Thoughts and prayers for the England and New Zealand players playing in this heat.
Scorchio!
Work has issued a WFH-if-you-want-to edict. I have come in to the office because a) I can cycle in, which, surprisingly, isn't an unpleasant commute - you get a wind in your face - and b) I can sit in an air conditioned office. I am the only one here and I am shivering.
Hmmm. Chris Philp is walking the line. Someone needs potentially to save him from himself.
(All open to elucidation, bu I think I am correct.)
He appeared on camera with Ryan Bridge of Raise the Colours. Ryan has now been arrested twice for violent offences whilst running his campaign and has published numbers of videos of himself indulging in threatening behaviour. Plus the organisation has Yaxley-Lennon associations, and its people have hard right history. He has also more prosaically agreed not to do his stuff in Oxfordshire with hardly a peep, the Council having obtained an injunction around harassment of Council staff. *
My opinion of Raise the Colours now is that they are Yaxley-Lennon style grifters from gullibles.
It was at a Policy Exchange event where Philp was giving a keynote about immigration, where he proposed a deportation rate higher than achieved by Trump. It's a sticky wicket because Philp is criticising all the things he did himself as Immigration Minister.
I know I've mentioned it before but Gorton and Denton was Starmer's fatal act of stubbornness and stupidity. Had Burnham stood he'd have won easily and not given the Greens momentum for the locals. Burnham wouldn't be the fabled slayer of Reform in their backyard either.
Yes, but Starmer would probably have lost his job even sooner.
Maybe. Maybe not. The locals wouldn't have been such a catastrophe. Nor would Burnham have been the clear choice of c 300 Labour MP's.
That should have been "sheltered petrified under a steel table" because the table wasn't petrified, you were. There's actually a word for this, but I've forgotten: I'll see if I can look it up.
That should have been "sheltered petrified under a steel table" because the table wasn't petrified, you were. There's actually a word for this, but I've forgotten: I'll see if I can look it up.
Quite astonishing how quickly we've gone from Burnham can't possibly find a seat he could win to Reform can't possibly win GM Mayor.
Yes, it's a bit mental, but at least it shows we can accept and react to evidence, and the scale of Burnham's victory in Makerfield is good evidence.
I'm not 100% convinced. I can't see Bev Craig getting the vote out in the same way. Depends if Reform choose another dud?
Actually, I find it difficult to imagine what a non-dud Reform candidate would look like. Their current roster of ‘big beasts’ include Yusuf, Goodwin, Tice, Pochin, Jenrick and Braverman who I imagine hardly set the Mancunian pulse racing except in a WTF way. I suppose Anderson might be a very loose fit.
South Africa and South Korea really have done the dirty on Scotland.
Benpointers guide to Scotland's travel prospects:
Group D Australia v Paraguay has 'stitch-up' 'draw' written all over it, allowing both teams to qualify. Same in group F with Japan v Sweden, and of course group J with Algeria v Austria, who have previous in these things. But, those all involve third placed teams already above Scotland so don't really impact Scotland's chances.
Of those who might overtake Scotland:
Group E: I can't see either Ecuador beating Germany or Curaçao beating Ivory Coast, so nether of them are an issue. Group G: Belgium should beat NZ and Egypt v Iran could well be a draw so I'd expect Iran to push Scotland down to 8th place. Group H: Another possibility for a stitch-up in Spain v Uruguay where a draw lets Uruguay leap-frog Scotland but I suspect Spain will win that one. Group I: Likely that Senegal beat Iraq - Scotland now down to 9th place. Group K: Congo are going to beat Uzbekistan to push Scotland to 10th place Group L: Ghana beating Croatia be three goals would be handy but I can't see it happening.
Summary: "We're doomed!"
South Africa really put a spanner in the progression, that was a (by my reckoning) 65% chance of someone finishing below Scotland that fell by the wayside. Scotland still need 4 groups to come good
Group D : 75% chance of both Ivory Coast and Germany getting at least a draw.
Group E: Paraguay are one goal away from being in Scotland's position, so I reckon they will be going for it on the break and Australia will respond in kind. Australia winning 2-0 to put Paraguay below Scotland is a chance - also contingent on Turkey not beating the USA. About a 25% chance of a Scotland friendly result.
Group F: Japan need to beat Sweden by 4 goals to benefit Scotland, 2% chance.
Group G: Broadly Scotland's benefit is served by Egypt beating Iran, around a 35% chance
Group H: In an identical setup to Group G, Spain need to beat Uruguay for Scotland, around a 50% chance.
Group I: Senegal failing to beat Iraq is probably a 30% chance
Group J: This is the Algeria Austria one. Even with a suspicious eye. Austria beating Algeria by a couple is about a 30% chance.
Group K: Congo failing to beat Uzbekistan is about a 20% chance.
Group L: Yes, 3 goal Ghana win against Croatia not that likely (and England have also to avoid losing to Panama!). 5% chance at best all in.
So, aggregating, on average 2.6 teams finish below Scotland, for a likely 9th place finish.
Two beneficial results tonight would be really welcome.
I can see Scotland surviving in the top 8 tonight but not tomorrow night, albeit it may not be mathematically concluded until the last group has finished. I agree it's likely to be a 9th (possibly 10th) place finish in the 3rd place teams group.
Thanks to Ben and yourself for the analysis.
I note the SFA decision to give Steve Clarke a new 4 year contract immediately before the World Cup is coming under some scrutiny this morning. He's taken Scotland to 3 major tournaments in his tenure and won 1 game at finals in total, which somehow qualifies him to be "Scotland's most successful Head Coach of all time". I'd argue getting Scotland to 16 or 24 team World Cups/Euros regularly was potentially more challenging.
Moaning about the McGinn non penalty or having the world's 6th and 7th best ranked sides in your group is just fluff, ultimately the squad as a whole aren't good enough (and may also not be coached well), as the three performances exposed.
South Africa and South Korea really have done the dirty on Scotland.
Benpointers guide to Scotland's travel prospects:
Group D Australia v Paraguay has 'stitch-up' 'draw' written all over it, allowing both teams to qualify. Same in group F with Japan v Sweden, and of course group J with Algeria v Austria, who have previous in these things. But, those all involve third placed teams already above Scotland so don't really impact Scotland's chances.
