Here follows the Green Party’s Six Step Plan to Abolish Landlords;
Introduce Rent Controls and Abolish Right to Buy. (HO401, HO503)
Abolish Section 21 Evictions and make all rental agreements secure long-term tenancies that can only be terminated by the tenant. (HO519)
Tax the Landlords - move towards a Land Value Tax levied on Owners, not Tenants. No Exceptions. Business Rates on AirBnBs/Short Lets. No Exceptions. Double taxation for empty properties. Put National Insurance on Private Rents. (HO401, EC780-2)
Remove finance for Landlords - end Buy to Let mortgages. (HO521)
Provide government backed finance to tenants. Give tenants First Right to Buy when Landlords sell, with their total rent paid discounted.
Provide finance to Councils. Councils should be given Second Right to Buy when Landlords sell, or property that hasn’t been insulated to EPC rating C or fails to meet the decent homes standard, or any property that is left empty for more than six months, with the total current tenancy discounted, tenants moved to a truly affordable Council tenancy. Government must change prudential borrowing requirements to allow Councils to buy back and build new housing on a massive scale. (2024 Manifesto Pg9).
Red card for Mel Stride in the morning media round he kept saying these cuts will pay down the debt. Absolute BS given currently borrowing £150bn a year. Reduce the deficit perhaps.
If only we had any political journalists who understand the difference between debt and deficit, the difference between prices and inflation, etc etc.
Peston ?
Peston on a good day maybe, where he’s actually looking for a sensible answer rather than a political ‘gotcha’ that looks great clipped out of context to a 30s soundbite.
Andrew Neil was good back in the day too.
The rest of them, not so much.
The only thing in their favor (sic), is that they come across as total and utter geniuses to anyone who spends any time watching what passes for mainstream political journalism in the US, where ignorance and partisanship are way more important than informing the audience.
The only US stuff I watch is the finance commentary on the likes of CNBC. I avoid Fox.
Red card for Mel Stride in the morning media round he kept saying these cuts will pay down the debt. Absolute BS given currently borrowing £150bn a year. Reduce the deficit perhaps.
If only we had any political journalists who understand the difference between debt and deficit, the difference between prices and inflation, etc etc.
Even if we did, is there any sign at all that the public would vote for it? We didn't get here accidentally, and it's not just due to Ukraine/COVID/Truss/Brown etc.
In the days of the duopoly, you might have had a back channels understanding that something tough needed to be done and neither side would push the issue too hard. (There was a fair chunk of that in 2010- the question was more about the shape of austerity than the need for it.) In a politics where there are opportunistic populists on the left and right, that will be much much harder.
One might argue that the only reason that the left and right opportunistic populists exist, is because of a failure of the old duopoly to make life meaningfully better for much of the population.
Even immigration, today’s hot button topic, would be a lot less of a problem if housing had been a priority over the past three decades.
The President is now deploying red state military to blue states over the objective of people's elected representatives in those states.
He's ordering U.S. troops to patrol cities in places that - at worst - have a couple blocks that could use a few more police, or even some federal law enforcement. A judge that Trump appointed just ruled that Trump's deployment isn't legal, saying there's no evidence that the protests were "significantly violent or disruptive."
But Trump is sending U.S. troops in anyway, from a red state, right after he told a room full of generals that the country is at war with an enemy from within, and after the President just told the Navy that the country has to "take care of" the Democrats.
The President is sending our military in to protect an army of masked federal agents who - while they may have begun by focusing on violent criminals - are now arresting legal residents and American citizens so they can hit Stephen Miller's quota or lose their jobs.
They are filming themselves using force against people who have not yet been found guilty of a crime. They are violating the basic 4th and 5th Amendment rights of Americans - every day. The person they report to - the most powerful White House official - calls the opposition party a domestic extremist organization, and accuses judges who rule against him of being legal insurrectionists.
I honestly don't know how Democrats can have any part of funding a government that will use the money to continue this. I don't know how this is not the focus right now. https://x.com/jonfavs/status/1975029399184699539
Landlords? We can correct the market: Empower LHAs to build on land owned by councils with planning bypasses Empower LHAs to borrow at government rates LHA property not for sale, thus can set rents people can afford That crashes the private rental price That makes many of the for profit private landlords sell which dumps a load of property on the market
Price corrects, less money is tied up in mortgage / rent and thus can circulate through the economy providing jobs.
Don't legislate to crush landlords as the Greens suggest. We need a gentle correction as more LHA properties become available to rent, not a full-on collapse.
Bloody laptop now updated to Win 11 at last after two failed downloads. Taken much of the afternoon and evening. Now I can depart. Night all.
Client laptop (provided for a now completed project which I don't use) needed a big update to Win11. Reminds me why I ditched Windows long ago - its awful!
Here follows the Green Party’s Six Step Plan to Abolish Landlords;
Introduce Rent Controls and Abolish Right to Buy. (HO401, HO503)
Abolish Section 21 Evictions and make all rental agreements secure long-term tenancies that can only be terminated by the tenant. (HO519)
Tax the Landlords - move towards a Land Value Tax levied on Owners, not Tenants. No Exceptions. Business Rates on AirBnBs/Short Lets. No Exceptions. Double taxation for empty properties. Put National Insurance on Private Rents. (HO401, EC780-2)
Remove finance for Landlords - end Buy to Let mortgages. (HO521)
Provide government backed finance to tenants. Give tenants First Right to Buy when Landlords sell, with their total rent paid discounted.
Provide finance to Councils. Councils should be given Second Right to Buy when Landlords sell, or property that hasn’t been insulated to EPC rating C or fails to meet the decent homes standard, or any property that is left empty for more than six months, with the total current tenancy discounted, tenants moved to a truly affordable Council tenancy. Government must change prudential borrowing requirements to allow Councils to buy back and build new housing on a massive scale. (2024 Manifesto Pg9).
Extending right to buy to the private sector. Very Thatcherite.
"total rent paid discounted."
So if you are a landlord and you rent the house to a family who don't move for years and years - say 20 - as they are bringing up kids and they are in local school etc etc and then finally you decide to sell then if they decide under 'first right to buy' to buy the house, you lose all the money you have been paid in rent for the last twenty years as a discount, knocking maybe £190K off the value of the house?
So you own an asset and make nothing for twenty years?
Eh?
It should be made very clear that this policy was voted through at lunchtime on final day of conference when half the delegates are already at the train station but even so...
Sure, but isn't that pretty much what Mrs T did, down to 70% discount? The discount depended on time in occupation.
Yeh but that was a discounted provided by the local authority i.e. us tax payers rather than a single private citizen.
Not that I agreed with Thatcher's policy anyway. Certainly not the idea the councils were blocked from building replacement social housing.
Thatcher's first discount setup was 33% + 1% per year of occupation iirc, which was then extended for ideological reasons.
Landlords? We can correct the market: Empower LHAs to build on land owned by councils with planning bypasses Empower LHAs to borrow at government rates LHA property not for sale, thus can set rents people can afford That crashes the private rental price That makes many of the for profit private landlords sell which dumps a load of property on the market
Price corrects, less money is tied up in mortgage / rent and thus can circulate through the economy providing jobs.
Don't legislate to crush landlords as the Greens suggest. We need a gentle correction as more LHA properties become available to rent, not a full-on collapse.
Empower councils to build on land owned by developers for more than two years (with sone sort of financial compensation derived from future rents). That would get building going one way or the other.
Anyway, I'm off to Glasgow today which has enough derelict land to house half a million people, much of which is within 15 minutes cycle away of Buchanan Street.
Everybody just went bonkers coz some guy ran about ten yards
What's this about? I don't have a clue.
Fake Rugby.
Bad Fake Rugby
The hits are much bigger in NFL. Although they have dialed it back a bit where it used to be allowed to go helmet to helmet. Also the acceleration and top end pace is greater than any rugby players. Rees-Zammit is thought of one of the fastest players in rugby, he had a go at NFL, but they basically said ain't anything special in terms of pace.
Also the kickers are better than rugby. No rugby kicker can make 65 yard penalty kicks or send it 80 yards kicking out the hand.
While that's true, an NFL team is fuill of specialists. They'll switch out almost all the people on the field between plays depending on whether they're playing offence, defence, kicking or running.
Typically, they'll have an offensive 11, a defensive 11, and then a further 11 specialists, and then another 12-14 reserves. For each game.
Absolutely and the specialists give tiny edges e.g. the "centre" who throws the ball back is different for the field goal attempts. He is a specialist in just being able to launch the ball further back and faster than the regular centre who delivers the ball to the QB.
But it is also a league of "freaks" (plus plenty of use of PEDs). Rees-Zammit is fast, I have seen him real life and he has absolute wheels, but in relation to NFL speedsters he isn't all that and he isn't "that big". Some of the WR are 6ft 4/5 and still have better acceleration and top end speed.
It has been suggested one reason athletics has stalled (besides better drugs detection since the 1980s) is a lot of the people who would have been running and jumping have instead been signed up for NFL, basketball and (outside the USA) football.
Immergut has *granted* Oregon and California's motion to block the new call-up of Guard troops to Portland. She says this effort to bring CA and TX troops to Oregon is in "direct contravention" of her original order. https://x.com/kyledcheney/status/1975036556500197526
This is the most basic constitutional law which goes all the way back to the Framers, and is not even minimally controversial.
Even the most deadheaded originalist cannot make a case against that. Though it wouldn't entirely surprise me if the Roberts court were to try.
The latest Rest is History episode on Enoch Powell should be required listening. Amazing how history repeats itself and as ever a much more nuanced look at things than usual.
Everybody just went bonkers coz some guy ran about ten yards
What's this about? I don't have a clue.
Fake Rugby.
Bad Fake Rugby
The hits are much bigger in NFL. Although they have dialed it back a bit where it used to be allowed to go helmet to helmet. Also the acceleration and top end pace is greater than any rugby players. Rees-Zammit is thought of one of the fastest players in rugby, he had a go at NFL, but they basically said ain't anything special in terms of pace.
Also the kickers are better than rugby. No rugby kicker can make 65 yard penalty kicks or send it 80 yards kicking out the hand.
