Thanks for the header piece, Mike, and for calling out Betfair so uneqivocally.
I don't have a huge amount of skin in this game. The main irritation is having funds tied up unnecessarily. As a lifelong punter and member of a family involved in betting and bookmaking for generations I'm appalled by what Betfair are doing here. They have quite simply changed the rules - not mid-event, but in fact after the result was known. This is unprecedented in my experience.
I'm maxed out so I can't take advantage of the absurd prices still available. I'd consider borrowing BUT if Betfair can change the rules once, they can do so again. Who knows what they will come up with next? Who knows when they will settle?
I guess it will be Dec 14th, although that date is no more logical than Christmas, New Years Day or Pancake Tuesday. I guess too that the Electoral College will not bowl them a googly by perversely voting for Trump.
They'll probably get away with it. The lesson for punters is not to trust a capricious market maker. I certainly won't be trusting them with my money again.
If the majority of people dying with Covid-19 are over 80 and have existing health conditions, we need to know about it. Desmond Swayne was right IMO in saying what he said today in the House of Commons.
We already do know that.
It's key to pretend not to know things, or deliberately not find things out, so you can appear to be asking questions rather than simply advocating a position.
Oh gods, this means that idiot minister is more in tune with the public than me.
Though I suppose there's a difference between perhaps they should, versus the idea it should be required.
My eldest daughter thought it was completely true - so I gave her some hints and she is off reading real history now.
If you use real names etc, the "fictional" disclaimer should be in large type.
Pearl Harbor U-571 Braveheart
Anything by Philippa Gregory
What about Hilary Mantel? The way people banged on about it I'd assumed Wolf Hall would be a tremendous read, but found it rather dull and lacking in character compared to others in the genre, so perhaps too much accuracy was the problem?
I've enjoyed plenty of Conn Iggulden, but he doesn't even try for verisimilitude, and has now literally started writing fantasy fiction (really weirdly structured ones, too).
Phenomenal batting by England, that was a pleasure to watch.
Surprised Malan took a single there at the end to finish 99 Not Out. If I was him with 15 balls remaining I'd have been tempted to turn down the single and swing for the boundary next ball.
Credit to him that he didn't. Particularly in 20/20, the way to win consistently is to ensure every decision, however small and at whatever point, is made in the interests of the team rather than the player's own stats.
I get that but with 15 balls to go? How often do you get an opportunity for a T20 International century?
99* is a decent score. 103* goes into the record books. Needing a single off 15 balls he could have taken until the end of the over and still had two overs spare.
Not 100% certain of the rules here, but I think running two gets him the ton. I agree - bizarre stuff from Malan. My sense is he simply miscalculated.
Phenomenal batting by England, that was a pleasure to watch.
Surprised Malan took a single there at the end to finish 99 Not Out. If I was him with 15 balls remaining I'd have been tempted to turn down the single and swing for the boundary next ball.
Credit to him that he didn't. Particularly in 20/20, the way to win consistently is to ensure every decision, however small and at whatever point, is made in the interests of the team rather than the player's own stats.
I get that but with 15 balls to go? How often do you get an opportunity for a T20 International century?
99* is a decent score. 103* goes into the record books. Needing a single off 15 balls he could have taken until the end of the over and still had two overs spare.
Not 100% certain of the rules here, but I think running two gets him the ton. I agree - bizarre stuff from Malan. My sense is he simply miscalculated.
Seems likely, but he can now use it to argue he was being mature and selfless.
Christ, after absolutely filleting the Corp lawyer and the DOJ concurring lawyer as a 9-0nblock the Supreme Court justices have now moved onto the slaves' lawyer and are basically all going "Slavery, is it really that bad?".
Oh gods, this means that idiot minister is more in tune with the public than me.
Though I suppose there's a difference between perhaps they should, versus the idea it should be required.
My eldest daughter thought it was completely true - so I gave her some hints and she is off reading real history now.
If you use real names etc, the "fictional" disclaimer should be in large type.
Pearl Harbor U-571 Braveheart
Anything by Philippa Gregory
What about Hilary Mantel? The way people banged on about it I'd assumed Wolf Hall would be a tremendous read, but found it rather dull and lacking in character compared to others in the genre, so perhaps too much accuracy was the problem?
I've enjoyed plenty of Conn Iggulden, but he doesn't even try for verisimilitude, and has now literally started writing fantasy fiction (really weirdly structured ones, too).
Wolf Hall is simply partisan on the side of Cromwell. It is interesting to read - as another take on what happened.
Bit like reading "Ceasar - a sketch" by James Anthony Foude.
Both aren't the truth, I would say... but interesting, nonetheless.
Oh gods, this means that idiot minister is more in tune with the public than me.
Though I suppose there's a difference between perhaps they should, versus the idea it should be required.
My eldest daughter thought it was completely true - so I gave her some hints and she is off reading real history now.
If you use real names etc, the "fictional" disclaimer should be in large type.
I am not sure how it qualifies as fiction. All history consists of taking a factual framework and interpolating to fill the gaps. There is more fact and less interpolation here than in a bona fide history of pretty much any previous monarch you can think of. You wouldn't get away for one millisecond in a libel trial with a claim that your play was about a fictional character who spookily shared the name, address, job and relations as the plaintiff.
