12 June 2010: Global

So the World Cup started yesterday. For those with any interest in the beautiful game, it's a chance to see who's really any good and find out how England will manage to disappoint in new and exciting ways. (The way the draw works out, it's pretty difficult for England to lose to Portugal on penalties this time, which means they'll have to think of something new).

South Africa v Mexico was a good start: that goal from Shalalalala (start humming 'Is This The Way To Amarillo') was pretty special. I kept thinking 1990 and Cameroon v Argentina, but South Africa were not ruthless enough in defence (for which read: didn't get players sent off for battery and assault) so the equaliser came. That could be an interesting group: I'd assumed it would be France and Uruguay through, and it may well the case, but from what I could tell, France looked a bit lacklustre in that game and that means (1) I'm not so afraid of England playing them in the QFs (assuming both with their groups) and (2) maybe France won't win their group. Maybe they'll go out at the group stage, a la 2002?

Meantime South Korea and Greece are at half-time as I write this: South Korea winning and I'm back to puzzling how much bribery money changed hands in 2002 to get them as far as they did that year. No enquiry was ever launched, but some of those refereeing decisions in favour of the Koreans back then made Maradona's hand of God look positively regulation. And England-USA to follow later, of course.

But I won't blog too much about results etc: you can get that from the BBC site. This blog, if it's about anything, is about bringing unique and different insights from my brain or other inside sources (usually the Saints forum) so you can be a little ahead of the curve. So what can I offer on the World Cup that you can't get? Well, for those in the UK, how about a British view of American World Cup coverage?

The World Cup is being shown here - every match - on either free-to-air or basic cable. So, not quite as good as most places in the world, but not bad. The contract is held by Disney (believe it or not), but that means ABC for free-to-air games and ESPN for the rest. ABC, naturally, are showing England-USA this afternoon, along with a bizarre variety of other games and then most of the main ones as we get towards the end of the tournament. Clearly however, the schedulers know little about the World Cup because they've also scheduled the most pointless, unwatched game in the tournament - the playoff for 3rd and 4th place between the semi-final losers - to be shown live on ABC. Nobody cares about that game, nobody watches it and even the teams are made up of squad players. In 1990, England played in that game and I believe Tony Dorigo actually got picked. That's how nothing of a game it is.

The other good news - and news that might make UK fans jealous - is that while you Brits have to listen to John Motson and Clive Tyldesley -
sheesh, two-nil to South Korea now -
we get to have Martin Tyler doing the commentary. (Favourite all-time Clive Tyldesly quote: "on a scale of one to ten, you'd have to say Wimbledon have done pretty well".) The rest of the team are the usual ESPN suspects led by Derek Rae, but I'm pretty happy with that.

The downside, however, is that due to Comcast cable TV performing a digital switchover last month, our ESPN and ESPN2 is currently off, pending us figuring out with the landlords how to get hold of a digital box from the cable company. So that means I'm watching it on ESPN3.com (which is pretty good) or - and here's the irony - using my secret method of watching UK TV online (no I'm not going to tell you how I do it). So as of right now, I'm hearing Jon Champion commentating for ITV on the Korean onslaught, and have to wait for this afternoon before the free-to-air ABC lets me get back to the American coverage for the big game.

Andy M visited last week and we discussed what it means in today's world to be living in a different country but still very tied to where you came from. For me, it remains weird: we're clearly in Indiana, clearly established in our community and work, clearly familiar with local events ('Ribfest' today outside our place... the noisiest and rowdiest festival of the year, which two years ago finished with police chasing people through the alley and in the car park)... and yet I'm watching Come Dine With Me or Time Team on Channel 4, eating Lincolnshire-style sausages and dry-cure back bacon and writing a blog that's mainly read by Brits. When you emigrate, you were traditionally supposed to leave - to make a clean break, and maybe go through some culture-shock training first. For us, the internet has meant that British life is so close that the things we miss - walking down the street to the greengrocer or butcher, Big George's tandoori chicken kebabs, Shahi takeaway on Lodge Road, walking or cycling in the New Forest - are fewer in number and don't seem as far away. Which makes homesickness different - more specific,maybe - but also means it happens less, I think.

Hard to tell. Still, this afternoon I'll clearly be backing England over the USA, even if he does pick Heskey.

3 June 2010: Nine

Not much time for blogging. But in a curious twist today it appears that Peter Crouch has finally received some kind of credit from the England manager for his somewhat remarkable (why does everyone say 'surprising'?) scoring record for his country.

He has 21 goals in 38 games. Of those 38, he has started 18. In those 18, he has scored 17. Not bad for a man who gets dropped in favour of Heskey on a regular basis.