Is this true? The longest pro field goal was 66 yards, longest rugby penalty in a test was 70 yards. NFL players score from the centre of the posts whereas rugby kickers have to factor in all sorts of angles and this extra distance.
Also rugby “kickers” play most of the match until subbed or injured and have to be involved in all aspects, running, tackling, rucks, mauls etc whereas NFL kickers are on for a specific moment and have no other requirement to waste their energy or get injured.
In addition, NFL kickers should be able to train purely on their kicking and develop technique and strength to be better kickers whereas rugby kickers have to train and build for multi roles.
Red card for Mel Stride in the morning media round he kept saying these cuts will pay down the debt. Absolute BS given currently borrowing £150bn a year. Reduce the deficit perhaps.
None of our political class come close to addressing the scale of our problems. That in itself is demoralising. The budget next month really needs £20bn of tax increases and £30bn of cuts. As does the budget next year. And the one after. And the one after that. No money for fripperies or addressing alleged unfairnesses such as the 2 child cap. No money for optimistic investment. It is brutal and necessary but none of our politicians have the courage to even talk about it.
No party will tackle it because the scale of the tax increases or spending cuts are such that it is impossible to place them purely on people who vote for other parties. For Stride to propose these while keeping the Triple Lock is just facepalm stuff.
It's all castle on clouds stuff. Massive cuts to civil service numbers etc, but also a massive increase in deportations just doesn't add up.
Red card for Mel Stride in the morning media round he kept saying these cuts will pay down the debt. Absolute BS given currently borrowing £150bn a year. Reduce the deficit perhaps.
I had forgotten he was Shadow Chancellor until yesterday when sadly someone reminded me.
He is good as a minister for the Today programme as he does know his brief and answers well, calmly and politely which should be encouraged.
I think Kemi really needs to find a way to get much more exposure as she is a bit drowned out by Farage and the Labour dramas. It doesn’t really matter if she is a bit rusty or clunky now because the more exposure she gets the better she will get and I think more people will see her as a goo alternative to Farage or Starmer/Burnham/Lenin.
Landlords? We can correct the market: Empower LHAs to build on land owned by councils with planning bypasses Empower LHAs to borrow at government rates LHA property not for sale, thus can set rents people can afford That crashes the private rental price That makes many of the for profit private landlords sell which dumps a load of property on the market
Price corrects, less money is tied up in mortgage / rent and thus can circulate through the economy providing jobs.
Don't legislate to crush landlords as the Greens suggest. We need a gentle correction as more LHA properties become available to rent, not a full-on collapse.
Enhanced compulsory purchase powers, where LAs took a greater percentage of the planning gain, could turbocharge that - without being confiscatory in the manner of the Green nonsense.
Red card for Mel Stride in the morning media round he kept saying these cuts will pay down the debt. Absolute BS given currently borrowing £150bn a year. Reduce the deficit perhaps.
I had forgotten he was Shadow Chancellor until yesterday when sadly someone reminded me.
Some people were touting him as leadership material.
He’s classic middle manager material.
...in the David Brent style.
The utter lack of talent on the Tory benches is actually quite shocking. Its the Dunning Kruger effect on acid; they are utterly deluded, not delusions of grandeur, but delusions of adequacy. Their flimsy understanding of virtually everything is compounded by an adamantine certainty that their room temperature IQ ideas are not just phoned in, but the product of an intellectual debate of more than 5 minutes.
The idea that by doubling down on the "nasty party", leave the ECHR drivel, is the way back to political relevance is utterly laughable. The idea that no one must speak in favour of the ECHR is pathetic and reveals Badenoch at her attempted authoritarian, vacuous worst.
This conference seems set to reveal that unless a radical change comes at the top, there really is no way back for the Conservatives. Cosplaying Reform will kill the Tories.
Everybody just went bonkers coz some guy ran about ten yards
What's this about? I don't have a clue.
Fake Rugby.
Bad Fake Rugby
The hits are much bigger in NFL. Although they have dialed it back a bit where it used to be allowed to go helmet to helmet. Also the acceleration and top end pace is greater than any rugby players. Rees-Zammit is thought of one of the fastest players in rugby, he had a go at NFL, but they basically said ain't anything special in terms of pace.
Also the kickers are better than rugby. No rugby kicker can make 65 yard penalty kicks or send it 80 yards kicking out the hand.
Is this true? The longest pro field goal was 66 yards, longest rugby penalty in a test was 70 yards. NFL players score from the centre of the posts whereas rugby kickers have to factor in all sorts of angles and this extra distance.
Also rugby “kickers” play most of the match until subbed or injured and have to be involved in all aspects, running, tackling, rucks, mauls etc whereas NFL kickers are on for a specific moment and have no other requirement to waste their energy or get injured.
In addition, NFL kickers should be able to train purely on their kicking and develop technique and strength to be better kickers whereas rugby kickers have to train and build for multi roles.
They are better because they specialise. They are now regularly hitting 60 yard kicks (measured from.the snap i.e. add another 10+ yards on to official yardage as that is where it is kicked from) with very high accuracy and its harder than rugby because the ball is in motion, snapped back and held by a human rather than a off a tee....all while a load of 300 pound 6ft 6 guys try to murder you and you have to hit it sub optimal trajectory to get it over them.
Off a tee, no line of scrimmage they can hit it much further than in game numbers.
Very few rugby kicks are being made from 50+ yards.. but yes having to play the full match will have an effect. But for instance Elliot Daley has tried in practice and he can't make 60+ yarders and he has one of the longest kicks in rugby.
Red card for Mel Stride in the morning media round he kept saying these cuts will pay down the debt. Absolute BS given currently borrowing £150bn a year. Reduce the deficit perhaps.
If only we had any political journalists who understand the difference between debt and deficit, the difference between prices and inflation, etc etc.
Peston ?
Peston on a good day maybe, where he’s actually looking for a sensible answer rather than a political ‘gotcha’ that looks great clipped out of context to a 30s soundbite.
Andrew Neil was good back in the day too.
The rest of them, not so much.
The only thing in their favor (sic), is that they come across as total and utter geniuses to anyone who spends any time watching what passes for mainstream political journalism in the US, where ignorance and partisanship are way more important than informing the audience.
The only US stuff I watch is the finance commentary on the likes of CNBC. I avoid Fox.
CNBC is good, so long as you don’t confuse it with MSNBC. Fox is just like MSNBC, but from the other ‘side’.
Hence the rise of independent media in the US.
The Free Press https://www.thefp.com/ was just sold for $150m, not bad for something that started as a Substack only four years ago, with 10 people and $1m in funding. They have paid subscribers in the six figures, people who just want to know the news rather than endless partisan opinions.
Landlords? We can correct the market: Empower LHAs to build on land owned by councils with planning bypasses Empower LHAs to borrow at government rates LHA property not for sale, thus can set rents people can afford That crashes the private rental price That makes many of the for profit private landlords sell which dumps a load of property on the market
Price corrects, less money is tied up in mortgage / rent and thus can circulate through the economy providing jobs.
Don't legislate to crush landlords as the Greens suggest. We need a gentle correction as more LHA properties become available to rent, not a full-on collapse.
Empower councils to build on land owned by developers for more than two years (with sone sort of financial compensation derived from future rents). That would get building going one way or the other.
Anyway, I'm off to Glasgow today which has enough derelict land to house half a million people, much of which is within 15 minutes cycle away of Buchanan Street.
Two years is too short - often the delays are caused by the Councils themselves, either due to wanting time to negotiate or to think about it, or for lack of capacity.
The latter is down mainly to Councils having been gutted by Government. The last one I was involved in, we were ready to move quickly and the Council asked for two or three rounds of delay, then said "no" to protect the party running the Authority (Lib Dems / Zadrozny).
It also neglects that there is more than one stage in bringing development land into use, because the developer (private or public) wants to share the planning permission risk.
It's like many national Green policies - half good sense, half loopy which will destroy the interests of those who it is aimed to benefit.
Red card for Mel Stride in the morning media round he kept saying these cuts will pay down the debt. Absolute BS given currently borrowing £150bn a year. Reduce the deficit perhaps.
Here follows the Green Party’s Six Step Plan to Abolish Landlords;
Introduce Rent Controls and Abolish Right to Buy. (HO401, HO503)
Abolish Section 21 Evictions and make all rental agreements secure long-term tenancies that can only be terminated by the tenant. (HO519)
Tax the Landlords - move towards a Land Value Tax levied on Owners, not Tenants. No Exceptions. Business Rates on AirBnBs/Short Lets. No Exceptions. Double taxation for empty properties. Put National Insurance on Private Rents. (HO401, EC780-2)
Remove finance for Landlords - end Buy to Let mortgages. (HO521)
Provide government backed finance to tenants. Give tenants First Right to Buy when Landlords sell, with their total rent paid discounted.
Provide finance to Councils. Councils should be given Second Right to Buy when Landlords sell, or property that hasn’t been insulated to EPC rating C or fails to meet the decent homes standard, or any property that is left empty for more than six months, with the total current tenancy discounted, tenants moved to a truly affordable Council tenancy. Government must change prudential borrowing requirements to allow Councils to buy back and build new housing on a massive scale. (2024 Manifesto Pg9).
Everybody just went bonkers coz some guy ran about ten yards
What's this about? I don't have a clue.
Fake Rugby.
Bad Fake Rugby
The hits are much bigger in NFL. Although they have dialed it back a bit where it used to be allowed to go helmet to helmet. Also the acceleration and top end pace is greater than any rugby players. Rees-Zammit is thought of one of the fastest players in rugby, he had a go at NFL, but they basically said ain't anything special in terms of pace.
Also the kickers are better than rugby. No rugby kicker can make 65 yard penalty kicks or send it 80 yards kicking out the hand.
Is this true? The longest pro field goal was 66 yards, longest rugby penalty in a test was 70 yards. NFL players score from the centre of the posts whereas rugby kickers have to factor in all sorts of angles and this extra distance.
Also rugby “kickers” play most of the match until subbed or injured and have to be involved in all aspects, running, tackling, rucks, mauls etc whereas NFL kickers are on for a specific moment and have no other requirement to waste their energy or get injured.
