Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Never put off until tomorrow… – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 12,240
edited January 6 in General
imageNever put off until tomorrow… – politicalbetting.com

Many years ago the late Charles Stallard, father of the current Bishop of Llandaff and much the wisest man I have ever known, said to me that while a loyal Liberal Democrat he would probably vote for any party that agreed to do nothing in education or health for ten years. His logic was that every time you meddle, you create work, waste time and lose money. It would be better to have a prolonged period of calm to allow for sober reflection on everything.

Read the full story here

«134567

Comments

  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 50,230
    edited January 6
    First! On a dog pic thread?
  • BattlebusBattlebus Posts: 59
    My sister was a regional bod in Ofsted but I chose private education for my kids. Mixed results as kids are mixed. There is no real answer other than do your best for your offspring with what is available at the time.

    Thinking there is a 'solution' is the road to madness.
  • TazTaz Posts: 15,441
    Even if she’s not going to be Leader after Starmer Labour will go for a woman so if not her Rayner ? Reeves ?
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,609
    Taz said:

    Even if she’s not going to be Leader after Starmer Labour will go for a woman so if not her Rayner ? Reeves ?

    There's probably someone on the back benches yet to come forward who is in with a chance. Nobody on the current front benches shows any ability.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 120,158
    India, Australia and England are reportedly in talks to develop a two-tier system for Test cricket, and the proposal could see the "Big Three" nations play each other more often in big-ticket series. Record crowds for the recently completed Border-Gavaskar Trophy have reportedly given the idea momentum because the "Big Three" nations have a significant following and therefore the idea is gaining traction, thus the International Cricket Council led by chairman Jay Shah is taking it seriously. A total of 8,37,879 people attended the recently-concluded Border-Gavaskar Trophy.

    According to the report in The Age, Shah along with Cricket Australia chairman Mike Baird and England Cricket Board chairman Richard Thompson are set to meet later this month where the two-tier structure for Test cricket will be discussed....

    ...The report further claims, the top division of Test cricket will include seven teams -- South Africa, Australia, England, India, New Zealand, Sri Lanka and Pakistan -- while the second division will have West Indies, Bangladesh, Ireland, Afghanistan and Zimbabwe.


    https://www.msn.com/en-in/sports/cricket/india-australia-england-in-talks-to-divide-test-cricket-into-two-tiers-as-shadow-of-big-3-looms-again-report/ar-AA1x1z57
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 10,999

    Taz said:

    Even if she’s not going to be Leader after Starmer Labour will go for a woman so if not her Rayner ? Reeves ?

    There's probably someone on the back benches yet to come forward who is in with a chance. Nobody on the current front benches shows any ability.
    You may underestimate their weakness in depth!

    (Not just a Labour phenomenon)
  • TazTaz Posts: 15,441

    Taz said:

    Even if she’s not going to be Leader after Starmer Labour will go for a woman so if not her Rayner ? Reeves ?

    There's probably someone on the back benches yet to come forward who is in with a chance. Nobody on the current front benches shows any ability.
    If Rachel Reeves got it, if she’s as good a PM as she is a chancellor then heaven help us.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,609
    edited January 6
    Omnium said:

    Taz said:

    Even if she’s not going to be Leader after Starmer Labour will go for a woman so if not her Rayner ? Reeves ?

    There's probably someone on the back benches yet to come forward who is in with a chance. Nobody on the current front benches shows any ability.
    You may underestimate their weakness in depth!

    (Not just a Labour phenomenon)
    All parties appear to be struggling. The Tories claim to talent is questionable and Ed Chuckles Davey is looking a career in entertainment.

    However given 400 MPs in Labour that has to be the likely pool from which a leader will come All the talent they have is likely to be in this cohort. So there has to be someone capable in that batch or else they are in real trouble.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 29,084
    She at least seems to like animals, so that's in her favour.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 23,274

    India, Australia and England are reportedly in talks to develop a two-tier system for Test cricket, and the proposal could see the "Big Three" nations play each other more often in big-ticket series. Record crowds for the recently completed Border-Gavaskar Trophy have reportedly given the idea momentum because the "Big Three" nations have a significant following and therefore the idea is gaining traction, thus the International Cricket Council led by chairman Jay Shah is taking it seriously. A total of 8,37,879 people attended the recently-concluded Border-Gavaskar Trophy.

    According to the report in The Age, Shah along with Cricket Australia chairman Mike Baird and England Cricket Board chairman Richard Thompson are set to meet later this month where the two-tier structure for Test cricket will be discussed....

    ...The report further claims, the top division of Test cricket will include seven teams -- South Africa, Australia, England, India, New Zealand, Sri Lanka and Pakistan -- while the second division will have West Indies, Bangladesh, Ireland, Afghanistan and Zimbabwe.


    https://www.msn.com/en-in/sports/cricket/india-australia-england-in-talks-to-divide-test-cricket-into-two-tiers-as-shadow-of-big-3-looms-again-report/ar-AA1x1z57

    Since 2010 England have played 40 Tests vs Australia, 37 vs India, 6 vs Bangladesh, 2 vs Ireland and none against Afghanistan and Zimbabwe. How many less tests will we play against these teams in the new format?
  • TazTaz Posts: 15,441

    Omnium said:

    Taz said:

    Even if she’s not going to be Leader after Starmer Labour will go for a woman so if not her Rayner ? Reeves ?

    There's probably someone on the back benches yet to come forward who is in with a chance. Nobody on the current front benches shows any ability.
    You may underestimate their weakness in depth!

    (Not just a Labour phenomenon)
    All parties appear to be struggling. The Tories claim to talent is questionable and Ed Chuckles Davey is looking a career in entertainment.

    However given 400 MPs in Labour that has to be the likely pool from which a leader will come all the talent they have is likely to be in this cohort. So there has to be someone capable in that batch or else they are in real trouble.
    Although many are just gormless former SPADs/Charity/NGO workers there are some bright sparks on there who comment more substantively than just recycling govt press releases.

    Some will emerge but there will be many from the former cohort who think they deserve a ministerial gig and get nowhere and after a few years there will be discontent on the backbenches.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,659
    A politician would never follow advice of not putting things off alone (hence the full quote i suppose). Doing stuff comes with risks, and who wants that?

    Of course in reality politicians typically come in 3 varieties - the do nothing people, terrified of cocking up further so just put a plaster on. The tinkerers that you identify like Gove, who do try a bit but usually on small problems (in fairness their boss may not agree to do big stuff). And then the ones who do do big things on big issues, but very badly due to unearned confidence in their abilities.
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 10,999
    Taz said:

    Omnium said:

    Taz said:

    Even if she’s not going to be Leader after Starmer Labour will go for a woman so if not her Rayner ? Reeves ?

    There's probably someone on the back benches yet to come forward who is in with a chance. Nobody on the current front benches shows any ability.
    You may underestimate their weakness in depth!

    (Not just a Labour phenomenon)
    All parties appear to be struggling. The Tories claim to talent is questionable and Ed Chuckles Davey is looking a career in entertainment.

    However given 400 MPs in Labour that has to be the likely pool from which a leader will come all the talent they have is likely to be in this cohort. So there has to be someone capable in that batch or else they are in real trouble.
    Although many are just gormless former SPADs/Charity/NGO workers there are some bright sparks on there who comment more substantively than just recycling govt press releases.

    Some will emerge but there will be many from the former cohort who think they deserve a ministerial gig and get nowhere and after a few years there will be discontent on the backbenches.
    Anyone you think might show promise?

    Actually given your thoughts on Reeves who on earth would you replace her with?
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,659

    India, Australia and England are reportedly in talks to develop a two-tier system for Test cricket, and the proposal could see the "Big Three" nations play each other more often in big-ticket series. Record crowds for the recently completed Border-Gavaskar Trophy have reportedly given the idea momentum because the "Big Three" nations have a significant following and therefore the idea is gaining traction, thus the International Cricket Council led by chairman Jay Shah is taking it seriously. A total of 8,37,879 people attended the recently-concluded Border-Gavaskar Trophy.

    According to the report in The Age, Shah along with Cricket Australia chairman Mike Baird and England Cricket Board chairman Richard Thompson are set to meet later this month where the two-tier structure for Test cricket will be discussed....

    ...The report further claims, the top division of Test cricket will include seven teams -- South Africa, Australia, England, India, New Zealand, Sri Lanka and Pakistan -- while the second division will have West Indies, Bangladesh, Ireland, Afghanistan and Zimbabwe.


    https://www.msn.com/en-in/sports/cricket/india-australia-england-in-talks-to-divide-test-cricket-into-two-tiers-as-shadow-of-big-3-looms-again-report/ar-AA1x1z57

    Since 2010 England have played 40 Tests vs Australia, 37 vs India, 6 vs Bangladesh, 2 vs Ireland and none against Afghanistan and Zimbabwe. How many less tests will we play against these teams in the new format?
    Test Cricket is basically already dead unfortunately, so efforts are merely focused on stringing it out.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 11,810
    kle4 said:

    A politician would never follow advice of not putting things off alone (hence the full quote i suppose). Doing stuff comes with risks, and who wants that?

    Of course in reality politicians typically come in 3 varieties - the do nothing people, terrified of cocking up further so just put a plaster on. The tinkerers that you identify like Gove, who do try a bit but usually on small problems (in fairness their boss may not agree to do big stuff). And then the ones who do do big things on big issues, but very badly due to unearned confidence in their abilities.

    PB is cynical this morning!
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,659

    kle4 said:

    A politician would never follow advice of not putting things off alone (hence the full quote i suppose). Doing stuff comes with risks, and who wants that?

    Of course in reality politicians typically come in 3 varieties - the do nothing people, terrified of cocking up further so just put a plaster on. The tinkerers that you identify like Gove, who do try a bit but usually on small problems (in fairness their boss may not agree to do big stuff). And then the ones who do do big things on big issues, but very badly due to unearned confidence in their abilities.

    PB is cynical this morning!
    I woke up before 8am so am cranky.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 51,675

    kle4 said:

    A politician would never follow advice of not putting things off alone (hence the full quote i suppose). Doing stuff comes with risks, and who wants that?

    Of course in reality politicians typically come in 3 varieties - the do nothing people, terrified of cocking up further so just put a plaster on. The tinkerers that you identify like Gove, who do try a bit but usually on small problems (in fairness their boss may not agree to do big stuff). And then the ones who do do big things on big issues, but very badly due to unearned confidence in their abilities.

    PB is cynical this morning!
    How long since we had an MP who had noted success in turning an organisation around and running it successfully? Let alone a minister?
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 29,084
    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    A politician would never follow advice of not putting things off alone (hence the full quote i suppose). Doing stuff comes with risks, and who wants that?

    Of course in reality politicians typically come in 3 varieties - the do nothing people, terrified of cocking up further so just put a plaster on. The tinkerers that you identify like Gove, who do try a bit but usually on small problems (in fairness their boss may not agree to do big stuff). And then the ones who do do big things on big issues, but very badly due to unearned confidence in their abilities.

    PB is cynical this morning!
    I woke up before 8am so am cranky.
    5.30 says hello.
  • DopermeanDopermean Posts: 633

    India, Australia and England are reportedly in talks to develop a two-tier system for Test cricket, and the proposal could see the "Big Three" nations play each other more often in big-ticket series. Record crowds for the recently completed Border-Gavaskar Trophy have reportedly given the idea momentum because the "Big Three" nations have a significant following and therefore the idea is gaining traction, thus the International Cricket Council led by chairman Jay Shah is taking it seriously. A total of 8,37,879 people attended the recently-concluded Border-Gavaskar Trophy.

    According to the report in The Age, Shah along with Cricket Australia chairman Mike Baird and England Cricket Board chairman Richard Thompson are set to meet later this month where the two-tier structure for Test cricket will be discussed....

