Well, politics does throw up some strange stuff.

It turns out John "Two Jags" Prescott has been having an affair for TWO years with his secretary. Now, with the greatest respect, is she blind? I mean, I know he's Deputy Prime Minister and all that and has two cars but he resembles a beached whale!

Its nearly as astonishing as John Major having an affair with Edwina Curry but not quite so gross.

Ewww.

Now that really isn't news you want to read over breakfast.

There was a report on BBC News this morning about the fact some clever boffins at Cambridge University have worked out how we can all lengthen our lives. They did a study of 22,000 people and they reckon, and this will come as a shock to all of my 3 readers, that....

*drum roll please*

If you stop smoking, eat healthily and do some exercise, you will live longer!

Oh. My. God! Genius!

Thanks for that. I'm glad the tax that is paying your research grants is going to such good use. It gave me that extra spring in my step on the way in to work today.

So, without further ado, I shall give up the fags, do some more exercise and eat more fruit and vegetables immediately because now, for the first time ever, I know that it will help me live longer.

Honestly, who would have thought it that cigarettes were bad for you? Or a good diet and exercising was beneficial to your health?! It certainly surprised the hell out of me!

Those clever, clever people at Cambridge. What would we do without them?

You can read the article here

I travel to work each day on the train. It is, thankfully, only a short journey. It should only take 23 minutes but of course it rarely does.

I quite like trains as a method of transport. What I absolutely hate is the way in which they are run. The demise of our raliways started with Maggie Thatcher, who decided that no public investment would be made on the infrastructure, so they went through a period of years and years of neglect. Then, when they privatised them, some bright spark decided that the regions would make up the operating companies but another company would then look after the track!

Thereby, in an instant, creating a monopoly.

I'm quite often staggered at the stupidity in politics but this, surely, is one of the stupidest things ever. Did they not stop and think about it?

Of course not. I mean, having a monopoly on the track would be fine, surely? Farm it out to the biggest bidder and then have them compromise public safety by hiring out the cheapest contractor to fix the track! Great idea!

Of course, they weren't using the trains so they couldn't give a toss about it. The devious little rat-faced weasel fuckers.

I don't know if you've noticed it but I love the way the train companies now have a "passengers charter" and "service reports". You see these stuck up at the bigger stations detailing how well they are doing in meeting their targets. For example:

Punctuality :- Target figure - 99%
Punctuality :- Actual figure - 97%

You what? Oh fuck right off. Only 3% of trains have not made it in on time? DO YOU TRAVEL ON THEM? EVER? I would say 3% of my trains make it in on time, the rest are late. I base my travel arrangements on the trains on the basis they will be late and I'm rarely disappointed.

But then, when you read the really small print, you realise that the punctuality figures are allowed 5 minutes of leeway.

Hmm. 5 minutes. So, on my 23 minute journey, being 5 minutes late is OK? Thats 22% late. What about on someones 10 minute journey? If a train is 5 minutes late on a 10 minute journey, its 50% late. Thats OK?! That ISN'T late?

Imagine if I based my life on that principle. I work 9 till 5:30 with an hour for lunch, so its a seven and a half hour day. 22% of my day would be roughly one hour and three quarters. So I'd rock up at 10:45am in the morning each day and this would be acceptable and within reason? I think not.

What these figures need is a sense of proportion. You can't have a blanket 5 minutes. Its OK for a journey that takes over an hour to be 5 minutes late, but for the shorter journeys, I would suggest two minutes. Otherwise its not punctual.

Actually, it seems that we're now defining punctual as late.

Its absolutely bonkers.

Most people are now aware that the only way you will now see live televised Cricket in this country, at least until 2010, is by owning Sky TV. This means a cost, at the very least, of £37.50 a month. While this isn't a great deal of money in today’s world, to some people it is just an expense they cannot afford or justify. Other people cannot get access to Sky because of planning permission or they might live in short term rented accommodation. Sky will always exist in a minority rather than a majority of UK households for the foreseeable future.