In addition, NFL kickers should be able to train purely on their kicking and develop technique and strength to be better kickers whereas rugby kickers have to train and build for multi roles.
Rugby balls are slightly heavier and rounder, and inflated at a slightly lower pressure. They're harder to throw, but easier to kick.
There's also a big different between kicking from the spot, and doing so under much more time pressure, from the snap.
"We just want more money" say one Reform cabinet member on KCC. "We’ve got more demand than ever before and it’s growing", we're "down to the bare bones".
Another: "“Everyone thought we’d come in and there were going to be these huge costs we could cut away but there just aren’t"
Everybody just went bonkers coz some guy ran about ten yards
What's this about? I don't have a clue.
Fake Rugby.
Bad Fake Rugby
The hits are much bigger in NFL. Although they have dialed it back a bit where it used to be allowed to go helmet to helmet. Also the acceleration and top end pace is greater than any rugby players. Rees-Zammit is thought of one of the fastest players in rugby, he had a go at NFL, but they basically said ain't anything special in terms of pace.
Also the kickers are better than rugby. No rugby kicker can make 65 yard penalty kicks or send it 80 yards kicking out the hand.
Is this true? The longest pro field goal was 66 yards, longest rugby penalty in a test was 70 yards. NFL players score from the centre of the posts whereas rugby kickers have to factor in all sorts of angles and this extra distance.
Also rugby “kickers” play most of the match until subbed or injured and have to be involved in all aspects, running, tackling, rucks, mauls etc whereas NFL kickers are on for a specific moment and have no other requirement to waste their energy or get injured.
In addition, NFL kickers should be able to train purely on their kicking and develop technique and strength to be better kickers whereas rugby kickers have to train and build for multi roles.
They are better because they specialise. They are now regularly hitting 60 yard kicks (measured from.the snap i.e. add another 10+ yards on to official yardage as that is where it is kicked from) with very high accuracy and its harder than rugby because the ball is in motion, snapped back and held by a human rather than a off a tee....all while a load of 300 pound 6ft 6 guys try to murder you and you have to hit it sub optimal trajectory to get it over them.
Off a tee, no line of scrimmage they can hit it much further than in game numbers.
Fair enough but I guess it is subjective about what constitutes best. To me any Jonny Wilkinson rugby type who can score after running and tackling for 70 minutes having been battered by huge opponents is more impressive than the specialist who just has that one role - how many times do kickers actually get “sacked” it’s nowhere near the amount of hits a rugby kicker takes per game.
Here follows the Green Party’s Six Step Plan to Abolish Landlords;
Introduce Rent Controls and Abolish Right to Buy. (HO401, HO503)
Abolish Section 21 Evictions and make all rental agreements secure long-term tenancies that can only be terminated by the tenant. (HO519)
Tax the Landlords - move towards a Land Value Tax levied on Owners, not Tenants. No Exceptions. Business Rates on AirBnBs/Short Lets. No Exceptions. Double taxation for empty properties. Put National Insurance on Private Rents. (HO401, EC780-2)
Remove finance for Landlords - end Buy to Let mortgages. (HO521)
Provide government backed finance to tenants. Give tenants First Right to Buy when Landlords sell, with their total rent paid discounted.
Provide finance to Councils. Councils should be given Second Right to Buy when Landlords sell, or property that hasn’t been insulated to EPC rating C or fails to meet the decent homes standard, or any property that is left empty for more than six months, with the total current tenancy discounted, tenants moved to a truly affordable Council tenancy. Government must change prudential borrowing requirements to allow Councils to buy back and build new housing on a massive scale. (2024 Manifesto Pg9).
Bad Enoch is really not trying to win my vote back at all.
ICE are repugnant. Nobody should be modelling anything on them.
Hell has frozen over. I have had to give you a like. Armed masked goons beating the shit out of people going about their ( in many cases) lawful business before being thrown into a truck and dragged off to El Salvador. Is this genuinely proposed Conservative Party policy or just performative?
Depends what they are proposing
An independent, police department (if that’s the right term) accountable to its own leadership, and ministers with clear rules of engagement and subject to judicial oversight. A bit like the NCA but focused on immigration. Fine.
Red card for Mel Stride in the morning media round he kept saying these cuts will pay down the debt. Absolute BS given currently borrowing £150bn a year. Reduce the deficit perhaps.
None of our political class come close to addressing the scale of our problems. That in itself is demoralising. The budget next month really needs £20bn of tax increases and £30bn of cuts. As does the budget next year. And the one after. And the one after that. No money for fripperies or addressing alleged unfairnesses such as the 2 child cap. No money for optimistic investment. It is brutal and necessary but none of our politicians have the courage to even talk about it.
No party will tackle it because the scale of the tax increases or spending cuts are such that it is impossible to place them purely on people who vote for other parties. For Stride to propose these while keeping the Triple Lock is just facepalm stuff.
It's all castle on clouds stuff. Massive cuts to civil service numbers etc, but also a massive increase in deportations just doesn't add up.
"Everyone thought we'd come in and there were going to be these huge costs we could just cut away but there just aren't" said a third senior Reform cabinet member in Kent.
Red card for Mel Stride in the morning media round he kept saying these cuts will pay down the debt. Absolute BS given currently borrowing £150bn a year. Reduce the deficit perhaps.
These morons don't understand the difference
Of course he does. But he might well be thinking "these morons don't understand the difference".
Here follows the Green Party’s Six Step Plan to Abolish Landlords;
Introduce Rent Controls and Abolish Right to Buy. (HO401, HO503)
Abolish Section 21 Evictions and make all rental agreements secure long-term tenancies that can only be terminated by the tenant. (HO519)
Tax the Landlords - move towards a Land Value Tax levied on Owners, not Tenants. No Exceptions. Business Rates on AirBnBs/Short Lets. No Exceptions. Double taxation for empty properties. Put National Insurance on Private Rents. (HO401, EC780-2)
Remove finance for Landlords - end Buy to Let mortgages. (HO521)
Provide government backed finance to tenants. Give tenants First Right to Buy when Landlords sell, with their total rent paid discounted.
Provide finance to Councils. Councils should be given Second Right to Buy when Landlords sell, or property that hasn’t been insulated to EPC rating C or fails to meet the decent homes standard, or any property that is left empty for more than six months, with the total current tenancy discounted, tenants moved to a truly affordable Council tenancy. Government must change prudential borrowing requirements to allow Councils to buy back and build new housing on a massive scale. (2024 Manifesto Pg9).
Everybody just went bonkers coz some guy ran about ten yards
What's this about? I don't have a clue.
Fake Rugby.
Bad Fake Rugby
The hits are much bigger in NFL. Although they have dialed it back a bit where it used to be allowed to go helmet to helmet. Also the acceleration and top end pace is greater than any rugby players. Rees-Zammit is thought of one of the fastest players in rugby, he had a go at NFL, but they basically said ain't anything special in terms of pace.
Also the kickers are better than rugby. No rugby kicker can make 65 yard penalty kicks or send it 80 yards kicking out the hand.
Is this true? The longest pro field goal was 66 yards, longest rugby penalty in a test was 70 yards. NFL players score from the centre of the posts whereas rugby kickers have to factor in all sorts of angles and this extra distance.
Also rugby “kickers” play most of the match until subbed or injured and have to be involved in all aspects, running, tackling, rucks, mauls etc whereas NFL kickers are on for a specific moment and have no other requirement to waste their energy or get injured.
In addition, NFL kickers should be able to train purely on their kicking and develop technique and strength to be better kickers whereas rugby kickers have to train and build for multi roles.
They are better because they specialise. They are now regularly hitting 60 yard kicks (measured from.the snap i.e. add another 10+ yards on to official yardage as that is where it is kicked from) with very high accuracy and its harder than rugby because the ball is in motion, snapped back and held by a human rather than a off a tee....all while a load of 300 pound 6ft 6 guys try to murder you and you have to hit it sub optimal trajectory to get it over them.
Off a tee, no line of scrimmage they can hit it much further than in game numbers.
Fair enough but I guess it is subjective about what constitutes best. To me any Jonny Wilkinson rugby type who can score after running and tackling for 70 minutes having been battered by huge opponents is more impressive than the specialist who just has that one role - how many times do kickers actually get “sacked” it’s nowhere near the amount of hits a rugby kicker takes per game.
Well yes, rugby players have to be multifaceted. As Christian Wade and Rees Zammit have found out having a balance of skills doesn't lend itself to NFL. It's ultra specialised game where a bloke can get $250k a year just for snapping the ball back on kicks, because they can do get it to the holder.fractions of a second faster.
Also PED usage is widespread in American football from very young age.
The latest Rest is History episode on Enoch Powell should be required listening. Amazing how history repeats itself and as ever a much more nuanced look at things than usual.
I'm only 25 mins in mind.
The Origin Story podcast on Powell is very good, they provide a reading list as well. Will listen to the RiH one.
Off-topic anyone-else finding their Spotify recommendation "More podcasts like this" aren't at all related, but a list of rabid wingnuts, mainly US?!
Red card for Mel Stride in the morning media round he kept saying these cuts will pay down the debt. Absolute BS given currently borrowing £150bn a year. Reduce the deficit perhaps.
These morons don't understand the difference
Of course he does. But he might well be thinking "these morons don't understand the difference".
To be generous, he might have been talking about percentage of GDP (the metric that matters).
Good morning from the 07.13 to Manchester Piccadilly.
At a guess I’d say roughly half of the passengers are heading to the Tory conference. Among them are many examples of a very particular type: the Tory Boy. Think young Michael Gove.
Where will the Tory Boys go if the party continues to lose ground? I really can’t see them feeling comfortable in Reform. There are posh Reformers of course, but the Tory Boy is neither fash-city-trader of the Farage ilk nor Howard’s Way meets Eldorado baddie like Tice.
They have their Labour equivalents (somewhat less outwardly nerdy but equally or more earnest), and their Lib Dem equivalents (flamboyantly gayer, self-mocking but equally nerdy). My guess is that the Tory Boys will be the last conservatives standing when all else is lost.
