Rugby

Rugby.
A sport.
A lifestyle.
A stereotype.

Technically 2 major stereotypes of players, thus of most fans.
1. The Forward

• Level-headed
• Unimaginative
• Simple
• Implacable
• Big

2. The Back

• Flighty
• Inventive
• Clever
• Light-footed
• Small

Obviously there are exceptions to this, 2 most notable to myself are Matt Banahan and Lee Mears. Matt Banahan is the Bath left wing, who is basically a forward, and Lee Mears is the Bath Hooker, though could comfortably play scrum half.

Then there are those who define the moulds. I shall take two players from playing history Jeremy Guscott, an iconic inside centre and ever the back, and Martin Johnson, the man mountain, captain of England's 2003 greats.

The more astute of you may have now caught onto where this may well be going.

As I said earlier the players are generally fans, and Martin Johnson is now the England Manager and responsible for the worst series of results since the world cup. He was brought in because English rugby was in dire straights and the then chairman of the RFU refused to bring back Woodward. So step into the ring our immovable talisman. Martin Johnson. With no managerial experience we all thought that he would still bring us out of the doldrums, myself included.

Since then he has led us from mediocrity to ignominy with little to bring us hope... Until now?

NO!

Martin Johnson is almost what the forward stereotype was based on. He has a plan and will stop at nothing to achieve it. He wants to repeat the 2003 World Cup. The evidence? Well Simon Shaw and Mike Tindall are in the team. True they are in good form, wrong they are the best in England. Mike Tindall is part of the English style of rugby that only Leicester can maintain. Leicester still play the pack dominant and tactical kicking game. That is how Martin Johnson has played all his professional life, England and Leicester. It is how he still wants to play, even when the premiership has moved along. It is why Ryan Lamb of London Irish, and Nick Evans of Harlequins will never get a look in under his management. They do not build their game on the tactical kicking like Jonny Wilkinson, Toby Flood, Charlie Hodgson and Andy Goode.

Last Saturday we got a taste of what Johnson thinks is the way forward, where the inside centre is second string at club level to his team mate Olly Barkley, who was on the tour and was not even picked for the "Third Test". Olly Barkley is the form inside centre of the Premiership, guiding Bath to a near miraculous comeback, only failing to beat Leicester twice (probably only encouraging Johnson). The semi-final bath lost at the line-out, where Bath just could not win their own ball. A fact that Johnson probably glazed over.

The England pack are far from the dominance that the Leicester pack commands.

This has the knock-on effect of harming a tactical kicking game. The solid platform that is essential for a kicking based game plan. This however is not the biggest problem, as we saw a fortnight ago when England were shamed by a vastly understrength Australian team. The tactical kicking game, with the most solid of foundations can be broken by poor kicking.

The main reason we should not start believing in an English renaissance IS the kicking game. Though it is the chase where we lose every time. A fundamental rule I had hammered into my head when I was old enough for kicking to be allowed was this:

"A good kick and a bad chase is infinitely worse than a bad kick and a good chase."

 

England, or perhaps Martin Johnson and his coaching staff, must never have learnt this, thought it was a myth or simply have forgotten it. We will never challenge a full strength Australia, let alone the better teams of New Zealand and South Africa, if we cannot do this. The Southern Hemisphere sides thrive in broken play. If a kick is not inch perfect we will be punished and we cannot hope that a 3rd string front row, and second string backline are sent out against us all the time.

Until Johnson addresses this issue, or leaves. England will not be 1st or 2nd in any competition.

The Average of the Armchair

Not for the man from the armchair is the century at Lord's.

Not for the man from the armchair is the 5 minute mile.

Not for the man from the armchair is sprightly spring to steal the lineout.

Not for the man from the armchair is the taking part.

The man from the armchair is the encyclopaedia.

The man from the armchair is the fountain of knowledge.

But what of those who join the man in support of the nation's team? He who has only a passing interest in the sport or a fierce national pride kept quiet out of respect of those who might not feel quite so. What is he to do in the face of this fountain of knowledge? What of the many? What is the average of the armchair?

I ask this as, like many of my friends, I have only a passing interest in football (in rugby I have some knowledge but not really past the borders of England) and with the pre-world cup fever gripping the newspapers and media outlets, why should I feel upset that I don't know anything about it?

I have one friend who refuses to acknowledge it, but that is not for me. I have an Englishman's pride. It is not showy and it is not vocal, until challenged, and to this end I support my national teams in all their exploits. I never feel comfortable watching the football at home with my father, because he has frown extremely tired of my comments on the ability for moths to knock professionals over with a look. In the pub I feel rather overwhelmed by the complete lack of conversation outside of the topic of the sport or the match. No political, musical or philosophical discussions there.

So how am I going to watch the football I hear a voice ask... In all probability... It will only be by accident, not intent that I shall see this competition of physical, tactical and psychological mastery. I find this a shame. Football is supposed to be the game of the people, a game for everyone, from youngest speaker, to oldest man of the armchair. Yet I find myself isolated.

So what of us average men of the armchair? Those of us who would rather play the sport than watch it? Those of us who don't have an interest in any other part of the sport than the national side? Where can we watch this extravaganza with like minded fellows?

