No, Scotland. No Party.

This will be the last post about football for a while, I promise...

As of this morning, the pain is over. Thank goodness! It turns out that all the expectations that a win over Haiti and narrow defeats to Morocco and Brazil would be enough - only one team qualified on 3 points, and with a positive goal difference. We weren't going to achieve that.

But that, and my previous statements that this tournament does actually represent progress, does still mean that this tournament ultimately goes down as a failure. We had our best chance to qualify, possibly the best chance we will ever have, and we failed to do so. Worse, we can't claim that we actually played particularly well in any of our games - the one we won was perhaps lucky, and the other two saw some horrible failings in defense.

So, where does it always go wrong?

To be honest, I think a large part of the issue can be boiled down into two words, "England Expects".

Here's the thing: England always goes into these competitions with a desperate hope that this time will be the one when they finally win it (they probably won't, but I digress). However, they also go in with the definite assurance that they will get past the group stages. That may be arrogance, but it's also not unreasonable. A team of England's size and quality should be progressing.

Which is why, in the one occasion recently when they didn't this led to wholesale changes in how they approached their international setup, changes that led them to turn it around and become the (beaten) finalists last time out.

And that means that while they don't dismiss their opponents in the group stages, they also go into those matches with serious assurance that they'll get the job done.

Scotland don't do that.

Now, in fairness we had an absolutely stinking group to get through. Getting anything from Morocco or Brazil was always a really big ask. But in 2024 our group was Germany, Switzerland, and Hungary. Our 2021 group was Croatia, England, and Czechia. Meaning no offense, but neither of those is the same category of task, and both times we utterly collapsed.

So.

It remains to be seen who will be the next Scotland manager. There will be a task of qualifying for the next Euros (maybe - we might get automatic qualification), and certainly for the next World Cup, and there will be a task of refreshing the squad as players age out.

But I think we also need to stop accepting that just getting to these competitions is enough. The Tartan Army travel in too great numbers, and at too great a cost, for that to be acceptable. So we should be making a statement right from the off: barring another absolute horror of a draw, we Expect to qualify from our group stages - if not in 2028 then 2030 at the latest.

Supergirl

"Supergirl" is a female-led superhero movie, and as such the reviews are utterly useless - there's a loud and obnoxious strain of review-bombers who would have you believe this is the greatest insult to filmmaking ever consigned to the screen, and there's a misguided counter-movement who consequently cannot bear to admit any flaw in the piece. It's really quite maddening.

Supergirl is a character who has had several interpretations on the screen (and, like most superheroes, even more in the comics): there's the "female Superman" iteration portrayed by Melissa Benoist and Helen Slater, there's Sasha Calle's brutalised and damaged version from "The Flash", and here we have Millie Alcock's drunken and messy version. (There's also a version in "Smallville", but I didn't get far enough into that show to see it.) My favourite, generally, is Benoist's take... but I do have to note that "female Superman" is a largely redundant character - it's fine if Supergirl is essentially the only Kryptonian in your shared universe, but doesn't work if you're doing a Cinematic Universe centred around Superman himself. You need something different.

Anyway...

There were parts of this version of "Supergirl" that I really enjoyed, and I thought Millie Alcock was very good indeed in the role. I liked the tone of the piece, and I thought that the action sequences were mostly well done.

Sadly, there was also a significant amount that I just didn't care for. I found pretty much all of the rest of the cast largely wasted - even the usually-reliable Jason Momoa was largely forgettable (though I'm guessing Lobo will appear again...). The villains were bland (more on this later), the secondary hero was wasted, and generally it was just a whole lot of people who existed to take up space. A real shame.

I'm now going to have to go into some spoilers, so if you want to avoid, stop reading now!

There were two things in particular I didn't like about the film. Firstly, Supergirl kept finding herself getting caught out and poisoned, or incapacitated, or poisoned and incapacitated. Once was fine, but this kept happening over and over again. After about the fourth time I really started to get bored - let's just get to the end, please!

The other big problem was the villains of the piece, who were frankly all over the place.

They are introduced as raiders come to shake down a blacksmith to steal some swords - the best ever forged. Fair enough. They proceed to slaughter everyone, leaving the daughter, Ruthye, as the sole survivor. An important note: they were clearly aware that she was there, but just left her.

Ruthye then takes up her family blade, swears revenge, and draws Supergirl into the action. Except that Kara is determined not to get involved - unfortunately for her, Krypto is poisoned and she needs to get the antidote.

Later in the film, having stolen these swords, they then made no use of them whatsoever. Instead, their motivations had changed: they're now an all-male species (how?) who capture lots of young women to be their "brides" and propagate their species. Consequently, they're shown as being quite keen to capture both our heroes.

The key problem with that? Ruthye is the very same daughter that they clearly saw, but just as clearly left alone at the outset of the film. So, really, it would have been much, much easier just to take her right at the start. And then none of it happens.

But the whole "brides" thing is problematic in another way - they're another example of characters existing in the film to take up space, rather than in their own right. As mentioned, Supergirl isn't motivated by this obvious and horrible wrong - she wants the antidote for her dog. Ruthye is motivated by her desire for revenge. In terms of story, both of those are perfectly coherent motives, but they fall somewhat short under the circumstances.

Worse than that, none of the "brides" actually exist as characters. There's one who has a couple of lines (because the script required a reason for a sudden but inevitable betrayal), but barely that.

Thinking on it, it feels like the "brides" were probably added to the script quite late, and so don't really fit with the rest - they probably exist simply to show how beastly the raiders are. And that's fair enough, I guess - they deserved a good punching.

Anyway, "Supergirl" is an okay film. It's not the abomination the review-bombers would have you believe, but it's a long way from being a masterpiece. In terms of similar films, I'd consider it much better than the previous "Supergirl", a little better than "The Marvels" or "Wonder Woman 1984", but less good than "Captain Marvel". It's also much less good than "Wonder Woman", which probably remains the best female-led superhero movie (though itself not without it's flaws).

Thunderbolt and Lightning, Very, Very Frightening

I do quite like thunderstorms, especially after a prolonged spell of hot weather and the high pressure that goes with it - it always feels like a big release of tension, and the lightning itself is very impressive.

Sadly, that enjoyment is marred somewhat by having a dog that is absolutely terrified by the loud noises and bright lights, even with her ear protectors in place, and even given my best efforts to comfort her. Lion did not have a good morning on Friday.

A shame, really. Poor dog.

The Traditional Waiting Game

As expected, Scotland managed to be (deservedly) beaten by Morocco, and then beaten by Brazil. Going into that last match we knew that a draw would guarantee qualification, a 1-0 defeat would almost certainly guarantee it, 2-0 would leave us in trouble but probably okay, while a 3-0 defeat would leave us hanging by a thread.

We therefore promptly registered a 3-0 defeat, because of course we did. We now have two teams confirmed in a better third-place than us, with nine groups to play. By my count, there are three groups that are very likely to end with the third place team below us, with several others in the "maybe" bracket. We now really need Australia to beat Paraguay by at least two goals, which doesn't seem likely.

And the sad truth is that if it does end here, it's no more than we deserve. Yes, we were rather unlucky in our draw (having three host nations all in pot one somewhat skewed things), and yes we were rather unlucky not to get a penalty against Morocco, but fundamentally we kinda knew we needed more against Haiti and just didn't get it done, and against both Morocco and Brazil our defense was suspect (to put it mildly).

I still maintain that this group of players have the ability to do better, and I'm not blaming Steve Clarke for this either (though many will). Fundamentally, I think it's still an issue of confidence: in qualifying they proved that they are worthy of being in the competition, but when it comes to the actual big stage they just don't seem to be doing it.

Oh well.

As I said in my previous post on the topic, even an elimination at this point represents progress: we've avoided being the worst team (which shouldn't be a goal, but after the Euros...), we managed to score a goal, and we managed to win a match. So we go again.

 #19: "The Mystery of Dunvegan Castle", by T.L. Huchu

King of the North

So Starmer is out. I'm afraid I'm not at all sorry to see him go - I've long been of the view that he didn't so much win the last election as the Tories very much lost it (in every sense of the word), and he's been deeply unimpressive since.

And it very much looks like Burnham will be the next guy - having been gifted a very safe seat in the recent by-election he's now eligible to become Labour leader, and he has the great virtue of being untainted with the shambles that has gone before. It's a chance for Labour to make a clean break, reinvent itself, and hopefully change direction enough to fend off the threat of Reform.

Except...

I find myself deeply troubled by the democratic legitimacy of this one. At the General Election we were presented with a Labour party led by Kier Starmer and presenting themselves under a specific manifesto. Switching to Burnham and making a clean break means ditching both of those things. Would people have voted as they did under those circumstances? Would they vote that way now?

And this switch is even more outrageous than even the 'normal' changes in Prime Minister that we've had in the last decade - at least then the replacement leader was someone who had been elected at the same time and under the same manifesto as the outgoing leader, so there was at least some sense of continuity. Burnham doesn't have that - indeed, that's the very key to his relative popularity.

Our constitution doesn't require a change of PM to be followed by a General Election. In practice, however, such changes generally have been followed by one in short order: May was crazy enough to call one after Cameron left, Boris called one after he took over from May, and Rishi only had 20 months left in the parliamentary term before he had to call one. (Truss wasn't in office long enough for it to matter.)