Everybody just went bonkers coz some guy ran about ten yards
What's this about? I don't have a clue.
Fake Rugby.
Bad Fake Rugby
The hits are much bigger in NFL. Although they have dialed it back a bit where it used to be allowed to go helmet to helmet. Also the acceleration and top end pace is greater than any rugby players. Rees-Zammit is thought of one of the fastest players in rugby, he had a go at NFL, but they basically said ain't anything special in terms of pace.
Also the kickers are better than rugby. No rugby kicker can make 65 yard penalty kicks or send it 80 yards kicking out the hand.
Is this true? The longest pro field goal was 66 yards, longest rugby penalty in a test was 70 yards. NFL players score from the centre of the posts whereas rugby kickers have to factor in all sorts of angles and this extra distance.
Also rugby “kickers” play most of the match until subbed or injured and have to be involved in all aspects, running, tackling, rucks, mauls etc whereas NFL kickers are on for a specific moment and have no other requirement to waste their energy or get injured.
In addition, NFL kickers should be able to train purely on their kicking and develop technique and strength to be better kickers whereas rugby kickers have to train and build for multi roles.
They are better because they specialise. They are now regularly hitting 60 yard kicks (measured from.the snap i.e. add another 10+ yards on to official yardage as that is where it is kicked from) with very high accuracy and its harder than rugby because the ball is in motion, snapped back and held by a human rather than a off a tee....all while a load of 300 pound 6ft 6 guys try to murder you and you have to hit it sub optimal trajectory to get it over them.
Off a tee, no line of scrimmage they can hit it much further than in game numbers.
Fair enough but I guess it is subjective about what constitutes best. To me any Jonny Wilkinson rugby type who can score after running and tackling for 70 minutes having been battered by huge opponents is more impressive than the specialist who just has that one role - how many times do kickers actually get “sacked” it’s nowhere near the amount of hits a rugby kicker takes per game.
Completely different games and skill sets.
Of course the NFL kicker has a much narrower role (and that's reflected in their pay relative to the rest of the roster). But the psychological pressure on each kick is much higher as a result. Really reliable kickers who can hit the longer kicks are quite rare.
And what is the equivalent skill set to a quarterback ? The requirements on a fly half are similarish, but nowhere near as great.
Everybody just went bonkers coz some guy ran about ten yards
What's this about? I don't have a clue.
Fake Rugby.
Bad Fake Rugby
The hits are much bigger in NFL. Although they have dialed it back a bit where it used to be allowed to go helmet to helmet. Also the acceleration and top end pace is greater than any rugby players. Rees-Zammit is thought of one of the fastest players in rugby, he had a go at NFL, but they basically said ain't anything special in terms of pace.
Also the kickers are better than rugby. No rugby kicker can make 65 yard penalty kicks or send it 80 yards kicking out the hand.
Is this true? The longest pro field goal was 66 yards, longest rugby penalty in a test was 70 yards. NFL players score from the centre of the posts whereas rugby kickers have to factor in all sorts of angles and this extra distance.
Also rugby “kickers” play most of the match until subbed or injured and have to be involved in all aspects, running, tackling, rucks, mauls etc whereas NFL kickers are on for a specific moment and have no other requirement to waste their energy or get injured.
In addition, NFL kickers should be able to train purely on their kicking and develop technique and strength to be better kickers whereas rugby kickers have to train and build for multi roles.
They are better because they specialise. They are now regularly hitting 60 yard kicks (measured from.the snap i.e. add another 10+ yards on to official yardage as that is where it is kicked from) with very high accuracy and its harder than rugby because the ball is in motion, snapped back and held by a human rather than a off a tee....all while a load of 300 pound 6ft 6 guys try to murder you and you have to hit it sub optimal trajectory to get it over them.
Off a tee, no line of scrimmage they can hit it much further than in game numbers.
Fair enough but I guess it is subjective about what constitutes best. To me any Jonny Wilkinson rugby type who can score after running and tackling for 70 minutes having been battered by huge opponents is more impressive than the specialist who just has that one role - how many times do kickers actually get “sacked” it’s nowhere near the amount of hits a rugby kicker takes per game.
Completely different games and skill sets.
Of course the NFL kicker has a much narrower role (and that's reflected in their pay relative to the rest of the roster). But the psychological pressure on each kick is much higher as a result. Really reliable kickers who can hit the longer kicks are quite rare.
Interestingly an increasing number of punters are Australian, from aussie rules football background. The NFL have also been exploring gaelic footballers and rugby kickers but the field goal.game have gone from don't miss within 40 to can you make 55-65.yarders (a bit.like basketball has gone 3 point heavy).
Everybody just went bonkers coz some guy ran about ten yards
What's this about? I don't have a clue.
Fake Rugby.
Bad Fake Rugby
The hits are much bigger in NFL. Although they have dialed it back a bit where it used to be allowed to go helmet to helmet. Also the acceleration and top end pace is greater than any rugby players. Rees-Zammit is thought of one of the fastest players in rugby, he had a go at NFL, but they basically said ain't anything special in terms of pace.
Also the kickers are better than rugby. No rugby kicker can make 65 yard penalty kicks or send it 80 yards kicking out the hand.
Is this true? The longest pro field goal was 66 yards, longest rugby penalty in a test was 70 yards. NFL players score from the centre of the posts whereas rugby kickers have to factor in all sorts of angles and this extra distance.
Also rugby “kickers” play most of the match until subbed or injured and have to be involved in all aspects, running, tackling, rucks, mauls etc whereas NFL kickers are on for a specific moment and have no other requirement to waste their energy or get injured.
In addition, NFL kickers should be able to train purely on their kicking and develop technique and strength to be better kickers whereas rugby kickers have to train and build for multi roles.
They are better because they specialise. They are now regularly hitting 60 yard kicks (measured from.the snap i.e. add another 10+ yards on to official yardage as that is where it is kicked from) with very high accuracy and its harder than rugby because the ball is in motion, snapped back and held by a human rather than a off a tee....all while a load of 300 pound 6ft 6 guys try to murder you and you have to hit it sub optimal trajectory to get it over them.
Off a tee, no line of scrimmage they can hit it much further than in game numbers.
Fair enough but I guess it is subjective about what constitutes best. To me any Jonny Wilkinson rugby type who can score after running and tackling for 70 minutes having been battered by huge opponents is more impressive than the specialist who just has that one role - how many times do kickers actually get “sacked” it’s nowhere near the amount of hits a rugby kicker takes per game.
Completely different games and skill sets.
Of course the NFL kicker has a much narrower role (and that's reflected in their pay relative to the rest of the roster). But the psychological pressure on each kick is much higher as a result. Really reliable kickers who can hit the longer kicks are quite rare.
Agree, and it gave us the plot for Ace Ventura after all. I do watch the NFL highlights on YouTube on a Saturday morning - 20 mins per game makes it look great.
Red card for Mel Stride in the morning media round he kept saying these cuts will pay down the debt. Absolute BS given currently borrowing £150bn a year. Reduce the deficit perhaps.
None of our political class come close to addressing the scale of our problems. That in itself is demoralising. The budget next month really needs £20bn of tax increases and £30bn of cuts. As does the budget next year. And the one after. And the one after that. No money for fripperies or addressing alleged unfairnesses such as the 2 child cap. No money for optimistic investment. It is brutal and necessary but none of our politicians have the courage to even talk about it.
No party will tackle it because the scale of the tax increases or spending cuts are such that it is impossible to place them purely on people who vote for other parties. For Stride to propose these while keeping the Triple Lock is just facepalm stuff.
It's all castle on clouds stuff. Massive cuts to civil service numbers etc, but also a massive increase in deportations just doesn't add up.
"Everyone thought we'd come in and there were going to be these huge costs we could just cut away but there just aren't" said a third senior Reform cabinet member in Kent.
What we are seeing is the impact of reality on rhetoric.
It's going to be a steep learning curve for Reform, but better that they actually learn if they are going to be running the place. I suspect the next governments cabinet are going to come from these councillors.
Everybody just went bonkers coz some guy ran about ten yards
What's this about? I don't have a clue.
Fake Rugby.
Bad Fake Rugby
The hits are much bigger in NFL. Although they have dialed it back a bit where it used to be allowed to go helmet to helmet. Also the acceleration and top end pace is greater than any rugby players. Rees-Zammit is thought of one of the fastest players in rugby, he had a go at NFL, but they basically said ain't anything special in terms of pace.
Also the kickers are better than rugby. No rugby kicker can make 65 yard penalty kicks or send it 80 yards kicking out the hand.
Is this true? The longest pro field goal was 66 yards, longest rugby penalty in a test was 70 yards. NFL players score from the centre of the posts whereas rugby kickers have to factor in all sorts of angles and this extra distance.
Also rugby “kickers” play most of the match until subbed or injured and have to be involved in all aspects, running, tackling, rucks, mauls etc whereas NFL kickers are on for a specific moment and have no other requirement to waste their energy or get injured.
In addition, NFL kickers should be able to train purely on their kicking and develop technique and strength to be better kickers whereas rugby kickers have to train and build for multi roles.
They are better because they specialise. They are now regularly hitting 60 yard kicks (measured from.the snap i.e. add another 10+ yards on to official yardage as that is where it is kicked from) with very high accuracy and its harder than rugby because the ball is in motion, snapped back and held by a human rather than a off a tee....all while a load of 300 pound 6ft 6 guys try to murder you and you have to hit it sub optimal trajectory to get it over them.
Off a tee, no line of scrimmage they can hit it much further than in game numbers.
Fair enough but I guess it is subjective about what constitutes best. To me any Jonny Wilkinson rugby type who can score after running and tackling for 70 minutes having been battered by huge opponents is more impressive than the specialist who just has that one role - how many times do kickers actually get “sacked” it’s nowhere near the amount of hits a rugby kicker takes per game.
Completely different games and skill sets.
Of course the NFL kicker has a much narrower role (and that's reflected in their pay relative to the rest of the roster). But the psychological pressure on each kick is much higher as a result. Really reliable kickers who can hit the longer kicks are quite rare.
