning scepticism if not outright disbelief?
Logic provides us with two options:

  1.  Abstain – If you have no idea what is best then you had better avoid the booths altogether. This is not a time for guesswork for God’s Sake. 
  2. Vote In – If you are unsure of what is best but are determined to vote then support the status quo.Since we are in the EU, and have been for some time, the onus in this campaign is for the Leave side to convince you theirs is the best course of action. If they have not done that, if you are not certain that leaving the EU is obviously best, than you cannot in good conscience take that gamble with this country’s future.
How can anybody be convinced to leave based on a few months of increasingly outrageous invective and wild speculation? Let’s Vote to Remain now, let’s give the issue proper thought in the future, let’s try to make things better for everyone in the EU, and if it nevertheless becomes evident that leaving the EU is wisest for us, than let’s put it to another vote. 

Our colleagues in the EU have had a tendency to take chances because they believed in something greater than themselves. They believed in something greater than any one nation state. It led them to create a single currency. It led them to let the economically weaker Mediterranean countries join. They told themselves that despite the risks, they would make it work...

Doesn’t that sound like the Brexiteers? Aren’t they the ones who have this fantastical vision of Britain outside the EU, cruising alone into a new Golden Age of patriotic sovereignty and trade agreements? Aren’t they the ones saying fuck the torpedoes; we’ll make it work somehow?

To put it mildly, I say no thanks to their fantasies. I’m not buying it. Vote Remain.

Thursday, 19 May 2016

Turkish Poetry Festival May 2016

Ok so I read today that some German comedian is being prosecuted because he read out an offensive poem about the Turkish President, Recep Tayyip ErdoÄŸan. You can read about it here.

Obviously, this means that everyone has to make up some offensive poems about His Excellency President Erdogan. I made up a couple of quick ones which follow:

The Great Caliph Erdogan says,
Someone has put shit in my fez!
But don't worry sir,
Your words are a slur,
Against all the Free Speech in the West.

and...

There was a big goat in the mountains,
That said to me 'Erdogan found me!
He loved my great butt,
And sucked on my nuts,
Then bathed in a big semen fountain.'

Come and prosecute me you humourless bastard!

Tuesday, 27 October 2015

A Blue Perspective on a Dark Vista

As I write this Chelsea are losing 1-0 away at Stoke in the League Cup with ten minutes to go. It's at times like these when a football fan needs to reassess exactly what is important about supporting their team. 

Listening to the match I begin thinking about ways in which I can rationalise, justify and excuse the disastrous run of results my club has suffered. You can talk about pre-season with its fitness and recruitment implications, you can talk about the Carneiro issue and its moral implications and you can blame the players and manager in equal measure. It's probably a combination of all those things. Never have I known such a dark period.

But so what? What does it matter if Chelsea can barely win a game this Season? What if Chelsea finish mid-table, woefully short of Champions League football? (Just heard Remy equalise!!!!) The only thing that matters to the individual fan is hard-nosed, unquestioning loyalty and unrelenting support. It doesn't matter how low things become I will still support my club. I will still bring hope to every match. Maybe we will have to remedy our expectations and maybe we will have to cope with a few Seasons of mediocrity. It doesn't matter, I will still feel the same emotions whatever happens and take victory and defeat in the same manner, whether stoic or elated. 

Let's take some perspective on things. Since 1997 we have won a trophy most years. Nearly every Season we have challenged for the Premier League title. Is a couple of fallow seasons so horrible? It reminds me of David Moyes at Manchester Utd. It was a total disaster for them and numerous records were broken with multiple teams breaking their Old Trafford duck. They finished outside the top four but are inevitably coming back. If there is any logic in the Chelsea Board, we will be able to bounce back with a Chelsea fan, Jose Mourinho, who is probably the best manager since Ferguson. With any luck the promising youngsters will get a full blooding over the course of the season and we will be able to watch them grow into their potential over the next five years. Chelsea fans have become so saturated with success that we have got to the point where we perhaps value the progress of our youths more than we do the space in our trophy cabinet. This miserable period is the best chance our impressive youngsters have of playing regular competitive football. Treasure it because there is no doubting that the relentless ambition for the biggest trophies is detrimental to their prospects. Take the positives and think of the future for once.