So what credit has he received? Well, not much, but today Capello revealed the squad numbers for the World Cup, and Crouch got number nine. Doesn't mean anything too much in these days of squad numbers - indeed, I fully expect Crouch to play perhaps one game in the competition and Rooney spend most of the time up on his own, or watching Heskey fall over. But it's something.

Shame Theo didn't make it, but he'll be back... he's just too good. Watching him play for England on the wing (by the way, he's a better centre-forward than winger) and Crouch up front was like watching Saints reserves from a few years ago. All we need is Garry Monk in there and we'd be sorted.

Meantime there are rumours of HMRC launching two legal actions against the Premier League and Football League, one linked directly to the Pompey fiasco and one less directly linked. Maybe Pompey aren't out of the woods yet?

24 May 2010: Cuts

As expected, plenty of government cuts, including some reported here.

Quote from that report of special interest to the original purpose of this blog:

"The government department that was hardest hit by Monday's cuts was that for Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS). BIS is now to scrap its funding — announced by then-PM Gordon Brown in March — for a new Institute of Web Science. The institute would have been focused on the development of the Semantic Web, and would have been led by Sir Tim Berners-Lee and Professor Nigel Shadbolt of the University of Southampton.

"In light of the current pressures on public finances, the government has decided that it cannot support the creation of a new Institute for Web Science at Southampton University at this time," a BIS spokesperson said in a statement."

The thing is this: someone's going to do it, and the UK will miss out as a result. Cuts need to be made - drastically, yes - but when we emerge (assuming we do emerge), there can be little doubt that this will be regarded as a missed opportunity. As is often the case in Comp Sci, things move quickly and you can't simply delay something like this. Someone else will do it, and it'll be the UK - not just ECS Southampton and us ex-AKTors - who will miss out.

And before you get people saying "yes, but cuts need to be made, and 5 million is a lot of wonga", I would like to mention a few short words about other areas of astonishing - aSTONishing - waste over the last few years: government contracts; Stellent; Club. Very few people know what that's about, but if you think 5 million is a lot of wonga to waste on a world-leading Institute of Web Science, try digging around to see how much IT wastage there has been in recent years, paid for by UK taxes.

To say the least, one commonly-promoted statistic in undergrad computer science is this: 80% of all IT projects are never deployed.

20 May 2010: Important

A recent dinner visit by some British friends brought up an old debate. No, not tax-funded healthcare, the existence of a deity or even whether toilet roll goes over or under. Simply this: we made scones and clotted cream, and with jam supplied by Betty's of York, it was time to find out whether our guests were jam-first or cream-first people.

I am jam-first. Gloria is cream-first. Our guests were equally split 50-50, along with the comment "never really thought about it." Which is how most people are, I believe.

And then on to the BBC news site today and they even have a video story about it - click here to see it and I believe that if you're in the UK you can watch it without having to see a commercial for a train company first. Those people - interviewed up on Dartmoor on a terribly misty, cold day (ie summer) - were split evenly too.

So here's the question: jam first, or cream first? (You can also say why if you want).

Postscript: Becky comments that Argyle are selling their best player (they only have one worth selling, at least they did until he left this week) and saying "no, there are no plans to go into administration" and wondering if something might be up. I wouldn't say anything other than Michael Heseltine used to somewhat famously go round saying he wouldn't run for Conservative Party leader, before doing so on at least two occasions. Expect administration pretty soon. Not because of illegal doings or anything, just relegation and a divided board who have refused to put any money into the club, despite their having plenty.

12 May 2010: Double Take

Is it just me or are these two vaguely reminiscent of the Double Take Brothers from Harry Enfield?

11 May 2010: Endgame

And there it is. I was working and so missed the dramatic moments on live TV, but Gordon's gone to the Queen and said "I'm off", and as I write this David Cameron has gone to Buckingham Palace to be asked by the Queen "Are you in a position to form a government?" Presumably he'll say "yes", otherwise the Queen will have to respond like a disappointed teacher: "well, go back and do it again". The exact deal hasn't been finalised yet, let alone ratified by the Lid Dems, but presumably Dave will now take over as PM straight away and will have until the Queen's Speech to put the actual team together in time for the first vote.

Earlier, the Rainbow Alliance plan seemed to finally have fallen by the wayside - Lib Dems and Labour just far enough apart and the minority government that would be formed just too much of a minority to work. Also, Labour seem to be taking a slightly longer-term strategy of letting their two rival parties tackle the economic deficit, and however successful they are it still will be painful, and Labour will be in a position to come in and come right back at the next election, whenever that may be. (Sounds weird, but don't forget Winston Churchill won the Second World War and immediately lost the next General Election.)

