Music Saves Lives – So lets save some!

As you may have noticed I have decided to get my blog to support the charity Music Saves Lives. I want as many people who view this blog to do as many activities as possible to help get blood donations for people.

It’s very simple, all you have to do is click on the counter to the left of this page and it will direct you to do some very simple activities. They will only take you a second to do so please do as many as possible and help raise some money for charity.

I think this charity is well worthwhile so please help.

Think Bike! Think Car!

Anyone who has done any motorway driving in the last month will have seen the signs that say ‘Think Bike!’ put in place to lower the casualties to motorcyclist’s.

Just the advertising campaign alone is strange, a driver sees the sign and spends so long thinking about the message and working out what ‘Think Bike!’ means that they could potentially hit a bike in the process.

I don’t know whose harebrained idea it was but they obviously didn’t think it through if you will excuse the pun.

But that is not my main beef with the campaign. I have a serious problem that the campaign is so  focused on car drivers thinking about motorcyclist’s. Surely this should work both ways, but you don’t see many signs for bikers saying ‘Think Car!’ do you? No.

Think Car!

Recently I have been doing quite a lot of driving up and down various motorways both in the day and at night, and I have to say bikers can be some of the most irresponsible vehicle drivers on the road.

Many of them zip in and out of traffic without so much as indicating, and some of them also travel so much over the speed limit, that by the time a driver has had chance to ‘Think Bike!’ and see the bike, the motorcyclist’s has already hit the tarmac.

Now I’m not saying that car drivers should not be aware of bikes and be sure to look out for them, but equally I think there should be a more strict approach to motorcyclist’s and their sometimes irresponsible actions. So let’s launch a ‘Think Car!’ campaign as well so that we all understand our own roles on the road.

Does 3D spoil films?

This weekend I went to see ‘Clash of the Titans’ in 3D, and have to say that the film being in 3D did not really enhance it at all.

The storyline of the film wasn’t brilliant and, as a lot of 3D films do, sacrificed the plot for impressive graphics and effects. It’s not just ‘Clash of the Titans’ that has fallen foul of this, if we consider ‘Avatar’ which had exactly the same problem. 

To watch a film in discomfort with large clumpy glasses so that you can see  a little bit more depth hardly seems worth it.

It’s not just films aswell, look at the reaction to Sky Sports ’ introduction of 3D sports. The balloon of sensation popped very quickly when people reacted by saying it wasn’t as good as they thought.

This is because when we think 3D, we think that things are going to fly out at you, but really it just makes the picture a little bit deeper, and to be honest it’s not worth it.

realistically films that are released for their effects in 3D are never going to sell beyond the cinema because the technology is not in people’s homes to watch DVD’s in 3D, and even when the technology is available to most homes who is going to sit in their front room wearing glasses? That’s the same with football, who wants to sit in a pub with glasses on?

Although the progress of technology will no doubt make our films more visually exciting, I only hope that the writing of films can keep some kind of reasonable standard.

The Return Of Suede

On Saturday night at a packed Club 100 in London, the four shadowed figures of Suede took to the stage in a return to the music scene after 18 years.

Seeing the set list containing songs like ‘Metal Mickey’, ‘Trash’ and ‘Beautiful Ones’ I couldn’t help but feeling all nostalgic and thinking how many other bands from the nineties would I like to see come back and perform. Being a bit of a Britpop fan, I had to narrow it down from a massive list, but here are my top 5.

1) The Boo Radley’s

2)The Bluetones

3) Catatonia

4)Lightening Seeds

5)Cast

England seeded for the World Cup, can they win it?

By Nathan Rowden

With 190 days to the start of the next fifa World Cup in South Africa excitement fills the countries who have qualified with the draw fast approaching.

The draw that takes place this Friday will see who England go up against the best teams from around the World to claim the title of World champions.

For England it has been a long path to the world cup draw in Cape Town. England have been made a top seed for the draw which means they can not play South Africa, Brazil, Spain, Holland, Italy, Germany or Argentina. But they can still face Nemesis Portugal or France.