Of those who might overtake Scotland:
Group E: I can't see either Ecuador beating Germany or Curaçao beating Ivory Coast, so nether of them are an issue. Group G: Belgium should beat NZ and Egypt v Iran could well be a draw so I'd expect Iran to push Scotland down to 8th place. Group H: Another possibility for a stitch-up in Spain v Uruguay where a draw lets Uruguay leap-frog Scotland but I suspect Spain will win that one. Group I: Likely that Senegal beat Iraq - Scotland now down to 9th place. Group K: Congo are going to beat Uzbekistan to push Scotland to 10th place Group L: Ghana beating Croatia be three goals would be handy but I can't see it happening.
Summary: "We're doomed!"
South Africa really put a spanner in the progression, that was a (by my reckoning) 65% chance of someone finishing below Scotland that fell by the wayside. Scotland still need 4 groups to come good
Group D : 75% chance of both Ivory Coast and Germany getting at least a draw.
Group E: Paraguay are one goal away from being in Scotland's position, so I reckon they will be going for it on the break and Australia will respond in kind. Australia winning 2-0 to put Paraguay below Scotland is a chance - also contingent on Turkey not beating the USA. About a 25% chance of a Scotland friendly result.
Group F: Japan need to beat Sweden by 4 goals to benefit Scotland, 2% chance.
Group G: Broadly Scotland's benefit is served by Egypt beating Iran, around a 35% chance
Group H: In an identical setup to Group G, Spain need to beat Uruguay for Scotland, around a 50% chance.
Group I: Senegal failing to beat Iraq is probably a 30% chance
Group J: This is the Algeria Austria one. Even with a suspicious eye. Austria beating Algeria by a couple is about a 30% chance.
Group K: Congo failing to beat Uzbekistan is about a 20% chance.
Group L: Yes, 3 goal Ghana win against Croatia not that likely (and England have also to avoid losing to Panama!). 5% chance at best all in.
So, aggregating, on average 2.6 teams finish below Scotland, for a likely 9th place finish.
Two beneficial results tonight would be really welcome.
Scotland may be less embarrassed by finishing 9th and going home with what ifs than being embarrassed again. Our defence is poor and we can’t score goals. We rely on a midfield that is out of form. We have a manager who is stale. Ok, we were in the same group as Brazil and Morocco (who I think will be at least semi finalists), but we are just not good enough.
I think your players are good enough to have qualified. Tactically it all felt confused and naive to me, plus self inflicted defensive errors, but it was a tough group. A striker and a fast centre back would make the world of difference.
Quite astonishing how quickly we've gone from Burnham can't possibly find a seat he could win to Reform can't possibly win GM Mayor.
Yes, it's a bit mental, but at least it shows we can accept and react to evidence, and the scale of Burnham's victory in Makerfield is good evidence.
I'm not 100% convinced. I can't see Bev Craig getting the vote out in the same way. Depends if Reform choose another dud?
A few thoughts - let's see where this leads:
The reason Labour kept losing was that people really wanted to give SKS a kicking. That, more than anything else, explains the local election results in GM (and indeed elsewhere) Makerfield, uniquely, offered people a chance to vote Labour while still giving SKS a kicking. The GM mayoralty doesn't offer a chance to kick SKS, really, because he's basically gone. So it falls somewhere between the vote-Reform-to-kick-SKS of the locals and the vote-Andy-to-kick-SKS of Makerfield. People will be genuinely voting just on preference. Very few people know who Bev Craig is - she is neither a positive nor a negative. (I'm talking in general terms - personally I know who she is and I rate her).
That should have been "sheltered petrified under a steel table" because the table wasn't petrified, you were. There's actually a word for this, but I've forgotten: I'll see if I can look it up.
That should have been "sheltered petrified under a steel table" because the table wasn't petrified, you were. There's actually a word for this, but I've forgotten: I'll see if I can look it up.
Pedantry.
Nope. It's It's "Transferred epithet" or "Hypallage"
Thoughts and prayers for the England and New Zealand players playing in this heat.
Scorchio!
Work has issued a WFH-if-you-want-to edict. I have come in to the office because a) I can cycle in, which, surprisingly, isn't an unpleasant commute - you get a wind in your face - and b) I can sit in an air conditioned office. I am the only one here and I am shivering.
I've done 4 days in the office for the first time since 2019, cycle and AC, may even be 5 if gardener cancels
That should have been "sheltered petrified under a steel table" because the table wasn't petrified, you were. There's actually a word for this, but I've forgotten: I'll see if I can look it up.
Actually I wasn't because I was a few months old but my parents and sister were petrified
It is a long time since I passed my English O level and of course the sad thing about ageing is you begin to forget all that which you had learned !!!
Quite astonishing how quickly we've gone from Burnham can't possibly find a seat he could win to Reform can't possibly win GM Mayor.
Yes, it's a bit mental, but at least it shows we can accept and react to evidence, and the scale of Burnham's victory in Makerfield is good evidence.
I'm not 100% convinced. I can't see Bev Craig getting the vote out in the same way. Depends if Reform choose another dud?
A few thoughts - let's see where this leads:
The reason Labour kept losing was that people really wanted to give SKS a kicking. That, more than anything else, explains the local election results in GM (and indeed elsewhere) Makerfield, uniquely, offered people a chance to vote Labour while still giving SKS a kicking. The GM mayoralty doesn't offer a chance to kick SKS, really, because he's basically gone. So it falls somewhere between the vote-Reform-to-kick-SKS of the locals and the vote-Andy-to-kick-SKS of Makerfield. People will be genuinely voting just on preference. Very few people know who Bev Craig is - she is neither a positive nor a negative. (I'm talking in general terms - personally I know who she is and I rate her).
My view is that this leads to a Labour win.
Low turnout, but I don't see Reform being able to enthuse people to turnout either. Even if they're grudging, Labour should get enough second preferences from Greens and Lib Dems to see them home.
Thoughts and prayers for the England and New Zealand players playing in this heat.
Scorchio!