And that's that, change of Executive branch of government in less than an hour. Cameron's still in there, incidentally - twenty minutes now, rather like Gordon Brown going to visit the house of the non-bigoted woman. He's the youngest PM since 1812. There's a rumour of Clegg becoming Deputy PM, but I can see problems with that (standing in a PMQ's for a start)... we probably won't know for sure for a while. There's no rush now - it's clearly a LibCon of some type that we'll get and the Queen's Speech isn't until May 25.

Oh, there he goes, off to work!

Edit: Clegg as Deputy Prime Minister is confirmed. Partly this means he has no particular portfolio and therefore can be kept out of mischief, but I reiterate my earlier question about PMQs and also, let's not forget the UK (well, Europe) has laws about Paternity Leave (notably lacking in the USA), which could be interesting come the autumn. (Yes, Mrs C is expecting.)

10 May 2010: Debate

Update 2.12pm eastern: Conservatives making a "final offer" to the Lib Dems: a referendum on the Alternative Vote (AV) system, and William Hague says this (AV) was at the specific request of the Lib Dems. In other words, they said they wanted AV, not STV, which will disappoint a lot of Lib Dem fans who actually will feel betrayed by Nick Clegg at this point. And this move by the Conservatives to offer an AV referendum is surely all a response to Mr Brown resigning. Funny how they're all now negotiating by action in the media: who can make the most impressive gesture? It's like watching a TV documentary about weird animal mating rituals. AV, for those interested, means that instead of just a tick/cross by one name, you put numbers by (at least some of) the names, indicating your order of preference. If the candidate with most 1's by their name fails to get over 50% for that constituency, they add in the 2's. And so on.

So Gordon's going to step down as Labour leader, having lost the election. Not because it's the decent thing to do (although that would be the main reason if it wasn't for what the main reason is): no, it's because the Lib Dems appear to have clearly told him there's no way they're joining Labour in some kind of rainbow coalition (see previous post for the sums on who has to be involved) without him stepping aside. So off he goes.

Meantime LibCon hasn't happened yet, Lib Dems saying they need more clarification on specific issues, although frankly those talks seem to be going far better than I'd ever have thought. But now the Lib Dems have opened a dialogue with Labour too, which is a much easier ideological fit but a much harder mathematical one. And if it can somehow happen, it'll be Gordon going as soon as the Lib Dems (and lots of Labour folks) can brush him out the door, and leaving David "Steve" Miller Band as odds-on fave to take over. Meaning...

Meaning, for one thing, that if it happens then the Prime Minister will NOT be one of the three who got involved in the "unique, ground-breaking" televised debates. Kind of makes a mockery of it, really, although it shows people what the difference is between a Presidency and a Prime Ministership. Unless Nick Clegg somehow winds up as caretaker manager or something.

One thing I have noticed is people saying: "well, this is proof as to why we shouldn't have PR" - not sure that holds up. The problem isn't so much that negotiating a coalition is difficult or takes time, but that in this case there are two specific situations: 1. you have a very, very finely balanced mathematical equation: Tories plus DUP = 314, Labour plus Lib Dem = 315, although you can add the 3 SDLPs with no bother to the Labour number since they take the Labour whip; more importantly though - 2. the two parties that can form a stable, majority government are the two least likely to jump into bed together (Conservative and Lib Dem - even Cons and Labour might be a little closer these days because the Lib Dems are clearly left of Labour these days).

In a "normal" coalition situation you'd have various alignments and if voting totals were proportional to seats, this election would undoubtedly lead to a LibLab coalition with no need for nationalists: 52% of the vote, two parties that are relatively similar in policy and ideology, and there you go. PR and we wouldn't have this mess.

(Of course, there's PR and there's PR. Lib Dems want the STV version, Labour are talking about Alternative Vote, which isn't even PR, and there's a ton of other systems out there, all of which sit somewhere on the sliding scale between the result we got and the 52% LibLab coalition situation I just described. None of it is perfect, all of it will fail sometime and as Gareth says, you need to ensure local representation, although I think the Euro-election MEP thing isn't far off with that.)

Anyway, the pound has just dropped 1.5 cents against the dollar since Gordon's announcement, and frankly this Rainbow Coalition thing still seems totally fanciful to me - for no other reason than it cannot, cannot last, especially with Labour backbenchers' histories of dissent. Maybe Cleggy's bunch are just trying to put pressure on Cameron's team to make more concessions... but if they're not, if this is genuine, I can't see any realistic outcome other than another election pretty darn quick.

Better get registered to vote, everyone. And David Dimbleby better catch up on his sleep.