It being my birthday on Sunday, this weekend we'll be hosting my third not-quite-annual birthday barbecue. (Not quite annual because the first one was four years ago, the second last year, and this will be the third. Though my expectation is that this pattern will continue, as there are distinct advantages to making use of the great outdoors, rather than cramming everyone in a single house.) It being the third such event, my mind is necessarily turning to thoughts of how to outdo last year's BBQ. (And, indeed, outdoing the two barbecues I've hosted for work thus far this year.)
Obviously the first thing on my list is to make sure I actually get to have one of the venison burgers this time! Beyond that, I have a two-pronged strategy: the barbecue itself and the peripheral offerings. That is, a slight expansion to the range of mostly-meats that will be grilled, and a fairly significant expansion to the range of side offerings. It's shaping up pretty well, I think.
But there's now a seed of worry starting to take root in my thinking. Because this sort of elaboration is exactly the sort of thing that can get out of hand if it's not watched carefully. It's a seasonal variation of the issues surrounding Christmas that I've blogged about in the past.
That's okay, though, because in among my strategising for Christmas I've already solved this problem: the key is to have a stable foundation of solid favourites, and then to add one or two flourishes, that may or may not be seen again. (Of course, if one of the flourishes is sufficiently well received, then it can become one of the foundation items. Though I would strongly advocate that it should be a replacement for an existing foundation item, not simply an addition. Otherwise, all you've really done is slowed down the rate at which things get out of hand.)
I've not quite locked down the two sets of items - I have a fairly good idea, but nothing absolute yet - so I'll post again once the barbecue has passed with my final decisions. But it's looking good... provided the weather plays ball.
#32: "Moon Over Soho", by Ben Aaronovitch
Tuesday, June 25, 2019
Friday, June 21, 2019
A Test for the System
The news this morning has featured a guest appearance by one Mark Field, a Tory MP who was filmed yesterday ejecting a climate change protestor from a private function he was attending last night. The problem being that the climate change protestor in question was a woman about half his size and was making a peaceful protest. Mark Field's reaction was... less than peaceful.
Mark Field has this morning made an unreserved apology, submitted himself to the Cabinet Office for investigation, and been suspended as a minister. He also claims that his actions were motivated by a genuine fear that she was a threat to those present.
Well... okay.
What we have now is a test of the system. What should happen now is that the police should launch an investigation, arrest Mark Field and interview him under caution, and he should almost certainly be charged. Then the courts can decide whether the actions that he took were proportionate to the level of threat (both perceived and real).
At the end of that process it might be the judgement of the court that he acted appropriately. Or it might not be, and he will find himself imprisoned.
But the system must be seen to work.
If not, then the lesson is quite simple: the system doesn't work. Either we all live under the rule of law, or none of us do. And that's a genie I think we really don't want to be letting out of its bottle.
(I should also note: the protestors should also be arrested and charged accordingly, which probably means some variant of trespass and/or breach of the peace. Because the system has to work for everyone.)
Mark Field has this morning made an unreserved apology, submitted himself to the Cabinet Office for investigation, and been suspended as a minister. He also claims that his actions were motivated by a genuine fear that she was a threat to those present.
Well... okay.
What we have now is a test of the system. What should happen now is that the police should launch an investigation, arrest Mark Field and interview him under caution, and he should almost certainly be charged. Then the courts can decide whether the actions that he took were proportionate to the level of threat (both perceived and real).
At the end of that process it might be the judgement of the court that he acted appropriately. Or it might not be, and he will find himself imprisoned.
But the system must be seen to work.
If not, then the lesson is quite simple: the system doesn't work. Either we all live under the rule of law, or none of us do. And that's a genie I think we really don't want to be letting out of its bottle.
(I should also note: the protestors should also be arrested and charged accordingly, which probably means some variant of trespass and/or breach of the peace. Because the system has to work for everyone.)
Thursday, June 20, 2019
Some Thoughts on Scotland v Argentina
With Scotland out of the World Cup, my flirtation with women's football is at an end. And with it ends also any residual interest I had in the 'beautiful' game.
As is standard for Scotland, we were faced with a must-win game, did extremely well, and then conspired to blow it in the most painful way possible. To lose a three-goal lead is painful, and I would normally agree that that was the mark of a team that, by rights, didn't deserve to progress.
Normally.
