And then you have a genius like Terry Pratchett...
He was a genius in that he wrote the same four books over and over again; getting paid each time.
Hey, even if that were true, 4 books is more than most people can do!
And it's clearly not true. I can think of just one sequence of the books, containing the same characters, which are vastly different. Guards guards, men at arms, feet of clay, jingo, the fifth elephant, night watch, thud. All the same principle cast, but very different in plot.
I stole the aperçu from my wife's friend's husband who is Something In Publishing and said it at dinner. I've only ever read a couple of TP's works and was that of necessity due to being confined on a warship without a desperately well stocked library. I recall one was Men at Arms and the cover got ripped off for use as a shithouse shinpad.
No one says you have to enjoy something just because other people do. But there are plenty of authors who genuinely do write the same book over and over again, and as someone who has read almost all of his work (I'd say 2/3 good, 1/3 not, and of the good another half are great, IMO) TP was not one of them (not to pick on David Eddings too much, as I have read many of his books and enjoyed them, but I couldn't finish the last one I tried reading over a decade ago, because not only was the basic plot so similar to some of his other works, and the characters clearly the same with different names, there was honest to gods repeated dialogue between them!)
F1: A month and five days until the first test. I think the first car reveals will be in a couple of weeks. The halo will be new, and I can't remember if they finally decided whether to keep or axe the shark fins. I believe the T-wings (coat-hangers at the back of the fins) are being axed.
We'll also have a ridiculous number of compounds, seven in 2018, with the hypersoft and super-hard (ahem) joining the current five dry compounds.
France is back on the calendar and, somewhat worryingly, the US is yet to be confirmed. Murmurings that Vietnam will be added in the near future (don't get excited. It'll probably be a shitty street circuit).
TBH nothing on the subject from my informed sources and if there’s a SE Asia trip I think there would be.
5 Star in particular are completely unpredictable - they will adopt whatever policies come into their heads as popular and then drop them again
A lesson in how though partisanship is usually a bad thing, and the ideologies of many parties are not as real as they (and their supporters) pretend, there is a reason we have such ideologically based parties as a means of at least general stability of expectation of what they will do.
King Cole, cheers, although it sounded like 2019 (or later) rather than this year, to me. But they do announce a lot of 'potential' races that never end up happening (cf second US race, Argentina, Denmark, Greece).
I think that was out. Remember, it's a two dimensional image of a three dimensional event.
I went to see Aggers and Boycott at the New Victoria Theatre in Woking on Friday night (they were very funny) and it was interesting to hear Agnew be quite sceptical about technology.
Personally I think it works okay in cricket. The only thing I would change is to take the no ball away from the on field umpire.
Jeremy Corbyn is under huge pressure to shift party policy on Brexit as an exclusive poll for the Observer reveals a substantial majority of existing and potential Labour voters want him to back permanent membership of the EU’s single market and customs union.
Four times as many Labour supporters favour that option as oppose it. The survey by Opinium also finds that more than twice as many in this group want Corbyn to support a second referendum on the eventual Brexit deal as reject it.
King Cole, cheers, although it sounded like 2019 (or later) rather than this year, to me. But they do announce a lot of 'potential' races that never end up happening (cf second US race, Argentina, Denmark, Greece).
I’ll keep my ears open, Mr D.. the last significant discussion was about associated related virtual reality games.
I think that was out. Remember, it's a two dimensional image of a three dimensional event.
I went to see Aggers and Boycott at the New Victoria Theatre in Woking on Friday night (they were very funny) and it was interesting to hear Agnew be quite sceptical about technology.
Personally I think it works okay in cricket. The only thing I would change is to take the no ball away from the on field umpire.
Football on the other hand...
As I recall they've proven that replays can be very misleading when it comes to whether a ball has been grounded or not for the reason you suggest, so it seems reasonable that benefit of the doubt goes to the on field decision.
Football will be able to work it out in time, the overreaction to the first uses of VAR were preposterous. Kinks will be worked out, and the really simple stuff that can very simply be checked to avoid what are common mistakes now, will be worth it.
I think that was out. Remember, it's a two dimensional image of a three dimensional event.
I went to see Aggers and Boycott at the New Victoria Theatre in Woking on Friday night (they were very funny) and it was interesting to hear Agnew be quite sceptical about technology.
Personally I think it works okay in cricket. The only thing I would change is to take the no ball away from the on field umpire.
Football on the other hand...
With cricket there's a regular natural break to review a decision, unlike association football.
Plus most cricket reviews are on matters of fact, not matters of opinion with seems prevalent with VAR.
And then you have a genius like Terry Pratchett...
He was a genius in that he wrote the same four books over and over again; getting paid each time.
Hey, even if that were true, 4 books is more than most people can do!
And it's clearly not true. I can think of just one sequence of the books, containing the same characters, which are vastly different. Guards guards, men at arms, feet of clay, jingo, the fifth elephant, night watch, thud. All the same principle cast, but very different in plot.
I stole the aperçu from my wife's friend's husband who is Something In Publishing and said it at dinner. I've only ever read a couple of TP's works and was that of necessity due to being confined on a warship without a desperately well stocked library. I recall one was Men at Arms and the cover got ripped off for use as a shithouse shinpad.