And there are usually fairly good reasons to call one: there's always a "new manager bounce" that comes from having someone new at the helm. Gordon Brown made a critical mistake in refusing to call a General Election when he became leader.

But a General Election now can only mean bad things for Labour - at the very least, they'll lose a lot of seats (because the current Commons arithmetic is a quirk of the system, unlikely to be repeated), and may very well usher in the Reform government of our nightmares.

So he's got an unenviable decision to make: call an Election and suffer for it, or refuse and be dogged by attacks that he's even more lacking in democratic mandate that is usual for replacement PMs. Not a good position.

Ultimately, I think it comes down to this: can the Labour government get the economy working again in the next 3 years? We're in a fairly horrible position where for an awful lot of people things have yet to really recover even from the crisis in 2008, with food inflation, in particular, causing real problems. Meanwhile, wage stagnation has meant that for most work just doesn't pay enough to be worthwhile - the gap between benefits and minimum wage, and between each step on the ladder to the next, just isn't enough for the additional effort needed to climb it.

If that can be addressed, Labour have a decent chance in the next election and should hold off. If not, it's likely they'll see a modest improvement in the polls now and then a continued slide, so their best bet of a win, any win, is basically now.

Either way, I don't actually see any chance of there being a General Election any time soon. But if it really is the King in the North, I'm afraid that in this instance I think there really should be.

Ladies First

This is not the absolute worst film I have ever seen, but it's fair to say that it's right up there.

The film has a well-worn premise: a sexist arse finds himself transported into a world where the gender roles have been flipped, and is forced to learn a salutary lesson in order to get home. That done, he's a new man. Huzzah!

The fundamental problem with the film is that it appears that the filmmakers have spent the last fifty (or at the very least the last ten) years in a bubble, completely oblivious to anything that has happened since. The behaviours depicted were not acceptable even when I started work thirty years ago, never mind following Weinstein and "Me Too". It really undercuts the parody when the thing that is being parodied doesn't actually exist, except possibly in some script-writers fevered brain.

In fairness, there are two mildly funny moments in the film.

Ultimately, though, this is one to avoid. We got it bundled as part of our Netflix subscription, and it still felt like being ripped off.

They Won? They Won!

I didn't watch the Scotland match - with a 2am kickoff it was just too late for me. By all accounts that was the right decision. Apparently Scotland were pretty terrible, and were perhaps lucky to come away with a 1-0 win against opponents that we really ought to have beaten.

All of which means we're probably barrelling towards an unlucky elimination on goal difference. The target seems to be 3 points and a -2 or better goal difference, and if Scotland do get beaten by Brazil and Morocco we'll be at 3 points and, at best -1. Plus, with Brazil and Morocco drawing, they both now know that the winner of the group will be decided by goal difference, so they'll want to put as many past us (and Haiti) as they can.

But...

There are two important mitigating factors to consider. In the previous two tournaments, Scotland have been rubbish in their first game and have then ground out a draw in their second game against, nominally, much better opposition. Well, we've apparently been rubbish in our first game... and a ground-out draw would guarantee our qualification. So I'll happily take that.

But the other thing to consider is this: like it or not, Scotland were the worst team at the Euros in 2024. So our first, fundamental goal for this tournament was simply to avoid that. As much as it sucks, simply not being the absolute worst represents progress. And we've done that. Huzzah, I guess. The next target was simply to score a goal (done), and then to actually win a game (done).

So the target now is to put in the best performances possible (ideally, at least one actually good performance), and we'll see how we go from there. A point would be glorious, even two defeats and qualification would represent our best-ever result at one of these major finals. But if even that doesn't happen... oh well, as long as next time is better again we'll at least, very slowly, be getting somewhere.

And that's not nothing.

Experimental Cookery 2026: Sumac Chicken Drumsticks

These came from Tom Kerridge's book, "The BBQ Book". I don't have a lot to say about them - they were quick and simple, with just a few steps to them (including marinading overnight), and were really nice once they were cooked. All in all, a winner - we'll definitely have these again.

That said, I did find that cooking these on the barbecue was somewhat fraught - I found myself utterly paranoid about whether they were sufficiently cooked or not. Our meat thermometer really didn't help, as it turns out that it just doesn't come up to temperature as it should - I've now replaced it with a better, digital one. But most of the problem was just sheer terror at the possibility that the chicken might not be cooked, even when it clearly was.

Incidentally, in addition to the chicken I also made up two jars of pickles from the same book over the weekend: one of pickled radishes and the other pickled chilli onions. Both of which were really nice, though neither really warrants its own post to say that.

#18: "Sharpe's Storm", by Bernard Cornwell

Warming Up to the World Cup

So Scotland have qualified for the World Cup, and are due to play our first match there for 28 years this Sunday morning. The hype is intense, the excitement is palpable... and I'm not joining in.

Unfortunately, at both the last two Euros we've gone into the competition on the crest of a wave, only to freeze in our first game and get soundly beaten. This was then followed with a plucky draw, a new wave of excitement because "if we can just beat... we could go through", and then another disappointment. There is very little reason to think that things will be any different here, except that Haiti aren't Germany... but that doesn't really matter if our team don't perform.

Of course, one thing that does work tremendously in our favour is that this time three teams will qualify from most of the groups - we're going from 48 teams down to 32 in the next round. So in theory only the truly terrible teams will be eliminated, with one win almost certainly enough to see us through.

And Scotland genuinely, honestly, aren't one of those "truly terrible" teams. On paper, given the group we're in and the form the team has been showing, we should go through and with something to spare. Indeed, with Brazil being a shadow of their former greatness, it's not entirely insane to suggest we could even top the group...

But, no. Because in this context "truly terrible" doesn't refer to the quality of the team on paper, or the form going into the matches, or anything else. All that matters is the next three games, and indeed most importantly the next game (since Haiti are by far the most beatable of the three teams - meaning no offense to them; they'll be saying exactly the same thing about Scotland).

In qualifying, both this time and last time, Scotland proved that they're good enough to be at the tournament. Against Germany they played as though they didn't believe that, and in so doing proved that they weren't.

The big question for Sunday, then: do our players believe that they deserve to be at the party?

Who's Future

I see that the BBC has now announced some big changes for "Doctor Who" - Russell Davies and Bad Wolf are out, they're putting the show out to tender, and they've cancelled the Christmas Special. That last isn't really a surprise. There was just no way to get it all filmed, through post-production, and onto TV for Christmas (at least, not this year...).

But where does that leave "Doctor Who"?

Well, nowhere good. Unfortunately, this means that the return of Russell Davies, the whole of the Disney deal, and indeed the tenures of both the last two (new) Doctors and the last two showrunners have been pretty much disasters. More or less the only good things to come from it is that we've now had our first female Doctor and our first person of colour as a permanent Doctor.

But what next?

If I were the BBC, I think I would immediately be approaching Paul McGann about possibly stepping into the role in the immediate term. If he's willing and available, I would proceed to adapt one or more of the "Big Finish" stories for TV - those are extremely well regarded, they have a script more or less ready to go, so it's something they should be able to get done at some speed. And the 8th Doctor has always been a joy to see and has always been the great "what if...", so let's do it!

If that doesn't work, I'd be inclined to approach Jo Martin about the same, and backfill the Fugitive Doctor story. I'm really not a fan of the Timeless Child stuff, but the fact is that it's canon now, and Jo Martin herself was really good in the role, so they might as well use it.

But if that doesn't work out, I think they have to accept a hiatus, potentially several years in length.

In which case, take your time, cast a whole new Doctor, and start fresh from a "some time later", and completely ignore the Billie Piper appearance - ideally, edit the end of the last episode to have the new Doctor appear in her place and pretend it has always been that way (in the same way that they inserted Ncuti Gatwa in "An Adventure in Time and Space" when they showed that most recently).

Ultimately, though, today's announcement is probably the bleakest news for "Doctor Who" since Colin Baker's firing in 1986.

Annoying Vindication

As I've mentioned a few times, one of my goals for this year has been to fix the garden. This was largely motivated by a desire not to pay to have someone come and do the job - it seemed awfully expensive, and I wasn't entirely convinced they'd quoted for everything we actually wanted.

I've made a start on the task, mostly involving filling in three holes in the garden: one we dug for a sandpit for Lion (which turned out to be a bad idea), and two that Lion dug herself. I also spread grass seed over the affected area.

Alas, this has not had entirely the desired effect, notably because Lion has proceeded to dig great big holes back in the garden. Which is more than a little frustrating.

On the other hand, it does mean that choosing not to spend the money to get it done was absolutely the right decision: as annoying as it is to see her tearing up my work, how much more annoying would it be had we spent a thousand pounds only to see her rip that to pieces?

#17: "The Worst Witch to the Rescue", by Jill Murphy

Mid Calder Gala Day: Gala Day Season Begins... and Ends

The band is struggling.

Last year we had an issue where the key members of our drum corps decided (not unreasonably) that they wanted to try their hand at competition. They let it be known that they would be available to us when they were free, but when there was a clash they would prioritize their competition band. This was unfortunate, but understandable - but it meant that for much of the gala day season we were really struggling for people.

At the end of the competition season our pipe major started looking around for an alternative drum corps, be that recruiting new people, or even hiring a tutor and training a new drum corps. However, nothing came of that - indeed, over the winter it became apparent that 'our' drummers had left their competing band, and so should now be available to us. Unfortunately, a few months ago they joined another competing band, and so we were once again stuck.

