Dance Tonight - Paul McCartney

The new Paul McCartney video - directed by Michel Gondry, guest starring Natalie Portman and Mackenzie Crook... It's great, and the song is great too... To me, anyway...

Huh?

Newsround used to be one of my favourite programmes when I was younger. And even when I was at university, I’d still watch it, because it was just a bit nicer to watch than the news.

These days, however, it annoys me.

This morning’s edition is a good example of why.

Take a few seconds to think about all the news in the world at the moment. Wars in Afganistan, Iraq, the Middle east. Terror suspects absconding. Human rights abuses all over the world, change of Prime Minister in a month’s time, North Korea test-firing missiles, the underwater dinosaur tracks showing that they could swim and the first results of this year’s Spingwatch survey. If you’re pushed, there’s the Big Brother controversies both here and in Australia, Blue Peter losing a show a week, the results of the Ivor Novello Awards, and even a story about an escaped Orangutan running riot at a zoo.

This was the 3-story order for the stories on this morning’s Newsround:

1, Michael Owen will captain the England B team against Albania tomorrow.

2, A boy who lives in a tent is interviewed

3, a bird poos on George W Bush during a press conference.

Now, granted, the third is a very funny story and would always make my personal running order, but is this really the best we can do?

I know that not all kids would be interested in a lot of the heavy news that’s been cropping up, and the editors need to do what will interest their target audience, but surely we don’t have to dumb things down so much that we get to this stage?!

Sigh.

Judge not lest you be judged...?

Theologian damns most Britons to hell

Why is it that the Conservative side of Christianity has a far bigger mouth?

The Eurovision Political Contest

Sigh.

We're not in a Balkan country. Or an ex-Russian territory. Or a Baltic country. In short, we're unlikely to win the Eurovision Song contest until everyone else has forgotten about Iraq - or been forced to vote according to the quality of the song entry, not whether or not they're mates with another country.

It's sad - there were some intruiging songs in there, not great, but interesting. And ours wasn't bad, you know. I am aware that the papers have criticised Scooch for their performance (especially the Daily Mirror), but they did well - the performance was funny, they weren't out of tune, and the song was a good one in Eurovision terms - it was silly, fluffy pop, subtly filthy, and accompanied by daft costumes and at least one permatan. In fact, all we needed was for the two guys to be sporting healthy beards and we'd be able to claim we'd followed the Abba formula...

And we, the humble voting public of the UK did vote this through as our representative. We can hardly blame Scooch for not winning - we sent them there, and they don't decide to mount illegal invasions of other countries. We should be proud of them, I think - they certainly deserved to do a lot better in the voting than they did.

The voting is ridiculous. It always was, but its worse now. There were always the predictable love-ins: Greece and Cyprus; Norway, Denmark, Finland, Iceland and Sweden; Portugal and Spain. But now we have countless countries voting, and surely we can't be sure that there's not some rigging going on somewhere...

The song that won, quite simply, was awful. It was dirgy, had perhaps the least exciting performance of the show, and a performer who had the on-stage charisma of a squashed ant. It's neatly summed up by her views on music:

'I listen to music - I don't want to watch it, I want to listen to it.'

Which misses the entire point of Eurovision, surely.

Scooch had a catchy song, and maybe it was a little out of date in that sense (as Tim Moore argues here). But hang on, a lot of the other songs were rocky power ballads - a staple from the 1980s... And the only differences that spring to mind are Ireland (awful as it was, it was a truely Irish pop song - folky and twee. And in need of stronger vocals), Estonia (hmm. It was just an old drag queen - the song was not at all memorable), and Sweden (an interesting 60s throwback with a man who looked a bit ridiculous).

Oh, and the French. That was worse than awful with a small bald man resembling Richard O'Brien running round and round the band shouting into the mic, completely distracting from the act.

The German entry was very good as I remember though, nice to see something as different as swing making it onto the Eurovision stage. but that disappeared too.

I'm a quiet Eurovision fan, but I'm no less disappointed with this year's show. Something needs to change. If the people running the show were there on Saturday and heard the boos coming from the audience, maybe they'll get the message somewhere along the line.

I love music, and I love the art of songwriting, and that is what this is meant to showcase. Instead, its a daft circus which is followed by a biased and allegedly corrupt method of determining a winner.

Time for a regime change, George and Tony?

Down and Out With A Whimper

Charlton were relegated tonight after losing 2-0 to Spurs at the Valley.

OK, so there’s the scandal of West Ham fielding allegedly inelligible players and being given the luckiest break of all football history by not being docked points when they would have done in any other situation and having a set of fans who inexplicably seem to think they have some divine right to be in the Premiership.