The thing is, though, the first two goals that Scotland, while painful, were both good goals. If Argentina had scored a third goal like that, then that would be one thing. Indeed, if Argentina had scored a really scrappy third goal that trickled over the line after a goalmouth scrum... well that would be fine too.
But what actually happened was a trio of the most outrageous refereeing decisions I've ever witnessed.
First, there was a free kick, at which time Scotland took the opportunity to make a double substitution. However, rather than waiting for us to do that and be ready (as they're supposed to), the referee blew to restart the match while the substitution was in progress - indeed, while we still had twelve players on the pitch. The upshot of this bad decision was that our defender was badly out of position, and that led, in part, to her conceding the penalty.
The penalty decision itself was close but was, sadly, correct. That hurts, but it's fair enough. So even at this point, if that was all that was wrong then I wouldn't have an issue.
But the next cruel twist came after Scotland's keeper saved the penalty, whereupon VAR 'reviewed' the decision and, incorrectly, adjudged that she'd left her line before the ball was kicked. And so the penalty was retaken, and the keeper booked for her troubles. Needless to say, the retaken kick was scored.
The third kick in the teeth came thirty seconds later. Having taken eight and a half minutes deliberating over the VAR decision, and with four further minutes to be added on for stoppage time anyway, the referee instead decided to stop the game, thus eliminating both teams.
As a result of this, an awful lot of people have been blaming VAR for this. I don't - VAR is just the use of technology. All it can do is give people the ability to review what happened; it is still up to people to interpret it and apply the rules appropriately. VAR is therefore exactly as good or as bad as those using it.
A lot of people have also blamed bad officiating. It's not as if these have been the only bad decisions made in this World Cup, after all. And, indeed, there was a truly terrible decision early in the Champions' League final that killed that game, too.
But then, if the officiating was just bad, you would see it being consistently bad, with wrong decisions going either way with roughly equal frequency. But, by a stunning coincidence, these refereeing 'mistakes' invariably go against the smaller country, where 'smaller' is defined according to TV viewing figures. Scotland, as part of the UK, effectively brings zero viewers to the World Cup, and while Argentina is a massive force in the men's game, the women's game is barely a niche interest there. So if they just happened to come to a draw, thus eliminating both and giving their place to some other team... well, wouldn't that be convenient?
Ever since the infamous Thierry Henry handball in 2009, I've had grave doubts about football. They're now at a point where I no longer have doubts. And without a level playing field, I no longer have any interest in the game.
As is standard for Scotland, we were faced with a must-win game, did extremely well, and then conspired to blow it in the most painful way possible. To lose a three-goal lead is painful, and I would normally agree that that was the mark of a team that, by rights, didn't deserve to progress.
Normally.
The thing is, though, the first two goals that Scotland, while painful, were both good goals. If Argentina had scored a third goal like that, then that would be one thing. Indeed, if Argentina had scored a really scrappy third goal that trickled over the line after a goalmouth scrum... well that would be fine too.
But what actually happened was a trio of the most outrageous refereeing decisions I've ever witnessed.
First, there was a free kick, at which time Scotland took the opportunity to make a double substitution. However, rather than waiting for us to do that and be ready (as they're supposed to), the referee blew to restart the match while the substitution was in progress - indeed, while we still had twelve players on the pitch. The upshot of this bad decision was that our defender was badly out of position, and that led, in part, to her conceding the penalty.
The penalty decision itself was close but was, sadly, correct. That hurts, but it's fair enough. So even at this point, if that was all that was wrong then I wouldn't have an issue.
But the next cruel twist came after Scotland's keeper saved the penalty, whereupon VAR 'reviewed' the decision and, incorrectly, adjudged that she'd left her line before the ball was kicked. And so the penalty was retaken, and the keeper booked for her troubles. Needless to say, the retaken kick was scored.
The third kick in the teeth came thirty seconds later. Having taken eight and a half minutes deliberating over the VAR decision, and with four further minutes to be added on for stoppage time anyway, the referee instead decided to stop the game, thus eliminating both teams.
As a result of this, an awful lot of people have been blaming VAR for this. I don't - VAR is just the use of technology. All it can do is give people the ability to review what happened; it is still up to people to interpret it and apply the rules appropriately. VAR is therefore exactly as good or as bad as those using it.
A lot of people have also blamed bad officiating. It's not as if these have been the only bad decisions made in this World Cup, after all. And, indeed, there was a truly terrible decision early in the Champions' League final that killed that game, too.
