Seriously, though, Sevco has got some gall to complain about referees, when they've been awarded penalties in practically every game already this season. It seems Warbie is getting too used to his players getting every decision going and, consequently, if they don't then he thinks he's being cheated. And you've got to laugh at The Peeppul banging on about dangerous play. Two words: Lee McCulloch.
In the same saga, Marc Burchill is being pulled up for being racist. Obviously he could have expressed himself a bit better but you've got to marvel at the sheer brass neck of The Peeppul accusing anybody of racism. Oh, sorry, forgot, we learned in the referendum that it's only racism when you say something about the English; the Irish, apparently, don't count.
And speaking of referees, as I was, you've got to laugh at our media; otherwise you'd have to start greeting! They're all banging on about a dodgy referee costing the Scottish rugby team its place in the World Cup. The ref gave Australia 'a penalty for accidental offside', whatever that means. Aren't these things supposed to 'even themselves out'? That's what we usually hear in these situations. It's probably what we normally would have been hearing, after what happened last Saturday in the Celtic v Motherwell game; not this time, though. Funnily enough, it was only a few months ago that the same dodgy official got Celtic knocked out of the League Cup; but, hey - these things happen!
They're even suggesting that the rugby match be replayed; after all, it's not fair, is it? Strangely, there were no such calls for the Celtic/Inverness match to be replayed. All our media was concerned about was that it was a wee shame that the hand-ball culprit received a ban. They practically forced the SFA into reversing its decision and the player was let off. Different story now, eh?
The referee at the rugby match comes from South Africa, where, incidentally, you get a lot of the 'brothers', if you know what I mean. It's easy to understand what Brother Muir's all about; Brother Joubert is a bit harder to fathom, but not impossible. What's the one big thing the 'brothers' have been obsessing about recently, even more than Ireland and Catholics? Imagine if Scotland actually won the World Cup, even if it was in rugby! With the Labour Party scared to even mention Scotland in case we all become nationalists, it would have put fear into some hearts for Scotland to have something to be proud about. It makes you wonder if a wee word was had in Brother Joubert's ear.
And I see that my old name of 'Bisto FC' might have to be resurrected as Sevco continues to serve as a retirement home for Warbie's old chums from Brentford. The latest to climb aboard is one Neil McIlhargey, who has signed up as 'Head of Analysis'. Is that even a thing? Christ, those Sevconian heads really must button up at the back! The story also revealed that the Daily Record is up to its old tricks again. They've allowed comments on the story, but it's obvious if you look at them that a negative comment has been removed. As used to always happen, one of those stupid ads telling you that you can earn £7k a month is allowed to stay. Maybe Level 5 is running the ad scam as well!
After last night's fiasco against Molde, it looks to me like Ronny's tea's oot. I think it's getting to the stage where everybody's patience is wearing thin. It appears as if he's still playing about with the team and hasn't decided yet what works best, which, in an important match like this, is bloody ridiculous. The defence hasn't been sorted out and he just refuses point-blank to admit that he's wrong with the system of zonal defending, especially at set pieces. I've said it before and I'll say it again: it's football, not bloody netball!
It's not like Kris Commons to play the prima donna; last night's display was not just petulance, there was something more going on there. It reminded me of Mark Viduka in that infamous Inverness game, where John Barnes was floundering about while Kenny Dalglish was in a golf clubhouse somewhere. It certainly doesn't bode well for Deila. Still, it gives the deluded Peeppul something to cheer about while they blame the referee for their team's poor display against Livi in the Petrofac Cup!
Meanwhile, I see Phil Mac Giolla Bhain has been having a spot of bother with Ruth Dudley Edwards. I first came across this harridan when I was researching for 'Fear and Smear' and she really is a nasty piece of work. Like her father before her, she is a historian. Her father, Robert Dudley Edwards, seems as if he was an old-fashioned Whig historian, seeing all of history as a series of improvements. He was accused by other historians of avoiding the theme of violence and atrocity in his treatment of Ireland in the 16th and 17th Centuries; a theme that is an integral part of what went on.
Ruth Dudley Edwards has carried on the Whiggish tradition of her father, with a new twist. According to her, Ireland was a land full of savages until it was civilised by the English. Apparently, the Irish are still a bunch of savages; it was the Irish moving to Scotland that caused all the sectarian bigotry. As part of her agenda she praises the 'Protestant Ascendancy', the Orange Order and all manner of Loyalist thugs. How the hell this individual got a degree is beyond me!
Her latest cause is complaining about the idea of erecting a statue of James Connolly in Edinburgh. 'Sectarian statues will provoke only bigotry and hatred' is her headline in the Belfast Telegraph. Strangely, I've never heard her complain about the statue of Edward Carson at Stormont. It appears that sectarian 'bigotry and hatred' is only inspired by Republican figures.
Edwards also has a go at Jeremy Corbyn, saying that he betrays a great ignorance of history, especially that of Ireland. This is quite a laughable accusation, since Edwards herself commits one of the worst errors a historian can ever commit. If you study History at all seriously, one of the first things drummed into you is not to impose modern ideas and moralities onto the past. Yes, one can condemn certain aspects of history as a person, but not as a historian. It's essential to remain detached and judge people by the standards of their own times. Edwards, it seems, can't do this.
In her article in the Belfast Telegraph, she says that Connolly was at odds with his fellow Socialists, who felt that he shouldn't be involved in any struggle to do with nationalism. She, of course, gives no sources, which is understandable since it's probably a load of shite. Nationalism back then didn't have the pejorative connotations that it has nowadays; in fact, nationalism was a great cause among both liberals and socialists. The real enemy was the great empires of Britain, Russia and Austria-Hungary, as well as the imperialist ambitions of Germany. It looks like Edwards can't judge folk in history by the standards of the time. The truth is, though, that her bigoted hatred clouds any judgment that she should be making as a historian. In that respect, she actually doesn't count as a historian at all!
Finally, I'm at last getting to grips with formatting my new book and it should be available in a week or so. It's all about organised child abuse in the UK, involving politicians and other top people. Much of the story is set in Northern Ireland in the 70s and part of the tale is that the Provisional IRA's bombing campaign in England was actually at the instigation of the English. Like the sound of it? Well, how about the chance of winning a free paperback copy?
In the front pages of 'Never Mind the Zombies' I thought I'd stick my qualifications after my name to give it the appearance of a serious, historical work. 'B.A.' is easy, it stands for 'Bachelor of Arts'. 'P.G.C.E' means 'Post Graduate Certificate in Education'. Now, here's my question: what does 'F.H.S.I.B' mean? I'll give you a slight clue; the 'H' has got nothing to do with 'History' or 'Historical'.
You've got a week to give me your answer. The first correct answer out of the hat on November 1 will get the paperback. If nobody gets the answer right, then I'll give the prize to the funniest!
You might want to send your answers to my e-mail address. If you get it right, you don't want anybody copying you! My e-mail is andersonpat43@gmail.com. (If you already have my AOL e-mail, then you can send it there as well.)
No comments:
Post a Comment