The current subscriber base to Sky is around 10 million viewers in the UK, less than 1/6th of the population. The viewing figures for last years Ashes series reached around 8 million at times. Now that Sky has the rights, there is absolutely no chance of the viewing figures reaching that point for the 2009 Ashes series for the next home series.

That constitutes a problem for the good of the game as far as I'm concerned and the ECB, when brokering this deal, where guilty of not being able to see past the shiny pound signs.

We live in a world that, sports-wise, is saturated by media coverage of football and last summer was a very welcome break from that. Cricket, for once, kept the overpaid prima-donnas of the Premiership off the back pages and made today’s kids realise there was another sport available to them to watch and play. There were other heroes, playing a different kind of game. It showed there was a game being played between two sides that actually showed sportsmanship as it should be; it showed fight, it showed spirit, it showed guts and the pride of playing for your country from both sides.

But no longer will just anyone be able to tune in to the days play. It’s a travesty as far as I'm concerned.

My other gripe with the fact Sky now has the cricket, is that the coverage simply isn't very good. I'm not talking about the camera work or the number of adverts or the technical media side of it but regarding the commentary team and the way the game is presented.

Sky assumes the viewer knows what is going on and is already knowledgeable about the game. It doesn't make the game as accessible to the newcomer or casual watcher as Channel 4 did. It has employed two generations of ex-England captains to present the opinion and provide the commentary based on no reason except, well, they're ex England Captains. Gower has all the charm of watching paint dry. Botham is boorish and opinionated. Willis is chock full of disdain and Lloyd is high on the drug of optimism.

Sky just lacks the class that the Channel 4 presentation had.

Maybe they will surprise me over the season. I hope so. But I've been watching their coverage for many years and I know who I’d rather watch out of choice.

Debate still continues to rage about who the next England manager is going to be. The shortlist contains Sam Allardyce, Alan Curbishley, Steve McClaren, Martin O'Neill and Luiz Felipe Scolari and today the papers are saying that the new hot favourite is Scolari. I can't quite keep up with it all to be honest. First of all Martin O'Neill was the hot favourite, then it was Alan Curbishley, then Steve Mclaren and now its Scolari as the man who has the job in the bag. In fact, the only person not to have been installed as the current hot favourite is Big Sam.

The trouble with listening to the newspapers on these matters is it is purely speculative. They may have someones Grannies cousin who is a cleaner inside the FA but as the FA have not made their decision yet, they do not actually know. Nor do they know what the current thinking of the executive committee is because they are not actually on it.

Its all getting quite tiresome.

I have several issues with the whole process. First, who actually decided that "shortlist"? Are these really the best contenders for the job? I don't believe this to be the case. The powers that be have decided, very early on, that a foreign manager is only an outside chance and the only name left in the hat happens to be the last manager to win the World Cup, i.e., Scolari. Admittedly, this isn't a bad name to have left so then, when you put his CV up against all the rest of the contenders, it should be a foregone conclusion, right? Apparently not. The FA is a fairly stuffy and jingoistic organisation and they believe that because of all the process and coaching skills and groundwork they have put in for English managers and coaches, it should therefore go to someone English. Which rules out Scolari and O'Neill. Therefore we're left with Mclaren, Curbishley and Allardyce. Mclaren has been shadowing Eriksson as an assistant coach with England for the last 4 years, something that neither Big Sam or Alan Curbishley have done.

So, out of all the English managers, the fact he has shadowed a manager that has produced a lot of third rate football with first class players seems to make him favourite.

Insanity.

With all due respect to all the current crop of English managers, absolutely none of them have any experience at the highest level. The number of Champions League matches between them? None. The number of trophies between them? One, Steve Mclaren with the Carling Cup. Their highest ever league position? Allardyce, with 5th last season. Their European experience? UEFA Cup only and that is only Allardyce briefly and Mclaren currently.