The pub? Certainly not. Any that are showing it will be frequented by the 'Real Men'.

The trendy bar? Nope. This will have the 'Modern Men' in. 'Modern Man' is not the pure passion of the 'Real Man' but will love to hold his superior knowledge over your head.

The friend's house? The best option of the 3 so far. If he is letting people over for the game, he will obviously care about it and he will have friends that do too, you will most likely still be a minority but at least you'll be in the company of friends.

Your house? Again getting better. Here you can choose who to invite, but if you don't invite any of your friends who are passionate fans, you will either see it gate-crashed or a poor turnout as those who aren't passionate drag them along to the pub.

By yourself? The worst option of the lot. If you care enough to want to watch the game, you make pretty poor company for yourself, and what is so wrong about your mates gathering at  a house or the pub.

So, as always, the average man is decided by the vocal minority.

The man from the armchair is better than the player.

The man from the armchair is right.

Not for the average of the armchair is the discordant choir.

Not for the average of the armchair is the trivia topping.

Not for the average of the armchair is the contest the day

Not for the average of the armchair is the armchair.

A New Beginning?

When I first started this blog, I had no idea where it was going to go. My main idea for it was to invite discussion, comment and possibly exert influence. In the times of regular postings I was starting a discovery of my political beliefs. I have reached a conclusion upon where those lie.

The main tenet of my political philosophy is in personal responsibility. It is not for the politician, scientist, 'expert', lobbyist, teacher, philosopher, parent or friend to tell you how to live your life. It is up to the individual to listen to what these people have to say and, from it, determine the best method for living. No one gets "their money for nothing, and their kicks for free." This is also why I disagree with what David Cameron's 'Big Society' appears to me. There should be no 'big' entity that dictates the appropriate method for conducting ones life. I do think that a big society is better than a big government, but it is the 'Big' aspect that I disagree with.

The next comes in the form of a, probably very incorrectly worded, quote:

"One should be free to do what isn't illegal, not what is legal."

If it isn't a quote then I want to claim it, but I'd rather know what the correct wording is (I know that was the gist of the statement) and who said it. I don't want to claim credit for what wasn't mine. I'm pretty sure I read it somewhere. No one should be persecuted for part-taking in something that is not illegal. If you find it immoral, then that is to do with your morals, they are not necessarily the other persons.

These are probably the two most important aspects of my political philosophy. I also feel that these are two that will not change because I age or anything else. They do not hold to one specific item and they are not mutually exclusive.

A return to the title of the post requires me to answer that question. I have stated what has been achieved through what I first started. I found this a useful method of thinking through ideas, as the words I write will mark down, on a more permanent basis, my thoughts and beliefs. Though I stopped posting on here, I do not think it would be in my interests to stop completely. I do realise I pretty much did.

So to answer the title of this post I shall mark today as a new start. Not really Volume II or Book II, more Chapter II. I feel that anyone who has read this blog may well have an small understanding of my character, and introduction. You have met me once or twice but do not yet know me.

Henceforth I shall write far more on the whimsical side than the irate side, flaming politics. There may be book reviews possibly music reviews as happens on my good friend Kyle's blog, Opinionated and Vocal. There may be short musings on a previous 'Food For Thought', that shall restart. I fear though that the poll shall die a death for a time, maybe to be resurrected like a magician's assistant, only time will tell. So, until I have time tomorrow (which reminds me, I need to clean my room the cleaner is coming around and he hasn't been in here for a couple of weeks and he needs to now), to quote a very favourite person of mine...

TTFN

Ta Ta For Now

Apathetic

I am currently in a bout of apathy. This post may well end up being one of the most reasonable post that I do. I have recently been relieved of my duty as a barman. This is not due to any fault of mine, apart from being the last person they hired (last in first out). It is due to the owners of the pub where I was working purchasing a new venue which had lots more staff that they had to take on than than they had been led to believe. For me this comes with some rather poor timing. It is now the Easter break for all the universities, so all those potential jobs in pubs that I had before going to work for the one that let me go have now pretty much disappeared.

It is this, in combination with the dearth of astute political leadership and situations at home, that has led to my current levels of apathy. That or a crash after a sugar rush, though I cannot establish when I had that if I did.

...

Apparently I need the ire to actually write a post. So I shall leave here some poetry that I have written.

I've been without a woman for cold long years.
I've felt familiar passions turning red my ears.
I've had the Icy Claw grasping at my fears.
I've need for love is what I tell my peers.

Time the healer, I thought had closed these scars.
Time believer, my faith was drowned in bars.
Time the dealer, would spare me this impasse.
Time the carer, don't leave me in this farce.

You were a Lightning bolt, a sudden strike of form.
You were the sight of land, safety from this storm.
You were a flight of geese, flying somewhere warm.
You were the rainbow, new hope in me was born.

Now it's here I stand, breaking in this rain.
Now it's here I stop, shouting in this pain.
Now it's there I run, demons in this flame.
Now it's there I roar, "By the Gods not this again!"

I quite like it, even if it was myself being a bit soppy after being dumped. To tell the truth, these are actually the verses in the song. Below is the chorus.

