A case of one good liar, and one a bit too old and slow

"This is the most humble day of my life" he says...Yeah, it should be!

I watched with interest today as Rupert Murdoch and his son James sat not so pale-faced, white nailed and with their tails between their legs, as MPs and the like questioned their integrity.



I have to say I didn't really expect to see anything extraordinary but I thought at least Murdoch Sr. might have had something to say for himself aside from long pauses while he carefully thought about whether his answer might come back to bite him in the proverbial, followed by "yes", "no" or "that's not something I was aware of."

James Murdoch on the other hand appeared to handle the questions well, but it just seemed like the better liar was the one with the younger and faster working brain. It all seems a bit too convenient that the chief executives of a company didn't know anything was going on.

More than a few disgusted laughs were provided though, the entertainment value of which I am grateful. RM sat and played the burning martyr as he moaned that "those he had trusted" had been the culprits of the phone hacking and that he had no idea it was going on.

He also claimed ignorance in that he had no idea who some of his employees responsible, some of whom had been arrested and even convicted, were. Anyone else smell faeces of the farm yard animal variety?

As clear as it is to many of us that the Murdochs cannot possibly have had no idea about the goings on at the New of The World, it is even harder to prove unless its shown in written evidence. As much as the guy bangs on about how his shame brought him to pull the plug on one of the nation's favourite papers, I can't help thinking he did it because he could, out of spite if nothing else.

Rumour has it, old Rupe is about to step down. The day can't come sooner as far as I'm concerned. Just look at the picture...smug git.

Everything seems so much better when the sun is shining!

We all notice a difference when the sun has his hat on and is high in the sky. The winter months are depressing and the cold makes it even worse.

The last two days have been filled with glorious sunshine, enough to make even Gillingham seem like it's not so bad after all. Amongst the chavs, hobos and generally quite deformed characters, the sun makes it all better.

No matter what troubles you may have, a nice afternoon walk to catch some rays will sort you right out. It's something so simple, and easy to do, but it works.

I have only realised recently how much of a difference the sun makes to everyone's mood. Walking around uni when the weather is good, you notice how much it actually affects the mood. 

In the words of that great boy band Five;

"I woke up today with this feeling,
Better things are coming my way.
I know the sunshine has a meaning,
And nothing left can get in my way."

So, everyone, get out and enjoy the sun, remember that everything is going to be all right, and forget about the stress of work and all. Roll on summer!

How to complain...The British way!

In Britain, we like a good moan and in fact somehow manage to find joy in complaining about something. If everything was right in the world and we had nothing to complain about I think we would actually feel a bit lost.

It actually makes us feel better to have a good old whinge about how everything is not fair and nothing ever goes our way.

It's how Britain complains as a culture that bemuses me - the letter writing culture. In the USA, if you don't like something, you march right on down there and you tell'em.

In some parts of the world if you complain, the likelihood is you won't live long enough to have the opportunity to do it again - people who would love the opportunity to be able to freely tell people they are wrong or that something is wrong.

So why is it that in Britian we think that the good old stiff, stern, snotty letter will get us the most attention? Why not go down there and kick up a fuss?

I think it's partly down to balls. It's all well and good writing a letter because you can read it over and over again. But actually going to speak to the person face to face would be much more of a problem. We would end up freezing up and fluffing our lines, whilst absorbing their corporate jargon (or whatever it may be), end up apologising and walking out, red faced, tails between our legs and a smacked bottom.

I rarely write letters, I think it's usually a waste of time. If I was working for a company and I received a snotty email I don't think my reply would be too dissimilar to "find something worthwhile to do with your time."

However, I did come across something this week, which has actually been bugging me for a while. Football ticket prices are absolutely shocking. The other day, I logged on to the Arsenal website to book tickets for the Leyton Orient FA Cup replay, thinking they won't be more than a tenner.

I was wrong - £34 at the cheapest price. I was so angry, I wrote them a letter. Observe...


"To whoever it may concern,


I have just found out, to my disgust, the price of the tickets for the FA Cup replay with Leyton Orient. I think it's absolutely disgusting that you are charging £34 per ticket to a game which is, in effect, a bonus to ticketing revenue for the season.