But have Charlton complained? Despite Wigan setting a pathetic precedent by whingeing their endangered little heads off about everybody else, all Charlton have complained about is their own performance.

I have a few worries about the season… I think Iain Dowie should have been given a better chance with this group of players – after all, he brought them in with a vision in mind. I’m concerned that for the first time, Charlton seem to have made a knee-jerk reaction with his firing, instead of showing faith. However, I think Alan Pardew is a very good man to have in his place, and maybe a season (or two) in the Championship is what he and the club need to truly begin working together. We saw what he’s capable of through the post-christmas revival, when we traditionally fall away disgustingly.

However, I’m still proud to be a Charlton supporter. I’m still proud at the honesty and dignity with which Pards has accepted the fate. We asked for it, gave survival our best short, nearly made it but lacked the quality to manage. Again, as with Saints being relegated in Rugby Union, maybe the ticket prices will go down a bit and I’ll be able to get along to see a game…

The Definition of a Bad Loser?

There’s been an unusual request made over the weekend.

Let me fill you in.

The last game of the “Millennium Magic” event at the Millennium Stadium in Cardiff was between two of the stronger teams in Super League – Bradford Bulls and Leeds Rhinos. Its usually a good match between them and this time was no exception. Bradford led 38-36 with a minute left to go. Leeds were awarded a penalty, and Kevin Sinfield kicked for goal to tie the game.

The kick rebounded off a post, a Leeds player collected the ball and got over the line to score a try, which turned out to be the winning points. The referee, Steve Ganson, wasn’t aware of any problems with the play and awarded the try without referring to the video referee.

It now seems that after viewing video evidence, the try-scorer, Jordan Tansey, was clearly offside when chasing the kick down, and therefore the try should have been disallowed. But the move was not referred, the video evidence not analysed by officials at the time, and nothing done. Since the game, Steve Ganson has seen the video, and backed by the Rugby Football League, publicly apologised for the mistake and said that he wished that he had referred the decision. Fair enough, you might think – its sport, played and regulated by human beings, and sometimes these things happen.

But, this is clearly not the way Bradford Bulls think about sport. The below is quoted on the BBC Sport website:

“The Leeds Rhinos club is justifiably a proud club, with a great tradition, and
a club which above all values its reputation for right and fair dealing in everything it does.
"For these reasons I shall be inviting the Leeds Rhinos to do the right thing again now, for the benefit of their own reputation certainly, but also for the good of the great game of rugby league, to voluntarily hand over to Bradford Bulls what is, as the whole game now acknowledges, rightfully ours - the two points so cruelly taken from us by Mr Ganson's failure to act.”

For goodness sake, do us all a favour and grow up. These things happen - it’s what sport does to you. You don’t always win and you are not always happy with everything. Just grow up, swallow it and get on with the next game.

For the record, the Leeds Rhinos’ response is perfect (in my opinion) – again quoted on the BBC Sport website:

“It's an unusual request to be asked to consider.
"The Bulls will have another chance for two points on 29 June when the two teams meet at Carnegie Headingley.”

In other words, just stop complaining and get on with it.

In the cricket world, Sri Lanka have complained to the ICC about Adam Gilchrist’s use of a squash ball in his batting glove while playing. For those of you who don’t know, AG used a softened squash ball in one of his gloves to prevent the bat from turning in his hands when playing a shot throughout the World Cup. It didn’t come up as an issue at the time presumably because his performances in the first 10 matches they played were modest by his standards. But since his record-breaking 149 from 104 balls in final helped the aussies beat Sri Lanka by 51 runs, it is apparently something the losing finalists have decided should be reported to the ICC. They claim that they aren’t saying its illegal, just that its not in the “spirit and tradition of the game.”

The Australian response is typically Aussie and thoroughly fair comment:

“It's a storm in a teacup, or a batting glove. It's been suggested that if
shoving a squash ball into your bottom glove makes you bat like Adam Gilchrist,
then perhaps the ICC should make it compulsory.”
Peter Young, Cricket Australia.

Taking a break...

For a few reasons, I'm going to take a couple of months off - well, more or less. I may post occasionally. But I'm doing this for a couple of reasons:
1, Luke and Nikki come first, and I'm running out of spare time!
2, I am completely unconvinced that anyone reads this.
3,I have started working on something I hope I can tell people about in a few months time - it's a writing project and I'm excited to have begun giving it attention. But I won't say anything else about it yet.