As extra-time winds down and penalties loom at Stoke let me finish by reiterating the point I am trying to make in this emotive ramble. Results are important for the League table and Cup competition progress; performances are important for assessing the progress and situation of the team; but for the fans their football club is an emotional investment which gives them either misery or joy on any given matchday. What happens on the pitch is a weekly opportunity, not a holy human right.

When assessing the Season thus far remember the fallow years between 1970 and 1997. Realise that their are Chelsea fans who experienced those years. Recall that history shows that every club goes through peaks and troughs. We are clearly in a trough but understand that troughs are only defined by the peaks which precede and proceed them. Things can always get worse for a football club (ask Leeds) but also know that we are almost at the point where things can only get better. But most of all support Chelsea, support Mourinho and support the tribe - that's all you can do.

Thursday, 13 November 2014

The Autumn Champions

Chelsea FC's season has gone very well so far. It's even November and 'disaster' has yet to strike! We are top of the league by a meaningful gap and are undefeated in all competitions. We were slightly unfortunate to leave Manchester with only two points and have thoroughly punished the Liverpool clubs. We are playing scintillating football. Wenger has conceded us the title; the only difference being that he actually said it in good time.  Man City are in our eight-point wake and don't look like making it up any time soon. Any other supposed title-challenger is laughably off the pace. 

Bearing all this in mind it is unsurprising that every sports media contributor, whether it be a pundit or journalist, believe Chelsea are sewn-on champions. So obvious is this supposition that the same folk are now naturally wondering if Chelsea can go the League season unbeaten. The narrative is already building up to a cataclysmic crescendo. The storm will break when we lose a game. If this happens whilst there is still a chance that we won't be champions the ensuing media-frenzy might rival the Liverpool parade to the title earlier in the year (until we put a stop to that nonsense). 

Everyone is waiting for us to lose; either to give themselves a glimmer of hope in the League, or so they can start writing incredible trash about a 'crisis'. And frankly, so am I - waiting to lose I mean. I do this because: Firstly, the sooner we lose the sooner the media can take a more even-handed approach towards us. This will lessen the pressure. Secondly, earnestly believing that we will eventually lose is the most I can do to ensure that it does not happen. That's called superstition. The Manager thinking the same is the best surety against complacency (which is our only potential issue according to everyone.) 

So what issues do we have?

Let's talk about our defense. It has been lauded - after all it is the joint second best in the League. However, it sounds better than it is. Look below to see the plain truth:


Best Defensive Records - Goals conceded
  1. Southampton - 5
  2. Chelsea, Swansea - 11
  3. Man City - 12
  4. Arsenal, Stoke - 13
  5. West Ham, Man Utd - 14
It's good but it's not the best is it? If you include other competitions you see that Chelsea have managed to concede at least one goal in most games. In 17 (undefeated) games we have kept only four clean sheets. They are:

  • Leicester h 2-0
  • Aston Villa h 3-0
  • Arsenal h 2-0
  • Maribor h 6-0
Those are all teams that we would expect to get clean sheets against. We also conceded against Strawberry Town. If we return to the former list, we see that Chelsea's defensive results are not dissimilar to that of Swansea, Man City, Arsenal and Stoke. West Ham and Man Utd aren't much worse than us. Southampton are much better than us defensively and they lost their best defender to Liverpool. We should note that what clean sheets we do have were all gained in home games. This means that invariably we have conceded when playing away. It's not a good trend and it will  eventually catch up with us.

Why is this?

Ivanovic has been awesome in attack this season. However, he has been doing so much attacking that he is inevitably doing less defending. This does not mean that he is any less the defender we know and love, it's just that he's not always there anymore. Aggressive full-backs are necessary to help break down parked buses which is great, but the space left behind is an obvious target for opponents. This brings us to one of the men who would fill that space - Gary Cahill.

