Monday Moan 13

Special Value Edition

 

 

Carrots – are they worth it?

Can someone like Prince Harry really be taken seriously? Can his bodyguards be trusted to keep anybody safe? Can we have a quote from Prince William on his brother’s suitability for a public role? 

 Would all those excusing him as 'just a young man having a bit of fun' tell us;-

a)      at what age we should expect 'young men' to grow up, and

b)      if they were, or would be, as understanding of their own children were they to behave like a prat/prince?

Maybe his Dad should have a quiet word with him?  Something like ‘grow up and remember who you are’?

 

Champagne Moment?

I am not a man given to extravagance.  I like nice things and am not afraid to pay for them, but I also expect value to go along with any high price tags. 

 

So, Saturday night was not the first time I have been faced with a bill for dinner for two that amounted to a three-figure sum (and I don’t mean single pounds and double-digit pence).  However, it was the first time that those three figures did not begin with a ‘1’. 

Was it worth it?  Well, the food was undeniably very tasty and brilliantly presented.  The venue was classy but not too pretentious.  The service could not have been better.  So, all of this began to make the high cost seem less extravagant.  I have some specific dietary needs which make dining out a bit of a nightmare sometimes, but I pre-warned them of these when I booked and they handled everything very well on the night - until the end.  Despite the pre-warning about no dairy produce they were unable to offer any soya milk for my after-dinner tea or coffee.  Such a shame.  They could have given us a bottle of champagne at an eye-watering £1208, but they couldn’t manage some soya milk at just over £1.

It’s the details that matter.

 

A name is not enough
 

Talking of high prices and attention to detail, we stayed in a well-known old English house recently, now part-converted into a hotel.  It trades on its name and history and offers guests a taste of the luxury only money can buy.

Except that failure to look after the details let them down.  Call me picky if you like, but when I am paying a small fortune for bed and breakfast I am disappointed if the bed linen has holes in it, if the bathroom floor and tiled walls have missing and/or dirty grouting, or if the fabric of the luxury chair is ripped.  I think I am also entitled to expect a breakfast in something better than the bar area  of the golf club that now pulls in the punters and that the loud and boisterous wedding party will be separated from the rest of the customers who have been expecting a quiet and intimate meal with their partners.

As I say, it’s the details that matter.

 

What’s the attraction?

I am puzzled by the attraction of my car to other drivers.  I turn up at a car park and go to the very far end, or maybe seek out the empty floor if it is a multi-storey building.  I leave my car in splendid isolation but when I return, no matter whether I am away for just a few minutes or a few hours, whilst the rest of the car park is still a wasteland unpolluted by the presence of vehicles, it is inevitably the case that somebody will have decided to park in the space next to mine.

Is this some kind of homing instinct, or a feeling that there is greater security in numbers?  Is it that people want to be associated with my humble car?

I have no idea why this happens, but it is hugely irritating.  Maybe the owners of these other vehicles derive pleasure from watching at a distance whilst I spend the next few minutes studying the side of my car to see if they have damaged it in any way, perhaps by carelessly opening their doors onto mine, or maybe by swinging bags or keys in a cavalier fashion? 

Whatever the reason, please stop it!

 

 

 

 

Monday Moan 12

Special Irony Edition

Putin their place by Russian realities

The Pussy Riot trial has rekindled memories of how Russia was in the days of Communism, where opposition to the State was crushed whenever it appeared as a means of keeping the population in its place.

Among the many ironies of the trial is that in Russia, for so long a place where religion was permitted only under sufferance by the State, offending Orthodox believers has been one of the crimes used to justify the conviction of these three young women. The trial judge spoke of the offence caused to those believers through wearing bright coloured clothes and by making sharp aggressive movements inside a church.  The full weight of the law had to be used to try to avoid such actions being repeated.

So nothing to do with their opposition to Vladimir Putin then.

But before we all get too indignant about Putin and his suppression of free speech, it is worth considering what kind of reaction there might have been in the UK press and from the UK government had the peace of Westminster Abbey been shattered by a similar stunt. Or is response to some of the other things the same group have done. 

The trouble is that we now have an unholy alliance between the western media and the rent-a-mob of global activists who will jump on any passing bandwagon.  I predict a wearisome string of stories and ‘protests’ and someone will get rich by selling lots of brightly-coloured balaclavas.

Life in black and white

I sometimes wish I could see things in black or white only, as so many others appear to do.  You know - for Pussy Riots and against Putin; for Julian Assange and against the USA;  for the anti-capitalists outside St Pauls and against whoever or whatever it was that they were against.  It’s just so difficult being able to see more than one point of view, isn’t it? 

