Leeds Update

Not much has changed with last weekend's games. We managed to salvage a point against Southend with Healy scoring an 88th minute equaliser. We were also denied a blatant penalty, and created enough opportunities to score plenty more goals. So we are still in the battle for survival but could really have done with a win. Luton's loss means that we are now equal bottom in terms of points. QPR's victory over Leicester moves them out of the bottom 3 and makes things just a little tougher for us.

Table:

Burnley 41 (37 games) Goal diff: -5
Hull 41 (39 games) Goal diff: -17
Barnsley 41 (39 games) Goal diff: -24
QPR 40 (38 games) Goal diff: -14
-------------------------------------------
Southend 39 (39 games) Goal diff: -19
Luton 36 (39 games) Goal diff: -20
Leeds 36 (39 games) Goal diff: -25

Come on boys!

Zimbabwe Ireland thriller!

A draw! Not very often this happens in cricket, and a great shock. Pity Ireland couldn't quite pull it off properly. Plus I reckon if you get the same number of runs, the team with the least wickets down should win. And if that were the case - Ireland with 9 down would have beaten the all out Zimbabweans.

It's a bit of a disaster how bad Zimbabwe have become thanks to the corrupt regime of Mugabe. They used to have a solid team with the likes of Flower (x2), Vermeulen, Campbell, Strang Olonga etc.

Black Caps England Preview.

The Black Caps get their world cup game underway with a crucial game against England. Both teams have injury concerns going into the match - yet both may well end up playing all their big guns, despite fitness concerns. James Anderson's broken finger may not keep him out of the starting line-up, McMillan has supposedly got through training OK with his bruised toe, and Fulton is set to play despite his finger problems. The so-called longer term casualties of Oram and Pietersen, both of whom were expected to make comebacks later in the tournament, are both likely to start! What this indicates to me is that there are many people (all teams inclusive) who are being rushed back - desperate to help their teams to the holy grail of the world cup. This is good to see - as long as it doesn't backfire on anyone with longer setbacks a result.

Both the Black Caps and England are incredibly inconsistent. Both can be bloody brilliant. And both can be dreadful. And both can be anywhere in between. Let's hope for a Black Caps win so we can take the points through to the Super 8 (as one would assume that both NZ and the mother country will qualify!)

I can't exactly talk...

Yes I know Leeds are very likely going down, but I might as well revel in a little misfortune of one of my most disliked clubs! What a great song to the tune of the Hokey Cokey! (Anyone who doesn't know the Hokey Cokey by the way must be shot!):

You put your Argies in,
Took your Argies out.
The Iceman comes,
And your manager's out.
You're selling Reo-Coker
and your're going down,
Thats why we like to shout...........

Oooooh Wanky Wanky West Ham,
Oooooh Wanky Wanky West Ham,
Oooooh Wanky Wanky West Ham,

Misfits, Has-beens HA HA HA!

You've gotta laugh.

Found this on a Leeds Utd message board. Whilst we are often involved in mutual hand wringing and anxiety, this is a great bunch of fans with a dark sense of humour. Which without it, we would surely cry instead!

Congratulations Taito Phillip Field!

His delaying tactics of introducing 50 last minute amendments will delay the passing of the controversial anti-smacking bill. This will mean more time for Labour and Maori Party MP's to be put under pressure. Lawyers have lately come out saying it is a badly worded law, and that parents who simply lightly smack their kids could end up in a police cell over night.

Unfortunately Chester Borrows amendment failed which would have actually defined reasonable force, and was a good middle ground.

NZ injury situation.

Bond bruises McMillan's toe with yorker putting him in doubt. Fulton broken finger, may play. Gillespie virus. Oram still with finger problem. It's never easy as a Black Caps fan - let's just hope for a good result in the game against England during the early hours of saturday morning. Any injuries for any team in a world cup piss me off!

Fantasy Cricket

To keep me vaguely amused throughout the world cup, I have a fantasy team in the competition. The worst news for my team is that James Anderson has just broken his finger and is in doubt. But at least I have Ricky Ponting! I recommend others to create a team, you'll only start a couple of games behind the play. If you know me feel free to join the provate league "one and all", key: 1172660625

New Football rule suggested.

The Football league is considering a proposal to scrap draws, and make them go into penalties instead. This is completely ridiculous in my view, and to even consider it is a farce. The draw is a sacred part of football. When two teams can't be separated, giving them 1 point each in the league is perfectly fair, instead of throwing up every game to the lottery of the shootout.

Down Down Down.

