Don't think anyone who watched that has been able to get to sleep since.
I foolishly checked my phone at about 3.30 hoping it was over but got sucked in, so went down stairs and couldn’t leave till the end. Managed about 2 h sleep after, back to work this morning!
I didn’t watch the match, which means I’m fresh as a daisy this morning. But those that did, please explain why this was such a great performance? The stats look abject.
34% possession, 262 passes to Mexico’s 465, 2 corners their 12… sounds awful, like a typical old style England performance. Backs to the wall, can’t keep possession, can’t pass the ball l, just boot it upfield. Spend the whole time in our own box. Oh and we got someone sent off.
I’ve watched enough of those sorts of embarrassing games in my time. Usually people mutter afterwards about how lucky we were, what a poor performance. Yet you were all impressed. What gives?
Speaking French, living in France, adopting French names. Sounds like they assimilated well. What more do you want?
Small boats.
They came in small boats.
But they rarely rowed them; the Vikings that came over from Norway were sailors. I see the Swedes have been making some pointed comments about the Norwegian fans' "Ro" football chant, observing that it was the lowland Vikings from Sweden who rowed their boats about.
I didn’t watch the match, which means I’m fresh as a daisy this morning. But those that did, please explain why this was such a great performance? The stats look abject.
34% possession, 262 passes to Mexico’s 465, 2 corners their 12… sounds awful, like a typical old style England performance. Backs to the wall, can’t keep possession, can’t pass the ball l, just boot it upfield. Spend the whole time in our own box. Oh and we got someone sent off.
I’ve watched enough of those sorts of embarrassing games in my time. Usually people mutter afterwards about how lucky we were, what a poor performance. Yet you were all impressed. What gives?
Mexico's main goal threat was from an EFL player. EFL v Premier League.
I didn’t watch the match, which means I’m fresh as a daisy this morning. But those that did, please explain why this was such a great performance? The stats look abject.
34% possession, 262 passes to Mexico’s 465, 2 corners their 12… sounds awful, like a typical old style England performance. Backs to the wall, can’t keep possession, can’t pass the ball l, just boot it upfield. Spend the whole time in our own box. Oh and we got someone sent off.
I’ve watched enough of those sorts of embarrassing games in my time. Usually people mutter afterwards about how lucky we were, what a poor performance. Yet you were all impressed. What gives?
Pretty much every player did well (you can make a case against Saka and the guy who was sent off, but the rest all did their job), two great goals from play, some outstanding saves from Pickford, and few glaring mistakes despite having the crowd and at times the referee against us. Add tons of excitement and drama and the nerve-wracking wait for the final whistle and you have a perfect match, at least as entertainment.
I didn’t watch the match, which means I’m fresh as a daisy this morning. But those that did, please explain why this was such a great performance? The stats look abject.
34% possession, 262 passes to Mexico’s 465, 2 corners their 12… sounds awful, like a typical old style England performance. Backs to the wall, can’t keep possession, can’t pass the ball l, just boot it upfield. Spend the whole time in our own box. Oh and we got someone sent off.
I’ve watched enough of those sorts of embarrassing games in my time. Usually people mutter afterwards about how lucky we were, what a poor performance. Yet you were all impressed. What gives?
Pretty much every player did well (you can make a case against Saka and the guy who was sent off, but the rest all did their job), two great goals from play, some outstanding saves from Pickford, and few glaring mistakes despite having the crowd and at times the referee against us. Add tons of excitement and drama and the nerve-wracking wait for the final whistle and you have a perfect match, at least as entertainment.
This is illustrates that football is a particularly poor sport to judge by the stats.
The good thing about having young children is I'm experienced at waking up in the middle night (once at 1am, then snoozed until 2am), being kept awake for a couple of hours with some drama or another, then going back to sleep for the last couple of hours before being up at 6 and ready to go.
I knew I was training for something useful. Great match.
I didn’t watch the match, which means I’m fresh as a daisy this morning. But those that did, please explain why this was such a great performance? The stats look abject.
34% possession, 262 passes to Mexico’s 465, 2 corners their 12… sounds awful, like a typical old style England performance. Backs to the wall, can’t keep possession, can’t pass the ball l, just boot it upfield. Spend the whole time in our own box. Oh and we got someone sent off.
I’ve watched enough of those sorts of embarrassing games in my time. Usually people mutter afterwards about how lucky we were, what a poor performance. Yet you were all impressed. What gives?
Pretty much every player did well (you can make a case against Saka and the guy who was sent off, but the rest all did their job), two great goals from play, some outstanding saves from Pickford, and few glaring mistakes despite having the crowd and at times the referee against us. Add tons of excitement and drama and the nerve-wracking wait for the final whistle and you have a perfect match, at least as entertainment.
This is illustrates that football is a particularly poor sport to judge by the stats.
All about game-state. It doesn't matter how good a team is, when they have something to protect, they defend (never mind when down to ten men).
I had no intention of being up for the 1 am kickoff, but woke at about 4 am to discover that all was not over, so listened to the gripping end.
It would be better on the nerves if it were like general elections, and at the second they kicked off John Curtice arrived to tell you the final score.
I didn’t watch the match, which means I’m fresh as a daisy this morning. But those that did, please explain why this was such a great performance? The stats look abject.
34% possession, 262 passes to Mexico’s 465, 2 corners their 12… sounds awful, like a typical old style England performance. Backs to the wall, can’t keep possession, can’t pass the ball l, just boot it upfield. Spend the whole time in our own box. Oh and we got someone sent off.
I’ve watched enough of those sorts of embarrassing games in my time. Usually people mutter afterwards about how lucky we were, what a poor performance. Yet you were all impressed. What gives?
Read the match reports, then. The early two goal lead was fully deserved, and not luck. England had little choice but to defend for half of the game, being down to ten men. The stats might otherwise have been very different. Made the most of their chances, and didn't choke.
And the manager's substitutions all worked, which is in itself a minor miracle for England.
Did we ever hear the end of the story of ydoethur's series of letters addressed to a mysterious person culminating in a hand delivered one? (From 4th July)
I didn’t watch the match, which means I’m fresh as a daisy this morning. But those that did, please explain why this was such a great performance? The stats look abject.
34% possession, 262 passes to Mexico’s 465, 2 corners their 12… sounds awful, like a typical old style England performance. Backs to the wall, can’t keep possession, can’t pass the ball l, just boot it upfield. Spend the whole time in our own box. Oh and we got someone sent off.
I’ve watched enough of those sorts of embarrassing games in my time. Usually people mutter afterwards about how lucky we were, what a poor performance. Yet you were all impressed. What gives?
Mexico was superb from the off and dominated possession for large chunks of the game, roared on by the Azteca crowd. It was indeed backs against the wall, for much of the first half and almost all of the second half. Overall Mexico had 67% possession and 20 shots (vs 6).
Against this onslaught, from a host team which was playing miles above itself, England was magnificent, hitting Mexico twice in quick succession in the first half against the run of play with two Bellingham goals. The first from a sublime Saka assist and the second a one-two with Kane.
Pickford pulled off some amazing athletic saves, but the whole England team - every one - gave performances of at least 8/10 IMO. The best England performance I've ever seen I think, especially given the occasion and location.
Adding the theatre was a couple of questionable VAR decisions (I thought the England sending off was understandable but harsh and I disagreed with the penalty against Kane).
In terms of player ratings, it was a match where many of the losing team could be given over 8/10 but for England I'd be hard pressed to give Pickford less than 10/10 and Bellingham close to that score.
Preparations have begun for a by-election in Clacton
Assuming Farage is found to be a naughty boy, I'd think it will be fairly easy to get 10% of his constituents to sign a recall petition (there must be that many who hate his guts, even in Clacton). Presumably he then romps home fairly effortlessly in the by-election, and we all ask what was the point of the whole saga, other than burning a load of taxpayers money.
Personally, I'm unconvinced any of this stuff will stick to him. My reasoning is simple - Farage's appeal is what he says he will *do*, not his personal probity.
Voters have worked out long ago that pretty much all politicians are bent as a nine bob note. It's still a problem for the left, because their politicans inevitably come claiming to have the moral high ground, then are revealed to be grubby little oiks like all the others. That's why the whole Lord Ali thing was so damaging to Starmer - instead of being pure as the driven snow, he was revealed as just another sanctimonious prig with his hand in the till (yes, it was technically within the rules, but the moral high ground it was not).
It's much less a problem for the right, because voters on the right are inclined to say - who cares if he's a bounder, it's what he *does* that matters. That's how Johnson got elected - not because anyone thought Johnson was anything other than a shit, but because Brexit had to happen, and he was the only plausible path to making it happen.
Reform need to be elected because the government needs radical change. The post Blair settlement does not work, and cannot work, as has been proven over the last 20 years. The only party which can rip it up and start again is Reform. The fact that they are led by a shit doesn't matter, providing it gets done and the human rights/quangos/equalities industry which is smothering the country gets smashed to smithereens. That's what the country needs, that's what voters want.
I can't see why Farage being funded by some crypto scoundrels is likely to make any difference to that. At least it's better than him sucking on the teat of the taxpayer. It's not *corruption* either, for the simple reason that they were funding him at a time when he had no political power, nor any obvious prospect of getting any - ergo, there was no corrupt benefit to be gained. For good or ill, these people actually just *agree* with Farage, and have been chucking him money, probably more in the hope that he might move the Overton Window a bit than anything else - I doubt at then time of these donation any of them thought he was ever likely to be a serious contender for Prime Minister.
I don't see that. Farage has nothing but rhetoric, and takes whatever policy positions are conditioned by that rhetoric, and the arguable (word chosen for the benefit of PB) money that he has been paid by whoever has given it to him.
I think there may very well be more to come - how much are in quiet little files and PDFs in media organisaions? They have all summer to get their clicks.
In power he will be like Trump - as incompetent and damaging, as he is lazy and inconsistent.
I more expect that the wheels will come off and he will try and walk away.
I didn’t watch the match, which means I’m fresh as a daisy this morning. But those that did, please explain why this was such a great performance? The stats look abject.
34% possession, 262 passes to Mexico’s 465, 2 corners their 12… sounds awful, like a typical old style England performance. Backs to the wall, can’t keep possession, can’t pass the ball l, just boot it upfield. Spend the whole time in our own box. Oh and we got someone sent off.
I’ve watched enough of those sorts of embarrassing games in my time. Usually people mutter afterwards about how lucky we were, what a poor performance. Yet you were all impressed. What gives?
Pretty much every player did well (you can make a case against Saka and the guy who was sent off, but the rest all did their job), two great goals from play, some outstanding saves from Pickford, and few glaring mistakes despite having the crowd and at times the referee against us. Add tons of excitement and drama and the nerve-wracking wait for the final whistle and you have a perfect match, at least as entertainment.
Thanks. Was an interesting phenomenon to wake to such universal praise for the team.
The priority for the footballing world now is for Belgium to boot the USA out of the competition in as emphatic a way as possible. It’s striking how American commenters, from all sides of politics, simply don’t notice the foul stench of what Trump and Infantino cooked up over the weekend. They do not get it.
I didn’t watch the match, which means I’m fresh as a daisy this morning. But those that did, please explain why this was such a great performance? The stats look abject.
34% possession, 262 passes to Mexico’s 465, 2 corners their 12… sounds awful, like a typical old style England performance. Backs to the wall, can’t keep possession, can’t pass the ball l, just boot it upfield. Spend the whole time in our own box. Oh and we got someone sent off.
I’ve watched enough of those sorts of embarrassing games in my time. Usually people mutter afterwards about how lucky we were, what a poor performance. Yet you were all impressed. What gives?
A lot of the international coverage I have read this morning, so safe from any English bias, has called it the game of the tournament, an instant World Cup classic and even one of the best World Cup matches ever. I think it was from the swing of the game, England up then Mexico claw back, red card, penalties, a hugely noisy home crowd, backs against the wall defending.
A v good game.
England Norway will be like a good premier league match stylistically.
Well, we did it - the least likely thing since the last one.
Onwards and sideaways - I think I'drather we were facing Brazil and given our record against smaller European teams at vital stages of competitions - Iceland, Croatia - a note of caution is deserved.
I still rate CONSTITUTION RIVER's win in the Eclipse and CALANDAGAN's in the Grand Prix de Saint Cloud as my sporting performances of the weekend but what do I know?
Did we ever hear the end of the story of ydoethur's series of letters addressed to a mysterious person culminating in a hand delivered one? (From 4th July)
I didn't stay up as I need my rest but it sounds an amazing game
Norway beating Brazil was unexpected, but well deserved as Brazil were poor and did not deserve to win
And as far as Trump and the corrupt FIFA are concerned I assume we are all Belgium supporters now
How can these corrupt individuals get away with spoiling the beautiful game ?