Afriyie, Adam Ahmad Khan, Imran Baker, Mr Steve Brady, Sir Graham Bridgen, Andrew Bristow, Paul Chope, Sir Christopher Clark, Greg Daly, James Davies, Philip Davis, Mr David Djanogly, Mr Jonathan Doyle-Price, Jackie Drax, Richard Duncan Smith, Sir Iain Francois, Mr Mark Fysh, Mr Marcus Gillan, Dame Cheryl Green, Chris Green, Damian Griffiths, Kate Harper, Mr Mark Hollobone, Mr Philip Jones, Mr David Knight, Julian Largan, Robert Latham, Mrs Pauline Loder, Chris Loughton, Tim Mackinlay, Craig Mangnall, Anthony McCartney, Karl McPartland, Stephen McVey, Esther Merriman, Huw Moore, Robbie Morris, Anne Marie Neill, Sir Robert Pawsey, Mark Redwood, John Robinson, Mary Rosindell, Andrew Smith, Henry Spencer, Dr Ben Swayne, Sir Desmond Syms, Sir Robert Tracey, Craig Tugendhat, Tom Vickers, Matt Wakeford, Christian Walker, Sir Charles Wallis, Dr Jamie Warburton, David Wragg, Mr William Wright, Jeremy
Lewis, Julian
Begum, Apsana Burgon, Richard Foy, Mary Kelly Gwynne, Andrew Hill, Mike Jones, Mr Kevan Lewell-Buck, Mrs Emma Mearns, Ian Morris, Grahame Osborne, Kate Ribeiro-Addy, Bell Spellar, John Stringer, Graham Sultana, Zarah Twigg, Derek
Oh gods, this means that idiot minister is more in tune with the public than me.
Though I suppose there's a difference between perhaps they should, versus the idea it should be required.
My eldest daughter thought it was completely true - so I gave her some hints and she is off reading real history now.
If you use real names etc, the "fictional" disclaimer should be in large type.
Pearl Harbor U-571 Braveheart
Anything by Philippa Gregory
What about Hilary Mantel? The way people banged on about it I'd assumed Wolf Hall would be a tremendous read, but found it rather dull and lacking in character compared to others in the genre, so perhaps too much accuracy was the problem?
I've enjoyed plenty of Conn Iggulden, but he doesn't even try for verisimilitude, and has now literally started writing fantasy fiction (really weirdly structured ones, too).
Phenomenal batting by England, that was a pleasure to watch.
Surprised Malan took a single there at the end to finish 99 Not Out. If I was him with 15 balls remaining I'd have been tempted to turn down the single and swing for the boundary next ball.
Credit to him that he didn't. Particularly in 20/20, the way to win consistently is to ensure every decision, however small and at whatever point, is made in the interests of the team rather than the player's own stats.
I get that but with 15 balls to go? How often do you get an opportunity for a T20 International century?
99* is a decent score. 103* goes into the record books. Needing a single off 15 balls he could have taken until the end of the over and still had two overs spare.
Not 100% certain of the rules here, but I think running two gets him the ton. I agree - bizarre stuff from Malan. My sense is he simply miscalculated.
Seems likely, but he can now use it to argue he was being mature and selfless.
Which surely nobody will be silly enough to believe? I mean what international cricketer would do himself out of a near-certain ton (vs an absolutely certain 98) when the result of the match is in no doubt?
Oh gods, this means that idiot minister is more in tune with the public than me.
Though I suppose there's a difference between perhaps they should, versus the idea it should be required.
My eldest daughter thought it was completely true - so I gave her some hints and she is off reading real history now.
If you use real names etc, the "fictional" disclaimer should be in large type.
I am not sure how it qualifies as fiction. All history consists of taking a factual framework and interpolating to fill the gaps.
That is not quite how it works. It consists of considering various hypotheses to fill the gaps, and arguing on the basis of the available evidence which one is the most likely.
Not deliberately making shit up to be dramatic or controversial.
Oh gods, this means that idiot minister is more in tune with the public than me.
Though I suppose there's a difference between perhaps they should, versus the idea it should be required.
My eldest daughter thought it was completely true - so I gave her some hints and she is off reading real history now.
If you use real names etc, the "fictional" disclaimer should be in large type.
I am not sure how it qualifies as fiction. All history consists of taking a factual framework and interpolating to fill the gaps. There is more fact and less interpolation here than in a bona fide history of pretty much any previous monarch you can think of. You wouldn't get away for one millisecond in a libel trial with a claim that your play was about a fictional character who spookily shared the name, address, job and relations as the plaintiff.
Hmmm - it certainly isn't a documentary. The people who wrote The Crown are quite clear that they modified events /made them up for the need of the story. There is something in just about every episode that simply isn't what happened, as a result.
For all that something had to be passed tonight, and so allowing it to pass was the right thing to do...
1 The government can't keep its "the 2019 landslide means you can't touch us until 2024" act going after this- can they? (Seriously- allowing a vote on regulations five hours before they come into force is just a dick move).
2 TMexPm may have a note from Matron (who knows?), but there is something delicious about seeing her give her successor exactly as much support from the backbenches as he gave her... I think her revenge could definitely be a substantial enough meal to qualify for a drink.
2 TMexPm may have a note from Matron (who knows?), but there is something delicious about seeing her give her successor exactly as much support from the backbenches as he gave her... I think her revenge could definitely be a substantial enough meal to qualify for a drink.
And of course there’s nothing he can do about that until 2024 either...
Oh gods, this means that idiot minister is more in tune with the public than me.
Though I suppose there's a difference between perhaps they should, versus the idea it should be required.
My eldest daughter thought it was completely true - so I gave her some hints and she is off reading real history now.
If you use real names etc, the "fictional" disclaimer should be in large type.
I am not sure how it qualifies as fiction. All history consists of taking a factual framework and interpolating to fill the gaps.
That is not quite how it works. It consists of considering various hypotheses to fill the gaps, and arguing on the basis of the available evidence which one is the most likely.
Not deliberately making shit up to be dramatic or controversial.
Exactly. The other day I was reading a book on Col. Pride of Prides Purge. There is a lot that isn't know about his life, so the author carefully pointed out in a number of places that he didn't know the facts, but here were his personal theories.
If the majority of people dying with Covid-19 are over 80 and have existing health conditions, we need to know about it. Desmond Swayne was right IMO in saying what he said today in the House of Commons.
Fractionally over 50% of victims are 80+, and of those almost all have other health conditions. This is also roughly true of pretty much all deaths caused by any kind of disease, so what is your point?