    ...The report further claims, the top division of Test cricket will include seven teams -- South Africa, Australia, England, India, New Zealand, Sri Lanka and Pakistan -- while the second division will have West Indies, Bangladesh, Ireland, Afghanistan and Zimbabwe.


    https://www.msn.com/en-in/sports/cricket/india-australia-england-in-talks-to-divide-test-cricket-into-two-tiers-as-shadow-of-big-3-looms-again-report/ar-AA1x1z57

    Since 2010 England have played 40 Tests vs Australia, 37 vs India, 6 vs Bangladesh, 2 vs Ireland and none against Afghanistan and Zimbabwe. How many less tests will we play against these teams in the new format?
    This is a plan that results in international cricket losing relevance. Developing the weaker teams, playing more matches, having a test league that is competitive would do more to ensure the future of cricket.
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 6,869

    India, Australia and England are reportedly in talks to develop a two-tier system for Test cricket, and the proposal could see the "Big Three" nations play each other more often in big-ticket series. Record crowds for the recently completed Border-Gavaskar Trophy have reportedly given the idea momentum because the "Big Three" nations have a significant following and therefore the idea is gaining traction, thus the International Cricket Council led by chairman Jay Shah is taking it seriously. A total of 8,37,879 people attended the recently-concluded Border-Gavaskar Trophy.

    According to the report in The Age, Shah along with Cricket Australia chairman Mike Baird and England Cricket Board chairman Richard Thompson are set to meet later this month where the two-tier structure for Test cricket will be discussed....

    ...The report further claims, the top division of Test cricket will include seven teams -- South Africa, Australia, England, India, New Zealand, Sri Lanka and Pakistan -- while the second division will have West Indies, Bangladesh, Ireland, Afghanistan and Zimbabwe.


    https://www.msn.com/en-in/sports/cricket/india-australia-england-in-talks-to-divide-test-cricket-into-two-tiers-as-shadow-of-big-3-looms-again-report/ar-AA1x1z57

    Since 2010 England have played 40 Tests vs Australia, 37 vs India, 6 vs Bangladesh, 2 vs Ireland and none against Afghanistan and Zimbabwe. How many less tests will we play against these teams in the new format?
    Fewer tests....
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,659
    edited January 6
    Dopermean said:

    India, Australia and England are reportedly in talks to develop a two-tier system for Test cricket, and the proposal could see the "Big Three" nations play each other more often in big-ticket series. Record crowds for the recently completed Border-Gavaskar Trophy have reportedly given the idea momentum because the "Big Three" nations have a significant following and therefore the idea is gaining traction, thus the International Cricket Council led by chairman Jay Shah is taking it seriously. A total of 8,37,879 people attended the recently-concluded Border-Gavaskar Trophy.

    According to the report in The Age, Shah along with Cricket Australia chairman Mike Baird and England Cricket Board chairman Richard Thompson are set to meet later this month where the two-tier structure for Test cricket will be discussed....

    ...The report further claims, the top division of Test cricket will include seven teams -- South Africa, Australia, England, India, New Zealand, Sri Lanka and Pakistan -- while the second division will have West Indies, Bangladesh, Ireland, Afghanistan and Zimbabwe.


    https://www.msn.com/en-in/sports/cricket/india-australia-england-in-talks-to-divide-test-cricket-into-two-tiers-as-shadow-of-big-3-looms-again-report/ar-AA1x1z57

    Since 2010 England have played 40 Tests vs Australia, 37 vs India, 6 vs Bangladesh, 2 vs Ireland and none against Afghanistan and Zimbabwe. How many less tests will we play against these teams in the new format?
    This is a plan that results in international cricket losing relevance. Developing the weaker teams, playing more matches, having a test league that is competitive would do more to ensure the future of cricket.
    Short termism winning out it seems. Not just politics.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,609
    Taz said:

    Omnium said:

    Taz said:

    Even if she’s not going to be Leader after Starmer Labour will go for a woman so if not her Rayner ? Reeves ?

    There's probably someone on the back benches yet to come forward who is in with a chance. Nobody on the current front benches shows any ability.
    You may underestimate their weakness in depth!

    (Not just a Labour phenomenon)
    All parties appear to be struggling. The Tories claim to talent is questionable and Ed Chuckles Davey is looking a career in entertainment.

    However given 400 MPs in Labour that has to be the likely pool from which a leader will come all the talent they have is likely to be in this cohort. So there has to be someone capable in that batch or else they are in real trouble.
    Although many are just gormless former SPADs/Charity/NGO workers there are some bright sparks on there who comment more substantively than just recycling govt press releases.

    Some will emerge but there will be many from the former cohort who think they deserve a ministerial gig and get nowhere and after a few years there will be discontent on the backbenches.
    I doubt we'll see much until mid government. By then SKS will have decided he's on for being ruthless or he will have jacked it in and a new leader can shuffle the pack.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 23,274
    kle4 said:

    India, Australia and England are reportedly in talks to develop a two-tier system for Test cricket, and the proposal could see the "Big Three" nations play each other more often in big-ticket series. Record crowds for the recently completed Border-Gavaskar Trophy have reportedly given the idea momentum because the "Big Three" nations have a significant following and therefore the idea is gaining traction, thus the International Cricket Council led by chairman Jay Shah is taking it seriously. A total of 8,37,879 people attended the recently-concluded Border-Gavaskar Trophy.

    According to the report in The Age, Shah along with Cricket Australia chairman Mike Baird and England Cricket Board chairman Richard Thompson are set to meet later this month where the two-tier structure for Test cricket will be discussed....

    ...The report further claims, the top division of Test cricket will include seven teams -- South Africa, Australia, England, India, New Zealand, Sri Lanka and Pakistan -- while the second division will have West Indies, Bangladesh, Ireland, Afghanistan and Zimbabwe.


    https://www.msn.com/en-in/sports/cricket/india-australia-england-in-talks-to-divide-test-cricket-into-two-tiers-as-shadow-of-big-3-looms-again-report/ar-AA1x1z57

    Since 2010 England have played 40 Tests vs Australia, 37 vs India, 6 vs Bangladesh, 2 vs Ireland and none against Afghanistan and Zimbabwe. How many less tests will we play against these teams in the new format?
    Test Cricket is basically already dead unfortunately, so efforts are merely focused on stringing it out.
    I don't think that is true, it is just a botch job of a format and will remain so. It is already an informal three tier system where teams play each other when they want. Eng, Aus, Ind at the top, Ireland, Afghanistan and Zimbabwe at the bottom with the rest in the middle bobbing up and down.

    Boxing would be another sport with a botched format, but it still draws interest. Not everything has to be ordered and logical.
  • TazTaz Posts: 15,441
    Omnium said:

    Taz said:

    Omnium said:

    Taz said:

    Even if she’s not going to be Leader after Starmer Labour will go for a woman so if not her Rayner ? Reeves ?

    There's probably someone on the back benches yet to come forward who is in with a chance. Nobody on the current front benches shows any ability.
    You may underestimate their weakness in depth!

    (Not just a Labour phenomenon)
    All parties appear to be struggling. The Tories claim to talent is questionable and Ed Chuckles Davey is looking a career in entertainment.

    However given 400 MPs in Labour that has to be the likely pool from which a leader will come all the talent they have is likely to be in this cohort. So there has to be someone capable in that batch or else they are in real trouble.
    Although many are just gormless former SPADs/Charity/NGO workers there are some bright sparks on there who comment more substantively than just recycling govt press releases.

    Some will emerge but there will be many from the former cohort who think they deserve a ministerial gig and get nowhere and after a few years there will be discontent on the backbenches.
    Anyone you think might show promise?

    Actually given your thoughts on Reeves who on earth would you replace her with?
    Darren Jones possibly ? It is not a great field to be honest, same as the Tories. But Jones does seem to be quite a good performer.

    I think Reeves has been poor but it is not irredeemable. She can, as can SKS, turn it around. it was Annaliese Dodds before Reeves and she was terrible too.

    Connor Tomlinson and Yuan Yuang both seem to be bright and have interests in specific fields.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 23,274

    India, Australia and England are reportedly in talks to develop a two-tier system for Test cricket, and the proposal could see the "Big Three" nations play each other more often in big-ticket series. Record crowds for the recently completed Border-Gavaskar Trophy have reportedly given the idea momentum because the "Big Three" nations have a significant following and therefore the idea is gaining traction, thus the International Cricket Council led by chairman Jay Shah is taking it seriously. A total of 8,37,879 people attended the recently-concluded Border-Gavaskar Trophy.

    According to the report in The Age, Shah along with Cricket Australia chairman Mike Baird and England Cricket Board chairman Richard Thompson are set to meet later this month where the two-tier structure for Test cricket will be discussed....

    ...The report further claims, the top division of Test cricket will include seven teams -- South Africa, Australia, England, India, New Zealand, Sri Lanka and Pakistan -- while the second division will have West Indies, Bangladesh, Ireland, Afghanistan and Zimbabwe.


    https://www.msn.com/en-in/sports/cricket/india-australia-england-in-talks-to-divide-test-cricket-into-two-tiers-as-shadow-of-big-3-looms-again-report/ar-AA1x1z57

    Since 2010 England have played 40 Tests vs Australia, 37 vs India, 6 vs Bangladesh, 2 vs Ireland and none against Afghanistan and Zimbabwe. How many less tests will we play against these teams in the new format?
    Fewer tests....
    Less pedants.....
  • TazTaz Posts: 15,441
    kle4 said:

    India, Australia and England are reportedly in talks to develop a two-tier system for Test cricket, and the proposal could see the "Big Three" nations play each other more often in big-ticket series. Record crowds for the recently completed Border-Gavaskar Trophy have reportedly given the idea momentum because the "Big Three" nations have a significant following and therefore the idea is gaining traction, thus the International Cricket Council led by chairman Jay Shah is taking it seriously. A total of 8,37,879 people attended the recently-concluded Border-Gavaskar Trophy.

    According to the report in The Age, Shah along with Cricket Australia chairman Mike Baird and England Cricket Board chairman Richard Thompson are set to meet later this month where the two-tier structure for Test cricket will be discussed....

    ...The report further claims, the top division of Test cricket will include seven teams -- South Africa, Australia, England, India, New Zealand, Sri Lanka and Pakistan -- while the second division will have West Indies, Bangladesh, Ireland, Afghanistan and Zimbabwe.


    https://www.msn.com/en-in/sports/cricket/india-australia-england-in-talks-to-divide-test-cricket-into-two-tiers-as-shadow-of-big-3-looms-again-report/ar-AA1x1z57

    Since 2010 England have played 40 Tests vs Australia, 37 vs India, 6 vs Bangladesh, 2 vs Ireland and none against Afghanistan and Zimbabwe. How many less tests will we play against these teams in the new format?
    Test Cricket is basically already dead unfortunately, so efforts are merely focused on stringing it out.
    T20I is the future. Sooner they accept it the better.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 29,084

    kle4 said:

    A politician would never follow advice of not putting things off alone (hence the full quote i suppose). Doing stuff comes with risks, and who wants that?

    Of course in reality politicians typically come in 3 varieties - the do nothing people, terrified of cocking up further so just put a plaster on. The tinkerers that you identify like Gove, who do try a bit but usually on small problems (in fairness their boss may not agree to do big stuff). And then the ones who do do big things on big issues, but very badly due to unearned confidence in their abilities.

    PB is cynical this morning!
    How long since we had an MP who had noted success in turning an organisation around and running it successfully? Let alone a minister?
    Farage!

    *Part of my strategy to tempt the lefties back by discussing their amazing skills of their favourite political figure.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,635
    Taz said:

    Even if she’s not going to be Leader after Starmer Labour will go for a woman so if not her Rayner ? Reeves ?

    Looks like any with name starting with R are real duffers. How do these talentless people ever rise to the top
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,659

    kle4 said:

    India, Australia and England are reportedly in talks to develop a two-tier system for Test cricket, and the proposal could see the "Big Three" nations play each other more often in big-ticket series. Record crowds for the recently completed Border-Gavaskar Trophy have reportedly given the idea momentum because the "Big Three" nations have a significant following and therefore the idea is gaining traction, thus the International Cricket Council led by chairman Jay Shah is taking it seriously. A total of 8,37,879 people attended the recently-concluded Border-Gavaskar Trophy.