It makes one despair
The corruption is spreading. Actually I think if it had been Kane or Bellingham this might be the case, hopefully not for Quansah.
‘ “The USA's red card was suspended after Donald Trump put in a call to Infantino. Could this be Keir Starmer's final act as prime minister - to try and get the red card from last night suspended?”
Education Minister Olivia Bailey: “Well, what I'm supposed to say is, politicians shouldn't interfere in sports. But knowing the Prime Minister, he is probably already texting him.”’
Speaking French, living in France, adopting French names. Sounds like they assimilated well. What more do you want?
What, like William (from the Old High German Willahelm)?
Interesting though that the Norse men (shall we call the that) took 30-50 years to adopt old French after settling in Normandy and then 300+ years to adopt English after invading England.
I didn’t watch the match, which means I’m fresh as a daisy this morning. But those that did, please explain why this was such a great performance? The stats look abject.
34% possession, 262 passes to Mexico’s 465, 2 corners their 12… sounds awful, like a typical old style England performance. Backs to the wall, can’t keep possession, can’t pass the ball l, just boot it upfield. Spend the whole time in our own box. Oh and we got someone sent off.
I’ve watched enough of those sorts of embarrassing games in my time. Usually people mutter afterwards about how lucky we were, what a poor performance. Yet you were all impressed. What gives?
You need to have watched it live to appreciate it!
I didn’t watch the match, which means I’m fresh as a daisy this morning. But those that did, please explain why this was such a great performance? The stats look abject.
34% possession, 262 passes to Mexico’s 465, 2 corners their 12… sounds awful, like a typical old style England performance. Backs to the wall, can’t keep possession, can’t pass the ball l, just boot it upfield. Spend the whole time in our own box. Oh and we got someone sent off.
I’ve watched enough of those sorts of embarrassing games in my time. Usually people mutter afterwards about how lucky we were, what a poor performance. Yet you were all impressed. What gives?
I didn’t watch the match, which means I’m fresh as a daisy this morning. But those that did, please explain why this was such a great performance? The stats look abject.
34% possession, 262 passes to Mexico’s 465, 2 corners their 12… sounds awful, like a typical old style England performance. Backs to the wall, can’t keep possession, can’t pass the ball l, just boot it upfield. Spend the whole time in our own box. Oh and we got someone sent off.
I’ve watched enough of those sorts of embarrassing games in my time. Usually people mutter afterwards about how lucky we were, what a poor performance. Yet you were all impressed. What gives?
Pretty much every player did well (you can make a case against Saka and the guy who was sent off, but the rest all did their job), two great goals from play, some outstanding saves from Pickford, and few glaring mistakes despite having the crowd and at times the referee against us. Add tons of excitement and drama and the nerve-wracking wait for the final whistle and you have a perfect match, at least as entertainment.
This is illustrates that football is a particularly poor sport to judge by the stats.
I didn't stay up as I need my rest but it sounds an amazing game
Norway beating Brazil was unexpected, but well deserved as Brazil were poor and did not deserve to win
And as far as Trump and the corrupt FIFA are concerned I assume we are all Belgium supporters now
How can these corrupt individuals get away with spoiling the beautiful game ?
It makes one despair
The corruption is spreading. Actually I think if it had been Kane or Bellingham this might be the case, hopefully not for Quansah.
‘ “The USA's red card was suspended after Donald Trump put in a call to Infantino. Could this be Keir Starmer's final act as prime minister - to try and get the red card from last night suspended?”
Education Minister Olivia Bailey: “Well, what I'm supposed to say is, politicians shouldn't interfere in sports. But knowing the Prime Minister, he is probably already texting him.”’
Preparations have begun for a by-election in Clacton
Assuming Farage is found to be a naughty boy, I'd think it will be fairly easy to get 10% of his constituents to sign a recall petition (there must be that many who hate his guts, even in Clacton). Presumably he then romps home fairly effortlessly in the by-election, and we all ask what was the point of the whole saga, other than burning a load of taxpayers money.
Personally, I'm unconvinced any of this stuff will stick to him. My reasoning is simple - Farage's appeal is what he says he will *do*, not his personal probity.
Voters have worked out long ago that pretty much all politicians are bent as a nine bob note. It's still a problem for the left, because their politicans inevitably come claiming to have the moral high ground, then are revealed to be grubby little oiks like all the others. That's why the whole Lord Ali thing was so damaging to Starmer - instead of being pure as the driven snow, he was revealed as just another sanctimonious prig with his hand in the till (yes, it was technically within the rules, but the moral high ground it was not).
It's much less a problem for the right, because voters on the right are inclined to say - who cares if he's a bounder, it's what he *does* that matters. That's how Johnson got elected - not because anyone thought Johnson was anything other than a shit, but because Brexit had to happen, and he was the only plausible path to making it happen.
Reform need to be elected because the government needs radical change. The post Blair settlement does not work, and cannot work, as has been proven over the last 20 years. The only party which can rip it up and start again is Reform. The fact that they are led by a shit doesn't matter, providing it gets done and the human rights/quangos/equalities industry which is smothering the country gets smashed to smithereens. That's what the country needs, that's what voters want.
I can't see why Farage being funded by some crypto scoundrels is likely to make any difference to that. At least it's better than him sucking on the teat of the taxpayer. It's not *corruption* either, for the simple reason that they were funding him at a time when he had no political power, nor any obvious prospect of getting any - ergo, there was no corrupt benefit to be gained. For good or ill, these people actually just *agree* with Farage, and have been chucking him money, probably more in the hope that he might move the Overton Window a bit than anything else - I doubt at then time of these donation any of them thought he was ever likely to be a serious contender for Prime Minister.
I don't see that. Farage has nothing but rhetoric, and takes whatever policy positions are conditioned by that rhetoric, and the arguable (word chosen for the benefit of PB) money that he has been paid by whoever has given it to him.
I think there may very well be more to come - how much are in quiet little files and PDFs in media organisaions? They have all summer to get their clicks.
In power he will be like Trump - as incompetent and damaging, as he is lazy and inconsistent.
I more expect that the wheels will come off and he will try and walk away.
I think the more consequential question is where a thinking opposition party in the UK will appear from.
Reading the report we were discussing at the weekend (actually more a memo - it has a total of about 10-12 pages of content) about marriage and "unmarried mothers" allegedly being better off is feels like a return to a time 35-40 years ago when Peter Lilley was doing his "little list" of targets.
There is just a crass engagement with correlations, and no notice paid to either causations or consequences.
I didn’t watch the match, which means I’m fresh as a daisy this morning. But those that did, please explain why this was such a great performance? The stats look abject.
34% possession, 262 passes to Mexico’s 465, 2 corners their 12… sounds awful, like a typical old style England performance. Backs to the wall, can’t keep possession, can’t pass the ball l, just boot it upfield. Spend the whole time in our own box. Oh and we got someone sent off.
I’ve watched enough of those sorts of embarrassing games in my time. Usually people mutter afterwards about how lucky we were, what a poor performance. Yet you were all impressed. What gives?
Pretty much every player did well (you can make a case against Saka and the guy who was sent off, but the rest all did their job), two great goals from play, some outstanding saves from Pickford, and few glaring mistakes despite having the crowd and at times the referee against us. Add tons of excitement and drama and the nerve-wracking wait for the final whistle and you have a perfect match, at least as entertainment.
Thanks. Was an interesting phenomenon to wake to such universal praise for the team.
The priority for the footballing world now is for Belgium to boot the USA out of the competition in as emphatic a way as possible. It’s striking how American commenters, from all sides of politics, simply don’t notice the foul stench of what Trump and Infantino cooked up over the weekend. They do not get it.
The US commentary seems to be either 'nothing to see here', or 'everyone knows FIFA has been corrupt since forever; nothing to see here'.
I didn’t watch the match, which means I’m fresh as a daisy this morning. But those that did, please explain why this was such a great performance? The stats look abject.
34% possession, 262 passes to Mexico’s 465, 2 corners their 12… sounds awful, like a typical old style England performance. Backs to the wall, can’t keep possession, can’t pass the ball l, just boot it upfield. Spend the whole time in our own box. Oh and we got someone sent off.
I’ve watched enough of those sorts of embarrassing games in my time. Usually people mutter afterwards about how lucky we were, what a poor performance. Yet you were all impressed. What gives?
A lot of the international coverage I have read this morning, so safe from any English bias, has called it the game of the tournament, an instant World Cup classic and even one of the best World Cup matches ever. I think it was from the swing of the game, England up then Mexico claw back, red card, penalties, a hugely noisy home crowd, backs against the wall defending.
A v good game.
England Norway will be like a good premier league match stylistically.
England are last night in isolation by far the better team (Man for man the value of Mexico is similar to Coventry City & England Arsenal), the lack of England's physical adaptation to altitude creating a big leveller between the teams, hence the possession stats being back to front compared to how you'd expect the game to be at sea level.
Norway is roughly on a par with Villa
Game of the tournament still Cape Verde vs Argentina I think though.
I didn’t watch the match, which means I’m fresh as a daisy this morning. But those that did, please explain why this was such a great performance? The stats look abject.
34% possession, 262 passes to Mexico’s 465, 2 corners their 12… sounds awful, like a typical old style England performance. Backs to the wall, can’t keep possession, can’t pass the ball l, just boot it upfield. Spend the whole time in our own box. Oh and we got someone sent off.
I’ve watched enough of those sorts of embarrassing games in my time. Usually people mutter afterwards about how lucky we were, what a poor performance. Yet you were all impressed. What gives?
Pretty much every player did well (you can make a case against Saka and the guy who was sent off, but the rest all did their job), two great goals from play, some outstanding saves from Pickford, and few glaring mistakes despite having the crowd and at times the referee against us. Add tons of excitement and drama and the nerve-wracking wait for the final whistle and you have a perfect match, at least as entertainment.
Thanks. Was an interesting phenomenon to wake to such universal praise for the team.
The priority for the footballing world now is for Belgium to boot the USA out of the competition in as emphatic a way as possible. It’s striking how American commenters, from all sides of politics, simply don’t notice the foul stench of what Trump and Infantino cooked up over the weekend. They do not get it.
The US commentary seems to be either 'nothing to see here', or 'everyone knows FIFA has been corrupt since forever; nothing to see here'.
I am appalled and disgusted.
By FIFA, apparently, withdrawing the red card for free.
I would have at least expected a new watch for every member of the executive board of FIFA…
Speaking French, living in France, adopting French names. Sounds like they assimilated well. What more do you want?
What, like William (from the Old High German Willahelm)?
Interesting though that the Norse men (shall we call the that) took 30-50 years to adopt old French after settling in Normandy and then 300+ years to adopt English after invading England.
The French they spoke was Norman-French so a dialect which is heavily influenced by Old Norse. There are still a good number of people here who speak Jèrriais which is Jersey Norman French, s sub dialect.
The Norman French dialects are suitably different to French, as an example “ Bonsouair! Seyiz les beinv’nus” instead of “ bonsoir et bienvenue”. That’s a basic difference but massive differences where French visitors often think we’ve made terrible mistakes with the French language on signs which are just in English and Jèrriais.
I didn’t watch the match, which means I’m fresh as a daisy this morning. But those that did, please explain why this was such a great performance? The stats look abject.
34% possession, 262 passes to Mexico’s 465, 2 corners their 12… sounds awful, like a typical old style England performance. Backs to the wall, can’t keep possession, can’t pass the ball l, just boot it upfield. Spend the whole time in our own box. Oh and we got someone sent off.
I’ve watched enough of those sorts of embarrassing games in my time. Usually people mutter afterwards about how lucky we were, what a poor performance. Yet you were all impressed. What gives?
Pretty much every player did well (you can make a case against Saka and the guy who was sent off, but the rest all did their job), two great goals from play, some outstanding saves from Pickford, and few glaring mistakes despite having the crowd and at times the referee against us. Add tons of excitement and drama and the nerve-wracking wait for the final whistle and you have a perfect match, at least as entertainment.
Thanks. Was an interesting phenomenon to wake to such universal praise for the team.
The priority for the footballing world now is for Belgium to boot the USA out of the competition in as emphatic a way as possible. It’s striking how American commenters, from all sides of politics, simply don’t notice the foul stench of what Trump and Infantino cooked up over the weekend. They do not get it.
