Alf Bentley

Thanks for the suggestion. I've just listened to 4 tracks by Fender but, based on those, I'm not keen on him, I'm afraid. Musically, I didn't feel much Springsteen in those tracks - maybe in "Hypersonic missiles", plus his use of saxophone bursts. It felt like mainstream indie-rock crossed with "poor, poor me" singer-songwriter stuff (which is definitely not my thing). Lyrically there's perhaps a bit more Brucey similarity, in offering human stories - and some of Fender's lyrics were decent. I was trying to work out what I didn't like about those Fender tracks compared to what I do like about Bruce. Partly, it was that Fender's stories seemed to be all about himself and his life, whereas (apart from some early stuff) Bruce's songs/stories are about imagined selves or other imagined characters - and they say something more about life, the human condition, the American Dream v. the American reality or whatever. But mainly I was put off by the mood of Fender's songs, which seemed to be rather passively miserable or defeatist, even nostalgic. Many of Springsteen's songs describe tough lives/times (e.g. Nebraska, Tom Joad) but they often come with stated/implied anger, while other Bruce songs describe people getting by despite tough times or express defiant hope despite life's afflictions or even express joy. I felt like grabbing Fender by the shoulders and saying "Life is for living, not just looking back, Sam. Grasp life. Look forward, too. Fight back and find some joy". Thanks again for the suggestion, though it's mainly up to me to take some of my own advice and to kick myself up the arse to listen to R6 and get out to a few gigs.

I did see a strong Springsteen influence/similarity in the Gaslight Anthem track (DK about their other stuff - yet) - but more an influence of his quite good stuff, not his outstanding stuff. Although the first two (punky) Clash albums were massive for me at the time, I rarely play more than the odd track from them now - in moments of pent-up energy. For years, I've listened more to London Calling and Sandinista, the albums on which they diversified massively into reggae, dub, rockabilly, rap, soul, gospel - a mad spread. In a way, proto-folk-punk was my musical first love - as a primary school kid in the late 60s, playing my parents' Dubliners records. The Dubliners were folk-punk 20 years before the concept existed. Even as a small kid, I drew a big distinction between them and The Clancy Brothers (who my parents also liked) - the Clancys were more traditional Irish folk, decent but less interesting to me. I loved The Dubliners' blend of raucous roguishness, wit, emotion and moving instrumentals - definitely an influence on Shane.

Thanks for caring enough to attempt to re-educate me! I quite enjoyed all 3 of your linked songs, though they all stayed a bit too close to things that had gone before for my liking - making them good but not exceptional. I'm sure I'd enjoy any of them live, though. As the first bit of homework for my re-education programme, I'll listen to some more songs by these 3 artistes from your youth (I'd heard a little Gaslight Anthem before, but not the other two). I certainly see the "inspired by" claims you make: mid-late Springsteen and 1st two Pogues and Clash albums, respectively. All good stuff (inspirational when released in my youth), though one of the things I appreciate about those 3 acts is how they diversified massively (over 50 years for Bruce & over 5-6 albums for Pogues & Clash). 3rd & 4th albums were outstanding for the latter two; Bruce has had peaks and troughs since the 80s, his last two albums being the highest peak for a long time. Now I'll just need someone to help me bridge the gap between your youth and the current day, won't I? I really like some of the stuff my 19-year-old daughter plays, but understandably she's mostly too busy to play it for me. Watch out for the compression of time as you age, Finners. I was trying to think of "newer" acts I'd found inspirational and came up with The Libertines, The Long Blondes, Sleaford Mods, King Creosote.....but they all either existed 15-20 years ago or have existed almost as long. Lately, I've mainly been resorting to new material by old faves (Natalie Merchant, Wreckless Eric, Peter Perrett, Bruce, Men they couldn't hang) or diving into earlier acts I didn't know properly like Dylan and The Beatles.