Its just not a good enough CV to manage a team that consists of stars such as Beckham, Terry, Ferdinand, Cole, Owen, Rooney, Gerrard, Lampard et al. These guys are used to coaches of the stature of Wenger, Ferguson, Mourinho and Benitez. I can't see how Mclaren, Allardyce or Curbishley will command the respect of the current crop of English players, I really don't.

Eriksson has the respect of the players and he is a decent man manager; unfortunately I believe him to be selectorially and tactically inept which is why I believe England have no chance at the World Cup this summer. I hope he proves me wrong.

But if anyone but Scolari is picked out of the current shortlist, we'll have even less chance at Euro 2008.

The Sri Lankan team have arrived in England and although they are without one of their top batsman, Marvin Attapatu, they are still a decent Test Match side with a few outstanding performers. Muralitharan is a top class bowler, no matter what my opinion is of his action and Chaminda Vaas is a good seamer in whatever conditions he is presented with. The also have Sangakarra, who is an excellent wicket keeper and a very good Test batsmen.

However, truth be told, England should beat Sri Lanka and beat them fairly comfortably. They are ranked 7th in the Test Rankings and have a poor record away from home. Even with the injury situation that England currently has, there should be too much strength in reserve to allow Sri Lanka a sniff in the 3 match series, which starts on 11th May.

England will not have Vaughan, Harmison and Giles available for the 1st Test. However, they will have Trescothick back and ready for selection and also Simon Jones, as long as he doesn't break down again with an injury in the next 18 days. The selection discussions are going to primarily revolve around the batting positions and the two vacant bowling positions. Strauss, Trescothick and Pietersen will definitely be picked for 3 of the top 5 slots. That leaves two vacant batting positions; numbers 3 and 5. I believe that Pietersen should bat at 4 so that he and Flintoff, the team’s big hitters, are separated in the order, something I think is necessary. I am of the opinion that Collingwood was one of England’s best players on the winter tour and that he should definitely retain the number 4 slot. That leaves the position of number 3 available while Michael Vaughan is continuing his comeback from injury. So, with that in mind, who are the contenders?

Ian Bell
He had a poor Test series in India, albeit two of his six innings were batting as a makeshift opener which is not his natural position. He averaged only 21.83 in those 3 Tests and was guilty of getting himself out more often than not. He has a propensity to nibble at the ball outside off stump not only just early in his innings but later on as well when he looks set, which must be a concern for the England coaching staff. His average against Australia in the summer was just 17.50 and it could well be said that, his catching aside, England won The Ashes despite him being in the side. He had a good series in Pakistan, topping the averages but if you discount the series against Bangladesh, when he scored heavily, then his overall average is below 30. His demeanour at the crease is not convincing at all and he often looks like a rabbit in headlights when the pressure is on.

Alistair Cook
Got flown in as a last minute replacement when Trescothick went home in India. Hit 67 and an unbeaten century in the 1st Test although he subsequently failed in the second. He looks to have the technique to succeed at Test level and his temperament looks unflappable. He also scored 214 against the touring Australians last summer and has started this county season like an exocet, scoring 88 and 103* in the first county match of the season for Essex. However, he does lack Test Match experience and is only just 21.

Owais Shah
He was brought in for the last Test against India and scored a very composed and almost slightly cocky 88. He might well have had a century if he didn't have to try and force the pace whilst batting with the tail in the 1st Innings. He also scored a composed 34 in the 2nd innings when there was no shortage of chaos around him. He is the oldest of the three contenders for the batting slot at the age of 27. However, he was unconvincing in the one day matches after the Test Matches and is not renowned for his fielding ability.

There are two issues at stake here; the first is who will the selectors go with and the second is who do I think they should go with? I believe the selectors will stick with Ian Bell which, while admirable in terms of continuity of selection, I believe to be a fundamental mistake. I don't think that, right now, he has the mental toughness to play Test Cricket against the top teams. He doesn't dominate the crease or exude that aura of calm like the best players do. That, for me, is the key difference between him and the other two contenders. I think, given some time, he will turn into a good Test player but he needs to toughen up a bit first. When playing Australia in the winter, it is crucial that we have our mentally toughest cricketers playing.