There was also the study that refuted the about-to-drop-dead-in-the-next-10-minutes thing - the average person killed by COVID had a number of years of life to look forward to....
Which hardly needs a study, you just have to understand that it can be true and not really paradoxical both that life expectancy is 80 and that life expectancy at 80 is 88 or thereabouts.
Oh gods, this means that idiot minister is more in tune with the public than me.
Though I suppose there's a difference between perhaps they should, versus the idea it should be required.
My eldest daughter thought it was completely true - so I gave her some hints and she is off reading real history now.
If you use real names etc, the "fictional" disclaimer should be in large type.
Pearl Harbor U-571 Braveheart
Anything by Philippa Gregory
What about Hilary Mantel? The way people banged on about it I'd assumed Wolf Hall would be a tremendous read, but found it rather dull and lacking in character compared to others in the genre, so perhaps too much accuracy was the problem?
I've enjoyed plenty of Conn Iggulden, but he doesn't even try for verisimilitude, and has now literally started writing fantasy fiction (really weirdly structured ones, too).
The Mantel trilogy is seriously overrated: implausible as well as dull. Pat Barker’s Regeneration trilogy, on the other hand, is a thrilling mixture of history and fiction. It is a an epic treatment of the First World War that is also a profound exploration of masculinity and violence.
Rumour has it there's some cricketing nations in the Southern Hemisphere.
No sane person would play cricket in the Australian summer, so that can’t be it.
Cricket should be banned outside June, July and August.
I'm not the world's biggest cricket fan, although I find it entertaining in plenty different circumstances, but I always like the Boxing Day test.
It's on here late at night when all you are really doing is recovering from eating too much on Christmas day, the weather over here is shite but over there it's bright and sunny...I always find it a good sort of background thing on a Christmas holiday period.
When I was young we had the testcard for that. Or the potters wheel. Or that documentary they kept showing about some long pipeline.
Oh gods, this means that idiot minister is more in tune with the public than me.
Though I suppose there's a difference between perhaps they should, versus the idea it should be required.
My eldest daughter thought it was completely true - so I gave her some hints and she is off reading real history now.
If you use real names etc, the "fictional" disclaimer should be in large type.
I am not sure how it qualifies as fiction. All history consists of taking a factual framework and interpolating to fill the gaps. There is more fact and less interpolation here than in a bona fide history of pretty much any previous monarch you can think of. You wouldn't get away for one millisecond in a libel trial with a claim that your play was about a fictional character who spookily shared the name, address, job and relations as the plaintiff.
Hmmm - it certainly isn't a documentary. The people who wrote The Crown are quite clear that they modified events /made them up for the need of the story. There is something in just about every episode that simply isn't what happened, as a result.
OK. My position would be stronger if I had seen a single second of it. But my point about defamation law stands (I think).
2 TMexPm may have a note from Matron (who knows?), but there is something delicious about seeing her give her successor exactly as much support from the backbenches as he gave her... I think her revenge could definitely be a substantial enough meal to qualify for a drink.
And of course there’s nothing he can do about that until 2024 either...
I am as far from a classical scholar as you can get. I'm a physicist who went to a comprehensive in the late 1980s.
But my understanding is that a lot of classical literature boils down to: 1. Mortal has character flaw. 2. Gods come up with a punishment that exquisitely exploits said character flaw. 3. Punishment lasts forever.
Boris ought to be able to work out what's coming his way, shouldn't he?
Oh gods, this means that idiot minister is more in tune with the public than me.
Though I suppose there's a difference between perhaps they should, versus the idea it should be required.
My eldest daughter thought it was completely true - so I gave her some hints and she is off reading real history now.
If you use real names etc, the "fictional" disclaimer should be in large type.
Pearl Harbor U-571 Braveheart
Anything by Philippa Gregory
What about Hilary Mantel? The way people banged on about it I'd assumed Wolf Hall would be a tremendous read, but found it rather dull and lacking in character compared to others in the genre, so perhaps too much accuracy was the problem?
I've enjoyed plenty of Conn Iggulden, but he doesn't even try for verisimilitude, and has now literally started writing fantasy fiction (really weirdly structured ones, too).
The Mantel trilogy is seriously overrated: implausible as well as dull. Pat Barker’s Regeneration trilogy, on the other hand, is a thrilling mixture of history and fiction. It is a an epic treatment of the First World War that is also a profound exploration of masculinity and violence.
What do you find implausible btw? I enjoyed wolf hall, aside of the difficulty in following who was speaking or thinking, something she tried to fix in the 2nd book and made worse. I know she has made Cromwell th3 hero, and it’s possible to disagree with that, but so much of what we think we know of historical figures is seen through the propaganda prism of those who wrote the history. Richard III is a case in point. He was certainly character assassinated by the tudors, despite much evidence that he was brave, and well liked by many.
Oh gods, this means that idiot minister is more in tune with the public than me.
Though I suppose there's a difference between perhaps they should, versus the idea it should be required.
My eldest daughter thought it was completely true - so I gave her some hints and she is off reading real history now.
If you use real names etc, the "fictional" disclaimer should be in large type.
If you’re making a massive-budget show about the lives of living individuals who uniquely won’t answer back, it’s on you to say that the storylines are totally fictitious.
How this works alongside the deal the same media company did with the black sheep of the family, is of course incidental.
Oh gods, this means that idiot minister is more in tune with the public than me.
Though I suppose there's a difference between perhaps they should, versus the idea it should be required.
My eldest daughter thought it was completely true - so I gave her some hints and she is off reading real history now.
If you use real names etc, the "fictional" disclaimer should be in large type.
I am not sure how it qualifies as fiction. All history consists of taking a factual framework and interpolating to fill the gaps. There is more fact and less interpolation here than in a bona fide history of pretty much any previous monarch you can think of. You wouldn't get away for one millisecond in a libel trial with a claim that your play was about a fictional character who spookily shared the name, address, job and relations as the plaintiff.