Is there a central casting agency that can be asked to provide a motley crew of people to demonstrate for or against anything at a moment’s notice?  I assume so.  How else do we explain the magical (monotonous) appearance of indignant crowds of people prepared to wave banners and shout denunciations outside any given venue so that the waiting news crews have somebody to film?  This agency is really rather special though, since it can produce people of any nationality or ‘conviction’, as well as a celeb or two of the appropriate level as the situation demands.  I suppose with all the unemployment around, and with the understandable desire to take the five minutes of fame you are being offered, people are quite prepared to strike a pose for or against anything, no matter how ridiculous the notion they put forward. 

Julian Assange

Talking of five minutes of fame and ridiculous notions brings me back to Julian Assange – see Moan 4 for previous thoughts.

So many things to ponder in his current situation.  Here we have an Australian being held by the British on behalf of the Swedish Government which wants Assange to stand trial for the alleged rape of two Swedish women.  It’s not the most obvious next development in the world for Ecuador to choose to enter into this matter by offering Assange political asylum.

Oh, wait a minute.  This is not about the alleged rape of Swedish women though, it’s actually about that empire of evil the USA, according to Assange and his apologists.  Now we understand that the villain is the USA and not poor Mr Assange we can understand the eagerness of left-leaning Ecuador to take his side. 

According to Assange, in a surreal speech he gave to the world’s press from the balcony of the Ecuadorean embassy in London, this is all about our freedom to stand up against the USA and the suppression of free speech (translation – leaking of secret documents whenever he, Assange, feels it is justified).  He said “As WikiLeaks stands under threat, so does the freedom of expression and health of all our societies. I ask President Obama to do the right thing. The US must renounce its witch-hunt against WikiLeaks.”

No mention of Sweden or rape.  No mention of the irony of calling for freedom of expression whilst under the protection of an Ecuadorean government that itself denies such freedoms to journalists in its own country. 

Postcard from a long holiday

According to a new report from a group of five Tory MPs who we are told are ‘rising stars’ within the party, British workers are idlers. Apparently, we work the lowest hours and our productivity is poor.

The five intellectual giants who put their names to this attack are Kwarsi Kwarteng, Pritti Patel, Dominic Raab, Chris Skidmore and Elizabeth Truss.

It seems that most of them were unavailable for comment when journalists tried to ask about the report.  Probably a lack of mobile phone signals wherever they are currently enjoying their long summer holiday from 17 July to 3 September.  If the journalists are quick they might catch them when they return, before they take another well-earned break during the Conference season from 18 September to 15 October.

It’s good to know that they are hard at work while the rest of us are idling.

Monday Moan 11

Special Olympic Souvenir Edition – Part 2

The Greatest Show on Earth is over but for one more week the Monday Moan feels obliged to concentrate on the London 2012 Olympics.  Hopefully, there will be more things to talk about next week!

  

BBC – We want the action!

The BBC continued to frustrate and irritate with its coverage of the athletics and its apparent determination to get those ‘artistic’ or ‘atmospheric’ shots that they had decided upon at their editorial meetings before the live action.  So, during the nerve-stretching drama that was the 5,000 metres final and Mo Farah’s attempt to win a second gold medal, the BBC managed to miss some of the key moments by cutting away to what must have been pre-planned shots.

At 11.57, with just under two laps to go, Mo was near the front and poised to make his move. 


Mo makes his move - just under two laps to go

   

BBC cuts away to excited crowd

    


Oops - missed the action

 

OK, one lap to go and let’s give them another chance. 

Mo is now in the lead coming to the bell

 

Cut to cliche shot

Someone now on Mo's shoulder - missed it again

Whilst I’m on the subject of this race, I’m sure we were all thrilled to see glimpses of Mo’s family after the 10,000 metres race the previous week, and I imagine that some focus-group work for the BBC had revealed that this was a general feeling. But in typical fashion they reacted by going over the top with ‘family’ shots in the 5,000 metres race.  I can’t have been the only one to have been fed-up with the constant cutting away to shots of his wife and daughter rather than following Mo himself.

Dear BBC – please just show us the action!

Phil Jones – ever sensitive

In last week’s Moan I mentioned Phil’s contribution to the Games and his dubious interviewing techniques.  Someone said he seemed a bit like that dodgy uncle who makes you squirm with his insistence on a cuddle or a squeeze even if you don’t want it.  That’s as may be, but for me he continued to demonstrate a complete inability to show any kind of sensitivity for the moment. 

His interview with Stephen Kiprotich, winner of the marathon, was just embarrassing. Not for Phil the simple question to someone who has just exhausted himself after running over 26 miles in just over 2 hours.  No, he opened up with “what will this mean to your country?”  What?  That was exactly Kiprotich’s response.  For his next question Phil was into a statement – “You made a lot of sacrifices, tell me about that decision and how it’s worked out for you” Kiprotich appeared not to understand, so Paul repeated it, adding that those sacrifices had included leaving his family – “tell me about that”.  Kiprotich appeared both bemused and upset, but Phil saved the day with a laugh and a comment along the lines of “it’s obviously hard to put into words and we seem to be having a bit of a language barrier, but he’s smiling so he must be happy”. 