No one says you have to enjoy something just because other people do. But there are plenty of authors who genuinely do write the same book over and over again, and as someone who has read almost all of his work (I'd say 2/3 good, 1/3 not, and of the good another half are great, IMO) TP was not one of them (not to pick on David Eddings too much, as I have read many of his books and enjoyed them, but I couldn't finish the last one I tried reading over a decade ago, because not only was the basic plot so similar to some of his other works, and the characters clearly the same with different names, there was honest to gods repeated dialogue between them!)
The only interesting Eddingz book was his first - High Hunt I think - about a schoolboy athlete struggling with shattered ambitions as a result of a car accident
Yup. The replay cameras are at least 100m from the action, and not at the right height to judge a low catch as well as any other decision they’re asked to make. A rear stump camera might help with those ones.
I think that was out. Remember, it's a two dimensional image of a three dimensional event.
I went to see Aggers and Boycott at the New Victoria Theatre in Woking on Friday night (they were very funny) and it was interesting to hear Agnew be quite sceptical about technology.
Personally I think it works okay in cricket. The only thing I would change is to take the no ball away from the on field umpire.
Football on the other hand...
With cricket there's a regular natural break to review a decision, unlike association football.
Plus most cricket reviews are on matters of fact, not matters of opinion with seems prevalent with VAR.
That decision just now was a matter of opinion. I think it was caught. However, I can just about understand why someone might not overturn a not out decision in that case.
The problem the other night was that everyone looked at the Willian foul and said penalty. And it wasn't overturned. The powers that be need to decide what is and what isn't a foul.
I think that was out. Remember, it's a two dimensional image of a three dimensional event.
I went to see Aggers and Boycott at the New Victoria Theatre in Woking on Friday night (they were very funny) and it was interesting to hear Agnew be quite sceptical about technology.
Personally I think it works okay in cricket. The only thing I would change is to take the no ball away from the on field umpire.
Football on the other hand...
With cricket there's a regular natural break to review a decision, unlike association football.
Plus most cricket reviews are on matters of fact, not matters of opinion with seems prevalent with VAR.
Crossing a goal line, offside, both clear matters of fact. Foul/no foul? That's trickier but not impossible on the same basis as matters which are left as 'umpire's call' now (this grounding of the ball call an example) - if it comes down to a matter of opinion, you stay with the referee on the field. And football has enough fake breaks of play as people pretend to be hurt that a inserting a break of play should not be too problematic, particularly when most calls will need to be made around when the ref has called for offside or a foul, or a goal has been scored, and there's a break anyway.
I think that was out. Remember, it's a two dimensional image of a three dimensional event.
I went to see Aggers and Boycott at the New Victoria Theatre in Woking on Friday night (they were very funny) and it was interesting to hear Agnew be quite sceptical about technology.
Personally I think it works okay in cricket. The only thing I would change is to take the no ball away from the on field umpire.
Football on the other hand...
With cricket there's a regular natural break to review a decision, unlike association football.
Plus most cricket reviews are on matters of fact, not matters of opinion with seems prevalent with VAR.
That decision just now was a matter of opinion. I think it was caught. However, I can just about understand why someone might not overturn a not out decision in that case.
The problem the other night was that everyone looked at the Willian foul and said penalty. And it wasn't overturned. The powers that be need to decide what is and what isn't a foul.
They do, as I for one didn't think it was a penalty - when a player unnaturally drags their leg to make contact with a defender, it is usually given but should not in my opinion, no more than sticking your leg out to the side to catch on a defender should be.
Jeremy Corbyn is under huge pressure to shift party policy on Brexit as an exclusive poll for the Observer reveals a substantial majority of existing and potential Labour voters want him to back permanent membership of the EU’s single market and customs union.
Four times as many Labour supporters favour that option as oppose it. The survey by Opinium also finds that more than twice as many in this group want Corbyn to support a second referendum on the eventual Brexit deal as reject it.
And then you have a genius like Terry Pratchett...
He was a genius in that he wrote the same four books over and over again; getting paid each time.
Hey, even if that were true, 4 books is more than most people can do!
And it's clearly not true. I can think of just one sequence of the books, containing the same characters, which are vastly different. Guards guards, men at arms, feet of clay, jingo, the fifth elephant, night watch, thud. All the same principle cast, but very different in plot.
I stole the aperçu from my wife's friend's husband who is Something In Publishing and said it at dinner. I've only ever read a couple of TP's works and was that of necessity due to being confined on a warship without a desperately well stocked library. I recall one was Men at Arms and the cover got ripped off for use as a shithouse shinpad.
No one says you have to enjoy something just because other people do. But there are plenty of authors who genuinely do write the same book over and over again, and as someone who has read almost all of his work (I'd say 2/3 good, 1/3 not, and of the good another half are great, IMO) TP was not one of them (not to pick on David Eddings too much, as I have read many of his books and enjoyed them, but I couldn't finish the last one I tried reading over a decade ago, because not only was the basic plot so similar to some of his other works, and the characters clearly the same with different names, there was honest to gods repeated dialogue between them!)