In the meantime, however, we've also lost much of our pipe corps - between family commitments and various age-related health issues we've found that our regular attendance at practices is less than half a dozen, some of whom aren't able to march any distance.

And so, when the time came to determine which events we would be doing this year, we found ourselves in real trouble: there was one event at which we had sufficient numbers for a pipe corps and one that was a 'maybe', and only one event at which we had a drum corps. And so we've ended up having to cancel all our other events for the year. (It's also worth noting that those events are themselves ailing - we've lost both our Christmas events, we've lost our local gala day, and we were down to only a handful of potential events anyway.)

Anyway, Mid Calder gala day happened on Saturday. It's one of the more involved events: the third-longest parade, followed by lunch, followed by three or four mini-events as we play around the village.

We met at the school, as always, and as always proceeded to agonize over uniform: jackets or no jackets; capes or no capes? In the end, we went with neither jackets nor capes - a bold decision, but a lucky one as it happened. We had a pipe corps of seven, which is one more than the absolute bare minimum, and a drum corps of three (including a bass drummer). So an okay, but not great, band.

And from there it was all pretty straightforward. Except that I came away absolutely convinced that it was the right decision to cancel the other events, because it was very evident that we were struggling for lack of practice - several people weren't playing drones, there were chanters cutting out, and we'd had to restrict our repertoire to a mere five sets (not what you want when you have a long parade to do).

The highlight of the day was the lunch - my understanding is that the local butchers supply the food, in which case they come highly recommended. And then the three mini-events were fine, but no more than that.

And that's gala day season, at least as far as the band is concerned. And, indeed, that's the year's performances with the band done. (We do have our local gala day this weekend, and it will be good to be able to actually attend - I usually miss it. And I have some other solo piping events.)

As for the band, I'm afraid I'm going to have to take action. I'd really hoped not to have to do so, since I was enjoying not having the stress of having to run things, but we just can't go on as we are. So two things are evident:

1. If the band is to continue we need to be able to take on events, confident that we're actually able to fulfil them. And, as I said, it's entirely reasonable that 'our' existing drum corps want to go and compete (if you want to know how good you can be, that's pretty much a necessity), and if they're competing then they're not able to attend events with us. But that means that we need to recruit (or train) a new drum corps - we have to assume that 'our' drum corps are not available at the key times that we would need them, so need to make other arrangements. But I'm not in a position to do anything about that.
2. What I am in a position to do something about is the situation with pipers. As I mentioned, we've seen a massive drop-off in attendances at practice, and some of the reason for that (and also the consequence of that) is that practices themselves have become largely depressing - we've been drifting, not really doing anything of value, and only actually playing the bagpipes on those rare occasions when we can be bothered. That's something I can change - it's just a matter of imposing a little more structure and committing to actually practicing. So I guess I'll get started on that, and we'll see how it goes.

And maybe next year will be better. Maybe.

Day 150: Update on Goals

It seems no time since the last update, but as we've reached Day 150 of the year, it's time for another update on goals:

• Books: By this point I would hope to be at 14.79 books completed, which I passed quite some time ago. That said, I've just hit a set of "doorstop" fantasy novels that have turned out to have tiny print, so I may have a problem here...
• Weight: This is drifting along. It's okay, but by no means great.
• Church Website: This has made significant progress since the last update - I have populated pages for all the groups, and now just need to get the details in place. Then an update of what's already there, and things will be looking good.
• Garden: I've also made a big step forward here - the various holes were filled in and grass seed sown. I'm not sure that's going to bear fruit, as Lion (not to mention the birds) seem intent on undoing my work. But we'll see. I still need to fix the loose slab (on a wall, not a steps as previously reported) and get rid of an old gas cylinder, but it's looking reasonably hopeful.
• Blog: The target for this point in the year should be a little over 49 posts. I'm around that point, so things are looking good.

The upshot of all of that: things are actually looking good on almost all fronts. Here's hoping that continues!

The Flash

"The Flash" has finally made its way to Netflix and so, being at something of a loose end, I've gradually watched my way through it. It is offensively bad.

Firstly, though, there are some good things:

• Seeing Keaton back as Batman is really good fun. In fact, all three of the Batmans in this film do really good turns, with two of them giving their best-ever performances in the role.
• Similarly, Sasha Calle is really good as Kara. There's not much too the role, and they seem to be doing a weird take on the "Red Son" Superman comic, but that's fine - she does well with the material she is given.

And that's it. There are many, many bad things (spoilers from here):

• Basing a film about a character whose main trait is that he is annoying is an... interesting choice. To base it around two instances of that character, each more annoying than the other is not a good idea.
• The CGI looks terrible. Seriously, it is genuinely woeful at times. I've seen AI-generated videos that are streets ahead. The zombie cameo by Christopher Reeve is the absolute worst of them all, and the one that leads me to call the film offensively bad, but it's far from being the only offense.
• As with all time-travel films, it has a scene detailing the "rules" of time travel for the universe. As with all time-travel films, they're utter nonsense. However, these have absolutely no rhyme or reason... and serve to make the events of the film impossible even in-universe (if changing time affects both the future and the past then you can never again get back to the point that you've changed - the point in time no longer exists).
• There's a comic book trope called "women in refrigerators" where a woman exists in a story solely to die offscreen in a suitably horribly manner and thus motivate the (inevitably male) hero into action. "The Flash" features a particularly egregious version of this: the action is motivated by Barry's desire to prevent the murder of his mother (which happens off-screen). He does so, but Nora Allen is then given all of two scenes in the film, absolutely no character development, and indeed we learn basically nothing about her other than that she's "nice" (and that from the perspective of her son, so hardly an unbiased source). And then, as in so many time travel films, the resolution is to go and put things back the way they were - back into the fridge with her! (And to compound things, having learned his lesson not to meddle with time, Barry decides "what the hell" and does so anyway, this time managing to save his father, who had been falsely accused of the murder all along. I'm not saying there's a double standard or anything, but...)

Anyway, that's that. It's not the absolute worst film I've ever seen, or even the worst I've watched all the way through. But it's right up there. Avoid.

Beavers Sleepover

Funsize has been attending Scouts for a few years: first Squirrels, then Beavers, and she moved on to Cubs at Easter. Surprise! has likewise just started at Scouts, in the Squirrels section. You'll note that neither FS nor KS are currently members of Beavers, and yet this weekend I found myself helping out at a Beavers Sleepover event.

Basically, it's a story of events transpiring seemingly without rhyme or reason, and all just falling out to make for a good outcome: just as Funsize moved up to Cubs we were contacted by Scouts asking if we would be willing to be PVG checked - this being a requirement to be involved as parent helpers even on an occasional basis. (This is one of those good things that causes a problem, as an awful lot of people who otherwise would volunteer time and expertise are put off by the need for the check. And while organisations can promise that it's entirely benign, as indeed it is, it's entirely understandable that people don't want to invite the government's attention. But, yes, I'd much rather be in a world where those checks are in place. As I said, a good thing but not without its problems. Anyway...)

So LC and I completed our PVG checks a little while ago. Meanwhile, the Beavers camp ran into a small problem in that some of the leaders who had meant to attend suddenly found themselves unable. And so they could either cut down the number of places for Beavers to attend camp, or find a replacement. But where to find someone with the required PVG checks at short notice...?

As it happened, this past weekend was that rare thing - a weekend when we otherwise weren't really doing anything and so one of us could indeed arrange to go help out at the camp. And let's be honest - I wasn't going to let the children miss out just because I couldn't be bothered. So that was that.

For obvious reasons, I can't say too much about the camp itself: it ran from Saturday morning to Sunday afternoon at one of the Scouts camp site, it was in a fixed building rather than under canvas, and there were 17 Beavers in attendance and 5 adults.

As might be expected, it was good fun but very tiring - lots of activities, lots of keeping people together, safe, and entertained, lots of cooking and then washing up. Conceptually it wasn't much different from the BB camps I did back in the day: yes, a mixed group rather than all boys, a younger group than I've previously been with, and more focus on outdoor and adventure activities, but all all generally quite familiar.

My starring moment, such as it was, came with the discovery that there was no hot chocolate, which put something of a dampener on the "hot chocolate and pancakes" for supper plan. I therefore proceeded to magic up some hot chocolate (a big spoonful of chocolate spread in a pan of milk, heat gently while stirring constantly).

All in all, it was a good time. The children all seemed to really enjoy themselves, they were a good bunch, and it was all just friendly and relaxed. And the weather was glorious, which always helps. A good use for a weekend, really.

(I was asked at one point if someone had had "the conversation" with me about becoming a leader on a permanent basis. And they had indeed - I can't imagine it's lost on them that someone who is willing to come help with a camp might be willing to do more, and they're always in a position where the biggest constraint on what they can offer is based on the availability of leaders. Unfortunately, I did have to note that time is very limited. As I said, this was a rare 'free' weekend for us, and evenings are even more scarce.)

The Boys

I've been watching "The Boys" for some years now, and it has just come to an end. Sadly, this is not a glowing recommendation.

I really enjoyed the first few seasons of the show - it was something new, it was well made, and in both Vought and Homelander they had some pretty compelling villains. Unfortunately, somewhere in the fourth season (or maybe the fifth) it took a wrong turn.