We have already gone all the way in the Carling Cup, had home games in all previous rounds of the FA Cup and four games in the Champions League, including the astronomically priced FC Barcelona game.

I am a student and would love to come and support my team, I love Arsenal, but I simply cannot afford to do it at these prices. I understand the club needs to make money from ticketing and has a vast role of staff to pay for...but making a cup replay £20/£10, like you have done with the Carling Cup, would hardly have broken the bank, and allows real fans, who might not be able to afford to go every week (for whatever reason), to go and see a few extra games a season rather than clogging your ticket centre up trying to get United or Chelsea tickets because it's the only game they can afford to go to and might as well make it a big one...

I highly doubt you will sell out this game, first reason being it's against Leyton Orient, and with no disrespect to Orient - it's hardly a high profile derby. The second is it's on a Wednesday night and night games can be a problem for some people. The third and probably most important is that it will be on TV anyway. It seems to me a very strange decision to make it even harder for yourselves to sell out by keeping the ticket prices so high.

I am not usually one to write snotty letters, but I only write to you because I care. I love my club and want to support it in all ways I can. All I ask is for something small in return. Don't get me wrong, it won't stop me from buying a season ticket as soon as I can afford it, but right now (and this will always be the case with thousands of fans), I have to limit the number of games I attend. So far this season - only Ipswich at home.

I hope you can understand my frustrated point of view.


Yours sincerely,

James Warner"

It sort of fades out at the end because by that time my anger had deteriorated. I was quite proud of my achievements but of course, that was sent on Tuesday and I'm still waiting for a reply.

The Return of The Rock

It has been about seven years since I last watched wrestling...around the time The Rock left the WWE (or WWF). It has gone down hill ever since. I'm not sure if this is because I have grown up and am not fooled in any way by the ridiculous moves and fake punches, or it just got worse and worse. I think it is probably a combination of the two.

There are so many wrestlers or characters, who I have seen from my few occasions of watching (when there is nothing else on), who are extremely irritating or I just don't like. Sheamus, The Mizz, John Cena, Randy Orton - probably the only ones I can name of the new generation - all of whom I dislike. 

I genuinely miss the feeling of excitement I used to get leading up to a Wrestlemania or even something as simple as saturday morning Smackdown. I have attempted to watch it since but it's not the same without the Stone Cold/The Rock/Triple H/Kurt Angle etc. rivalries.

Only one of them was ever needed to make me start watching wrestling again, though...The Rock! And now he's back. After I found out, I instantly went to see when late night Raw was on. 2am on Monday night? Oh, and I have Tuesday off! There is absolutely no way I am going to bed before 4am that night.

I will almost certainly never be as excited as I was when I was young, but the return of The Rock is about as close as I'm going to get.

By the way, I really wanted to write about Arsenal vs. Barcelona, but I knew I would be accused of bias (because Arsenal were amazing and are now the best team in the world by default) which I am trying to avoid. So this is why you have this to read instead.

'It's not what you know, it's who you know.'

As a journalism student I have sometimes found it difficult to do any 'actual journalism' in assignments because nobody wants to talk to students.

There are two reasons for this, the first is that many people feel students are not qualified enough and are a waste of time.

The other is that people tend to look to what they might get out of an interview, and with a student, it's not likely to be published anywhere.

However, using contacts, I have recently discovered, it's not as hard as it looks. If you persist, and ask the right people, anything can be achieved.

It all comes down to the 'six degrees of separation' theory which suggests that everyone in the world is connected through six stages, yourself being the first stage, and anyone you know being the second.

Using this theory I have managed to get an interview with Chris Moncrieff, and through him, in the next week I will be interviewing Sir Bernard Ingham, and Lords Norman Tebbit and Ian Paisley - quite a scary prospect, especially the latter.

At least two of these people once had or still has a very strong and close relationship with Margaret Thatcher. (Bernard Ingham was her Chief Press Secretary and Chris Moncrieff travelled with her around the world as a political journalist.)

 Maybe Mrs. Thatcher herself could be my next interviewee?

In a business where they say "it's not what you know, it's who you know", using the six degrees of separation, there should, in theory, be no problem for anyone who wants to find a story worth sharing.