The only interesting Eddingz book was his first - High Hunt I think - about a schoolboy athlete struggling with shattered ambitions as a result of a car accident
As i recall he deliberately set out to write what amounted to the most basic archetypal fantasy tales - clear good and evil, magical macguffin, quest to save the world. Which can be written in a fun way,but in terms of ambition and creativity is hard to sustain over and over. The Mallorean and Tamuli series, were pretty decent.
I think that was out. Remember, it's a two dimensional image of a three dimensional event.
I went to see Aggers and Boycott at the New Victoria Theatre in Woking on Friday night (they were very funny) and it was interesting to hear Agnew be quite sceptical about technology.
Personally I think it works okay in cricket. The only thing I would change is to take the no ball away from the on field umpire.
Football on the other hand...
With cricket there's a regular natural break to review a decision, unlike association football.
Plus most cricket reviews are on matters of fact, not matters of opinion with seems prevalent with VAR.
That decision just now was a matter of opinion. I think it was caught. However, I can just about understand why someone might not overturn a not out decision in that case.
The problem the other night was that everyone looked at the Willian foul and said penalty. And it wasn't overturned. The powers that be need to decide what is and what isn't a foul.
They do, as I for one didn't think it was a penalty - when a player unnaturally drags their leg to make contact with a defender, it is usually given but should not in my opinion, no more than sticking your leg out to the side to catch on a defender should be.
The difficulty is that I don't think attackers are obliged to step over the leg of a defender. I think they have every right to go down when defenders go diving in like that.
EDIT: And if you don't think it was a penalty, then had it been given, then you should be in favour of it being overturned (which I'm sure it wouldn't have been). What I'm getting at, is that the margin for referee's call should be much smaller than it is. We can all see what has happened (whereas that isn't necessarily the case with some calls in cricket).
Italy has been in trouble for a long time. The north south divide is almost unbridgeable, corruption is rife, organised crime is entrenched, there is zero respect for state institutions. The EU and immigration are but the latest scapegoats for endemic, deep-seated and seemingly unsolveable problems. Italy is as it is because of decisions Italians have taken. The same applies to all EU member states, of course - including the UK.
I think that was out. Remember, it's a two dimensional image of a three dimensional event.
I went to see Aggers and Boycott at the New Victoria Theatre in Woking on Friday night (they were very funny) and it was interesting to hear Agnew be quite sceptical about technology.
Personally I think it works okay in cricket. The only thing I would change is to take the no ball away from the on field umpire.
Football on the other hand...
With cricket there's a regular natural break to review a decision, unlike association football.
Plus most cricket reviews are on matters of fact, not matters of opinion with seems prevalent with VAR.
That decision just now was a matter of opinion. I think it was caught. However, I can just about understand why someone might not overturn a not out decision in that case.
The problem the other night was that everyone looked at the Willian foul and said penalty. And it wasn't overturned. The powers that be need to decide what is and what isn't a foul.
I remember when DRS was being trialled there were a few kinks/protocols that needed ironing out.
And then you have a genius like Terry Pratchett...
He was a genius in that he wrote the same four books over and over again; getting paid each time.
They’re not for everyone certainly. But I don’t see a huge similarity in his works - apart from discworld he also wrote some science fiction which I thought was brilliant. . I think undeniably they are very popular and the disc World Series cuts across genres in a way that most authors can’t or don’t.
I think that was out. Remember, it's a two dimensional image of a three dimensional event.
I went to see Aggers and Boycott at the New Victoria Theatre in Woking on Friday night (they were very funny) and it was interesting to hear Agnew be quite sceptical about technology.
Personally I think it works okay in cricket. The only thing I would change is to take the no ball away from the on field umpire.
Football on the other hand...
With cricket there's a regular natural break to review a decision, unlike association football.
Plus most cricket reviews are on matters of fact, not matters of opinion with seems prevalent with VAR.
That decision just now was a matter of opinion. I think it was caught. However, I can just about understand why someone might not overturn a not out decision in that case.
The problem the other night was that everyone looked at the Willian foul and said penalty. And it wasn't overturned. The powers that be need to decide what is and what isn't a foul.
I remember when DRS was being trialled there were a few kinks/protocols that needed ironing out.
Perhaps VAR will just be like that.
If I remember rightly, didn't DRS require a much higher threshold to overturn a decision? There may be logical reasons for doing something one way, but in practice, you need to do what makes most sense to the spectator.
I think that was out. Remember, it's a two dimensional image of a three dimensional event.
I went to see Aggers and Boycott at the New Victoria Theatre in Woking on Friday night (they were very funny) and it was interesting to hear Agnew be quite sceptical about technology.
Personally I think it works okay in cricket. The only thing I would change is to take the no ball away from the on field umpire.
Football on the other hand...
With cricket there's a regular natural break to review a decision, unlike association football.
Plus most cricket reviews are on matters of fact, not matters of opinion with seems prevalent with VAR.
That decision just now was a matter of opinion. I think it was caught. However, I can just about understand why someone might not overturn a not out decision in that case.
The problem the other night was that everyone looked at the Willian foul and said penalty. And it wasn't overturned. The powers that be need to decide what is and what isn't a foul.
I remember when DRS was being trialled there were a few kinks/protocols that needed ironing out.
Perhaps VAR will just be like that.
It will take a long time to get over that penalty for Chelsea for me.
I think that was out. Remember, it's a two dimensional image of a three dimensional event.