Under new manger Fabio Capello, England have comfortably qualified for the 2010 World Cup winning their group by 6 points, and only losing once along the way. England are now fourth favourites to win the world cup behind Spain, Argentina and favourites Brazil. England fans will be hopeful that the likes of John Terry and Steven Gerrard can bring the world cup home for their country.

Of course all these odds can change on Friday after the draw.

England Vice-Captain Gerrard told Talksport “It can only be to our advantage being seeded. I don’t think we can be afraid of anyone”, as reported by Skysports.com.

The Draw

Due to FIFA rules, teams from the same confederation are kept apart if it is possible.  Due to the sheer volume of European teams of which there are  15  there will be some groups with more than one country from UEFA, but two European teams is the maximum.

Pot 1 will contain all the seeded teams, pot 2 will be teams from Asia, Oceania and North/Central America, and Pot 3 will be from Africa and South America whilst Pot 4 will be all non seeded European teams.

England’s best group would be to be matched against Slovenia, Algeria and North Korea based on world rankings. However it is just as possible that they could also be matched against France, Ivory Coast and the United States, which would be their ‘group of death’.

We shall have to see what happens come the draw in Cape town on Friday, however it is clear that England fans will be extremely excited about next summer’s tournament regardless of the draw and will hope that the time can repeat the success of 1966.

FIFA seedings for World Cup Play-Offs fair or unfair?

By Nathan Rowden

After watching Ireland valiantly stand-up to one of Europe’s heavyweights France on Saturday afternoon, myself and a few others began to question whether it was actually fair that there is a seeding system for the World Cup play-offs.

In a game which could have gone either way Ireland can consider themselves unlucky to have conceded at home to a heavily deflected shot from French forward Anelka.

There was little to pick between the two sides, and clearly France have not been playing to great standards as they did not win their qualifying group which begs the question why had they been seeded to play a so-called lesser opposition?

Other seeded teams were Portugal, Greece and Russia, and therefore got easier ties.

Out of the four seeded teams three of the them were victors in the first leg of their respective play-off games.

But is it really fair that teams like Bosnia-Herzegovina have to played teams who have not won their qualification groups but are seeded highly, and can not possibly be drawn against a lesser seeded country and stand a better chance?

Fairness of the draw

A poll by The Guardian shows that the large majority are in favour that the system is unfair.

The reasons for this are that if the up and coming lesser teams are having to play some of the so-called big boys of World football, whose path are being made that little bit easier by playing lower seeded opposition.

FIFA would panic if stars such as Henry of France and Ronaldo of Portugal were not to play, this is shown through the relief when Argentina finally stumbled across the finishing line to qualify which meant that Messi could play in the tournament.

Names like Messi, Ronaldo and Henry are bigger and more appealing than Doyle of Ireland or Muslimovic of Bosnia-Herzegovina. FIFA want the big boys in the World Cup for entertainment and revenue purposes and therefore favour the seeding system in the play-offs.

However, others argue that those so-called big boys have over the years consistently performed at a certain standard to gain their higher rankings and therefore it is only fair that a seeding system takes place in the qualification.

My reply to that would be that, not matter how ell you have performed in the past, if you dont automatically qualify and enter the play-offs then you do not deserve a seeding protection and should play who ever you get drawn against.

I strongly belive that this is something that FIFA really needs to look at after the 2010 World Cup in South Africa.

Should We Pull British Troops Out Of Afghanistan? – Tough Question

By Nathan Rowden

Photo by U.S Marine corps Corporal John Scott Rafoss (creative commons, Isafmedia)

The debate has been raised again about whether or not Britain should withdraw it’s troops from the Afghanistan after the death of five soldiers.

It certainly is a tough question to answer and difficult for many to know which side of the fence they sit on. Yesterday’s debate with Nicky Campbell on BBC Radio 5live addressed this issue directly.