Agree, and it gave us the plot for Ace Ventura after all. I do watch the NFL highlights on YouTube on a Saturday morning - 20 mins per game makes it look great.
That is another thing the NFL innovated on, automatically generated highlights. Those 15 mins packages on YouTube are generated by the computer with pretty much zero human input now.
Everybody just went bonkers coz some guy ran about ten yards
What's this about? I don't have a clue.
Fake Rugby.
Bad Fake Rugby
The hits are much bigger in NFL. Although they have dialed it back a bit where it used to be allowed to go helmet to helmet. Also the acceleration and top end pace is greater than any rugby players. Rees-Zammit is thought of one of the fastest players in rugby, he had a go at NFL, but they basically said ain't anything special in terms of pace.
Also the kickers are better than rugby. No rugby kicker can make 65 yard penalty kicks or send it 80 yards kicking out the hand.
Is this true? The longest pro field goal was 66 yards, longest rugby penalty in a test was 70 yards. NFL players score from the centre of the posts whereas rugby kickers have to factor in all sorts of angles and this extra distance.
Also rugby “kickers” play most of the match until subbed or injured and have to be involved in all aspects, running, tackling, rucks, mauls etc whereas NFL kickers are on for a specific moment and have no other requirement to waste their energy or get injured.
In addition, NFL kickers should be able to train purely on their kicking and develop technique and strength to be better kickers whereas rugby kickers have to train and build for multi roles.
They are better because they specialise. They are now regularly hitting 60 yard kicks (measured from.the snap i.e. add another 10+ yards on to official yardage as that is where it is kicked from) with very high accuracy and its harder than rugby because the ball is in motion, snapped back and held by a human rather than a off a tee....all while a load of 300 pound 6ft 6 guys try to murder you and you have to hit it sub optimal trajectory to get it over them.
Off a tee, no line of scrimmage they can hit it much further than in game numbers.
Fair enough but I guess it is subjective about what constitutes best. To me any Jonny Wilkinson rugby type who can score after running and tackling for 70 minutes having been battered by huge opponents is more impressive than the specialist who just has that one role - how many times do kickers actually get “sacked” it’s nowhere near the amount of hits a rugby kicker takes per game.
Well yes, rugby players have to be multifaceted. As Christian Wade and Rees Zammit have found out having a balance of skills doesn't lend itself to NFL. It's ultra specialised game where a bloke can get $250k a year just for snapping the ball back on kicks, because they can do get it to the holder.fractions of a second faster.
Also PED usage is widespread in American football from very young age.
The specialism in American football makes each individual impressive at their specialism (kicking a ball far, blocking people, running fast and catching etc), but for me makes for a far less interesting team sport than the likes of rugby or football.
There's something about only being able to pick 15/11 players (plus a reasonable number of subs), considering their relative strengths and weaknesses, and letting them run around for 80/90 minutes that just feels like a more cohesive team game than NFL.
I actually wish rugby would restrict subs further such that the use of 6 front row players on each team per match wasn't standard practice. Let them play the full 80 as standard and reduce weight if needed - it's what we have at amateur level.
Everybody just went bonkers coz some guy ran about ten yards
What's this about? I don't have a clue.
Fake Rugby.
Bad Fake Rugby
The hits are much bigger in NFL. Although they have dialed it back a bit where it used to be allowed to go helmet to helmet. Also the acceleration and top end pace is greater than any rugby players. Rees-Zammit is thought of one of the fastest players in rugby, he had a go at NFL, but they basically said ain't anything special in terms of pace.
Also the kickers are better than rugby. No rugby kicker can make 65 yard penalty kicks or send it 80 yards kicking out the hand.
Is this true? The longest pro field goal was 66 yards, longest rugby penalty in a test was 70 yards. NFL players score from the centre of the posts whereas rugby kickers have to factor in all sorts of angles and this extra distance.
Also rugby “kickers” play most of the match until subbed or injured and have to be involved in all aspects, running, tackling, rucks, mauls etc whereas NFL kickers are on for a specific moment and have no other requirement to waste their energy or get injured.
In addition, NFL kickers should be able to train purely on their kicking and develop technique and strength to be better kickers whereas rugby kickers have to train and build for multi roles.
They are better because they specialise. They are now regularly hitting 60 yard kicks (measured from.the snap i.e. add another 10+ yards on to official yardage as that is where it is kicked from) with very high accuracy and its harder than rugby because the ball is in motion, snapped back and held by a human rather than a off a tee....all while a load of 300 pound 6ft 6 guys try to murder you and you have to hit it sub optimal trajectory to get it over them.
Off a tee, no line of scrimmage they can hit it much further than in game numbers.
Fair enough but I guess it is subjective about what constitutes best. To me any Jonny Wilkinson rugby type who can score after running and tackling for 70 minutes having been battered by huge opponents is more impressive than the specialist who just has that one role - how many times do kickers actually get “sacked” it’s nowhere near the amount of hits a rugby kicker takes per game.
Completely different games and skill sets.
Of course the NFL kicker has a much narrower role (and that's reflected in their pay relative to the rest of the roster). But the psychological pressure on each kick is much higher as a result. Really reliable kickers who can hit the longer kicks are quite rare.
And what is the equivalent skill set to a quarterback ? The requirements on a fly half are similarish, but nowhere near as great.
I recall someone suggesting that American Football and Rugby reflected the US and UK military approaches. The US employ huge force, focus on driving with that power to take territory, bring in huge specialist groups for certain tasks and keep pushing until each goal is reached whereas with the British there are specific roles but everyone needs to be able to chip in with all aspects and whilst trying to take territory, sometimes you have to accept you are going to get pushed all the way back or have to go all the way back and then around another route.
Everybody just went bonkers coz some guy ran about ten yards
What's this about? I don't have a clue.
Fake Rugby.
Bad Fake Rugby
The hits are much bigger in NFL. Although they have dialed it back a bit where it used to be allowed to go helmet to helmet. Also the acceleration and top end pace is greater than any rugby players. Rees-Zammit is thought of one of the fastest players in rugby, he had a go at NFL, but they basically said ain't anything special in terms of pace.
Also the kickers are better than rugby. No rugby kicker can make 65 yard penalty kicks or send it 80 yards kicking out the hand.
Is this true? The longest pro field goal was 66 yards, longest rugby penalty in a test was 70 yards. NFL players score from the centre of the posts whereas rugby kickers have to factor in all sorts of angles and this extra distance.
Also rugby “kickers” play most of the match until subbed or injured and have to be involved in all aspects, running, tackling, rucks, mauls etc whereas NFL kickers are on for a specific moment and have no other requirement to waste their energy or get injured.
In addition, NFL kickers should be able to train purely on their kicking and develop technique and strength to be better kickers whereas rugby kickers have to train and build for multi roles.
They are better because they specialise. They are now regularly hitting 60 yard kicks (measured from.the snap i.e. add another 10+ yards on to official yardage as that is where it is kicked from) with very high accuracy and its harder than rugby because the ball is in motion, snapped back and held by a human rather than a off a tee....all while a load of 300 pound 6ft 6 guys try to murder you and you have to hit it sub optimal trajectory to get it over them.
Off a tee, no line of scrimmage they can hit it much further than in game numbers.
Fair enough but I guess it is subjective about what constitutes best. To me any Jonny Wilkinson rugby type who can score after running and tackling for 70 minutes having been battered by huge opponents is more impressive than the specialist who just has that one role - how many times do kickers actually get “sacked” it’s nowhere near the amount of hits a rugby kicker takes per game.
Completely different games and skill sets.
Of course the NFL kicker has a much narrower role (and that's reflected in their pay relative to the rest of the roster). But the psychological pressure on each kick is much higher as a result. Really reliable kickers who can hit the longer kicks are quite rare.
And what is the equivalent skill set to a quarterback ? The requirements on a fly half are similarish, but nowhere near as great.
NFL has some of the most accomplished sportsmen in the world. The very best of the best. The fastest, the smartest, the most accurate. No one denies this, they earn insane money for a reason
But they are wasted in a mediocre sport. There is a reason America has not been able to export its sports whereas it exports all its other cultural products with great success
Everybody just went bonkers coz some guy ran about ten yards
What's this about? I don't have a clue.
Fake Rugby.
Bad Fake Rugby
The hits are much bigger in NFL. Although they have dialed it back a bit where it used to be allowed to go helmet to helmet. Also the acceleration and top end pace is greater than any rugby players. Rees-Zammit is thought of one of the fastest players in rugby, he had a go at NFL, but they basically said ain't anything special in terms of pace.
Also the kickers are better than rugby. No rugby kicker can make 65 yard penalty kicks or send it 80 yards kicking out the hand.
Is this true? The longest pro field goal was 66 yards, longest rugby penalty in a test was 70 yards. NFL players score from the centre of the posts whereas rugby kickers have to factor in all sorts of angles and this extra distance.
Also rugby “kickers” play most of the match until subbed or injured and have to be involved in all aspects, running, tackling, rucks, mauls etc whereas NFL kickers are on for a specific moment and have no other requirement to waste their energy or get injured.
In addition, NFL kickers should be able to train purely on their kicking and develop technique and strength to be better kickers whereas rugby kickers have to train and build for multi roles.
They are better because they specialise. They are now regularly hitting 60 yard kicks (measured from.the snap i.e. add another 10+ yards on to official yardage as that is where it is kicked from) with very high accuracy and its harder than rugby because the ball is in motion, snapped back and held by a human rather than a off a tee....all while a load of 300 pound 6ft 6 guys try to murder you and you have to hit it sub optimal trajectory to get it over them.
Off a tee, no line of scrimmage they can hit it much further than in game numbers.
Fair enough but I guess it is subjective about what constitutes best. To me any Jonny Wilkinson rugby type who can score after running and tackling for 70 minutes having been battered by huge opponents is more impressive than the specialist who just has that one role - how many times do kickers actually get “sacked” it’s nowhere near the amount of hits a rugby kicker takes per game.
Completely different games and skill sets.
Of course the NFL kicker has a much narrower role (and that's reflected in their pay relative to the rest of the roster). But the psychological pressure on each kick is much higher as a result. Really reliable kickers who can hit the longer kicks are quite rare.