I like Cahill. He is a humble fella and he was there in Munich. But that does not make him a world-class, or even a great centre-back. When we bought him back in January 2012 did we think we were getting the next great English centre-back? I don't recall feeling that. He hasn't done much wrong, but he is clearly limited and needs Terry next to him to be comfortable. His commitment, physicality and ability to make excellent blocks commend him highly. However, he does not read the game that well because otherwise he wouldn't have to make so many desperate, if incredible, blocks. Furthermore, he is strangely non-committal when an attacker dribbles at him.  A long-term concern would be what happens when Terry retires (which can't be long now). I don't think Cahill can lead our centre-defense, and neither can Happy Zouma. We will need an authoritative replacement for Terry.

Talking about Terry: If we were to lose him we would be in trouble so fingers-crossed for Varane.

Fabregas has been wonderful for us. How many assists already? But again he does come with drawbacks when played next to Matic. He just ain't a defensive-minded player. People ghost past him too easily and then they can confuse Cahill to score. Personally, I feel the trade-off is well worth the while - long may Fabregas play for Chelsea.

Negative though the above has been, I think it important to highlight the reality that our defense has room for improvement. Comparisons to our team that only lost one game 04/05 in the League are quite farcical. That team could win one nil easily. This team, as we saw in Manchester, can't. If we had avoided conceding in Manchester I might be here joining with, rather than disproving the hype.

The Attacking Side

We are playing the best 'anti-football' in the League. Bus to Bugatti? People forget how we played great football at the start of last season - but that only culminated in a 2-3 defeat away to Stoke. Assaidi who? Then we got pragmatic and almost won the League.

Honestly, I do not have many concerns regarding our attack. We have wonderful team goals and plenty of talented individuals who can change a game. We might even be able to suffer an absence of Hazard. What we can't afford to lose for any period of time is Costa. The goal-threat just isn't substantially there without him. For me, Drogba has lost his touch and pace so isn't much use apart from as a fire-fighter for stoppage-time corners. But I think Remy is a perfectly adequate stand-in when he gets fit again.

Champions elect are found in Spring, not Autumn. Let's count our trophies when they are in the cabinet, not the newspapers.






The Wheels on the Bus go round and round, round and round...

I didn't finish this one and then forgot to post it...

Sunday, 27th April, 2014, Anfield: Liverpool 0 - 2 Chelsea

The reaction to the above result has been the most grotesque, bitter and petty affair this Premier League (PL) season has seen so far. We have total fools like Shaka Hislop criticising Mourinho for being a hypocrite. We have nearly every journalist in the land calling Chelsea's victory 'anti-football' while labelling it a 'tactical masterclass'. We have vitriolic abuse from those of a Liverpool inclination, as well as the tacit outrage of apparently all the neutrals. Nearly everything I have read concerning the game has lambasted Chelsea for winning in the 'wrong' way. A true tragi-comedy. 

But the last straw was listening to the Guardian Football Weekly Podcast. Barry Glendenning, (a Sunderland fan) said the following:


'It's very difficult to play a football match when only one team wants to play; it's very difficult. A match is about two teams playing. But this match was only one team playing and another not, as a famous manager once said.'

I didn't know they stacked shit that wide you fat bastard.

Anyway I am here to challenge the pathetic opinions of all those too blinded by their hatred of CFC to draw reasonable conclusions.

Mourinho is a Hypocrite
Really? Does that count as news nowadays? If I wanted to be pedantic I would argue the difference between West Ham's and Chelsea's performance was that Chelsea actually wanted to score. (To think that Chelsea approached the game with a draw in mind is so preposterous it does not even bare discussion.) Everyone knows that Managers basically say anything whenever it suits them. They are either manipulating the media with worrying ease and/or sending a message to their players. Being consistent has absolutely nothing to do with it. Shut up Shaka you utter idiot - why does ESPN tolerate your inane utterances?