The US commentary seems to be either 'nothing to see here', or 'everyone knows FIFA has been corrupt since forever; nothing to see here'.
I am appalled and disgusted.
By FIFA, apparently, withdrawing the red card for free.
I would have at least expected a new watch for every member of the executive board of FIFA…
An end of term pre-emptive pardon is probably worth more than a watch.
I didn't stay up as I need my rest but it sounds an amazing game
Norway beating Brazil was unexpected, but well deserved as Brazil were poor and did not deserve to win
And as far as Trump and the corrupt FIFA are concerned I assume we are all Belgium supporters now
How can these corrupt individuals get away with spoiling the beautiful game ?
It makes one despair
Balogun should not have been sent off, but of course I agree this stinks.
Football's red card rules are one reason why I've largely turned away from watching the game (which VAR has spoiled and red cards and penalties are given too readily).
If a player is sent off it changes, and often spoils, the game which is a shame for all including spectators. If a player is sent off in the first minute his team is disadvantaged for 89 minutes. If a player is sent off in the 89th minute his team is disadvantaged for 1 minute.
Perhaps teams who have a player sent off in the first half should be restored to 11 men after the break (and teams who have a player sent off in the half should be restored to 11 if extra time applies).
Preparations have begun for a by-election in Clacton
Assuming Farage is found to be a naughty boy, I'd think it will be fairly easy to get 10% of his constituents to sign a recall petition (there must be that many who hate his guts, even in Clacton). Presumably he then romps home fairly effortlessly in the by-election, and we all ask what was the point of the whole saga, other than burning a load of taxpayers money.
Personally, I'm unconvinced any of this stuff will stick to him. My reasoning is simple - Farage's appeal is what he says he will *do*, not his personal probity.
Voters have worked out long ago that pretty much all politicians are bent as a nine bob note. It's still a problem for the left, because their politicans inevitably come claiming to have the moral high ground, then are revealed to be grubby little oiks like all the others. That's why the whole Lord Ali thing was so damaging to Starmer - instead of being pure as the driven snow, he was revealed as just another sanctimonious prig with his hand in the till (yes, it was technically within the rules, but the moral high ground it was not).
It's much less a problem for the right, because voters on the right are inclined to say - who cares if he's a bounder, it's what he *does* that matters. That's how Johnson got elected - not because anyone thought Johnson was anything other than a shit, but because Brexit had to happen, and he was the only plausible path to making it happen.
Reform need to be elected because the government needs radical change. The post Blair settlement does not work, and cannot work, as has been proven over the last 20 years. The only party which can rip it up and start again is Reform. The fact that they are led by a shit doesn't matter, providing it gets done and the human rights/quangos/equalities industry which is smothering the country gets smashed to smithereens. That's what the country needs, that's what voters want.
I can't see why Farage being funded by some crypto scoundrels is likely to make any difference to that. At least it's better than him sucking on the teat of the taxpayer. It's not *corruption* either, for the simple reason that they were funding him at a time when he had no political power, nor any obvious prospect of getting any - ergo, there was no corrupt benefit to be gained. For good or ill, these people actually just *agree* with Farage, and have been chucking him money, probably more in the hope that he might move the Overton Window a bit than anything else - I doubt at then time of these donation any of them thought he was ever likely to be a serious contender for Prime Minister.
I don't see that. Farage has nothing but rhetoric, and takes whatever policy positions are conditioned by that rhetoric, and the arguable (word chosen for the benefit of PB) money that he has been paid by whoever has given it to him.
I think there may very well be more to come - how much are in quiet little files and PDFs in media organisaions? They have all summer to get their clicks.
In power he will be like Trump - as incompetent and damaging, as he is lazy and inconsistent.
I more expect that the wheels will come off and he will try and walk away.
I think the more consequential question is where a thinking opposition party in the UK will appear from.
Reading the report we were discussing at the weekend (actually more a memo - it has a total of about 10-12 pages of content) about marriage and "unmarried mothers" allegedly being better off is feels like a return to a time 35-40 years ago when Peter Lilley was doing his "little list" of targets.
There is just a crass engagement with correlations, and no notice paid to either causations or consequences.
Typo.
is feels / it feels
I wonder why there was no mention of "unmarried fathers", nor of the social reasons why couples separate. Just how far back in the mists of history has the former IDS / Monty think tank decamped culturally?
I didn’t watch the match, which means I’m fresh as a daisy this morning. But those that did, please explain why this was such a great performance? The stats look abject.
34% possession, 262 passes to Mexico’s 465, 2 corners their 12… sounds awful, like a typical old style England performance. Backs to the wall, can’t keep possession, can’t pass the ball l, just boot it upfield. Spend the whole time in our own box. Oh and we got someone sent off.
I’ve watched enough of those sorts of embarrassing games in my time. Usually people mutter afterwards about how lucky we were, what a poor performance. Yet you were all impressed. What gives?
Mexico was superb from the off and dominated possession for large chunks of the game, roared on by the Azteca crowd. It was indeed backs against the wall, for much of the first half and almost all of the second half. Overall Mexico had 67% possession and 20 shots (vs 6).
Against this onslaught, from a host team which was playing miles above itself, England was magnificent, hitting Mexico twice in quick succession in the first half against the run of play with two Bellingham goals. The first from a sublime Saka assist and the second a one-two with Kane.
Pickford pulled off some amazing athletic saves, but the whole England team - every one - gave performances of at least 8/10 IMO. The best England performance I've ever seen I think, especially given the occasion and location.
Adding the theatre was a couple of questionable VAR decisions (I thought the England sending off was understandable but harsh and I disagreed with the penalty against Kane).
In terms of player ratings, it was a match where many of the losing team could be given over 8/10 but for England I'd be hard pressed to give Pickford less than 10/10 and Bellingham close to that score.
Utterly brilliant sporting theatre.
I should add to this that the England substitutes were superb too.
I didn’t watch the match, which means I’m fresh as a daisy this morning. But those that did, please explain why this was such a great performance? The stats look abject.
34% possession, 262 passes to Mexico’s 465, 2 corners their 12… sounds awful, like a typical old style England performance. Backs to the wall, can’t keep possession, can’t pass the ball l, just boot it upfield. Spend the whole time in our own box. Oh and we got someone sent off.
I’ve watched enough of those sorts of embarrassing games in my time. Usually people mutter afterwards about how lucky we were, what a poor performance. Yet you were all impressed. What gives?
Pretty much every player did well (you can make a case against Saka and the guy who was sent off, but the rest all did their job), two great goals from play, some outstanding saves from Pickford, and few glaring mistakes despite having the crowd and at times the referee against us. Add tons of excitement and drama and the nerve-wracking wait for the final whistle and you have a perfect match, at least as entertainment.
Thanks. Was an interesting phenomenon to wake to such universal praise for the team.
The priority for the footballing world now is for Belgium to boot the USA out of the competition in as emphatic a way as possible. It’s striking how American commenters, from all sides of politics, simply don’t notice the foul stench of what Trump and Infantino cooked up over the weekend. They do not get it.
The US commentary seems to be either 'nothing to see here', or 'everyone knows FIFA has been corrupt since forever; nothing to see here'.
I am appalled and disgusted.
By FIFA, apparently, withdrawing the red card for free.
I would have at least expected a new watch for every member of the executive board of FIFA…
Trump takes bribes, sometimes in return for favours; he doesn't hand them out.
I didn’t watch the match, which means I’m fresh as a daisy this morning. But those that did, please explain why this was such a great performance? The stats look abject.
34% possession, 262 passes to Mexico’s 465, 2 corners their 12… sounds awful, like a typical old style England performance. Backs to the wall, can’t keep possession, can’t pass the ball l, just boot it upfield. Spend the whole time in our own box. Oh and we got someone sent off.
I’ve watched enough of those sorts of embarrassing games in my time. Usually people mutter afterwards about how lucky we were, what a poor performance. Yet you were all impressed. What gives?
Pretty much every player did well (you can make a case against Saka and the guy who was sent off, but the rest all did their job), two great goals from play, some outstanding saves from Pickford, and few glaring mistakes despite having the crowd and at times the referee against us. Add tons of excitement and drama and the nerve-wracking wait for the final whistle and you have a perfect match, at least as entertainment.
Thanks. Was an interesting phenomenon to wake to such universal praise for the team.
The priority for the footballing world now is for Belgium to boot the USA out of the competition in as emphatic a way as possible. It’s striking how American commenters, from all sides of politics, simply don’t notice the foul stench of what Trump and Infantino cooked up over the weekend. They do not get it.
The US commentary seems to be either 'nothing to see here', or 'everyone knows FIFA has been corrupt since forever; nothing to see here'.
I am appalled and disgusted.
By FIFA, apparently, withdrawing the red card for free.
I would have at least expected a new watch for every member of the executive board of FIFA…
Here is the thing, FIFA has not actually rescinded the red card ! This does sometimes happen and it would look a touch more above board if it was.
I didn’t watch the match, which means I’m fresh as a daisy this morning. But those that did, please explain why this was such a great performance? The stats look abject.
34% possession, 262 passes to Mexico’s 465, 2 corners their 12… sounds awful, like a typical old style England performance. Backs to the wall, can’t keep possession, can’t pass the ball l, just boot it upfield. Spend the whole time in our own box. Oh and we got someone sent off.
I’ve watched enough of those sorts of embarrassing games in my time. Usually people mutter afterwards about how lucky we were, what a poor performance. Yet you were all impressed. What gives?
Pretty much every player did well (you can make a case against Saka and the guy who was sent off, but the rest all did their job), two great goals from play, some outstanding saves from Pickford, and few glaring mistakes despite having the crowd and at times the referee against us. Add tons of excitement and drama and the nerve-wracking wait for the final whistle and you have a perfect match, at least as entertainment.
Thanks. Was an interesting phenomenon to wake to such universal praise for the team.
The priority for the footballing world now is for Belgium to boot the USA out of the competition in as emphatic a way as possible. It’s striking how American commenters, from all sides of politics, simply don’t notice the foul stench of what Trump and Infantino cooked up over the weekend. They do not get it.
The US commentary seems to be either 'nothing to see here', or 'everyone knows FIFA has been corrupt since forever; nothing to see here'.
I am appalled and disgusted.
By FIFA, apparently, withdrawing the red card for free.
I would have at least expected a new watch for every member of the executive board of FIFA…
An end of term pre-emptive pardon is probably worth more than a watch.
That would mean that the board of FIFA would be prepared to take Donald Trumps word that he would do something in future.
I’m not sure that anyone, outside the kind of people who pre-ordered a Trump Phone, is that stupid.
I didn’t watch the match, which means I’m fresh as a daisy this morning. But those that did, please explain why this was such a great performance? The stats look abject.
34% possession, 262 passes to Mexico’s 465, 2 corners their 12… sounds awful, like a typical old style England performance. Backs to the wall, can’t keep possession, can’t pass the ball l, just boot it upfield. Spend the whole time in our own box. Oh and we got someone sent off.
I’ve watched enough of those sorts of embarrassing games in my time. Usually people mutter afterwards about how lucky we were, what a poor performance. Yet you were all impressed. What gives?
Pretty much every player did well (you can make a case against Saka and the guy who was sent off, but the rest all did their job), two great goals from play, some outstanding saves from Pickford, and few glaring mistakes despite having the crowd and at times the referee against us. Add tons of excitement and drama and the nerve-wracking wait for the final whistle and you have a perfect match, at least as entertainment.
Thanks. Was an interesting phenomenon to wake to such universal praise for the team.
The priority for the footballing world now is for Belgium to boot the USA out of the competition in as emphatic a way as possible. It’s striking how American commenters, from all sides of politics, simply don’t notice the foul stench of what Trump and Infantino cooked up over the weekend. They do not get it.
The US commentary seems to be either 'nothing to see here', or 'everyone knows FIFA has been corrupt since forever; nothing to see here'.
I am appalled and disgusted.
By FIFA, apparently, withdrawing the red card for free.
I would have at least expected a new watch for every member of the executive board of FIFA…
Trump takes bribes, sometimes in return for favours; he doesn't hand them out.
He has been known to do… out of court settlements… for some things.
Brilliant bit of management skill from the German! Managed to navigate a win from an impossible position deciding 25 minutes from the end that it was a win in normal time or nothing. Few if any managers would have the courage to take off all his attacking players in that situation
Speaking French, living in France, adopting French names. Sounds like they assimilated well. What more do you want?
What, like William (from the Old High German Willahelm)?
Interesting though that the Norse men (shall we call the that) took 30-50 years to adopt old French after settling in Normandy and then 300+ years to adopt English after invading England.