So, that leaves the choice for me between Shah and Cook. Shah played very well in the Test match but has not shown much since, either in the one day matches or at the start of this county season. Cook, on the other hand, has shown plenty of form early season and is already being marked as an FEC (Future England Captain). Is now too soon? Also, if he was picked, he'd be playing out of position at 3 and this is where I think Shah currently has the edge on him.

Right now, my choice at number 3 will be Owais Shah.

So, the batting line up is now Strauss, Trescothick, Shah, Collingwood, Pietersen, Flintoff, Jones. What bowlers do we go with? Who are 8 to 11? Well, Hoggard, Simon Jones and with Harmison out, Jimmy Anderson are the pace bowling options, which then leaves the number 8 slot to be filled. I don't believe Duncan Fletcher will pick Monty Panesar as the spinning solution due to the fragility it gives the lower order. Therefore we either go with another seamer that can bat, like Liam Plunkett or a spinner that can bat, like Shaun Udal. I believe it will go to Udal to add some variety to the attack. It is by no means a long term option as Udal is 37 and it’s certainly not looking a forward looking move but Fletcher is hoping that Giles will be more than fit for The Ashes in November so, for the here and now, Udal is a good stop-gap measure.

I think it will be Udal, Hoggard, Jones and Anderson completing the line up for the 1st Test.

We shall see how correct I am in the next week or so.

Well, The Irons did it. We're in the FA Cup final for the first time since I was 7 years old. Truly a great day for a long time and sometimes long suffering supporter to myself.

I have to say it almost brought a tear to my eye.

Alan Pardews dance when Harewood scored was priceless. I bet he'll end up regretting that over the next few days!

Anyway, an FA Cup Final and win or lose, we have UEFA Cup football next season. What an amazing season.

Top stuff from Alan Pardew and the lads and I raise my glass to them tonight.

Yay!

While it drizzled where I am ALL day, the sun shone beautifully in Dublin and the whole day of Cricket went off without a hitch. Mind you, most of the rest of Dublin was down the road watching Leinster v Munster in a much more vicious sport.

Ireland were stuffed out of sight to be honest and that is without Hampshire bowling particularly well. Its clear to me that now that they don't have Ed Joyce in the side, they are probably going to really struggle in the batting department. 202 was never enough on a fairly decent April pitch and Hampshire knocked it off in fairly disdainful fashion.

However, one bugbear I did have was the Sky commentary. Look, I know Atherton and Lloyd know each other well, and Hussain and Atherton are mates too, but does the commentary have to be so bloody chummy? Does it? I don't think it does and I also think its unprofessional.

I think the ECB have sold English Cricket up the river by removing it from Channel 4, I really do and although the cash injection may well help in the short term, I believe in the long term they have made a huge, huge mistake.

Hmpff.

So, the start of the county season. Of course, what with it being mid April, most of the time the players have been sat in the pavillion drinking tea rather than actually playing Cricket but that is what you come to expect when you start this early into the "summer". When its not summer, its still actually spring.

Anyway, there were a few highlights to note.

1. Alistair Cook scoring 88 and 103 not out. I think this lad is absolute class and I think he should start the series against Sri Lanka. Even if Trescothick does come back, I think with Vaughan out, he should bat 3. The most exciting 21 year old batting talent in the English game I've seen since David Ivan Gower.

2. Chris Read scoring another hundred. He scored a hundred in the match against the MCC. Geraint Jones' batting has been quite poor for a while now for England and Read is an undoubtedly better keeper. I think he is seriously knocking on the selectors door and Jones better come up with some scores soon otherwise he is under serious threat.

3. Trescothick making only 12 and 4. I hope he comes good soon though because England need him back and firing for not only the summer but also The Ashes and next springs World Cup.

On another note, Sky are televising the Hampshire v Ireland game tommorow. Its in Dublin.

Amazingly the weather forecast looks OK.

Hangovers. They suck, of course, but you have no one else to blame but yourself. Which makes it even fucking worse.