The fifth and final season, then, was a massive step down in quality, on a par with "Game of Thrones" - it all suddenly seemed very small and mundane, the things that had seemed fun and edgy were mostly just dumb and repetitive (notably Soldier Boy), and frankly it all just became a slog through to the end.

In particular, it really seems that the creators had a massive axe to grind - Homelander became a thinly-veiled stand-in for Donald Trump... but a caricature of what a particularly mad subset of the American Left think Trump is. (I don't really understand their need to do that - Trump has flaws enough without having to invent them. This was just silly.)

I was also fairly deeply offended by the "Homelander thinks he's God" plotline in the final season. Not because of the villain's latest insanity, which was to be expected. But the show was then populated with a multitude of caricatures of what the American Left think modern, and especially American, Christianity represents - the only good Christian character was portrayed as abandoning her faith, while all the others were a cavalcade of liars, hypocrites, and general shits. Not one was actually willing to stand up and condemn what was going on. (And, again, this where the "Homelander = Trump" parody fails. Because while there is a distinct lack of public condemnation of Trump from America's religious right, it's also important to note that Trump has, in fact, not claimed to be God.)

Anyway, the finale was slightly better than the rest, and the final resting place was as it all should be. So there's that, at least. Mostly, though, I'm just glad it's done.

Also of note, while this season was airing the news was broken that the spin-off, "Gen-V", had been cancelled. On one hand, this was disappointing - that was a show I was enjoying. On the other hand, it means that this is a really good off-ramp from that universe, and since I have no desire to get sucked into their prequel, "Vought Rising", I'll be taking that opportunity.

Oh well. A shame, but not a disaster, I suppose.

#16: "The Silmarillion", by J.R.R. Tolkien

It Happened Again

Speaking of endings...

Saturday should have been one of the most glorious days in the history of Scottish football. We'd had the most fascinating season of my lifetime, and entered the final week with two games to go and one point between the top two teams, with both having difficult games ahead. Hearts then won their midweek game, while Celtic struggled in theirs... only to be given a controversial penalty at the last minute to win the match.

I didn't see the footage at the time, but have since, and while the video is truly bizarre, it does also appear to be a legitimate penalty. I'm not sure what the Motherwell player thinks he is doing, but somehow it does seem he contrives to put his hand on the ball when simply heading it would have been easier. And, of course, the same rules apply in the first minute and the last minute of the game...

And so we went into the final game with Celtic playing Hearts in a league decided. This, of course, basically never happens: almost every year someone has won the league some weeks before (almost always Celtic), and in the rare occasions when it is undecided it is usually between Celtic and Rangers who are not allowed to play each other on the last day (for fear of crowd trouble). So to have a title decider you need two unlikely things to happen at once.

Anyway, we kicked off in glorious sunshine, and what turned out to be a really interesting game ensued: Hearts were the better first half, and scored a deserved goal. They were then somewhat unfortunate to concede a penalty, and an equaliser, just before half time. But then in the second half Celtic were the better team... without quite ever getting there. Then, about five minutes from time came the decisive blow, as Celtic scored again.

This led to Hearts having to push hard for another goal that would win them the title. And, in turn, this left them vulnerable at the back, and so with 30 seconds to go Celtic had an opening, surged forward, and scored into an open goal.

What should have happened then is that the game restarted, they played another thirty seconds or so, and the match ended with a well-fought and deserved Celtic win. A real shame for Hearts, but Celtic came into form at just the right time, and the season plays to the very last whistle of the very last match.

What actually happened, though, is that there was another pitch invasion, in a repeat of the disgraceful scenes from the Scottish Cup quarter-final.

A few things before I go on: the SPFL and the match referee are claiming that the match was ended. This is not the case. The final whistle had not blown before the pitch invasion started, and play did not resume thereafter. That's an abandonment. I understand why that happened, and I also understand why they're claiming otherwise (as an abandonment creates all sorts of complications, especially with Celtic having been declared champions), but details really matter.

Ultimately, two things, though:

• Playing those last few seconds wouldn't have made any difference to the outcome. Celtic were indeed the best team on the day, and at the end of the season the league table doesn't lie - they were, just, the best team across the season.
• There must be a proper sanction applied for this, and it must be of a footballing nature. Deduct points for next season, or close a stand, or something. Not a fine, because that's meaningless.

And if the SPFL or SFA won't address this, the Scottish government and the police must. Enough is enough - I'd suggest a statement that if it happens again, the police will no longer attend home matches of the club involved, meaning they can't complete those fixtures. Put them on notice: sort it out, or we'll put you out of business.

(And, yes, it was Celtic fans this time. But this hasn't even been the only horrifying incident associated with Scottish football this week, and it wasn't Celtic fans who were responsible for the other.)

And so the curtain comes down on another Scottish league season, what should have been the very best this millennium. Congratulations to Celtic on a deserved championship. You disgust me.

Good Omens 3

"Good Omens" is perhaps my favourite book, and certainly one of the ones I have read most often. The first season of "Good Omens" is likewise really solid; about as good an adaptation as is at all possible for the material. The second season, "Good Omens 2" is likewise good, though not as good, but leaves the series in a really good place for a stellar third season.

Instead, we get a single 100-minute episode to wrap up the story. The reason for this is nothing at all to do with the cast, the crew, the funding, or anything like that - it's all entirely down Neil Gaiman and his well-publicised issues.

Which is really unfortunate, because it has utterly destroyed this final episode. There's a load of good material here, and the interplay between the main two characters remains the highlight of the show. But it's all far too truncated, with ideas being thrown onto the screen and then rushed through, time and again. And it doesn't help that the while thing is inevitably marred by the off-screen stuff.

The consequence is that this is probably as good a finale for the series as was possible... but it leaves me wishing that they'd just stopped after the first season.

So:

• If you've watched the first two seasons, you'll probably want to watch this to see how it ends up. Try to temper your expectations.
• If you've only watched the first season, or you're just starting, I'd recommend stopping after the first season. Sadly.
• If you haven't watched any of it, I'd be inclined to stay away. But maybe that's just me. In any case, I wouldn't watch beyond the first season.

All of which is a sad way to end things.

About "The Worst Witch"

My record of books read today adds "The Worst Witch Saves the Day", which is the fifth book in that series. I have not previously recorded the previous volumes. So, what's going on?

The answer to that is that each night for the last several years I read to one or both of Funsize and Surprise!. The plan was that Funsize and I would finish the "Harry Potter" series and then LC and I would switch, and I'd read to Surprise! while she read to Funsize. It seemed like a good idea, but has met with a certain amount of resistance.

Anyway, in addition to my reading to Funsize, for a while we had an arrangement where she read to me - a few pages a day, which quickly builds up. We seem to have moved beyond that, as she's now reading more and more books at school so doesn't need the practice in the same way.

The first such book she read was "The Worst Witch", which was then followed by "The Worst Witch Strikes Again", and then "A Bad Spell for the Worst Witch". She then started the fourth book in the series, "The Worst Witch All at Sea" before we completed "Harry Potter", and I then finished it off.

We've now started book six, "The Worst Witch to the Rescue", and will no doubt complete the sequence at some point. Meanwhile, Surprise! and I are most of the way through the "Thomas the Tank Engine" stories, which are fun to revisit, after which I think we'll be tackling "Winnie the Pooh".

#15: "The Worst Witch Saves the Day", by Jill Murphy (a book for Funsize)

Rangers Management Woes 2026 (part one?)

The Scottish title race is now suddenly down from a three-horse race to two-horse. And Celtic are probably now favourites - unless they happen to drop points to Motherwell on Wednesday, they'll go into the final match knowing a win will secure the title and will thus probably get that win.

But the big losers out of this are Rangers, who were looking strong a few short weeks ago, then collapsed to three defeats out of three. And, frankly, it is by no means certain that the pain is finished - they may yet lose to Hibs and/or Falkirk. They've also lost out on Champions League football next year, and may even find themselves looking at the Conference League (depending on the Scottish Cup result).

This all leaves Danny Röhl in a sticky position: suddenly he's gone from being the hero of the hour to hearing a clamour of Rangers fans wanting him gone.

My thoughts?

Well, first up, the last few games have been pretty much disastrous. And he has indeed been largely to blame. But prior to that he was doing a decent job, and there are hints that given time things could improve. Perhaps.

And, of course, there's an awful lot of the blame that needs to go to the players who have, frankly, been shocking.

Ultimately, I don't have a specific conclusion on his position at this time. In some ways, it's a shame that the rumours about the Wolfsburg job had no merit: that would have allowed for a very clean exit with plenty of plausible deniability on all sides. Oh well.

I think the Rangers upper management need to make a choice: either pull the trigger now and replace him, or decide to stick with him.

But whichever way they go, they really should make a commitment that the manager they start next season will be the same manager they end next season with. Rangers can't keep replacing managers every six months, not just because it's very expensive but because it's a reset back to the start of the project every time. They need to make a commitment and then see it through.

The other thing I'll note is that both Rangers and Celtic seem to have serious problems with their scouting systems - they're spending huge amounts of money, and really not getting the benefits they should from it. Hearts and Motherwell have much smaller budgets, and have been flying high this season. And, of course, when Rangers and Celtic enter European competition they find themselves up against teams that again have much smaller budgets, against teams against who they should (on paper) have no real problem with. And yet they struggle again and again.