The French they spoke was Norman-French so a dialect which is heavily influenced by Old Norse. There are still a good number of people here who speak Jèrriais which is Jersey Norman French, s sub dialect.
The Norman French dialects are suitably different to French, as an example “ Bonsouair! Seyiz les beinv’nus” instead of “ bonsoir et bienvenue”. That’s a basic difference but massive differences where French visitors often think we’ve made terrible mistakes with the French language on signs which are just in English and Jèrriais.
The difference is striking, though. I suspect it's purely about status. The Normans didn't conquer France, whereas England was completely subjugated. Norman French was the language of the rulers; English of the ruled. Hence the persistence of French/English today, for example the animal/food (lamb/mutton) duality.
Speaking French, living in France, adopting French names. Sounds like they assimilated well. What more do you want?
To be truly French they would have landed at Hastings and surrendered.
This American inspired meme of "Cheese eating surrender monkeys" is increasingly irritating.
For example, you know that 100 years war? You're taught about Crecy and Agincourt, which were temporary victories... You are taught about burning Joan of Arc...who, in the English mind was a cheat for being a woman. You are not taught about Castillon- the final battle of the war.... A decisive and complete French victory. Sure denigrating the French is a joke, but as I see more often when I am in the UK, you believe the amusing memes are true.
And its not just the French, where the joke is not the reality, and the way that the English turn their jokes and memes into a world view just makes them look unserious and borderline offensive. Fine when you rule the waves, but when you need partnerships it becomes a liability. Funny foreigners is part of the root of Brexit and is increasingly why even the friends of the UK just want to get past the inevitable silliness and start to talk like adults.
I didn’t watch the match, which means I’m fresh as a daisy this morning. But those that did, please explain why this was such a great performance? The stats look abject.
34% possession, 262 passes to Mexico’s 465, 2 corners their 12… sounds awful, like a typical old style England performance. Backs to the wall, can’t keep possession, can’t pass the ball l, just boot it upfield. Spend the whole time in our own box. Oh and we got someone sent off.
I’ve watched enough of those sorts of embarrassing games in my time. Usually people mutter afterwards about how lucky we were, what a poor performance. Yet you were all impressed. What gives?
Mexico was superb from the off and dominated possession for large chunks of the game, roared on by the Azteca crowd. It was indeed backs against the wall, for much of the first half and almost all of the second half. Overall Mexico had 67% possession and 20 shots (vs 6).
Against this onslaught, from a host team which was playing miles above itself, England was magnificent, hitting Mexico twice in quick succession in the first half against the run of play with two Bellingham goals. The first from a sublime Saka assist and the second a one-two with Kane.
Pickford pulled off some amazing athletic saves, but the whole England team - every one - gave performances of at least 8/10 IMO. The best England performance I've ever seen I think, especially given the occasion and location.
Adding the theatre was a couple of questionable VAR decisions (I thought the England sending off was understandable but harsh and I disagreed with the penalty against Kane).
In terms of player ratings, it was a match where many of the losing team could be given over 8/10 but for England I'd be hard pressed to give Pickford less than 10/10 and Bellingham close to that score.
Utterly brilliant sporting theatre.
Probably the best game I've ever watched. Just a towering performance from the England team and manager.
I didn’t watch the match, which means I’m fresh as a daisy this morning. But those that did, please explain why this was such a great performance? The stats look abject.
34% possession, 262 passes to Mexico’s 465, 2 corners their 12… sounds awful, like a typical old style England performance. Backs to the wall, can’t keep possession, can’t pass the ball l, just boot it upfield. Spend the whole time in our own box. Oh and we got someone sent off.
I’ve watched enough of those sorts of embarrassing games in my time. Usually people mutter afterwards about how lucky we were, what a poor performance. Yet you were all impressed. What gives?
Mexico was superb from the off and dominated possession for large chunks of the game, roared on by the Azteca crowd. It was indeed backs against the wall, for much of the first half and almost all of the second half. Overall Mexico had 67% possession and 20 shots (vs 6).
Against this onslaught, from a host team which was playing miles above itself, England was magnificent, hitting Mexico twice in quick succession in the first half against the run of play with two Bellingham goals. The first from a sublime Saka assist and the second a one-two with Kane.
Pickford pulled off some amazing athletic saves, but the whole England team - every one - gave performances of at least 8/10 IMO. The best England performance I've ever seen I think, especially given the occasion and location.
Adding the theatre was a couple of questionable VAR decisions (I thought the England sending off was understandable but harsh and I disagreed with the penalty against Kane).
In terms of player ratings, it was a match where many of the losing team could be given over 8/10 but for England I'd be hard pressed to give Pickford less than 10/10 and Bellingham close to that score.
Utterly brilliant sporting theatre.
Kane never touched the ball, which makes the penalty more understandable
Preparations have begun for a by-election in Clacton
Assuming Farage is found to be a naughty boy, I'd think it will be fairly easy to get 10% of his constituents to sign a recall petition (there must be that many who hate his guts, even in Clacton). Presumably he then romps home fairly effortlessly in the by-election, and we all ask what was the point of the whole saga, other than burning a load of taxpayers money.
Personally, I'm unconvinced any of this stuff will stick to him. My reasoning is simple - Farage's appeal is what he says he will *do*, not his personal probity.
Voters have worked out long ago that pretty much all politicians are bent as a nine bob note. It's still a problem for the left, because their politicans inevitably come claiming to have the moral high ground, then are revealed to be grubby little oiks like all the others. That's why the whole Lord Ali thing was so damaging to Starmer - instead of being pure as the driven snow, he was revealed as just another sanctimonious prig with his hand in the till (yes, it was technically within the rules, but the moral high ground it was not).
It's much less a problem for the right, because voters on the right are inclined to say - who cares if he's a bounder, it's what he *does* that matters. That's how Johnson got elected - not because anyone thought Johnson was anything other than a shit, but because Brexit had to happen, and he was the only plausible path to making it happen.
Reform need to be elected because the government needs radical change. The post Blair settlement does not work, and cannot work, as has been proven over the last 20 years. The only party which can rip it up and start again is Reform. The fact that they are led by a shit doesn't matter, providing it gets done and the human rights/quangos/equalities industry which is smothering the country gets smashed to smithereens. That's what the country needs, that's what voters want.
I can't see why Farage being funded by some crypto scoundrels is likely to make any difference to that. At least it's better than him sucking on the teat of the taxpayer. It's not *corruption* either, for the simple reason that they were funding him at a time when he had no political power, nor any obvious prospect of getting any - ergo, there was no corrupt benefit to be gained. For good or ill, these people actually just *agree* with Farage, and have been chucking him money, probably more in the hope that he might move the Overton Window a bit than anything else - I doubt at then time of these donation any of them thought he was ever likely to be a serious contender for Prime Minister.
I don't see that. Farage has nothing but rhetoric, and takes whatever policy positions are conditioned by that rhetoric, and the arguable (word chosen for the benefit of PB) money that he has been paid by whoever has given it to him.
I think there may very well be more to come - how much are in quiet little files and PDFs in media organisaions? They have all summer to get their clicks.
In power he will be like Trump - as incompetent and damaging, as he is lazy and inconsistent.
I more expect that the wheels will come off and he will try and walk away.
I think the more consequential question is where a thinking opposition party in the UK will appear from.
Reading the report we were discussing at the weekend (actually more a memo - it has a total of about 10-12 pages of content) about marriage and "unmarried mothers" allegedly being better off is feels like a return to a time 35-40 years ago when Peter Lilley was doing his "little list" of targets.
There is just a crass engagement with correlations, and no notice paid to either causations or consequences.
Typo.
is feels / it feels
I wonder why there was no mention of "unmarried fathers", nor of the social reasons why couples separate. Just how far back in the mists of history has the former IDS / Monty think tank decamped culturally?
AFAIK the modern name for "unmarried fathers" is Incels.
Preparations have begun for a by-election in Clacton
Assuming Farage is found to be a naughty boy, I'd think it will be fairly easy to get 10% of his constituents to sign a recall petition (there must be that many who hate his guts, even in Clacton). Presumably he then romps home fairly effortlessly in the by-election, and we all ask what was the point of the whole saga, other than burning a load of taxpayers money.
Personally, I'm unconvinced any of this stuff will stick to him. My reasoning is simple - Farage's appeal is what he says he will *do*, not his personal probity.
Voters have worked out long ago that pretty much all politicians are bent as a nine bob note. It's still a problem for the left, because their politicans inevitably come claiming to have the moral high ground, then are revealed to be grubby little oiks like all the others. That's why the whole Lord Ali thing was so damaging to Starmer - instead of being pure as the driven snow, he was revealed as just another sanctimonious prig with his hand in the till (yes, it was technically within the rules, but the moral high ground it was not).
It's much less a problem for the right, because voters on the right are inclined to say - who cares if he's a bounder, it's what he *does* that matters. That's how Johnson got elected - not because anyone thought Johnson was anything other than a shit, but because Brexit had to happen, and he was the only plausible path to making it happen.
Reform need to be elected because the government needs radical change. The post Blair settlement does not work, and cannot work, as has been proven over the last 20 years. The only party which can rip it up and start again is Reform. The fact that they are led by a shit doesn't matter, providing it gets done and the human rights/quangos/equalities industry which is smothering the country gets smashed to smithereens. That's what the country needs, that's what voters want.
I can't see why Farage being funded by some crypto scoundrels is likely to make any difference to that. At least it's better than him sucking on the teat of the taxpayer. It's not *corruption* either, for the simple reason that they were funding him at a time when he had no political power, nor any obvious prospect of getting any - ergo, there was no corrupt benefit to be gained. For good or ill, these people actually just *agree* with Farage, and have been chucking him money, probably more in the hope that he might move the Overton Window a bit than anything else - I doubt at then time of these donation any of them thought he was ever likely to be a serious contender for Prime Minister.
I don't see that. Farage has nothing but rhetoric, and takes whatever policy positions are conditioned by that rhetoric, and the arguable (word chosen for the benefit of PB) money that he has been paid by whoever has given it to him.
I think there may very well be more to come - how much are in quiet little files and PDFs in media organisaions? They have all summer to get their clicks.
In power he will be like Trump - as incompetent and damaging, as he is lazy and inconsistent.
I more expect that the wheels will come off and he will try and walk away.
I think the more consequential question is where a thinking opposition party in the UK will appear from.
Reading the report we were discussing at the weekend (actually more a memo - it has a total of about 10-12 pages of content) about marriage and "unmarried mothers" allegedly being better off is feels like a return to a time 35-40 years ago when Peter Lilley was doing his "little list" of targets.
There is just a crass engagement with correlations, and no notice paid to either causations or consequences.
Typo.
is feels / it feels
I wonder why there was no mention of "unmarried fathers", nor of the social reasons why couples separate. Just how far back in the mists of history has the former IDS / Monty think tank decamped culturally?
AFAIK the modern name for "unmarried fathers" is Incels.
Incels are the ones not having sex or relationships at all.
Preparations have begun for a by-election in Clacton
Assuming Farage is found to be a naughty boy, I'd think it will be fairly easy to get 10% of his constituents to sign a recall petition (there must be that many who hate his guts, even in Clacton). Presumably he then romps home fairly effortlessly in the by-election, and we all ask what was the point of the whole saga, other than burning a load of taxpayers money.
Personally, I'm unconvinced any of this stuff will stick to him. My reasoning is simple - Farage's appeal is what he says he will *do*, not his personal probity.
Voters have worked out long ago that pretty much all politicians are bent as a nine bob note. It's still a problem for the left, because their politicans inevitably come claiming to have the moral high ground, then are revealed to be grubby little oiks like all the others. That's why the whole Lord Ali thing was so damaging to Starmer - instead of being pure as the driven snow, he was revealed as just another sanctimonious prig with his hand in the till (yes, it was technically within the rules, but the moral high ground it was not).
It's much less a problem for the right, because voters on the right are inclined to say - who cares if he's a bounder, it's what he *does* that matters. That's how Johnson got elected - not because anyone thought Johnson was anything other than a shit, but because Brexit had to happen, and he was the only plausible path to making it happen.
Reform need to be elected because the government needs radical change. The post Blair settlement does not work, and cannot work, as has been proven over the last 20 years. The only party which can rip it up and start again is Reform. The fact that they are led by a shit doesn't matter, providing it gets done and the human rights/quangos/equalities industry which is smothering the country gets smashed to smithereens. That's what the country needs, that's what voters want.
