http://reverseswing.blog.co.uk/Articles on Cricket, Football, Rugby and other random interesting stuff about life in Londonen-UKMokoFeed10http://reverseswing.blog.co.uk/http://data5.blog.de/design/preview/95/0a7775505388289acc7567a87857a1_160x200.jpghttp://reverseswing.blog.co.uk/2006/07/05/hot_and_bothered~934612/tag:reverseswing.blog.co.uk,2006-07-05:/2006/07/05/hot_and_bothered~934612/Wed, 05 Jul 2006 11:30:48 +0200 <p>Wow, it&rsquo;s been hot. Really, really hot. One of the principle problems about living in a country that doesn&rsquo;t often have 30C temperatures is the fact we aren&rsquo;t equipped to deal with it. Our homes don&rsquo;t have air conditioning therefore at night, its very hot and stick and difficult to sleep. New York, on the other hand, always has a hot humid summer and because of that nearly every single apartment is equipped with air conditioning. <br>  <br>I was watched GMTV yesterday morning and they came up with all these brilliant ideas to keep you cool at night when sleeping. They were:</p> <p><em>1. Freeze a water bottle and then place it in front of a fan which should then cool the air down</em> </p> <p>Right, so this frozen water bottle thing. Its going to unfreeze and get warm isn&rsquo;t it? Yes. I bet when I wake up two hours after going to sleep its going to be a lukewarm bottle of water in front of an irritatingly noisy fan and will have precisely fuck all benefit. Excellent.</p> <p><em>2. Take a cool bag to bed with you and keep a towel in it so if you wake up, you have a nice cool towel to put over yourself.</em>  </p> <p>So, a cool bag with, I presume, freezer packs in it, right? Yet again, the key element here is that the freezer bags will melt and the cool bag will no longer be cool resulting in a towel that is about as refreshing as a salt sandwich. There is genius at work here, I&rsquo;m telling you.  </p> <p><em>3. Make sure you have some cold water beside the bed so you can drink it if you wake up dehydrated.  <br></em><br>But it won&rsquo;t be cold in a couple of hours will it? Do you see the pattern emerging?  </p> <p>So, the answer to keeping cool at night, is to make sure you have a bedroom that is fully equipped with a fridge and freezer so all these cool things are neatly to hand when you wake up sweating your tits off. <br>  <br>GMTV &ndash; television for morons, written by morons and presented by&hellip;.. yes, that&rsquo;s right, morons.</p> <p> <small> <a href="http://reverseswing.blog.co.uk/2006/07/05/hot_and_bothered~934612/#comments">Comments</a> </small> </p>gmtvhothttp://reverseswing.blog.co.uk/2006/07/05/hot_and_bothered~934612/#commentshttp://reverseswing.blog.co.uk/2006/06/22/england_suck~901783/tag:reverseswing.blog.co.uk,2006-06-22:/2006/06/22/england_suck~901783/Thu, 22 Jun 2006 10:28:50 +0200 <p>So England stutter and stumble their way through probably the weakest World Cup group they have ever been placed in over the last 20 years. </p> <p>At this rate, we're going to lose to Ecuador, the weakest possible second round opponents. </p> <p>I can't remember seeing 3 more shambolic performances from an England side at a World Cup finals. This much vaunted team with its array of "superstars" like Beckham, Gerrard, Lampard, Cole, Rooney and Ferdinand is playing like a busted arse. Our manager decides to take only 4 strikers, when two are injury doubts and one is barely out of nappies and has yet to play a competitive Premiership game, let alone an international match of consequence!</p> <p>Its pathetic. </p> <p>Sven is a fraud. He must be inwardly laughing his arse off at how he's managed to hoodwink the FA for so long. This team have limped and puffed their way through qualifying in an incredibly weak group but also managed to outdo themselves by losing to Northern Ireland and drawing with Macedonia yet no one at the FA chose to question why this was so. </p> <p>I don't know what he says to the team in the 2nd half but it must go something like this:</p> <p><i>Sven: Good first half lads but really, its all a bit too much for me. Can you play like wankers in the second half?</p> <p>Team: Ok boss, no problem!<br> </i></p> <p>Then lo and behold, they do. Its not all Svens fault though. The defending against Sweden was laughable. It was barely League One standard. Beckham had an appalling game. He can't seem to stay on the right hand side of the pitch, where he is supposed to be. He can't resist going for the "Hollywood" pass. In short, he should be dropped but that is never going to happen under Sven because the bloke doesn't have the testicles for it. </p> <p>Terry or Gerrard should be Captain. Beckham has been mediocre in an England shirt for nearly 4 years now. He also doesn't have the character to inspire his team mates. Of course the rumour is that he stays Captain because of all the extra sponsorship revenue the FA get. It wouldn't surprise me at all. </p> <p>Unless Sven can make the hard choices and start picking on form rather than reputation, play Gerrard in his best position and resist playing that lanky streak of piss Crouch up front, we're going out on Sunday. </p> <p>Will England win the World Cup? You're having a laugh. </p> <p> <small> <a href="http://reverseswing.blog.co.uk/2006/06/22/england_suck~901783/#comments">Comments</a> </small> </p>beckhamsvenenglandhttp://reverseswing.blog.co.uk/2006/06/22/england_suck~901783/#commentshttp://reverseswing.blog.co.uk/2006/06/13/england_world_cup_not_with_sven~876286/tag:reverseswing.blog.co.uk,2006-06-13:/2006/06/13/england_world_cup_not_with_sven~876286/Tue, 13 Jun 2006 11:32:54 +0200 <p>The World Cup is underway and the media have already, on the basis of the performance against Paraguay, heavily criticised England and in particular, the tactics of Sven Goran Eriksson. </p> <p>Is this justified?