Hmmm - it certainly isn't a documentary. The people who wrote The Crown are quite clear that they modified events /made them up for the need of the story. There is something in just about every episode that simply isn't what happened, as a result.
OK. My position would be stronger if I had seen a single second of it. But my point about defamation law stands (I think).
I got forced to sit through it by the children. As history it ranks with the Tudors, I think.
Ironically the best defence for The Crown against being sued is that is has obvious fictional bits in it.
If the majority of people dying with Covid-19 are over 80 and have existing health conditions, we need to know about it. Desmond Swayne was right IMO in saying what he said today in the House of Commons.
Fractionally over 50% of victims are 80+, and of those almost all have other health conditions. This is also roughly true of pretty much all deaths caused by any kind of disease, so what is your point?
There was also the study that refuted the about-to-drop-dead-in-the-next-10-minutes thing - the average person killed by COVID had a number of years of life to look forward to....
Which hardly needs a study, you just have to understand that it can be true and not really paradoxical both that life expectancy is 80 and that life expectancy at 80 is 88 or thereabouts.
Yes, but unfortunately, many of the covid deniers don’t have a grasp on either life expectancy or averages (or have managed to let their desire for it not to be true overwhelm their faculties). I know it escaped Toby himself in one of his first article on the pandemic, and I wouldn’t be surprised if he never actually understood what he got so wrong.
Oh gods, this means that idiot minister is more in tune with the public than me.
Though I suppose there's a difference between perhaps they should, versus the idea it should be required.
My eldest daughter thought it was completely true - so I gave her some hints and she is off reading real history now.
If you use real names etc, the "fictional" disclaimer should be in large type.
Pearl Harbor U-571 Braveheart
Anything by Philippa Gregory
What about Hilary Mantel? The way people banged on about it I'd assumed Wolf Hall would be a tremendous read, but found it rather dull and lacking in character compared to others in the genre, so perhaps too much accuracy was the problem?
I've enjoyed plenty of Conn Iggulden, but he doesn't even try for verisimilitude, and has now literally started writing fantasy fiction (really weirdly structured ones, too).
The Mantel trilogy is seriously overrated: implausible as well as dull. Pat Barker’s Regeneration trilogy, on the other hand, is a thrilling mixture of history and fiction. It is a an epic treatment of the First World War that is also a profound exploration of masculinity and violence.
What do you find implausible btw? I enjoyed wolf hall, aside of the difficulty in following who was speaking or thinking, something she tried to fix in the 2nd book and made worse. I know she has made Cromwell th3 hero, and it’s possible to disagree with that, but so much of what we think we know of historical figures is seen through the propaganda prism of those who wrote the history. Richard III is a case in point. He was certainly character assassinated by the tudors, despite much evidence that he was brave, and well liked by many.
I think the imparting of late twentieth/ early twenty-first century attitudes to historical characters can just about work for a character like Rivers in the Barker trilogy (as he was a pioneer of psychiatric therapy) I just can’t buy it when applied to the sixteenth-century.
Britain is expected to become the first western country to authorise a coronavirus vaccine, raising the prospect of immunisations beginning weeks ahead of the rest of Europe.
The UK medicines regulator is set to license the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine for emergency use within days, and possibly as soon as Wednesday. Britain has ordered 40m doses, of which 10m are expected to be available this year.
Oh gods, this means that idiot minister is more in tune with the public than me.
Though I suppose there's a difference between perhaps they should, versus the idea it should be required.
My eldest daughter thought it was completely true - so I gave her some hints and she is off reading real history now.
If you use real names etc, the "fictional" disclaimer should be in large type.
I am not sure how it qualifies as fiction. All history consists of taking a factual framework and interpolating to fill the gaps.
That is not quite how it works. It consists of considering various hypotheses to fill the gaps, and arguing on the basis of the available evidence which one is the most likely.
Not deliberately making shit up to be dramatic or controversial.
But popular history does the hypothesis selection behind the scenes, and only presents the winner, and still counts as history.
Found it interesting that the 'Chinese fail to apologise for offensive tweet' headline was front and centre on the BBC News this afternoon. I don't remember the original Australian incident the tweet referred to being given such high profile coverage.
At any rate, expecting to shame the Chinese Communist Party into apologising for an offensive tweet seems naïve in the extreme!
The revelations about the Australian special forces got front page coverage - and will get more in due course. The tweet caused such offence because if the faked up image attached to it. Would be tame stuff in (say) Trumpworld, but not expected of anyone else’s foreign minister.
I think there’s an element of displacement activity on both sides, perhaps.
Yeah, I do agree actually. The fact that a totalitarian regime is up to this type of thing doesn't surprise me me, but the Western world shouldn't be letting it go uncommented on.
The BBC headline which seemed to be framing it in the same way as if it was a celeb tweeting something vaguely sexist/racist seemed slightly absurd though. They went to the trouble of faking an image, of course they're not going to apologise!
The Football Association has announced a radical post-Brexit shake-up that will mean Premier League and EFL clubs cannot sign foreign players until they are 18, with all transfers from European Union nations set to be subject to work permits that will be allocated using a points-based system in a radical shake-up.
2 TMexPm may have a note from Matron (who knows?), but there is something delicious about seeing her give her successor exactly as much support from the backbenches as he gave her... I think her revenge could definitely be a substantial enough meal to qualify for a drink.
And of course there’s nothing he can do about that until 2024 either...
I am as far from a classical scholar as you can get. I'm a physicist who went to a comprehensive in the late 1980s.
But my understanding is that a lot of classical literature boils down to: 1. Mortal has character flaw. 2. Gods come up with a punishment that exquisitely exploits said character flaw. 3. Punishment lasts forever.
Boris ought to be able to work out what's coming his way, shouldn't he?
1. Infidelity 2. Children 3. More and more children.
Oh gods, this means that idiot minister is more in tune with the public than me.
Though I suppose there's a difference between perhaps they should, versus the idea it should be required.
My eldest daughter thought it was completely true - so I gave her some hints and she is off reading real history now.