I can't see why Farage being funded by some crypto scoundrels is likely to make any difference to that. At least it's better than him sucking on the teat of the taxpayer. It's not *corruption* either, for the simple reason that they were funding him at a time when he had no political power, nor any obvious prospect of getting any - ergo, there was no corrupt benefit to be gained. For good or ill, these people actually just *agree* with Farage, and have been chucking him money, probably more in the hope that he might move the Overton Window a bit than anything else - I doubt at then time of these donation any of them thought he was ever likely to be a serious contender for Prime Minister.
I don't see that. Farage has nothing but rhetoric, and takes whatever policy positions are conditioned by that rhetoric, and the arguable (word chosen for the benefit of PB) money that he has been paid by whoever has given it to him.
I think there may very well be more to come - how much are in quiet little files and PDFs in media organisaions? They have all summer to get their clicks.
In power he will be like Trump - as incompetent and damaging, as he is lazy and inconsistent.
I more expect that the wheels will come off and he will try and walk away.
I think the more consequential question is where a thinking opposition party in the UK will appear from.
Reading the report we were discussing at the weekend (actually more a memo - it has a total of about 10-12 pages of content) about marriage and "unmarried mothers" allegedly being better off is feels like a return to a time 35-40 years ago when Peter Lilley was doing his "little list" of targets.
There is just a crass engagement with correlations, and no notice paid to either causations or consequences.
Typo.
is feels / it feels
I wonder why there was no mention of "unmarried fathers", nor of the social reasons why couples separate. Just how far back in the mists of history has the former IDS / Monty think tank decamped culturally?
AFAIK the modern name for "unmarried fathers" is Incels.
Heh. I think the Cons have a major problem distinguishing between babies and bathwater. And it needs to be addressed at a level of their philosophy.
Preparations have begun for a by-election in Clacton
Assuming Farage is found to be a naughty boy, I'd think it will be fairly easy to get 10% of his constituents to sign a recall petition (there must be that many who hate his guts, even in Clacton). Presumably he then romps home fairly effortlessly in the by-election, and we all ask what was the point of the whole saga, other than burning a load of taxpayers money.
Personally, I'm unconvinced any of this stuff will stick to him. My reasoning is simple - Farage's appeal is what he says he will *do*, not his personal probity.
Voters have worked out long ago that pretty much all politicians are bent as a nine bob note. It's still a problem for the left, because their politicans inevitably come claiming to have the moral high ground, then are revealed to be grubby little oiks like all the others. That's why the whole Lord Ali thing was so damaging to Starmer - instead of being pure as the driven snow, he was revealed as just another sanctimonious prig with his hand in the till (yes, it was technically within the rules, but the moral high ground it was not).
It's much less a problem for the right, because voters on the right are inclined to say - who cares if he's a bounder, it's what he *does* that matters. That's how Johnson got elected - not because anyone thought Johnson was anything other than a shit, but because Brexit had to happen, and he was the only plausible path to making it happen.
Reform need to be elected because the government needs radical change. The post Blair settlement does not work, and cannot work, as has been proven over the last 20 years. The only party which can rip it up and start again is Reform. The fact that they are led by a shit doesn't matter, providing it gets done and the human rights/quangos/equalities industry which is smothering the country gets smashed to smithereens. That's what the country needs, that's what voters want.
I can't see why Farage being funded by some crypto scoundrels is likely to make any difference to that. At least it's better than him sucking on the teat of the taxpayer. It's not *corruption* either, for the simple reason that they were funding him at a time when he had no political power, nor any obvious prospect of getting any - ergo, there was no corrupt benefit to be gained. For good or ill, these people actually just *agree* with Farage, and have been chucking him money, probably more in the hope that he might move the Overton Window a bit than anything else - I doubt at then time of these donation any of them thought he was ever likely to be a serious contender for Prime Minister.
I don't see that. Farage has nothing but rhetoric, and takes whatever policy positions are conditioned by that rhetoric, and the arguable (word chosen for the benefit of PB) money that he has been paid by whoever has given it to him.
I think there may very well be more to come - how much are in quiet little files and PDFs in media organisaions? They have all summer to get their clicks.
In power he will be like Trump - as incompetent and damaging, as he is lazy and inconsistent.
I more expect that the wheels will come off and he will try and walk away.
I think the more consequential question is where a thinking opposition party in the UK will appear from.
Reading the report we were discussing at the weekend (actually more a memo - it has a total of about 10-12 pages of content) about marriage and "unmarried mothers" allegedly being better off is feels like a return to a time 35-40 years ago when Peter Lilley was doing his "little list" of targets.
There is just a crass engagement with correlations, and no notice paid to either causations or consequences.
Typo.
is feels / it feels
I wonder why there was no mention of "unmarried fathers", nor of the social reasons why couples separate. Just how far back in the mists of history has the former IDS / Monty think tank decamped culturally?
AFAIK the modern name for "unmarried fathers" is Incels.
Speaking French, living in France, adopting French names. Sounds like they assimilated well. What more do you want?
To be truly French they would have landed at Hastings and surrendered.
This American inspired meme of "Cheese eating surrender monkeys" is increasingly irritating.
For example, you know that 100 years war? You're taught about Crecy and Agincourt, which were temporary victories... You are taught about burning Joan of Arc...who, in the English mind was a cheat for being a woman. You are not taught about Castillon- the final battle of the war.... A decisive and complete French victory. Sure denigrating the French is a joke, but as I see more often when I am in the UK, you believe the amusing memes are true.
And its not just the French, where the joke is not the reality, and the way that the English turn their jokes and memes into a world view just makes them look unserious and borderline offensive. Fine when you rule the waves, but when you need partnerships it becomes a liability. Funny foreigners is part of the root of Brexit and is increasingly why even the friends of the UK just want to get past the inevitable silliness and start to talk like adults.
FFS UK, GROW UP!
Points could be made on the other side to "both sides" this, especially about stability and the value of political evolution over revolution, but I think there is much here about cowering behind partisan positions.
One I've been chipping away at recently is how we rebuild a local civil society, so that the present political economy of rewards for taking ever more extreme positions is reversed. Burnham in his Manchester speech made an excellent point about the model of the Cooperative movement. I think for example that The Rest is Politics duo should be working harder on this agenda; they overemphasise their ability to get interviews with the Foreign Minister of Ruritania and the Lord Mayor of Timbuctoo, and could do more to build a better political culture here.
Interestingly, many USA people seem to me to be quite tolerant of permanent gibes aimed at them, though these may have the benefit of being accurate.
I didn’t watch the match, which means I’m fresh as a daisy this morning. But those that did, please explain why this was such a great performance? The stats look abject.
34% possession, 262 passes to Mexico’s 465, 2 corners their 12… sounds awful, like a typical old style England performance. Backs to the wall, can’t keep possession, can’t pass the ball l, just boot it upfield. Spend the whole time in our own box. Oh and we got someone sent off.
I’ve watched enough of those sorts of embarrassing games in my time. Usually people mutter afterwards about how lucky we were, what a poor performance. Yet you were all impressed. What gives?
Because, despite all of the above, we scored three goals and they scored two.
Speaking French, living in France, adopting French names. Sounds like they assimilated well. What more do you want?
To be truly French they would have landed at Hastings and surrendered.
This American inspired meme of "Cheese eating surrender monkeys" is increasingly irritating.
For example, you know that 100 years war? You're taught about Crecy and Agincourt, which were temporary victories... You are taught about burning Joan of Arc...who, in the English mind was a cheat for being a woman. You are not taught about Castillon- the final battle of the war.... A decisive and complete French victory. Sure denigrating the French is a joke, but as I see more often when I am in the UK, you believe the amusing memes are true.
And its not just the French, where the joke is not the reality, and the way that the English turn their jokes and memes into a world view just makes them look unserious and borderline offensive. Fine when you rule the waves, but when you need partnerships it becomes a liability. Funny foreigners is part of the root of Brexit and is increasingly why even the friends of the UK just want to get past the inevitable silliness and start to talk like adults.
FFS UK, GROW UP!
The Hundred Years War thing is because France was a much bigger and richer country than England. The English took advantage of French chaos and the temporary ascendency of their innovative military tactics to gain far more than expected. You don't get historical credit for beating back an opponent you should have defeated from the beginning.
I didn’t watch the match, which means I’m fresh as a daisy this morning. But those that did, please explain why this was such a great performance? The stats look abject.
34% possession, 262 passes to Mexico’s 465, 2 corners their 12… sounds awful, like a typical old style England performance. Backs to the wall, can’t keep possession, can’t pass the ball l, just boot it upfield. Spend the whole time in our own box. Oh and we got someone sent off.
I’ve watched enough of those sorts of embarrassing games in my time. Usually people mutter afterwards about how lucky we were, what a poor performance. Yet you were all impressed. What gives?
Pretty much every player did well (you can make a case against Saka and the guy who was sent off, but the rest all did their job), two great goals from play, some outstanding saves from Pickford, and few glaring mistakes despite having the crowd and at times the referee against us. Add tons of excitement and drama and the nerve-wracking wait for the final whistle and you have a perfect match, at least as entertainment.
Thanks. Was an interesting phenomenon to wake to such universal praise for the team.
The priority for the footballing world now is for Belgium to boot the USA out of the competition in as emphatic a way as possible. It’s striking how American commenters, from all sides of politics, simply don’t notice the foul stench of what Trump and Infantino cooked up over the weekend. They do not get it.
The US commentary seems to be either 'nothing to see here', or 'everyone knows FIFA has been corrupt since forever; nothing to see here'.
The most irritating US commentary is “in American sport, our teams always want to beat the best. Unlike you whining Euro losers. That’s why we’d never complain about a red card being overturned”.
Untrue, exceptionalist (no surprise) but even more missing the point than the other commentary. It has already totally normalised the corrupt political interference, as if that goes without saying.
They really don’t understand how much the world loathes Trump.
Speaking French, living in France, adopting French names. Sounds like they assimilated well. What more do you want?
To be truly French they would have landed at Hastings and surrendered.
This American inspired meme of "Cheese eating surrender monkeys" is increasingly irritating.
For example, you know that 100 years war? You're taught about Crecy and Agincourt, which were temporary victories... You are taught about burning Joan of Arc...who, in the English mind was a cheat for being a woman. You are not taught about Castillon- the final battle of the war.... A decisive and complete French victory. Sure denigrating the French is a joke, but as I see more often when I am in the UK, you believe the amusing memes are true.
And its not just the French, where the joke is not the reality, and the way that the English turn their jokes and memes into a world view just makes them look unserious and borderline offensive. Fine when you rule the waves, but when you need partnerships it becomes a liability. Funny foreigners is part of the root of Brexit and is increasingly why even the friends of the UK just want to get past the inevitable silliness and start to talk like adults.
I didn’t watch the match, which means I’m fresh as a daisy this morning. But those that did, please explain why this was such a great performance? The stats look abject.
34% possession, 262 passes to Mexico’s 465, 2 corners their 12… sounds awful, like a typical old style England performance. Backs to the wall, can’t keep possession, can’t pass the ball l, just boot it upfield. Spend the whole time in our own box. Oh and we got someone sent off.
I’ve watched enough of those sorts of embarrassing games in my time. Usually people mutter afterwards about how lucky we were, what a poor performance. Yet you were all impressed. What gives?
Because, despite all of the above, we scored three goals and they scored two.
The other factor which I don't think anyone has mentioned is that coming into the match we (the fans who've seen it all before, we just know, we're so sure) were expecting to lose (throw it away, blow it away). And in recent years in those circumstances we always have.
Then we barely had time for being 1-0 and 2-0 up before it was 2-1 and we were under pressure - then after half time O'Reilly hitting the post and then the red card - to still come away with the win after all that is the best England win since at least the 5-1 in Munich in 2001.
Speaking French, living in France, adopting French names. Sounds like they assimilated well. What more do you want?
To be truly French they would have landed at Hastings and surrendered.
This American inspired meme of "Cheese eating surrender monkeys" is increasingly irritating.
For example, you know that 100 years war? You're taught about Crecy and Agincourt, which were temporary victories... You are taught about burning Joan of Arc...who, in the English mind was a cheat for being a woman. You are not taught about Castillon- the final battle of the war.... A decisive and complete French victory. Sure denigrating the French is a joke, but as I see more often when I am in the UK, you believe the amusing memes are true.
And its not just the French, where the joke is not the reality, and the way that the English turn their jokes and memes into a world view just makes them look unserious and borderline offensive. Fine when you rule the waves, but when you need partnerships it becomes a liability. Funny foreigners is part of the root of Brexit and is increasingly why even the friends of the UK just want to get past the inevitable silliness and start to talk like adults.