Andy Murray will never win a grand slam...unless he gets a personality transplant

Over the past few years I have been closely watching Andy Murray, ever since he burst onto the professional scene as a budding young teenager in 2005 and took over from Tim Henman as the great British hope.

During the early years of his career, I was mightily impressed with his talent. His speed and ability to cover ground that sometimes might not seem possible and his increasingly low error rate made him one of the hottest talents in the world.

Less than three years ago, when the Scot reached his first Grand Slam final (US Open 2008), I was really encouraged by his potential. Probably being an optimistic fan, unlike the characteristics of your average British tennis fan - stemming largely from the expectation in the days of Henman - I felt like Murray could be the worlds best player by the time he was 25.

However, since that first loss in the final to Roger Federer, having seen Murray be completely destroyed, I have had huge doubts about his credentials as a Grand Slam winner.

In big games, Murray's temperament is a big problem. His inability to keep a cool head when things aren't going his way are a trait we have come to accept and in my opinion, he totally lacks the bottle it takes to become a champion. It is visible off the pitch, too, where interviews with the press are conducted in a moody, monotonous and disinterested voice.

Not only have I come to realise that he is unlikely to ever fulfil his potential, I have also come to dislike the guy. He has so much talent and so much potential, but his aloof and defeatist attitude have put paid, in my opinion, to any chance he might have had in winning one of tennis' major honours.

About a year ago, I made a small bet with a friend who still believes Murray can do it. You might have thought that, last week, I would have been worried about losing that bet as he looked almost unstoppable on his way to the Australian Open final. Unfortunately, the only emotion I had was a faint hope that he wouldn't, one again, fall at the last hurdle. Despite the bet, I do still want Murray to succeed because, after all, he's all we English tennis fans have to hang on to right now.

Of course, I was proved right in this case, and not to say I will be right for the rest of his career, but the game against Novak Djokovic has only served as confirmation in my mind that Andy Murray will never win a grand slam.

Centre for Journalism does The One Show

As the News of the World continues to get itself into trouble after hacking half the celebrity worlds' phones, me and fellow student George Ocaya decided to investigate how easy it would be to hack a mobile phone. Watch the video to find out. 

I think I need to work on my reporter skills...

Premier League sticking their oar in once again...

Blackpool have been fined for fielding a weakened team against Aston Villa in November, something which I do not agree with and find totally ridiculous.

I hope this fine doesn't lead to the resignation of one of the funniest men in football - Ian Holloway. Back in November when it was first suggested that a fine was on the cards, Holloway said he would resign if the Premier League did decide to punish the club.

I can't say I blame the guy, a managers job is to pick the team and why should the Premier League be interfering and telling him who he can and can't play.

All the players in the squad against Aston Villa were in Blackpool's designated 25-man squad which clubs must now name at the beginning of each season. Who are the Premier League and their team of jumped up, over-paid cronies to say that those players aren't good enough?

Not only is it an insult to Ian Holloway who has signed the players on the basis that he believes they can win matches for the team, but to the players who, let's face it, are basically being called shit by the Premier League.

To suggest that a team who expect to be fighting to survive in the Premier League this season, and who will need all the points they can get, would have deliberately lost a game is beyond stupid.

Richard Scudamore needs to take a long hard look at the way his organisation is regulating its clubs. You can not tell a team who they can and can not play. It defeats the object of having a manager and like Holloway said - his chairman doesn't tell him who to play, why on earth are the Premier League sticking their oar in?

I Have Never...

The next part of that sentence will probably be a shock to many people. I usually get the response "oh my god, you've never seen...?"

I'm used to it by now but there are quite a few films that I have just never got around to watching. Ok, so here goes - I have never seen Forrest Gump, Top Gun, any of the Star Wars and until I watched The Kingdom of the Crystal Skull over Christmas, I hadn't seen any of the Indiana Jones films either - at least not all the way through.

So, I have made it my mission to see all the films I really should have, but never got around to watching. I will finally make sure I get around to watching the Terminators, Ferris Bueller's Day Off, Mad Max and Braveheart all the way through.