If you use real names etc, the "fictional" disclaimer should be in large type.
I am not sure how it qualifies as fiction. All history consists of taking a factual framework and interpolating to fill the gaps. There is more fact and less interpolation here than in a bona fide history of pretty much any previous monarch you can think of. You wouldn't get away for one millisecond in a libel trial with a claim that your play was about a fictional character who spookily shared the name, address, job and relations as the plaintiff.
Hmmm - it certainly isn't a documentary. The people who wrote The Crown are quite clear that they modified events /made them up for the need of the story. There is something in just about every episode that simply isn't what happened, as a result.
OK. My position would be stronger if I had seen a single second of it. But my point about defamation law stands (I think).
I got forced to sit through it by the children. As history it ranks with the Tudors, I think.
Ironically the best defence for The Crown against being sued is that is has obvious fictional bits in it.
Alternatively we can just agree that Mrs T really did try to get HMQ to suspend Parliament so that she could stay on indefinitely as PM, and add it to her list of demerits.
We are left wondering what it was about more contemporary events that made the notion that a British PM might ever try to suspend Parliament for personal political advantage pop into their heads?
Found it interesting that the 'Chinese fail to apologise for offensive tweet' headline was front and centre on the BBC News this afternoon. I don't remember the original Australian incident the tweet referred to being given such high profile coverage.
At any rate, expecting to shame the Chinese Communist Party into apologising for an offensive tweet seems naïve in the extreme!
The revelations about the Australian special forces got front page coverage - and will get more in due course. The tweet caused such offence because if the faked up image attached to it. Would be tame stuff in (say) Trumpworld, but not expected of anyone else’s foreign minister.
I think there’s an element of displacement activity on both sides, perhaps.
Yeah, I do agree actually. The fact that a totalitarian regime is up to this type of thing doesn't surprise me me, but the Western world shouldn't be letting it go uncommented on.
The BBC headline which seemed to be framing it in the same way as if it was a celeb tweeting something vaguely sexist/racist seemed slightly absurd though. They went to the trouble of faking an image, of course they're not going to apologise!
That idea was probably only above charging *people* 24 quid to travel in the overhead lockers...
I'm surprised EasyJet have gone down this route - for me, one of their key selling points is they're less money-grabbing than Ryanair with this type of thing. Race to the bottom I guess.
I kind of understand, given the amount of faff that seems to happen on every flight nowadays with everyone trying to fit their wheely-suitcase into the bins, and inevitably the stewards having to step in and rearrange everything. Must take up a disproportionate amount of time too, which I guess inevitably costs money.
As an aside, does anyone else find the Mail's use of lines like 'EasyJet customers have been left FUMING' tiresome. Which customers exactly? They are aware they can vote with their feet right, other airlines are availiable...
The Football Association has announced a radical post-Brexit shake-up that will mean Premier League and EFL clubs cannot sign foreign players until they are 18, with all transfers from European Union nations set to be subject to work permits that will be allocated using a points-based system in a radical shake-up.
So a week ago he says it looks like deaths have stabilised when the peak death figure was 34. Today he says it looks like it's they've levelled off despite the peak day being 35% higher.
Who wants to bet deaths will be stabilising (possibly falling) at an even higher figure next week?
That idea was probably only above charging *people* 24 quid to travel in the overhead lockers...
I'm surprised EasyJet have gone down this route - for me, one of their key selling points is they're less money-grabbing than Ryanair with this type of thing. Race to the bottom I guess.
I kind of understand, given the amount of faff that seems to happen on every flight nowadays with everyone trying to fit their wheely-suitcase into the bins, and inevitably the stewards having to step in and rearrange everything. Must take up a disproportionate amount of time too, which I guess inevitably costs money.
As an aside, does anyone else find the Mail's use of lines like 'EasyJet customers have been left FUMING' tiresome. Which customers exactly? They are aware they can vote with their feet right, other airlines are availiable...
I’m more surprised to learn they have any customers at the moment.
Oh gods, this means that idiot minister is more in tune with the public than me.
Though I suppose there's a difference between perhaps they should, versus the idea it should be required.
My eldest daughter thought it was completely true - so I gave her some hints and she is off reading real history now.
If you use real names etc, the "fictional" disclaimer should be in large type.
I am not sure how it qualifies as fiction. All history consists of taking a factual framework and interpolating to fill the gaps. There is more fact and less interpolation here than in a bona fide history of pretty much any previous monarch you can think of. You wouldn't get away for one millisecond in a libel trial with a claim that your play was about a fictional character who spookily shared the name, address, job and relations as the plaintiff.
Hmmm - it certainly isn't a documentary. The people who wrote The Crown are quite clear that they modified events /made them up for the need of the story. There is something in just about every episode that simply isn't what happened, as a result.
OK. My position would be stronger if I had seen a single second of it. But my point about defamation law stands (I think).
I got forced to sit through it by the children. As history it ranks with the Tudors, I think.
Ironically the best defence for The Crown against being sued is that is has obvious fictional bits in it.
Alternatively we can just agree that Mrs T really did try to get HMQ to suspend Parliament so that she could stay on indefinitely as PM, and add it to her list of demerits.
We are left wondering what it was about more contemporary events that made the notion that a British PM might ever try to suspend Parliament for personal political advantage pop into their heads?
Pms have played games with Parliamentary sessions since PMs were invented.
So the justification for making stuff up and presenting it as fact is current events?
Ok then. So we have an upcoming biopic of Atlee, including him making up fake intelligence and lying to parliament to get troops committed to Korea. Because later events....
Top tip: To avoid your Scotch Egg rolling around the plate, simply place it in the middle of a pineapple ring.
Some of us just cut it in half and place each half with the plane of section downwards.
But then the yolk would fall out!
A half sphere face up isn’t going to roll around, so why turn it face down?