I went to see Aggers and Boycott at the New Victoria Theatre in Woking on Friday night (they were very funny) and it was interesting to hear Agnew be quite sceptical about technology.
Personally I think it works okay in cricket. The only thing I would change is to take the no ball away from the on field umpire.
Football on the other hand...
With cricket there's a regular natural break to review a decision, unlike association football.
Plus most cricket reviews are on matters of fact, not matters of opinion with seems prevalent with VAR.
That decision just now was a matter of opinion. I think it was caught. However, I can just about understand why someone might not overturn a not out decision in that case.
The problem the other night was that everyone looked at the Willian foul and said penalty. And it wasn't overturned. The powers that be need to decide what is and what isn't a foul.
I remember when DRS was being trialled there were a few kinks/protocols that needed ironing out.
Perhaps VAR will just be like that.
If I remember rightly, didn't DRS require a much higher threshold to overturn a decision? There may be logical reasons for doing something one way, but in practice, you need to do what makes most sense to the spectator.
Yup, a very much higher threshold.
I remember Daryl Harper not overturning a not out decision because he hadn't turned up the volume on his headphones
I think that was out. Remember, it's a two dimensional image of a three dimensional event.
I went to see Aggers and Boycott at the New Victoria Theatre in Woking on Friday night (they were very funny) and it was interesting to hear Agnew be quite sceptical about technology.
Personally I think it works okay in cricket. The only thing I would change is to take the no ball away from the on field umpire.
Football on the other hand...
With cricket there's a regular natural break to review a decision, unlike association football.
Plus most cricket reviews are on matters of fact, not matters of opinion with seems prevalent with VAR.
That decision just now was a matter of opinion. I think it was caught. However, I can just about understand why someone might not overturn a not out decision in that case.
The problem the other night was that everyone looked at the Willian foul and said penalty. And it wasn't overturned. The powers that be need to decide what is and what isn't a foul.
They do, as I for one didn't think it was a penalty - when a player unnaturally drags their leg to make contact with a defender, it is usually given but should not in my opinion, no more than sticking your leg out to the side to catch on a defender should be.
The difficulty is that I don't think attackers are obliged to step over the leg of a defender. I think they have every right to go down when defenders go diving in like that.
Personally I think there's a difference in not avoiding a thrust leg and a very unnatural dragging of a limb - if it involves a movement that makes no sense, like dragging your leg low for no reason, then that is little more akin to simulation than being tripped. I'll give another example - sometime you can see in replsy that someone has started going down just before contact, but there was then contact, and those are sometimes given, but should not be. Or like one of the diving yellows given against Chelsea last week - there was a touch on the shoulder, I'd have given a foul perhaps, but the player flopped to the ground ankle first (that is, they felt contact, and then clearly threw themselves to the ground almost as though they had been tripped, rather than the shoulder tug they should have reacted to).
Those are all matters of opinion, so in situations like that, referee's call seems reasonable - pundits, particularly former players, almost always justify things on the basis of 'well, there was contact', but its the type of contact, who initiates it (I think if you drag your leg deliberately you initiated it, not the defender), and the way the person goes down that can all contribute to a call.
Not fluent, and he can’t get through a whole interview in French.
I didn't know Johnson had a claim for fluency in French. I checked out an interview on Youtube. He has a good ear and can replicate French tonality in a convincing way. Fine for "how are you today?" conversations but he doesn't have the vocabulary to carry an argument.
I think that was out. Remember, it's a two dimensional image of a three dimensional event.
I went to see Aggers and Boycott at the New Victoria Theatre in Woking on Friday night (they were very funny) and it was interesting to hear Agnew be quite sceptical about technology.
Personally I think it works okay in cricket. The only thing I would change is to take the no ball away from the on field umpire.
Football on the other hand...
With cricket there's a regular natural break to review a decision, unlike association football.
Plus most cricket reviews are on matters of fact, not matters of opinion with seems prevalent with VAR.
That decision just now was a matter of opinion. I think it was caught. However, I can just about understand why someone might not overturn a not out decision in that case.
The problem the other night was that everyone looked at the Willian foul and said penalty. And it wasn't overturned. The powers that be need to decide what is and what isn't a foul.
I remember when DRS was being trialled there were a few kinks/protocols that needed ironing out.
Perhaps VAR will just be like that.
Probably - certainly some of the complaints, do not seem impossible to deal with.
Why not German ? Or Mandarin ? I don't really see why fluency in French ought to be a requirement for our PM - though that speech May tried to read in French the other day was truly excruciating to listen to.
@kle4 - The opinion is about whether it is a foul or not. We can all see what happened on the replay. That's why the law makers need to clarify what is and what isn't a foul.
Jeremy Corbyn is under huge pressure to shift party policy on Brexit as an exclusive poll for the Observer reveals a substantial majority of existing and potential Labour voters want him to back permanent membership of the EU’s single market and customs union.
Four times as many Labour supporters favour that option as oppose it. The survey by Opinium also finds that more than twice as many in this group want Corbyn to support a second referendum on the eventual Brexit deal as reject it.