But then, if the officiating was just bad, you would see it being consistently bad, with wrong decisions going either way with roughly equal frequency. But, by a stunning coincidence, these refereeing 'mistakes' invariably go against the smaller country, where 'smaller' is defined according to TV viewing figures. Scotland, as part of the UK, effectively brings zero viewers to the World Cup, and while Argentina is a massive force in the men's game, the women's game is barely a niche interest there. So if they just happened to come to a draw, thus eliminating both and giving their place to some other team... well, wouldn't that be convenient?
Ever since the infamous Thierry Henry handball in 2009, I've had grave doubts about football. They're now at a point where I no longer have doubts. And without a level playing field, I no longer have any interest in the game.
Wednesday, June 19, 2019
Boris Should Back Independence
It emerged yesterday that 63% of Tory members would rather see Scotland leave the UK than for Brexit not to happen. Indeed, fully 26% of Tory members would be actively happy for Scotland to leave the UK in any circumstance.
That being the case if, as expected, Boris Johnson becomes the next Tory leader (and PM), and if, as expected, the combination of Boris as PM and the prospect of a Hard Brexit in October does indeed push opinion polls in Scotland to show a majority in favour of independence, then at that stage Boris really should approach the Scottish parliament with an offer: let's legislate for the end of the Union.
The thing is, at present Scotland sends 59 MPs to Westminster, of whom 13 are Tories (but most or all of whom are likely to lose their seats in any General Election), while 46 are anti-Tory MPs. And the Tories UK-wide are a few seats short of a majority, and are dependent on support from the DUP to remain in power.
But if Scotland leaves, suddenly the arithmetic changes - the Tories would have an outright majority, they would no longer depend on the DUP, and the PM's hands are then untied to do a deal. (And, indeed, he could then go for the Northern Ireland-only backstop arrangement that was originally suggested - an arrangement that the Tories were happy with but the DUP absolutely were not.) Getting rid of Scotland solves a lot of problems for the incoming Tory PM.
Of course, there's a question of whether Scotland actually wants independence - yes, we've elected a majority of pro-independence MPs, a majority of pro-independence MSPs, and 50% of our MEPs are pro-independence, but the reality is that at least some of those votes are probably 'on loan' for various reasons. (That's why I very much hope we don't end up turning an election into a de facto referendum on independence - the system used will inevitably skew the results. We really should find out where people actually stand on this issue. But, of course, that involves the people involved actually playing ball. If they don't, other mechanisms will have to be found.)
But if the polls say there's a majority for it, and if both Westminster and Holyrood stand ready to legislate accordingly, presumably such a referendum could be conducted quickly and smoothly. And, indeed, if both governments are actively campaigning for independence, it's only going to go one way.
...
All that said, file this one under "never going to happen". While it would indeed solve a lot of problems, I don't think any incoming Tory leader could really bear to be the one to bring an end to the 'Union' part of "United Kingdom". Plus there's the small matter of our oil, whisky, tourism, financial services, renewable energy, beef, gin, clean water... I'm not entirely sure that the rest UK could really afford their independence.
#30: "Morgrave Miscellany", by Keith Baker and Ruty Rutenberg
#31: "In the Skin of a Lion", by Michael Ondaatje (a book from The List)
That being the case if, as expected, Boris Johnson becomes the next Tory leader (and PM), and if, as expected, the combination of Boris as PM and the prospect of a Hard Brexit in October does indeed push opinion polls in Scotland to show a majority in favour of independence, then at that stage Boris really should approach the Scottish parliament with an offer: let's legislate for the end of the Union.
The thing is, at present Scotland sends 59 MPs to Westminster, of whom 13 are Tories (but most or all of whom are likely to lose their seats in any General Election), while 46 are anti-Tory MPs. And the Tories UK-wide are a few seats short of a majority, and are dependent on support from the DUP to remain in power.
But if Scotland leaves, suddenly the arithmetic changes - the Tories would have an outright majority, they would no longer depend on the DUP, and the PM's hands are then untied to do a deal. (And, indeed, he could then go for the Northern Ireland-only backstop arrangement that was originally suggested - an arrangement that the Tories were happy with but the DUP absolutely were not.) Getting rid of Scotland solves a lot of problems for the incoming Tory PM.