Agree, and it gave us the plot for Ace Ventura after all. I do watch the NFL highlights on YouTube on a Saturday morning - 20 mins per game makes it look great.
The three hour game on a weekend can be quite a lot of fun to watch with family in the US. An authentic American experience.
Here follows the Green Party’s Six Step Plan to Abolish Landlords;
Introduce Rent Controls and Abolish Right to Buy. (HO401, HO503)
Abolish Section 21 Evictions and make all rental agreements secure long-term tenancies that can only be terminated by the tenant. (HO519)
Tax the Landlords - move towards a Land Value Tax levied on Owners, not Tenants. No Exceptions. Business Rates on AirBnBs/Short Lets. No Exceptions. Double taxation for empty properties. Put National Insurance on Private Rents. (HO401, EC780-2)
Remove finance for Landlords - end Buy to Let mortgages. (HO521)
Provide government backed finance to tenants. Give tenants First Right to Buy when Landlords sell, with their total rent paid discounted.
Provide finance to Councils. Councils should be given Second Right to Buy when Landlords sell, or property that hasn’t been insulated to EPC rating C or fails to meet the decent homes standard, or any property that is left empty for more than six months, with the total current tenancy discounted, tenants moved to a truly affordable Council tenancy. Government must change prudential borrowing requirements to allow Councils to buy back and build new housing on a massive scale. (2024 Manifesto Pg9).
Everybody just went bonkers coz some guy ran about ten yards
What's this about? I don't have a clue.
Fake Rugby.
Bad Fake Rugby
The hits are much bigger in NFL. Although they have dialed it back a bit where it used to be allowed to go helmet to helmet. Also the acceleration and top end pace is greater than any rugby players. Rees-Zammit is thought of one of the fastest players in rugby, he had a go at NFL, but they basically said ain't anything special in terms of pace.
Also the kickers are better than rugby. No rugby kicker can make 65 yard penalty kicks or send it 80 yards kicking out the hand.
Is this true? The longest pro field goal was 66 yards, longest rugby penalty in a test was 70 yards. NFL players score from the centre of the posts whereas rugby kickers have to factor in all sorts of angles and this extra distance.
Also rugby “kickers” play most of the match until subbed or injured and have to be involved in all aspects, running, tackling, rucks, mauls etc whereas NFL kickers are on for a specific moment and have no other requirement to waste their energy or get injured.
In addition, NFL kickers should be able to train purely on their kicking and develop technique and strength to be better kickers whereas rugby kickers have to train and build for multi roles.
They are better because they specialise. They are now regularly hitting 60 yard kicks (measured from.the snap i.e. add another 10+ yards on to official yardage as that is where it is kicked from) with very high accuracy and its harder than rugby because the ball is in motion, snapped back and held by a human rather than a off a tee....all while a load of 300 pound 6ft 6 guys try to murder you and you have to hit it sub optimal trajectory to get it over them.
Off a tee, no line of scrimmage they can hit it much further than in game numbers.
Fair enough but I guess it is subjective about what constitutes best. To me any Jonny Wilkinson rugby type who can score after running and tackling for 70 minutes having been battered by huge opponents is more impressive than the specialist who just has that one role - how many times do kickers actually get “sacked” it’s nowhere near the amount of hits a rugby kicker takes per game.
Completely different games and skill sets.
Of course the NFL kicker has a much narrower role (and that's reflected in their pay relative to the rest of the roster). But the psychological pressure on each kick is much higher as a result. Really reliable kickers who can hit the longer kicks are quite rare.
And what is the equivalent skill set to a quarterback ? The requirements on a fly half are similarish, but nowhere near as great.
NFL has some of the most accomplished sportsmen in the world. The very best of the best. The fastest, the smartest, the most accurate. No one denies this, they earn insane money for a reason
But they are wasted in a mediocre sport. There is a reason America has not been able to export its sports whereas it exports all its other cultural products with great success
The sports are shit
You do know you could have watched NFL yesterday, in front of a 60,000 sellout crowd in…
Bad Enoch is really not trying to win my vote back at all.
ICE are repugnant. Nobody should be modelling anything on them.
Hell has frozen over. I have had to give you a like. Armed masked goons beating the shit out of people going about their ( in many cases) lawful business before being thrown into a truck and dragged off to El Salvador. Is this genuinely proposed Conservative Party policy or just performative?
Depends what they are proposing
An independent, police department (if that’s the right term) accountable to its own leadership, and ministers with clear rules of engagement and subject to judicial oversight. A bit like the NCA but focused on immigration. Fine.
ICE? No
But 1 could be said to be “modelled” on 2
I'm not sure what Badenoch is thinking using ICE as a reference point.
The US police is already militarised compared to ours. Sure, we have specialised armed units to respond to comparatively rare incidents like in Manchester. But policing by consent is still a thing.
ICE is a paramilitary mob with masks, dragging people off the street and onto planes with no due process.
It would be political suicide here.
You can enforce immigration law without resorting to lawless thuggery.
Everybody just went bonkers coz some guy ran about ten yards
What's this about? I don't have a clue.
Fake Rugby.
Bad Fake Rugby
The hits are much bigger in NFL. Although they have dialed it back a bit where it used to be allowed to go helmet to helmet. Also the acceleration and top end pace is greater than any rugby players. Rees-Zammit is thought of one of the fastest players in rugby, he had a go at NFL, but they basically said ain't anything special in terms of pace.
Also the kickers are better than rugby. No rugby kicker can make 65 yard penalty kicks or send it 80 yards kicking out the hand.
Is this true? The longest pro field goal was 66 yards, longest rugby penalty in a test was 70 yards. NFL players score from the centre of the posts whereas rugby kickers have to factor in all sorts of angles and this extra distance.
Also rugby “kickers” play most of the match until subbed or injured and have to be involved in all aspects, running, tackling, rucks, mauls etc whereas NFL kickers are on for a specific moment and have no other requirement to waste their energy or get injured.
In addition, NFL kickers should be able to train purely on their kicking and develop technique and strength to be better kickers whereas rugby kickers have to train and build for multi roles.
They are better because they specialise. They are now regularly hitting 60 yard kicks (measured from.the snap i.e. add another 10+ yards on to official yardage as that is where it is kicked from) with very high accuracy and its harder than rugby because the ball is in motion, snapped back and held by a human rather than a off a tee....all while a load of 300 pound 6ft 6 guys try to murder you and you have to hit it sub optimal trajectory to get it over them.
Off a tee, no line of scrimmage they can hit it much further than in game numbers.
Fair enough but I guess it is subjective about what constitutes best. To me any Jonny Wilkinson rugby type who can score after running and tackling for 70 minutes having been battered by huge opponents is more impressive than the specialist who just has that one role - how many times do kickers actually get “sacked” it’s nowhere near the amount of hits a rugby kicker takes per game.
Completely different games and skill sets.
Of course the NFL kicker has a much narrower role (and that's reflected in their pay relative to the rest of the roster). But the psychological pressure on each kick is much higher as a result. Really reliable kickers who can hit the longer kicks are quite rare.
And what is the equivalent skill set to a quarterback ? The requirements on a fly half are similarish, but nowhere near as great.
NFL has some of the most accomplished sportsmen in the world. The very best of the best. The fastest, the smartest, the most accurate. No one denies this, they earn insane money for a reason
But they are wasted in a mediocre sport. There is a reason America has not been able to export its sports whereas it exports all its other cultural products with great success
The sports are shit
You do know you could have watched NFL yesterday, in front of a 60,000 sellout crowd in…
London.
A sport selling out a few 60,000 stadium matches per year in a city of 10 million plus including commuter towns isn't particularly impressive.
"We just want more money" say one Reform cabinet member on KCC. "We’ve got more demand than ever before and it’s growing", we're "down to the bare bones".
Another: "“Everyone thought we’d come in and there were going to be these huge costs we could cut away but there just aren’t"
The entire world knows that, and knew it before the local election, but the only background staff work they did was inserting their heads in Farage's anus.
The greatest defence for Reform areas are that they are utter clowns, and will I hope do little or nothing.
Everybody just went bonkers coz some guy ran about ten yards
What's this about? I don't have a clue.
Fake Rugby.
Bad Fake Rugby
The hits are much bigger in NFL. Although they have dialed it back a bit where it used to be allowed to go helmet to helmet. Also the acceleration and top end pace is greater than any rugby players. Rees-Zammit is thought of one of the fastest players in rugby, he had a go at NFL, but they basically said ain't anything special in terms of pace.
Also the kickers are better than rugby. No rugby kicker can make 65 yard penalty kicks or send it 80 yards kicking out the hand.
Is this true? The longest pro field goal was 66 yards, longest rugby penalty in a test was 70 yards. NFL players score from the centre of the posts whereas rugby kickers have to factor in all sorts of angles and this extra distance.
Also rugby “kickers” play most of the match until subbed or injured and have to be involved in all aspects, running, tackling, rucks, mauls etc whereas NFL kickers are on for a specific moment and have no other requirement to waste their energy or get injured.
In addition, NFL kickers should be able to train purely on their kicking and develop technique and strength to be better kickers whereas rugby kickers have to train and build for multi roles.
They are better because they specialise. They are now regularly hitting 60 yard kicks (measured from.the snap i.e. add another 10+ yards on to official yardage as that is where it is kicked from) with very high accuracy and its harder than rugby because the ball is in motion, snapped back and held by a human rather than a off a tee....all while a load of 300 pound 6ft 6 guys try to murder you and you have to hit it sub optimal trajectory to get it over them.
Off a tee, no line of scrimmage they can hit it much further than in game numbers.
Fair enough but I guess it is subjective about what constitutes best. To me any Jonny Wilkinson rugby type who can score after running and tackling for 70 minutes having been battered by huge opponents is more impressive than the specialist who just has that one role - how many times do kickers actually get “sacked” it’s nowhere near the amount of hits a rugby kicker takes per game.
Completely different games and skill sets.
Of course the NFL kicker has a much narrower role (and that's reflected in their pay relative to the rest of the roster). But the psychological pressure on each kick is much higher as a result. Really reliable kickers who can hit the longer kicks are quite rare.