    According to the report in The Age, Shah along with Cricket Australia chairman Mike Baird and England Cricket Board chairman Richard Thompson are set to meet later this month where the two-tier structure for Test cricket will be discussed....

    ...The report further claims, the top division of Test cricket will include seven teams -- South Africa, Australia, England, India, New Zealand, Sri Lanka and Pakistan -- while the second division will have West Indies, Bangladesh, Ireland, Afghanistan and Zimbabwe.


    https://www.msn.com/en-in/sports/cricket/india-australia-england-in-talks-to-divide-test-cricket-into-two-tiers-as-shadow-of-big-3-looms-again-report/ar-AA1x1z57

    Since 2010 England have played 40 Tests vs Australia, 37 vs India, 6 vs Bangladesh, 2 vs Ireland and none against Afghanistan and Zimbabwe. How many less tests will we play against these teams in the new format?
    Test Cricket is basically already dead unfortunately, so efforts are merely focused on stringing it out.
    I don't think that is true, it is just a botch job of a format and will remain so. It is already an informal three tier system where teams play each other when they want. Eng, Aus, Ind at the top, Ireland, Afghanistan and Zimbabwe at the bottom with the rest in the middle bobbing up and down.

    Boxing would be another sport with a botched format, but it still draws interest. Not everything has to be ordered and logical.
    The botched format is a symptom of its death, the occasional bout of interest doesn't really mitigate that interest is lower and given the amounts pkayes likely to get even more so in the the middle.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,635
    Taz said:

    Omnium said:

    Taz said:

    Omnium said:

    Taz said:

    Even if she’s not going to be Leader after Starmer Labour will go for a woman so if not her Rayner ? Reeves ?

    There's probably someone on the back benches yet to come forward who is in with a chance. Nobody on the current front benches shows any ability.
    You may underestimate their weakness in depth!

    (Not just a Labour phenomenon)
    All parties appear to be struggling. The Tories claim to talent is questionable and Ed Chuckles Davey is looking a career in entertainment.

    However given 400 MPs in Labour that has to be the likely pool from which a leader will come all the talent they have is likely to be in this cohort. So there has to be someone capable in that batch or else they are in real trouble.
    Although many are just gormless former SPADs/Charity/NGO workers there are some bright sparks on there who comment more substantively than just recycling govt press releases.

    Some will emerge but there will be many from the former cohort who think they deserve a ministerial gig and get nowhere and after a few years there will be discontent on the backbenches.
    Anyone you think might show promise?

    Actually given your thoughts on Reeves who on earth would you replace her with?
    Darren Jones possibly ? It is not a great field to be honest, same as the Tories. But Jones does seem to be quite a good performer.

    I think Reeves has been poor but it is not irredeemable. She can, as can SKS, turn it around. it was Annaliese Dodds before Reeves and she was terrible too.

    Connor Tomlinson and Yuan Yuang both seem to be bright and have interests in specific fields.
    Her voice is enough to vote against her without the fact she is absolute crap to boot.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,659
    malcolmg said:

    Taz said:

    Even if she’s not going to be Leader after Starmer Labour will go for a woman so if not her Rayner ? Reeves ?

    Looks like any with name starting with R are real duffers. How do these talentless people ever rise to the top
    They are the best available. Or making themselves available.
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,635
    Eabhal said:

    I saw Malcolm's post about "toff's children" on the prior thread.

    From my friends' experience, privately educated children can have an awful time at school and there are plenty of examples of sexual and physical abuse happening at private schools, as demonstrated by the Scottish Child Abuse Inquiry. No money in the world can mitigate being raped as a child.

    It's during debates like this that I remember to be grateful for the safe, secure and loving environment I grew up in, cycling to a high-performing state school in a beautiful part of Scotland, and returning to a home full of books, music and great food.

    Very true but that tends to be individuals not packs of animals.
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 10,999
    edited January 6
    Taz said:

    Omnium said:

    Taz said:

    Omnium said:

    Taz said:

    Even if she’s not going to be Leader after Starmer Labour will go for a woman so if not her Rayner ? Reeves ?

    There's probably someone on the back benches yet to come forward who is in with a chance. Nobody on the current front benches shows any ability.
    You may underestimate their weakness in depth!

    (Not just a Labour phenomenon)
    All parties appear to be struggling. The Tories claim to talent is questionable and Ed Chuckles Davey is looking a career in entertainment.

    However given 400 MPs in Labour that has to be the likely pool from which a leader will come all the talent they have is likely to be in this cohort. So there has to be someone capable in that batch or else they are in real trouble.
    Although many are just gormless former SPADs/Charity/NGO workers there are some bright sparks on there who comment more substantively than just recycling govt press releases.

    Some will emerge but there will be many from the former cohort who think they deserve a ministerial gig and get nowhere and after a few years there will be discontent on the backbenches.
    Anyone you think might show promise?

    Actually given your thoughts on Reeves who on earth would you replace her with?
    Darren Jones possibly ? It is not a great field to be honest, same as the Tories. But Jones does seem to be quite a good performer.

    I think Reeves has been poor but it is not irredeemable. She can, as can SKS, turn it around. it was Annaliese Dodds before Reeves and she was terrible too.

    Connor Tomlinson and Yuan Yuang both seem to be bright and have interests in specific fields.
    Jones is ok. Dodds was a ludicrous appointment as shadow chancellor - very much the wrong role for her.

    I've not heard of Tomlinson, but from the tiny bit I know of her Yuang does seem to have potential.

    I personally quite like Matthew Pennycook as a possible candidate to progress further.

    Edit: Her name is Yang, not Yuang - after looking at wikipedia.

    Edit2: And Hamish Falconer hasn't had to resign from anything yet.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 14,026
    edited January 6
    Evening all from Aotearoa :)

    The three recent T20 matches with Sri Lanka were all shown live and free to air on the TVNZ 1 channel. Most sports can only dream of prime time coverage on a Saturday evening for nearly four hours.

    In these times, live sport fulfills a useful function as entertainment and diversion. The Wellington Cup meeting at Trentham is also going to get main channel coverage.
  • TazTaz Posts: 15,441
    malcolmg said:

    Taz said:

    Even if she’s not going to be Leader after Starmer Labour will go for a woman so if not her Rayner ? Reeves ?

    Looks like any with name starting with R are real duffers. How do these talentless people ever rise to the top
    In the case of Rachel Reeves her predecessor was even worse.

    It is the same in all political parties. There is some talent in there but it is mainly careerists and mediocrities. Middle Managers who want to manage things not solve them.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 23,274
    Dopermean said:

    India, Australia and England are reportedly in talks to develop a two-tier system for Test cricket, and the proposal could see the "Big Three" nations play each other more often in big-ticket series. Record crowds for the recently completed Border-Gavaskar Trophy have reportedly given the idea momentum because the "Big Three" nations have a significant following and therefore the idea is gaining traction, thus the International Cricket Council led by chairman Jay Shah is taking it seriously. A total of 8,37,879 people attended the recently-concluded Border-Gavaskar Trophy.

    According to the report in The Age, Shah along with Cricket Australia chairman Mike Baird and England Cricket Board chairman Richard Thompson are set to meet later this month where the two-tier structure for Test cricket will be discussed....

    ...The report further claims, the top division of Test cricket will include seven teams -- South Africa, Australia, England, India, New Zealand, Sri Lanka and Pakistan -- while the second division will have West Indies, Bangladesh, Ireland, Afghanistan and Zimbabwe.


    https://www.msn.com/en-in/sports/cricket/india-australia-england-in-talks-to-divide-test-cricket-into-two-tiers-as-shadow-of-big-3-looms-again-report/ar-AA1x1z57

    Since 2010 England have played 40 Tests vs Australia, 37 vs India, 6 vs Bangladesh, 2 vs Ireland and none against Afghanistan and Zimbabwe. How many less tests will we play against these teams in the new format?
    This is a plan that results in international cricket losing relevance. Developing the weaker teams, playing more matches, having a test league that is competitive would do more to ensure the future of cricket.
    Without IPL and franchise cricket I would agree with you.

    But how realistic is it to get audiences to be regularly interested in Ireland playing anyone in a Test match over several days when it will either be someone they are mismatched against, or the likes of Zimbabwe? How is that going to fund Irish players to stay in Test cricket and develop those skills ahead of franchise cricket across the year?

    Whereas there definitely is demand from audiences, and prestige for players, for Ashes, and India vs Eng and Aus, so that is what we shall (continue to) get.
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 17,583
    On the bright side, the schools bill does look like it's about the academy system withering not being uprooted. A higher bar for conversion and the possibility for councils to open new schools.

    https://schoolsweek.co.uk/schools-bill-all-39-proposed-policies-and-when-theyll-start/

    But while new laws are the visible bit of the iceberg, the interesting bit will be how the government chooses to read the existing statutes.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 28,686

    A start might be recognising that deliberately running the schools at 99% capacity is madness.

    Operations research has long shown that if you remove all “excess capacity” from an organisation, the result is…

    “Fragmented, disorganised, understaffed, hopelessly mismanaged”….

    Falling numbers provides an opportunity to introduce spare capacity or, better, cut class sizes towards (although not to) private school levels. Unfortunately, the way the money is distributed means it probably can't happen.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 11,810

    India, Australia and England are reportedly in talks to develop a two-tier system for Test cricket, and the proposal could see the "Big Three" nations play each other more often in big-ticket series. Record crowds for the recently completed Border-Gavaskar Trophy have reportedly given the idea momentum because the "Big Three" nations have a significant following and therefore the idea is gaining traction, thus the International Cricket Council led by chairman Jay Shah is taking it seriously. A total of 8,37,879 people attended the recently-concluded Border-Gavaskar Trophy.

    According to the report in The Age, Shah along with Cricket Australia chairman Mike Baird and England Cricket Board chairman Richard Thompson are set to meet later this month where the two-tier structure for Test cricket will be discussed....

    ...The report further claims, the top division of Test cricket will include seven teams -- South Africa, Australia, England, India, New Zealand, Sri Lanka and Pakistan -- while the second division will have West Indies, Bangladesh, Ireland, Afghanistan and Zimbabwe.


    https://www.msn.com/en-in/sports/cricket/india-australia-england-in-talks-to-divide-test-cricket-into-two-tiers-as-shadow-of-big-3-looms-again-report/ar-AA1x1z57

    Since 2010 England have played 40 Tests vs Australia, 37 vs India, 6 vs Bangladesh, 2 vs Ireland and none against Afghanistan and Zimbabwe. How many less tests will we play against these teams in the new format?
    Fewer tests....
    https://www.grammarphobia.com/blog/2010/12/less-fewer.html
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 28,686
    Re header. Is Ofsted inspection team safeguarding really that much of an issue? It is embarrassing but aiui there aren't many inspectors and they are quickly in and out.

    And "council of despair"?
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 12,983
    Dopermean said:

    India, Australia and England are reportedly in talks to develop a two-tier system for Test cricket, and the proposal could see the "Big Three" nations play each other more often in big-ticket series. Record crowds for the recently completed Border-Gavaskar Trophy have reportedly given the idea momentum because the "Big Three" nations have a significant following and therefore the idea is gaining traction, thus the International Cricket Council led by chairman Jay Shah is taking it seriously. A total of 8,37,879 people attended the recently-concluded Border-Gavaskar Trophy.

    According to the report in The Age, Shah along with Cricket Australia chairman Mike Baird and England Cricket Board chairman Richard Thompson are set to meet later this month where the two-tier structure for Test cricket will be discussed....