Perhaps Phil’s finest hour was his interview with Usain Bolt, Johan Blake and Warren Weir, the three medal winning Jamaicans after their triumph in the 200 metres.  Phil had been told to interview them, so that was what he was going to do.  No matter that they wanted to show some respect to David Rudisha, winner of the 800 metres whose medal ceremony was taking place at the same time, and to the national anthem of Kenya that was being played.  Phil was having none of that – “I know the national anthem is being played but I’m gonna grab you for a quick word”.  Johan Blake’s look seems to be saying ‘plonker’.  Spot on.



Phil moves in

He makes a grab for Warren

You plonker

The world’s biggest broken pencil?

London 2012 has been a fabulous celebration of sport. It has been joyous, uplifting, entertaining and exciting.  It has, mercifully, been free of the awful things that some commentators, not all of them entirely objectively, had been given endless amounts of airtime to drone on about prior to the Games starting. There were no security, transport or drugs issues of any real note.  Even the weather relented and gave us only a few moments of trouble.

So what was it with the closing ceremony?  The guidance from the IOC says “the Closing Ceremony is a celebration for the participants in the Olympic Games, a chance to celebrate the drama of the Games and the successes of the athletes. It is a time to revel in friendships made, and of borders and boundaries crossed.”  It acknowledges that the ceremony will include things relevant to the host nation’s culture.  I have searched it very carefully and cannot find anything that suggests it should be an occasion for ignoring sports and instead providing a platform for massaging the already over-inflated egos of ‘stars’ from the world of music.

I admit I feared the worst even before it had started but I was astonished to discover how even my nightmares had not come up with anything as awful as the actual event.  A succession of people whose importance in the scheme of things is akin to that of a flower that blooms briefly, then disappears and is replaced by another and then another and then another. Interesting whilst it lasts but hardly memorable or important.  No sense in me listing them all here, but perhaps special mention should be made of a few whose presence seemed particularly irrelevant.  A moving video of John Lennon singing ‘Imagine’ was replaced by George Michael.  From the top to the bottom in one move.  Fat Boy Slim appeared, pretending to play some records.  Russell Brand came on to general disbelief – what on earth was he doing there?  The Spice Girls – for goodness sake.   Notions of ‘girl power’ have moved on and been given a new meaning by the performances of so many female athletes during these Games.

Full marks to Ray Davies’s agent, by the way, for securing a two-page spread for his man in Friday’s Evening Standard which not only gave the impression that Davies has been the most important and influential figure in British popular music over the last 40 years, but that his role in the closing ceremony would be pivotal, with him filling the end of the show spot traditionally reserved for Paul McCartney.  No matter that hardly anybody would have known the words and been able to sing along with ‘Waterloo Sunset’.  Slightly over-hyped his importance to the event, since he was on quite early and for a couple of minutes only, but the publicity will have done him no harm at all.

Congratulations also to those who decided that they were going to sing live – didn’t always work out well, but at least they tried.  Shame on those who mimed.  Double shame on those who mimed badly.

To me it was just like the biggest broken pencil in the world – completely pointless.  It was a bloated and rather embarrassing spectacle, but I realise this will be a minority view in the media as we’re all supposed to tow the line that we have done all of this better than they did in Beijing.  It’s also not good form to wield a pin anywhere near the egos of our pop stars.   

I really feel I ought to end on a positive note, so here goes. The one good thing to come out of the closing ceremony was that it made me realise that perhaps the opening ceremony had not been quite as dire as I first thought. 

Olympic Broadcasting Awards

After two weeks of wall-to-wall coverage has given huge exposure to the BBC’s team of presenters, the Monday Moan felt it right to hand out awards in recognition of the most deserving.

Most impressive across a range of events – Clare Balding

Most authoritative and interesting expert – Michael Johnson

Best ‘lad’ presenter – Gabby Logan

Most improved commentator – Steve Cram

Most insufferably smug presenter – John Inverdale

Most boring expert – Denise Lewis

Most out of depth presenter – Gary Lineker

Most irritating and insensitive interviewer – Phil Jones (of course), but with a mention for Sharon Davies who tried her best in this category

  

Let’s finish with a non-Olympic moan

Mitt Romney continues to dazzle as potentially the next President of the USA.  Fresh from his error-strewn trip around Europe and the Middle East (see Moan 9) he introduced Paul Ryan, his choice to be the Vice-Presidential running mate in the forthcoming election, as “the next President of the United States”.  This may seem particularly dumb for someone who will, like it or not, be entrusted with the nuclear button amongst other things, but perhaps we should not be too hard on him and we should just put it down to the excitement of the moment.  After all, it seems that President Obama made the same mistake when he announced Joe Biden as his running mate in the last election.