Barring truly unprecedented events, it does seem like the Tories are heading for the exit door. But anyone looking at the byelection results and assuming Labour will win a majority should think again. Might happen but might not. To win a secure 50-seat majority, Labour would need to take about 150 seats. Here are their target seats: https://www.electionpolling.co.uk/battleground/targets/labour So, to achieve that secure majority, they'd need to take: - About 26 SNP seats (more than the polls currently suggest) - Numerous Tory seats that currently have 12,000-15,000 majorities (the byelection majorities were higher but byelection swings are rarely replicated at a general election) - Seats not won since Blair or not even won then: e.g. Finchley, Macclesfield, Scarborough, Thanet, Basingstoke, Dover, NE Somerset - Boundary changes are also likely to hand another dozen seats or so to the Tories, compared to 2019 - It still seems likely that photo ID will be required, potentially disproportionately reducing turnout among the young, poor and ethnic minorities, and favouring the Tories - Things might unravel further for the Tories, but they might also reel in a bit of the Lab lead if the economy improves slightly, pre-election tax cuts are made or culture wars win some voters over; govts often recover some support in their last year At the moment, it does feel a bit like 1996-97, when Tory defeat seemed inevitable - and it's hard to imagine circumstances in which they stay in govt (only the DUP, surely, would prop up a minority Tory govt and they'll only have a few seats). But it's far from guaranteed that Labour will win a majority. I have mixed feelings about that. On the one hand, I'd love to see the current Tories decimated (and replaced by a more competent, reputable centre-right force) and we do need a stable govt long-term given all the difficulties that we face. On the other, an election where Labour were the largest party but reliant on Lib Dem support could be better if the LDs demand electoral reform as their price for supporting a minority Lab govt.

Oh, I completely agree. With gigs, what discourages me is the lack of local mates to go with and not drinking. I know older people do go to gigs from the few that I do go to - and, like you, I wouldn't be bothered even if I was the only old fogey there. What I meant by that "hanging out with kids" comment is that I've no desire to have the thorough knowledge of the current music scene that I had in my teens/twenties. But what I should be doing is listening to a bit of new stuff online or on R6, stumbling on a few new acts that I like and acquiring their music or going to more local gigs, even if I'm on my own and on soft drinks - I usually enjoy it when I do make the effort.

Yep, that's a pretty good description of my music routine for the past 30 years. I've no desire to be that embarrassing "oldest swinger in town", hanging out with the kids and knowing all the new stuff, but I'm disappointed at myself for being as out of touch with new music as I am. There's no excuse as Radio 6 is made for the likes of me, with its blend of old stuff and new stuff that old Peel listeners might like - but I tune in very rarely. I've got worse in recent years as I rarely go to gigs - maybe a festival plus 3-4 gigs per year, when an old friend visits or a favourite act is on tour. In the past, I'd always either go to gigs with friends or be drinking if I went alone. All my music-loving mates live in other parts of the country and I quit boozing 8+ years ago. Going to see a little-known band alone and drinking lime and soda lacks appeal.... I'll hopefully be moving soon so will have to make an effort to meet people up for a gig or two.

At school in about 1977, we were sent to a series of mysterious but compulsory "computer studies" classes. We had to write some algebraic code, were given rolls of perforated tape to examine (which ended up all over the floor) and were taken to look through mesh-reinforced glass at a couple of enormous metal cupboards. These 3 activities were connected in some mystifying way and constituted "computer studies". Most of us were none the wiser for this education. I first used a computer in about 1986-87 (aged 24-25) but just to print off work reports. Only a few specialists did data input, never mind computing. I first started using computers properly in 1992 (aged 30) but not the Internet until 1996 (age 34). Getting back on topic.... The albums I used to revisit most were London Calling by The Clash and Darkness on the Edge of Town by Springsteen, but I've not listened to either for ages, just odd tracks online. Recently, the most revisited would be two under-rated albums by old heroes: Peace and Love by The Pogues and Even Serpents Shine by the Only Ones. I try to kick myself up the arse to listen to new music but keep unearthing unfamiliar stuff by old artistes - or new stuff by old artistes, where they're still active and releasing new material rather than just rehashing the old hits. I'm getting old, aren't I?

Indeed, a large proportion of Tory party membership and at least a significant minority of the parliamentary party seem to see Johnson and/or Truss as the solution to their problems. That's like LCFC fans blaming Dean Smith for relegation and calling for a Brendan/Sven dream team to get us back where we belong....