</p> <p>In my humble opinion, yes it is. I think that Sven doesn’t actually have a clue about how to manage an international team. I certainly think he is tactically inept. From the squad selection through to his tactics, I think there is a compelling weight of argument that says that he doesn’t really know what he is doing. </p> <p>Let’s look at the key points:</p> <p>1. Picking Jenas and Hargreaves and not taking a fifth striker. This is already looking a poor move; a fully fit Jermain Defoe would have been ideal cover for an unfit and out of form Michael Owen and either Jenas or Hargreaves could have made way. I don’t think we need Carrick, Hargreaves and Carragher all sitting there with the ability to play a holding midfield role. </p> <p>2. The fact that England team have never scored a second half goal under Eriksson in World Cup Final matches. This point to the fact that he is happy to sit onto a lead, as he tried to do in 2002 and in Portugal in 2004. This is not something that suits the English game and I would have thought he would have realised this by now. </p> <p>3. Sven’s inability to get Lampard and Gerrard to form an effective partnership in midfield. Two of the world’s best central midfielders often look lost in the middle of the park. Sometimes your best team doesn’t involve your best players, something that Sven can’t seem to grasp. </p> <p>4. The gaps that appear between midfield and attack. The defence will, when defending a lead, take up far too deep a position causing the midfield to drop back and then leave too much space between them and the strikers. </p> <p>5. Too much reliance on long ball football and not enough retention of possession seems to be a disease throughout the team. </p> <p>6. Pulling Michael Owen back for corners. Why? Leave him up the pitch so that it means the opposition have to leave players further up the field and also gives us a threat up front on the counter-attack. </p> <p>7. The bizarre substitutions; a national newspaper listed them recently and there is not many of those substitutions that any football fan will agree with. </p> <p>8. Messing around with tactics in the build up games. The bloke has had FIVE YEARS in the job to work out a set of tactics and different systems, so why start mucking around with them three games before the start of the World Cup?</p> <p>I think that any manager of a football team, club or international, should be able to list these issues out, like I have and then work out effective ways of solving them. If I can call it, then surely you would expect someone being paid £4,000,000 a year to be able to do the same?</p> <p>The other issue is that it seems that Steve McLaren is willing to go along with all these substitutions and has virtually no say. If I was the England manager elect, I’d try and at least get Sven to sit down and listen but then maybe he agrees? If he does, it doesn’t bode well for the future. </p> <p>England will get no further than the 1/4 finals so for anyone thinking we can win the World Cup, I suggest you think again. We have a lot of good players, but we have a joke of a manager. </p> <p> <small> <a href="http://reverseswing.blog.co.uk/2006/06/13/england_world_cup_not_with_sven~876286/#comments">Comments</a> </small> </p>englandworld-cupsvenhttp://reverseswing.blog.co.uk/2006/06/13/england_world_cup_not_with_sven~876286/#commentshttp://reverseswing.blog.co.uk/2006/06/08/our_neighbours_the_england_haters~862464/tag:reverseswing.blog.co.uk,2006-06-08:/2006/06/08/our_neighbours_the_england_haters~862464/Thu, 08 Jun 2006 11:25:36 +0200 <p>So, the time is nearly upon us for the World Cup. The time, where every four years, the Scottish remind us how much they hate us. Ah yes, because Scotland never make it to the World CUp they choose to support anyone that England plays. How very mature that is. Especially from the Scottish people that live and work in England. </p> <p>I don't get wound up by much but this really, REALLY gets my goat. </p> <p>Well, if you hate England that much, why do you live here? Why do you work with English people? Why don't you fuck off back to Scotland and then join the rest of your English hating friends?</p> <p>Scots always bang on about "English arrogance". What a bunch of crap. If you speak to any English football supporter not one of us expects us to ACTUALLY win the World Cup. Nor do we think its our divine right to win the damn thing. We hope, usually with misplaced optimism, that we might win it. This time we think we have a really good chance. What we really want though, if we don't win it, is a heroic loss, usually involving penalties so at least we can say, ah well, the boys did their best. The whole English arrogance is a myth dreamt up by the Scots, the Irish and the Welsh so that they can't vent their vitriol which really comes from the depths of history. </p> <p>So, if you're a Scot living in England around the World Cup, you're welcome to watch the matches in any pub I'm in. If you start supporting the other side vocally though, expect to find yourself being told to "Go away" in no uncertain terms. </p> <p> <small> <a href="http://reverseswing.blog.co.uk/2006/06/08/our_neighbours_the_england_haters~862464/#comments">Comments</a> </small> </p>englandworld-cupscotlandhttp://reverseswing.blog.co.uk/2006/06/08/our_neighbours_the_england_haters~862464/#commentshttp://reverseswing.blog.co.uk/2006/06/07/omg_drugs~860310/tag:reverseswing.blog.co.uk,2006-06-07:/2006/06/07/omg_drugs~860310/Wed, 07 Jun 2006 14:01:16 +0200 <p>I was walking back home from the station the other day, past my local pub when I noticed a police van parked outside it. Then I noticed a fair number of uniformed plod wearing bullet-proof vests. Now, bearing in mind where I live, this is not something that you expect to ever see. It really is a quiet and peaceful part of Greater London; its ABC1 and has been a Tory stronghold for about 30 years. </p> <p>As I get nearer, some bloke is handcuffed and there are police stationed outside every pub exit. Obviously being a nosey bastard, I'm staring as I go past and trying to see what all the fuss is about. I then see two more police and another police car further down the road. </p> <p>Odd. </p> <p>I found out the next day that it was a "drugs raid". I also learnt that they found precisely fuck all. </p> <p>Now, I'm no policeman (thank God) but I reckon that I could have told them that my local pub, in the area it is in, was NEVER going to be a good bet for a drugs raid. At the very best they would have found a couple of 18 years olds with a few spliffs worth of weed. </p> <p>Which brings me to this question; did the police really investigate this "tip off"? Did they send someone in plains clothes down there on a Saturday night to investigate this alleged den of inequity? I would