Maybe more worrying is the fact that he has chosen Paul Ryan.  It’s not just his political attitudes (no doubt we’ll discuss these at some time but for the moment suffice to say that in some ways he makes Sarah Palin seem like a good choice last time round) it’s also his inability to utter a coherent sentence when presented to the world by Romney.  If you were interviewing someone for the post of Vice-President, would you be impressed by someone whose first words were “Hey! And right in front of the USS Wisconsin, huh? Oh, man!"? 

Didn’t think so.

Monday Moan 10

Special Souvenir Olympic Edition

Obviously, as there's nothing else happening anywhere in the world this week, the Monday Moan is following the rest of the UK media in concentrating upon the Olympics.

BBC – could do better

The BBC has not distinguished itself so far in so many little ways – some of which are covered in the Moan this week. 

First we have the constant switching from one channel to another, often without continuous coverage, so that you miss some of the action whilst, say, BBC1 takes over a session from BBC2.

Second, and probably most irritating of all, our sporting enjoyment has been interrupted by pointless advertisements for forthcoming BBC programmes, usually Dr Who or Eastenders.  This advertising of the BBC’s own programmes is hugely annoying at all times, but it’s just crazy to subject the watching public to this in the middle of the greatest sporting spectacle the world has ever seen.

These two failures are often used in combination by the BBC – we have come to recognise that the promise that “coverage is now continuing on BBC2” actually means there will be a two minute gap in coverage whilst the BBC plugs some upcoming drama programmes – so we all reach for the remote control and see what we can watch on another channel.

 

The BBC has also decided that before any significant action we all need to watch little film clips they have pulled together showing the ‘background’ to the featured competitor.  Pointless and deeply annoying for sports fans, and not really terribly helpful to non-sports fans who might have been lured into watching the action.  It simply destroys the build-up of tension before the event itself, and reached its nadir with the absolutely ridiculous decision to cut away from the build-up to the start of the final event in the Heptathlon, the 800 metres, where at that stage there could not have been anyone watching who did not know all they needed to about Jessica Ennis and what was about to happen.  That didn’t stop the BBC, of course, and so we had to endure their pre-planned film insert and came back to the live pictures to be told that “well you have just missed the biggest cheer of the day as Jessica Ennis was introduced to the crowd”. 

Precisely.  Shame on the BBC.

Not having access to Sky or Virgin, I don’t know if these same irritations occur in their coverage, but if they do then shame on them as well as on the BBC.

“So, you’re a failure – tell us how it feels”

The current practice of grabbing competitors for an interview as soon as their event has finished is leaving me cold. 

Apparently some viewers find the desire for physical contact with the competitors (as done most notably by Paul Jones after athletics events) rather unnerving and creepy.  For me though, it’s the desire to thrust a microphone under their nose for an instant reaction.  If somebody has won then perhaps that’s fair enough – although understandably, in the heat of the moment not all of them can string together a coherent sentence.  But why do we have to intrude on those who have just seen their dreams shattered, who have seen four years of hard graft go unrewarded?  “Well that was disappointing to finish last – do you think you’ll retire now?”  What sort of a question is that? 

The BBC no longer confines itself to interviewing British competitors either.  I so wanted Tyson Gay to give an honest answer to Phil Jones after the 100 metres final yesterday, moments after he had come fourth and just missed a medal.  Jones asked him “can you tell me how you’re feeling right now?”  BBC executives must have feared some choice language was about to hit the airwaves, but Gay kept his cool and simply said “I’m hurting right now”.  Honest …………………. but only to a point.

Vanity knows no bounds?

Talking of Tyson Gay, he appeared to have shunned the trend for sportsmen to shave all their bodily hair, in favour of a suspiciously well-groomed underarm look ….

It’ll never catch on, surely?

What it says on the tin?

I'm not convinced that we are being told the truth in everything to do with this Olympics.  For example, the Trading or Advertising Standards people might wish to consider whether it was a little harsh for this Turkish lady to be forced to wear this branding …….

But even if this one gets past their scrutiny, then surely allowing this lot to take part in the Coxless Fours was a clear breach of their rules?

Sadly, the evidence for or against Bryan Cocquard is inconclusive ….

True Brit .....no more tears

No tears this time for Andy Murray – a true Brit at last.  He may have struggled with whether or not to sing along to the national anthem, but he seemed to have no problems with the Union Jack he was handed after the medal ceremony yesterday.  He also managed to contain the tears this time – victory must be less emotional than defeat.

Congratulations to him on such a clear cut victory over Roger Federer, and shame on the commentator I heard suggest that Roger had demonstrated what a gentleman he was in gifting Britain’s favourite Scotsman the title by not turning up for yesterday’s match.