I'm going by Empire magazine's top 500 greatest films of all time and I reckon in about a year I might have worked my way through all of them. Starting with Jailhouse Rock...

Some Journalism or something...Time for a fresh look at fairer football?

Nothing makes a football fan mad like a linesman waving his flag in the air for a player who “was miles onside, lino! Put your specs on you t**t”

Nothing can rattle a man’s cage more than a yellow card for diving after “an absolutely blatant foul, ref!”

Nobody can get under a supporter’s skin like a referee who missed a ball crossing the line…as some in the past, including me, have found out.

Referees must live in fear sometimes after getting key decisions wrong. I know I wouldn’t want to be on the receiving end of the wrath of 40,000 fans in the stadium, let alone the hatred of a couple of million up and down the country. It’s a job I certainly wouldn’t want to do.

So, they are still human after all right? We all make mistakes, right? So do the officials need a little bit of help when it comes to making those key decisions?

The subject of goal-line technology has become one of the most hotly discussed topics in world football today. In the past few years, as technology has developed, calls for major reviews of the refereeing system involving cameras on the goal-line or micro-chips in footballs have been plenty.

In recent times, technology has been introduced increasingly into sport as world governing bodies seek to make their respective games fairer.

One of the first of these technologies to be developed was created in the UK in 2001 by engineers at Roke Manor Research Limited of Romsey, Hampshire. The system – called Hawk-Eye – was first used in cricket in a Test match between England and Pakistan at Lord’s in 2001. Its primary use was to determine the trajectory of the flight of the balls on television but has since been introduced into many more areas of the sport, including the disputing of umpires’ decisions.

A similar system has since become commonplace in tennis where players can contest decisions taken by the umpire or any of the line-judges who have decided whether the ball was in or out. The system works on a challenge basis where each player is awarded three challenges and a player may challenge any decision. If they are right, they keep the challenge, but if they are wrong, they lose a challenge - to avoid abuse of the system.

Some sports also operate a referral system whereby players or the referee may ask for a video referee (watching a monitor from within the ground) to review the incident using slow motion or computerised simulation. This is the case in rugby where the referee on the pitch may ask for a decision to be referred to the video referee, usually to determine whether or not a try has been scored.

A similar system has been suggested for football, where a camera would be installed on the goal-line and the referee would be able to review incidents he is unsure about with a fifth referee.

There have been two systems developed for use in football. The first came from Hawk-Eye – the same system used in cricket, tennis and snooker and involves a camera-based system placed strategically around the pitch. The other was developed by Cairos and involves a microchip being inserted into the ball which can determine the exact position of the ball at any time – perfect for deciding whether it has crossed the goal-line or not.

However, both these systems have been rejected by both the Fédération Internationale de Football Associations (FIFA) – the world governing body of football – and The International Football Association Board (IFAB) – an independent body which determines the laws of the game.

Many fans, players, managers and referees alike are in support of some kind of system being introduced. It would wipe out the majority of the mistakes, more importantly the major mistakes, and make for a much fairer game.

Football fans are notoriously hard to please, however, and many England fans who complained about Frank Lampard’s disallowed goal against Germany in this summer’s World Cup may have forgotten that one of the goals scored in the famous 1966 victory was not actually a goal. There is a major argument to consider here – that there will always be controversy within the sport and, if they cut it out, would it be the same game that we have come to know and love?

FIFA president Sepp Blatter, accused by many of bias against England, asks a similar question of English fans.

“It is obvious that after the experience so far in this World Cup it would be a nonsense not to reopen the file of technology at the business meeting of the International FA Board in July.

“Personally I deplore it when you see evident referee mistakes but it's not the end of a competition or the end of football, this can happen.

“It happened in 1966 and then 44 years later – though it was not quite the same," Blatter said. "I apologised to England and Mexico. The English said thank you and accepted that you can win [some] and you lose [some], and the Mexicans bowed their head and accepted it.

“We will come out with a new model in November on how to improve high-level referees.

“We will start with a new concept of how to improve match control. I cannot disclose more of what we are doing but something has to be changed.”