Technically it does, but it depends how much of a displacing force you apply (ie there is a marked point of discontinuity in the righting moment/displacement angle plot). It's only small forces which allow it to cycle back through damped oscillations, the friction of the breadcrumbs acting as a damper.
Oh gods, this means that idiot minister is more in tune with the public than me.
Though I suppose there's a difference between perhaps they should, versus the idea it should be required.
My eldest daughter thought it was completely true - so I gave her some hints and she is off reading real history now.
If you use real names etc, the "fictional" disclaimer should be in large type.
Pearl Harbor U-571 Braveheart
Anything by Philippa Gregory
What about Hilary Mantel? The way people banged on about it I'd assumed Wolf Hall would be a tremendous read, but found it rather dull and lacking in character compared to others in the genre, so perhaps too much accuracy was the problem?
I've enjoyed plenty of Conn Iggulden, but he doesn't even try for verisimilitude, and has now literally started writing fantasy fiction (really weirdly structured ones, too).
The Mantel trilogy is seriously overrated: implausible as well as dull. Pat Barker’s Regeneration trilogy, on the other hand, is a thrilling mixture of history and fiction. It is a an epic treatment of the First World War that is also a profound exploration of masculinity and violence.
Can't agree with you on the Wolf Hall trilogy, it's unbelievably good in my opinion. Although she needed a tougher editor for the third book. Also love the Crown, a real guilty pleasure.
So I see the government got its measures through by 291 to 78 - a majority of 213.
Boris sure is in trouble now
Indeed. He didn’t have to rely on the tacit support of the Opposition. Not at all. Completely normal for a man who won in a landslide less than a year ago.
So I see the government got its measures through by 291 to 78 - a majority of 213.
Boris sure is in trouble now
Indeed. He didn’t have to rely on the tacit support of the Opposition. Not at all. Completely normal for a man who won in a landslide less than a year ago.
The actual support of some of the primary Opposition party, too (the SNP, like the SCUP MPs, should be regarded as null under EVEL).
So I see the government got its measures through by 291 to 78 - a majority of 213.
Boris sure is in trouble now
Indeed. He didn’t have to rely on the tacit support of the Opposition. Not at all. Completely normal for a man who won in a landslide less than a year ago.
Labour don't have 213 votes to be fair: he would still have won.
Top tip: To avoid your Scotch Egg rolling around the plate, simply place it in the middle of a pineapple ring.
Some of us just cut it in half and place each half with the plane of section downwards.
But then the yolk would fall out!
A half sphere face up isn’t going to roll around, so why turn it face down?
Technically it does, but it depends how much of a displacing force you apply (ie there is a marked point of discontinuity in the righting moment/displacement angle plot). It's only small forces which allow it to cycle back through damped oscillations, the friction of the breadcrumbs acting as a damper.
After cutting it in half, it is probably best left well alone.
So I see the government got its measures through by 291 to 78 - a majority of 213.
Boris sure is in trouble now
Just a minor point, but more government MPs voted against tiers tonight (55] than voted against Chamberlain in the Norway debate (41).
I think you will find the size of that rebellion caused more than a few issues for Mr Chamberlain.
Tonight, Captain Hindsight decided that the Public Health was more important than embarrassing the Prime Minister more than is strictly necessary.
He also showed that the Research Group Party has a strength of about 70.
Both of those are useful bits of intelligence, whilst also ensuring that a proportion of us don't... you know... DIE OF A CONTAGIOUS DISEASE TO MAKE A POLITICAL POINT.
Top tip: To avoid your Scotch Egg rolling around the plate, simply place it in the middle of a pineapple ring.
Some of us just cut it in half and place each half with the plane of section downwards.
But then the yolk would fall out!
A half sphere face up isn’t going to roll around, so why turn it face down?
Technically it does, but it depends how much of a displacing force you apply (ie there is a marked point of discontinuity in the righting moment/displacement angle plot). It's only small forces which allow it to cycle back through damped oscillations, the friction of the breadcrumbs acting as a damper.
You would need to turn it though more than 90 degrees to get it to fall over: the centroid is 3/8 of the way from the centre to the curved surface.
Edit: I'm assuming a uniform density: in practice it would be even further down as the meat part is denser than the egg.
So I see the government got its measures through by 291 to 78 - a majority of 213.
Boris sure is in trouble now
Just a minor point, but more government MPs voted against tiers tonight (55] than voted against Chamberlain in the Norway debate (41).
I think you will find the size of that rebellion caused more than a few issues for Mr Chamberlain.
Bit of trivia. Who was the last surviving person who had voted against Chamberlain in that vote?
John Profumo.
Of all,slightly unlikely people.
I think that's right!
He entered the house aged 25 at a by-election in Kettering just before the vote. He was the youngest member by several years (as there hadn’t been a general election for five years) so it’s not actually terribly surprising he was the last survivor.
Top tip: To avoid your Scotch Egg rolling around the plate, simply place it in the middle of a pineapple ring.
Some of us just cut it in half and place each half with the plane of section downwards.
But then the yolk would fall out!
A half sphere face up isn’t going to roll around, so why turn it face down?
Technically it does, but it depends how much of a displacing force you apply (ie there is a marked point of discontinuity in the righting moment/displacement angle plot). It's only small forces which allow it to cycle back through damped oscillations, the friction of the breadcrumbs acting as a damper.
You would need to turn it though more than 90 degrees to get it to fall over: the centroid is 3/8 of the way from the centre to the curved surface.
Edit: I'm assuming a uniform density: in practice it would be even further down as the meat part is denser than the egg.
Not quite sure about that last. The minced meat contains a fair bit of fat at about 0.9 sg as well as the protein and water, and will have been mixed with starch and water in the process of making sausagemeat, depending on how upmarket your egg is.
For all that something had to be passed tonight, and so allowing it to pass was the right thing to do...
1 The government can't keep its "the 2019 landslide means you can't touch us until 2024" act going after this- can they? (Seriously- allowing a vote on regulations five hours before they come into force is just a dick move).