And what is the equivalent skill set to a quarterback ? The requirements on a fly half are similarish, but nowhere near as great.
NFL has some of the most accomplished sportsmen in the world. The very best of the best. The fastest, the smartest, the most accurate. No one denies this, they earn insane money for a reason
But they are wasted in a mediocre sport. There is a reason America has not been able to export its sports whereas it exports all its other cultural products with great success
The sports are shit
Have you read about the early life of Alistair Cooke when he arrived (early 30s) in the USA?
IIRC there is a reference to him with a "glamorous" celebrity-linked social life.
Everybody just went bonkers coz some guy ran about ten yards
What's this about? I don't have a clue.
Fake Rugby.
Bad Fake Rugby
The hits are much bigger in NFL. Although they have dialed it back a bit where it used to be allowed to go helmet to helmet. Also the acceleration and top end pace is greater than any rugby players. Rees-Zammit is thought of one of the fastest players in rugby, he had a go at NFL, but they basically said ain't anything special in terms of pace.
Also the kickers are better than rugby. No rugby kicker can make 65 yard penalty kicks or send it 80 yards kicking out the hand.
Is this true? The longest pro field goal was 66 yards, longest rugby penalty in a test was 70 yards. NFL players score from the centre of the posts whereas rugby kickers have to factor in all sorts of angles and this extra distance.
Also rugby “kickers” play most of the match until subbed or injured and have to be involved in all aspects, running, tackling, rucks, mauls etc whereas NFL kickers are on for a specific moment and have no other requirement to waste their energy or get injured.
In addition, NFL kickers should be able to train purely on their kicking and develop technique and strength to be better kickers whereas rugby kickers have to train and build for multi roles.
They are better because they specialise. They are now regularly hitting 60 yard kicks (measured from.the snap i.e. add another 10+ yards on to official yardage as that is where it is kicked from) with very high accuracy and its harder than rugby because the ball is in motion, snapped back and held by a human rather than a off a tee....all while a load of 300 pound 6ft 6 guys try to murder you and you have to hit it sub optimal trajectory to get it over them.
Off a tee, no line of scrimmage they can hit it much further than in game numbers.
Fair enough but I guess it is subjective about what constitutes best. To me any Jonny Wilkinson rugby type who can score after running and tackling for 70 minutes having been battered by huge opponents is more impressive than the specialist who just has that one role - how many times do kickers actually get “sacked” it’s nowhere near the amount of hits a rugby kicker takes per game.
Completely different games and skill sets.
Of course the NFL kicker has a much narrower role (and that's reflected in their pay relative to the rest of the roster). But the psychological pressure on each kick is much higher as a result. Really reliable kickers who can hit the longer kicks are quite rare.
And what is the equivalent skill set to a quarterback ? The requirements on a fly half are similarish, but nowhere near as great.
NFL has some of the most accomplished sportsmen in the world. The very best of the best. The fastest, the smartest, the most accurate. No one denies this, they earn insane money for a reason
But they are wasted in a mediocre sport. There is a reason America has not been able to export its sports whereas it exports all its other cultural products with great success
The sports are shit
It's not that - it's just that in the US those are the sports that you get indoctrinated with at school. One of the highest paid employees at every US public school is the coach. But the rest of the world doesn't have that - so the US sports can only grow with volunteers, usually the parents. Where I was growing up we had 2 american football sides that had to travel to elsewhere in Scotland to get a game. But every weekend there were dozens and dozens of football and rugby teams.
Everybody just went bonkers coz some guy ran about ten yards
What's this about? I don't have a clue.
Fake Rugby.
Bad Fake Rugby
The hits are much bigger in NFL. Although they have dialed it back a bit where it used to be allowed to go helmet to helmet. Also the acceleration and top end pace is greater than any rugby players. Rees-Zammit is thought of one of the fastest players in rugby, he had a go at NFL, but they basically said ain't anything special in terms of pace.
Also the kickers are better than rugby. No rugby kicker can make 65 yard penalty kicks or send it 80 yards kicking out the hand.
Is this true? The longest pro field goal was 66 yards, longest rugby penalty in a test was 70 yards. NFL players score from the centre of the posts whereas rugby kickers have to factor in all sorts of angles and this extra distance.
Also rugby “kickers” play most of the match until subbed or injured and have to be involved in all aspects, running, tackling, rucks, mauls etc whereas NFL kickers are on for a specific moment and have no other requirement to waste their energy or get injured.
In addition, NFL kickers should be able to train purely on their kicking and develop technique and strength to be better kickers whereas rugby kickers have to train and build for multi roles.
They are better because they specialise. They are now regularly hitting 60 yard kicks (measured from.the snap i.e. add another 10+ yards on to official yardage as that is where it is kicked from) with very high accuracy and its harder than rugby because the ball is in motion, snapped back and held by a human rather than a off a tee....all while a load of 300 pound 6ft 6 guys try to murder you and you have to hit it sub optimal trajectory to get it over them.
Off a tee, no line of scrimmage they can hit it much further than in game numbers.
Fair enough but I guess it is subjective about what constitutes best. To me any Jonny Wilkinson rugby type who can score after running and tackling for 70 minutes having been battered by huge opponents is more impressive than the specialist who just has that one role - how many times do kickers actually get “sacked” it’s nowhere near the amount of hits a rugby kicker takes per game.
Completely different games and skill sets.
Of course the NFL kicker has a much narrower role (and that's reflected in their pay relative to the rest of the roster). But the psychological pressure on each kick is much higher as a result. Really reliable kickers who can hit the longer kicks are quite rare.
Agree, and it gave us the plot for Ace Ventura after all. I do watch the NFL highlights on YouTube on a Saturday morning - 20 mins per game makes it look great.
The three hour game on a weekend can be quite a lot of fun to watch with family in the US. An authentic American experience.
Everybody just went bonkers coz some guy ran about ten yards
What's this about? I don't have a clue.
Fake Rugby.
Bad Fake Rugby
The hits are much bigger in NFL. Although they have dialed it back a bit where it used to be allowed to go helmet to helmet. Also the acceleration and top end pace is greater than any rugby players. Rees-Zammit is thought of one of the fastest players in rugby, he had a go at NFL, but they basically said ain't anything special in terms of pace.
Also the kickers are better than rugby. No rugby kicker can make 65 yard penalty kicks or send it 80 yards kicking out the hand.
Is this true? The longest pro field goal was 66 yards, longest rugby penalty in a test was 70 yards. NFL players score from the centre of the posts whereas rugby kickers have to factor in all sorts of angles and this extra distance.
Also rugby “kickers” play most of the match until subbed or injured and have to be involved in all aspects, running, tackling, rucks, mauls etc whereas NFL kickers are on for a specific moment and have no other requirement to waste their energy or get injured.
In addition, NFL kickers should be able to train purely on their kicking and develop technique and strength to be better kickers whereas rugby kickers have to train and build for multi roles.
They are better because they specialise. They are now regularly hitting 60 yard kicks (measured from.the snap i.e. add another 10+ yards on to official yardage as that is where it is kicked from) with very high accuracy and its harder than rugby because the ball is in motion, snapped back and held by a human rather than a off a tee....all while a load of 300 pound 6ft 6 guys try to murder you and you have to hit it sub optimal trajectory to get it over them.
Off a tee, no line of scrimmage they can hit it much further than in game numbers.
Fair enough but I guess it is subjective about what constitutes best. To me any Jonny Wilkinson rugby type who can score after running and tackling for 70 minutes having been battered by huge opponents is more impressive than the specialist who just has that one role - how many times do kickers actually get “sacked” it’s nowhere near the amount of hits a rugby kicker takes per game.
Well yes, rugby players have to be multifaceted. As Christian Wade and Rees Zammit have found out having a balance of skills doesn't lend itself to NFL. It's ultra specialised game where a bloke can get $250k a year just for snapping the ball back on kicks, because they can do get it to the holder.fractions of a second faster.
Also PED usage is widespread in American football from very young age.
Re rugby players trying and failing to make it in the NFL - one of the reasons I have heard is that they simply don't have the years of learning how to play the game in them. So all the hundreds of different plays etc. Its ingrained into college kids in the US, but not for LRZ etc. I think you also have the issues of how seriously the NFL sides are about actually getting them playing as opposed to being part of the marketing back to Europe (so part of the whole game a week in Europe which is clearly coming)?
Everybody just went bonkers coz some guy ran about ten yards
What's this about? I don't have a clue.
Fake Rugby.
Bad Fake Rugby
The hits are much bigger in NFL. Although they have dialed it back a bit where it used to be allowed to go helmet to helmet. Also the acceleration and top end pace is greater than any rugby players. Rees-Zammit is thought of one of the fastest players in rugby, he had a go at NFL, but they basically said ain't anything special in terms of pace.
Also the kickers are better than rugby. No rugby kicker can make 65 yard penalty kicks or send it 80 yards kicking out the hand.
Is this true? The longest pro field goal was 66 yards, longest rugby penalty in a test was 70 yards. NFL players score from the centre of the posts whereas rugby kickers have to factor in all sorts of angles and this extra distance.
Also rugby “kickers” play most of the match until subbed or injured and have to be involved in all aspects, running, tackling, rucks, mauls etc whereas NFL kickers are on for a specific moment and have no other requirement to waste their energy or get injured.
In addition, NFL kickers should be able to train purely on their kicking and develop technique and strength to be better kickers whereas rugby kickers have to train and build for multi roles.
They are better because they specialise. They are now regularly hitting 60 yard kicks (measured from.the snap i.e. add another 10+ yards on to official yardage as that is where it is kicked from) with very high accuracy and its harder than rugby because the ball is in motion, snapped back and held by a human rather than a off a tee....all while a load of 300 pound 6ft 6 guys try to murder you and you have to hit it sub optimal trajectory to get it over them.
Off a tee, no line of scrimmage they can hit it much further than in game numbers.
Fair enough but I guess it is subjective about what constitutes best. To me any Jonny Wilkinson rugby type who can score after running and tackling for 70 minutes having been battered by huge opponents is more impressive than the specialist who just has that one role - how many times do kickers actually get “sacked” it’s nowhere near the amount of hits a rugby kicker takes per game.