Neither side could raise an argument to sway me either way. This is very much an argument that I can see both sides of.

As written by Christina Lamb in The Times a ComRes survey for the BBC has shown that “64% said the war was “unwinnable” and 63% thought British troops should be withdrawn “as soon as possible”.

This is a large percentage, but there are still many out there who do not think that withdrawals are the answer.

The ‘arguments’

On one side, you have the Afghan-sceptics who believe that it’s time for Britain to cut her losses and withdraw the troops, as we are very much in a Vietnam style situation in Afghanistan.

There are some who believe that young life, such as the five that were killed on Tuesday, is being wasted in Afghanistan in a conflict we can not possibly win.

Many also think as well as life being wasted, that much money is being wasted and is being pointlessly thrown at this conflict.

An opinion that Kim Howells, the chairman of the parliamentary intelligence and security committee has shared according to The Times which writes “Howells last week wrote an article questioning whether spending £2.6 billion a year keeping troops in Afghanistan was the best way to protect national security.”

Howells conclusion from  this was clear as he “called for a phased withdrawal”.

Then you have the other side who say that we are in too deep to withdraw now, that we must persist until the end no matter what it takes, which is basically more soldiers and money.

These people are of the opinion that we can not possibly leave the conflict and be seen defeated and have our pride dented. There are also that think if Britain pulls out of Afghanistan, then the Taliban will gain control there and Al-Qaeda training will commence.

A sentiment that Prime Minister Brown holds, he said “We know that Al-Qaeda continue to train and plot attacks on Britain from the region. We cannot, must not and will not walk away.”

The people on this side, on the whole believe that the end is in sight, especially with  President Obama showing a willingness to send more American troops into the “war of necessity” as he claimed.

What can we conclude

I see very valid points for both arguments. It is always sad when soldiers are killed in conflict, however despite this, it is a war and death is inevitable, and soldiers are fully aware of the risk when they take the job to be paid to fight for their country, which is extremely admirable.

Would drawing the troops out of  Afghanistan and concede defeat mean that the soldiers who have already died in the conflict have died in vain?

We can only see what the next government decide to do, and it would be a brave government to announce which way they sway this close to the elections, although at Prime Minister’s Questions on Wednesday, Liberal Democrat leader Nick Clegg did hint that he would be in favour of withdrawals.

We can only wait and see, and support the troops who are currently out there.

Home Secretary Faces Exodus After Nutt Sacking

Home Secretary Alan Johnson faces a mass exodus of staff from the governments drug advisory body after the sacking of  Professor David Nutt.

Talking to The Guardian, another member of the body has claimed that the experts were “planning collective action”. A mass resignation from the board would be a disaster for the government, and leave Alan Johnson blushing.

Today Johnson publically came out on national television to defend his decision to sack Nutt. The home secretary angrily told Sky News “You cannot have a chief adviser at the same time stepping into the public field and campaigning against government decisions. You can do one or the other, you can’t do both.” Johnson also went on to say “I’ve got enormous respect for the advisory council. I want to meet them very soon. I’ve got enormous respect for the scientific community. They’ve got to understand that Professor Nutt crossed this line between offering advice … and then campaigning against the government on political decisions.”

Johnson has come in from heavy attack for scientists over this sacking, most notably Lord Winston has  told BBC Radio 4 “I think it shows a rather poor understanding of the value of science.”

Two members of the government body have already resigned, both Dr. King and Marion Walker left the body in the wake of Nutt being sacked. Dr. King told BBC News “the classification of drugs is about drug harm. It doesn’t need to be politicised in the way that it is.”

Prof. Nutt himself has already told the BBC that he thought that the councils position was now “untenable”.

We shall see what happens over the next few days, however the uproar from the science community may leave Home Secretary Alan Johnson with regretting the decision to sack Nutt as rapidly as he did.

Liverpool Reserves 1-2 Arsenal’s Kids – Are Kids The Best Policy?