FFS UK, GROW UP!
First of all - it wasn't started by the Americans. They tried to pick it up and kinda mucked it up. Secondly - it's the French. Therefore perfectly justified. Thirdly - They are just as rude about the British. Perfidious Roast Beefs etc....
I didn’t watch the match, which means I’m fresh as a daisy this morning. But those that did, please explain why this was such a great performance? The stats look abject.
34% possession, 262 passes to Mexico’s 465, 2 corners their 12… sounds awful, like a typical old style England performance. Backs to the wall, can’t keep possession, can’t pass the ball l, just boot it upfield. Spend the whole time in our own box. Oh and we got someone sent off.
I’ve watched enough of those sorts of embarrassing games in my time. Usually people mutter afterwards about how lucky we were, what a poor performance. Yet you were all impressed. What gives?
Because, despite all of the above, we scored three goals and they scored two.
Or as per CNN: England saw off an immense challenge from Mexico, beating one of the tournament co-hosts in their home stadium after seeing one player sent off in a game that will go down as one of the best of the 2026 World Cup. It was a game that had pretty much everything one could ask for: An electric atmosphere in Estadio Azteca, one of the great cathedrals of world soccer; two goals in two minutes from England; a goal from Mexico minutes later that threatened to shake Azteca’s foundations; a red card to England’s Jarrell Quansah that forced his side to defend a man down for 35 minutes; a penalty to England scored by their captain that rebuilt a two-goal lead; that same captain then committing a foul that allowed Mexico to pull close again; and then close to 30 minutes of Mexico pressuring England in search of an equalizer.
Speaking French, living in France, adopting French names. Sounds like they assimilated well. What more do you want?
To be truly French they would have landed at Hastings and surrendered.
This American inspired meme of "Cheese eating surrender monkeys" is increasingly irritating.
For example, you know that 100 years war? You're taught about Crecy and Agincourt, which were temporary victories... You are taught about burning Joan of Arc...who, in the English mind was a cheat for being a woman. You are not taught about Castillon- the final battle of the war.... A decisive and complete French victory. Sure denigrating the French is a joke, but as I see more often when I am in the UK, you believe the amusing memes are true.
And its not just the French, where the joke is not the reality, and the way that the English turn their jokes and memes into a world view just makes them look unserious and borderline offensive. Fine when you rule the waves, but when you need partnerships it becomes a liability. Funny foreigners is part of the root of Brexit and is increasingly why even the friends of the UK just want to get past the inevitable silliness and start to talk like adults.
FFS UK, GROW UP!
Points could be made on the other side to "both sides" this, especially about stability and the value of political evolution over revolution, but I think there is much here about cowering behind partisan positions.
One I've been chipping away at recently is how we rebuild a local civil society, so that the present political economy of rewards for taking ever more extreme positions is reversed. Burnham in his Manchester speech made an excellent point about the model of the Cooperative movement. I think for example that The Rest is Politics duo should be working harder on this agenda; they overemphasise their ability to get interviews with the Foreign Minister of Ruritania and the Lord Mayor of Timbuctoo, and could do more to build a better political culture here.
Interestingly, many USA people seem to me to be quite tolerant of permanent gibes aimed at them, though these may have the benefit of being accurate.
On the partisan extremism at home - see my comments on the Cameron Directs and the media response to them. Conflict sells.
One thing that might be interesting is getting interviews with ambassadors into the media, more often.
On the USA reactions - you obviously haven't listened to the MAGA types. Thin skinned is barely the beginning of it.
Two historic UK private schools bought by a Chinese company are set to close their doors months after its owners were accused of asset-stripping.
Durham High School in Durham and Ruthin School in Denbighshire, North Wales, will not reopen to pupils after the end of the academic term in July, both schools confirmed in statements this week.
Two historic UK private schools bought by a Chinese company are set to close their doors months after its owners were accused of asset-stripping.
Durham High School in Durham and Ruthin School in Denbighshire, North Wales, will not reopen to pupils after the end of the academic term in July, both schools confirmed in statements this week.
Two historic UK private schools bought by a Chinese company are set to close their doors months after its owners were accused of asset-stripping.
Durham High School in Durham and Ruthin School in Denbighshire, North Wales, will not reopen to pupils after the end of the academic term in July, both schools confirmed in statements this week.
Two historic UK private schools bought by a Chinese company are set to close their doors months after its owners were accused of asset-stripping.
Durham High School in Durham and Ruthin School in Denbighshire, North Wales, will not reopen to pupils after the end of the academic term in July, both schools confirmed in statements this week.
Two historic UK private schools bought by a Chinese company are set to close their doors months after its owners were accused of asset-stripping.
Durham High School in Durham and Ruthin School in Denbighshire, North Wales, will not reopen to pupils after the end of the academic term in July, both schools confirmed in statements this week.
Two historic UK private schools bought by a Chinese company are set to close their doors months after its owners were accused of asset-stripping.
Durham High School in Durham and Ruthin School in Denbighshire, North Wales, will not reopen to pupils after the end of the academic term in July, both schools confirmed in statements this week.
I didn’t watch the match, which means I’m fresh as a daisy this morning. But those that did, please explain why this was such a great performance? The stats look abject.
34% possession, 262 passes to Mexico’s 465, 2 corners their 12… sounds awful, like a typical old style England performance. Backs to the wall, can’t keep possession, can’t pass the ball l, just boot it upfield. Spend the whole time in our own box. Oh and we got someone sent off.
I’ve watched enough of those sorts of embarrassing games in my time. Usually people mutter afterwards about how lucky we were, what a poor performance. Yet you were all impressed. What gives?
A lot of the international coverage I have read this morning, so safe from any English bias, has called it the game of the tournament, an instant World Cup classic and even one of the best World Cup matches ever. I think it was from the swing of the game, England up then Mexico claw back, red card, penalties, a hugely noisy home crowd, backs against the wall defending.
A v good game.
England Norway will be like a good premier league match stylistically.
England are last night in isolation by far the better team (Man for man the value of Mexico is similar to Coventry City & England Arsenal), the lack of England's physical adaptation to altitude creating a big leveller between the teams, hence the possession stats being back to front compared to how you'd expect the game to be at sea level.
Norway is roughly on a par with Villa
Game of the tournament still Cape Verde vs Argentina I think though.
Yes, were it not for some very dodgy refereeing decisions, England win the game 2-0 and the narrative is that Mexico weren’t anything special and the altitude not nearly as important as people were making out.
Cape Verde genuinely gave Argentina a scare and that doesn’t bode well for Messi and co. I think it will be Switzerland or Colombia playing England or Norway in the semi final.
Speaking French, living in France, adopting French names. Sounds like they assimilated well. What more do you want?
To be truly French they would have landed at Hastings and surrendered.
This American inspired meme of "Cheese eating surrender monkeys" is increasingly irritating.
For example, you know that 100 years war? You're taught about Crecy and Agincourt, which were temporary victories... You are taught about burning Joan of Arc...who, in the English mind was a cheat for being a woman. You are not taught about Castillon- the final battle of the war.... A decisive and complete French victory. Sure denigrating the French is a joke, but as I see more often when I am in the UK, you believe the amusing memes are true.
And its not just the French, where the joke is not the reality, and the way that the English turn their jokes and memes into a world view just makes them look unserious and borderline offensive. Fine when you rule the waves, but when you need partnerships it becomes a liability. Funny foreigners is part of the root of Brexit and is increasingly why even the friends of the UK just want to get past the inevitable silliness and start to talk like adults.
FFS UK, GROW UP!
LOL. For someone who is supposed to be well travelled you have a particularly narrow view of the world. Taking the piss out of your neighbours is ingrained into every country I have ever lived or worked in - close to 30 at last count. And yes it is turned into a world view in all those countries as well. It is certainly not something to rant about, nor is it 'offensive'.
Two historic UK private schools bought by a Chinese company are set to close their doors months after its owners were accused of asset-stripping.
Durham High School in Durham and Ruthin School in Denbighshire, North Wales, will not reopen to pupils after the end of the academic term in July, both schools confirmed in statements this week.
I think ydoethur mentioned this last week but I'd not appreciated the Chinese dimension.
Every one of the schools that have closed have a significant amount of prime real estate that would make very profitable building land.
That's a bingo.
Especially in light of Burnham wanting to get a move on with housing.
The resistance to turning an ex-private school site into housing might well be less, locally.
You really think it'll be low-cost or council housing?
Now, about this bridge........
Who is going to deliver and build the "low cost housing:"? The only people with the build capacity, in the short term are... drum roll... big developers. So if Burnham wants social housing, he will need to have it built by the Usual Suspects.
Having the government pay the usual, over the odds prices, would actually be a good business plan. Guaranteed price for all the units, in advance, probably. Plus you will get the government using through any planning required.
Much like the housing of migrants is profitable - a large order of capacity from the people who run the country. What can go wrong?
Speaking French, living in France, adopting French names. Sounds like they assimilated well. What more do you want?
To be truly French they would have landed at Hastings and surrendered.
This American inspired meme of "Cheese eating surrender monkeys" is increasingly irritating.
For example, you know that 100 years war? You're taught about Crecy and Agincourt, which were temporary victories... You are taught about burning Joan of Arc...who, in the English mind was a cheat for being a woman. You are not taught about Castillon- the final battle of the war.... A decisive and complete French victory. Sure denigrating the French is a joke, but as I see more often when I am in the UK, you believe the amusing memes are true.
And its not just the French, where the joke is not the reality, and the way that the English turn their jokes and memes into a world view just makes them look unserious and borderline offensive. Fine when you rule the waves, but when you need partnerships it becomes a liability. Funny foreigners is part of the root of Brexit and is increasingly why even the friends of the UK just want to get past the inevitable silliness and start to talk like adults.
Preparations have begun for a by-election in Clacton
Assuming Farage is found to be a naughty boy, I'd think it will be fairly easy to get 10% of his constituents to sign a recall petition (there must be that many who hate his guts, even in Clacton). Presumably he then romps home fairly effortlessly in the by-election, and we all ask what was the point of the whole saga, other than burning a load of taxpayers money.
Personally, I'm unconvinced any of this stuff will stick to him. My reasoning is simple - Farage's appeal is what he says he will *do*, not his personal probity.
Voters have worked out long ago that pretty much all politicians are bent as a nine bob note. It's still a problem for the left, because their politicans inevitably come claiming to have the moral high ground, then are revealed to be grubby little oiks like all the others. That's why the whole Lord Ali thing was so damaging to Starmer - instead of being pure as the driven snow, he was revealed as just another sanctimonious prig with his hand in the till (yes, it was technically within the rules, but the moral high ground it was not).
It's much less a problem for the right, because voters on the right are inclined to say - who cares if he's a bounder, it's what he *does* that matters. That's how Johnson got elected - not because anyone thought Johnson was anything other than a shit, but because Brexit had to happen, and he was the only plausible path to making it happen.
Reform need to be elected because the government needs radical change. The post Blair settlement does not work, and cannot work, as has been proven over the last 20 years. The only party which can rip it up and start again is Reform. The fact that they are led by a shit doesn't matter, providing it gets done and the human rights/quangos/equalities industry which is smothering the country gets smashed to smithereens. That's what the country needs, that's what voters want.
I can't see why Farage being funded by some crypto scoundrels is likely to make any difference to that. At least it's better than him sucking on the teat of the taxpayer. It's not *corruption* either, for the simple reason that they were funding him at a time when he had no political power, nor any obvious prospect of getting any - ergo, there was no corrupt benefit to be gained. For good or ill, these people actually just *agree* with Farage, and have been chucking him money, probably more in the hope that he might move the Overton Window a bit than anything else - I doubt at then time of these donation any of them thought he was ever likely to be a serious contender for Prime Minister.
I don't see that. Farage has nothing but rhetoric, and takes whatever policy positions are conditioned by that rhetoric, and the arguable (word chosen for the benefit of PB) money that he has been paid by whoever has given it to him.
I think there may very well be more to come - how much are in quiet little files and PDFs in media organisaions? They have all summer to get their clicks.
In power he will be like Trump - as incompetent and damaging, as he is lazy and inconsistent.
I more expect that the wheels will come off and he will try and walk away.
I think the more consequential question is where a thinking opposition party in the UK will appear from.
Reading the report we were discussing at the weekend (actually more a memo - it has a total of about 10-12 pages of content) about marriage and "unmarried mothers" allegedly being better off is feels like a return to a time 35-40 years ago when Peter Lilley was doing his "little list" of targets.
There is just a crass engagement with correlations, and no notice paid to either causations or consequences.