    ...The report further claims, the top division of Test cricket will include seven teams -- South Africa, Australia, England, India, New Zealand, Sri Lanka and Pakistan -- while the second division will have West Indies, Bangladesh, Ireland, Afghanistan and Zimbabwe.


    https://www.msn.com/en-in/sports/cricket/india-australia-england-in-talks-to-divide-test-cricket-into-two-tiers-as-shadow-of-big-3-looms-again-report/ar-AA1x1z57

    Since 2010 England have played 40 Tests vs Australia, 37 vs India, 6 vs Bangladesh, 2 vs Ireland and none against Afghanistan and Zimbabwe. How many less tests will we play against these teams in the new format?
    This is a plan that results in international cricket losing relevance. Developing the weaker teams, playing more matches, having a test league that is competitive would do more to ensure the future of cricket.
    Cricket did OK and was intensely competitive when these things applied: In England the County Championship was not about promotion and relegation; Test series were finite in number, tours were long with lots of county involvement, and there were significant gaps between tests.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 11,810

    kle4 said:

    A politician would never follow advice of not putting things off alone (hence the full quote i suppose). Doing stuff comes with risks, and who wants that?

    Of course in reality politicians typically come in 3 varieties - the do nothing people, terrified of cocking up further so just put a plaster on. The tinkerers that you identify like Gove, who do try a bit but usually on small problems (in fairness their boss may not agree to do big stuff). And then the ones who do do big things on big issues, but very badly due to unearned confidence in their abilities.

    PB is cynical this morning!
    How long since we had an MP who had noted success in turning an organisation around and running it successfully? Let alone a minister?
    Farage!

    *Part of my strategy to tempt the lefties back by discussing their amazing skills of their favourite political figure.
    Farage is one example. We could also choose Starmer, who turned around the fortunes of the Labour Party, winning an historic majority. We could choose Davey, who delivered his party a record number of MPs. What about Carla Denyer, who has likewise delivered her party a record number of MPs?
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,635
    Taz said:

    malcolmg said:

    Taz said:

    Even if she’s not going to be Leader after Starmer Labour will go for a woman so if not her Rayner ? Reeves ?

    Looks like any with name starting with R are real duffers. How do these talentless people ever rise to the top
    In the case of Rachel Reeves her predecessor was even worse.

    It is the same in all political parties. There is some talent in there but it is mainly careerists and mediocrities. Middle Managers who want to manage things not solve them.
    Taz, that is an insult to middle managers. Most could not run a bath.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 17,323
    edited January 6
    Musk proposes that America "liberates the people of Britain from their tyrannical government"

    The Trump administration has a lot of previous allies to invade. Britain, Canada, Denmark just added to the list.
  • TazTaz Posts: 15,441
    malcolmg said:

    Taz said:

    malcolmg said:

    Taz said:

    Even if she’s not going to be Leader after Starmer Labour will go for a woman so if not her Rayner ? Reeves ?

    Looks like any with name starting with R are real duffers. How do these talentless people ever rise to the top
    In the case of Rachel Reeves her predecessor was even worse.

    It is the same in all political parties. There is some talent in there but it is mainly careerists and mediocrities. Middle Managers who want to manage things not solve them.
    Taz, that is an insult to middle managers. Most could not run a bath.
    True, they'd get a SPAD to do it for them
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 43,778

    kle4 said:

    A politician would never follow advice of not putting things off alone (hence the full quote i suppose). Doing stuff comes with risks, and who wants that?

    Of course in reality politicians typically come in 3 varieties - the do nothing people, terrified of cocking up further so just put a plaster on. The tinkerers that you identify like Gove, who do try a bit but usually on small problems (in fairness their boss may not agree to do big stuff). And then the ones who do do big things on big issues, but very badly due to unearned confidence in their abilities.

    PB is cynical this morning!
    How long since we had an MP who had noted success in turning an organisation around and running it successfully? Let alone a minister?
    Farage!

    *Part of my strategy to tempt the lefties back by discussing their amazing skills of their favourite political figure.
    One of Farage's major problems is that he eventually seems to fall out with everyone he works with.

    It just happened much quicker with Musk than usual.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 55,301
    edited January 6

    Dopermean said:

    India, Australia and England are reportedly in talks to develop a two-tier system for Test cricket, and the proposal could see the "Big Three" nations play each other more often in big-ticket series. Record crowds for the recently completed Border-Gavaskar Trophy have reportedly given the idea momentum because the "Big Three" nations have a significant following and therefore the idea is gaining traction, thus the International Cricket Council led by chairman Jay Shah is taking it seriously. A total of 8,37,879 people attended the recently-concluded Border-Gavaskar Trophy.

    According to the report in The Age, Shah along with Cricket Australia chairman Mike Baird and England Cricket Board chairman Richard Thompson are set to meet later this month where the two-tier structure for Test cricket will be discussed....

    ...The report further claims, the top division of Test cricket will include seven teams -- South Africa, Australia, England, India, New Zealand, Sri Lanka and Pakistan -- while the second division will have West Indies, Bangladesh, Ireland, Afghanistan and Zimbabwe.


    https://www.msn.com/en-in/sports/cricket/india-australia-england-in-talks-to-divide-test-cricket-into-two-tiers-as-shadow-of-big-3-looms-again-report/ar-AA1x1z57

    Since 2010 England have played 40 Tests vs Australia, 37 vs India, 6 vs Bangladesh, 2 vs Ireland and none against Afghanistan and Zimbabwe. How many less tests will we play against these teams in the new format?
    This is a plan that results in international cricket losing relevance. Developing the weaker teams, playing more matches, having a test league that is competitive would do more to ensure the future of cricket.
    Without IPL and franchise cricket I would agree with you.

    But how realistic is it to get audiences to be regularly interested in Ireland playing anyone in a Test match over several days when it will either be someone they are mismatched against, or the likes of Zimbabwe? How is that going to fund Irish players to stay in Test cricket and develop those skills ahead of franchise cricket across the year?

    Whereas there definitely is demand from audiences, and prestige for players, for Ashes, and India vs Eng and Aus, so that is what we shall (continue to) get.
    They need to think outside the box.

    For example, put a stream on YouTube and Rumble, available anywhere except the competitor countries or where they’ve sold TV coverage, and run international ads on that stream. It will likely get millions of views over the course of an average Test, as loads of people will put it on and watch in the background, and any exciting finishes will bring in millions more. Easy to imagine someone posting on here that SA v Zimbabwe looks like an amazing final session, here’s a link to it on YouTube, and getting 50 hits just from that. Definitely put extended highlights on all of the popular platforms ASAP. Or look to sell global rights for a series to Amazon or Netflix, which are pretty much ubiquitous in the West and may drive subscribers in emerging markets.
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 6,869

    India, Australia and England are reportedly in talks to develop a two-tier system for Test cricket, and the proposal could see the "Big Three" nations play each other more often in big-ticket series. Record crowds for the recently completed Border-Gavaskar Trophy have reportedly given the idea momentum because the "Big Three" nations have a significant following and therefore the idea is gaining traction, thus the International Cricket Council led by chairman Jay Shah is taking it seriously. A total of 8,37,879 people attended the recently-concluded Border-Gavaskar Trophy.

    According to the report in The Age, Shah along with Cricket Australia chairman Mike Baird and England Cricket Board chairman Richard Thompson are set to meet later this month where the two-tier structure for Test cricket will be discussed....

    ...The report further claims, the top division of Test cricket will include seven teams -- South Africa, Australia, England, India, New Zealand, Sri Lanka and Pakistan -- while the second division will have West Indies, Bangladesh, Ireland, Afghanistan and Zimbabwe.


    https://www.msn.com/en-in/sports/cricket/india-australia-england-in-talks-to-divide-test-cricket-into-two-tiers-as-shadow-of-big-3-looms-again-report/ar-AA1x1z57

    Since 2010 England have played 40 Tests vs Australia, 37 vs India, 6 vs Bangladesh, 2 vs Ireland and none against Afghanistan and Zimbabwe. How many less tests will we play against these teams in the new format?
    Fewer tests....
    Less pedants.....
    Fewer pedants ...if you must. ....
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 17,583

    A start might be recognising that deliberately running the schools at 99% capacity is madness.

    Operations research has long shown that if you remove all “excess capacity” from an organisation, the result is…

    “Fragmented, disorganised, understaffed, hopelessly mismanaged”….

    Trouble is that allowing schools to have a capacity buffer (which, as you say, is the only sane thing to do) means that parents can't have that temptingly empty space for their child. Which is an awfully difficult sell.

    ("If there's a spare desk, you can have it" was a very very early Thatcher reform. And these days, a school's best hope of making the budget work is to be completely full.)
  • TazTaz Posts: 15,441

    kle4 said:

    A politician would never follow advice of not putting things off alone (hence the full quote i suppose). Doing stuff comes with risks, and who wants that?

    Of course in reality politicians typically come in 3 varieties - the do nothing people, terrified of cocking up further so just put a plaster on. The tinkerers that you identify like Gove, who do try a bit but usually on small problems (in fairness their boss may not agree to do big stuff). And then the ones who do do big things on big issues, but very badly due to unearned confidence in their abilities.

    PB is cynical this morning!
    How long since we had an MP who had noted success in turning an organisation around and running it successfully? Let alone a minister?
    Farage!

    *Part of my strategy to tempt the lefties back by discussing their amazing skills of their favourite political figure.
    One of Farage's major problems is that he eventually seems to fall out with everyone he works with.

    It just happened much quicker with Musk than usual.
    True, that is very much his M.O. but in this case I think it is understandable given Musk continues to support Robinson and has said Farage needs to be replaced.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 11,810
    Sandpit said:

    Some Monday morning light relief: Golden Globes jokes. Well done to comedian Nikki Glaser, a different style to Ricky Gervais and wants to be invited back next year!

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U9HTM9JBBO4

    https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/tv/tv-news/nikki-glaser-golden-globes-monologue-jokes-1236098425/

    — “This feels like I finally made it. I’m in a room full of producers at the Beverly Hilton and this time all of my clothes are on. It was worth it.”

    — “I’m not here to roast you. And how could I? You’re all so famous, so talented, so powerful. I mean, you could really do anything — except tell the country who to vote for. But it’s okay. You’ll get them next time!”

    — “Zendaya you were incredible in Dune. I woke up for all of your scenes. And Challengers? That was more sexually charged than Diddy’s credit card. The after party is not going to be as good this year, but we have to move on. I know ‘Stanley Tucci Freak Off’ doesn’t have the same ring to it.”

    — “I look out and I see some of the hardest working actors in show business — and by that, I mean your servers.”

    — “I did not know much about Wicked going into this year because I had friends in high school … Everyone loved Wicked. I loved Wicked. My boyfriend loved Wicked. My boyfriend’s boyfriend really loved Wicked.”

    — “In Wicked, some people complained that the movie was ruined by people singing. And then in Joker 2, some people complained that the movie was ruined by the images on the screen and the sounds that accompanied them. I’m sorry, Joker 2. Where’s their table? Oh, they’re not here.”

    — “The legendary Harrison Ford is here tonight. I was talking to Harrison back stage and after he gave me his drink order. I said, ‘Would you rather work with Zendaya or Ariana?’ And he said, ‘indica.'”

    — “The Bear, The Penguin, Baby Reindeer. These are not just things found in R.F.K.’s freezer. These are TV shows nominated tonight.”

    — “Eddie Redmayne did TV this year. He’s nominated for Peacock’s The Day of the Jackal. It’s about a top-secret elite sniper who no one can see — because he’s on Peacock.”

    — “This is going be a very memorable evening, and maybe not even in the way that you think. I predict five years from now, when you’re watching old clips of this show on YouTube, you’ll see someone in one of the crowd shots, and you’ll go, ‘Oh my God, that was before they caught that guy.’ It could be a woman, you know. I think 100 percent of the time it’s a man. But it could be a woman. It won’t be, it never is, kinda like Best Director.”

    — “I do want to remind you, if you do lose tonight, please just keep in mind that the point of making art is not to win an award. The point of making art is to start a tequila brand.”

    https://youtu.be/U9HTM9JBBO4 for her opening bit
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 17,583
    Taz said:

    kle4 said:

    A politician would never follow advice of not putting things off alone (hence the full quote i suppose). Doing stuff comes with risks, and who wants that?