Well I've been checking out this morning's full round of Championship action, and thanks to a 1-1 draw with Leicester we've now picked up a win and a draw in our last two games. Unfortunately this unusual event of actually doing OK for a change is not as good as it looks. This is because of the excellent form of some of the teams around us. Southend have picked up 2 wins in a row after beating Ipswich on the weekend, as have Hull. We only seem to have made real ground on Luton, and perhaps QPR. We've been having a lot of bad luck this season, combined with the fact we've actually been really shit at times. But 4 points out of 6 and still bottom is not good.

I think God doesn't like us.

8 dates with destiny to go. Including a MASSIVE game against Southend this weekend.

I think we'll be relegated with a couple of games to go. In which case I will be crying like a baby :(

Current Table:

Burnley 41 (36 games) Goal diff: -3

Hull 41 (38 games) Goal diff: -15

Southend 38 (38 games) Goal diff: -19

Barnsley 38 (37 games) Goal diff: -23

----------------------------------------------

QPR 37 (37 games) Goal diff: -16

Luton 36 (38 games) Goal diff: -18

Leeds 35 (38 games) Goal diff: -25

World Cup gets underway!

It's here and I'm excited. Except for the fact I'm already rather behind in my uni work and won't be able to dedicate myself to the cup as I would like. I could pretty much watch all the live games if I had the chance but unfortunately it seems like the highlight packages might be getting a pounding instead! Tonight is West Indies v Pakistan to set the tone for an exciting few weeks.

Go the Black Caps.

Dwayne Leverock is my hero.

Dwayne Leverock is a member of the Bermuda side competing at the 2007 cricket world cup. He has also topped 21 stone (about 135 kg). Simply put: he is one helluva big lad. Yet he's one of the team's stars. In his sides friendly against England he managed an excellent 2-32 from 10 overs (easily the best figures of the team), including the prize scalps of Pietersen and Collingwood. His slow left-arm orthodox bowling is very accurate, and quite dangerous. As Michael Vaughan noted: "He bowled very well. Any spinner that drags Kevin Pietersen out of his crease and does him in the flight, it is a good delivery". It is quite a sight seeing him stagger in to bowl but he obviously has some quality.

Good luck to him for the World Cup. You are my hero. And obviously have created a bit of stir already if some of the British Press is anything to go by!

Frank Haden dies.

Sad to hear of the death of Frank Haden. I used to really enjoy his columns in the Press regarding the use of the English language. I even emailed him once (while I was in seventh form I think) about two things, and lo and behold he included both my comments in his next column. One was that these days students are not taught grammar, suggesting that practically no-one would know what the past pluperfect tense was (don't ask me what it is either!), the other was the annoying habit of certain cricket commentators (Ian Smith) using the word connotations when he actually meant permutations during the VB series round that time. Haden also used to write articles on political issues in the Sunday Star times, usually with a centre-right perspective.

A little Green on the inside.

I've always been someone deeply concerned about our environment, and in this regard have held some sympathies towards the greenie protestations coming from the Green Party. Unfortunately their few iotas of sense are mixed up with the likes of scaremongering (peak oil, and even more so an almost fanatical opposition to the wonders of Genetic Engineering) and their other extreme political viewpoints that are completely non-environment related, and often completely at odds with my perspective. Examples would include their considering the Treaty of Waitangi in almost gospel like proportions, leading them to positively discriminate towards maori - a concept that has gained in popularity with the emergence of the maori party as a force, their seemingly unmitigated desire to perpetuate the cycle of welfare dependency, and an addiction to increased social spending.

However, at the risk of being accused of authoritarianism or being a 'filthy filthy tory', I have found myself in the rare situation of agreeing with Metiria Turei and Hone Harawira. They back up the Cancer Society and OSH's desire to ban point of sale displays of cigarette and tobacco products. It's a very nanny statish call but it's one I would be in favour of. Smoking is a disgusting habit which leads to a plethora of health problems such as lung cancer, never mind the cigarette companies making huge profits from the addictions of the populace (especially from the lower socio-economic groups who are over represented in these statistics). These companies will naturally exploit any means of marketing their product (even at times in breach of legal regulations) - and no doubt these above the counter visual images increases their sales. Check out the Cancer Society article for further discussion upon this point. Smoking really is something we need to encourage youngsters not to take up, so we should do what we can on this score. Plus if there's anything we can do to drastically reduce the number of cigarettes people smoke we should try and do it. If something as simple as product placement even might make a difference then it's worth a go. It is rather ironic though that the Greens are strongly against cigarettes and yet would decriminalise (or even legalise) Marijuana - and have an avowed pot smoker amongst their ranks.