Thanks for the heads-up, I'd not noticed this news. Seems massive for politics within Europe - and could presumably have consequences for Ukraine, after recent strife with Poland? Some analysis for anyone interested, though I claim no expertise on Polish politics: https://www.euractiv.com/section/politics/news/pro-eu-forces-to-oust-polish-conservatives-exit-polls/

If he scored, ran to Rooney's technical area, plucked some grass and mimed eating or smoking it, while the P.A. pumped out Tom Jones' "Green, green grass of home"....I'd like to see that, won't lie.

I suppose that's a possible Reason 5. But I'd argue that reason is only reliable much closer to the election. I know Labour are well ahead in the polls now, but even if they only closed somewhat - say, to a 10-point lead - then the result would absolutely not be guaranteed. In general, a struggling govt tends to claw back some support during its final year. Some pre-election cash will be handed out in tax cuts or public spending, inflation and interest rates might have fallen a bit, right-wing media will trash Lab credibility etc. At the moment, it looks like the Tories are heading for opposition (and maybe even a truly massive defeat), but that could change a fair bit in the next year. Out of curiosity, what sort of seat are you in? Con safe seat, Lab/LD seat, marginal?

If we ever get electoral reform, there could be a value to voting Green, WEP or other minority parties anywhere in the country. For now, it's only worth doing so in the tiny minority of seats where the Greens stand a chance or in the large number of seats where one party has an unassailable majority. Indeed, I voted Green myself in 2019, as I was in Leicester South where Labour had a 20,000+ majority. In a Con/Lab swing seat, the only conceivable electoral impact of you voting for a minor party is to make another Tory govt slightly more likely. I can see 4 potential reasons for an anti-Tory voter making this choice: 1) You genuinely see no difference between current Con and Lab policies and see no historical difference between Labour in power and the Tories in power. If so, the polite response is to say that you should do a bit of research. That's not to say that past Lab govts were perfect or that a future Lab govt would be. But would it be no better than 5+ more years of these Tories? 2) You feel that if we reluctantly accept another Tory govt, then in 2029 the voters will turn to a radical left-wing govt led by the new Corbyn. If so, I'd refer you to the result of the 2019 election (or, indeed, 1983), when the electorate had the option of choosing a more left-wing govt. Personally, I reckon that 5 more years of Tory-inflicted misery and destruction would make a shift to the Far Right more likely in 2029 or sooner, but that's speculation. 3) You are a revolutionary socialist who doesn't really support parliamentary democracy and feel that 5 more years of the Tories would make a socialist revolution more likely. 4) You would prefer to feel morally pure on an individual level, rather than compromise and reluctantly support a less-than-perfect option (Lab) that would almost certainly improve many people's lives to some extent and might improve lives a lot. Reason 1 is for people who are genuinely stupid or too blinkered to consider the evidence. Reasons 2 and 3 are for the "Pure Left" (parliamentary and revolutionary wings, respectively): some Momentum leaders would subscribe to 2, the SWP would subscribe to 3, but wouldn't be honest enough to say it in the public arena. As you don't seem stupid and I'm not picking up the jargon of Hard Left factions, I assume you come under Reason 4. I can quite understand you wanting a Lab govt to do more than it is promising - and it might actually do a bit more, once it has won power, while striving to keep power - without which politics is pissing in the wind. Hell, I'd want it to do more. But if it promises too much, it will not win power and will achieve nothing, just as Corbyn promised more in 2019 and achieved nothing - or less than nothing as his massive defeat handed 5 years of untrammelled power to arguably the most damaging govt in history. I see Reason 4 as, not virtue signaling, so much as well-intended virtue-signaling to oneself: "Mirror, mirror on the wall, who's the most socialisty socialist of them all?" "Oh! You are, darling, you are! And your personal purity is worth more than all the people in the country!". Please question your political priorities.