    Of course in reality politicians typically come in 3 varieties - the do nothing people, terrified of cocking up further so just put a plaster on. The tinkerers that you identify like Gove, who do try a bit but usually on small problems (in fairness their boss may not agree to do big stuff). And then the ones who do do big things on big issues, but very badly due to unearned confidence in their abilities.

    PB is cynical this morning!
    How long since we had an MP who had noted success in turning an organisation around and running it successfully? Let alone a minister?
    Farage!

    *Part of my strategy to tempt the lefties back by discussing their amazing skills of their favourite political figure.
    One of Farage's major problems is that he eventually seems to fall out with everyone he works with.

    It just happened much quicker with Musk than usual.
    True, that is very much his M.O. but in this case I think it is understandable given Musk continues to support Robinson and has said Farage needs to be replaced.
    Also, Musk doesn't exactly have a tip-top record on the "maintaining long-term working relationships" front.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 23,274
    Sandpit said:

    Dopermean said:

    India, Australia and England are reportedly in talks to develop a two-tier system for Test cricket, and the proposal could see the "Big Three" nations play each other more often in big-ticket series. Record crowds for the recently completed Border-Gavaskar Trophy have reportedly given the idea momentum because the "Big Three" nations have a significant following and therefore the idea is gaining traction, thus the International Cricket Council led by chairman Jay Shah is taking it seriously. A total of 8,37,879 people attended the recently-concluded Border-Gavaskar Trophy.

    According to the report in The Age, Shah along with Cricket Australia chairman Mike Baird and England Cricket Board chairman Richard Thompson are set to meet later this month where the two-tier structure for Test cricket will be discussed....

    ...The report further claims, the top division of Test cricket will include seven teams -- South Africa, Australia, England, India, New Zealand, Sri Lanka and Pakistan -- while the second division will have West Indies, Bangladesh, Ireland, Afghanistan and Zimbabwe.


    https://www.msn.com/en-in/sports/cricket/india-australia-england-in-talks-to-divide-test-cricket-into-two-tiers-as-shadow-of-big-3-looms-again-report/ar-AA1x1z57

    Since 2010 England have played 40 Tests vs Australia, 37 vs India, 6 vs Bangladesh, 2 vs Ireland and none against Afghanistan and Zimbabwe. How many less tests will we play against these teams in the new format?
    This is a plan that results in international cricket losing relevance. Developing the weaker teams, playing more matches, having a test league that is competitive would do more to ensure the future of cricket.
    Without IPL and franchise cricket I would agree with you.

    But how realistic is it to get audiences to be regularly interested in Ireland playing anyone in a Test match over several days when it will either be someone they are mismatched against, or the likes of Zimbabwe? How is that going to fund Irish players to stay in Test cricket and develop those skills ahead of franchise cricket across the year?

    Whereas there definitely is demand from audiences, and prestige for players, for Ashes, and India vs Eng and Aus, so that is what we shall (continue to) get.
    They need to think outside the box.

    For example, put a stream on YouTube and Rumble, available anywhere except the competitor countries or where they’ve sold TV coverage, and run international ads on that stream. It will likely get millions of views over the course of an average Test, as loads of people will put it on and watch in the background, and any exciting finishes will bring in millions more. Easy to imagine someone posting on here that SA v Zimbabwe looks like an amazing final session, here’s a link to it on YouTube, and getting 50 hits just from that. Definitely put extended highlights on all of the popular platforms ASAP. Or look to sell global rights for a series to Amazon or Netflix, which are pretty much ubiquitous in the West and may drive subscribers in emerging markets.
    SA v Zimbabwe is getting to an amazing final session, maybe once in a hundred tests. That is 500 days of scheduled play, plus travel and practice days to get one interesting session. SA v Zim works as T20 but not as Tests. Despite being neighbours SA have only bothered playing them twice since 2010, and not at all since 2017. We don't need a new divisional structure to make the schedule they are discussing happen, we already have it.
  • glwglw Posts: 9,976
    edited January 6
    FF43 said:

    Musk proposes that America "liberates the people of Britain from their tyrannical government"

    The Trump administration has a lot of previous allies to invade. Britain, Canada, Denmark just added to the list.

    I look forward to the usual suspects bro-splaining why this is in fact a genius move and good for Farage/Reform and therefore the UK, and not the ravings of a dangerous lunatic.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 43,778
    edited January 6

    Taz said:

    kle4 said:

    A politician would never follow advice of not putting things off alone (hence the full quote i suppose). Doing stuff comes with risks, and who wants that?

    Of course in reality politicians typically come in 3 varieties - the do nothing people, terrified of cocking up further so just put a plaster on. The tinkerers that you identify like Gove, who do try a bit but usually on small problems (in fairness their boss may not agree to do big stuff). And then the ones who do do big things on big issues, but very badly due to unearned confidence in their abilities.

    PB is cynical this morning!
    How long since we had an MP who had noted success in turning an organisation around and running it successfully? Let alone a minister?
    Farage!

    *Part of my strategy to tempt the lefties back by discussing their amazing skills of their favourite political figure.
    One of Farage's major problems is that he eventually seems to fall out with everyone he works with.

    It just happened much quicker with Musk than usual.
    True, that is very much his M.O. but in this case I think it is understandable given Musk continues to support Robinson and has said Farage needs to be replaced.
    Also, Musk doesn't exactly have a tip-top record on the "maintaining long-term working relationships" front.
    Doesn't he? Gwynne Shotwell's been running SpaceX for him for at least two decades, and AIUI there are a fair few senior Tesla people who have been there for yonks.

    Though the way he treated his secretary was awful, and perhaps the start of his descent into madness.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,845
    On the topic of "Never put off until tomorrow...", a quick reminder about the 2025 PB Prediction Competition:

    The competition questions are:

    1. Highest share of the vote in 2025 with a BPC registered pollster in a GB wide poll for each of Lab, Con, LD, Reform.
    2. Lowest share of the vote in 2025 with a BPC registered pollster in a GB wide poll for each of Lab, Con, LD, Reform.
    3. Number of Reform MPs on 31/12/2025.
    4. Number of Tory MP defectors to Reform in 2025.
    5. Number of Westminster by-elections held in 2025.
    6. Number of ministers to leave the Westminster cabinet during 2025.
    7. Number of seats won by the AfD in the May 2025 German Federal Election.
    8. UK CPI figure for November 2025 (Nov 2024 = 2.6%).
    9. UK borrowing in the financial year-to-November 2025 (Year to Nov 2024 = £113.2bn).
    10. UK GDP growth in the 12 months to October 2025 (Oct 23 to Oct 24 = 1.3%).
    11. US growth annualised rate in Q3 2025 (Q3 2024 = 3.1%).
    12. EU growth Q3 2024 to Q3 2025 (2024 = 1.0%).
    13. USD/Ruble exchange rate at London FOREX close on 31/12/2025 (31/12/2024 = 114 USD/RUB).
    14. The result of the 2025-2026 Ashes series (2023 series: Drawn 2–2).

    Entries must be posted on PB or PM'ed to me by the end of January. Please put the word 'competition' in your post to help me find entries.

    I have entries so far from the following, if your name's not in the list below but you think you have posted an entry, please let me know. Thanks!

    malcolmg
    Barnesian
    Omnium
    NickPalmer
    madmacs
    Sean_F
    Essexit
    Taz
    Benpointer
    Sunil_Prasannan
    HYUFD
    Cookie
    Malmesbury
    Shecorns88
    MarqueeMark
    MattW
    BartholomewRoberts
    BatteryCorrectHorse
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 43,778
    Good to see a reference to Gerald Fiennes' book. It's particularly interesting how there seems to be parallels between the messy electrification of the GEML in the 1960s and the GWML today. It's almost as though lessons have never been learned...
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 29,191
    Taz said:

    Taz said:

    viewcode said:

    Sorry to see so many “take a break” in recent days.

    Hopefully it’s clearer than ever that Musk and X seek only to sow division.

    @BatteryCorrectHorse , @MattW, @Beibheirli_C ... even @Andy_JS , PB's shining star, now comments here occasionally

    In the end people comment here voluntarily, and if it becomes unpleasant they will leave.
    And @Foxy
    @Foxy suggested this place had become a sewer a couple of nights ago. If anything it has subsequently got worse. It is no longer for the faint hearted, particularly if overt racial prejudice makes one queasy.
    Perhaps you should flounce too ? Then come back a few days later.
    I thought you avoided reading my posts. I don't read your "Reeves is shit" posts as you advised. I'll leave if I so desire and based on the islamophobic bile spitting that has gone on over the last few days why wouldn't I?

    The site has been a great asset for me since 2005. I did leave for a number of years but came back for GE 2017 and it has remained informative throughout although over the years we have lost some great posters, sometimes because of the behaviour of other posters, and one in particular.

    If you want it to be part of a Conservative/Reform echo chamber chewing the fat with the Field Marshal and others that's fine. However an anti Muslim echo chamber, cloaked in the shroud of Rochdale taxi driver child abuse doesn't interest me. By the number of posters actively condemning then leaving the site over this weekend suggests racial hatred is not for them either

    Several posters should be ashamed of themselves, but due to their lack of self awareness, I doubt they will. I'll come and go as I please until the mods say otherwise. If you want me gone you better take it up with them.
    No, I said I had no wish to engage with you. However on this it is worth breaking that rule.

    I do not see the commentary as Anti Muslim. More a concern about how the grooming scandal became what it was. I appreciate that is uncomfortable and for some of you then you find it challenging. So be it. It is a conversation that has to be had.

    On the day that seemed to stress so many fragile flowers I was posting about darts.
    You considered it worth breaking your rule just to be snide and offensive?

    I'd prefer if you stuck to your rules and your manifold dreary "Reeves is shit" posts which I am avoiding like the plague.

    I don't believe anyone is excusing the underage rape scandal, but "fragile flowers" are offended that it has been hijacked into an anti -ALL Muslims narrative by one poster and several of the hard-of-thinking have stuck the boot in for good measure. He tees them up and they fire them straight and true down the fairway of Islamophobia.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 63,909
    edited January 6
    Good morning

    Interesting header and very true

    And who would have expected this headline from More in Common poll today ?

    'Labour on par with partygate'

    Quarter of voters regret backing Sir Keir Starmer and winter fuel axe ‘worse than Partygate’,

    One in four voters who backed Labour last year now regrets it, a new poll for LBC reveals.

    More than half (56 per cent) of all voters now have a lower opinion of Sir Keir Starmer’s government after six months in power, damning research by More in Common shows.

    The public also see taking away winter fuel payments from some pensioners and slapping extra inheritance taxes on farmers is on a par with the ‘partygate’ scandal under the Tories.

    It comes as the PM heads back for a new term in Westminster today with a landmark speech on how he will drive down waiting lists and help get the NHS back on its feet.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 55,301
    edited January 6

    Sandpit said:

    Dopermean said:

    India, Australia and England are reportedly in talks to develop a two-tier system for Test cricket, and the proposal could see the "Big Three" nations play each other more often in big-ticket series. Record crowds for the recently completed Border-Gavaskar Trophy have reportedly given the idea momentum because the "Big Three" nations have a significant following and therefore the idea is gaining traction, thus the International Cricket Council led by chairman Jay Shah is taking it seriously. A total of 8,37,879 people attended the recently-concluded Border-Gavaskar Trophy.

    According to the report in The Age, Shah along with Cricket Australia chairman Mike Baird and England Cricket Board chairman Richard Thompson are set to meet later this month where the two-tier structure for Test cricket will be discussed....

    ...The report further claims, the top division of Test cricket will include seven teams -- South Africa, Australia, England, India, New Zealand, Sri Lanka and Pakistan -- while the second division will have West Indies, Bangladesh, Ireland, Afghanistan and Zimbabwe.


    https://www.msn.com/en-in/sports/cricket/india-australia-england-in-talks-to-divide-test-cricket-into-two-tiers-as-shadow-of-big-3-looms-again-report/ar-AA1x1z57

    Since 2010 England have played 40 Tests vs Australia, 37 vs India, 6 vs Bangladesh, 2 vs Ireland and none against Afghanistan and Zimbabwe. How many less tests will we play against these teams in the new format?
    This is a plan that results in international cricket losing relevance. Developing the weaker teams, playing more matches, having a test league that is competitive would do more to ensure the future of cricket.
    Without IPL and franchise cricket I would agree with you.