Chelsea's Approach was 'Anti-Football'
What does 'anti-football' even mean? Does it mean some kind of non-sport where you don't aim to put a ball in a net? Does it mean Rugby? Basketball? Wait I know what it means - it means any approach which stifles attacking football doesn't it. It's all part of that tired Catalonian narrative where if Guardiola, Wenger, and now Rodgers lose, they blame their opposition's defensiveness and not their own team's abject failure to score more than a team that doesn't 'attack' LMAO. 'Anti-football' is part of the terminology of losers and ideologues. 
    This is why Chelsea fans don't use this specious term. When Chelsea comes up against a 'parked bus', has all the possession, has loads of shots and loses the game (which has happened quite a few times this season btw), we don't complain about the perfectly logical approach of the opposition, we curse our lack of goals. If Chelsea had only got a measly three points from all the games lost against supposed 'lesser' teams then the story would be different right now. 
     Jamie Carragher recently said that he played exactly like Chelsea did, away at a big club in Europe, looking to do anything, including time-wasting, to keep a clean sheet. So let's just forget about time-wasting since every team does it whenever it is advantageous to them. Funny how time-wasting only now appears on the media's agenda.
    I have also read a lot opinion to the sum of: Chelsea have a responsibility to play attacking football because of all the talent they have. Wrong. The only responsibility Chelsea has is to its fans. If Chelsea has a responsibility to football due to its wealth of talented players it is this - to win every game. 


Tuesday, 15 April 2014

Who will win the 2014 Champions League?

A very long time ago I decided to write an article regarding the relationship between the winner of the Champions League and their respective league positions the previous and winning seasons. 

For example: Chelsea won the Champions League (CL) in 2012 after finishing 2nd in the Premier League (PL) the season before. In 2012, the year Chelsea won the CL, they finished 6th in the PL.

So anyway, I fortuitously discovered the research I did and realised that I had better get the revolutionary statistics I conjured published before they become obsolete!

So here goes...

- Only 47% of CL Winners won their domestic league the same year
- A substantial 72% of CL Winners won their domestic league the season before 
  (i.e. qualifying season)

So how is this reflected amongst the most prolific winners of the CL/European Cup?

Real Madrid 
- 9 Wins_5 Domestic Championships to qualify
- 9 Wins_7 League Championship failures same season

AC Milan 
- 7 Wins_4 Domestic Championships to qualify
- 7 Wins_6 League Championship failures same season

Bayern Munich
- 5 Wins_3 Domestic Championships to qualify
- 5 Wins_2 League Championship failures same season

Liverpool
- 5 Wins_4 Domestic Championships to qualify
- 5 Wins_3 League Championship failures same season

Of course statistics like this are of dubious value and are highly unlikely to display anything other than the most negligible reflection of the future. However, it took a fucking long time to get these stats together and there are plenty more which I am not going to bother to reveal because they proved even less significant than the italicised stats above; so what can we glean from all this pointless effort anyway?

Here are some nonsensical and speculative implications:

- Bayern Munich definitely have a 60% chance of winning it
- Real Madrid have a 77% chance of winning it if they fail to win La Liga = Conundrum
- Athletico Madrid can improve their chance of winning to 37% if they win La Liga
- Chelsea will win it

KTBFFH



Friday, 24 May 2013

Album War: Megadeth vs Metallica!


OK. It is time to take breath a reader. I need a few before this begins…  The moment has come for me to pen my contribution to this most ancient and violent of arguments. It’s Megadeth arrayed against Metallica - two of the most well known metal bands of all time.

I have seen sensible people go red in the face raging about this subject i.e. WHO IS BETTER? This question, unfair or not, makes rational humans go apoplectic. Against my better judgment I am going to plough my own furrow in this brutal sectarian divide. Here goes…



(Before I go on certain caveats need to be explained: A brief perusal of the table below will reveal that not every release by either band has been included in the Metallic Table of Deth. What I have included are the proper albums; not cover albums, live albums, or otherwise albums – actual albums of original material. Furthermore, I will be comparing albums ad hoc, as seems appropriate.