I got to bed about 3am last night. I think I drank an entire bottle of vodka. I slept through my alarm this morning and didn't actually manage to get up until 8:30am. When I did, someone jumped inside my head and started smashing by skull around with a mallet. THREE Nurofen weren't enough to cure it.

The end result is, I was late for work. I'm now sitting here feeling ill. Very ill. I'm about as productive as a dead goldfish.

I should have called in sick but I had a meeting with my Boss. Which he has just cancelled.

Bollocks.

The time is 2:35pm as I write this and its nearly time for the long bank holiday weekend. I'm really looking forward to it, so that means time right now is literally crawling by. I get out of work @ 5:30pm which is only 2hr 55 minutes away but from where I'm sitting right now, it seems like an eternity.

Work has been one snore after another today. I'm doing a tedious task and I'm surrounded by tedious people with tedious lives being oh-so-fucking tedious. I wouldn't mind if the work was dull but the people were fun but they're not. They're unfriendly and very, very dull. I would imagine a morgue is a more lively and fun place than my office.

I only wish I was joking.

I'm off out tonight. For some reason we've decided to go out in Hoxton. Actually, I didn't decide it at all. I left it up to a mate of mine who lives 15 minutes walk away from Hoxton and therefore I guess it was obvious where we would end up. The lazy bastard.

So, Hoxton eh? Hoxton is usually full of Nathan Barley type twats who think they are "oh so cool" but really they are just twenty somethings with the brain the size of a pea and can't actually formulate an original thought on what to wear. Its fun to watch all the Shoreditch twats that think they are on the bleeding edge of fashion trying to look "down wiv' it". It passes a moment when the conversation isn't in full flow.

I plan on getting drunk tonight. I'm not really a big one for the "odd glass of wine" or "just the one beer". If I drink, I drink to get drunk. If I'm not drinking, I'll have a glass of orange juice thanks.

It just seems like the right way to go about things.

Matthew Hayden, the barrel chested Australian opener, was quoted in the newspapers today saying that "Flintoff carries England" and that Australia are an "amazing side" whereas England are a "very good" side. Right. So why do England have The Ashes? I love the way the Australian Cricket team have gone into total denial about The Ashes ever since they left England.

Its like it never happened.

Their much vaunted batting lining up was shown up by good, fast, accurate swing bowling. Hayden himself only averaged 35, and he only got that by eking out a truly tortuous century in a Boycott style on a very flat pitch at The Oval in the last match. His contributions up until that point were minimal. For a man that has bullied mediocre attacks the world over, this should have been a wake up call. I would imagine that all Englands bowlers are looking forward to bowling at him again in the winter in Australia.

As for his comment that England are "carried"? Well, I believe Shane Warne took 40 wickets and also dug their batting out of a hole both at Edgbaston and Trent Bridge. Ponting rescued them at Old Trafford. Kevin Pietersen was the top run scorer in the series, Trescothick averaged over 40, Strauss hit two centuries, Harmison took 17 wickets and Simon Jones took 18 wickets @ 21. I hardly call that a one man team.

The thing is with Hayden is his comments are often delusional and short-sighted. If you believe the press, he is not a very liked Cricketer outside of his own team by all accounts. He is a born again Christian, which is always shaky ground to be on when you're one of the biggest sledgers in the game. I'm not sure how being a Christian works when you're continually calling the opposition batsmen a "c*nt" and questioning their parentage? Maybe he can enlighten me on that.

As for Australia being an amazing side, well, their feats in the past are impressive but now? Lets look at the state of play. The Australian side is now so old that they'll soon need stairlifts from the pavillion to get them onto the field of play. Hayden is 35, Warne is 36, Langer is 36, Martyn is 35, Gilchrist is 34, McGrath is 37. Compare that with England and the oldest player is Giles, at 33. The next oldest is Vaughan at 30.

Spin it anyway you want Mr. Hayden but the fact is you were beaten in the Summer, not just by Freddie but by the England team. I can't see any other way for the current Australian side but a period of decline. Why? Because they simply haven't got the precocious talent coming through to replace two giants of the modern game such as Shane Warne and Glenn McGrath.