Another idea coming out of the Green Party ranks shouldn't be completely dismissed. Green Party co-leader Russel Norman has suggested that those who sign up to Kiwisaver should be given a 'socially responsible' option as to where to invest, citing that "the New Zealand Superannuation Fund has investments in companies that manufacture nuclear weapons, destroy the environment and breach labour and human rights". I don't know the validity of his claims, nor how he defines destroying the environment - chances are he's spouting some extremist propaganda - but his comments do raise a question in my mind: when looking to invest - do we just look for simply the best financial return or should we try and balance this out a little with our moral and social concerns? I suggest the latter. Life shouldn't just be about more money at whatever cost.

Having stood up for the Green Party a little here, readers should be clear that overall I think their set of policies is one of the crazier in parliament, and one of the most out of tune with my perspective. But sometimes, just sometimes, there's a smidgeon of sense hidden away somewhere. Most of the time this is where conservation is concerned - but occasionally, sense crops up elsewhere!

Not Guilty!

Rickards, Shipton and Schollum have all been found not guilty on historic sex-charges...again. Is it just me or does something stink about this? I usually make it a policy of mine that I don't comment either way on court charges because you can never know the truth.

But everyone knows their guilty. To me it is just bloody obvious. This decision is enough to make anyone bitter. Those poor women who have tried to fight their case in court and failed because of the smarmy lies of Rickards and co.

Not happy.

Compulsory Savings

Recently Winston Peters has been espousing his much loved ideas on compulsory savings. There is some merit to his ideas as it is important that New Zealanders try to save healthy chunks of their income rather than just using it irresponsibly. A lot of New Zealanders have no idea of the concept of savings. Many people like to spend their full quota of income, perceiving it as somehow wasted if it's sitting accruing interest in the bank. New clothes must be bought, or expensive restaurants dined at, or the latest gadget bought for their 9 year old boy.

It's disappointing that many people don't know the meaning of savings. My family is in a comfortable financial position because they worked hard, and scrimped and saved a vast majority of their earnings. If 10 pounds was left over at the end of the week it wouldn't just be spent on luxury items, it would be added to the savings. We have family friends who earn a lot but spend it all, and hence can't afford it when an unexpected bill comes along. This is a nonsense. Savings must be encouraged. People, especially lower earners, should be encouraged to spend only on what is necessary, in the long-run it will be good for them.

But regardless of the excesses of many people, compulsory savings shouldn't be the way to go. There are lots of pressures on household finances as it is that many may not afford it. Plus it is everyone's personal choice as to how much they save. In a sense though, if it were compulsory, there could be an opportunity for relieving government spending in the area of superannuation, giving a top-up to their compulsory scheme. Again, whether this is a good thing or not is easily debatable.

We haven't heard much from Winston on this since the 1997 referendum when the voting public were strongly against it. Savings is an important part of life but we shouldn't legislate for it.

Buck up your maths skills kiwis!

According to an article in today's Press (A7): "poor mathematics skills are leaving shoppers out of pocket because they fail to notice getting shortchanged." It also noted that "one in three workers admitted their inadequate skills had lost their company money".

This is shocking but unsurprising.

Too many people are leaving school without even the basic school certificate (NCEA level 1) Maths. Or even enough knowledge in applied Maths to work out the change. As someone who was once called "William the calculator" for my skills in mental maths I find it incredibly hard to understand how you can pass through a school system without these skills, even if you bunked most of the time and hardly listened. The amount of times I see shoppers and shopkeepers struggling is unbelievable. And if they can't do this, I bet they can't sit there and quickly work out whether the 300g or 500g option is cheaper per gram. I always have to work this out - it's a simple technique that saves me a few cents here and there - which all add up.

At least New Zealanders tend to use eftpos a lot! Come on Kiwis, buck up your ideas and at least follow your maths teacher who helps you try and solve these practical problems.

Alcohol consumption hits a high: some philosophical meanderings on attitudes to alcohol.

According to the Weekend Press New Zealand's alcohol consumption is the highest in 20 years, a staggering 464 million litres. That's 2.15 litres per man, woman or child per week. If we ignore the 21.5% of people aged under 15, that's 2.74 litres per week. Considering that this of course includes all the teetotallers and people for whom one to 5 standard drinks in a week is the norm, one would suggest that there is a huge amount being consumed in the under 25 bracket, the time in one's life when alcohol consumption is probably at its peak.