That would require Labour to leave free movement permanently in place, a policy which would not help them win the Leave voting Tory marginals they need for a majority
King Cole, not my cup of tea, but e-sports are increasing in popularity, and it is an interesting idea. There would also be a natural shadowing of the main event, and if it acted as a gateway for younger people to get drawn into F1, with small cost (compared to the actual sport) it could be a hit.
Why not German ? Or Mandarin ? I don't really see why fluency in French ought to be a requirement for our PM - though that speech May tried to read in French the other day was truly excruciating to listen to.
Well, at least one other useful language would be good. Paddy Ashdown was... probably still is ... fluent in Mandarin
No-one discussed the importance of Penguin Awareness Day yesterday and it took my long-term if "Jezza falls under a bus" candidate,currently available at 13-2 best priced,Emily Thornberry,too remind us: More than a quarter of the world's penguins are British. It is our duty to safeguard their seas. #BackTheBlueBelt
Penguins are even better than huskies and us Brits love our penguins.
Looking forward to hearing the Test selectors explaining why they didn't pick Rashid....or Hales or Buttler.
Nobody will be holding their breath.
Rashid doesn't control the ball enough in Tests.
Hales has failed in test cricket.
Buttler doesn't play enough red ball cricket.
In 2017 Gary Ballance scored more first class hundreds than Buttler has in his entire career.
Agree about Hales, but Buttler is too outrageously talented not to be somewhere in the middle order. As for Rashid, I think he's been handled woefully at test level. Control can be learned.
Looking forward to hearing the Test selectors explaining why they didn't pick Rashid....or Hales or Buttler.
Nobody will be holding their breath.
Rashid doesn't control the ball enough in Tests.
Hales has failed in test cricket.
Buttler doesn't play enough red ball cricket.
In 2017 Gary Ballance scored more first class hundreds than Buttler has in his entire career.
Agree about Hales, but Buttler is too outrageously talented not to be somewhere in the middle order. As for Rashid, I think he's been handled woefully at test level. Control can be learned.
Think Hales deserves another go. There’s some sort of problem between Root and Rasid, isn’t there?
Macron says any bespoke deal for Britain should respect the single market and will not see full access to it for the UK without a budget contribution and respect for the 4 freedoms. Any deal for the City will depend on what the UK puts on the table. He also says he interprets the Brexit vote as a vote from the losers of globalisation and the middle and working classes and the old and there was not enough explanation of how to improve it. Perhaps the UK government was too free market without enough regulation, although Macron says he believes in the free market and market economy it needs regulation. He also wants more sovereignty, unity and democracy in the EU.
Macron is a class act. He undoubtedly believes Brexit is a big opportunity for France.
Why not German ? Or Mandarin ? I don't really see why fluency in French ought to be a requirement for our PM - though that speech May tried to read in French the other day was truly excruciating to listen to.
Well, at least one other useful language would be good. Paddy Ashdown was... probably still is ... fluent in Mandarin
I can't find any evidence of that. The former PM of Australia, Kevin Rudd, is genuinely fluent in Chinese with perfect comprehension and an ability to choose his expressions. Chinese is a tonal language and Rudd's tones are suspect, but that's normal for westerners.
Looking forward to hearing the Test selectors explaining why they didn't pick Rashid....or Hales or Buttler.
Nobody will be holding their breath.
Rashid doesn't control the ball enough in Tests.
Hales has failed in test cricket.
Buttler doesn't play enough red ball cricket.
In 2017 Gary Ballance scored more first class hundreds than Buttler has in his entire career.
Agree about Hales, but Buttler is too outrageously talented not to be somewhere in the middle order. As for Rashid, I think he's been handled woefully at test level. Control can be learned.
Rashid would have got far more runs and wickets than Moeen did in the Ashes. Incredible how Moeen is indulged in this team.
Looking forward to hearing the Test selectors explaining why they didn't pick Rashid....or Hales or Buttler.
Nobody will be holding their breath.
Rashid doesn't control the ball enough in Tests.
Hales has failed in test cricket.
Buttler doesn't play enough red ball cricket.
In 2017 Gary Ballance scored more first class hundreds than Buttler has in his entire career.
Agree about Hales, but Buttler is too outrageously talented not to be somewhere in the middle order. As for Rashid, I think he's been handled woefully at test level. Control can be learned.
Think Hales deserves another go. There’s some sort of problem between Root and Rasid, isn’t there?
Perhaps, but it's the job of those who lead the team to get the best players in there and ensure they give of their best. If you can't handle a Pietersen (for example) you shouldn't be captain, or coach.
Why not German ? Or Mandarin ? I don't really see why fluency in French ought to be a requirement for our PM - though that speech May tried to read in French the other day was truly excruciating to listen to.
Couldn't Blair speak French to quite a high level?
Why not German ? Or Mandarin ? I don't really see why fluency in French ought to be a requirement for our PM - though that speech May tried to read in French the other day was truly excruciating to listen to.
Couldn't Blair speak French to quite a high level?
Oui.
So could Ted Heath but with a very heavy accent.
Interesting fact, Officer Crabtree from 'Allo 'Allo and his French was inspired by Ted Heath.
If accurate, this reminds me of the Channel 4 debate around the Danish cartoons. They held an audience (I think) survey to see if they should show them. A majority wanted them shown. Channel 4 declined to do so anyway, because censorship/blasphemy 'laws' trump democracy and free speech.