That's interesting. I didn't know that, although I'm not surprised. Another of my Dad's quotes from that era...apparently Churchill said Attlee was "a modest little man with a great deal to be modest about". Well, while Churchill has gone down in history as a great war leader, Attlee has gone down as a great peacetime leader.....though detailed analysis would find flaws in the performance of both of them. Mind you, I do agree with @Voll Blau and @MonkeyTennis? that Starmer could make a better connection with the public than he is doing. I don't mean that he should become a showman like Johnson - or even Blair. He should just relax the caution and pre-scripting a bit and reveal of bit more genuine personality, humour and what makes him tick. The mood for change and disgust at the Tories may be such that Labour can win without him doing that. But, if Labour does win, it's important that they have some public buy-in, not just a victory based on rejection of the Tories. That could become massively important once they're (hopefully) in government, as the times, circumstances, debts and budgets will make it a very tough time in which to govern. There'll be lots of difficult decisions and the likelihood that most improvements will take a long time. Life may remain pretty crap for a lot of people for a long time........if so, that's when public buy-in might allow Labour to retain support, whereas a victory based on not being the Tories could see support dissolve quickly in tough times.

My Dad arrived in England from Ireland as a young man when Attlee was PM - and became a lifelong fan of Attlee and his team, especially Bevan. At the time, he used to go back to Ireland telling his conservative-minded, devout Catholic parents and siblings that this was what Ireland needed - and they'd shake their heads at this young idealist. Apparently, even at the time Attlee was known for personal dullness and not playing the PR/charisma game (which would've been limited by modern standards). Once he emerged from No. 10 on New Year's Day and a reporter asked him if he had a New Year message for the nation - and Attlee replied "No". What my Dad liked about Attlee, apart from the substantive achievements, was that he devolved a lot of power to his ministers, but then ruthlessly replaced any who weren't delivering. Apparently he was asked why he'd sacked one minister and replied "Not up to the job". Definite pre-echoes of Nigel Pearson, it seems to me.....

But do you need any stinking badges?

....or mass revulsion at their team being 11 points behind the mighty LCFC and a division below the boys in old gold?

He certainly wasn't impressive in the air in his few appearances under Rodgers, but seems much better this season. I remember him ducking under high balls back then, so perhaps his confidence is better this season? Don't let me down on this one, Yannik!

The Tories have little to lose in Scotland, as they only have 6 Scottish MPs. Similarly, they only have 14 MPs in Wales. If they are to be "annihilated", that will have to happen in England. But if the SNP lose a lot of seats, based on current polls it would greatly increase Labour's chances of winning an overall majority, rather than simply being the biggest party at Westminster. Bizarrely, an SNP collapse at the general election could hand a small number of SNP/Tory marginals to the Tories - but it's Labour that would mainly benefit from such a collapse, and the Tories might lose some/all of their 6 existing seats. I have mixed feelings about the idea of the Tories being annihilated UK-wide. On a visceral level, I'd love it - particularly given what the Tory party has become in recent years (a weird blend of polarising bigotry, populism, free-market extremism, apparent corruption and incompetence). But what about the longer-term? If Labour win but don't embrace electoral reform, even if they govern well they'll face an uphill challenge to win again in 2029 due to the state of the nation. We need a competent, decent opposition and alternative govt if so. And I'm not sure that the Tories are going to provide that. Most of their moderate, competent centre-right types have left or been booted out and the party membership and parliamentary party seem to be in the hands of laissez-faire ideologues and/or anti-truth populists. Labour faced some justified criticism for going too far left under Corbyn, but he never really had full control of party and parliament. Whereas the UKIPist ideological takeover of the Tories has gone much deeper - the majority of party membership supports this rightward shift, along with a sizeable proportion of the parliamentary party. If the Tories lose the election, maybe there'll be some sort of Tory split or realignment - or a full populist right takeover of the party? But, unlike with Labour, it's hard to see that there's any moderate Tory party left to bounce back. Where does that leave us after a few more years of difficult times? A choice between a perhaps unpopular centre-left/social-democratic Labour and a seriously nasty, divisive, Trumpian Tory party?