                But how blatantly subjective you cry? Damn right. This is music. Don’t like it? Don’t care;)


Provocation 1:                   Killing Is My Business is better than Kill ‘Em All



Already I can hear teeth gnashing amongst the ‘Lica fans. Seriously, listen to KIMB and tell me it isn’t the most astonishing thrash metal album EVER.  KEA is amazing, don’t get me wrong, but there’s no denying the astonishing nature of KIMB. Check out ‘The Four Horsemen’: it’s basically a ditchwater version of ‘Mechanix’. Both songs rock though…



Searching… Seek and Destroy!



Provocation 2:            Peace Sells… But Who’s Buying is better than Ride The Lightning



Having a fit yet? PSBWB is another tour de force from Megadeth. All the tracks are amazing except the grotesque cover ‘I Ain’t Superstitious’ – that one doesn’t count. RTL is brim full of iconic songs like ‘For Whom The Bell Tolls’, ‘Ride The Lightning’ and ‘Creeping Death’, but please, whose idea was it to start the album with ‘Fight Fire With Fire’? That song is awful, as is ‘Trapped Under Ice’. Ouch. It’s a fantastic sophomore effort from Metallica (and Mustaine), but unfortunately the standard from PSBWB is too strong.



If there’s a new way… I’d be the first in line.



Fact 1:                           Master Of Puppets is better than So Far, So Good… So What?



Did you really suspect it might go the other way? After two excellent albums, Megadeth let everybody down with this glammy-nonsense. Very little mitigates this third effort, which took ten years to go platinum. Metallica, however, finally stepped away from Mustaine’s lengthy shadow and produced another brilliant album all on their own.



RIP Cliff Burton 27 Sep 1986



Fact 2:                                   Rust In Peace is better than …And Justice For All



AJFA is a much maligned album amongst ‘Lica fans and I can see why. It isn’t as bad as they say; but it’s not as good as some say either. It does have ‘One’ on it. On the other hand you have RIP, which kicks ass! ‘Holy Wars… The Punishment Due’ is probably the best Megadeth song EVER. Songs like ‘Hangar 18’ and ‘Tornado Of Souls’ provide the supreme backing cast. RIP simply blows AJFA out of the water. Just try and disagree.



Paid by the Alliance… To slay all the Giants!



Bodge 1:                       The Black Album is better than Countdown To Extinction



The 90’s marked a softening of the thrash which marked the 80’s, and is probably why these two giants of metal became more broadly popular. The standard on CTE is good and features a few excellent tracks like: ‘This Was My Life’, ‘Sweating Bullets’ and ‘Psychotron’. Alternatively we have the BA; it does contain some poor tracks, but it has too many great songs to be beaten by CTE. Behold tracks like: ‘Sad But True’, ‘Don’t Tread On Me’ and ‘The Unforgiven’ solo.



Noticed my comparison system so far? Now it collapses.



Provocation 3:                   Youthanasia is better than the Black Album



For five years after the BA, Metallica failed to do produce a genuine album; probably because they were too busy playing ‘Enter Sandman’ to vast crowds. In the meantime, the irrepressible Mustaine went and produced Youthanasia; arguably one of their best, if not best albums. Teeth gnashing? The natural sequel to CTE, Megadeth’s 1994 effort is stacked with brilliant tracks: ‘Reckoning Day’, ‘Addicted To Chaos’, ‘The Killing Road’, ‘Blood Of Heroes’ and the list goes on…



Lost my mind… I lost all my money… I lost my mind to the Killing Road.



Bodge 2:                              Cryptic Writings is better than Load and Reload



Things start getting really dicey now… Metallica finally fired out some stuff in 96’ and 97’ whilst Megadeth released CW in 97’. Basically, CW is better than the two ‘Lica albums because it has more good songs and less bad songs. Honourable mention goes to ‘Fuel’ and ‘The Unforgiven II’ – it’s not salvation for the latter of two poor albums, but at least it’s something salvaged.



Ooooh, on I burn… Fuel is pumping engines, burning hard, loose and clean.



And here’s the ends because I can’t continue being subjective without being objectively unfair...



Part Two coming up!