Work has issued a WFH-if-you-want-to edict. I have come in to the office because a) I can cycle in, which, surprisingly, isn't an unpleasant commute - you get a wind in your face - and b) I can sit in an air conditioned office. I am the only one here and I am shivering.
I've done 4 days in the office for the first time since 2019, cycle and AC, may even be 5 if gardener cancels
I'm retired from full-time work now so not too worried by the heat, but my poor lad called this morning to say that the power is out at his air-conditioned office in London so everyone has to work from home. Not easy in his top-floor flat which has already reached 30C!
I know I've mentioned it before but Gorton and Denton was Starmer's fatal act of stubbornness and stupidity. Had Burnham stood he'd have won easily and not given the Greens momentum for the locals. Burnham wouldn't be the fabled slayer of Reform in their backyard either.
Yes, but Starmer would probably have lost his job even sooner.
Yes, if the Locals were as bad. And it would still have been Burnham. But more likelihood of a contest rather than a coronation. Going back to my 'rubber duck' analogy (which has remarkably wide utility) the initial blocking of Burnham simply served to turbocharge demand for him when he at last became available. To labour it slightly, having been pushed down to the bottom of Keir's bath the duck came shooting up with ferocious velocity once released. The duck being Andy there.
I know I've mentioned it before but Gorton and Denton was Starmer's fatal act of stubbornness and stupidity. Had Burnham stood he'd have won easily and not given the Greens momentum for the locals. Burnham wouldn't be the fabled slayer of Reform in their backyard either.
Ironically, Sir Keir did Andy a big favour by blocking him the first time. He's gone from being a plausible contender to the saviour of civilisation as we know it. Timing is all.
Quite astonishing how quickly we've gone from Burnham can't possibly find a seat he could win to Reform can't possibly win GM Mayor.
Momentum in the modern age is extraordinary. We won't take long to find out whether Burnham grasps not only how to grasp it but also to retain it.
I make one guess: That Burnham will try a genuinely less polemical brand of politics and leadership. More story telling and narrative, less polemic against everyone else. More 'the common good'.
I wonder how PMQs would get on if Kemi is met with northern charm and courtesy and a bit of seeking common ground? Even trying to discern and respond to the question?
Quite astonishing how quickly we've gone from Burnham can't possibly find a seat he could win to Reform can't possibly win GM Mayor.
Yes, it's a bit mental, but at least it shows we can accept and react to evidence, and the scale of Burnham's victory in Makerfield is good evidence.
I'm not 100% convinced. I can't see Bev Craig getting the vote out in the same way. Depends if Reform choose another dud?
A few thoughts - let's see where this leads:
The reason Labour kept losing was that people really wanted to give SKS a kicking. That, more than anything else, explains the local election results in GM (and indeed elsewhere) Makerfield, uniquely, offered people a chance to vote Labour while still giving SKS a kicking. The GM mayoralty doesn't offer a chance to kick SKS, really, because he's basically gone. So it falls somewhere between the vote-Reform-to-kick-SKS of the locals and the vote-Andy-to-kick-SKS of Makerfield. People will be genuinely voting just on preference. Very few people know who Bev Craig is - she is neither a positive nor a negative. (I'm talking in general terms - personally I know who she is and I rate her).
My view is that this leads to a Labour win.
Low turnout, but I don't see Reform being able to enthuse people to turnout either. Even if they're grudging, Labour should get enough second preferences from Greens and Lib Dems to see them home.
Apart from anything else the voters of Manchester will spot both who the PM is and who forms this government, and the next, and vote on the off chance of the pork barrel aspect of politics favouring a Labour mayor in a northern area when we are in for 8 more years of Labour government.
I know I've mentioned it before but Gorton and Denton was Starmer's fatal act of stubbornness and stupidity. Had Burnham stood he'd have won easily and not given the Greens momentum for the locals. Burnham wouldn't be the fabled slayer of Reform in their backyard either.
Ironically, Sir Keir did Andy a big favour by blocking him the first time. He's gone from being a plausible contender to the saviour of civilisation as we know it. Timing is all.
Perhaps as with Labour’s loveless landslide, beginning with non-inflated expectations would have been more beneficial.
Quite astonishing how quickly we've gone from Burnham can't possibly find a seat he could win to Reform can't possibly win GM Mayor.
Momentum in the modern age is extraordinary. We won't take long to find out whether Burnham grasps not only how to grasp it but also to retain it.
I make one guess: That Burnham will try a genuinely less polemical brand of politics and leadership. More story telling and narrative, less polemic against everyone else. More 'the common good'.
I wonder how PMQs would get on if Kemi is met with northern charm and courtesy and a bit of seeking common ground? Even trying to discern and respond to the question?
South Africa and South Korea really have done the dirty on Scotland.
Benpointers guide to Scotland's travel prospects:
Group D Australia v Paraguay has 'stitch-up' 'draw' written all over it, allowing both teams to qualify. Same in group F with Japan v Sweden, and of course group J with Algeria v Austria, who have previous in these things. But, those all involve third placed teams already above Scotland so don't really impact Scotland's chances.
Of those who might overtake Scotland:
Group E: I can't see either Ecuador beating Germany or Curaçao beating Ivory Coast, so nether of them are an issue. Group G: Belgium should beat NZ and Egypt v Iran could well be a draw so I'd expect Iran to push Scotland down to 8th place. Group H: Another possibility for a stitch-up in Spain v Uruguay where a draw lets Uruguay leap-frog Scotland but I suspect Spain will win that one. Group I: Likely that Senegal beat Iraq - Scotland now down to 9th place. Group K: Congo are going to beat Uzbekistan to push Scotland to 10th place Group L: Ghana beating Croatia be three goals would be handy but I can't see it happening.
Summary: "We're doomed!"
South Africa really put a spanner in the progression, that was a (by my reckoning) 65% chance of someone finishing below Scotland that fell by the wayside. Scotland still need 4 groups to come good
Group D : 75% chance of both Ivory Coast and Germany getting at least a draw.