    But how realistic is it to get audiences to be regularly interested in Ireland playing anyone in a Test match over several days when it will either be someone they are mismatched against, or the likes of Zimbabwe? How is that going to fund Irish players to stay in Test cricket and develop those skills ahead of franchise cricket across the year?

    Whereas there definitely is demand from audiences, and prestige for players, for Ashes, and India vs Eng and Aus, so that is what we shall (continue to) get.
    They need to think outside the box.

    For example, put a stream on YouTube and Rumble, available anywhere except the competitor countries or where they’ve sold TV coverage, and run international ads on that stream. It will likely get millions of views over the course of an average Test, as loads of people will put it on and watch in the background, and any exciting finishes will bring in millions more. Easy to imagine someone posting on here that SA v Zimbabwe looks like an amazing final session, here’s a link to it on YouTube, and getting 50 hits just from that. Definitely put extended highlights on all of the popular platforms ASAP. Or look to sell global rights for a series to Amazon or Netflix, which are pretty much ubiquitous in the West and may drive subscribers in emerging markets.
    SA v Zimbabwe is getting to an amazing final session, maybe once in a hundred tests. That is 500 days of scheduled play, plus travel and practice days to get one interesting session. SA v Zim works as T20 but not as Tests. Despite being neighbours SA have only bothered playing them twice since 2010, and not at all since 2017. We don't need a new divisional structure to make the schedule they are discussing happen, we already have it.
    But it costs almost nothing to add a couple of geo-fenced free live streams, so every extra viewer they get is a bonus on which they can sell ads. They’re already doing the TV production at the ground. Loads of people WFH or retired would put it on in the background.

    My point was that if it’s on a free and easy platform people will watch it and share it, but if it’s on some obscure cable channel or not at all, they won’t. If someone here sends a link to willow.tv that wants you to sign up for $5 a month, no-one will click through - but if it’s on YouTube/Rumble/Twitter then they will.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 61,111
    Eabhal said:

    I saw Malcolm's post about "toff's children" on the prior thread.

    From my friends' experience, privately educated children can have an awful time at school and there are plenty of examples of sexual and physical abuse happening at private schools, as demonstrated by the Scottish Child Abuse Inquiry. No money in the world can mitigate being raped as a child.

    It's during debates like this that I remember to be grateful for the safe, secure and loving environment I grew up in, cycling to a high-performing state school in a beautiful part of Scotland, and returning to a home full of books, music and great food.

    Private education is just education. They get no funding from government so, if an independent school wants to set up - for example, to focus on children with more distinct education needs, or to provide a local better alternative, or deliver to an alternative educational philosophy - they have to charge a fee to be viable.

    That fee means - outside a few bursaries and scholarships the school can self-fund for 10-20% of its pupils - parents have to pay. And, alas, not all parents will be able to afford that fee.

    That's it. There's no "privilege" outside of that. It's the small, local, independent private schools that will be hit hardest by the VAT/business rate changes, and not the big public schools that educate the very wealthy, that virtually none of us can afford, which is why this policy is so vindictive and insidious.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,546

    A start might be recognising that deliberately running the schools at 99% capacity is madness.

    Operations research has long shown that if you remove all “excess capacity” from an organisation, the result is…

    “Fragmented, disorganised, understaffed, hopelessly mismanaged”….

    I remember when “lean” was the future
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 29,191
    boulay said:

    glw said:

    FF43 said:

    Musk proposes that America "liberates the people of Britain from their tyrannical government"

    The Trump administration has a lot of previous allies to invade. Britain, Canada, Denmark just added to the list.

    I look forward to the usual suspects bro-splaining why this is in fact a genius move and good for Farage/Reform and therefore the UK, and not the ravings of a dangerous lunatic.
    Sorry but this sort of comment is why the site has been toxic and shit recently - endless posts attacking posters and lumping posters together as lefties, PB right wingers, Musk Fanbois etc etc.

    There has been endless playing the man not the ball recently that it’s effectively creating a constant cycle of “your side are arses” and people feeling the need to defend “their side” instead of actually critically discussing the arguments.

    It’s the same with people feeling some bizarre need to throw in an attack against another poster when they haven’t even been posting - I don’t get if certain posters are living rent free in other posters heads or if they think they get cred points with their “tribe”.

    There has always been a good level of knockabout and snark but it’s got a bit stupid now with the constant division.
    No the site has been shite because one poster hijacks the narrative, normally it's just about bollocks like AI, his holidays and visits, as a guest, to the Groucho club, but the last few days he's picked up Musk's racist ball and run with it, and bizarrely some normally sensible right wingers have latched on as well.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 23,274
    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    Dopermean said:

    India, Australia and England are reportedly in talks to develop a two-tier system for Test cricket, and the proposal could see the "Big Three" nations play each other more often in big-ticket series. Record crowds for the recently completed Border-Gavaskar Trophy have reportedly given the idea momentum because the "Big Three" nations have a significant following and therefore the idea is gaining traction, thus the International Cricket Council led by chairman Jay Shah is taking it seriously. A total of 8,37,879 people attended the recently-concluded Border-Gavaskar Trophy.

    According to the report in The Age, Shah along with Cricket Australia chairman Mike Baird and England Cricket Board chairman Richard Thompson are set to meet later this month where the two-tier structure for Test cricket will be discussed....

    ...The report further claims, the top division of Test cricket will include seven teams -- South Africa, Australia, England, India, New Zealand, Sri Lanka and Pakistan -- while the second division will have West Indies, Bangladesh, Ireland, Afghanistan and Zimbabwe.


    https://www.msn.com/en-in/sports/cricket/india-australia-england-in-talks-to-divide-test-cricket-into-two-tiers-as-shadow-of-big-3-looms-again-report/ar-AA1x1z57

    Since 2010 England have played 40 Tests vs Australia, 37 vs India, 6 vs Bangladesh, 2 vs Ireland and none against Afghanistan and Zimbabwe. How many less tests will we play against these teams in the new format?
    This is a plan that results in international cricket losing relevance. Developing the weaker teams, playing more matches, having a test league that is competitive would do more to ensure the future of cricket.
    Without IPL and franchise cricket I would agree with you.

    But how realistic is it to get audiences to be regularly interested in Ireland playing anyone in a Test match over several days when it will either be someone they are mismatched against, or the likes of Zimbabwe? How is that going to fund Irish players to stay in Test cricket and develop those skills ahead of franchise cricket across the year?

    Whereas there definitely is demand from audiences, and prestige for players, for Ashes, and India vs Eng and Aus, so that is what we shall (continue to) get.
    They need to think outside the box.

    For example, put a stream on YouTube and Rumble, available anywhere except the competitor countries or where they’ve sold TV coverage, and run international ads on that stream. It will likely get millions of views over the course of an average Test, as loads of people will put it on and watch in the background, and any exciting finishes will bring in millions more. Easy to imagine someone posting on here that SA v Zimbabwe looks like an amazing final session, here’s a link to it on YouTube, and getting 50 hits just from that. Definitely put extended highlights on all of the popular platforms ASAP. Or look to sell global rights for a series to Amazon or Netflix, which are pretty much ubiquitous in the West and may drive subscribers in emerging markets.
    SA v Zimbabwe is getting to an amazing final session, maybe once in a hundred tests. That is 500 days of scheduled play, plus travel and practice days to get one interesting session. SA v Zim works as T20 but not as Tests. Despite being neighbours SA have only bothered playing them twice since 2010, and not at all since 2017. We don't need a new divisional structure to make the schedule they are discussing happen, we already have it.
    But it costs almost nothing to add a couple of geo-fenced free live streams, so every extra viewer they get is a bonus on which they can sell ads. They’re already doing the TV production at the ground. Loads of people WFH or retired would put it on in the background.

    My point was that if it’s on a free and easy platform people will watch it and share it, but if it’s on some obscure cable channel or not at all, they won’t. If someone here sends a link to willow.tv that wants you to sign up for $5 a month, no-one will click through - but if it’s on YouTube/Rumble/Twitter then they will.
    I love watching test cricket but it has to have at least a plausible chance of being a test and not just a procession and thrashing. The gap is too big, and the money from T20 means the gap can't be reduced as it will always make more sense for good Irish or Zimbabwean players to focus on T20 and/or play for a bigger country.
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 9,068
    edited January 6

    Eabhal said:

    I saw Malcolm's post about "toff's children" on the prior thread.

    From my friends' experience, privately educated children can have an awful time at school and there are plenty of examples of sexual and physical abuse happening at private schools, as demonstrated by the Scottish Child Abuse Inquiry. No money in the world can mitigate being raped as a child.

    It's during debates like this that I remember to be grateful for the safe, secure and loving environment I grew up in, cycling to a high-performing state school in a beautiful part of Scotland, and returning to a home full of books, music and great food.

    Private education is just education. They get no funding from government so, if an independent school wants to set up - for example, to focus on children with more distinct education needs, or to provide a local better alternative, or deliver to an alternative educational philosophy - they have to charge a fee to be viable.

    That fee means - outside a few bursaries and scholarships the school can self-fund for 10-20% of its pupils - parents have to pay. And, alas, not all parents will be able to afford that fee.

    That's it. There's no "privilege" outside of that. It's the small, local, independent private schools that will be hit hardest by the VAT/business rate changes, and not the big public schools that educate the very wealthy, that virtually none of us can afford, which is why this policy is so vindictive and insidious.
    Depends if you think such families should have given rely on charity or not. There are more SEND kids in the state sector than the private sector, as a proportion, and Labour have increased spending by £1 billion per annum.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 63,319
    Thanks for the header @ydoethur

    The reality is Phillipson's career is highly likely to be sunk by the university sector imploding in 2025.

  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 42,250
    Cometh the hour, cometh the man, finally someone ready to fight the rape gangs and grooming with his sexual choke holds and porn sites.



    Is Inevitable West one of Musk’s sock puppet accounts?
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 55,301

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    Dopermean said:

    India, Australia and England are reportedly in talks to develop a two-tier system for Test cricket, and the proposal could see the "Big Three" nations play each other more often in big-ticket series. Record crowds for the recently completed Border-Gavaskar Trophy have reportedly given the idea momentum because the "Big Three" nations have a significant following and therefore the idea is gaining traction, thus the International Cricket Council led by chairman Jay Shah is taking it seriously. A total of 8,37,879 people attended the recently-concluded Border-Gavaskar Trophy.

    According to the report in The Age, Shah along with Cricket Australia chairman Mike Baird and England Cricket Board chairman Richard Thompson are set to meet later this month where the two-tier structure for Test cricket will be discussed....

    ...The report further claims, the top division of Test cricket will include seven teams -- South Africa, Australia, England, India, New Zealand, Sri Lanka and Pakistan -- while the second division will have West Indies, Bangladesh, Ireland, Afghanistan and Zimbabwe.


    https://www.msn.com/en-in/sports/cricket/india-australia-england-in-talks-to-divide-test-cricket-into-two-tiers-as-shadow-of-big-3-looms-again-report/ar-AA1x1z57

    Since 2010 England have played 40 Tests vs Australia, 37 vs India, 6 vs Bangladesh, 2 vs Ireland and none against Afghanistan and Zimbabwe. How many less tests will we play against these teams in the new format?
    This is a plan that results in international cricket losing relevance. Developing the weaker teams, playing more matches, having a test league that is competitive would do more to ensure the future of cricket.
    Without IPL and franchise cricket I would agree with you.

    But how realistic is it to get audiences to be regularly interested in Ireland playing anyone in a Test match over several days when it will either be someone they are mismatched against, or the likes of Zimbabwe? How is that going to fund Irish players to stay in Test cricket and develop those skills ahead of franchise cricket across the year?