Well yes, rugby players have to be multifaceted. As Christian Wade and Rees Zammit have found out having a balance of skills doesn't lend itself to NFL. It's ultra specialised game where a bloke can get $250k a year just for snapping the ball back on kicks, because they can do get it to the holder.fractions of a second faster.
Also PED usage is widespread in American football from very young age.
The specialism in American football makes each individual impressive at their specialism (kicking a ball far, blocking people, running fast and catching etc), but for me makes for a far less interesting team sport than the likes of rugby or football.
There's something about only being able to pick 15/11 players (plus a reasonable number of subs), considering their relative strengths and weaknesses, and letting them run around for 80/90 minutes that just feels like a more cohesive team game than NFL.
I actually wish rugby would restrict subs further such that the use of 6 front row players on each team per match wasn't standard practice. Let them play the full 80 as standard and reduce weight if needed - it's what we have at amateur level.
I find it hard to recall when rugby only had injury replacements. Arguably it was a better game for working out which side was strongest as you had 60 minutes of wearing the opponent down and then points would be scored in the last 20. Was often of feature of the 5 nations, for instance.
I do think we have reached overkill with subs now. And the idea of a 'bomb squad' of a very heavy front row to come on and play 20-25 minutes (so less overall fitness needed, more muscle) is not how I was raised in the game. But thats the current version and coaches now talk about a matchday squad of 23, rather than the starting 15 and how the finishers are as important.
Comments
Even immigration, today’s hot button topic, would be a lot less of a problem if housing had been a priority over the past three decades.
He's ordering U.S. troops to patrol cities in places that - at worst - have a couple blocks that could use a few more police, or even some federal law enforcement. A judge that Trump appointed just ruled that Trump's deployment isn't legal, saying there's no evidence that the protests were "significantly violent or disruptive."
But Trump is sending U.S. troops in anyway, from a red state, right after he told a room full of generals that the country is at war with an enemy from within, and after the President just told the Navy that the country has to "take care of" the Democrats.
The President is sending our military in to protect an army of masked federal agents who - while they may have begun by focusing on violent criminals - are now arresting legal residents and American citizens so they can hit Stephen Miller's quota or lose their jobs.
They are filming themselves using force against people who have not yet been found guilty of a crime. They are violating the basic 4th and 5th Amendment rights of Americans - every day. The person they report to - the most powerful White House official - calls the opposition party a domestic extremist organization, and accuses judges who rule against him of being legal insurrectionists.
I honestly don't know how Democrats can have any part of funding a government that will use the money to continue this. I don't know how this is not the focus right now.
https://x.com/jonfavs/status/1975029399184699539
Empower LHAs to build on land owned by councils with planning bypasses
Empower LHAs to borrow at government rates
LHA property not for sale, thus can set rents people can afford
That crashes the private rental price
That makes many of the for profit private landlords sell which dumps a load of property on the market
Price corrects, less money is tied up in mortgage / rent and thus can circulate through the economy providing jobs.
Don't legislate to crush landlords as the Greens suggest. We need a gentle correction as more LHA properties become available to rent, not a full-on collapse.
Anyway, I'm off to Glasgow today which has enough derelict land to house half a million people, much of which is within 15 minutes cycle away of Buchanan Street.
https://x.com/kyledcheney/status/1975036556500197526
This is the most basic constitutional law which goes all the way back to the Framers, and is not even minimally controversial.
Even the most deadheaded originalist cannot make a case against that.
Though it wouldn't entirely surprise me if the Roberts court were to try.
I'm only 25 mins in mind.
Also rugby “kickers” play most of the match until subbed or injured and have to be involved in all aspects, running, tackling, rucks, mauls etc whereas NFL kickers are on for a specific moment and have no other requirement to waste their energy or get injured.
In addition, NFL kickers should be able to train purely on their kicking and develop technique and strength to be better kickers whereas rugby kickers have to train and build for multi roles.
It's all castle on clouds stuff. Massive cuts to civil service numbers etc, but also a massive increase in deportations just doesn't add up.
I think Kemi really needs to find a way to get much more exposure as she is a bit drowned out by Farage and the Labour dramas. It doesn’t really matter if she is a bit rusty or clunky now because the more exposure she gets the better she will get and I think more people will see her as a goo alternative to Farage or Starmer/Burnham/Lenin.
The utter lack of talent on the Tory benches is actually quite shocking. Its the Dunning Kruger effect on acid; they are utterly deluded, not delusions of grandeur, but delusions of adequacy. Their flimsy understanding of virtually everything is compounded by an adamantine certainty that their room temperature IQ ideas are not just phoned in, but the product of an intellectual debate of more than 5 minutes.
The idea that by doubling down on the "nasty party", leave the ECHR drivel, is the way back to political relevance is utterly laughable. The idea that no one must speak in favour of the ECHR is pathetic and reveals Badenoch at her attempted authoritarian, vacuous worst.
This conference seems set to reveal that unless a radical change comes at the top, there really is no way back for the Conservatives.
Cosplaying Reform will kill the Tories.
Off a tee, no line of scrimmage they can hit it much further than in game numbers.
Very few rugby kicks are being made from 50+ yards.. but yes having to play the full match will have an effect. But for instance Elliot Daley has tried in practice and he can't make 60+ yarders and he has one of the longest kicks in rugby.
Hence the rise of independent media in the US.
The Free Press https://www.thefp.com/ was just sold for $150m, not bad for something that started as a Substack only four years ago, with 10 people and $1m in funding. They have paid subscribers in the six figures, people who just want to know the news rather than endless partisan opinions.
The latter is down mainly to Councils having been gutted by Government. The last one I was involved in, we were ready to move quickly and the Council asked for two or three rounds of delay, then said "no" to protect the party running the Authority (Lib Dems / Zadrozny).
It also neglects that there is more than one stage in bringing development land into use, because the developer (private or public) wants to share the planning permission risk.
It's like many national Green policies - half good sense, half loopy which will destroy the interests of those who it is aimed to benefit.
Oh…..
https://www.ft.com/content/277c6a95-e45e-4e7b-a99b-b757693955ca (£)
They're harder to throw, but easier to kick.
There's also a big different between kicking from the spot, and doing so under much more time pressure, from the snap.
https://www.ft.com/content/277c6a95-e45e-4e7b-a99b-b757693955ca#comments-anchor
"We just want more money" say one Reform cabinet member on KCC. "We’ve got more demand than ever before and it’s growing", we're "down to the bare bones".
Another: "“Everyone thought we’d come in and there were going to be these huge costs we could cut away but there just aren’t"
An independent, police department (if that’s the right term) accountable to its own leadership, and ministers with clear rules of engagement and subject to judicial oversight. A bit like the NCA but focused on immigration. Fine.
ICE? No
But 1 could be said to be “modelled” on 2
https://on.ft.com/4pTvJ62
But he might well be thinking "these morons don't understand the difference".
Also PED usage is widespread in American football from very young age.
Will listen to the RiH one.
Off-topic anyone-else finding their Spotify recommendation "More podcasts like this" aren't at all related, but a list of rabid wingnuts, mainly US?!
Evening better I met his keyboardist •Mysteria”
At a guess I’d say roughly half of the passengers are heading to the Tory conference. Among them are many examples of a very particular type: the Tory Boy. Think young Michael Gove.
Where will the Tory Boys go if the party continues to lose ground? I really can’t see them feeling comfortable in Reform. There are posh Reformers of course, but the Tory Boy is neither fash-city-trader of the Farage ilk nor Howard’s Way meets Eldorado baddie like Tice.
They have their Labour equivalents (somewhat less outwardly nerdy but equally or more earnest), and their Lib Dem equivalents (flamboyantly gayer, self-mocking but equally nerdy). My guess is that the Tory Boys will be the last conservatives standing when all else is lost.
Of course the NFL kicker has a much narrower role (and that's reflected in their pay relative to the rest of the roster).
But the psychological pressure on each kick is much higher as a result. Really reliable kickers who can hit the longer kicks are quite rare.
And what is the equivalent skill set to a quarterback ?
The requirements on a fly half are similarish, but nowhere near as great.
It's going to be a steep learning curve for Reform, but better that they actually learn if they are going to be running the place. I suspect the next governments cabinet are going to come from these councillors.
NEW THREAD
Went to my first NFL match
At one of the most iconic and hi tech new stadiums in the world
Then took my first self-driving vehicle ride, with a Waymo
Then had a large platter of British Colombian oysters
Then went to Iron Maiden front man’s solo gig at LA’s most beautiful venue, and drank Liquid Death with him at the after show party
Now I sip wine in my hotel once owned by Charlie Chaplin, who lost it in a game of poker to John Wayne
There's something about only being able to pick 15/11 players (plus a reasonable number of subs), considering their relative strengths and weaknesses, and letting them run around for 80/90 minutes that just feels like a more cohesive team game than NFL.
I actually wish rugby would restrict subs further such that the use of 6 front row players on each team per match wasn't standard practice. Let them play the full 80 as standard and reduce weight if needed - it's what we have at amateur level.
I’m not sure it’s totally fair but made me smile.
But they are wasted in a mediocre sport. There is a reason America has not been able to export its sports whereas it exports all its other cultural products with great success
The sports are shit
An authentic American experience.
London.
The US police is already militarised compared to ours. Sure, we have specialised armed units to respond to comparatively rare incidents like in Manchester. But policing by consent is still a thing.
ICE is a paramilitary mob with masks, dragging people off the street and onto planes with no due process.
It would be political suicide here.
You can enforce immigration law without resorting to lawless thuggery.
The greatest defence for Reform areas are that they are utter clowns, and will I hope do little or nothing.
IIRC there is a reference to him with a "glamorous" celebrity-linked social life.
I do think we have reached overkill with subs now. And the idea of a 'bomb squad' of a very heavy front row to come on and play 20-25 minutes (so less overall fitness needed, more muscle) is not how I was raised in the game. But thats the current version and coaches now talk about a matchday squad of 23, rather than the starting 15 and how the finishers are as important.