suggest not because if they had, they wouldn't have wasted their time, the taxpayers money and the pubs patrons evening on such a pointless exercise. </p> <p>This whole "War on Drugs" thing is such a bunch of crap as well. I mean, you're not going to win it. Honestly, you're not. The US spend $50bn EVERY YEAR on the "War on Drugs" and still make no dent into the inflow of narcotics. Drugs will always be available and if someone wants to take them, then they are going to irregardless of their legality. </p> <p>Personally I say legalise them all. Cut out the organised crime, make them safer than the crap that gets sold on the street, tax them and then pump the money into Education, Pensions and Health. This would improve the quality of life in this country, cut down crime by a massive amount as the mafia would then have no substantial source of income, and also save lives. </p> <p>Bit too radical for most people though; DRUGS ARE EVIL, DRUGS ARE BAD, etc. </p> <p>People getting addicted to drugs are symptomatic of the ills of society, not because drugs are available (illegally or legally). If you address the social issues, then people won't walk down that path in the first place. So legalise drugs, make society better, and then just get on with your life. </p> <p>Simple. </p> <p> <small> <a href="http://reverseswing.blog.co.uk/2006/06/07/omg_drugs~860310/#comments">Comments</a> </small> </p>drugspolicehttp://reverseswing.blog.co.uk/2006/06/07/omg_drugs~860310/#commentshttp://reverseswing.blog.co.uk/2006/06/05/england_lose_3rd_test~856043/tag:reverseswing.blog.co.uk,2006-06-05:/2006/06/05/england_lose_3rd_test~856043/Mon, 05 Jun 2006 20:21:14 +0200 <p>Well, England, from a position of having Sri Lanka 162 for 8, contrived to lose the 3rd and final Test. Gah. The current England side is a far cry from the Ashes winning team of last Summer. Michael Vaughan, Steve Harmison, Simon Jones and Ashley Giles are all badly missed right now. What really did worry me though was the tactical and selection errors that happened. In order. </p> <p>1. Saj Mahmood being left out in favour of Jon Lewis. I have no idea why this was done and it just completely went against Englands selection policy of the last few years. There is no substitute for natural pace and this is something Saj has and Lewis never has or will possess. It made Englands attack too "samey". This was a rare poor decision from Duncan Fletcher. </p> <p>2. Flintoffs tactics. In the 1st Innings, when we had them on the ropes, England bowled badly. He should have thrown the ball to Monty far, far earlier. Also, his positioning of fielders out on the boundary smacked of panic. </p> <p>3. Englands body language. Under Flintoff the team just doesn't have that same steely grit and belief they do under Vaughan and you can see it in the field. </p> <p>4. The middle order collapse in the 2nd Innings. Yes, it was a stiff total but not one player from 3 to 7 managed double figures. That is inexcusable. </p> <p>All in all, probably the worst day for English Cricket in close to 3 years. </p> <p> <small> <a href="http://reverseswing.blog.co.uk/2006/06/05/england_lose_3rd_test~856043/#comments">Comments</a> </small> </p>flintoffenglandsri-lankavaughanhttp://reverseswing.blog.co.uk/2006/06/05/england_lose_3rd_test~856043/#commentshttp://reverseswing.blog.co.uk/2006/05/30/sven_has_lost_the_plot~840239/tag:reverseswing.blog.co.uk,2006-05-30:/2006/05/30/sven_has_lost_the_plot~840239/Tue, 30 May 2006 12:03:08 +0200 <p>Sven really has now lost the plot. I don't know what he's been taking but its pretty strong stuff, I can tell you. </p> <p>First, if the reports are true, he is going to play Jamie Carragher in a holding midfield role. I think Carragher is a decent centre half, probably even a good one but he is not and never will be a quality holding midfield player. He doesn't have the pace, the mobility or enough quality with the ball to manage that role effectively at either club level or at international level. I realise Michael Carrick didn't have a great game for England "B" v Belarus last Thursday but he is still a far better bet than Carragher. Madness. </p> <p>The second item is this quote from the man himself:</p> <p><i>Eriksson said: 'When we decided to play Hungary and I phoned up Lothar Matthaus to ask if he wanted a game, maybe at Wembley, but that's gone. </p> <p>'When he said yes, I told him he had to play like Sweden. He said that was okay, but now the manager has gone.' </i></p> <p>You what?! He's finally gone bonkers. He asked Hungary to play like Sweden? How was the manager at that time, Lothar Mattheus, going to manage that? He might be able to play the same formation but how, exactly, will they play like Sweden what with the fact they're the Hungarian team and not the Swedish team? I would suggest if he wanted to test us out against a Scandinavian style team, that Denmark would have been a good idea rather than Hungary.</p> <p>100% barking mad. </p> <p> <small> <a href="http://reverseswing.blog.co.uk/2006/05/30/sven_has_lost_the_plot~840239/#comments">Comments</a> </small> </p>http://reverseswing.blog.co.uk/2006/05/30/sven_has_lost_the_plot~840239/#commentshttp://reverseswing.blog.co.uk/2006/05/24/cricket_update~826074/tag:reverseswing.blog.co.uk,2006-05-24:/2006/05/24/cricket_update~826074/Wed, 24 May 2006 16:32:34 +0200 <p>I haven’t posted much recently, especially about anything Cricket related. That is because, to be honest, I haven’t had anything nice to say about England. I watched, in parts, their performance versus Sri Lanka and although the batting was decent in the 1st Innings and there was some good(ish) bowling in the Sri Lankans 1st Innings, the rest of it was pants. </p> <p>9 dropped catches in Sri Lankas 2nd Innings. There was poor body language from the team. Only 27 overs bowled by the spinner (Pasenar) in two innings. The tactics from Flintoff were unimaginative and the bowling, at times, was pedestrian and without guile, bite or venom. </p> <p>The game should have been won but yet again we conspire to let a team off the hook. It is becoming a worrying trend. </p> <p>We should have won the 1st Test in the winter versus Pakistan. If we had, I suspect we would have won the series. We should have won the test match versus India at Nagpur as well, had we