Why not German ? Or Mandarin ? I don't really see why fluency in French ought to be a requirement for our PM - though that speech May tried to read in French the other day was truly excruciating to listen to.
Couldn't Blair speak French to quite a high level?
Oui.
So could Ted Heath but with a very heavy accent.
Interesting fact, Officer Crabtree from 'Allo 'Allo and his French was inspired by Ted Heath.
To be fair, Heath's English accent was quite strange, too.
Why not German ? Or Mandarin ? I don't really see why fluency in French ought to be a requirement for our PM - though that speech May tried to read in French the other day was truly excruciating to listen to.
Couldn't Blair speak French to quite a high level?
Oui.
So could Ted Heath but with a very heavy accent.
Interesting fact, Officer Crabtree from 'Allo 'Allo and his French was inspired by Ted Heath.
To be fair, Heath's English accent was quite strange, too.
I don't understand the obsession with the question of whether or not someone has changed their accent.
If it's okay for someone to change their appearance by, say, covering themselves in tattoos and piercings, by the same token it must also be okay for them to change their accent whenever and however they want, yes? If not, you're applying double standards to the question of whether someone is entitled to make changes to their own persona, physical or otherwise, whenever they feel like it.
No-one discussed the importance of Penguin Awareness Day yesterday and it took my long-term if "Jezza falls under a bus" candidate,currently available at 13-2 best priced,Emily Thornberry,too remind us: More than a quarter of the world's penguins are British. It is our duty to safeguard their seas. #BackTheBlueBelt
Penguins are even better than huskies and us Brits love our penguins.
A quarter of the world's penguins being British? Hmmmm....unless the stats were compiled in days of Empire. Falklands, South Georgia, Tristan da Cunha. British Overseas Territory. Maybe if we are given a designated bit of Antractica? That's it.
I have seen all but one of the world's species of penguins (New Zealand's Fiordland Penguin still missing, if you were wondering) - in South Africa, Ecuador (Galapagos), Argentina, (possibly also in Chilean waters), Australia, New Zealand, Antarctica. I've seen them on South Georgia. And Tristan da Cunha - that after a Brazilian bulk carrier slammed into Nightingale Island and spilt 1800 tonnes of bunker fuel over the local penguins. They were all being de-oiled in the Tristan da Cunha swimming pool that had been commandeered for the purpose.
And these British there didn't exactly compare to seeing a 17 acre rookery of Royal Penguins on Macquarie Island, Tasmania - the resident scientists apologised they couldn't show us the big colonies because of the weather.....
If accurate, this reminds me of the Channel 4 debate around the Danish cartoons. They held an audience (I think) survey to see if they should show them. A majority wanted them shown. Channel 4 declined to do so anyway, because censorship/blasphemy 'laws' trump democracy and free speech.
Why not German ? Or Mandarin ? I don't really see why fluency in French ought to be a requirement for our PM - though that speech May tried to read in French the other day was truly excruciating to listen to.
Couldn't Blair speak French to quite a high level?
Oui.
So could Ted Heath but with a very heavy accent.
Interesting fact, Officer Crabtree from 'Allo 'Allo and his French was inspired by Ted Heath.
To be fair, Heath's English accent was quite strange, too.
The only strange accent is the Geordie accent. I struggle to understand them.
Why not German ? Or Mandarin ? I don't really see why fluency in French ought to be a requirement for our PM - though that speech May tried to read in French the other day was truly excruciating to listen to.
Couldn't Blair speak French to quite a high level?
Oui.
So could Ted Heath but with a very heavy accent.
Interesting fact, Officer Crabtree from 'Allo 'Allo and his French was inspired by Ted Heath.
To be fair, Heath's English accent was quite strange, too.
The only strange accent is the Geordie accent. I struggle to understand them.
Why not German ? Or Mandarin ? I don't really see why fluency in French ought to be a requirement for our PM - though that speech May tried to read in French the other day was truly excruciating to listen to.
Couldn't Blair speak French to quite a high level?
Oui.
So could Ted Heath but with a very heavy accent.
Interesting fact, Officer Crabtree from 'Allo 'Allo and his French was inspired by Ted Heath.
To be fair, Heath's English accent was quite strange, too.
The only strange accent is the Geordie accent. I struggle to understand them.
If accurate, this reminds me of the Channel 4 debate around the Danish cartoons. They held an audience (I think) survey to see if they should show them. A majority wanted them shown. Channel 4 declined to do so anyway, because censorship/blasphemy 'laws' trump democracy and free speech.
If accurate, this reminds me of the Channel 4 debate around the Danish cartoons. They held an audience (I think) survey to see if they should show them. A majority wanted them shown. Channel 4 declined to do so anyway, because censorship/blasphemy 'laws' trump democracy and free speech.
Why not German ? Or Mandarin ? I don't really see why fluency in French ought to be a requirement for our PM - though that speech May tried to read in French the other day was truly excruciating to listen to.
Couldn't Blair speak French to quite a high level?
Oui.
So could Ted Heath but with a very heavy accent.
Interesting fact, Officer Crabtree from 'Allo 'Allo and his French was inspired by Ted Heath.
To be fair, Heath's English accent was quite strange, too.