I needed to get around London at lunchtime today. Now, for those of you that live in town or work here, you'll know that even with the advent of the congestion charge, trying to get around London by car is akin to wading through a swimming pool full of treacle. You also need to re-mortgage your house before you even consider getting into a black cab that is going to take you through two post codes because it is insane how expensive it is. So, what are the alternatives? Well, two choices:

1. Buses
2. The Tube

Buses

I hate buses. They suck. They stop everywhere, dropping people off and letting people on. Yes I know that is the point but its SOOOO slow when they also have to wade through the treacle of London traffic. In fact, more often than not, buses are half the problem in respect to most traffic jams. Especially those bendy bastards. They really are a terrific idea in London aren't they? They work amazingly in small, narrow streets with tight turnings. What genius decided that one? Probably the same genius that decided to sod around with all the traffic light timings so that you only get twenty seconds to get through before the lights change.

Buses have some weird people on them too. Some of them smell of wee and look like they are on day release from the local psychiatric unit.

The other thing is you need to be armed with some kind of encyclopeadic knowledge of what number does what route and when if you actually want to get anywhere that is vaguely complicated. Its enough to put me off to be honest.

I'd really rather walk.

The Tube

So, given my pathological hatred of all things bus, I decided to get The Tube. Now, thanks to Ken, a Zone 1 single is £3. Three-fucking-quid for a journey into Zone 1. He is having a laugh!

"Ah yes" says Ken, "but if you buy an Oyster Card, its only £2!"

Tosser. I don't want to buy an Oyster card. I don't use the Tube enough to warrant wasting valuable minutes of my life getting an Oyster card. To be honest Ken, you can shove your Oyster card up your arse. The trouble is this now means I'm going to get anally violated for £1 every time I want to use The Tube. Rather like you do when you go to buy a packet of fags in the West End.

Me: "20 Malboro Lights please"
Vendor: "That'll be 7 quid. Now please drop your trousers and bend over..."
Me: "...."

/sigh

Anyway, back to the Tube. Ok, it's pretty convenient and reasonably quick most of the time and it served my purpose this lunchtime. I would just suggest that you don't use it in the Summer. Or expect value for money. Or the Northern Line to be running any kind of decent service. Or them not to strike on the day you most need it.

Actually, I'll take it back. Its pretty shit.

In yesterdays and todays news, the big headline story was that Tony Blair is now "taking charge" of the perceived NHS cash crisis.

Gosh, I'm very glad about that. Tony's recent track record is second to none. What with his adept handling of the Iraq war, his brilliant policy for school reform, the introduction of ID cards as a method of "reducing the threat of terrorism" and his peerless handling of the EU Presidency I, for one, am glad that such a top man should be dealing with the cash crisis.

I am, of course, being sarcastic.

The problem with the NHS is the levels of bureacracy that exist that have been put in place by this government and ones previously. On top of that the cost of medication is incredibly expensive as pharmaceutical companies are rip-off bastards who are only interested in maximising their profit margins. In between nearly killing people in clinical trials, of course. Ultimately the NHS is always going to struggle as it is a state funded organisation existing in a capitalist market.

I'm not saying that I have the answers on how to solve the problem. But one things for sure, I wouldn't count on Tony having any more of a clue either.

I'm currently monitoring Englands progress in the 6th One Day International Cricket Match vs. India. We seem to be actually winning this one although it has to be said that we are playing the Indians 2nd XI. Mind you, we've continually had a "B" team on this tour both for the Test Series and the ODI matches.

What has been seen though is a lack of strength in depth England have in the one day game. It has also exposed our tactics and naievety in the short format. Why is that? Well, partially I think that as a nation, we don't have a the same passion for the one day format that we do for Test Cricket. It is the other way round for countries like India, Pakistan and even South Africa these days.