been a little bit more adventurous. That would have also meant a series win. We should have won the Lords Test Match. </p> <p>The difference between England and Australia is that when the Australians have a team on the rack is they don’t ease up; they apply the words “never give a sucker an even break”. The England side just doesn’t yet have that same mentality. </p> <p>I realise England have a long injury list but its not getting any better. Simon Jones may make some of the Pakistan Test Matches. No one knows when or if Vaughan will be back. Giles may come back into the side during the Pakistan series. Harmison will hopefully be back for the 3rd Sri Lankan Test Match. So we need to make sure that the back-up plans for these guys is firmly in place now, ready for Australia in November. </p> <p>Flintoff looked like he was trundling in to me throughout the Sri Lankan match. He certainly wasn’t the bowler of the winter or last summer. I think Strauss needs to take over the captaincy for now and Flintoff should concentrate on what he does best. Batting and bowling with all his heart and mind. </p> <p> <small> <a href="http://reverseswing.blog.co.uk/2006/05/24/cricket_update~826074/#comments">Comments</a> </small> </p>englandsri-lankaflintoffhttp://reverseswing.blog.co.uk/2006/05/24/cricket_update~826074/#commentshttp://reverseswing.blog.co.uk/2006/05/24/world_cup_countdown~826037/tag:reverseswing.blog.co.uk,2006-05-24:/2006/05/24/world_cup_countdown~826037/Wed, 24 May 2006 16:19:09 +0200 <p>The World Cup is nearly upon us and millions of men around the world rejoice whilst millions of wives and girlfriends despair. This is the time of year when men become “incommunicado” with their female companions unless, of course, the female companion happens to like and understand football. Or they happen to be offering to get them a beer or food whilst a game in on. </p> <p>I love the World Cup usually right up until the time England get knocked out at which point I then take a lesser interest in what then comes to pass. I like watching the Final and I always find Brazil entertaining but I had little interest in the semi-final between Germany and South Korea in 2002. </p> <p>The England side this year has a genuine chance to win the tournament even if Rooney isn’t fit. In some ways I think Rooney not being fit might do us a favour. He is a fantastic player but if he is in the starting XI, then we always play 4-4-2, although the way Rooney drops off, it’s often a 4-4-1-1. The trouble is, the dozy Swede can’t seem to get Gerrard and Lampard to play well together and that leaves our back four exposed. If they can’t work out what to do between them then one of them has to give way to a defensive midfielder whilst the other pushes up but I can’t see Sven having the nads to do that. </p> <p>Taking Theo Walcott was an odd decision. The lad doesn’t have any experience even at Premiership level and I would much rather have taken Darren Bent, who is used to playing in a 4-5-1 formation, in case Owen breaks down and Rooney isn’t fit. It just seems a huge, huge gamble to me. If you were going to take him, then at least have the prudence to name 5 strikers in your squad and include Bent in that 23. </p> <p>If we had a manager such as Terry Venables, Arsene Wenger or Jose Mourinho I reckon we’d have a big, big chance to win. I just don’t think we have got a World Cup winning manager in Sven “Shagging” Eriksson. </p> <p>Putting all that to one side though, it is now just 16 days to the World Cup and lots and lots and lots of beer drinking. Hurrah! </p> <p> <small> <a href="http://reverseswing.blog.co.uk/2006/05/24/world_cup_countdown~826037/#comments">Comments</a> </small> </p>englandsvenworld-cuphttp://reverseswing.blog.co.uk/2006/05/24/world_cup_countdown~826037/#commentshttp://reverseswing.blog.co.uk/2006/05/03/there_is_one_born_every_day~773763/tag:reverseswing.blog.co.uk,2006-05-03:/2006/05/03/there_is_one_born_every_day~773763/Wed, 03 May 2006 19:50:09 +0200 <p>Sometimes I worry about the intellect of people in this country, I really do. </p> <p>If you read <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/suffolk/4968092.stm">this</a>, you'll see what I mean. </p> <p>Does he really think that watching your football team suffer a premature exit from the World Cup (in Englands case, not qualifying from the group or being knocked out in the second round by a lesser nation) could possibly trauma you in such a severe psychological way that the insurance company would ever pay out?</p> <p>No Doctor on earth is going to put that down as the cause of severe psychological trauma. You'd have to be a basket case in the first place. I mean, I like supporting England and as with any fan, suffer the ecstasy of winning and the trauma of losing but not in any way is it going to do me lasting psychological damage! </p> <p>In essence its an insurance company taking the piss out of people too stupid to actually live on this planet. </p> <p>What a moron. </p> <p> <small> <a href="http://reverseswing.blog.co.uk/2006/05/03/there_is_one_born_every_day~773763/#comments">Comments</a> </small> </p>englandfootballworld-cupinsurancehttp://reverseswing.blog.co.uk/2006/05/03/there_is_one_born_every_day~773763/#commentshttp://reverseswing.blog.co.uk/2006/05/03/title~772801/tag:reverseswing.blog.co.uk,2006-05-03:/2006/05/03/title~772801/Wed, 03 May 2006 12:56:04 +0200 <p>I don't understand why Eriksson is paid £5m a year. Apparently, according to his assistant Tord Grip, they have yet to formulate a "Plan B" without Rooney. </p> <p><a href="http://www.blog.co.uk/srv/media/media_item.php?item_ID=520280"><img src="http://data1.blog.de/media/280/520280_10084c40ec_s.jpg" align="" alt="_41264309_grip_sven203" vspace="5" hspace="5"></a></p> <p>The BBC article is <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/world_cup_2006/teams/england/4967712.stm">here</a></p> <p>Right. Ok. So, you're an International football coach and your whole tactic of winning the World Cup involves Wayne Rooney being fit, ready and available the whole tournament?