Of course, there's a question of whether Scotland actually wants independence - yes, we've elected a majority of pro-independence MPs, a majority of pro-independence MSPs, and 50% of our MEPs are pro-independence, but the reality is that at least some of those votes are probably 'on loan' for various reasons. (That's why I very much hope we don't end up turning an election into a de facto referendum on independence - the system used will inevitably skew the results. We really should find out where people actually stand on this issue. But, of course, that involves the people involved actually playing ball. If they don't, other mechanisms will have to be found.)
But if the polls say there's a majority for it, and if both Westminster and Holyrood stand ready to legislate accordingly, presumably such a referendum could be conducted quickly and smoothly. And, indeed, if both governments are actively campaigning for independence, it's only going to go one way.
...
All that said, file this one under "never going to happen". While it would indeed solve a lot of problems, I don't think any incoming Tory leader could really bear to be the one to bring an end to the 'Union' part of "United Kingdom". Plus there's the small matter of our oil, whisky, tourism, financial services, renewable energy, beef, gin, clean water... I'm not entirely sure that the rest UK could really afford their independence.
#30: "Morgrave Miscellany", by Keith Baker and Ruty Rutenberg
#31: "In the Skin of a Lion", by Michael Ondaatje (a book from The List)
Monday, June 17, 2019
Huh. The Grass Really is Always Greener
I find myself in Copenhagen for work, which is nice. And I spent the morning musing once again that it really does seem to be a good place to live - things like the cycling infrastructure, the generally welcoming nature of the people, and so forth. Additionally, our office here is right next to a school, and I was blown away by the contents of the playground - a climbing frame, an semi-enclosed football pitch, trampolines... (Of course, it's worth noting that I have no way of knowing if that's representative of Denmark, representative of Copenhagen, or indeed is the single best school in the whole country. And it's also worth noting that right now I'm pretty much seeing Copenhagen at its best - the grim reality of October or February might be rather different! Having said that, Denmark does regularly come near the top of the tables for both equality and happiness, so there's that.)
Anyway, while I was musing on all these things, we took a break from our exhausting labours (!) and gathered at the coffee machine. While there, the conversation turned to other places to live, whereupon one of my colleagues from Copenhagen started waxing lyrical about the many attractions of living in Edinburgh - the culture, the mountains, the history...
So, yeah, it turns out that the grass really is always greener on the other side.
#28: "The Horse and His Boy", by C.S. Lewis (a book for Funsize)
#29: "The Crow Road", by Iain Banks
Anyway, while I was musing on all these things, we took a break from our exhausting labours (!) and gathered at the coffee machine. While there, the conversation turned to other places to live, whereupon one of my colleagues from Copenhagen started waxing lyrical about the many attractions of living in Edinburgh - the culture, the mountains, the history...
So, yeah, it turns out that the grass really is always greener on the other side.
#28: "The Horse and His Boy", by C.S. Lewis (a book for Funsize)
#29: "The Crow Road", by Iain Banks
Monday, June 10, 2019
Some Thoughts on England vs Scotland
Due to a combination of factors, I unfortunately only got to see parts of Scotland's first match in the Women's World Cup. Which was a shame - I'd been rather looking forward to it. Anyway, some thoughts based on what I did see:
Anyway, on to the next match, and to Rennes. Huzzah!
- Sadly, 2-1 was probably about the right result. Although Scotland played pretty well, and especially had some very good phases, they were overall the weaker team. It's also worth noting that there didn't seem to be a specific area where this was true - it seemed mostly to be a matter of a few degrees across the board.
- That said, 2-1 is probably the least painful loss possible - that goal means that we only have a goal difference of -1 (which knowing Scotland may be crucial) while also getting us off the mark scoring-wise. And there were plenty of positives to take from the game.
- I haven't been able to track down a video of the penalty decision (just the penalty itself). I've heard it's rather harsh, but that may just be because we lost.
- With a lot of luck, Japan and Argentina will draw today, and England will then beat both of these teams. That would then give Scotland the best chance of getting through the group.
- Our next match is on Friday at 13:30, which is almost exactly when I finish work for the week. So almost no chance of seeing that one either. (Boo!) Guess I'll need to rely on the Radio Scotland commentary.
Anyway, on to the next match, and to Rennes. Huzzah!
Sunday, June 09, 2019
The Key Information
It being Summer, and given the events of last year, I find myself in need of a new Summer jacket. (The "events of last year" being that I decided my old Summer jacket needed replaced, and so I got rid.) And so I find myself visiting various stores' websites trying to find a suitable jacket - ideally, I'd like to assemble a very short shortlist, then go and look at the items in the flesh, and then decide.