The game of football is celebrated for the high tempo at which it is played – especially in the English leagues – and some fans argue that any technology introduced would slow the game down and create something of a ‘stop-start’ nature evident in rugby and cricket, while the referees wait for decisions.

FIFA and IFAB have always said, that if any technology was to be used, it must be a split second result in the decision being made and so developers were encouraged to design something which could deliver these kind of results.

In October 2010, a statement from IFAB read: “The indication of whether a goal has been scored must be immediate and automatically confirmed within one second."

Oliver Braun, marketing director for Cairos – which developed the microchip-based technology – has seen the company create a prototype which complies with this idea, only to have it rejected.

He said: “It's frustrating for us because we have developed this system over so many years. IFAB encouraged us to develop the system.

“They set up some criteria and said if they were met they would go with the technology. For them to come back and say in principle they don't want to use any technology, that's frustrating.

“If they said that before it would have saved a lot of time, effort and money.

“The solution to these incidents is here - it's not an issue that the technology isn't working. The technology is working, but they don't want to use it.”

Fans and managers of lower league clubs, however, have voiced concerns that they would not be able to afford the technology and that this would unbalance the game even further with only the teams in the top leagues being able to afford to have such a system implemented.

Raymond Kennedy, president of the Irish Football Association, Northern Ireland, is opposed to the technology.

He said: “If you were to take the FA Cup as an example, that has teams right from the very bottom, and if you were to use [goal-line technology] in that competition you would have to have that installed in many of the smaller grounds.

“I happen to believe that the extra officials, maybe brought in at a latter stage, does much more than goal-line technology. They are there; they will see the fouls that go on in the penalty area.

“We believe our game is played by humans and we want human eyeballs to decide whether it is a goal or not. There will be mistakes; people thrive in the controversy of football.”

In November 2008, France’s Thierry Henry infamously used his arm to keep the ball in play, which ultimately led to France scoring the winning goal against the Republic of Ireland in their World Cup play-off.

Considering Northern Ireland’s rivalry with the Republic, perhaps Kennedy’s view is not so surprising. I wonder if it would be the same if the football boot was on the other foot.

Birmingham City are huge compared with Ramsgate FC but Brum boss Alex Mcleish thinks that technology might help “little club(s)” win trophies:

“I know you can't stop every part of the game but certainly for key decisions in a major competition like the FA Cup your chances of getting to semi-finals and finals are few and far between for a little club like us.”

Some referees are in favour of extra help for the officials on the pitch, saying it would make their jobs easier.

Former Premier League referee Graham Poll, who infamously showed three yellow cards to Josip Simunic at the World Cup in Germany 2006, says: "It's the same as experimenting with things like sin bins, they say ‘Oh that's a rugby idea, we wouldn't do that.’ We have to be different, we're football.

“I've spoken to Dr Paul Hawkins who developed Hawk-Eye and it is clear that technology, which has been tested in Premier League grounds, in Premier League training grounds, to the satisfaction of the Premier League, is available and would help match officials.”

The UK’s top official Howard Webb, who refereed last year’s World Cup final, is also in favour of a system but says he understands fears that the game may change as a result of any technology which is introduced.
“It's got to be worth looking at to make our job on those really crucial decisions that bit easier. I don't think you'll find many referees who say ‘It's not something we want.’

“It's a matter of fact whether or not all of the ball has crossed all of the goal-line between the posts and under the crossbar.

“Bearing in mind that's the entire aim of the sport, to score a goal.

“If we were to have some support - some assistance that was totally accurate and totally reliable and instantaneous - then I guess it's got to be worth looking at."

“We sit here in 2010 and other sports have embraced certain types of technology.

“Football hasn't - but that tells me that's because it's really difficult, without changing the basic way the game is played. That's the fear, which I understand.”

Urs Meier is a former referee who officiated in a Champions League final and a World Cup semi-final but retired amid a storm of acrimony over his decision to rule out a late Sol Campell goal at Euro 2004. He said most referees were in favour:

“You need help. You need a chip in the ball for example. I'm in favour of that. It's the best way out of this discussion. All the referees want technology. I was always in favour.”

So, with so many referees and managers in support of a technology-based refereeing system, and many more who are yet to speak out, the question on many people’s lips is: why are we still waiting for a system to be implemented?