Tactically, Fletcher is a great coach in the Test Match arena. His record is second to none and winning The Ashes last summer just goes to prove that. In the ODI game though, he seems somewhat inept. Let us look at the current round of matches versus India. Forget the fact this is really a 2nd XI due to so many players out being injured. That shouldn't matter, you should still be going out to win with the best possible players. So why have we had a wicket-keeper opening? Is Prior a better choice than anyone else we have available? Ok, so with Jones injured he should play but before then I don't see the logic of opening the batting with a wicket keeper unless its Adam Gilchrist. My other question is also why Ian Bell hasn't played up until today? It seems rather odd.

Let us look at the tactics we use in ODI matches. Fletchers desire is thus:

1 to 4 specialist batsmen
5, 6, 7 1 all rounder, 1 batsman who bowls + keeper/batsman
8, 9 bowling all-rounders
10, 11 bowlers

Lets look at India:

1 to 5 specialist batsmen
6, 7 all rounder, wicket keeper batsmen
8, 9 bowlers that bat a bit
10, 11 bowlers

Funny that the India make up looks like a test side isn't it? Lets look at Australia:

1 wicket keeper / bat (but this is Gilchrist we are talking about here)
2 - 6 specialist batsmen
7 all-rounder
8 bowler who can bat
9, 10, 11 bowlers

Again, awfully like the make up of a test side. So, on this current tour, lets look at the last side make-up (in batting order):

1 specialist batsmen
2 wicket keeper playing as a batsmen
3 bowling all rounder
4 specialist batsmen
5 all rounder
6 batsmen that bowls
7 specialist batsmen
8 wk / bat
9 bowler who can bat
10 bowler who can allegedly bat
11 bowler

The best ODI teams may vary personnell but they don't really change the structure of the team too much from Test Cricket. You do get ODI specialists and you also get players retiring from ODI to play Test Cricket for longer but fundamentally you tend to stick with the same make-up of the side. Unless you are Duncan Fletcher, it would seem.

Maybe I'm missing something but I find Englands approach to the one day game weird.

Ah, Chelsea FC. Now officially the most hated football team in England. Why does everyone hate them so? Poor, poor, much maligned Chelsea. Well, lets have a look:

1. They are bankrolled by a Russian Billionaire.
2. The Manager is never wrong and rarely gracious.
3. They don't play attractive football.
4. They have foreign players prone to taking a dive now and then.
5. They lack class.
6. They can price everyone else out of the transfer market.
7. They artificially inflate players prices.
8. They can buy players to stop other teams getting them.

In essence, they are not good for the game of football. For many reasons but ones which I shall go into in another article at some point. They are a club that is richer than God. They can buy any player they want. However, what they don't seem to do is buy real quality and class. The gulf between Chelsea and Barcelona this season was all too apparent for me.

Why? Why don't they have the real quality players? Partly because of Mourinho. He doesn't want "superstar" players. He doesn't favour "devil may care" football. He is a pragmatist and bases his tactics on a sound defence, 5 across midfield and 1 up front. When they break, they break with the wingers and Lampard coming up in support. Its not particularly attractive football. Effective? Yes. Good to watch? Only sometimes. However it does win matches and it does win titles.

Will they ever win the Champions League with Mourinho? Not in my opinion. Not while teams like Barcelona are in the competition.

Music is great. Well, lots of it is. Lots of it is shit too. Like Dido, for example. Dido is music for people who don't like music. Bland, insipid, dull, featureless bland sounds for featureless bland people with bland lives.

If Dido was a colour she would be Magnolia.

Anyway, amongst other things, I play records. You know a DJ.

By DJing I don't mean some dude with a dodgy shirt, bad hair and a microphone playing Careless Whisper at a wedding. I mean Technics 1210s, a club and lots of people doing "big fish, little fish" and throwing shapes and looking like demented loons.

Anyway, I've stuck an (old) mix up. You can download it at the link below. Its quite banging, so if you're not into the harder side of dance music, I probably wouldn't bother. Enjoy!

