Forum Replies Created
- Posts
Judging by the two matches with K, Rangers haven’t a prayer of winning the SPL, and with reduced income prospects they won’t be able to strengthen their team.
Andy Burnham genuinely isn’t thick – I have friends who know him well and say he is both bright and engaging. He just has what most politicians of all parties have – what to me is a vastly over-inflated idea of what should be within the scope of government. Football (like many other facets of life) should be none of their business.
I thought it was an excellent programme and quite reassuring about how carefully Betfair and the horse-racing authorities discharge their responsibilities. As previous posters have said, with that degree of oversight, many who might be tempted to cheat may well be deterred.
Several specific points struck me:
1) most importantly, the horse racing authorities seem, for reasons not made clear, to be at a disadvantage to the BBC in getting hold of information held by other public bodies and presumably obtained by the BBC legally. Or maybe they are just slower off the mark. Surely something for the horse-racing authorities to consider;
2) it is not only among the young in the deprived inner-city areas where foul-mouthed, aggressive thugs can be found – we saw two utterly repulsive middle-aged individuals from, one would say, the better heeled part of society, whom I find it quite embarrassing to have to acknowledge as fellow members of the human race;
3) the presenter’s professionalism. Good command of the material; a preparedness to ask awkward questions (many of the BBC’s political correspondents would do well to take lessons from him) without Paxman-like theatrics; and calm under provocation including actual assault.
Overall I thought this was the BBC at its best, investigative without being didactic or inappropriately polemic.
Assuming the story is true, isn’t it essentially the situation that obtains every day when those on course and viewing a race live are able to bet via Betfair and other exchanges with more knowledge than those watching "live" on their televisions who are actually seeing events some seconds later than they are occurring?
The transfer market seems very volatile. If I recall correctly, not long ago Liverpool were asking Villa for £10m to sign Scott Carson on a permanent basis, Now, according to Sky Sports, they have agreed a fee of £3.5m with Stoke, which if correct seems a bargain price for a promising young keeper already capped for England.
I can’t help feeling that if Liverpool had asked Villa for say £6m, they might have made more for Carson who would then have gone to a frankly much better side than Stoke. If he does sign it is surely odds on he’ll be in the Championship this time next year.
This, coupled with the protracted tooing and froing over Barry, makes me think that one of the US owners of Liverpool is right and the Liverpool CE should go.
Mike
I thought it was a really good Cup and enjoyed nearly all the games I watched – the exception being France/Roumania.
The performances of the Cup were for me Holland’s defeat of Italy – some brilliant goals, and Spain’s defeat of Russia. Some of the other games had more excitement – take a bow Turkey in this regard – but I thought those two performances were the best. Free-flowing football, with the ball mainly on the deck – that’s the way England have to go to be competitive.
Many individual performances that merited attention, not least Villa’s goals and the excellence of the Spanish, Dutch and Italian keepers. But for me the best single moment of the whole Cup was Torres’s composed finish last night, and the best overall performance in a single game Fabregas’s in the semi-final – and I am not a Liverpool or Arsenal fan.
Also good was the mainly high standard of player conduct, coupled with referees’ performance. In the former area the Germans disappointed most, as I thought there were several very cynical fouls that went largely unpunished last night, and Ballack, though a great player, was one of the culprits. As regards referees, there seemed to be less prima donas than in the Premiership with, generally speaking, a willingness to let games flow and be remembered for the quality of the football and the players, not the referees.
For the future, the Spanish side can only get better – assuming they make a good managerial appointment – and should give Brazil and Argentina a run for their money in the World Cup. Portugal and Holland should also improve, but like Spain will have new managers which may or may not help. By contrast, Italy, Germany and France join England in needing to think about how to move forward. Hard to see any of those four making much impact in 2010 on present evidence, though it looked to me as if France’s problem was their lunatic manager and with a change there the spirit among the team and the performance on the pitch could, I think, improve to a very much greater extent than seems likely with Italy, Germany and England.
What a great game Cesc Fabregas had. In my view he was the star of an excellent Spanish team performance on the night.
I hope the Spanish team can hold their nerve and win the Cup, but I can’t help feeling that, despite playing less attractive football, the Germans will somehow manage to come out on top.
Insomniac
Another thing I’ve noticed is that quite often, even when seemingly not under much pressure, professionals "drag" their shots wide. When I played (very low grade amateur soccer) I used to do that a lot, but I’d expect professionals to kick the ball cleanly more often.
They are of course playing at much greater speed than I ever did – indeed the few times I’ve sat at a match really close to the action instead of up in the stands I’ve been amazed by how fast it is.
David
"Just as diving slowly crept into football and is now endemic, we are now seeing these team tactics slowly creeping into racing. In 5-10 years will we all be despairing over how to stop team tactics which are ruining the sport or should it be stamped out now before it gets that far."