I'd rate the season thus far as absolutely astonishing. "Thus far" are important words. Other teams might find better ways of counteracting Enzoball, we might get complacent, we might lose key players through injury or January sales. But the progress thus far is incredible. I didn't know quite what to expect. But beforehand I'd have considered a good outcome to have been: rebuild, gradual improvement, above halfway by Christmas, challenging for promotion by season end. Just consider what Enzo inherited: - About 40% of our 1st team squad leaving, including several of our best players - Several other players also wanting to leave - Outgoing manager's tactics a proven failure - Player morale presumably at rock bottom after relegation - A couple of our best youth prospects with long-term injuries - A lack of time to coach new players/ideas given some late signings and a questionable trip to Asia In response: - A good squad assembled within 2-3 months, one suited to tactics and looking capable of promotion - Fitness apparently much improved on last season (scoring late instead of conceding late) - Several players who "wanted out" successfully reintegrated, seemingly happy to stay - New formation, tactics & style of play introduced with player buy-in and successful results - Longstanding players like Ricardo & Ndidi proving successful in transformed roles - Morale and team spirit apparently very high - Top of the league, with individual and team performances continuing to improve I know we're one of the wealthier clubs in this division, but to be top of the table within a few months, having won 9 out of 10, after that amount of turmoil and transformation really is astonishing. There'll be setbacks, but hopefully only bumps in the road - for this season, at least. We need to appreciate good times....

Some of the criticism of Stephy's performance last night is OTT. In the first half, he was our main threat of a breakthrough. Despite their packed defence, he got through several times, which we weren't achieving by other means. It's true that he then didn't find the final ball. That might've been partly poor judgment on his part, but Preston were packing their box with bodies and we often didn't have many runners - so his options were generally limited. He faded in the second half and was rightly subbed - and we found other routes to goal, but he gave Preston a headache in the first half.

This analysis and strategy by the Tories might represent their best electoral option. They certainly cannot stand on their record and don't seem to have credible, inspiring plans for the future. So, presenting themselves as the "party of change" in an election when people want change might have some traction - especially if Labour continue to focus on being a cautious, competent but uninspiring potential govt. The Tories are increasingly using populist causes to present themselves as the opposition to the status quo: "hurricane" of migrants, attacking fabricated "wokeist" policies for meat tax, councils deciding how often you go to the shops, "diktats" for 7 recycling bins, rolling back "unreasonable" policies to address climate change, opposing tighter speed limits & emissions zones, perhaps using cash saved by cancelling HS2 to fund pre-election tax cuts as the "low tax party"... This might seem mental, as you say, when they've been in power for 13 years. But they won a landslide in 2019 by presenting themselves as the anti-establishment party of change, despite having been in power for 9 years. Admittedly, they had a much easier job in 2019 as they had 3 factors they don't have now: "Get Brexit done", "charismatic Boris" () and Corbyn. I doubt that presenting themselves as the populist, anti-establishment party of change will win them the next election. But it might reduce the scale of their defeat, if Labour continues to be seen as competent, cautious but uninspiring. Assuming the Tories lose the election, I worry about where British politics will be in 5 years. Given the state of the nation and structural factors (aging population, low growth, climate change, depleted public services), the UK will probably still be in a bad state in 5 years however well or badly a Labour govt does. So, there's every chance that the country will be looking for change again in 2029....and what will the opposition be like then? The Tories seem to be becoming a populist party of the Far Right, open to Trumpist anti-truth, conspiracy theories etc. It's instructive to hear the speeches by potential Tory leadership contenders and to see Farage happily jigging about at conference, not ruling out joining the Tories. That long-term picture makes me wonder if it would be better if Labour didn't win a majority, but was dependent on Lib Dem support - in which case the LDs would surely demand electoral reform, making it harder for extremists to gain majority power. Meanwhile, there are rumours that Andy Street might resign as Birmingham Mayor over HS2. That would be a blow to the Tories - and the departure of one of the last moderate Tory leaders. The country does need a party of the sane, moderate Right as it's where a lot of voters stand. I'm not sure it works long-term if a Labour Govt is the voice of cautious centrism - opposed by a populist, extremist Tory party.

Yes. A moving film with acting of great subtlety and a visually impressive film. Themes of how we change with time, life and location - yet retain early emotional bonds. One of the best films I've seen in a long while.

Well, he didn't escape, did he? He was captured. Case dismissed!

1. Marc Albrighton 2. Stephy Malvididi 3. Abdul Fatawu 4. Kasey McAteer 5. Yunus Akgun 6. Wanya Marcal 7. Ricardo Pereira 8. Calum Doyle 9. James Justin 10. Victor Kristiansen 11. Luke Thomas 12. Marcin Wasilewski Just being silly, not having a pop.