Group E: Paraguay are one goal away from being in Scotland's position, so I reckon they will be going for it on the break and Australia will respond in kind. Australia winning 2-0 to put Paraguay below Scotland is a chance - also contingent on Turkey not beating the USA. About a 25% chance of a Scotland friendly result.
Group F: Japan need to beat Sweden by 4 goals to benefit Scotland, 2% chance.
Group G: Broadly Scotland's benefit is served by Egypt beating Iran, around a 35% chance
Group H: In an identical setup to Group G, Spain need to beat Uruguay for Scotland, around a 50% chance.
Group I: Senegal failing to beat Iraq is probably a 30% chance
Group J: This is the Algeria Austria one. Even with a suspicious eye. Austria beating Algeria by a couple is about a 30% chance.
Group K: Congo failing to beat Uzbekistan is about a 20% chance.
Group L: Yes, 3 goal Ghana win against Croatia not that likely (and England have also to avoid losing to Panama!). 5% chance at best all in.
So, aggregating, on average 2.6 teams finish below Scotland, for a likely 9th place finish.
Two beneficial results tonight would be really welcome.
I can see Scotland surviving in the top 8 tonight but not tomorrow night, albeit it may not be mathematically concluded until the last group has finished. I agree it's likely to be a 9th (possibly 10th) place finish in the 3rd place teams group.
Thanks to Ben and yourself for the analysis.
I note the SFA decision to give Steve Clarke a new 4 year contract immediately before the World Cup is coming under some scrutiny this morning. He's taken Scotland to 3 major tournaments in his tenure and won 1 game at finals in total, which somehow qualifies him to be "Scotland's most successful Head Coach of all time". I'd argue getting Scotland to 16 or 24 team World Cups/Euros regularly was potentially more challenging.
Moaning about the McGinn non penalty or having the world's 6th and 7th best ranked sides in your group is just fluff, ultimately the squad as a whole aren't good enough (and may also not be coached well), as the three performances exposed.
The despair of the commentators - "They need to do something. Anything!" - exposed the lack of any sort of compelling force in Scotland's play. You cannot rely upon teams like Morocco and Brazil to cock-up to get you a hole of your own making.
Glad they made it there, but simply not good enough to progress. What will be depressing will be to see the company they in of those also departing.
I know I've mentioned it before but Gorton and Denton was Starmer's fatal act of stubbornness and stupidity. Had Burnham stood he'd have won easily and not given the Greens momentum for the locals. Burnham wouldn't be the fabled slayer of Reform in their backyard either.
Yes, but Starmer would probably have lost his job even sooner.
Yes, if the Locals were as bad. And it would still have been Burnham. But more likelihood of a contest rather than a coronation. Going back to my 'rubber duck' analogy (which has remarkably wide utility) the initial blocking of Burnham simply served to turbocharge demand for him when he at last became available. To labour it slightly, having been pushed down to the bottom of Keir's bath the duck came shooting up with ferocious velocity once released. The duck being Andy there.
So after being in for just two years and having achieved nothing, Starmer is out for a duck?
Scotland aren't out yet. Don't they have about a 30% chance of making it?
I think that depends on the model you choose.
One other factor - by playing early in the last round of group games, Scotland can no longer influence their own destiny, where other sides can. So we may yet see tame draws that enable both teams to qualify, potentially at the expense of the Tartan Army.
South Africa and South Korea really have done the dirty on Scotland.
Benpointers guide to Scotland's travel prospects:
Group D Australia v Paraguay has 'stitch-up' 'draw' written all over it, allowing both teams to qualify. Same in group F with Japan v Sweden, and of course group J with Algeria v Austria, who have previous in these things. But, those all involve third placed teams already above Scotland so don't really impact Scotland's chances.
Of those who might overtake Scotland:
Group E: I can't see either Ecuador beating Germany or Curaçao beating Ivory Coast, so nether of them are an issue. Group G: Belgium should beat NZ and Egypt v Iran could well be a draw so I'd expect Iran to push Scotland down to 8th place. Group H: Another possibility for a stitch-up in Spain v Uruguay where a draw lets Uruguay leap-frog Scotland but I suspect Spain will win that one. Group I: Likely that Senegal beat Iraq - Scotland now down to 9th place. Group K: Congo are going to beat Uzbekistan to push Scotland to 10th place Group L: Ghana beating Croatia be three goals would be handy but I can't see it happening.
Summary: "We're doomed!"
South Africa really put a spanner in the progression, that was a (by my reckoning) 65% chance of someone finishing below Scotland that fell by the wayside. Scotland still need 4 groups to come good
Group D : 75% chance of both Ivory Coast and Germany getting at least a draw.
Group E: Paraguay are one goal away from being in Scotland's position, so I reckon they will be going for it on the break and Australia will respond in kind. Australia winning 2-0 to put Paraguay below Scotland is a chance - also contingent on Turkey not beating the USA. About a 25% chance of a Scotland friendly result.
Group F: Japan need to beat Sweden by 4 goals to benefit Scotland, 2% chance.
Group G: Broadly Scotland's benefit is served by Egypt beating Iran, around a 35% chance
Group H: In an identical setup to Group G, Spain need to beat Uruguay for Scotland, around a 50% chance.
Group I: Senegal failing to beat Iraq is probably a 30% chance
Group J: This is the Algeria Austria one. Even with a suspicious eye. Austria beating Algeria by a couple is about a 30% chance.
Group K: Congo failing to beat Uzbekistan is about a 20% chance.
Group L: Yes, 3 goal Ghana win against Croatia not that likely (and England have also to avoid losing to Panama!). 5% chance at best all in.
So, aggregating, on average 2.6 teams finish below Scotland, for a likely 9th place finish.
Two beneficial results tonight would be really welcome.
I can see Scotland surviving in the top 8 tonight but not tomorrow night, albeit it may not be mathematically concluded until the last group has finished. I agree it's likely to be a 9th (possibly 10th) place finish in the 3rd place teams group.
Thanks to Ben and yourself for the analysis.
I note the SFA decision to give Steve Clarke a new 4 year contract immediately before the World Cup is coming under some scrutiny this morning. He's taken Scotland to 3 major tournaments in his tenure and won 1 game at finals in total, which somehow qualifies him to be "Scotland's most successful Head Coach of all time". I'd argue getting Scotland to 16 or 24 team World Cups/Euros regularly was potentially more challenging.