2 TMexPm may have a note from Matron (who knows?), but there is something delicious about seeing her give her successor exactly as much support from the backbenches as he gave her... I think her revenge could definitely be a substantial enough meal to qualify for a drink.
1) No, they can't, but with vaccine rollout they probably are correct they can push past Covid rebellions for another 6-9 months, as Labour will probably abstain on many measures.
I don't think Boris cares except for rebellions on Brexit
Top tip: To avoid your Scotch Egg rolling around the plate, simply place it in the middle of a pineapple ring.
Some of us just cut it in half and place each half with the plane of section downwards.
But then the yolk would fall out!
A half sphere face up isn’t going to roll around, so why turn it face down?
Technically it does, but it depends how much of a displacing force you apply (ie there is a marked point of discontinuity in the righting moment/displacement angle plot). It's only small forces which allow it to cycle back through damped oscillations, the friction of the breadcrumbs acting as a damper.
You would need to turn it though more than 90 degrees to get it to fall over: the centroid is 3/8 of the way from the centre to the curved surface.
Edit: I'm assuming a uniform density: in practice it would be even further down as the meat part is denser than the egg.
Not quite sure about that last. The minced meat contains a fair bit of fat at about 0.9 sg as well as the protein and water, and will have been mixed with starch and water in the process of making sausagemeat, depending on how upmarket your egg is.
Top tip: To avoid your Scotch Egg rolling around the plate, simply place it in the middle of a pineapple ring.
Some of us just cut it in half and place each half with the plane of section downwards.
But then the yolk would fall out!
A half sphere face up isn’t going to roll around, so why turn it face down?
Technically it does, but it depends how much of a displacing force you apply (ie there is a marked point of discontinuity in the righting moment/displacement angle plot). It's only small forces which allow it to cycle back through damped oscillations, the friction of the breadcrumbs acting as a damper.
You would need to turn it though more than 90 degrees to get it to fall over: the centroid is 3/8 of the way from the centre to the curved surface.
Edit: I'm assuming a uniform density: in practice it would be even further down as the meat part is denser than the egg.
Not quite sure about that last. The minced meat contains a fair bit of fat at about 0.9 sg as well as the protein and water, and will have been mixed with starch and water in the process of making sausagemeat, depending on how upmarket your egg is.
If you fell asleep from excess drink and left BBC2 on, in my youth you’d wake up on the floor and some guy on the TV would be explaining something like that
Top tip: To avoid your Scotch Egg rolling around the plate, simply place it in the middle of a pineapple ring.
Some of us just cut it in half and place each half with the plane of section downwards.
But then the yolk would fall out!
A half sphere face up isn’t going to roll around, so why turn it face down?
Technically it does, but it depends how much of a displacing force you apply (ie there is a marked point of discontinuity in the righting moment/displacement angle plot). It's only small forces which allow it to cycle back through damped oscillations, the friction of the breadcrumbs acting as a damper.
You would need to turn it though more than 90 degrees to get it to fall over: the centroid is 3/8 of the way from the centre to the curved surface.
Edit: I'm assuming a uniform density: in practice it would be even further down as the meat part is denser than the egg.
Not quite sure about that last. The minced meat contains a fair bit of fat at about 0.9 sg as well as the protein and water, and will have been mixed with starch and water in the process of making sausagemeat, depending on how upmarket your egg is.
If you fell asleep from excess drink and left BBC2 on, in my youth you’d wake up on the floor and some guy on the TV would be explaining something like that
The jockey Hollie Doyle is the only woman on the list of contenders, which contains the fewest number of female sports stars since the controversial all-male shortlist in 2011 – a reflection of how much women’s sport has been pushed to the margins during the pandemic.
Well, most of the time they seem immune to open rebellions on things, which is just weird and suspicious for a party with so many MPs, so about time they have some public spats.
Comments
I don't have a huge amount of skin in this game. The main irritation is having funds tied up unnecessarily. As a lifelong punter and member of a family involved in betting and bookmaking for generations I'm appalled by what Betfair are doing here. They have quite simply changed the rules - not mid-event, but in fact after the result was known. This is unprecedented in my experience.
I'm maxed out so I can't take advantage of the absurd prices still available. I'd consider borrowing BUT if Betfair can change the rules once, they can do so again. Who knows what they will come up with next? Who knows when they will settle?
I guess it will be Dec 14th, although that date is no more logical than Christmas, New Years Day or Pancake Tuesday. I guess too that the Electoral College will not bowl them a googly by perversely voting for Trump.
They'll probably get away with it. The lesson for punters is not to trust a capricious market maker. I certainly won't be trusting them with my money again.
Dominic Cummings’ press conference.
I've enjoyed plenty of Conn Iggulden, but he doesn't even try for verisimilitude, and has now literally started writing fantasy fiction (really weirdly structured ones, too).
https://twitter.com/tconnellyRTE/status/1333864254370439177?s=20
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/rishi-sunak-tourist-vat-tax-coronavirus-recovery-b128379.html
Bit like reading "Ceasar - a sketch" by James Anthony Foude.
Both aren't the truth, I would say... but interesting, nonetheless.