Click

I'm a big sports fanatic, much to my long suffering girlfriends delight. Poor thing. She is Irish and has been subjected to hours of Cricket on the TV. She does now understand the rules and has a rather worrying liking for Freddie Flintoff and its not his cricketing skills she has been admiring.

Cricket, football, rugby, I'll happily watch any of them. Preferably live but if not, the pub is a good second. Or, if I'm trying to save money I'll stay in because I can't actually go down the pub without drinking too much. Its a curse.

Or something like that.

I support West Ham. Someone has to. We're currently doing OK, and I'm hoping we can make the FA Cup Final for the first time in years. I'm not holding out too much hope though. The good thing about being a West Ham fan is it is preparation for supporting England at major football tournaments. You have some faint hope that they might do OK but deep down you know they are going to lose before finishing the job. Its just the way it is. I always feel that if you support Manchester United and England, it must be quite depressing watching England play as you are so used to watching your team bring home success, you expect the same from England. Therefore I'm quite happy to support The Irons.

That what I keep telling myself anyway.

Sadly, I work in the IT industry. That in itself is bad enough but when you couple it with finance, it really doesn't get much lower than that. IT is renowned for having clueless know nothing bastards but then when you marry it with finance, you get clueless know nothing arrogant rich bastards with a god complex. Its just peachy.

Not that I'm bitter about it or anything.

I still don't quite understand how I managed to fall into finance. The IT side of it was a deliberate choice because (a) I was good at it and (b) it pays well. Therefore my degree was IT based which enabled me to walk into a job straight out of University. However, as the years go by, I find myself dealing with more and more stupidity, process and clueless know nothing idiots in positions of authority (how? how the hell did they get there?!) than ever before. I'll give you an example. I'm asked to come up with an estimate in terms of "man days" for a project. I speak to my boss about this and it goes something like this:

Me: So, have we done this kind of project before?
Boss: Oh yes, lots of times.
Me: With these two specific products? Migrating one to the other?
Boss: Well, no, not exactly.
Me: Not exactly? As in "no, not at all" or "once before"?
Boss: Well, no, not at all.
Me: Riiight. So we haven't done it before then.
Boss: Not exactly, no.
Me: Right. So as we haven't done this before, I presume we are pricing this on a time and materials basis?
Boss: No. Its a fixed price.
Me: But then what are we basing our estimate on?
Boss: Well, you can come up with something.
Me: But you said we have never done it before? So I will have no reference point?
Boss: Yes, but we can estimate it based on the requirements.
Me: So we can gather requirements first as a consultancy exercise?
Boss: Oh, no. Its a fixed price.
Me: But how can I estimate it then?
Boss: Well I'm sure we have a general idea and I'm sure you'll work something reasonable out.
Me: .....

So I'll guess. On a fixed price. Then, when it screws up, it'll be my fault for estimating it wrongly even though I said it from the outset.

Yay!

This is nothing new though, it's a regular occurence in an industry full of spivs and charlatans. Sure, there are some good people out there but my god you have to hunt hard for them. Anyway, enough about my lovely job. I'm sure it will feature later on anyway.

Right, so a Blog then. Why am I doing one? Well I guess I'm partly a frustrated writer and this is one way of satisfying that particular side of my personality. As for the contents of the Blog, well, its primarily a sporting Blog, devoted to my two favourite sports, Cricket and Football. Probably in that order. However, should other interesting things happen to me along the way or I feel the need to vent my spleen about certain things, then these shall also be included just to add a little variety to proceedings. I'm quite fond of a good rant about things and London life does provide plenty of opportunity to have a good rant.

Ok, so a little bit about myself.

I'm a 33 year old bloke
I live and work in London.
I work in IT
I like sport
I like music
I like going out
I like a drink
I like pretty girls

All standard stuff. Actually, the bit about London isn't strictly true. I actually live just outside London but its still classified as Zone 5 and I have an 0208 number. Of course, everyone who has an 0207 number reckons that anyone that doesn't have one isn't a Londoner.

It's exactly these sort of wankers than need to be first up against the wall when the revolution comes.