</p> <p>Even though he got injured in Euro 2004 and we subsequently lost? They say you learn from your mistakes but apparently not if you're a dozy Swedish wanker that is more interested in shagging around than actually doing his job. </p> <p>I've never liked Sven and I've never rated him tactically. </p> <p>Now I just think he's a fuckwit. </p> <p> <small> <a href="http://reverseswing.blog.co.uk/2006/05/03/title~772801/#comments">Comments</a> </small> </p>footballenglanderikssontord-griphttp://reverseswing.blog.co.uk/2006/05/03/title~772801/#commentshttp://reverseswing.blog.co.uk/2006/05/02/oh_no_metatarsal_the_sequel~770885/tag:reverseswing.blog.co.uk,2006-05-02:/2006/05/02/oh_no_metatarsal_the_sequel~770885/Tue, 02 May 2006 16:05:08 +0200 <p>The other story from the weekend that is now going to dominate from here until the start of the World Cup is Wayne Rooney and his fractured metatarsal. I was hoping that we were going to be spared the same fiasco that happened during the run-up to last World Cup when David Beckham fractured his foot but apparently not. </p> <p>Obviously the debate about Rooney has be centred around “do you take him or don’t you”. For me, this is a simple question with a simple answer of “yes”. </p> <p>He won’t be fit for the group games. That is fairly obvious. So we have to hope that he can come back either by the quarter final or by the semi final if we get that far. I think that the moral within the team will be better if Rooney is in the squad and I would suggest that he stays with Manchester United for training right up until such time as they are obliged to release him to the England squad. </p> <p>What has been of concern to me are the reports that quoted Steven Gerrard saying we need Rooney available to win the World Cup. It sounds like the excuses are coming out already. England has players like Gerrard, Beckham, Lampard, Joe Cole, Michael Owen, Rio Ferdinand, John Terry, Ashley Cole and Gary Neville. These players are seasoned professionals that have all experienced the highest levels of European football for several years. Do people really think our chances at the World Cup are hinged on Wayne Rooney?</p> <p>It seems many are, including the players and the manager. This is not the right attitude and for once I agree with Sir Alex Ferguson when he stated that the more senior England players such as Beckham, Gerrard, Lampard, Neville et al should be shouldering more of the responsibility. </p> <p>Rooney is a precocious talent, of that there is no doubt, and England will be poorer without him but I actually think in many ways it could benefit them tactically. If Eriksson can figure out what to do, that is. </p> <p>For my mind, without having Rooney available, we are forced into looking at playing one of two systems. The first would be a 4 – 4 – 1 – 1 system. This would involve playing Michael Carrick in a holding role to cover the back four and having Gerrard, Beckham and Lampard playing across midfield. Gerrard would be out on the left, Beckham on the right, and Lampard through the middle. Joe Cole would then play in behind Michael Owen and would provide the link to the midfield quartet. </p> <p>The second way of playing would be to adopt a 3 – 5 – 2 system. England have a lot of high quality centre halves available to them, so I would play three across the back and then have Ashley Cole and David Beckham playing as wing backs. We would then have Lampard, Carrick and Gerrard playing across the centre, and then Joe Cole would then play up front with Owen. </p> <p>You could argue that Beckham isn’t quick enough but he often goes on runs from deep for Real Madrid so I don’t think it will be a problem. I also believe the quality of his crosses and his ability from a dead ball situation is something that England will need during the tournament. It may be that Shaun Wright-Phillips can be used in the last twenty minutes in that wing back position to terrorise tiring defences. </p> <p>I still think this bunch of England players constitutes a very good team. Maybe it doesn’t have the individual brilliance of, say, Brazil, but I think that if the players gel, then we still have a decent shot at having an impressive World Cup. </p> <p>Plus, if we do get as far as the semi-finals, who is to stop Rooney coming on in the second half and then firing us into the final?</p> <p>Stranger things have happened and that, for my money, is why you gamble and take him. </p> <p> <small> <a href="http://reverseswing.blog.co.uk/2006/05/02/oh_no_metatarsal_the_sequel~770885/#comments">Comments</a> </small> </p>beckhamerikssonenglandrooneyfergusonhttp://reverseswing.blog.co.uk/2006/05/02/oh_no_metatarsal_the_sequel~770885/#commentshttp://reverseswing.blog.co.uk/2006/05/02/chelsea_win_title_but_mourinho_steals_th~770766/tag:reverseswing.blog.co.uk,2006-05-02:/2006/05/02/chelsea_win_title_but_mourinho_steals_th~770766/Tue, 02 May 2006 15:13:28 +0200 <p>Chelsea Football Club are The Premiership champions once again after beating Manchester United 3 – 0 on Saturday. United themselves never really turned up and, Rooney apart, never looked like a threat. Christian Ronaldo yet again flattered to deceive and the Manchester United back four looked like a shadow of their former selves when confronted with Joe Cole and Didier Drogba. </p> <p>Of course, there were two huge talking points after the match. One was the injury to Wayne Rooney after being tackled by Paulo Ferreira and the other was the behaviour and speech of the Chelsea manager, José Mourinho, of which I have a few opinions. </p> <p>Mourinho put on a quite unbelievable display of narcissistic behaviour. Rather than focusing solely on his players achievements, he focused on himself as usual. José told the assembled media that he nearly quit Chelsea twice this season. He believed that they (the media) were unfairly portraying him and that it is very tough to get credit when you are the manager of Chelsea. Wow. Most managers would have stepped back when they won and let the players take the credit but apparently not Mourinho. </p> <p>I’m sorry but I’m not going to shed a tear for you José. You have the richest team in the world and you are bankrolled by one of the richest men in the world. You can buy any player you so desire and, to a point, you can stop other players from being bought by your rivals, as we have seen with Shaun Wright-Phillips. This is not something that will be looked upon as anything but a huge advantage for a football manager. </p> <p>Given all the funds available at his disposal, Mourinho has moulded a team that doesn’t play particularly attractive football. They play efficient, effective football. Chelsea haven’t covered themselves in glory with the behaviour of either the manager or the players this season. The Robben incident versus Liverpool, Drogba and his antics regarding diving and Mourinho himself in respect of saying that Lionel Messi of Barcelona was, in fact, a cheat and that this is the reason why Chelsea got knocked out of the Champions League. He also stated that “the better team lost”. </p> <p>These are not the words of a gracious loser. They are also simply not true. </p> <p>Del Horno was just as guilty in that incident and Barcelona were clearly a class above Chelsea over both legs. They are certainly a far more attractive team to watch. Their assembled line-up also cost considerably less than Chelsea’s.