I think the issue here is that they're operating as though they're English clubs (which I think also find themselves underperforming relative to the money they pay out). The difference is that English clubs are swimming in money, so when they pay over the odds they still get top-tier players; Rangers and Celtic are not, and so they're paying over the odds for, frankly, fairly mediocre players. In terms of money paid out, they've very much punching below their weight.

So, for Rangers, they need to make a decision and then maybe find a new manager. Celtic need to find a new manager (Martin O'Neill has been fantastic, but he's surely not going to go on for another season?). And both of them should look to their scouting systems, and become a lot more efficient.

Well, Thank Goodness That's Over

The Scottish elections are finally done. Thank goodness!

Unfortunately, it was a fairly unedifying choice. There were a huge array of no-hope micro-parties, but of those actually able to win at least one seat the choices were grim: evil, very evil, mostly useless, almost completely useless, completely useless, and legitimately insane.

Even before it all kicked off, there were really only two questions of interest:

• Would the SNP somehow get a majority? The odds were spectacularly against it, but stranger things have happened, and if it had happened then the consequences could have been interesting.
• Just how many seats would Reform win, and at whose expense?

In the event, the answer to the first was the expected "no". In fact, the SNP lost both seats and vote share. We've ended up with a mostly-balanced parliament otherwise, with a nominal pro-independence majority, but with the minority SNP government able to pass legislation if they can gain support from any other party.

The answer to the other question was a fairly depressing 17, though these came almost entirely at the expense of the Tories. So not great, but not seismic. (It's perhaps worth noting that I don't approve of the other parties now closing ranks to try to isolate Reform in the chamber. Firstly because I think it will be counter-productive - people voted Reform largely in protest at our MSPs refusing to listen to them; doubling down on this will only strengthen Reform. Secondly, though, is that those people who voted Reform are entitled to representation. I don't like how they've voted, but that is beside the point.)

Anyway, the upshot of this is that everything will basically carry on as they have been: the SNP will form a minority government, Swinney will ask for an independence referendum for form's sake, Starmer will say "no", and then we'll have five years of not much happening. And then we go again.

(Incidentally, Starmer has significant justification for that "no" - the SNP made clear that an SNP single-party majority would be the mandate for a referendum, and they didn't get that; in fact they lost both seats and vote share. But, of course, that entire argument is nonsense - in a representative democracy the mandate for something is that a majority of elected representatives vote for it. The real justification is rather more stark: the constitution is a reserved matter, and Starmer says "no". How you square that against the right of Scottish, and Welsh, people for self-determination is a topic for another day.)

One last thought: In the Scottish election Labour once again lost both seats and vote share. It is deeply unpopular here. In Wales, Labour have lost control of the Senedd for the first time ever. Labour have never had any presence in Northern Ireland (where, again, a party in favour of leaving the UK is in government). And in England Labour have just taken a major kicking due to their huge unpopularity.  There's no part of the UK where Labour are actually popular. And yet, Labour have a huge majority in the Commons, a consequence of a voting system that doesn't really work. That's not a good situation to be in in a representative democracy - in what sense does parliament represent the wishes of the people?

#14: "Our Lady of Mysterious Ailments", by T.L. Huchu

Experimental Cookery 2026: All-in-One Lamb Dhansak

This one comes from the Hairy Bikers "Great Curries". It was dead easy to put together, but did have a couple of long steps - an hour in the oven followed by another 45 minutes in the oven. But, as noted, the oven did all the work there, so once it was settled I was able to go off and do other things.

The end result was very nice - it's quite different from the other lamb curries we've had, not carrying anything like the same heat, but had a nice combination of lamb, lentils, and butternut squash. All in all, that's a win - we'll have this again.

But there's not really anything more to say about it than that.

#13: "The Return of the King", by J.R.R. Tolkien

Young Sherlock

I don't have much to say about this one. I very much enjoyed it - I wasn't so keen in the final episode, which seemed to rush an awful lot of things through to a conclusion, but everything leading up to that point was really good.

All in all, I'm looking forward to the next season. This one gets an unalloyed recommendation.

(Though it's still in my usual category: if you're subscribed to Prime, it's worth the watch; it's probably not worth the subscription all by itself.)

Dear Political Parties...

Yesterday I received an election communication from Reform. Amusingly, it came in an envelope - I can only assume they were worried that if they sent these things out without they would somehow get 'lost' along the way.

Anyway...

At the outset, I need to note that there is no world in which I was ever going to vote for Reform, so I barely glanced at the card before dropping it in the "to shred" pile. But that glance was enough to catch my eye.

Because the headline on the thing was something along the lines of "only Reform can stop the SNP". In other words, exactly the same claim every other party is making - you need to vote for us, not because of any virtue we might claim or any policy we have to propose, but because you want to stop them (whoever "them" are).

It's hard to think of a more dispiriting approach to politics. Every party, it seems, has given up on actually arguing why we should vote for them. Instead, they're all more concerned about stopping the other guy.

I suppose that makes sense. In terms of policy, none of the big four have any meaningful differences. Labour and the SNP, in particular, are functionally identical - the only difference is on the topic of independence, where Labour are opposed (of course), and the SNP are in favour (in the same way as I'm in favour of becoming a billionaire - it's never going to happen, I have no power to make it happen, and I'm not going to take any meaningful action to make it happen). Basically, Labour just want to do exactly the same things in exactly the same way, but somehow better and with different names on all the people. The Lib Dems are slightly different, but not so you'd actually notice, while the Tories are slightly different in the other direction - mostly wanting all the same stuff but with lower taxes that they won't deliver.

Since there's so little between them, and essentially no difference in terms of the quality of their candidates (or, really, the lack thereof), I can well understand why they're just focusing on stopping one another - it's all they have.

But Reform are actually proposing something that's actually different. It's awful, hateful nonsense, of course, but it does in theory mean they have something to advocate. And yet they choose exactly the same pointless attack - only we (a party who have never won a seat in a Holyrood election) can stop the SNP (who will almost inevitably form the next government).

In fact, the only party that I give any credit in this utter mess of an election are the Greens, who at least are proposing some actual policies and suggesting any reason why we should actually vote for them. It's just a shame that they're utterly insane... but even that's a step up from hateful. So, small mercies, I guess.

(The summary for those who can't be bothered to read the preceding: stop telling us we should vote against the other lot. Tell us why we should vote for you. And if you've got nothing, go away and have a long think about why that is, and then change it.)

Bad Boys: Ride or Die

This is an interesting one, because it really should be an awful film, and yet somehow manages to be pretty okay.

As I mentioned in my review for "Bad Boys For Life", I think the first "Bad Boys" film is actually a very good action film, the second has aged really badly, and the third is better than it really should be - and, indeed, is better than the second.

The fourth film really shouldn't work, not least because the premise is that their beloved captain is being framed for crimes he didn't commit and they have to help him... except that he died in the third film. So that's weak to start with.

Still, I suppose the premise of a film doesn't actually need to be stellar - especially a dumb action film, it's really just about kicking off the action and then you go from there. And the action in this one, while being exactly what you'd expect from this type of film and nothing more, is still well handled.

The upshot of all of that is that "Bad Boys: Ride or Die" is somehow a step up on the okay-ish "Bad Boys For Life", and a big step up from "Bad Boys 2". It's not as good as the first film, but that's not a surprise.

(This does mean that "Bad Boys" is now joining "Mission: Impossible" and "The Fast and The Furious" in being a series that seems to be getting better as it goes on - and, in all three cases, after a very weak second instalment. Though I think they may have left it a bit too late between the second and third films for it to have the legs for a long run, unless they can find a way to pass the torch on.)

Anyway, as regards this film my recommendation is the same as for the third: if you enjoyed "Bad Boys" you'll probably enjoy this; if you didn't you almost certainly won't. And if you have a subscription to the appropriate service (currently Netflix - I don't know if that's their permanent home) then it's worth a watch. But, as always, I wouldn't subscribe just for this.

Lean and Hungry

About nine months ago I made a mistake - following some significant gains of the year before I decided to take a year to consolidate those gains, with a view to then striking out again from a position of strength. That seemed like a sensible approach, not least because the previous few years had been fairly punishing.

Unfortunately, the big problem is that those months have basically just drifted, with nothing much being achieved, and that "position of strength" just hasn't materialised - frankly, it feels like I'm if anything worse off than I was a year ago.

Still, “Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue that counts.”

So, time to reset, shake off the dust of the last year, and get back in train.

How To Do The Big Shop

Over the weekend the Algorithm saw fit to inflict on me several instances of an awful video by an influencer (female) complaining about another awful video by an influencer (male) talking about doing the Big Shop. I'm reasonably sure that the latter of these was either a parody, or perhaps someone advocating for deploying weaponized incompetence, while the former was a rant about the horrors of the mental load.

Anyway, as someone who is well-versed in the arts of the Big Shop, I thought I'd offer my advice.

Step One: Plan the Meals

The first step in the Big Shop is actually nothing to do with shopping, and is instead a matter of deciding what you're going to eat in the time covered by said Big Shop (in our case, that's the next week, but your timing may vary). This includes four things: breakfasts, lunches, dinners, and snacks of various sorts.

(I should note at this point that for us three of those are pretty straightforward - we maintain supplies of some staples for breakfasts, lunches, and snacks, and add only a few "specials"; that is, maybe a different breakfast for one weekend morning, or something for a lunch, or whatever. The only thing I really need to note is which days I need to make sandwiches for packed lunches.)