I don't understand the obsession with the question of whether or not someone has changed their accent.
If it's okay for someone to change their appearance by, say, covering themselves in tattoos and piercings, by the same token it must also be okay for them to change their accent whenever and however they want, yes? If not, you're applying double standards to the question of whether someone is entitled to make changes to their own persona, physical or otherwise, whenever they feel like it.
I have no problem with that at all - I do it myself. It was the less than euphonious result, rather than the effort.
McDonnell says he regards Macron as articulate and a man of the centre left but too sympathetic to the market economy for him but he does like Macron's language on how neoliberalism has alienated many
Why not German ? Or Mandarin ? I don't really see why fluency in French ought to be a requirement for our PM - though that speech May tried to read in French the other day was truly excruciating to listen to.
Couldn't Blair speak French to quite a high level?
Oui.
So could Ted Heath but with a very heavy accent.
Interesting fact, Officer Crabtree from 'Allo 'Allo and his French was inspired by Ted Heath.
To be fair, Heath's English accent was quite strange, too.
I don't understand the obsession with the question of whether or not someone has changed their accent.
If it's okay for someone to change their appearance by, say, covering themselves in tattoos and piercings, by the same token it must also be okay for them to change their accent whenever and however they want, yes? If not, you're applying double standards to the question of whether someone is entitled to make changes to their own persona, physical or otherwise, whenever they feel like it.
Sounds reasonable to me. Of course people do change their accents, but would get judged for it (either by poshing it up or adopting something suggesting a more humble origin).
If accurate, this reminds me of the Channel 4 debate around the Danish cartoons. They held an audience (I think) survey to see if they should show them. A majority wanted them shown. Channel 4 declined to do so anyway, because censorship/blasphemy 'laws' trump democracy and free speech.
I didn't watch the interview, but I suspect Andrew Marr wasn't asking McDonnell for permission to replay his comments on McVey. They wouldn't replay them if he said "Yes". I am not going to defend hate speech, but it is a bit of "When did you stop beating your wife?" question. If he says "no" he has something to hide and if he says "yes", they won't play the remarks because they are too horrible.
If accurate, this reminds me of the Channel 4 debate around the Danish cartoons. They held an audience (I think) survey to see if they should show them. A majority wanted them shown. Channel 4 declined to do so anyway, because censorship/blasphemy 'laws' trump democracy and free speech.
None of which means anything of course. McDonnell doesn't care he said what he said, and how many who vote for him will care? Not many as most will already know about it. And how many will allow it, even if they do care, to trump why they planned to vote Labour in the first place?
Unless someone is one of those who literally believe only Tories are capable of nasty things, and only Labour people are nice, that he is capable of being nasty won't change anyone up. And in fact the sort of people that think only party x is good and only party y are bad, are also the type to excuse the bad behaviour of party x when it is directed at party y.
Why not German ? Or Mandarin ? I don't really see why fluency in French ought to be a requirement for our PM - though that speech May tried to read in French the other day was truly excruciating to listen to.
Couldn't Blair speak French to quite a high level?
Oui.
So could Ted Heath but with a very heavy accent.
Interesting fact, Officer Crabtree from 'Allo 'Allo and his French was inspired by Ted Heath.
To be fair, Heath's English accent was quite strange, too.
I don't understand the obsession with the question of whether or not someone has changed their accent.
If it's okay for someone to change their appearance by, say, covering themselves in tattoos and piercings, by the same token it must also be okay for them to change their accent whenever and however they want, yes? If not, you're applying double standards to the question of whether someone is entitled to make changes to their own persona, physical or otherwise, whenever they feel like it.
Yeah, it's not like people get any criticism or are judged for covering themselves in tattoos and piercings.
Of course everyone is entitled to do all of these things, just as everyone is entitled to have a view on them.
If accurate, this reminds me of the Channel 4 debate around the Danish cartoons. They held an audience (I think) survey to see if they should show them. A majority wanted them shown. Channel 4 declined to do so anyway, because censorship/blasphemy 'laws' trump democracy and free speech.
I didn't watch the interview, but I suspect Andrew Marr wasn't asking McDonnell for permission to replay his comments on McVey. They wouldn't replay them if he said "Yes". I am not going to defend hate speech, but it is a bit of "When did you stop beating your wife?" question. If he says "no" he has something to hide and if he says "yes", they won't play the remarks because they are too horrible.
Is it so bad to ask a 'when did you stop beating your wife' question of a wife beater ?
If accurate, this reminds me of the Channel 4 debate around the Danish cartoons. They held an audience (I think) survey to see if they should show them. A majority wanted them shown. Channel 4 declined to do so anyway, because censorship/blasphemy 'laws' trump democracy and free speech.
None of which means anything of course. McDonnell doesn't care he said what he said, and how many who vote for him will care? Not many as . And how many will allow it, even if they do care, to trump why they planned to vote Labour in the first place?
Unless someone is one of those who literally believe only Tories are capable of nasty things, and only Labour people are nice, that he is capable of being nasty won't change anyone up. And in fact the sort of people that think only party x is good and only party y are bad, are also the type to excuse the bad behaviour of party x when it is directed at party y.
"most will already know about it"
"most" have no idea who he is. If it gets a wider airing, how do you think these comments will play with women voters?