    Whereas there definitely is demand from audiences, and prestige for players, for Ashes, and India vs Eng and Aus, so that is what we shall (continue to) get.
    They need to think outside the box.

    For example, put a stream on YouTube and Rumble, available anywhere except the competitor countries or where they’ve sold TV coverage, and run international ads on that stream. It will likely get millions of views over the course of an average Test, as loads of people will put it on and watch in the background, and any exciting finishes will bring in millions more. Easy to imagine someone posting on here that SA v Zimbabwe looks like an amazing final session, here’s a link to it on YouTube, and getting 50 hits just from that. Definitely put extended highlights on all of the popular platforms ASAP. Or look to sell global rights for a series to Amazon or Netflix, which are pretty much ubiquitous in the West and may drive subscribers in emerging markets.
    SA v Zimbabwe is getting to an amazing final session, maybe once in a hundred tests. That is 500 days of scheduled play, plus travel and practice days to get one interesting session. SA v Zim works as T20 but not as Tests. Despite being neighbours SA have only bothered playing them twice since 2010, and not at all since 2017. We don't need a new divisional structure to make the schedule they are discussing happen, we already have it.
    But it costs almost nothing to add a couple of geo-fenced free live streams, so every extra viewer they get is a bonus on which they can sell ads. They’re already doing the TV production at the ground. Loads of people WFH or retired would put it on in the background.

    My point was that if it’s on a free and easy platform people will watch it and share it, but if it’s on some obscure cable channel or not at all, they won’t. If someone here sends a link to willow.tv that wants you to sign up for $5 a month, no-one will click through - but if it’s on YouTube/Rumble/Twitter then they will.
    I love watching test cricket but it has to have at least a plausible chance of being a test and not just a procession and thrashing. The gap is too big, and the money from T20 means the gap can't be reduced as it will always make more sense for good Irish or Zimbabwean players to focus on T20 and/or play for a bigger country.
    Isn’t the gap being too big the whole reason they want to split the Test league into two divisions in the first place?

    If they sold it as primarily a better way for the emerging nations to play each other, rather than as a better way for the big teams to play each other and make more money, they’d stand a higher chance of getting everyone on board.
  • Alphabet_SoupAlphabet_Soup Posts: 3,355

    India, Australia and England are reportedly in talks to develop a two-tier system for Test cricket, and the proposal could see the "Big Three" nations play each other more often in big-ticket series. Record crowds for the recently completed Border-Gavaskar Trophy have reportedly given the idea momentum because the "Big Three" nations have a significant following and therefore the idea is gaining traction, thus the International Cricket Council led by chairman Jay Shah is taking it seriously. A total of 8,37,879 people attended the recently-concluded Border-Gavaskar Trophy.

    According to the report in The Age, Shah along with Cricket Australia chairman Mike Baird and England Cricket Board chairman Richard Thompson are set to meet later this month where the two-tier structure for Test cricket will be discussed....

    ...The report further claims, the top division of Test cricket will include seven teams -- South Africa, Australia, England, India, New Zealand, Sri Lanka and Pakistan -- while the second division will have West Indies, Bangladesh, Ireland, Afghanistan and Zimbabwe.


    https://www.msn.com/en-in/sports/cricket/india-australia-england-in-talks-to-divide-test-cricket-into-two-tiers-as-shadow-of-big-3-looms-again-report/ar-AA1x1z57

    So the ICC is perfectly relaxed about Afghanistan's gender apartheid?
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,657
    IanB2 said:

    First! On a dog pic thread?

    It is, of course, to illustrate the scale of Education's problems.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 51,675

    A start might be recognising that deliberately running the schools at 99% capacity is madness.

    Operations research has long shown that if you remove all “excess capacity” from an organisation, the result is…

    “Fragmented, disorganised, understaffed, hopelessly mismanaged”….

    I remember when “lean” was the future
    Running at 99% is to running a well managed lean organisation

    as

    “Beatings will continue until morale improves” is to a sane personnel management policy.

    As with Health & Safety, it has been used by morons who have no idea apart from reading a paragraph of an article in Forbes.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 29,191
    edited January 6

    Cometh the hour, cometh the man, finally someone ready to fight the rape gangs and grooming with his sexual choke holds and porn sites.



    Is Inevitable West one of Musk’s sock puppet accounts?

    Tate running the UK as Prime Minister from his Romanian prison cell?
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 22,329
    Nice to see a picture of our next Prime Minister in the header.
  • kjhkjh Posts: 12,017
    edited January 6

    kle4 said:

    A politician would never follow advice of not putting things off alone (hence the full quote i suppose). Doing stuff comes with risks, and who wants that?

    Of course in reality politicians typically come in 3 varieties - the do nothing people, terrified of cocking up further so just put a plaster on. The tinkerers that you identify like Gove, who do try a bit but usually on small problems (in fairness their boss may not agree to do big stuff). And then the ones who do do big things on big issues, but very badly due to unearned confidence in their abilities.

    PB is cynical this morning!
    How long since we had an MP who had noted success in turning an organisation around and running it successfully? Let alone a minister?
    Farage!

    *Part of my strategy to tempt the lefties back by discussing their amazing skills of their favourite political figure.
    One of Farage's major problems is that he eventually seems to fall out with everyone he works with.

    It just happened much quicker with Musk than usual.
    I suspect that isn't Farage's fault. When positioned at that point on the political spectrum and without a far right group to your right you are going to attract a large number of certain people who are then going to come out with some extreme views that he has to distance himself from.
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 19,040
    algarkirk said:

    Dopermean said:

    India, Australia and England are reportedly in talks to develop a two-tier system for Test cricket, and the proposal could see the "Big Three" nations play each other more often in big-ticket series. Record crowds for the recently completed Border-Gavaskar Trophy have reportedly given the idea momentum because the "Big Three" nations have a significant following and therefore the idea is gaining traction, thus the International Cricket Council led by chairman Jay Shah is taking it seriously. A total of 8,37,879 people attended the recently-concluded Border-Gavaskar Trophy.

    According to the report in The Age, Shah along with Cricket Australia chairman Mike Baird and England Cricket Board chairman Richard Thompson are set to meet later this month where the two-tier structure for Test cricket will be discussed....

    ...The report further claims, the top division of Test cricket will include seven teams -- South Africa, Australia, England, India, New Zealand, Sri Lanka and Pakistan -- while the second division will have West Indies, Bangladesh, Ireland, Afghanistan and Zimbabwe.


    https://www.msn.com/en-in/sports/cricket/india-australia-england-in-talks-to-divide-test-cricket-into-two-tiers-as-shadow-of-big-3-looms-again-report/ar-AA1x1z57

    Since 2010 England have played 40 Tests vs Australia, 37 vs India, 6 vs Bangladesh, 2 vs Ireland and none against Afghanistan and Zimbabwe. How many less tests will we play against these teams in the new format?
    This is a plan that results in international cricket losing relevance. Developing the weaker teams, playing more matches, having a test league that is competitive would do more to ensure the future of cricket.
    Cricket did OK and was intensely competitive when these things applied: In England the County Championship was not about promotion and relegation; Test series were finite in number, tours were long with lots of county involvement, and there were significant gaps between tests.
    I dunno about that. I hear that Test cricket in the 50s was deadly dull.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 61,111
    Eabhal said:

    Eabhal said:

    I saw Malcolm's post about "toff's children" on the prior thread.

    From my friends' experience, privately educated children can have an awful time at school and there are plenty of examples of sexual and physical abuse happening at private schools, as demonstrated by the Scottish Child Abuse Inquiry. No money in the world can mitigate being raped as a child.

    It's during debates like this that I remember to be grateful for the safe, secure and loving environment I grew up in, cycling to a high-performing state school in a beautiful part of Scotland, and returning to a home full of books, music and great food.

    Private education is just education. They get no funding from government so, if an independent school wants to set up - for example, to focus on children with more distinct education needs, or to provide a local better alternative, or deliver to an alternative educational philosophy - they have to charge a fee to be viable.

    That fee means - outside a few bursaries and scholarships the school can self-fund for 10-20% of its pupils - parents have to pay. And, alas, not all parents will be able to afford that fee.

    That's it. There's no "privilege" outside of that. It's the small, local, independent private schools that will be hit hardest by the VAT/business rate changes, and not the big public schools that educate the very wealthy, that virtually none of us can afford, which is why this policy is so vindictive and insidious.
    Depends if you think such families should have given rely on charity or not. There are more SEND kids in the state sector than the private sector, as a proportion, and Labour have increased spending by £1 billion per annum.
    Parents should have choice in educating their children and, to the greatest extent possible, I'd like to see this liberated from the ability to pay.

    This is why I'd go the other way and support portable education vouchers.
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 9,068
    edited January 6

    Eabhal said:

    Eabhal said:

    I saw Malcolm's post about "toff's children" on the prior thread.

    From my friends' experience, privately educated children can have an awful time at school and there are plenty of examples of sexual and physical abuse happening at private schools, as demonstrated by the Scottish Child Abuse Inquiry. No money in the world can mitigate being raped as a child.

    It's during debates like this that I remember to be grateful for the safe, secure and loving environment I grew up in, cycling to a high-performing state school in a beautiful part of Scotland, and returning to a home full of books, music and great food.

    Private education is just education. They get no funding from government so, if an independent school wants to set up - for example, to focus on children with more distinct education needs, or to provide a local better alternative, or deliver to an alternative educational philosophy - they have to charge a fee to be viable.

    That fee means - outside a few bursaries and scholarships the school can self-fund for 10-20% of its pupils - parents have to pay. And, alas, not all parents will be able to afford that fee.

    That's it. There's no "privilege" outside of that. It's the small, local, independent private schools that will be hit hardest by the VAT/business rate changes, and not the big public schools that educate the very wealthy, that virtually none of us can afford, which is why this policy is so vindictive and insidious.
    Depends if you think such families should have given rely on charity or not. There are more SEND kids in the state sector than the private sector, as a proportion, and Labour have increased spending by £1 billion per annum.
    Parents should have choice in educating their children and, to the greatest extent possible, I'd like to see this liberated from the ability to pay.

    This is why I'd go the other way and support portable education vouchers.
    Would those vouchers be £6,200 per year (state) or £15,000 per year (private)?

    Either double the education budget or destroy private schools. Tricky decision.
  • kjhkjh Posts: 12,017

    Nice to see a picture of our next Prime Minister in the header.

    Bridget or the dog?
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 43,682

    Nice to see a picture of our next Prime Minister in the header.

    Labour have missed out on all the other political ‘firsts’, I suppose they might as well go for the first canine PM.
    You're forgetting they did score the first ploughloon PM ...
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 55,301
    edited January 6
    kjh said:

    kle4 said:

    A politician would never follow advice of not putting things off alone (hence the full quote i suppose). Doing stuff comes with risks, and who wants that?

    Of course in reality politicians typically come in 3 varieties - the do nothing people, terrified of cocking up further so just put a plaster on. The tinkerers that you identify like Gove, who do try a bit but usually on small problems (in fairness their boss may not agree to do big stuff). And then the ones who do do big things on big issues, but very badly due to unearned confidence in their abilities.

    PB is cynical this morning!
    How long since we had an MP who had noted success in turning an organisation around and running it successfully? Let alone a minister?
    Farage!

    *Part of my strategy to tempt the lefties back by discussing their amazing skills of their favourite political figure.
    One of Farage's major problems is that he eventually seems to fall out with everyone he works with.

    It just happened much quicker with Musk than usual.
    I suspect that isn't Farage's fault. When positioned at that point on the political spectrum and without a far right group to your right you are going to attract a large number of certain people who are then going to come out with some extreme views that he has to distance himself from.
    To his credit (yes I know), Farage has always been good at getting rid of people in his organisations who don’t know where to draw the line. Just as UKIP was infiltrated by a number of BNP-types, now Reform has to deal with a bunch of EDL-types.

    He’ll be furious at Elon Musk for misunderstanding the differences between the Overton Window in the US and UK, going too far from a position of ignorance, and basically endorsing a man far to Farage’s right who’s currently in prison for contempt of court.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,657

    A start might be recognising that deliberately running the schools at 99% capacity is madness.