By and large, the person who is going to actually do the cooking should take the lead on this. Ideally, they should review their choices with the others in the household, just in case everyone is sick of pizza every night.

Step Two: Prepare the List

Now that you have the meals decided, the next step is to prepare the list for the Big Shop. Mostly, this involves working around the key rooms in the house and seeing what's coming to an end: if you're on your last tube of toothpaste, add that to the list; if you have plenty of mouthwash, maybe skip it this week. And so on and so forth.

I generally start upstairs with the bathrooms, then work through the cleaning products downstairs, and then add foodstuffs last. When it comes to the meals decided on in the previous step, dig out the list of ingredients, check what you have, and add anything you're missing.

Once complete, double-check the list. Then it's quite important to review it with others: firstly, with the person who is doing the cooking (as above), in case there's some implied accompaniment you've forgotten, and also with the other adults in the house. That extra check is definitely worthwhile: there's a good chance you've forgotten something, and there are potentially other things that need bought that you might not know about (I don't, for example, keep track of when LC is going to run out of shampoo and conditioner).

This is also the time for people to express any key preferences that they have: if there's a particular brand of toilet paper that they simply have to have, or they would like green apples instead of red this week, or whatever else, now is the time to say! (And if you're not going to be able to remember, write these preferences on the list!)

Quite important: The person who is actually going to do the Big Shop should also be the person who takes the lead on putting together the list. (Just as the person who does the cooking should usually be the person who cleans up afterwards...) That feels counter-intuitive, as people naturally want to split the labour, and this seems like a good place, but trust me on this one - as I mentioned above, there's a good chance you've forgotten something, and there's also a good chance that the review won't catch it. But there's a decent chance that you'll see the item when going around the shop and realize you need it... and that only works if you were the person who made the list.

(The reason for the cooking/clean-up thing is that it encourages efficiency - if you know you're going to have to do the clean-up, this provides incentive to only use those utensils you actually need and to clean as you go. Lacking that incentive the "occasional cook" is likely to leave a disaster area.)

Optional: Reordering the List

Having done the Big Shop a few times you should have the layout of the store memorised. So take a few minutes to rewrite the list in the order in which you'll find them in the shop. Especially if you have the list in an electronic format, this will save a disproportionate amount of time in the shop.

(That said, there's an even higher level of mastery where you transcend the need to do even that, and can simply mentally reorder the list as you go.)

Step Three: Shop

So, you've made a list, you've checked it twice, and so it's time to go to the shop.

This is actually the easiest bit of the job: go, put the things in the trolley, check you've got everything from each zone before you move to the next (to minimise backtracking), and once you've got everything, you're done.

Now, here's the bit that those two awful influencers got themselves in a mess with: supermarkets have a wide range of products, so how do you decide which of the dozen types of apples is the right one, or which of the fifty bottles of fabric softener is just right?

Here's the answer: either at the review at the end of Step Two, or perhaps at some time in the past, a strong preference may have been expressed on exactly what is wanted - as noted, it may be green apples this week; it may always be crunchy peanut butter instead of smooth. If so, that's the thing to get.

If there is no expressed preference, or said preference can't be fulfilled (because they don't have crunchy peanut butter), the person doing the Big Shop makes the choice. That may mean getting an alternative (a small jar of smooth peanut butter, or the store's own brand instead of the "good stuff", or whatever), or it might mean not getting anything ('cos you'll manage without, or pick it up somewhere else later).

Step Four: Take it Home

Once you've got all the stuff, paid for it, and packed it, it's time to take it home. You then get the joys of unpacking and putting it away. All of which is pretty easy: it's just work.

Responsibility of the Other Person

Where it seemed to go wrong for both of our awful influencers was a set of unreasonable expectations: on the one hand, the male influencer was apparently heading to the shop with a list, but also with a knowledge that his partner expected each and every item to be exactly the preferred one, necessitating a constant cycle of phoning home to check every decision. Meanwhile, the female influencer was complaining that their partner didn't have that exact list of preferences memorised - she objected to the mental load of having to maintain that knowledge.

Which, in both cases, is fairly idiotic.

In a sensible environment, here's how it works: where there are a reasonably small number of Important Preferences, the person doing the shopping should be able to memorise and apply those. Or, failing that, get them written down somewhere so they can be checked. If you partner hates Chardonnay, it's reasonable to expect that you'll know that and shop accordingly (I make no comment on how reasonable, or otherwise, that preference is - people are allowed to like or dislike things).

Beyond that reasonably small number of known preferences, it needs to not matter - if the choice of diluting juice isn't one of the Important Preferences, then when faced with the choice between "Summer Fruits" and "Apple & Blackcurrant" the person doing the shop should just make a choice (because it doesn't matter), and when they get back that choice shouldn't even warrant a comment (because it doesn't matter). Chances are the difference won't even be noticed.

However... If it is actually the case that one person have a large set of Important Preferences (because they must have green apples, and they must have "Apple & Blackcurrant" juice, and they must have a particular type of cheese, and and and...) then the solution is this: that person must be the one to do the Big Shop.

In short, then, the main responsibilities of the person who is not doing the job are to clearly express their Important Preferences beforehand, and then afterwards to accept that the person who is doing the job will then act independently on everything else.

(And, incidentally, that applies to just about everything else. The way I pack the dishwasher won't be exactly the same as the way you pack the dishwasher. Or batch clothes up for the washing machine, or wash the car, or whatever else the task is. But as long as the job gets done, the finer detail over preference doesn't really matter... and indeed needs to not matter. If for some reason it does really matter to one or the other, then that person needs to be the one doing that job.)

Two Last Notes:

1. I feel the need to reiterate that this post is entirely motivated by the two awful videos I referenced at the outset. Funnily enough, we more or less manage to get the Big Shop done without LC and I passive-aggressively sniping at one another. (Basically, I'm hoping that this will clear a bit of headspace that those videos have been filling over the past couple of days.)
2. Yes, pretty much everything here is, or should be, the bleeding obvious. I do hope that at least one of those videos was intended as a joke, because I'm increasingly finding myself wondering how supposed adults actually manage to get through the day.

Optimus Prime's Weakness of Leadership

Through a slightly bizarre sequence of events, that I'm not going to elaborate on, I found myself thinking once more about my great role-models for leadership. There are several of these, but two stand head and shoulders over the others: Jean-Luc Picard and, of course, Optimus Prime. Each of these has many fine qualities that tend towards exceptional leadership, including the ability to motivate and direct a diverse team so that they become more than the sum of their parts.

However, last time I found myself musing on Optimus Prime's leadership technique I found myself unavoidably recognizing one key weakness (and it's one I was reminded of again today). Ironically, it's something that I suspect the writers included thinking it showed the character's strength as a leader, not realizing it was the opposite.

Specifically, there are a number of times when Optimus is absent or unavailable: he gets injured, or captured, or dies, and at these times suddenly the team starts to unravel - there's no clear direction, everyone starts pulling in different directions, and nothing much gets done. Then Optimus (or in one case Rodimus) steps in and pulls things back together and all is well again.

I think that's supposed to show just how important the good leader is to the team. And it's true - a good leader is of huge importance to a team and can indeed cause the team to become more than the sum of its parts.

But...

It's also the case that there will be times when the team has to function in the absence of that leader, and one of the attributes of a good leader is that they will have prepared for exactly that eventuality. I can demonstrate this most effectively by referencing the other paragon on my list: in "Best of Both Worlds" Jean-Luc Picard is captured and assimilated by the Borg, and the crew of the Enterprise have to manage in his absence.

And so what happens is that Riker, the nominated First Officer, steps up and assumes command. And for the remainder of the story he provides the direction and leadership. But even there, it's not quite as simple as one person replacing another - prior to that event Picard has established a clear culture within the crew such that everyone knows their role, everyone knows the expectations of how things need to be done, and so when Picard isn't there things just click into place.

Having a good leader in place is invaluable. But a big part of that is how they prepare the team for their absence. And, unfortunately, that was a weakness I was forced to recognize in my hero.

Experimental Cookery 2026: Chicken, Tomato, and Chickpea Stew

This one came from the Tesco magazine. It was dead easy to put together, although I made a crucial mistake by buying chicken drumsticks instead of drumstick fillets - this necessitated a fairly long bake instead of a fairly short simmer.

The end result was very nice, but would have been better without the bones and without the greens - I always like the idea of these, but they never live up to their promise (not to mention making me ill to at least some extent).

All in all, a success, and one we'll have again (albeit with the modifications mentioned above).

Two To-Dos

As I mentioned in my previous post, two of my goals are to update the church website and to sort out our garden. Each of these is a task with several subtasks, and as I may have a window of opportunity for dealing with some of these, here is the current state of affairs:

For the Church Website

I left this with the church calendar and sidebar up-to-date and the pages for discontinued groups disabled (meaning that at least there is no superfluous information on the site). My next steps are as follows:

1. Generate shell pages for all the new groups that don't currently have one.
2. Clean up the site menu - for some reason this is now not accepting updates, so I may need to generate an entirely new menu and insert that instead.
3. Clean up the "contact us" form and possible the maps.
4. Reach out to the various groups to get information to properly populate the individual pages.