Comments
EDIT: or was he?
FURTHER EDIT: Yes! Wasn't incontrovertible evidence to overturn the umpires' decision.
King Cole, cheers, although it sounded like 2019 (or later) rather than this year, to me. But they do announce a lot of 'potential' races that never end up happening (cf second US race, Argentina, Denmark, Greece).
I went to see Aggers and Boycott at the New Victoria Theatre in Woking on Friday night (they were very funny) and it was interesting to hear Agnew be quite sceptical about technology.
Personally I think it works okay in cricket. The only thing I would change is to take the no ball away from the on field umpire.
Football on the other hand...
Four times as many Labour supporters favour that option as oppose it. The survey by Opinium also finds that more than twice as many in this group want Corbyn to support a second referendum on the eventual Brexit deal as reject it.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/jan/20/brexit-labour-majority-back-eu-single-market-membership?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other
Football will be able to work it out in time, the overreaction to the first uses of VAR were preposterous. Kinks will be worked out, and the really simple stuff that can very simply be checked to avoid what are common mistakes now, will be worth it.
Plus most cricket reviews are on matters of fact, not matters of opinion with seems prevalent with VAR.
https://twitter.com/NSoames/status/955012197339533312
The problem the other night was that everyone looked at the Willian foul and said penalty. And it wasn't overturned. The powers that be need to decide what is and what isn't a foul.
Time for me to be Prime Minister?
Clegg is fluent in four other European languages IIRC.
It would be a surprise.
EDIT: And if you don't think it was a penalty, then had it been given, then you should be in favour of it being overturned (which I'm sure it wouldn't have been). What I'm getting at, is that the margin for referee's call should be much smaller than it is. We can all see what has happened (whereas that isn't necessarily the case with some calls in cricket).
Perhaps VAR will just be like that.
.
I think undeniably they are very popular and the disc World Series cuts across genres in a way that most authors can’t or don’t.
I remember Daryl Harper not overturning a not out decision because he hadn't turned up the volume on his headphones
Australia 3.8.
Those are all matters of opinion, so in situations like that, referee's call seems reasonable - pundits, particularly former players, almost always justify things on the basis of 'well, there was contact', but its the type of contact, who initiates it (I think if you drag your leg deliberately you initiated it, not the defender), and the way the person goes down that can all contribute to a call.
I don't really see why fluency in French ought to be a requirement for our PM - though that speech May tried to read in French the other day was truly excruciating to listen to.
McDonnell refuses to back down for his McVey death wishes on Marr. Nobody will care.
Nobody will be holding their breath.
Hales has failed in test cricket.
Buttler doesn't play enough red ball cricket.
In 2017 Gary Ballance scored more first class hundreds than Buttler has in his entire career.
Thanks for the tip on England last night BTW
Aus 4.4 to get the runs, despite being ahead on both runs and wickets compared to England’s innings.
More than a quarter of the world's penguins are British.
It is our duty to safeguard their seas.
#BackTheBlueBelt
Penguins are even better than huskies and us Brits love our penguins.
As for Rashid, I think he's been handled woefully at test level. Control can be learned.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bro4mkb_VKc
Rashid has 13 caps - not a single one in England.
If you can't handle a Pietersen (for example) you shouldn't be captain, or coach.
So could Ted Heath but with a very heavy accent.
Interesting fact, Officer Crabtree from 'Allo 'Allo and his French was inspired by Ted Heath.
https://twitter.com/DPJHodges/status/955017014376058880
If it's okay for someone to change their appearance by, say, covering themselves in tattoos and piercings, by the same token it must also be okay for them to change their accent whenever and however they want, yes? If not, you're applying double standards to the question of whether someone is entitled to make changes to their own persona, physical or otherwise, whenever they feel like it.
Told him if England lose this I'll eat pineapple pizza tonight.
I have seen all but one of the world's species of penguins (New Zealand's Fiordland Penguin still missing, if you were wondering) - in South Africa, Ecuador (Galapagos), Argentina, (possibly also in Chilean waters), Australia, New Zealand, Antarctica. I've seen them on South Georgia. And Tristan da Cunha - that after a Brazilian bulk carrier slammed into Nightingale Island and spilt 1800 tonnes of bunker fuel over the local penguins. They were all being de-oiled in the Tristan da Cunha swimming pool that had been commandeered for the purpose.
And these British there didn't exactly compare to seeing a 17 acre rookery of Royal Penguins on Macquarie Island, Tasmania - the resident scientists apologised they couldn't show us the big colonies because of the weather.....
Except, of course, it makes McDonnell look bad as it makes it looks like he has something to hide. It could also prompt a Streisand effect.
Andrew Neil would have.
But come on England!
It was the less than euphonious result, rather than the effort.
Unless someone is one of those who literally believe only Tories are capable of nasty things, and only Labour people are nice, that he is capable of being nasty won't change anyone up. And in fact the sort of people that think only party x is good and only party y are bad, are also the type to excuse the bad behaviour of party x when it is directed at party y.
Of course everyone is entitled to do all of these things, just as everyone is entitled to have a view on them.
"most" have no idea who he is. If it gets a wider airing, how do you think these comments will play with women voters?
a) badly?
b) very badly?
c) you want me to vote for HIM?