I'm still contactable via crackingcheese@hotmail.com, and the two other blogs attached to this one, Duplo Philosophy and Sir Leonard Beastly's Social Whirl will both be updated as normal...
http://duplo-philosophy.blogspot.com
http://sir-leonard-beastlys-social-whirl.blogspot.com

If you ever read this, please take a minute to let me know. It might influence when I start posting again. Otherwise, come and find me on www.facebook.com and let me know.

Chris.

Warning: includes expansionist tendancies

Well, the "empire" expands again.

(I use the " " because the idea that I have some kind of blogging empire is bizarre and rather laughable...)

There is now a dedicated blog for my poetry. If you read this blog (I don't think there are many, if any, of you...) and you're interested, pop along to http://duplo-philosophy.blogspot.com to have a read.

For the lucky, lucky readers who haven't been introduced to my poems, let me give a little background.

I rarely talk about this without being pushed. That's not to say that its something I am ashamed of - far from it - its just something I hold rather personally. Over the last few years, I've been writing. Stories, sketched, plays, poetry - whatever occurs, really. I started doing it as a way of expressing myself - and for a while as a strange kind of self-therapy to forget depression. It just became a habit and something that I enjoyed for the sake of doing it, after a while.

My poems and scripts have been used in weird and wonderful places and ways - from church services to magazine space-fillers to being performed as street theatre at a national festival, and I've written things that have then been read in school assemblies (well after I'd left school, I have to add), and even one that made it all the way to the wall of a child's bedroom (no, not Luke's...).

I have read some of the poems in public before, but it really didn't occur to me at first that others might like them. So, all I ask is that if you read them, and you have an opinion about it, please let me know. I've found that more often than not, that poems I don't like are well-received by other people and the poems I do like are usually ones that noone else likes...

The poems themselves aren't anyting particularly complicated or impressively intellectual, and I don't pretend to be another Seamus Heaney or T.S.Eliot... I've been more influenced by poets like John Betjeman, Roger McGough, Harold Pinter, John Hegley and Michael Rosen than anyone else, and I tend to keep to a simple style, without a huge amount of rhyme - I like finding phrasings and sentences that flow nicely and sound good to me. A curious phrase or an interesting fact is more use to me than a metephorical pretext...

Some are quite obviously influenced by my faith, and some are not. Some look closely at emotions, some expressing my thoughts on an event, and some of them are about nothing, really. Some are experiments, some follow distinct patterns, some mimic the styles of others.

If you do decide to have a look: Thank you. I hope you enjoy them, and I hope you'll let me know what you think.

http://duplo-philosophy.blogspot.com

Do the words “Outstanding” and “Contribution” mean anything these days?

Hmm. How do I put this?

I was at a loss for words when I heard this news from last week's Brit Awards:

Outstanding contribution to music: Oasis

WHAT???! WHAT FOR?

FOR NICKING OTHER PEOPLE’S MUSIC AND THEN PROCLAIMING THEMSELVES AS BETTER THAN EVERYONE ELSE?

FOR LOOKING LIKE A BUNCH OF SHAMBOLIC DRUNK TOSSERS?

FOR NOT SHAVING AND/OR CUTTING THEIR HAIR BECAUSE IT’S “COOL” TO COVER THE HOOD OF YOUR FRAYED AND PEE-STAINED PARKA WITH YOUR MANKY DANDRUFF?

I just don’t get it.

What do people see in them? The attitude is irritating, and isn’t backed up by their back-catalogue. They’re amazingly intolerant of other artists and genres, especially seeing as everyone else has to put up with their own inane shamblings in the media.

I will concede that there are a few good songs in there – Wonderwall (although Ryan Adams’ version showed that the original was a poor version), The Masterplan (although that was a B-side…), Whatever, and Definitely Maybe was a good album… and I have heard very good things about the new album.

I will also nail my colours to the mast. In the whole Oasis vs. Blur contest thingy at the height of “Britpop” (yuck), I was firmly, and still am, fighting the Blur corner. They are infinitely more creative, more experimental, more popular. And yet, it’s Oasis that are honoured.

I assume they have been honoured for making sure people don’t forget how good the Beatles were.

I once heard someone on a tube train telling someone that Oasis were so good because they are what the Beatles would sound like if they were still together now.

I have a feeling that if the Beatles sounded like that, they’d have gladly given up music and gone to work in a fast-food restaurant. Which is what Oasis should have done instead of inflicting themselves on us and getting rich from being idiots that can shout over the squeals of a guitar being assaulted and then fight amongst themselves in the press conference afterwards.

I’d have thought an award for outstanding contribution to music should be given to someone who we couldn’t live without. I think I’d far rather try to survive without them.

Oh God. Please no.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/6371239.stm