Moaning about the McGinn non penalty or having the world's 6th and 7th best ranked sides in your group is just fluff, ultimately the squad as a whole aren't good enough (and may also not be coached well), as the three performances exposed.
The despair of the commentators - "They need to do something. Anything!" - exposed the lack of any sort of compelling force in Scotland's play. You cannot rely upon teams like Morocco and Brazil to cock-up to get you a hole of your own making.
Glad they made it there, but simply not good enough to progress. What will be depressing will be to see the company they in of those also departing.
I don't understand why they played the way they did last night.
Surely if you aren't good enough to pass the ball around the back when under pressure, don't do it!
Scotland aren't out yet. Don't they have about a 30% chance of making it?
I think that depends on the model you choose.
One other factor - by playing early in the last round of group games, Scotland can no longer influence their own destiny, where other sides can. So we may yet see tame draws that enable both teams to qualify, potentially at the expense of the Tartan Army.
Yes that was a disadvantage. Doubly so with having their 'easy' game first.
Scotland aren't out yet. Don't they have about a 30% chance of making it?
I think that depends on the model you choose.
One other factor - by playing early in the last round of group games, Scotland can no longer influence their own destiny, where other sides can. So we may yet see tame draws that enable both teams to qualify, potentially at the expense of the Tartan Army.
There is an unfairness about that becoming apparent. Obviously Scots will react to any grievance they may have about the system with their characteristic cheerful happy go lucky optimism but starting with 48 teams is crazy. You need to be eliminating teams on an equal basis. What about 40 teams in 8 groups of five, eliminating the bottom team from each group, guaranteeing all teams, however humble, four games at the top?
It’s like shooting fish in a barrel at this point. How do you send drones 1,500km during the day, and they still make it to their target?
Someone somewhere has made a very detailed map of Russian air defence installations.
And they are all on the way to Moscow anyway.
I'm a bit surprised an attempt hasn't been made on the Yelabuga drone factory. Maybe the range limits the payload that can be carried, and drones are less effective against something that doesn't by nature burn, like an oil refinery
The recent successful hits on drone and electronics factories have been done by missiles, rather than drones, because the missiles carry a larger payload (and also hit at high velocity, meaning they can explode from within the target, rather than outside).
Ukraine are developing missiles with longer range and larger payloads. The Netherlands has just decided to buy a bunch of Ruta cruise missiles to donate to Ukraine too.
Last night's attacks on Russia involved ~300 Ukrainian drones, and Russia air defences will have taken down more than 250. But if the remaining drones are on target they can still cause a large mess.
Russia is concentrating air defences to defend Moscow and Putin's dacha at Valdai. The main effect of this is insufficient air defense to defend against Ukraine's mid-range campaign of air interdiction.
A drone is just a short range, slow, really low payload missile.
If you build a “drone” that can fly 2000km and avoid defences, congrats. You’ve just built a missile.
Scotland aren't out yet. Don't they have about a 30% chance of making it?
I think that depends on the model you choose.
One other factor - by playing early in the last round of group games, Scotland can no longer influence their own destiny, where other sides can. So we may yet see tame draws that enable both teams to qualify, potentially at the expense of the Tartan Army.
There is an unfairness about that becoming apparent. Obviously Scots will react to any grievance they may have about the system with their characteristic cheerful happy go lucky optimism but starting with 48 teams is crazy. You need to be eliminating teams on an equal basis. What about 40 teams in 8 groups of five, eliminating the bottom team from each group, guaranteeing all teams, however humble, four games at the top?
If you had to go 48 then 8 groups of 6. Group winners to last 16. Second places to play third. I know it would take forever. But at least it would be fairer.
I know I've mentioned it before but Gorton and Denton was Starmer's fatal act of stubbornness and stupidity. Had Burnham stood he'd have won easily and not given the Greens momentum for the locals. Burnham wouldn't be the fabled slayer of Reform in their backyard either.
Ironically, Sir Keir did Andy a big favour by blocking him the first time. He's gone from being a plausible contender to the saviour of civilisation as we know it. Timing is all.
Perhaps as with Labour’s loveless landslide, beginning with non-inflated expectations would have been more beneficial.
Less whinging about The Blob and more changing things would help as well.
As well as policies that don’t feel like a punch in the mouth to many Labour MPs, members and voters
It’s like shooting fish in a barrel at this point. How do you send drones 1,500km during the day, and they still make it to their target?
Someone somewhere has made a very detailed map of Russian air defence installations.
And they are all on the way to Moscow anyway.
I'm a bit surprised an attempt hasn't been made on the Yelabuga drone factory. Maybe the range limits the payload that can be carried, and drones are less effective against something that doesn't by nature burn, like an oil refinery
The recent successful hits on drone and electronics factories have been done by missiles, rather than drones, because the missiles carry a larger payload (and also hit at high velocity, meaning they can explode from within the target, rather than outside).
Ukraine are developing missiles with longer range and larger payloads. The Netherlands has just decided to buy a bunch of Ruta cruise missiles to donate to Ukraine too.
Last night's attacks on Russia involved ~300 Ukrainian drones, and Russia air defences will have taken down more than 250. But if the remaining drones are on target they can still cause a large mess.
Russia is concentrating air defences to defend Moscow and Putin's dacha at Valdai. The main effect of this is insufficient air defense to defend against Ukraine's mid-range campaign of air interdiction.
A drone is just a short range, slow, really low payload missile.
If you build a “drone” that can fly 2000km and avoid defences, congrats. You’ve just built a missile.
Scotland aren't out yet. Don't they have about a 30% chance of making it?
I think that depends on the model you choose.
One other factor - by playing early in the last round of group games, Scotland can no longer influence their own destiny, where other sides can. So we may yet see tame draws that enable both teams to qualify, potentially at the expense of the Tartan Army.
There is an unfairness about that becoming apparent. Obviously Scots will react to any grievance they may have about the system with their characteristic cheerful happy go lucky optimism but starting with 48 teams is crazy. You need to be eliminating teams on an equal basis. What about 40 teams in 8 groups of five, eliminating the bottom team from each group, guaranteeing all teams, however humble, four games at the top?