Typo.
is feels / it feels
I wonder why there was no mention of "unmarried fathers", nor of the social reasons why couples separate. Just how far back in the mists of history has the former IDS / Monty think tank decamped culturally?
AFAIK the modern name for "unmarried fathers" is Incels.
Speaking French, living in France, adopting French names. Sounds like they assimilated well. What more do you want?
To be truly French they would have landed at Hastings and surrendered.
This American inspired meme of "Cheese eating surrender monkeys" is increasingly irritating.
For example, you know that 100 years war? You're taught about Crecy and Agincourt, which were temporary victories... You are taught about burning Joan of Arc...who, in the English mind was a cheat for being a woman. You are not taught about Castillon- the final battle of the war.... A decisive and complete French victory. Sure denigrating the French is a joke, but as I see more often when I am in the UK, you believe the amusing memes are true.
And its not just the French, where the joke is not the reality, and the way that the English turn their jokes and memes into a world view just makes them look unserious and borderline offensive. Fine when you rule the waves, but when you need partnerships it becomes a liability. Funny foreigners is part of the root of Brexit and is increasingly why even the friends of the UK just want to get past the inevitable silliness and start to talk like adults.
FFS UK, GROW UP!
LOL. For someone who is supposed to be well travelled you have a particularly narrow view of the world. Taking the piss out of your neighbours is ingrained into every country I have ever lived or worked in - close to 30 at last count. And yes it is turned into a world view in all those countries as well. It is certainly not something to rant about, nor is it 'offensive'.
You need to grow a sense of humour.
That is the standard response to any criticism of what the English deem to be the virtue beyond all virtues "a good sense of humour".
It is because I am indeed pretty well traveled and am also reasonably multi lingual, that I notice, time after time, the fact that your "sense of humour" many cultures just find irritating. More to the point, the jokes are mostly in-jokes that are just not recognized away from the UK cultural space, so the response is not a gentle chuckle, it is bafflement- a bit like an embarrassing uncle at Christmas. The other problem is that the joke is usually the first and only thing that comes to mind when dealing with foreigners. I was in London at a conference on Friday and two English speakers hijacked an entire session cracking exactly these kinds of jokes about history.
The subject was future developments in technology. The majority non English audience just viewed the whole thing with a mild disbelief.
Two historic UK private schools bought by a Chinese company are set to close their doors months after its owners were accused of asset-stripping.
Durham High School in Durham and Ruthin School in Denbighshire, North Wales, will not reopen to pupils after the end of the academic term in July, both schools confirmed in statements this week.
I think ydoethur mentioned this last week but I'd not appreciated the Chinese dimension.
Every one of the schools that have closed have a significant amount of prime real estate that would make very profitable building land.
That's a bingo.
Especially in light of Burnham wanting to get a move on with housing.
The resistance to turning an ex-private school site into housing might well be less, locally.
A (THE tbf) private school local to us does a junior Parkrun which we (Me and my daughter) regularly attend. The buildings and grounds definitely would have a big development value for housing (Right next to Clumber Park). It has a real smorgasbord of sporting facilities https://schoolhire.co.uk/worksop/worksop-college "used extensively by the school and wider local community". No idea of it's current financial situation but I'd hope it wouldn't be bought by a Chinese property Company masquerading as an education vehicle ! My old prep school ( https://kinghenrys.co.uk/pre-prep/ ) is closing it's doors as a school in 2026/27 with students being relocated to the other primary site in the trust (https://www.bablake.com/prep-school/). Maybe the site will be sold for housing which will be sad, sheep were kept on the school field when I went there in the eighties !
I didn’t watch the match, which means I’m fresh as a daisy this morning. But those that did, please explain why this was such a great performance? The stats look abject.
34% possession, 262 passes to Mexico’s 465, 2 corners their 12… sounds awful, like a typical old style England performance. Backs to the wall, can’t keep possession, can’t pass the ball l, just boot it upfield. Spend the whole time in our own box. Oh and we got someone sent off.
I’ve watched enough of those sorts of embarrassing games in my time. Usually people mutter afterwards about how lucky we were, what a poor performance. Yet you were all impressed. What gives?
Pretty much every player did well (you can make a case against Saka and the guy who was sent off, but the rest all did their job), two great goals from play, some outstanding saves from Pickford, and few glaring mistakes despite having the crowd and at times the referee against us. Add tons of excitement and drama and the nerve-wracking wait for the final whistle and you have a perfect match, at least as entertainment.
Thanks. Was an interesting phenomenon to wake to such universal praise for the team.
The priority for the footballing world now is for Belgium to boot the USA out of the competition in as emphatic a way as possible. It’s striking how American commenters, from all sides of politics, simply don’t notice the foul stench of what Trump and Infantino cooked up over the weekend. They do not get it.
The US commentary seems to be either 'nothing to see here', or 'everyone knows FIFA has been corrupt since forever; nothing to see here'.
That's the thing about corruption, if you don't crack down on it it spreads ever further and eventually becomes the norm. Then you end up living in a society where police stop motorists for bribes to let them go, every business transaction has someone on the take, getting any official to do their job requires some sort of favour or payment to grease the wheels. America will end up operating like Russia much faster than many of them think, and they may already have passed the point of no return.
Speaking French, living in France, adopting French names. Sounds like they assimilated well. What more do you want?
To be truly French they would have landed at Hastings and surrendered.
This American inspired meme of "Cheese eating surrender monkeys" is increasingly irritating.
For example, you know that 100 years war? You're taught about Crecy and Agincourt, which were temporary victories... You are taught about burning Joan of Arc...who, in the English mind was a cheat for being a woman. You are not taught about Castillon- the final battle of the war.... A decisive and complete French victory. Sure denigrating the French is a joke, but as I see more often when I am in the UK, you believe the amusing memes are true.
And its not just the French, where the joke is not the reality, and the way that the English turn their jokes and memes into a world view just makes them look unserious and borderline offensive. Fine when you rule the waves, but when you need partnerships it becomes a liability. Funny foreigners is part of the root of Brexit and is increasingly why even the friends of the UK just want to get past the inevitable silliness and start to talk like adults.
FFS UK, GROW UP!
LOL. For someone who is supposed to be well travelled you have a particularly narrow view of the world. Taking the piss out of your neighbours is ingrained into every country I have ever lived or worked in - close to 30 at last count. And yes it is turned into a world view in all those countries as well. It is certainly not something to rant about, nor is it 'offensive'.
You need to grow a sense of humour.
That is the standard response to any criticism of what the English deem to be the virtue beyond all virtues "a good sense of humour".
It is because I am indeed pretty well traveled and am also reasonably multi lingual, that I notice, time after time, the fact that your "sense of humour" many cultures just find irritating. More to the point, the jokes are mostly in-jokes that are just not recognized away from the UK cultural space, so the response is not a gentle chuckle, it is bafflement- a bit like an embarrassing uncle at Christmas. The other problem is that the joke is usually the first and only thing that comes to mind when dealing with foreigners. I was in London at a conference on Friday and two English speakers hijacked an entire session cracking exactly these kinds of jokes about history.
The subject was future developments in technology. The majority non English audience just viewed the whole thing with a mild disbelief.
You know why the sun didn't set on the British Empire?
I didn’t watch the match, which means I’m fresh as a daisy this morning. But those that did, please explain why this was such a great performance? The stats look abject.
34% possession, 262 passes to Mexico’s 465, 2 corners their 12… sounds awful, like a typical old style England performance. Backs to the wall, can’t keep possession, can’t pass the ball l, just boot it upfield. Spend the whole time in our own box. Oh and we got someone sent off.
I’ve watched enough of those sorts of embarrassing games in my time. Usually people mutter afterwards about how lucky we were, what a poor performance. Yet you were all impressed. What gives?
Pretty much every player did well (you can make a case against Saka and the guy who was sent off, but the rest all did their job), two great goals from play, some outstanding saves from Pickford, and few glaring mistakes despite having the crowd and at times the referee against us. Add tons of excitement and drama and the nerve-wracking wait for the final whistle and you have a perfect match, at least as entertainment.
Thanks. Was an interesting phenomenon to wake to such universal praise for the team.
The priority for the footballing world now is for Belgium to boot the USA out of the competition in as emphatic a way as possible. It’s striking how American commenters, from all sides of politics, simply don’t notice the foul stench of what Trump and Infantino cooked up over the weekend. They do not get it.
The US commentary seems to be either 'nothing to see here', or 'everyone knows FIFA has been corrupt since forever; nothing to see here'.
That's the thing about corruption, if you don't crack down on it it spreads ever further and eventually becomes the norm. Then you end up living in a society where police stop motorists for bribes to let them go, every business transaction has someone on the take, getting any official to do their job requires some sort of favour or payment to grease the wheels. America will end up operating like Russia much faster than many of them think, and they may already have passed the point of no return.
Like New York construction used to be? Or is that just hackneyed mafia movie hokum?
Speaking French, living in France, adopting French names. Sounds like they assimilated well. What more do you want?
To be truly French they would have landed at Hastings and surrendered.
This American inspired meme of "Cheese eating surrender monkeys" is increasingly irritating.
For example, you know that 100 years war? You're taught about Crecy and Agincourt, which were temporary victories... You are taught about burning Joan of Arc...who, in the English mind was a cheat for being a woman. You are not taught about Castillon- the final battle of the war.... A decisive and complete French victory. Sure denigrating the French is a joke, but as I see more often when I am in the UK, you believe the amusing memes are true.
And its not just the French, where the joke is not the reality, and the way that the English turn their jokes and memes into a world view just makes them look unserious and borderline offensive. Fine when you rule the waves, but when you need partnerships it becomes a liability. Funny foreigners is part of the root of Brexit and is increasingly why even the friends of the UK just want to get past the inevitable silliness and start to talk like adults.
FFS UK, GROW UP!
LOL. For someone who is supposed to be well travelled you have a particularly narrow view of the world. Taking the piss out of your neighbours is ingrained into every country I have ever lived or worked in - close to 30 at last count. And yes it is turned into a world view in all those countries as well. It is certainly not something to rant about, nor is it 'offensive'.
You need to grow a sense of humour.
That is the standard response to any criticism of what the English deem to be the virtue beyond all virtues "a good sense of humour".
It is because I am indeed pretty well traveled and am also reasonably multi lingual, that I notice, time after time, the fact that your "sense of humour" many cultures just find irritating. More to the point, the jokes are mostly in-jokes that are just not recognized away from the UK cultural space, so the response is not a gentle chuckle, it is bafflement- a bit like an embarrassing uncle at Christmas. The other problem is that the joke is usually the first and only thing that comes to mind when dealing with foreigners. I was in London at a conference on Friday and two English speakers hijacked an entire session cracking exactly these kinds of jokes about history.
The subject was future developments in technology. The majority non English audience just viewed the whole thing with a mild disbelief.
You know why the sun didn't set on the British Empire?
God didn't trust the British in the dark!
I though the traditional version was that "God was afraid of what the British would get up to in the dark"?
The French surrender thing dates to 1940 - when the French Government folded like damp cardboard. The contrast to WWI etc was very marked and sparked things like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Collapse_of_the_Third_Republic - which took the line that it was down to corruption and infiltration of institutions by rich, foreign influenced individuals who wanted to bring down democracy.
I didn’t watch the match, which means I’m fresh as a daisy this morning. But those that did, please explain why this was such a great performance? The stats look abject.
34% possession, 262 passes to Mexico’s 465, 2 corners their 12… sounds awful, like a typical old style England performance. Backs to the wall, can’t keep possession, can’t pass the ball l, just boot it upfield. Spend the whole time in our own box. Oh and we got someone sent off.
I’ve watched enough of those sorts of embarrassing games in my time. Usually people mutter afterwards about how lucky we were, what a poor performance. Yet you were all impressed. What gives?
Pretty much every player did well (you can make a case against Saka and the guy who was sent off, but the rest all did their job), two great goals from play, some outstanding saves from Pickford, and few glaring mistakes despite having the crowd and at times the referee against us. Add tons of excitement and drama and the nerve-wracking wait for the final whistle and you have a perfect match, at least as entertainment.
Thanks. Was an interesting phenomenon to wake to such universal praise for the team.
The priority for the footballing world now is for Belgium to boot the USA out of the competition in as emphatic a way as possible. It’s striking how American commenters, from all sides of politics, simply don’t notice the foul stench of what Trump and Infantino cooked up over the weekend. They do not get it.
The US commentary seems to be either 'nothing to see here', or 'everyone knows FIFA has been corrupt since forever; nothing to see here'.