For the Garden

This is the more likely to see progress in the near future. The steps for this one:

1. Dispose of the old gas canister. Since switching to the new charcoal BBQ, this is now superfluous.
2. Dispose of the old kids slide and seesaw - Funsize and Surprise! are too big for these now, and they've seen better days, so it's time to get rid.
3. Fix the stairs at the side of the house. The top step, in particular, needs properly fixed back in place.
4. Remove the lawn leading from the patio to the aforementioned steps, and replace with stones to provide better grip and/or drainage.
5. Fill to two holes Lion has recently dug into the lawn.
6. Fix the huge hole we dug for Lion's sandpit - this was a disaster that now needs undone. This requires laying a mesh, then a layer of small stones, then successive layers of soil until it's properly filled.
7. Reseed the lawn so it has actual grass rather than various versions of mud.

The BBQ will also need cleaned, and there's a certain amount of weeding and of cleaning up the borders, but I'm not capturing those are distinct steps - they're just general maintenance.

#11: "The Autumn Republic", by Brian McClellan

#12: "The Fox and the Ghost King", by Michael Morpurgo

Day 100: Update on Goals

Day 100, so time for the second update of the year. I should note that this is being written quite a ways in advance, and so may need an edit after the fact. Anyway, here goes:

• Books: The on-track target for day 100 is 9.86 books. I'm somewhat ahead of target on this, and so am pretty happy with it, all in all.
• Weight: There has been something of a reversal since the last update, and then a reversal of the reversal. All in all, not great but not terrible.
• Church Website: Eh. I've made an update or two to the website, but can't say I'm noticeably closer to completing this goal.
• Garden: The new goal for the year, this hasn't seen any tangible progress, but I do more or less have a plan on how to tackle it. So that's good, I think. Obviously, with the weather improving (hopefully), I'd expect to deal with this in the next six months, with the goal being complete before the clocks go back. We'll see if that happens.
• Blog: By day 100, I would expect to have posted approximately 33 times. I'm a bit behind target here, but expect to catch up in the next few days.

So that's that. Basically, everything is going nice and steadily. Can't complain... but no huge breakthroughs either.

Wonder Man

This was weird. I enjoyed it, but it was certainly weird.

"Wonder Man" is an 8-part Disney+ series about a super-powered actor trying to hide his powers in order to have a career (for insurance reasons, super-powered individuals cannot work in Hollywood), and Trevor Slattery trying to get past his previous role as The Mandarin. And the basis of the show is that unlikely friendship between the two actors.

I didn't care for the first episode. After that, however, it very rapidly found a groove, built largely on the chemistry between the two leads (Ben Kingsley, in particular, is always reliable). Though the single funniest part is an extended cameo by Josh Gadd in a flashback episode.

All in all, I recommend this. Though my usual caveat applies: if you have Disney+ then check it out; if not, don't subscribe just for this.

I'm also not entirely won over by the notion of a second season. The ending of this one suggests to me that any second season would be sufficiently different as to lose something crucial. I might be wrong, but...

#10: "Until August", by Gabriel García Márquez (apparently, the author concluded that this one didn't really work, and should be buried rather than published. While I don't necessarily agree with the second part of that, I'm afraid I do agree with the first)

The Last Voyage of the Demeter

This is a film I'd been wanting to see for some time, and we finally took the opportunity this weekend. It's a bit of a frustrating film - I enjoyed it, but also have to acknowledge that it could clearly have been a lot better.

Apparently, the film spent a lot of time in development hell, suffering multipel rewrites, changes of director and cast, and general messing around. And, sadly, it shows - it feels like it could have done with either one more, or several fewer, rewrites, a bit of tightening up. Oh, and some humour, at least in the first section.

The other thing to note is that we already know going in that this is a doomed voyage - even for the occasional viewer unfamiliar with "Dracula", the title of the film gives that away. So the film might as well lean right into that. It's a feature, not a bug, so perhaps the crew should acknowledge their fate a whole lot earlier and start making plans based on that fatalism. But that doesn't quite happen.

I don't really have much more to say than that. As I said, I enjoyed it, and it could have been better. Given the chance to view it as part of an existing subscription, I would recommend it as a decent use of two hours, but I wouldn't recommend subscribing just to get this film.

#9: "The Two Towers", by J.R.R. Tolkien

How to Create a Shortage

Here we go again: with the US attacks on Iran we now have the Strait of Hormuz closed, and some disruption to the global supply chain for fuel. And so now we have rumours of petrol shortages, which will no doubt be followed up with panic buying, actual shortages, and all the troubles that that entails.

And, as usual, there's no need for it. We actually have plenty of fuel (for now, at least), so if people just keep calm and carry on things will sort themselves out. (Now, if the disruption carries on too long, that would no longer be the case. But that's a longer-term problem.)

But of course, that's not what's happening. Instead the media are playing up that fear (since it's the story), which means everyone needs to act (because you can't afford to be the one person who runs out), which means that there's a run on petrol, which means there's now a shortage.

Which is really frustrating - the issue isn't a lack, but rather that the rate at which people consume is faster than the rate at which the pumps can be restocked, and so we run out. At least for a while. And then there will come a period where the pumps are restocked and everyone has a full tank and egg on their faces.

In the meantime, though, we're still stuck. As I said, you can't afford to be the one person who runs out, so you need to play the game the same as everyone else. And so we create a shortage. Great.

Paging the Tooth Fairy

Rather shockingly, Surprise! announced to us on Monday that he had a wobbly tooth. This morning, he announced that he no longer had a wobbly tooth.

This is even more of a shock than when Funsize announced the same three years ago - it all feels rather too early for us to be at this stage, though he is very close to his fifth birthday. Anyway, the upshot of this is that we'll once again have to call on the services of the tooth fairy.

Thanks Donald

Two years ago, we found ourselves coming to the end of our fixed mortgage deal just as there was a spike in interest rates. So we took our a two-year fix, in the hope that they'd come down again in that time. And that was fine.

And, indeed, the plan looked really good until about two weeks ago - the base rate had dropped to 3.75% with a further reduction expected this week and then, hopefully, at least one more in the months to come. Which would have been good.

Right on cue, therefore, this situation with Iran kicked off. Which has of course disrupted the oil supplies, leading to an immediate spike in prices, and in turn a rise in inflation. So the expected rate reduction didn't come, any prospect of further increases has evaporated, and indeed it's likely that the Bank of England may well start raising the rate again (because of course the thing to do in an impending cost of living crisis is to pile on a load more misery - that'll teach the plebs to want such fripperies as petrol to commute and food to eat).

And, just for fun, we're also coming to the end of our current deal on gas and electricity...

Oh well, I guess things could be a lot worse.

The Drift

It has been a frustrating week. On the face of things, it's all okay - things are just proceeding onwards, there was an issue but there's a workaround, and there are things to do but no immediate crisis. And yet... it all just feels like a big drift. There's a bunch of stuff I'm waiting on, and no signs of anything much happening until then.

Which all feels a bit odd, but it all does definitely feel like it's waiting for something to happen.

Reboot Whack-a-Mole

It has been an odd weekend for news on the reboot front - late on Saturday I saw the news that the "Buffy the Vampire Slayer" reboot is now not going ahead, and then yesterday came the news that "Firefly" is restarting, with an animated series set between the show and the film, reuniting all the surviving cast members.

I must admit, I was actually rather glad of the first news, and have deeply mixed feelings about the second. Because while "Buffy" and (in particular) "Firefly" are prime material for a reboot in some form, any such reboot has to grapple with the Joss Whedon problem: he has been cancelled for fairly good reason, but he's also pretty much essential to the success of those properties.

The upshot of that is that I find it extremely hard to muster any enthusiasm for any reboot that doesn't involve Joss Whedon, and have no enthusiasm for one that does. As I said before, I'm afraid it's time for those IP to die.

(And yet, all that said, if the "Firefly" show does actually happen, I inevitably will end up watching it, because I can't claim to be entirely consistent.)

#8: "Tyrant", by Conn Iggulden

Odd One

The petrol station at our local Tesco has been closed for refurbishment for several weeks. This has been a bit of a pain, given my usual practice of filling up while doing the Big Shop, but fair enough. It reopened last week, and so today was the first time I used it.

And I just can't actually see what's different? It's the same arrangement, it's the same pumps, they haven't even really been cleaned up all that much. All in all, it seems like a whole load of effort and nuisance for, essentially, nothing.

Oh well. It doesn't matter... just odd enough to be worth remarking on.

 #7: "The Crimson Campaign", by Brian McClennan

The Ugly Sisters

Just for once, Scotland has a really exciting football season. And so it was probably inevitable that Rangers and Celtic would play a Scottish Cup quarter final and put on one of the worst displays of "football" ever (though not even their worst game this season...). But far worse than that was the pitch invasion and the disgraceful scenes that followed the merciful end of the game.

It is probably the case that there are some lessons to be learned about the crowd allocation and the stewarding of the match. If so, those lessons should be investigated and learned. It's also probably the case that one side started it, and that one side was the worse offender (and not necessarily the same side either way).

But all of that is largely irrelevant. The bottom line is that this is not the first time something like this has happened, and while all the talking heads are lining up to express their disgust, almost nobody is truly surprised by any of this. That it happened is a mark of shame, but perhaps a bigger shame is that it seems to just be a feature of our game.

So.

There needs to be a sanction applied to these two clubs. And that cannot be a fine: if the penalty for breaking a rule is a fine, that rule becomes optional for the very rich. And stamping this out cannot be optional.

So the penalty should take the nature of a footballing sanction.