</p> <p>This season José Mourinho has come across as petulant, arrogant and sulky. He is prone to throwing fits on the touchline and making strange tactical choices at times. He has often refused to speak to the press. In short, he has no one to blame but himself for the negative brand image that Chelsea now have, not only here in this country but also throughout Europe. </p> <p>If José was so naïve to think that winning trophies with a football club that has more financial power than any other in the world would be given the same adulation that winning the Champions League with Porto, then he is surely not “The Special One” he claims to be. </p> <p> <small> <a href="http://reverseswing.blog.co.uk/2006/05/02/chelsea_win_title_but_mourinho_steals_th~770766/#comments">Comments</a> </small> </p>premiershipmourinhochelsearooneyhttp://reverseswing.blog.co.uk/2006/05/02/chelsea_win_title_but_mourinho_steals_th~770766/#commentshttp://reverseswing.blog.co.uk/2006/04/26/home_affairs~756635/tag:reverseswing.blog.co.uk,2006-04-26:/2006/04/26/home_affairs~756635/Wed, 26 Apr 2006 09:33:41 +0200 <p>Well, politics does throw up some strange stuff. </p> <p>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!</p> <p>Its nearly as astonishing as John Major having an affair with Edwina Curry but not quite so gross. </p> <p>Ewww. </p> <p>Now that really isn't news you want to read over breakfast. </p> <p> <small> <a href="http://reverseswing.blog.co.uk/2006/04/26/home_affairs~756635/#comments">Comments</a> </small> </p>prescottaffairhttp://reverseswing.blog.co.uk/2006/04/26/home_affairs~756635/#commentshttp://reverseswing.blog.co.uk/2006/04/25/cambridge_geniuses~754262/tag:reverseswing.blog.co.uk,2006-04-25:/2006/04/25/cambridge_geniuses~754262/Tue, 25 Apr 2006 11:45:45 +0200 <p>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.... </p> <p>*drum roll please*</p> <p>If you stop smoking, eat healthily and do some exercise, you will live longer!</p> <p>Oh. My. God! Genius!</p> <p>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. </p> <p>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. </p> <p>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!</p> <p>Those clever, clever people at Cambridge. What would we do without them?</p> <p>You can read the article <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/4941910.stm"> here</a> </p> <p> <small> <a href="http://reverseswing.blog.co.uk/2006/04/25/cambridge_geniuses~754262/#comments">Comments</a> </small> </p>cambridgehealthscientistshttp://reverseswing.blog.co.uk/2006/04/25/cambridge_geniuses~754262/#commentshttp://reverseswing.blog.co.uk/2006/04/24/trains_on_time_no_chance~752374/tag:reverseswing.blog.co.uk,2006-04-24:/2006/04/24/trains_on_time_no_chance~752374/Mon, 24 Apr 2006 17:15:51 +0200 <p>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. </p> <p>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!</p> <p>Thereby, in an instant, creating a monopoly. </p> <p>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?</p> <p>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!</p> <p>Of course, they weren't using the trains so they couldn't give a toss about it. The devious little rat-faced weasel fuckers.</p> <p>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:</p> <p>Punctuality :- Target figure - 99%<br> Punctuality :- Actual figure - 97%</p> <p>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. </p> <p>But then, when you read the really small print, you realise that the punctuality figures are allowed 5 minutes of leeway. </p> <p>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?</p> <p>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. </p> <p>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. </p> <p>Actually, it seems that we're now defining punctual as late. </p> <p>Its absolutely bonkers. </p> <p> <small> <a href="http://reverseswing.blog.co.uk/2006/04/24/trains_on_time_no_chance~752374/#comments">Comments</a> </small> </p>http://reverseswing.blog.co.uk/2006/04/24/trains_on_time_no_chance~752374/#commentshttp://reverseswing.blog.co.uk/2006/04/24/sky_vs_channel~752284/tag:reverseswing.blog.co.uk,2006-04-24:/2006/04/24/sky_vs_channel~752284/Mon, 24 Apr 2006 16:32:56 +0200 <p>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. </p> <p>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. </p> <p>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. </p> <p>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.</p> <p>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. </p> <p>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. </p> <p>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. </p> <p>Sky just lacks the class that the Channel 4 presentation had.