Unfortunately, my key question when buying a jacket (after "does it look vaguely okay") concerns internal pockets: does it have some, if so how many, how big, and how do they seal? Those are the key questions I have, and ultimately those will be the things that decide between one jacket and another.
Instead, the websites consist of picture after picture of their models wearing the jackets. And, in basically every case, the jackets look fine. Not surprisingly, given that they're being worn by professional models. (Oh, and because designing a jacket that looks basically okay isn't that hard - there's just not that much variation possible, or indeed wanted.)
For the benefit of the various shops: when selling men's clothing, you might want to try selling them like you would electronic toys. That is, fill up the page with lots of lovely technical specifications: what materials are used, just how waterproof is it? And, yes, what are the actual details of the pockets on the thing - just saying "it has some" really isn't helpful.
Unfortunately, my key question when buying a jacket (after "does it look vaguely okay") concerns internal pockets: does it have some, if so how many, how big, and how do they seal? Those are the key questions I have, and ultimately those will be the things that decide between one jacket and another.
Instead, the websites consist of picture after picture of their models wearing the jackets. And, in basically every case, the jackets look fine. Not surprisingly, given that they're being worn by professional models. (Oh, and because designing a jacket that looks basically okay isn't that hard - there's just not that much variation possible, or indeed wanted.)
For the benefit of the various shops: when selling men's clothing, you might want to try selling them like you would electronic toys. That is, fill up the page with lots of lovely technical specifications: what materials are used, just how waterproof is it? And, yes, what are the actual details of the pockets on the thing - just saying "it has some" really isn't helpful.
Saturday, June 08, 2019
So Where are the HABs?
Every time there is a major (male) football tournament, the media subject us to long and lavish coverage of the WAGs - the Wives and Girlfriends of the various players. Which is pretty reductionist and demeaning, particularly as most of the women in question have reasonably high profile careers in their own rights (and the ones that aren't in the public eye presumably choose not to be).
Still, where there is a major football tournament being run and the wives and girlfriends are there specifically in a supporting role to their husbands and boyfriends, I suppose there is at least a little justification. Maybe.
Except that right now we have a major footballing tournament being run, the Women's World Cup, during which many of the players presumably have husbands and boyfriends in attendance, there specifically in a supporting role to their wives and girlfriends.
So... where is the long and lavish coverage of the HABs? Where are the multi-page spreads, the slobbering debates over which country has the hottest HABs?
I should perhaps note that I'm not particularly desperate to see such coverage. But geese and ganders, and all that stuff: we shouldn't be accepting a double standard. So, as a matter of principle, it must be there.
Or perhaps the media could stop drooling over the WAGs in future?
(Oh, one last thing: I'm aware of course that at least some of the players in the Women's World Cup are gay, and as a consequence have wives and girlfriends supporting them, and it wouldn't be fair for me to completely ignore them. I haven't mentioned them thus far mostly because I've been talking about double standards re:WAGs/HABs. But given the events of this week, it's also important to note that I'm very much not calling for such intrusive coverage. As a wise woman said this week: they're not there for our benefit.)
#27: "Gardens of Gallowspire", by Crystal Frasier
Still, where there is a major football tournament being run and the wives and girlfriends are there specifically in a supporting role to their husbands and boyfriends, I suppose there is at least a little justification. Maybe.
Except that right now we have a major footballing tournament being run, the Women's World Cup, during which many of the players presumably have husbands and boyfriends in attendance, there specifically in a supporting role to their wives and girlfriends.
So... where is the long and lavish coverage of the HABs? Where are the multi-page spreads, the slobbering debates over which country has the hottest HABs?
I should perhaps note that I'm not particularly desperate to see such coverage. But geese and ganders, and all that stuff: we shouldn't be accepting a double standard. So, as a matter of principle, it must be there.
Or perhaps the media could stop drooling over the WAGs in future?
(Oh, one last thing: I'm aware of course that at least some of the players in the Women's World Cup are gay, and as a consequence have wives and girlfriends supporting them, and it wouldn't be fair for me to completely ignore them. I haven't mentioned them thus far mostly because I've been talking about double standards re:WAGs/HABs. But given the events of this week, it's also important to note that I'm very much not calling for such intrusive coverage. As a wise woman said this week: they're not there for our benefit.)
#27: "Gardens of Gallowspire", by Crystal Frasier
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)