Thats been my bone of contention with the European Cup in rugby for many years. Have the right number of groups so that the top x goes through, be it 1, 2 or 3.
However the 8 from 12 third place teams is introducing a delightful randomness to the later stages that are not there for a top two goes to the last 16.
This, from the article, shows more info than the one in the tweet.
What is the justification for classing non-plug-in hybrids separately from petrol and diesel vehicles? They still require petrol or diesel to run. Aren't they basically just particularly efficient (but more complex) versions of straightforward petrol or diesel vehicles as far as environmental considerations are concerned?
Scotland aren't out yet. Don't they have about a 30% chance of making it?
I think that depends on the model you choose.
One other factor - by playing early in the last round of group games, Scotland can no longer influence their own destiny, where other sides can. So we may yet see tame draws that enable both teams to qualify, potentially at the expense of the Tartan Army.
There is an unfairness about that becoming apparent. Obviously Scots will react to any grievance they may have about the system with their characteristic cheerful happy go lucky optimism but starting with 48 teams is crazy. You need to be eliminating teams on an equal basis. What about 40 teams in 8 groups of five, eliminating the bottom team from each group, guaranteeing all teams, however humble, four games at the top?
If you had to go 48 then 8 groups of 6. Group winners to last 16. Second places to play third. I know it would take forever. But at least it would be fairer.
8 groups of 6 - top only progresses to quarter finals. 5 group games, three knock out.
This, from the article, shows more info than the one in the tweet.
What is the justification for classing non-plug-in hybrids separately from petrol and diesel vehicles? They still require petrol or diesel to run. Aren't they basically just particularly efficient (but more complex) versions of these vehicles as far as environmental considerations are concerned?
Efficiency, emissions and tracking a segment that is likely to go full EV relatively easily.
This, from the article, shows more info than the one in the tweet.
What is the justification for classing non-plug-in hybrids separately from petrol and diesel vehicles? They still require petrol or diesel to run. Aren't they basically just particularly efficient (but more complex) versions of straightforward petrol or diesel vehicles as far as environmental considerations are concerned?
Totally. My Auris is just a petrol care with pretty decent efficiency (55 mpg for petrol). It does have electric drive so no gears, regenerative braking etc, but its power is ALL from petrol.
When the projectile needs to turn, the rear collar becomes internally coupled to the main body of the projectile. This harnesses the air resistance acting on the collar’s strakes and transfers it to the main body of the projectile. This acts as a brake on the projectile spin rate, inducing a torquing motion opposite the direction of spin, transferred via the internal coupling, to slow down the projectile spin rate to the desired level. As this spin rate slows, the projectile reaches the desired level of gyroscopic stability, and becomes more susceptible to having its direction changed. At this point, the flap on the collar can be ‘locked’ into a stable position relative to the Earth, to induce an aerodynamic moment (turning force) on the projectile, acting as a rudder, and thereby allowing the projectile to be steered in the desired direction. This same operating principle can also be used to extend the projectile’s range.
This is an extremely clever piece of engineering, and on paper looks to have a number of advantages over various other types of steering system. Unlike single-use thrusters, or jettisonable weights, it can be used to change the projectile’s direction multiple times over the course of its trajectory. Unlike fin-guided projectiles, it takes full advantage of the projectile’s spin stabilisation. Additionally, mounting the entire steering mechanism in the rear is more space- and weight-efficient than most pop-out fin designs, which must sacrifice more of their available volume to accommodate the fins. While the technology is still some ways from being fielded, it nonetheless looks like a highly promising approach.
The doodle-bugs in WWII used to be programmed to switch the engine off over the right place.
Didn't always work, of course. Stories of RAF pilots flying fighters underneath, just close enough to be able to turn them and sending them back whence they came.
Was there not an awful lot of misinformation sent back to Nazi Germany by 'turned' spies about where the V1's were landing? So that the settings were over corrected?
Yes. Report flying north so they'd be targeted at Kentish fields. And the plane thing was to tip the wings so they'd crash. No point turning them back even if it could be done as they were launched from France, which was nominally on our side and more importantly was full of allied troops. The V1 and V2 (rocket) campaigns were towards the end of the war, after D-Day, when any rational Führer would have realised they'd already lost,
This, from the article, shows more info than the one in the tweet.
What is the justification for classing non-plug-in hybrids separately from petrol and diesel vehicles? They still require petrol or diesel to run. Aren't they basically just particularly efficient (but more complex) versions of these vehicles as far as environmental considerations are concerned?
Efficiency, emissions and tracking a segment that is likely to go full EV relatively easily.
Considered as a black box, though, they are not qualitatively different to any other petrol or diesel vehicle. You have to fill them with fuel at a petrol station, and you can't charge them. They just have some fancy technology to make them use fuel more efficiently. Why single out one particular method of making a petrol or diesel car more efficient?
It’s like shooting fish in a barrel at this point. How do you send drones 1,500km during the day, and they still make it to their target?
Someone somewhere has made a very detailed map of Russian air defence installations.
And they are all on the way to Moscow anyway.
I'm a bit surprised an attempt hasn't been made on the Yelabuga drone factory. Maybe the range limits the payload that can be carried, and drones are less effective against something that doesn't by nature burn, like an oil refinery
The recent successful hits on drone and electronics factories have been done by missiles, rather than drones, because the missiles carry a larger payload (and also hit at high velocity, meaning they can explode from within the target, rather than outside).
Ukraine are developing missiles with longer range and larger payloads. The Netherlands has just decided to buy a bunch of Ruta cruise missiles to donate to Ukraine too.
Last night's attacks on Russia involved ~300 Ukrainian drones, and Russia air defences will have taken down more than 250. But if the remaining drones are on target they can still cause a large mess.
Russia is concentrating air defences to defend Moscow and Putin's dacha at Valdai. The main effect of this is insufficient air defense to defend against Ukraine's mid-range campaign of air interdiction.
A drone is just a short range, slow, really low payload missile.