It is difficult to stop things once they are endemic. One just has to note how much criticism the referee attracted giving a penalty in the European Cup when a defender blatantly shirt-pulled an opponent down in the box, on the basis that it happens all the time. But if the will was there, such conduct could be stamped out: if penalties were awarded each time, within a few weeks defenders would conduct themselves differently. However, the example of whip abuse, where fines and suspensions result rather than races forfeited, suggests that the racing authorities are as unwilling as their football counterparts to impose penalties that really would end undesirable conduct.
"Team" racing poses real problems in respect of evidence. Trainers often run more than one horse, with each running on its merits, and it is hard to be sure a move by one that benefits another of the stable’s runners was done for that purpose. But despite the evidence problems I agree with you that the issue needs to be addressed before it becomes more widespread.
Clivex
I’m wondering how you feel about the appointment of Scolari to succeed Grant?
The Sunday Times today has a piece with the seemingly accurate title "I went for the money", which of course he’ll get either way. If he succeeds and stays, his annual income; if he fails a large payoff. (The article suggests he has a much different idea of what constitutes enough money than most people.)
As I see it, Chelsea have essentially swapped a young and hungry manager (Jose) with a need to continue building a reputation with someone whose reputation is established beyond tarnishing in his home country, and who is most unlikely to have the same hunger and desire for success at Chelsea as Jose had. In essence, they have taken on a guy looking for a well paid "retirement" job.
It may of course prove that Scolari’s personal pride and undoubted talent as a manager, coupled with Abramovitch’s seemingly endlessly deep pockets, will bring success. And that would be even more likely if United lose Ronaldo. But my hunch is still that Chelsea are in for another potless season.
Doesn’t Down have horses himself? If so, perhaps he could place one or two with Mrs Alner and put his money where his great big mouth is.
Seagull
I see no incompatibility in the Post’s comments. The problem wasn’t that Mister Green won, but that Yokozuma performed so poorly after the dramatic drift.
Firefox
Certainly the Russians played a significant role in defeating the Germans. We (the UK and US) then had to defeat communism, now as dead as a doornail (and as, hopefully, Castro and the clown who rules North Korea will soon be).
And no, I take a quite different view of Iraq. A real prospect of establishing a second democracy in the Middle East. The way, long term, to defeat Muslim fundamentalism is the same as that which defeated communism – a combination of standing firm against aggression and individious comparison.
Clivex
As regards a forecast of potless at the end of next season if Jose does not return, time will tell. If Chelsea lose the key players the press is speculating may go, I can’t see them getting as close to Man. U next season as they managed this time.
Abramovitch had a winner in Jose and dispensed with his services to take on a loser. He now has a very big decision to make, for if Chelsea end up pot-less again next season it will self-evidently be his, Abramovitch’s, judgement that is shown to be inadequate, not that of the guy he appoints.
There are only three managers with proven ability to win the Premiership – currently the best league in Europe – and do well in Europe. Neither Ferguson or Wenger would, I suspect, give Abramovitch the time of day, both working for clubs which recognise the benefits of continuity, managerially-speaking, and which have at least as good a chance of Premiership/European success as Chelsea.
That leaves Jose, with whom Abramovitch is said to have had conversations over the last month. Has he the humility to accept he made a mistake and – emulating the Portsmouth Chairman a couple of years ago vis-a-vis Harry Rednap – re-appoint? I doubt it. If not, his options are Premiership managers with potential, such as Mark Hughes, Martin O’Neil and Roy Keane, who have it all to prove in terms of winning the title/achieving success in Europe, or the oft-mentioned band of itinerant foreign managers, some of whom have success in Europe but none has much experience of the pace and physicality of Premiership football.
Personally, I think he’ll go for one of the latter, and if so it will probably be another lean year for Stamford Bridge in terms of silverware.
Racing, like any other activity, exists within a societal context which changes over time. Either it takes steps to make itself acceptable within that context, or Parliament – eventually – will. Personally, I would regret the latter as much legislation has unforeseen or unintended consequences that, on occasion, create problems much worse than those they purport to address.
The proper enforcement of current rules re the use of the whip would be a good first step. The horse of any jockey found in breach should be automatically disqualified, just as it would be if the jockey was found to have carried too little weight. Then the current practice of jockeys happily accepting brief bans because the rewards of winning prestigious races are so great would be ended, and the "handicap" on those riders not willing to cheat in this way would be removed.
The carrying forward of small amounts is on the assumption that the account remains active and is for mutual convenience. It sounds as though the account has been inactive for a while and, to my mind not unreasonably, Hills want you to settle up. As you acknowledge that you owe them the money, the only honest thing to do is to pay up.
Not only is it the honest thing to do, it is the prudent thing to do. If you don’t, you may find you are listed as a bad credit risk and that may effect you adversely at some future point when seeking a loan, applying for a new credit card or whatever.
Sympathies over the redundancy but I’ve no sympathy whatsoever with not paying a debt you acknowledge.
It has been suggested (not by you) that finding £15 may be a problem. Anyone who finds it difficult to pay a trivial debt like £15 debt, even if redundant, shouldn’t be betting and almost certainly shouldn’t have been when in work as they have clearly failed to make any provision against contingencies.