    Operations research has long shown that if you remove all “excess capacity” from an organisation, the result is…

    “Fragmented, disorganised, understaffed, hopelessly mismanaged”….

    Perhaps removing funding by capitation, as school rolls fall, might be a way ?

    Having been a school governor, I'm not altogether convinced by the header's assertion that more funding wouldn't help.
    Apart from that, I wholly agree with its argument.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 29,191
    A well informed header @ydoethur , however the sooner these appalling saps on resources, the Academy groups are shown the door the better.Several hundred thousand pounds salary per CEO, CFO and COO over and above each Head's salary, it's money for old rope. Don't pay them off give them the same Government redundancy package those losing their jobs at Homebase will receive.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 42,250
    Carnyx said:

    Nice to see a picture of our next Prime Minister in the header.

    Labour have missed out on all the other political ‘firsts’, I suppose they might as well go for the first canine PM.
    You're forgetting they did score the first ploughloon PM ...
    And illegitimate to boot.
    Though plenty of other bastards in the post.
  • carnforthcarnforth Posts: 5,019
    Eabhal said:

    Eabhal said:

    Eabhal said:

    I saw Malcolm's post about "toff's children" on the prior thread.

    From my friends' experience, privately educated children can have an awful time at school and there are plenty of examples of sexual and physical abuse happening at private schools, as demonstrated by the Scottish Child Abuse Inquiry. No money in the world can mitigate being raped as a child.

    It's during debates like this that I remember to be grateful for the safe, secure and loving environment I grew up in, cycling to a high-performing state school in a beautiful part of Scotland, and returning to a home full of books, music and great food.

    Private education is just education. They get no funding from government so, if an independent school wants to set up - for example, to focus on children with more distinct education needs, or to provide a local better alternative, or deliver to an alternative educational philosophy - they have to charge a fee to be viable.

    That fee means - outside a few bursaries and scholarships the school can self-fund for 10-20% of its pupils - parents have to pay. And, alas, not all parents will be able to afford that fee.

    That's it. There's no "privilege" outside of that. It's the small, local, independent private schools that will be hit hardest by the VAT/business rate changes, and not the big public schools that educate the very wealthy, that virtually none of us can afford, which is why this policy is so vindictive and insidious.
    Depends if you think such families should have given rely on charity or not. There are more SEND kids in the state sector than the private sector, as a proportion, and Labour have increased spending by £1 billion per annum.
    Parents should have choice in educating their children and, to the greatest extent possible, I'd like to see this liberated from the ability to pay.

    This is why I'd go the other way and support portable education vouchers.
    Would those vouchers be £6,200 per year (state) or £15,000 per year (private)?

    Either double the education budget or destroy private schools. Tricky decision.
    You'd ban topping up, then?
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 43,682
    edited January 6

    A well informed header @ydoethur , however the sooner these appalling saps on resources, the Academy groups are shown the door the better.Several hundred thousand pounds salary per CEO, CFO and COO over and above each Head's salary, it's money for old rope. Don't pay them off give them the same Government redundancy package those losing their jobs at Homebase will receive.

    IANAE but are there any protections against the groups being bankrupted by loans [edit] from their parent commercial companies such that the schools are shut down and the sites and playing fields handed over to aforesaid companies who then have a very nice housing or supermarket site to develop?
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 63,909
    Good morning @Benpointer

    Thank you so much for your quiz and I append below my response

    1) 32 32 18 26
    2) 23 21 12 16
    3) 5
    4) 0
    5) 3
    6) 3
    7) 125
    8) 2.5
    9) 120
    10) 1.1
    11) 3.9
    12) 1.0
    13) 102
    14) 3 -1
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 43,778
    Sandpit said:

    kjh said:

    kle4 said:

    A politician would never follow advice of not putting things off alone (hence the full quote i suppose). Doing stuff comes with risks, and who wants that?

    Of course in reality politicians typically come in 3 varieties - the do nothing people, terrified of cocking up further so just put a plaster on. The tinkerers that you identify like Gove, who do try a bit but usually on small problems (in fairness their boss may not agree to do big stuff). And then the ones who do do big things on big issues, but very badly due to unearned confidence in their abilities.

    PB is cynical this morning!
    How long since we had an MP who had noted success in turning an organisation around and running it successfully? Let alone a minister?
    Farage!

    *Part of my strategy to tempt the lefties back by discussing their amazing skills of their favourite political figure.
    One of Farage's major problems is that he eventually seems to fall out with everyone he works with.

    It just happened much quicker with Musk than usual.
    I suspect that isn't Farage's fault. When positioned at that point on the political spectrum and without a far right group to your right you are going to attract a large number of certain people who are then going to come out with some extreme views that he has to distance himself from.
    To his credit (yes I know), Farage has always been good at getting rid of people in his organisations who don’t know where to draw the line. Just as UKIP was infiltrated by a number of BNP-types, now Reform has to deal with a bunch of EDL-types.

    He’ll be furious at Elon Musk for misunderstanding the differences between the Overton Window in the US and UK, going too far from a position of ignorance, and basically endorsing a man far to Farage’s right who’s currently in prison for contempt of court.
    What makes you think Musk has misunderstood the difference in politics? Perhaps he just likes Tommy Robinson's message.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 43,682

    Carnyx said:

    Nice to see a picture of our next Prime Minister in the header.

    Labour have missed out on all the other political ‘firsts’, I suppose they might as well go for the first canine PM.
    You're forgetting they did score the first ploughloon PM ...
    And illegitimate to boot.
    Though plenty of other bastards in the post.
    Almae matres = Self, Drainie Parish School and Birkbeck, too.
  • TazTaz Posts: 15,441

    India, Australia and England are reportedly in talks to develop a two-tier system for Test cricket, and the proposal could see the "Big Three" nations play each other more often in big-ticket series. Record crowds for the recently completed Border-Gavaskar Trophy have reportedly given the idea momentum because the "Big Three" nations have a significant following and therefore the idea is gaining traction, thus the International Cricket Council led by chairman Jay Shah is taking it seriously. A total of 8,37,879 people attended the recently-concluded Border-Gavaskar Trophy.

    According to the report in The Age, Shah along with Cricket Australia chairman Mike Baird and England Cricket Board chairman Richard Thompson are set to meet later this month where the two-tier structure for Test cricket will be discussed....

    ...The report further claims, the top division of Test cricket will include seven teams -- South Africa, Australia, England, India, New Zealand, Sri Lanka and Pakistan -- while the second division will have West Indies, Bangladesh, Ireland, Afghanistan and Zimbabwe.


    https://www.msn.com/en-in/sports/cricket/india-australia-england-in-talks-to-divide-test-cricket-into-two-tiers-as-shadow-of-big-3-looms-again-report/ar-AA1x1z57

    So the ICC is perfectly relaxed about Afghanistan's gender apartheid?
    They're currently touring Zimbabwe
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 9,068
    edited January 6
    carnforth said:

    Eabhal said:

    Eabhal said:

    Eabhal said:

    I saw Malcolm's post about "toff's children" on the prior thread.

    From my friends' experience, privately educated children can have an awful time at school and there are plenty of examples of sexual and physical abuse happening at private schools, as demonstrated by the Scottish Child Abuse Inquiry. No money in the world can mitigate being raped as a child.

    It's during debates like this that I remember to be grateful for the safe, secure and loving environment I grew up in, cycling to a high-performing state school in a beautiful part of Scotland, and returning to a home full of books, music and great food.

    Private education is just education. They get no funding from government so, if an independent school wants to set up - for example, to focus on children with more distinct education needs, or to provide a local better alternative, or deliver to an alternative educational philosophy - they have to charge a fee to be viable.

    That fee means - outside a few bursaries and scholarships the school can self-fund for 10-20% of its pupils - parents have to pay. And, alas, not all parents will be able to afford that fee.

    That's it. There's no "privilege" outside of that. It's the small, local, independent private schools that will be hit hardest by the VAT/business rate changes, and not the big public schools that educate the very wealthy, that virtually none of us can afford, which is why this policy is so vindictive and insidious.
    Depends if you think such families should have given rely on charity or not. There are more SEND kids in the state sector than the private sector, as a proportion, and Labour have increased spending by £1 billion per annum.
    Parents should have choice in educating their children and, to the greatest extent possible, I'd like to see this liberated from the ability to pay.

    This is why I'd go the other way and support portable education vouchers.
    Would those vouchers be £6,200 per year (state) or £15,000 per year (private)?

    Either double the education budget or destroy private schools. Tricky decision.
    You'd ban topping up, then?
    Dunno. I think you'd just end up in the same situation as we're in now, with private fees at a higher market rate with the state effectively subsiding the first £6,200.

    A lot of these debates - housing, education, health, crime - boil down to intergenerational wealth inequality and we're just messing around trying to fix the symptoms of it.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 22,329
    ***** COMPETITION ***

    OK, here goes. For the economic data, I'm going with "No Change":


    1. Highest share of the vote in 2025 with a BPC registered pollster in a GB wide poll for each of Lab, Con, LD, Reform. 35%, 32%, 17%, 28%
    2. Lowest share of the vote in 2025 with a BPC registered pollster in a GB wide poll for each of Lab, Con, LD, Reform. 20%, 20%, 9%, 13%
    3. Number of Reform MPs on 31/12/2025. 7
    4. Number of Tory MP defectors to Reform in 2025. 2
    5. Number of Westminster by-elections held in 2025. 5
    6. Number of ministers to leave the Westminster cabinet during 2025. 4
    7. Number of seats won by the AfD in the May 2025 German Federal Election. 88 (See what I did there?)
    8. UK CPI figure for November 2025 (Nov 2024 = 2.6%). 2.6%
    9. UK borrowing in the financial year-to-November 2025 (Year to Nov 2024 = £113.2bn). £113.2bn
    10. UK GDP growth in the 12 months to October 2025 (Oct 23 to Oct 24 = 1.3%). 1.3%
    11. US growth annualised rate in Q3 2025 (Q3 2024 = 3.1%). 3.1%
    12. EU growth Q3 2024 to Q3 2025 (2024 = 1.0%). 1.0%
    13. USD/Ruble exchange rate at London FOREX close on 31/12/2025 (31/12/2024 = 114 USD/RUB). 114
    14. The result of the 2025-2026 Ashes series (2023 series: Drawn 2–2). Aus 4, Eng 1
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 22,329

    Eabhal said:

    Eabhal said:

    I saw Malcolm's post about "toff's children" on the prior thread.

    From my friends' experience, privately educated children can have an awful time at school and there are plenty of examples of sexual and physical abuse happening at private schools, as demonstrated by the Scottish Child Abuse Inquiry. No money in the world can mitigate being raped as a child.

    It's during debates like this that I remember to be grateful for the safe, secure and loving environment I grew up in, cycling to a high-performing state school in a beautiful part of Scotland, and returning to a home full of books, music and great food.

    Private education is just education. They get no funding from government so, if an independent school wants to set up - for example, to focus on children with more distinct education needs, or to provide a local better alternative, or deliver to an alternative educational philosophy - they have to charge a fee to be viable.

    That fee means - outside a few bursaries and scholarships the school can self-fund for 10-20% of its pupils - parents have to pay. And, alas, not all parents will be able to afford that fee.

    That's it. There's no "privilege" outside of that. It's the small, local, independent private schools that will be hit hardest by the VAT/business rate changes, and not the big public schools that educate the very wealthy, that virtually none of us can afford, which is why this policy is so vindictive and insidious.
    Depends if you think such families should have given rely on charity or not. There are more SEND kids in the state sector than the private sector, as a proportion, and Labour have increased spending by £1 billion per annum.
    Parents should have choice in educating their children and, to the greatest extent possible, I'd like to see this liberated from the ability to pay.

    This is why I'd go the other way and support portable education vouchers.
    Which merely subsidises those who can top them up with there own cash to send their kids to an elite school. Bad policy.
Sign In or Register to comment.