In the tie of the round Liverpool played Arsenal Away last night at the Emirates Stadium and lost an emphatic game 2-1. Arsenals kids not the first time got the better of Liverpool’s reserves.

Arsenal manger Arsene Wenger has his head screwed on when it comes to buying  young players. Yes other managers dabble, but Wenger is the expert in spotting raw young talent. Once again Wenger’s team did him proud as they stood up against a more experienced Liverpool team.

Liverpool manager Rafa Benitez played the likes of  Kuyt, Voronin, Babel, Skrtel, Insua and bought on Beneyoun and Aquilani all of which regularly play for Liverpool’s first team. The difference between Liverpool and Arsenal last night was that Arsenal had quality in the final third, where as Liverpool, to not beat around the bush didn’t. The typical under achieving  Liverpool “squad” players faltered yet again without the seniors.

Where as Arsenal had Ramsey, Merida, Eastmond to name but a few on the pitch, a largely more inexperienced side than Liverpool’s, however they had quality, quick accurate passing and were productive in front of goal. In fact for most of the first half, Liverpool couldnt get the ball near the Arsenal goal, and when they did they fluffed everything. Wenger had his “Kids” well organised and they were out there to impress their manager.

It is something that more managers in the premier league should be doing, investing in youngsters and give them the chance to impress, they will be more up for a game than the senior players, who are never impressed playing in a lesser cup like the Carling Cup.Arsenal will come good when these young players mature, and teams like Liverpool will be left with stale reserve squads constantly topped up with average players instead of investing in their own world-class players.

The Arsenal team fully deserved their win and although Liverpool should have had a late penalty and probably did deserve a draw, the Arsenal by no means deserved to lose the game and once again they gave themselves a very good account of their abilities and have answered the question yet again that Kids are the best policy in the Carling Cup and that investment in the future is essential to success.

The U.S Begins To Pull Through The Recession – What About The UK?

America has today announced that it has began to climb out of the recession, leaving the UK as the only leading economic power to still be suffering the effects.

Gordon Brown will be blushing tonight in the knowledge that the country he was chancellor and Prime Minister of is still in the recession behind many of the leading economic powers such as Germany, Japan, France, China and today America has joined that list. The Times reported that “US gross domestic product (GDP), a key measure of a country’s economic strength, grew by 3.5 per cent between July and September — at the top end of economists’ forecasts.” President Obama claimed there was a “long way to go”, but this is extremely good news for the U.S economy.

Although Gordon Brown still insists that the UK will be out of the recession by the end of the year, it is very clear that we are still very much in it and even when we do eventually pull through, are we going to be able to sustain it? It also begs the question, why has the UK taken so much longer to get to the other side of the recession?

We as a nation have been building ourselves up to this recession for many years, borrowing money has become a way of life, and that is why we have been hit so hard when the recession came along. Is this the chancellors fault? Partly, but not by any means solely. Where as our GDP dropped in the last quarter everyone elses grew, we need to start spending what we have and not spend what we haven’t got.

We also need to ask ourselves, is a jobless recovery possible? With jobs being lost everyday in the UK and people struggling to get work, can we spend what we have without borrowing? Jobs need to be generated for people in order to kick-start the economy so that we do not get into another borrowing and credit cycle. Easier said than done I know, but we need to make sure that every vacancy is filled and stop as a nation having this job snobbery where we feel we are too good for certain jobs. The fact is if your unemployed for more than 6 months then your not too good for lower jobs, at least as a temporary measure.

An interesting point was made to me about the job situation, which is of course integral to the re-boot in the economy. If people are on jobseekers allowance, for more than 3 months, make these people do community service for their money, is that not fair? An interesting suggestion I thought. I wonder whether any Government would actually be daring enough to carry it out. We shall see.

Hopefully by the end of the next couple of months or so things will begin to look up and we will in the famous words of Baroness Vadera see the “green shoots” of economic recovery.