The answer is that only the board members of IFAB and FIFA would be able to answer you that, though it would be nigh impossible to get any of them to tell the truth.

Alternatives to technology are currently being trialled in UEFA’s Champions League and Europa League (formerly known as the UEFA cup). This season’s competition has seen an extra official standing in line with the goal at both ends of the pitch.

The idea was that they would stay there for the whole game and as a result would be in pole position to verify any key decisions the main referee might need to make. However, after seemingly making no difference, they have faced steep criticism – namely from Arsenal Manager Arsene Wenger, who branded the system “useless”.

After seeing his side defeated by Sporting Braga in November 2010, Wenger criticised the trial. With the score at 0-0, Arsenal forward Carlos Vela was clearly brought down in the box, but was booked for diving by the referee.

The Frenchman believed that this was a “turning point” in the game and said: “We have another proof that it is absolutely useless, this system.”

“It is difficult to understand how we did not get a penalty,” he added. “The five referees is not an answer to the problem.”

It’s easy to understand where Wenger is coming from when the fourth and fifth officials are too scared to put their hands up and say “you’re wrong” to the referee.

The system clearly needs reviewing once again and IFAB have got to seriously ask themselves if the technology is available for use (which it plainly is), why is it not being used around the world?

If only limited to use in international competitions – an entire FA of any country will be able to afford a few of the micro-chipped balls – and for use in the major club competitions like the UEFA Europa League and the Champions League.

This is a simple solution to keep the fat cats at major European clubs and board men of football associations around the world happy.

If you tell me I'm killing myself one more time...

The other day, I was having a conversation with my Dad and his mate about the smoking ban. Now, being that we were and still are all smokers, you can probably guess the lines of the conversation.

We concluded, in our infinite wisdom and through a cloud of smoke, that the smoking ban, was in fact, a load of rubbish. People will argue with this because, as we all know, smoking kills, and passive smoking can also be a killer. But, there are many reasons why it's still a load of old shit.

Take, for example, a public house. By definition, this is a house - to which the owner has invited the public to enter. If I were to have a day where, in my house in Gillingham, I opened up the door and had a sign which said; "please come in, and help yourself to a drink", I would then become a public house. Does this then mean that I cannot smoke in my own home?

This is what the smoking ban essentially does...It denies the landlord the right to smoke in his own home. Why? Because the government has made it illegal to smoke in the work place. OK, but if you worked in a pub before the smoking ban, and you didn't like the smoke, you didn't have to work there. Simples.

The point I am trying to make here is that, as a landlord has a right to refuse anyone entry to his house, the public have just as much right to refuse to enter in the first place. On the same level, the landlord should be able to decide whether people are allowed to smoke in his house.

Maybe I'm being a bit technical because pub's have licences to sell alcohol and they are somewhat different to your every day home. Instead I will mention that, up and down the country, landlords have been fined for smoking in their pub - after the doors have been locked. Effectively - once the doors are locked - it no longer becomes a pub and reverts back to being a home. So, I ask you, why are home owners being fined for smoking in their own homes?

Of course, the rules only apply to those who do not make them. In the House of Commons bar - to this day selling tax and duty free cigarettes and alcohol - you are allowed to smoke as much as you like. One rule for one etc. etc.

The ban has closed many of Britain's longest running pub's and in my opinion didn't help with the near crash of the British economy. Clubs and pub's now smell of piss, sweat and accumulated farts and I blame the government for kissing the EU's arse. They wanted us to ban smoking in public places so of course we bent over and obliged, unlike the rest of Europe who said "yeah, alright" and carried on as usual while laughing at the British idiots who actually did as they were told. Pathetic.

A New Start

I have blogged on and off - although 'off' for the most part - for three or four years now, restricting my blogging to sport. I have decided that there is a lot more in my mind which should probably not be shared with the rest of the world, but which I am going to share anyway.

I hope everyone will gain something from reading my posts, and although some may be completely irrelevant to many of you, my aim is that it will still be an enjoyable read. After all - if a trainee journalist can't interest his readers, it's probably time to get out now.

Profitez!