I've been alone,
For far too long,
I thought I'd found:
Someone to care with me,
Someone to share with me.

But now you've gone,
Left me all alone,
Just a passing note:
Thanks for the memories,
Thanks but it's time to leave.

If I manage to record the song in a fashion that allows me to put it up here I may well do so...

Well, the apathy continues, and as I have no other whims at this moment I shall leave things there.

It's the name of the blog dammit!

This is attempt number two at a blog post that is based more on a whim than any other. The main source of my ire I have not yet located, probably why I am still struggling to write any decent metal lyrics but can whack out a good couple of riffs with relative ease. The most recent event to find this well of anger came from Senior. Some of his attitudes towards how I conduct myself seem to be all to similar to this government for me not to have a brief rant on this topic.

The most recent incident was over this very blog. On here I do not tend to moderate anything I say, with the exception of expletives as there can be so much more inventive insults that the crude one word ejaculations most people are content with (ejaculation is also a synonym of exclaim to justify its position in the sentence as more than just a word to titillate). This has led to what I say becoming extreme, my simple counter to this is a simple one. Whom, when irate, is anything other than extreme?  Ire is an emotion of extreme. Ire is not reasonable. Ire does not think and moderate. It shouts curses screams and makes wild and outrageous accusations. Unfortunately the title of the blog appears not to reference in peoples minds when reading what I have posted. Maybe I should have a warning sticker on the site?

The incident over this blog was Senior following up on what I had done with this blog. I posted about this, and decided there were several options. I had informed senior that there rather than his suggestion of deletion, there was the more simple version of changing the e-mail address with which this site is registered to one that isn't my personal address. So when Senior comes to ask the follow up question about what I have done with my blog how would you, an impartial (assumption made you do not know me or anyone close to me) reader, pose the question of effectively disconnecting my real-life persona from this blog? The most sensible method would surely be something akin to "Pingu in Portugal, what have you done with your blog since I last talked to you about it?" Sensible, no?

Now Senior's inquiry into the affair should be surprising, as Senior canvassed for the Iron Lady herself and states he is right of centre and liberal. The question he posed me was "Have you deleted that blog yet?"... Now where to begin on this? What aspect of this should I deride first?

None. First I shall take you further into the workings of Senior's mind. In the first paragraphs I used the word "some" referring to Senior's attitudes towards me. The second comment made to me is one that I ignored at the time, and one that I may at a later date come back to him over. Senior if you are reading this, have a look at Blog Content post to check that it is you and not OB, the reason I didn't go to your old school too, Then please do ask me about what I have said on this post. If you thought you had bad arguments with OB then prepare for a new Number 1. The comment in question was said in relevance to going to a new university to study a different course. "You can make some new friends, other than your real ale lot." Now I have never been noted for my reliance on remembering statements verbatim, and I have not here (hence why it is merely a comment, not a quote). I do know, however, that the statement started with the old "no offence" comment, thus insuring the comment is offensive if only that part is remembered, and was stated in such a manner that it was all but unsaid that my current crop of friends was undesirable in his eyes.

Combine these two comments and what do we get? Effectively, Senior trying to run my life as he believes would benefit me the most. Yes it is all good intentions on his part, though I increasingly struggle to find the benefit to me in deserting good friends, but it is still an attempt to control me. Having caused significant disappointment in recent times, and taking into account the ease with which agreeing and ignoring generally works upon Senior, I have generally suffered these type of comments with no fuss. The advice imparted upon me is generally very good and based on many more years experience than I have.

Now though, I tire of it. I may well be Pingu Junior, but I have well passed the time when I need to be watched over and monitored. A staple comment I now find exiting Senior's mouth is, "How many drinks is that?" with a simple answer of 'none of your business' readily available I go for the "It's my second, the same number as you." Though the feel I always get in response to this comment is 'Do as I say. Not as I do.'

This all combines to leave me with the simple conclusion that Senior is acting in the manner that a Lib\Lab\Con government would want to be seen. Informing you of how to act and behave because it is for your benefit. This may be why I am feeling increasingly irritated at home by complete non-events that would make a mole-hill a planet, let alone a mountain. I can see what a benign intervention should be and what the government actually does, or that I see what the government and find myself viewing the benign acts of Senior and LG and feeling them as the malicious forces that a Lib\Lab\Con government would be.

The audacity to imply that my friends weren't up to scratch. The arrogance to assume that the course suggested had to be the course taken, and the hypocrisy of the 'Do as I say, not as I do.' I am starting to understand why OB is moving to Exeter. In the short term, my exodus to the Sou' West is inevitable. In the long-term, my exodus from this country is probable. The new country to which I will be a citizen, if only an unhappy one, has recently become Switzerland. If I am gonna make a break from this country I my aswell lose the lingo too. Make the break that much more surgical.

A quick return to the title of the post. A person is allowed their opinions. Do not judge a man 'til you have met him. It is easy to let your invention rule when it is you and a computer screen against no-one. Never judge a man by his blog.

(I wanted to do never judge a blog by its owner. Unfortunately it got the message around the wrong way)