If you build a “drone” that can fly 2000km and avoid defences, congrats. You’ve just built a missile.
I think we're going to have to delineate between drones and missiles. I propose this
Drone: lift comes wholly or mostly from wings (static or totating)
Missile: lift comes wholly or mostly from exhaust. Wings are reduced to fins to provide direction
Scotland aren't out yet. Don't they have about a 30% chance of making it?
I think that depends on the model you choose.
One other factor - by playing early in the last round of group games, Scotland can no longer influence their own destiny, where other sides can. So we may yet see tame draws that enable both teams to qualify, potentially at the expense of the Tartan Army.
There is an unfairness about that becoming apparent. Obviously Scots will react to any grievance they may have about the system with their characteristic cheerful happy go lucky optimism but starting with 48 teams is crazy. You need to be eliminating teams on an equal basis. What about 40 teams in 8 groups of five, eliminating the bottom team from each group, guaranteeing all teams, however humble, four games at the top?
If you had to go 48 then 8 groups of 6. Group winners to last 16. Second places to play third. I know it would take forever. But at least it would be fairer.
8 groups of 6 - top only progresses to quarter finals. 5 group games, three knock out.
Probably too many dead games in the mid to late stages of the group stage.
It sounds more impressive when they don't mention that petrol hybrids (non plug in, so entirely petrol as the prime mover*) substantially out sell both.
Add petrol hybrids of this sort to the petrol manual tally, and petrol cars are still outselling EVs nearly 3-1.
* These are sold as more economical than manual petrols. They obviously are better in stop start traffic, but having tested my old 1.3 manual petrol Yaris against my dad's hybrid Yaris on a number of real world journeys, I got better MPG every trip. I do have a bit of an advantage, as I actually know how to drive a manual economically, most drivers are taught terrible habits - e.g. my wife was told to drive in the gear matching the speed limit - 2nd for 20mph, 3rd gear for 30mph, 4th gear for 40mph etc. Her car is quite short geared, it pulls 5th very happily from about 25mph unless you're going up steep hills.
It sounds more impressive when they don't mention that petrol hybrids (non plug in, so entirely petrol as the prime mover*) substantially out sell both.
Add petrol hybrids of this sort to the petrol manual tally, and petrol cars are still outselling EVs nearly 3-1.
* These are sold as more economical than manual petrols. They obviously are better in stop start traffic, but having tested my old 1.3 manual petrol Yaris against my dad's hybrid Yaris on a number of real world journeys, I got better MPG every trip. I do have a bit of an advantage, as I actually know how to drive a manual economically, most drivers are taught terrible habits - e.g. my wife was told to drive in the gear matching the speed limit - 2nd for 20mph, 3rd gear for 30mph, 4th gear for 40mph etc. Her car is quite short geared, it pulls 5th very happily from about 25mph unless you're going up steep hills.
I used to drive a petrol Yaris and would get 58-60 mpg quite well. My current Auris will just about do that, but is a much bigger car.
It’s like shooting fish in a barrel at this point. How do you send drones 1,500km during the day, and they still make it to their target?
Someone somewhere has made a very detailed map of Russian air defence installations.
And they are all on the way to Moscow anyway.
I'm a bit surprised an attempt hasn't been made on the Yelabuga drone factory. Maybe the range limits the payload that can be carried, and drones are less effective against something that doesn't by nature burn, like an oil refinery
The recent successful hits on drone and electronics factories have been done by missiles, rather than drones, because the missiles carry a larger payload (and also hit at high velocity, meaning they can explode from within the target, rather than outside).
Ukraine are developing missiles with longer range and larger payloads. The Netherlands has just decided to buy a bunch of Ruta cruise missiles to donate to Ukraine too.
Last night's attacks on Russia involved ~300 Ukrainian drones, and Russia air defences will have taken down more than 250. But if the remaining drones are on target they can still cause a large mess.
Russia is concentrating air defences to defend Moscow and Putin's dacha at Valdai. The main effect of this is insufficient air defense to defend against Ukraine's mid-range campaign of air interdiction.
A drone is just a short range, slow, really low payload missile.
If you build a “drone” that can fly 2000km and avoid defences, congrats. You’ve just built a missile.
I think we're going to have to delineate between drones and missiles. I propose this
Drone: lift comes wholly or mostly from wings (static or totating)
Missile: lift comes wholly or mostly from exhaust. Wings are reduced to fins to provide direction
"A missile is a guided, self-propelled airborne weapon designed to deliver an explosive warhead to a specific target" ** "A drone is primarily an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV)—a flying aircraft guided by remote control or autonomous software." **
It sounds more impressive when they don't mention that petrol hybrids (non plug in, so entirely petrol as the prime mover*) substantially out sell both.
Add petrol hybrids of this sort to the petrol manual tally, and petrol cars are still outselling EVs nearly 3-1.
* These are sold as more economical than manual petrols. They obviously are better in stop start traffic, but having tested my old 1.3 manual petrol Yaris against my dad's hybrid Yaris on a number of real world journeys, I got better MPG every trip. I do have a bit of an advantage, as I actually know how to drive a manual economically, most drivers are taught terrible habits - e.g. my wife was told to drive in the gear matching the speed limit - 2nd for 20mph, 3rd gear for 30mph, 4th gear for 40mph etc. Her car is quite short geared, it pulls 5th very happily from about 25mph unless you're going up steep hills.
Yes but driving that that will never allow you accelerate fast and hear the engine go VROOOM; which is my reason for keeping a petrol car. Electric cars can accelerate even faster but they don’t go VROOOOM.
What the fucking fuck is going on with school closures - never would have happened if we hadn't had Covid I reckon.
Primary school rolls have dropped around 5% in the last half decade (birthrates and crackdown on immigration), and will likely fall another 7% by the end of the decade. Unless you switch from per pupil funding, and maintain overall funding in order to reduce class sizes, school closures are inevitable.
I mean today lol.
Probably staff not wanting/able to travel in, and the schools themselves just being too hot - so closing with union support.
Anything for extra holidays , yet they get months of holidays already, slackers.
It sounds more impressive when they don't mention that petrol hybrids (non plug in, so entirely petrol as the prime mover*) substantially out sell both.