</p> <p>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. </p> <p> <small> <a href="http://reverseswing.blog.co.uk/2006/04/24/sky_vs_channel~752284/#comments">Comments</a> </small> </p>skycricketchannel-4http://reverseswing.blog.co.uk/2006/04/24/sky_vs_channel~752284/#commentshttp://reverseswing.blog.co.uk/2006/04/24/phil_for_england~751559/tag:reverseswing.blog.co.uk,2006-04-24:/2006/04/24/phil_for_england~751559/Mon, 24 Apr 2006 11:54:45 +0200 <p>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. </p> <p>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. </p> <p>Its all getting quite tiresome. </p> <p>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. </p> <p>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. </p> <p>Insanity. </p> <p>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. </p> <p>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. </p> <p>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. </p> <p>But if anyone but Scolari is picked out of the current shortlist, we'll have even less chance at Euro 2008. </p> <p> <small> <a href="http://reverseswing.blog.co.uk/2006/04/24/phil_for_england~751559/#comments">Comments</a> </small> </p>englandmanagererikssonbig-philhttp://reverseswing.blog.co.uk/2006/04/24/phil_for_england~751559/#commentshttp://reverseswing.blog.co.uk/2006/04/24/playing_at_selector~751448/tag:reverseswing.blog.co.uk,2006-04-24:/2006/04/24/playing_at_selector~751448/Mon, 24 Apr 2006 10:59:21 +0200 <p>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. </p> <p>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.</p> <p>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?</p> <p>Ian Bell<br> 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. </p> <p>Alistair Cook<br> 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. </p> <p>Owais Shah<br> 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. </p> <p>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. </p> <p>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.</p> <p>Right now, my choice at number 3 will be Owais Shah. </p> <p>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. </p> <p>I think it will be Udal, Hoggard, Jones and Anderson completing the line up for the 1st Test. </p> <p>We shall see how correct I am in the next week or so. </p> <p> <small> <a href="http://reverseswing.blog.co.uk/2006/04/24/playing_at_selector~751448/#comments">Comments</a> </small> </p>cricketengland1st-testsri-lankahttp://reverseswing.blog.co.uk/2006/04/24/playing_at_selector~751448/#commentshttp://reverseswing.blog.co.uk/2006/04/23/liverpool_v_west_ham~750598/tag:reverseswing.blog.co.uk,2006-04-23:/2006/04/23/liverpool_v_west_ham~750598/Sun, 23 Apr 2006 22:23:24 +0200 <p>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. </p> <p>I have to say it almost brought a tear to my eye. </p> <p>Alan Pardews dance when Harewood scored was priceless. I bet he'll end up regretting that over the next few days!</p> <p>Anyway, an FA Cup Final and win or lose, we have UEFA Cup football next season. What an amazing season. </p> <p>Top stuff from Alan Pardew and the lads and I raise my glass to them tonight. </p> <p>Yay! </p> <p> <small> <a href="http://reverseswing.blog.co.uk/2006/04/23/liverpool_v_west_ham~750598/#comments">Comments</a> </small> </p>west-hamfa-cupalan-pardewhttp://reverseswing.blog.co.uk/2006/04/23/liverpool_v_west_ham~750598/#commentshttp://reverseswing.blog.co.uk/2006/04/23/ireland_v_hampshire~750586/tag:reverseswing.blog.co.uk,2006-04-23:/2006/04/23/ireland_v_hampshire~750586/Sun, 23 Apr 2006 22:16:01 +0200 <p>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. </p> <p>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.</p> <p>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. </p> <p>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. </p> <p>Hmpff. </p> <p> <small> <a href="http://reverseswing.blog.co.uk/2006/04/23/ireland_v_hampshire~750586/#comments">Comments</a> </small> </p>skyhampshirecricketirelandhttp://reverseswing.blog.co.uk/2006/04/23/ireland_v_hampshire~750586/#commentshttp://reverseswing.blog.co.uk/2006/04/22/squelch_start_of_the_cricket_season~747920/tag:reverseswing.blog.co.uk,2006-04-22:/2006/04/22/squelch_start_of_the_cricket_season~747920/Sat, 22 Apr 2006 19:45:01 +0200 <p>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. </p> <p>Anyway, there were a few highlights to note. </p> <p>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. </p> <p>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. </p> <p>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. </p> <p>On another note, Sky are televising the Hampshire v Ireland game tommorow. Its in Dublin. </p> <p>Amazingly the weather forecast looks OK. </p> <p> <small> <a href="http://reverseswing.blog.co.uk/2006/04/22/squelch_start_of_the_cricket_season~747920/#comments">Comments</a> </small> </p>http://reverseswing.blog.co.uk/2006/04/22/squelch_start_of_the_cricket_season~747920/#commentshttp://reverseswing.blog.co.uk/2006/04/20/hungover_thursday~742035/tag:reverseswing.blog.co.uk,2006-04-20:/2006/04/20/hungover_thursday~742035/Thu, 20 Apr 2006 14:34:19 +0200 <p>Hangovers. They suck, of course, but you have no one else to blame but yourself. Which makes it even fucking worse. </p> <p>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. </p> <p>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. </p> <p>I should have called in sick but I had a meeting with my Boss. Which he has just cancelled. </p> <p>Bollocks. </p> <p> <small> <a href="http://reverseswing.blog.co.uk/2006/04/20/hungover_thursday~742035/#comments">Comments</a> </small> </p>http://reverseswing.blog.co.uk/2006/04/20/hungover_thursday~742035/#commentshttp://reverseswing.blog.co.uk/2006/04/13/nearly_but_not_quite~724845/tag:reverseswing.blog.co.uk,2006-04-13:/2006/04/13/nearly_but_not_quite~724845/Thu, 13 Apr 2006 14:42:10 +0200 <p>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. </p> <p>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.</p> <p>I only wish I was joking. </p> <p>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. </p> <p>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. </p> <p>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. </p> <p>It just seems like the right way to go about things. </p> <p> <small> <a href="http://reverseswing.blog.co.uk/2006/04/13/nearly_but_not_quite~724845/#comments">Comments</a> </small> </p>http://reverseswing.blog.co.uk/2006/04/13/nearly_but_not_quite~724845/#commentshttp://reverseswing.blog.co.uk/2006/04/13/hayden_mouths_off_again~724179/tag:reverseswing.blog.co.uk,2006-04-13:/2006/04/13/hayden_mouths_off_again~724179/Thu, 13 Apr 2006 09:56:59 +0200 <p>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. </p> <p>Its like it never happened. </p> <p>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. </p> <p>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. </p> <p>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. </p> <p>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. </p> <p>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 <strong>team</strong>. 