Alcohol watchdogs are blaming RTD's for the increase. Rebecca Williams notes that "RTD's are cheap, convenient and designed to appeal to young people". She's right. And the people I believe it to be affecting most are young women. Young women these days are notoriously big drinkers compared to their counterparts of a generation ago. In some cases women try to out-drink the men with disastrous consequences. The culture these days find it acceptable for women to get absolutely off their face. This is particularly prevalent among students, for whom binge-drinking of any kind is the norm. It is no good for these young women's livers or other biological functions. Naturally binge drinking is not good for us blokes either, but a women's system is even less designed to cope. The Alcopops range is very appealing to girls pretty much anywhere from high school upwards, and in many of these drinks you can't even taste the alcohol, meaning youngsters become absolutely slaughtered before they know it.

The problem with these 'slaughtered' young women is that they can become pliant, and easy to be taken advantage of. It is likely that many a time a young woman in this situation - who acquiesces to consensual sex - soon regret their actions. The bloke cannot be charged with rape because everything was ostensibly consensual but he has taken advantage of their high alcohol intake. Naturally this can work the other way round but this way appears a more common scenario. Of course the more people drink alcohol, the more they have sex...and the more they have sex, the more chance of STI's and unwanted pregnancies becoming a reality (given that alcohol leads us to less rational decisions like not worrying about contraception). Children having sex younger and younger is something to avoid as well!

The culture of binge drinking is to a large extent ingrained in the Kiwi psyche. Rugby and Beer seem to be our national icons, and the two are synonymous with each other. Middle aged New Zealanders binge drink, their children binge drink. Binge drinking is particularly bad in students lifestyles. I have participated in this binge drinking culture, and far too often at that. Most people go out from time to time with the simple objective of getting wasted. Others go out for a few quiets that descend into a binge. I can sit here and tell you that if I have a dozen beers in one night, I don't consider it a huge night. Neither would others. It may well be seen as a moderate, fairly drunk night, depending how quickly they were consumed of course. And this of course is a dangerous perspective to have.

It is the binges that are doing us damage. If I had 3 standard drinks 6 nights of the week, this would be much healthier than one night of sinking 14. Somewhere along the line education has to solve the issue. Raising the drinking age to 20 is not going to help. Well it could a little, but it's a measure I would vote against. At 18 you are deemed an adult who can participate in most legal activities, surely you should be allowed the fundamental right of supping a beer in a pub?

At the moment, as the law stands, it is illegal for those under 18 to buy alcohol, but it is legal to supply a minor with alcohol and for them to consume it. Apparently the Hospitality Association's Bruce Robertson wants an actual drinking age of 18 to be considered with any minor who consumes alcohol, effectively becoming a criminal. I can see the rationale behind the idea. It is certainly not good for children to drink. To abuse your body with alcohol is not good at the best of times but before the age of 18 when your liver hasn't fully developed is a particularly bad time to be doing it. Especially if it's week in week out systematic abuse. I wouldn't support the measure though. My parents gave me my first beer when I was about 13 or 14. I was never allowed more than one until I was about 17 or so. If this age range can learn to sensibly have a drink or two under controlled parental supervision then this is surely a good thing. They are less likely to go off the rails when they are 18. France doesn't have a drinking age. A glass of red wine is considered something worthy for any age. And France don't have the problems we have.

That is because it is all about culture and education. With the right education, with an improvement in our drinking culture our problems will diminish. One of these days I'm going to listen to that voice in my head telling me every binge session is doing me damage. If we could all listen to that voice in our heads more often, society would be a lot better place!

Leeds United: Relegation Inevitable

One of my darkest days as a Leeds fan is right now, and it certainly suits my current mood. I fully expected to lose to Wolves last night but the result is still hard to take, especially when you take into account how the bottom six are sitting. A week or two ago everything had squeezed up and we were in with a shout of survival. But the draw against QPR a few days ago was crucial. They were on a freefall. A win would have lifted us to level on points with them but an abject 0-0 draw resulted. And now the loss against Wolves makes the table look like this:

Luton 36
Hull 35
QPR 35

------------
Barnsley 35
Southend 31
Leeds 31

And we have the worst goal difference. We have 12 games to go. We are not yet down but we sure as hell will be. 95% chance of going down. I feel so hollow. This just adds to my hollowness about at least two other things. I did have the hope that checking the results today would ease some bitterness instead of just exacerbating it. The end of LUFC is nigh. Leeds United: rest in peace. Dennis Wise you are a muppet as was John Carver and Kevin Blackwell before you. Ken Bates you are a useless turd. And as for the players: this is the Leeds United shirt we are talking about - play like you could die for it instead of just going through the motions. Very few of you actually seem to care. You pick up your healthy pay cheques and start planning which club you are going to join next season. Our vast array of injuries don't help but our players are not only not up to the job - they are not up for the job. Players, management, hang your heads in shame. You have 12 games to be heroes. 12 games to retain our status. Here are the games for us remaining:

Birmingham v Leeds Utd
Leeds Utd v Sheff Weds
Leeds Utd v Luton Town
Leicester v Leeds Utd
Southend v Leeds Utd
Leeds Utd v Preston NE
Leeds Utd v Plymouth
Colchester v Leeds Utd
Leeds Utd v Burnley
Southampton v Leeds Utd
Leeds Utd v Ipswich
Derby v Leeds Utd

We should lose against Birmingham but the next 4 games after that will completely define the season. If we could get a minimum of 3 wins and a draw out of Wednesday, Luton, Leicester and Southend then we would really give ourselves a fighting chance. And these are potentially winnable matches against lowly ranked teams, two of them also fighting relegation. I very much doubt we will but we need good results in those games, and set us up for the tough last 7 games.

But whatever way you look at, I think we're done for. I feel too down and upset to cry. No doubt I will do a few times before the season is over. And play a bit of "Everybody Hurts" by REM, or John Blunt, to make me feel even more upset. When we failed in the Championship playoff final last season the next day I was singing the Leeds songs to myself all day long with tears in my eyes. I have to prepare myself for a similar eventuality. What a circus for Leeds fans to endure. I hope the Leeds fans go to the last game of the season against Derby and throw a party.

We have never been as low as the third tier of English football. To go there would be the worst moment as a Leeds fan. The last 5 or 6 years have been like hell on earth for us Leeds fans. But if we do go down, I just have to hope that we can come back over the next few years instead of remaining condemned to the lower leagues for an eternity.

We'll be back.

MARCHING ON TOGETHER (highlighting - all my own choice)

Here we go with Leeds United
We're gonna give the boys a hand
Stand up and sing for Leeds United
They are the greatest in the land

Every day, we're all gonna say
We love you Leeds! Leeds! Leeds!
Everywhere, we're gonna be there
We love you Leeds! Leeds! Leeds!

Marching on together
We're gonna see you win(na na na na na na)
We are so proud
We shout it out loud
We love you Leeds! Leeds! Leeds!

We've been through it all together
And we've had our ups and downs (ups and downs!)
We're gonna stay with you forever
At least until the world stops turning 'round

Every day, we're all gonna say
We love you Leeds! Leeds! Leeds!
Everywhere, we're gonna be there
We love you Leeds! Leeds! Leeds!

Marching on together
We're gonna see you win (na na na na na na)
We are so proud
We shout it out loud
We love you Leeds! Leeds! Leeds!

Anti Smacking Bill.

Today Sue Bradford's Anti Smacking Bill is set to comfortably pass its second reading. This bill would effectively repeal s59 of the Crimes Act which permits parents to use reasonable force against children. My position on this issue is exactly in line with Chester Burrows of the National Party who is set to place certain amendments on the table.

My problem with s59 is that it allows parents the opportunity to get away with unacceptable levels of violence against their children. I know people who have disciplined their children far too harshly such as with a belt or stick. I'm even not a fan of the slipper. Any discipline that leaves the child with marks on their body is surely unacceptable, with no place in modern society. So some change is desirable.

However repealing s59 would effectively criminalise parents who simply smack their children. Sue Bradford says it won't: "Repeal of s59 will not criminalize parents. Police, as always, will exercise discretion about mounting a prosecution, as their procedural rules require them to do. Only abusive parents have reason to fear the repeal of S59." However their actions would still be deemed within illegal bounds, and police time would be wasted on a trifling matter. If criminalising these parents is not the intent why can't we just define reasonable force?

Nanaia Mahuta who has come out in favour of the bill says that "there continues to be far too many instances of young people being abused, neglected or killed, and this cannot continue." Certainly she is correct, but how making smacking illegal will help that is surely anybody's guess. She is clearly radical on this issue, disappointed that the bill does not go as far as it had originally, in other words outlawing reasonable force as a defence. Would she prefer that the parent being attacked by an enraged child just take it, and not defend themselves at all?

A smack, delivered occasionally, is a valuable parenting tool. I can count on one hand the number of times I have been on the receiving end of a smack. I deserved that punishment. And it was effective. It shouldn't be overused however because then it simply becomes meaningless and commonplace. Effectively making smacking illegal however would be a disgrace.

In summary let's hope we get Chester Burrow's amendments. We should keep reasonable force but define exactly what that is by outlawing the use of implements, and simply making the only acceptable physical punishment as an open-handed smack.