Add petrol hybrids of this sort to the petrol manual tally, and petrol cars are still outselling EVs nearly 3-1.
* These are sold as more economical than manual petrols. They obviously are better in stop start traffic, but having tested my old 1.3 manual petrol Yaris against my dad's hybrid Yaris on a number of real world journeys, I got better MPG every trip. I do have a bit of an advantage, as I actually know how to drive a manual economically, most drivers are taught terrible habits - e.g. my wife was told to drive in the gear matching the speed limit - 2nd for 20mph, 3rd gear for 30mph, 4th gear for 40mph etc. Her car is quite short geared, it pulls 5th very happily from about 25mph unless you're going up steep hills.
I drove a new ford minibus the other weekend, the eco mode on the dash was all green except for gear-change which, apparently I was terrible at.
Comments
I have come in to the office because a) I can cycle in, which, surprisingly, isn't an unpleasant commute - you get a wind in your face - and b) I can sit in an air conditioned office.
I am the only one here and I am shivering.
(All open to elucidation, bu I think I am correct.)
He appeared on camera with Ryan Bridge of Raise the Colours. Ryan has now been arrested twice for violent offences whilst running his campaign and has published numbers of videos of himself indulging in threatening behaviour. Plus the organisation has Yaxley-Lennon associations, and its people have hard right history. He has also more prosaically agreed not to do his stuff in Oxfordshire with hardly a peep, the Council having obtained an injunction around harassment of Council staff. *
https://www.gettyimages.se/detail/nyhetsfoto/shadow-home-secretary-chris-philp-speaks-to-raise-the-nyhetsfoto/2281266960
My opinion of Raise the Colours now is that they are Yaxley-Lennon style grifters from gullibles.
It was at a Policy Exchange event where Philp was giving a keynote about immigration, where he proposed a deportation rate higher than achieved by Trump. It's a sticky wicket because Philp is criticising all the things he did himself as Immigration Minister.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_WeoTACetxE
* https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2026/jun/23/nationalist-group-stop-hoisting-st-george-flags-oxfordshire-court-injunction
The locals wouldn't have been such a catastrophe.
Nor would Burnham have been the clear choice of c 300 Labour MP's.
I suppose Anderson might be a very loose fit.
Thanks to Ben and yourself for the analysis.
I note the SFA decision to give Steve Clarke a new 4 year contract immediately before the World Cup is coming under some scrutiny this morning. He's taken Scotland to 3 major tournaments in his tenure and won 1 game at finals in total, which somehow qualifies him to be "Scotland's most successful Head Coach of all time". I'd argue getting Scotland to 16 or 24 team World Cups/Euros regularly was potentially more challenging.
Moaning about the McGinn non penalty or having the world's 6th and 7th best ranked sides in your group is just fluff, ultimately the squad as a whole aren't good enough (and may also not be coached well), as the three performances exposed.
The reason Labour kept losing was that people really wanted to give SKS a kicking. That, more than anything else, explains the local election results in GM (and indeed elsewhere)
Makerfield, uniquely, offered people a chance to vote Labour while still giving SKS a kicking.
The GM mayoralty doesn't offer a chance to kick SKS, really, because he's basically gone. So it falls somewhere between the vote-Reform-to-kick-SKS of the locals and the vote-Andy-to-kick-SKS of Makerfield. People will be genuinely voting just on preference.
Very few people know who Bev Craig is - she is neither a positive nor a negative. (I'm talking in general terms - personally I know who she is and I rate her).
My view is that this leads to a Labour win.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/bitesize/articles/zhrsf4j
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypallage
https://www.bbc.co.uk/bitesize/articles/zhrsf4j
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypallage
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ce95r7gvm5go
It is a long time since I passed my English O level and of course the sad thing about ageing is you begin to forget all that which you had learned !!!
I make one guess: That Burnham will try a genuinely less polemical brand of politics and leadership. More story telling and narrative, less polemic against everyone else. More 'the common good'.
I wonder how PMQs would get on if Kemi is met with northern charm and courtesy and a bit of seeking common ground? Even trying to discern and respond to the question?
We shall find out.
https://www.dwarkesh.com/p/tony-blair
Glad they made it there, but simply not good enough to progress. What will be depressing will be to see the company they in of those also departing.
Simon Evans
@drsimevans.carbonbrief.org
NEW ANALYSIS: UK sales of electric vehicles just overtook petrol cars for the first time
https://bsky.app/profile/drsimevans.carbonbrief.org/post/3mp4a2tlwps2k
One other factor - by playing early in the last round of group games, Scotland can no longer influence their own destiny, where other sides can. So we may yet see tame draws that enable both teams to qualify, potentially at the expense of the Tartan Army.
Surely if you aren't good enough to pass the ball around the back when under pressure, don't do it!
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/ng-interactive/2026/jun/25/us-fighter-pilot-strangled-woman-england-why-military-trial
This, from the article, shows more info than the one in the tweet.
https://x.com/bayraktar_1love/status/2070062187326890271
Just a guess.
Group winners to last 16. Second places to play third.
I know it would take forever. But at least it would be fairer.
As well as policies that don’t feel like a punch in the mouth to many Labour MPs, members and voters
However the 8 from 12 third place teams is introducing a delightful randomness to the later stages that are not there for a top two goes to the last 16.
Add petrol hybrids of this sort to the petrol manual tally, and petrol cars are still outselling EVs nearly 3-1.
* These are sold as more economical than manual petrols. They obviously are better in stop start traffic, but having tested my old 1.3 manual petrol Yaris against my dad's hybrid Yaris on a number of real world journeys, I got better MPG every trip. I do have a bit of an advantage, as I actually know how to drive a manual economically, most drivers are taught terrible habits - e.g. my wife was told to drive in the gear matching the speed limit - 2nd for 20mph, 3rd gear for 30mph, 4th gear for 40mph etc. Her car is quite short geared, it pulls 5th very happily from about 25mph unless you're going up steep hills.
"A drone is primarily an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV)—a flying aircraft guided by remote control or autonomous software." **
A drone could therefore also be a missile
** Merriam-Webster