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. </p> <p> <small> <a href="http://reverseswing.blog.co.uk/2006/04/13/hayden_mouths_off_again~724179/#comments">Comments</a> </small> </p>australiahaydenenglandcrickethttp://reverseswing.blog.co.uk/2006/04/13/hayden_mouths_off_again~724179/#commentshttp://reverseswing.blog.co.uk/2006/04/12/getting_around_london_town~722120/tag:reverseswing.blog.co.uk,2006-04-12:/2006/04/12/getting_around_london_town~722120/Wed, 12 Apr 2006 13:56:38 +0200 <p>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:</p> <p>1. Buses<br> 2. The Tube</p> <p><strong>Buses</strong></p> <p>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. </p> <p>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. </p> <p>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. </p> <p>I'd really rather walk. </p> <p><strong>The Tube</strong></p> <p>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! </p> <p><i>"Ah yes" says Ken, "but if you buy an Oyster Card, its only £2!"</i></p> <p>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.</p> <p><i>Me: "20 Malboro Lights please"<br> Vendor: "That'll be 7 quid. Now please drop your trousers and bend over..."<br> Me: "...."<br> </i></p> <p>/sigh</p> <p>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. </p> <p>Actually, I'll take it back. Its pretty shit. </p> <p> <small> <a href="http://reverseswing.blog.co.uk/2006/04/12/getting_around_london_town~722120/#comments">Comments</a> </small> </p>londonbusestubehttp://reverseswing.blog.co.uk/2006/04/12/getting_around_london_town~722120/#commentshttp://reverseswing.blog.co.uk/2006/04/12/don_t_panic_blair_to_the_rescue~721813/tag:reverseswing.blog.co.uk,2006-04-12:/2006/04/12/don_t_panic_blair_to_the_rescue~721813/Wed, 12 Apr 2006 11:32:08 +0200 <p>In yesterdays and todays news, the big headline story was that Tony Blair is now "taking charge" of the perceived NHS cash crisis. </p> <p>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. </p> <p>I am, of course, being sarcastic. </p> <p>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.</p> <p>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. </p> <p> <small> <a href="http://reverseswing.blog.co.uk/2006/04/12/don_t_panic_blair_to_the_rescue~721813/#comments">Comments</a> </small> </p>blairnhshttp://reverseswing.blog.co.uk/2006/04/12/don_t_panic_blair_to_the_rescue~721813/#commentshttp://reverseswing.blog.co.uk/2006/04/12/england_and_odi_cricket~721703/tag:reverseswing.blog.co.uk,2006-04-12:/2006/04/12/england_and_odi_cricket~721703/Wed, 12 Apr 2006 10:39:27 +0200 <p>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. </p> <p>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. </p> <p>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. </p> <p>Let us look at the tactics we use in ODI matches. Fletchers desire is thus:</p> <p><i>1 to 4 specialist batsmen<br> 5, 6, 7 1 all rounder, 1 batsman who bowls + keeper/batsman<br> 8, 9 bowling all-rounders<br> 10, 11 bowlers</i></p> <p>Lets look at India:</p> <p><i>1 to 5 specialist batsmen<br> 6, 7 all rounder, wicket keeper batsmen<br> 8, 9 bowlers that bat a bit<br> 10, 11 bowlers</i></p> <p>Funny that the India make up looks like a test side isn't it? Lets look at Australia:</p> <p><i>1 wicket keeper / bat (but this is Gilchrist we are talking about here)<br> 2 - 6 specialist batsmen<br> 7 all-rounder<br> 8 bowler who can bat<br> 9, 10, 11 bowlers</i></p> <p>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):<br> <i><br> 1 specialist batsmen<br> 2 wicket keeper playing as a batsmen<br> 3 bowling all rounder<br> 4 specialist batsmen<br> 5 all rounder<br> 6 batsmen that bowls<br> 7 specialist batsmen<br> 8 wk / bat<br> 9 bowler who can bat<br> 10 bowler who can allegedly bat<br> 11 bowler<br> </i></p> <p>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. </p> <p>Maybe I'm missing something but I find Englands approach to the one day game weird. </p> <p> <small> <a href="http://reverseswing.blog.co.uk/2006/04/12/england_and_odi_cricket~721703/#comments">Comments</a> </small> </p>cricketinternationalenglandindiahttp://reverseswing.blog.co.uk/2006/04/12/england_and_odi_cricket~721703/#commentshttp://reverseswing.blog.co.uk/2006/04/11/chelsea_fc~720689/tag:reverseswing.blog.co.uk,2006-04-11:/2006/04/11/chelsea_fc~720689/Tue, 11 Apr 2006 21:20:47 +0200 <p>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:</p> <p><i>1. They are bankrolled by a Russian Billionaire.<br> 2. The Manager is never wrong and rarely gracious.<br> 3. They don't play attractive football.<br> 4. They have foreign players prone to taking a dive now and then.<br> 5. They lack class.<br> 6. They can price everyone else out of the transfer market.<br> 7. They artificially inflate players prices.<br> 8. They can buy players to stop other teams getting them.<br> </i><br> 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 <strong>real</strong> quality and class. The gulf between Chelsea and Barcelona this season was all too apparent for me. </p> <p>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. </p> <p>Will they ever win the Champions League with Mourinho? Not in my opinion. Not while teams like Barcelona are in the competition. </p> <p> <small> <a href="http://reverseswing.blog.co.uk/2006/04/11/chelsea_fc~720689/#comments">Comments</a> </small> </p>mourinhochelseahttp://reverseswing.blog.co.uk/2006/04/11/chelsea_fc~720689/#commentshttp://reverseswing.blog.co.uk/2006/04/11/musings_on_music~720633/tag:reverseswing.blog.co.uk,2006-04-11:/2006/04/11/musings_on_music~720633/Tue, 11 Apr 2006 20:58:54 +0200 <p>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. </p> <p>If Dido was a colour she would be Magnolia. </p> <p>Anyway, amongst other things, I play records. You know a <strong>DJ</strong>. </p> <p>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. </p> <p>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!<br> <a href="http://s1.upload.sc/request/f33cf8e79a2f034d56b012e25b533c8d/owner"><br> Click<br> </a> </p> <p> <small> <a href="http://reverseswing.blog.co.uk/2006/04/11/musings_on_music~720633/#comments">Comments</a> </small> </p>djdidomusichttp://reverseswing.blog.co.uk/2006/04/11/musings_on_music~720633/#comments