Afriyie, Adam
Ahmad Khan, Imran
Baker, Mr Steve
Brady, Sir Graham
Bridgen, Andrew
Bristow, Paul
Chope, Sir Christopher
Clark, Greg
Daly, James
Davies, Philip
Davis, Mr David
Djanogly, Mr Jonathan
Doyle-Price, Jackie
Drax, Richard
Duncan Smith, Sir Iain
Francois, Mr Mark
Fysh, Mr Marcus
Gillan, Dame Cheryl
Green, Chris
Green, Damian
Griffiths, Kate
Harper, Mr Mark
Hollobone, Mr Philip
Jones, Mr David
Knight, Julian
Largan, Robert
Latham, Mrs Pauline
Loder, Chris
Loughton, Tim
Mackinlay, Craig
Mangnall, Anthony
McCartney, Karl
McPartland, Stephen
McVey, Esther
Merriman, Huw
Moore, Robbie
Morris, Anne Marie
Neill, Sir Robert
Pawsey, Mark
Redwood, John
Robinson, Mary
Rosindell, Andrew
Smith, Henry
Spencer, Dr Ben
Swayne, Sir Desmond
Syms, Sir Robert
Tracey, Craig
Tugendhat, Tom
Vickers, Matt
Wakeford, Christian
Walker, Sir Charles
Wallis, Dr Jamie
Warburton, David
Wragg, Mr William
Wright, Jeremy
Lewis, Julian
Begum, Apsana
Burgon, Richard
Foy, Mary Kelly
Gwynne, Andrew
Hill, Mike
Jones, Mr Kevan
Lewell-Buck, Mrs Emma
Mearns, Ian
Morris, Grahame
Osborne, Kate
Ribeiro-Addy, Bell
Spellar, John
Stringer, Graham
Sultana, Zarah
Twigg, Derek
Corbyn, Jeremy
Doesn’t add up m’lord.
Not deliberately making shit up to be dramatic or controversial.
For all that something had to be passed tonight, and so allowing it to pass was the right thing to do...
1 The government can't keep its "the 2019 landslide means you can't touch us until 2024" act going after this- can they? (Seriously- allowing a vote on regulations five hours before they come into force is just a dick move).
2 TMexPm may have a note from Matron (who knows?), but there is something delicious about seeing her give her successor exactly as much support from the backbenches as he gave her... I think her revenge could definitely be a substantial enough meal to qualify for a drink.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9005663/EasyJet-CHARGE-passengers-use-overhead-lockers.html
But my understanding is that a lot of classical literature boils down to:
1. Mortal has character flaw.
2. Gods come up with a punishment that exquisitely exploits said character flaw.
3. Punishment lasts forever.
Boris ought to be able to work out what's coming his way, shouldn't he?
How this works alongside the deal the same media company did with the black sheep of the family, is of course incidental.
Ironically the best defence for The Crown against being sued is that is has obvious fictional bits in it.
The UK medicines regulator is set to license the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine for emergency use within days, and possibly as soon as Wednesday. Britain has ordered 40m doses, of which 10m are expected to be available this year.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/dec/01/uk-likely-to-be-first-western-country-to-license-a-covid-vaccine
The BBC headline which seemed to be framing it in the same way as if it was a celeb tweeting something vaguely sexist/racist seemed slightly absurd though. They went to the trouble of faking an image, of course they're not going to apologise!
https://www.theguardian.com/football/2020/dec/01/work-permits-for-eu-players-and-no-under-18-signings-in-post-brexit-regulations
2. Children
3. More and more children.
We are left wondering what it was about more contemporary events that made the notion that a British PM might ever try to suspend Parliament for personal political advantage pop into their heads?
If it was Hancock saying it then I'd say "haven't you got better things to be dealing with"?
But the person who said it was ... Culture Secretary. Dealing with Cultural issues is literally his responsibility.
Culture Secretary speaks about biggest drama on TV shouldn't be shocking news.
https://reaction.life/leaving-the-eu-cap-is-an-unprecedented-win-for-nature-in-post-brexit-britain/
Jezza and IDS. LOTO old boys club.
I kind of understand, given the amount of faff that seems to happen on every flight nowadays with everyone trying to fit their wheely-suitcase into the bins, and inevitably the stewards having to step in and rearrange everything. Must take up a disproportionate amount of time too, which I guess inevitably costs money.
As an aside, does anyone else find the Mail's use of lines like 'EasyJet customers have been left FUMING' tiresome. Which customers exactly? They are aware they can vote with their feet right, other airlines are availiable...
Boris sure is in trouble now
One week ago
https://twitter.com/cricketwyvern/status/1331228662654496771
So a week ago he says it looks like deaths have stabilised when the peak death figure was 34. Today he says it looks like it's they've levelled off despite the peak day being 35% higher.
Who wants to bet deaths will be stabilising (possibly falling) at an even higher figure next week?
So the justification for making stuff up and presenting it as fact is current events?
Ok then. So we have an upcoming biopic of Atlee, including him making up fake intelligence and lying to parliament to get troops committed to Korea. Because later events....
A real physics teacher should have spotted that flaw in his reasoning right away...
I think you will find the size of that rebellion caused more than a few issues for Mr Chamberlain.
He also showed that the Research Group Party has a strength of about 70.
Both of those are useful bits of intelligence, whilst also ensuring that a proportion of us don't... you know... DIE OF A CONTAGIOUS DISEASE TO MAKE A POLITICAL POINT.
Edit: I'm assuming a uniform density: in practice it would be even further down as the meat part is denser than the egg.
Of all,slightly unlikely people.
Current Betfair prices:-
Biden 1.04
Democrats 1.04
Biden PV 1.03
Biden PV 49-51.9% 1.05
Trump PV 46-48.9% 1.05
Trump ECV 210-239 1.07
Biden ECV 300-329 1.07
Biden ECV Hcap -48.5 1.06
Biden ECV Hcap -63.5 1.08
Trump ECV Hcap +81.5 1.01
AZ Dem 1.05
GA Dem 1.05
MI Dem 1.05
NV Dem 1.05
PA Dem 1.05
WI Dem 1.05
Trump to leave before end of term NO 1.1
Trump exit date 2021 1.08
I don't think Boris cares except for rebellions on Brexit
2) Certainly hope so.
Good night.
https://twitter.com/bradheath/status/1333880306651238403
"You have to be responsible" - He knows who he was voting for when he voted for Trump, responsble behaviour was not on the cards.
https://twitter.com/bradheath/status/1333880888891944961
The jockey Hollie Doyle is the only woman on the list of contenders, which contains the fewest number of female sports stars since the controversial all-male shortlist in 2011 – a reflection of how much women’s sport has been pushed to the margins during the pandemic.
I'm shocked that this was the Guardian's take.