That's the thing about corruption, if you don't crack down on it it spreads ever further and eventually becomes the norm. Then you end up living in a society where police stop motorists for bribes to let them go, every business transaction has someone on the take, getting any official to do their job requires some sort of favour or payment to grease the wheels. America will end up operating like Russia much faster than many of them think, and they may already have passed the point of no return.
Like New York construction used to be? Or is that just hackneyed mafia movie hokum?
New York construction is still not clean - things like shadow jobs etc.
But it is much better than it was. Organised crime literally ran stuff like the concrete industry until Giuliani & Co. busted the 5 families.
Two historic UK private schools bought by a Chinese company are set to close their doors months after its owners were accused of asset-stripping.
Durham High School in Durham and Ruthin School in Denbighshire, North Wales, will not reopen to pupils after the end of the academic term in July, both schools confirmed in statements this week.
I think ydoethur mentioned this last week but I'd not appreciated the Chinese dimension.
Every one of the schools that have closed have a significant amount of prime real estate that would make very profitable building land.
That's a bingo.
Especially in light of Burnham wanting to get a move on with housing.
The resistance to turning an ex-private school site into housing might well be less, locally.
A (THE tbf) private school local to us does a junior Parkrun which we (Me and my daughter) regularly attend. The buildings and grounds definitely would have a big development value for housing (Right next to Clumber Park). It has a real smorgasbord of sporting facilities https://schoolhire.co.uk/worksop/worksop-college "used extensively by the school and wider local community". No idea of it's current financial situation but I'd hope it wouldn't be bought by a Chinese property Company masquerading as an education vehicle ! My old prep school ( https://kinghenrys.co.uk/pre-prep/ ) is closing it's doors as a school in 2026/27 with students being relocated to the other primary site in the trust (https://www.bablake.com/prep-school/). Maybe the site will be sold for housing which will be sad, sheep were kept on the school field when I went there in the eighties !
My passport interview (see previous rants) included asking about my education – infants school (now closed); junior school (now closed); comprehensive (now closed); uni/college (now closed); poly (now closed). I am school kryptonite.
Comments
What a match. What a last 10 minutes. Great from England. Contenders - don't let anybody say otherwise.
When we retired the shirt, @Brixian59, they laughed and took the piss.
They’re grateful now.
34% possession, 262 passes to Mexico’s 465, 2 corners their 12… sounds awful, like a typical old style England performance. Backs to the wall, can’t keep possession, can’t pass the ball l, just boot it upfield. Spend the whole time in our own box. Oh and we got someone sent off.
I’ve watched enough of those sorts of embarrassing games in my time. Usually people mutter afterwards about how lucky we were, what a poor performance. Yet you were all impressed. What gives?
I knew I was training for something useful. Great match.
If this continues, Burnham is a lucky git.
It would be better on the nerves if it were like general elections, and at the second they kicked off John Curtice arrived to tell you the final score.
The early two goal lead was fully deserved, and not luck.
England had little choice but to defend for half of the game, being down to ten men. The stats might otherwise have been very different.
Made the most of their chances, and didn't choke.
And the manager's substitutions all worked, which is in itself a minor miracle for England.
Many congratulations to England on a famous win
I didn't stay up as I need my rest but it sounds an amazing game
Norway beating Brazil was unexpected, but well deserved as Brazil were poor and did not deserve to win
And as far as Trump and the corrupt FIFA are concerned I assume we are all Belgium supporters now
How can these corrupt individuals get away with spoiling the beautiful game ?
It makes one despair
https://x.com/therealbuni/status/2073990221880840247?s=61
https://www.chathamhouse.org/publications/the-world-today/2026-06/britains-place-new-world-order
Against this onslaught, from a host team which was playing miles above itself, England was magnificent, hitting Mexico twice in quick succession in the first half against the run of play with two Bellingham goals. The first from a sublime Saka assist and the second a one-two with Kane.
Pickford pulled off some amazing athletic saves, but the whole England team - every one - gave performances of at least 8/10 IMO. The best England performance I've ever seen I think, especially given the occasion and location.
Adding the theatre was a couple of questionable VAR decisions (I thought the England sending off was understandable but harsh and I disagreed with the penalty against Kane).
In terms of player ratings, it was a match where many of the losing team could be given over 8/10 but for England I'd be hard pressed to give Pickford less than 10/10 and Bellingham close to that score.
Utterly brilliant sporting theatre.
I think there may very well be more to come - how much are in quiet little files and PDFs in media organisaions? They have all summer to get their clicks.
In power he will be like Trump - as incompetent and damaging, as he is lazy and inconsistent.
I more expect that the wheels will come off and he will try and walk away.
The priority for the footballing world now is for Belgium to boot the USA out of the competition in as emphatic a way as possible. It’s striking how American commenters, from all sides of politics, simply don’t notice the foul stench of what Trump and Infantino cooked up over the weekend. They do not get it.
A v good game.
England Norway will be like a good premier league match stylistically.
..
Well, we did it - the least likely thing since the last one.
Onwards and sideaways - I think I'drather we were facing Brazil and given our record against smaller European teams at vital stages of competitions - Iceland, Croatia - a note of caution is deserved.
I still rate CONSTITUTION RIVER's win in the Eclipse and CALANDAGAN's in the Grand Prix de Saint Cloud as my sporting performances of the weekend but what do I know?
Actually I think if it had been Kane or Bellingham this might be the case, hopefully not for Quansah.
‘ “The USA's red card was suspended after Donald Trump put in a call to Infantino. Could this be Keir Starmer's final act as prime minister - to try and get the red card from last night suspended?”
Education Minister Olivia Bailey: “Well, what I'm supposed to say is, politicians shouldn't interfere in sports. But knowing the Prime Minister, he is probably already texting him.”’
https://x.com/sophyridgesky/status/2074025413404148197?s=61&t=LYVEHh2mqFy1oUJAdCfe-Q
Interesting though that the Norse men (shall we call the that) took 30-50 years to adopt old French after settling in Normandy and then 300+ years to adopt English after invading England.
Reading the report we were discussing at the weekend (actually more a memo - it has a total of about 10-12 pages of content) about marriage and "unmarried mothers" allegedly being better off is feels like a return to a time 35-40 years ago when Peter Lilley was doing his "little list" of targets.
There is just a crass engagement with correlations, and no notice paid to either causations or consequences.
Norway is roughly on a par with Villa
Game of the tournament still Cape Verde vs Argentina I think though.
By FIFA, apparently, withdrawing the red card for free.
I would have at least expected a new watch for every member of the executive board of FIFA…
The Norman French dialects are suitably different to French, as an example “ Bonsouair! Seyiz les beinv’nus” instead of “ bonsoir et bienvenue”. That’s a basic difference but massive differences where French visitors often think we’ve made terrible mistakes with the French language on signs which are just in English and Jèrriais.
Football's red card rules are one reason why I've largely turned away from watching the game (which VAR has spoiled and red cards and penalties are given too readily).
If a player is sent off it changes, and often spoils, the game which is a shame for all including spectators. If a player is sent off in the first minute his team is disadvantaged for 89 minutes. If a player is sent off in the 89th minute his team is disadvantaged for 1 minute.
Perhaps teams who have a player sent off in the first half should be restored to 11 men after the break (and teams who have a player sent off in the half should be restored to 11 if extra time applies).
Bit like the FS herself.
is feels / it feels
I wonder why there was no mention of "unmarried fathers", nor of the social reasons why couples separate. Just how far back in the mists of history has the former IDS / Monty think tank decamped culturally?
I’m not sure that anyone, outside the kind of people who pre-ordered a Trump Phone, is that stupid.
This would reduce corruption in both the US Executive Branch *and* FIFA.
I suspect it's purely about status. The Normans didn't conquer France, whereas England was completely subjugated. Norman French was the language of the rulers; English of the ruled.
Hence the persistence of French/English today, for example the animal/food (lamb/mutton) duality.
For example, you know that 100 years war? You're taught about Crecy and Agincourt, which were temporary victories... You are taught about burning Joan of Arc...who, in the English mind was a cheat for being a woman. You are not taught about Castillon- the final battle of the war.... A decisive and complete French victory. Sure denigrating the French is a joke, but as I see more often when I am in the UK, you believe the amusing memes are true.
And its not just the French, where the joke is not the reality, and the way that the English turn their jokes and memes into a world view just makes them look unserious and borderline offensive. Fine when you rule the waves, but when you need partnerships it becomes a liability. Funny foreigners is part of the root of Brexit and is increasingly why even the friends of the UK just want to get past the inevitable silliness and start to talk like adults.
FFS UK, GROW UP!
One I've been chipping away at recently is how we rebuild a local civil society, so that the present political economy of rewards for taking ever more extreme positions is reversed. Burnham in his Manchester speech made an excellent point about the model of the Cooperative movement. I think for example that The Rest is Politics duo should be working harder on this agenda; they overemphasise their ability to get interviews with the Foreign Minister of Ruritania and the Lord Mayor of Timbuctoo, and could do more to build a better political culture here.
Interestingly, many USA people seem to me to be quite tolerant of permanent gibes aimed at them, though these may have the benefit of being accurate.
Has Farage ever looked shabbier?
Untrue, exceptionalist (no surprise) but even more missing the point than the other commentary. It has already totally normalised the corrupt political interference, as if that goes without saying.
They really don’t understand how much the world loathes Trump.
Then we barely had time for being 1-0 and 2-0 up before it was 2-1 and we were under pressure - then after half time O'Reilly hitting the post and then the red card - to still come away with the win after all that is the best England win since at least the 5-1 in Munich in 2001.
Context, @MelonB, is everything.
Secondly - it's the French. Therefore perfectly justified.
Thirdly - They are just as rude about the British. Perfidious Roast Beefs etc....
But he has never looked more corrupt.
One thing that might be interesting is getting interviews with ambassadors into the media, more often.
On the USA reactions - you obviously haven't listened to the MAGA types. Thin skinned is barely the beginning of it.
Durham High School in Durham and Ruthin School in Denbighshire, North Wales, will not reopen to pupils after the end of the academic term in July, both schools confirmed in statements this week.
The schools are owned by Chinese company Galaxy Global Education, which was accused of asset-stripping in April after it closed another private school in Worcestershire.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/durham-high-school-ruthin-closure-galaxy-global-b3007554.html
I think ydoethur mentioned this last week but I'd not appreciated the Chinese dimension.
https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-d&q=trump+cheating#fpstate=ive&vld=cid:4d4ce34f,vid:eRmOmutBeSA,st:0
https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-d&q=trump+cheating#fpstate=ive&vld=cid:2ca95a17,vid:eRmOmutBeSA,st:0
Especially in light of Burnham wanting to get a move on with housing.
The resistance to turning an ex-private school site into housing might well be less, locally.
Now, about this bridge........
Cape Verde genuinely gave Argentina a scare and that doesn’t bode well for Messi and co. I think it will be Switzerland or Colombia playing England or Norway in the semi final.
..
You need to grow a sense of humour.
Having the government pay the usual, over the odds prices, would actually be a good business plan. Guaranteed price for all the units, in advance, probably. Plus you will get the government using through any planning required.
Much like the housing of migrants is profitable - a large order of capacity from the people who run the country. What can go wrong?
It is because I am indeed pretty well traveled and am also reasonably multi lingual, that I notice, time after time, the fact that your "sense of humour" many cultures just find irritating. More to the point, the jokes are mostly in-jokes that are just not recognized away from the UK cultural space, so the response is not a gentle chuckle, it is bafflement- a bit like an embarrassing uncle at Christmas. The other problem is that the joke is usually the first and only thing that comes to mind when dealing with foreigners. I was in London at a conference on Friday and two English speakers hijacked an entire session cracking exactly these kinds of jokes about history.
The subject was future developments in technology. The majority non English audience just viewed the whole thing with a mild disbelief.
My old prep school ( https://kinghenrys.co.uk/pre-prep/ ) is closing it's doors as a school in 2026/27 with students being relocated to the other primary site in the trust (https://www.bablake.com/prep-school/). Maybe the site will be sold for housing which will be sad, sheep were kept on the school field when I went there in the eighties !
God didn't trust the British in the dark!
The French surrender thing dates to 1940 - when the French Government folded like damp cardboard. The contrast to WWI etc was very marked and sparked things like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Collapse_of_the_Third_Republic - which took the line that it was down to corruption and infiltration of institutions by rich, foreign influenced individuals who wanted to bring down democracy.
But it is much better than it was. Organised crime literally ran stuff like the concrete industry until Giuliani & Co. busted the 5 families.