Two other things:

1. Any sanction applied should be applied equally to both sides. So extreme is the hatred between the extremists of both sides, we cannot rule out the possibility of false flag actions to bring trouble down on the other side.
2. Any sanction of lost points or removal from competitions should also apply to the next season. Again, I wouldn't put it past either side to seek some sort of advantage by deliberately bringing down the sanction when they lose.

At this point, I'm inclined to ban both Rangers and Celtic from the Scottish Cup next season. They caused this blight in a Scottish Cup match, so eject them from that competition next year.

But if that's not enough to stop this happening again, then in future I think we need to stop holding the Old Firm matches - when those fixtures are scheduled, simply rest the teams and assign both a 3-0 defeat.

And there comes a point, very soon indeed, when we should consider declaring both these teams ineligible for European competition, as happened to English teams in the 80s. That's probably the most effective sanction, but should probably be considered a nuclear option - it means both these clubs losing a huge amount of money, it means they become hugely unappealing to any calibre of player... but perhaps that's what we need to do.

But none of that will happen, of course. We'll have a couple of token arrests, some sort of slap on the wrist, and "lessons have been learned".

In the meantime, I'm very much hoping that Hearts win the league and Falkirk, St Mirren, or even Dunfermline win the Scottish Cup.

Shame on them both.

Please Let This Be the End...

Young Surprise! has been ill. Indeed, he has been ill for the past several weeks, starting with overnight vomiting, then all manner of horrible stuff from both ends, endless washing and rewashing of clothes and bedding, and a huge amount of time off nursery (all of which meant working from home, which is fine, but also while trying to keep him looked after).

It's fair to say that it has been a difficult time, to the extent that last night I finally ran out of energy completely and fell asleep while watching TV (which for me basically never happens).

Anyway, it does look like he might finally be over it, and is back at nursery. Or, at least, I desperately hope that he's finally over it!

Fair Play

It's a rare year when you get through Christmas without having to return/replace something. This year, it is a game controller for my nephew, which failed just after the end of the "returns window". Which is far from ideal - consumer law means that defective items should be accepted for return within any reasonable timeframe, but I've found before that consumer law is, sadly, something of an illusion.

Oh well.

So, I got in touch with Amazon, and found myself redirected to their third-party provider. Not good. Then I walked around Amazon's support a second time, and found myself redirected to their third-party provider. Still not good.

But then I went onto their support chat and spoke to an agent (which I strongly suspect to be an AI, but never mind). Anyway, a few minutes there and a return has been arranged.

So, fair play to Amazon - they actually came through, and without too much hassle. Now to actually return the item, collect the refund, and order a replacement...

Experimental Cookery 2026: Waffles Again

The second attempt at waffles saw me switching to a different waffle mix, and increasing the waffle maker setting from '3' to '4'. I also started adding more of the waffle mix to the device, meaning we now got fully-formed waffles.

The upshot was that the outcome was vastly superior, though we're still not quite there yet. A few things still to adjust...

1. The waffle mix was just the right quantity, or perhaps slightly more than was needed - at present, three of us eat waffles, while the mix made enough for four. But perhaps Surprise! will change his mind one day...
2. I'm currently hovering between "not quite enough" and "slightly too much" waffle mix per waffle. I think the correct amount is about one and a third cups, but I haven't hit it yet.
3. It's really quite important that the waffle mix be fairly loose and runny. Otherwise gravity doesn't get a chance to do its job before the heat cooks the waffles.
4. This new recipe doesn't include any vanilla extract. I think I'll add that for my next attempt. Otherwise, I think this will be chosen mix. (Oh, and I'll use self-raising flour instead of plain flour and baking powder. Apparently, self-raising flour isn't really a thing in the US.)

But it's definitely getting there...

Mene, mene, tekel, parsin?

A little over a century ago, the Liberal party ceased to be the party of government for the last time (the Lib Dems have been a part of a coalition since, but never by themselves). The position once held by the Liberals had been usurped by the Labour party - a feature of the first-past-the-post system is that you inevitably have two "big" parties and one "neither of the above" party (plus any number of minor parties that basically just make up the numbers).

After the last General Election, there was a lot of chatter about that transition being a once-in-a-century event, with the Tories about to lose their spot as one of the big two to Reform. And that certainly seems to be the case. (And I should note that I take no joy in this. While I don't share the Tories' politics, and while they had been becoming increasingly insane, at least under Rishi Sunak they were at least somewhat bearable - Reform are just horrible. Of course, I'm far from convinced that today's Tories aren't just as horrible, in an awful bid to stay relevant.)

However what I didn't expect, and what the calamitous polling of Kier Starmer's Labour and the result of the election in Gorton and Denton suggests, is that we might actually be getting to a point where both of the big two are about to lose their spots - that the Tories may be supplanted by Reform and the Labour party supplanted by the Greens.

In reality, it's far too soon to declare that the writing's on the wall. But now that the Greens have shown that they can win, it's suddenly not inconceivable that people might start voting for them. And Labour have pretty thoroughly alienated their own left wing, largely on the logic that they have nowhere else to do... only now they do.

It certainly makes for an interesting thought...

All at Sea

I got new glasses today. I hate getting new glasses.

The reality is that for each individual part of my vision, these are a marked improvement over the old glasses - both my distance and near-field prescriptions had changed slightly, which was causing me some problems with reading in particular. So moving to new glasses was a necessary step, and both areas are improved.

The problem is that my eyes are used to the existing glasses, and in particular the various transition points between the various areas, and in the new glasses they're all slightly different. Which means that any time I look at something other than dead ahead, or any time I change where I'm looking, my vision swims until it gets back to normal.

That's all to be expected, of course - I get this every time I have to change my glasses, which is why I hate getting new glasses. But it's never fun in the interim.

Controversy at the BAFTAs

It has been a long time since I watched any awards show, be that the BAFTAs, the Oscars, the Brit Awards, the MOBOs, or any other. For the most part, I concluded that they were basically just people in the industry patting themselves on their backs while enjoying a lavish party, and that really the only reason anyone cared is because they're connected at least tangentially to things we actually do care about. I also concluded that winning BAFTAs or Oscars was actually no indication of whether I would actually enjoy the film in question.

But I digress.

This weekend at the BAFTAs there was a moment of controversy when one of the attendees, John Davidson, a sufferer from a particularly difficult form of Tourette's Syndrome, shouted the N-word while two people of colour, Michael B. Jordan and Delroy Lindo, were on stage.

The whole thing was generally horrible.

Now, the very first thing I have to say is that I have nothing but respect for Michael B. Jordan and Delroy Lindo (and indeed for Jamie Foxx, who also seems to have been particularly strongly affected by this incident), as actors and also as individuals. And people of colour get faced with this sort of shit far too often, so I certainly can't blame them for objecting.

But two things can be true at once. And in this case, the other truth is that John Davidson was present at the BAFTA ceremony precisely because of the film that was made depicting his journey with Tourette's, the way it has affected his life, and the negative effects of it. And, crucially, the fact that his tics and outbursts are entirely involuntary and out of his control - to the extent that he has previously shouted "F- the Queen" while receiving his MBE, and declaring that he was carrying significant amounts of illegal drugs while at airport security.

It's a very difficult disability, and is out of his control.

So any suggestion to deal with it, "couldn't he just..." has the answer that, no, he couldn't just. There were basically two possibilities: either accept his presence, and the risk that went with it that something like this could happen; or bar him from the ceremony in some form (which, incidentally, would be illegal under the Equalities Act...)

Ultimately, there's no neat resolution to any of this.

For myself, my sympathies lie with the victims in all of this, all of them: Michael B. Jordan and Delroy Lindon, of course, and also John Davidson. Because there was offense caused, and we shouldn't minimise that... but this is that odd case where there isn't actually someone to blame.

And engaging in a witch-hunt, or fighting it as yet another front in the Culture War does nobody any good.

(All that said, there is one little bit of blame to go around: apparently, the BBC in their wisdom elected not to edit out the slur from their time-delayed transmission, while editing out both Alan Cummings' later apology for it and some other shouts that occurred in the night. They could easily, and should, have handled that better. But in all of this, that's a fairly minor point.)

And that's that, I think.

The Future of VAR

On Clyde 1 Superscoreboard last night there was an interesting debate concerning the future of VAR - apparently the scope of its use is due to be significantly expanded at this year's World Cup, and the question was whether that would be the end, of if we'd see further expansions in scope.

I'm reasonably convinced that the answer to that is not only that it will be massively expanded in scope, but in the next few years we'll start to see AI-assisted refereeing, where the AI has been trained on the last several years of video footage, will 'watch' the game in real time, and will make all sorts of rulings. Indeed, there may come a point where the AI referee becomes the primary authority in the running of the game, although we're some way away from that just now.

In theory, this actually represents a good thing - at the moment, the biggest problems with VAR are that the checks seem to take ages (certainly, far too long), and they're all-too-often still wrong. Switching to an AI assistant should lead to much quicker turnaround and should, again in theory, see them become much more accurate.

(That said, they'll need to be very careful in how they train the AI, or they'll see them much more likely to award decisions to the 'big' team over the 'smaller' one. Or maybe the opposite...)

But all of that is a few years away... though maybe only a few. I think there's a reasonably good chance that we may see an AI assistant being tried out at the Women's World Cup in 2031, in advance of its being rolled out more generally after that.