St Landrew

Watch until the end. I thought it was some obscure Simple Minds track that I didn't know, at first, but then the female voice came in, and I hadn't a clue. But I stayed with it [well there was a distraction of sorts..!] This Town Religion, by The Delays. BTW, there's a fair few Le Tiss comparison videos. Every time heralds a host of wowee comments except, of course, from any Blue Fewers.

Sometimes it's a good idea to make a serious point amongst throwaway jokey talk. It tends to make people sit up and think a lot clearer than when it is buried within other serious points. Besides, if you want to joke, small or not, go to TMS.

Traditionally, the Brits have never been that good at portraying war on TV because it requires a large budget to do the sprawling subject justice. We do tend to do it well in documentaries though. The British acted war series on TV that have been excellent have been about smaller scale operations or situations. Both of BBC's Secret Army and Colditz were excellent, in their time, but they're not explosive enough for today's audiences, brought up on fantasy violence. My old Dad used to have a saying for a commodity that US TV and Films had [and still have], that was missing from British stuff in the same vein. He called it Yankee Bull[sh!t], and he was right. What makes the American TV more watchable is the lump of Yankee Bull they usually throw in, for good measure. He loved it, but having identified it, I found I didn't, on the whole. Give me the honest stuff, even if it is less entertaining. At least it is the truth. I can't give you an example of US TV, as I tend not to watch any, but obvious examples of US films are Saving Private Ryan [good film, but did the Americans really appear to do it all on their own..? No British..? No French..? No Polish..? No Canadians, No ANZacs, etc..?] and U571, where you'd think good old Uncle Sam saved the world merchant fleets, single handed, by finding an Enigma machine, complete with codes. US media is quite influential. I've even heard that WWII started in 1942..! Dumbed down that it is, to say there is nothing of merit produced by British TV companies, on our TV screens, is a huge generalisation. Perhaps there's just nothing for you. To be perfectly honest, I'm struggling to think of any output, from any country, that is worthy of actually turning on the TV nowadays, apart from the odd LIVE event. I could watch the half dozen programmes, per week, I bother to tune into on the various players on the Web.

Perhaps it's time somebody had a change in attitude then. Or are we all to care just because we know someone might care back..? Being caring in a selfish way..? Not really the right way to view things, is it.

I read Nelson's biography, written by Terry Coleman, a couple of years back and it showed Nelson in quite a critical light, as most modern biographies tend to do, where they uncover the negative traits of various heroes as if they are to be set against the myth. Coleman's version did reveal a couple of things I didn't know though. One, that Nelson was almost invariably seasick whilst aboard ship, [something that I have yet to encounter in 25 on-off years of sailing] and two, that all his injuries, apart from his fatal one, were received while leading or orchestrating land skimishes. It was written that he was as inept at land battles as he was brilliant at sea. As to the Royal Navy being knocked down to size, it is fantasy to expect GB to spend the sort of money to keep a massive presence all over the world. GB is a reasonably strong nation on the edge of Europe, with the 4th largest national economy in the world. But it is no longer the huge super power that it once was. I occasionally think people don't quite realise the utter dominance this country had over the rest of the world, from the mid 18th century to the beginning of the 20th. No other single nation has since had that influence, and probably never will have. Nowadays, GB has better things to do than go around being the world's floating policeman. Let someone else do it.

For those who didn't see it, and who can't wait for the slightly extended highlights to pop up on the BBC Southampton webpage, here's the Football League show: http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00qs7tc/The_Football_League_Show_2009_2010_06_02_2010/ Start 51mins in for Saints.

Sorted for you. As for whether I would be surprised if Cortese acts decisively..? No, I wouldn't.

I actually prefer Jack Nicholson's effort to publicise an early Hydrogen Car and the hydrogen fuel it took to power it. This was 1978. http://www.milkandcookies.com/link/148089/detail/

Listened in while working. Very disappointed with the result, and the apparent level of play from Saints. From what I can remember, as it was mostly forgettable, Exeter matched us pretty well on a really heavy and badly cutting-up pitch. Immediately we scored, I wondered how long we'd stay in front, because we didn't sound as if we were particularly interested in adding to it. It came as a slight surprise that the score stayed 1-0 until HT, but little surprise when we conceded minutes after the restart. Once again, we didn't boss the opposition, nor close out a game with pressure. The Lads seemed rather more worried about losing than winning the game. Members will know I'm not normally this negative, and we did draw away from home, but this goes down as two points lost again. It was a slight recompense that Alan Pardew didn't make any excuses either, but the playoffs seem out of reach to me now, if Saints can't alter their game to accept pitches and conditions that are less than perfect, unlike the surface at St Marys.

My garden is in a terrible state, at present, although I think the wildlife prefer it that it way. This year, I'm going to have to spend some time getting it back into order, so that I can appreciate the goings on of nature.

I quite like the red sash. Although Saints have played in red and white stripes from most of their existence, they first played in white with a red sash. That firmly makes a point of those original years. Of course, we could always play in red and white quarters, which I believe we did for a time. I'm happy with the white, with red sash.

I used to loathe this with a passion when it was originally transmitted. I feel I did it a disservice back then. I knew full well it was good drama, but it was so bloody depressing in its old values and northern hardship. Peculiarly, I'd probably like it now, like so many of the excellent BBC dramas made back then. I can still remember the theme... Come here me little Jacky, now ah've smoked me baccy, hev a bit of cracky, till the boat comes in. Dance to thy Daddy, sing to thy Mammy, dance to thy Daddy, to thy Mammy sing. Thou shalt have a fishy on a little dishy, Thou shalt have a fishy when the boat comes in. In truth it carried on for several verses, naming various fish, until... thou shalt have a salmon...

The irony as seen by voters is that the Labour Party has traditionally seen itself as the keeper of moral values, and has presented itself as so, from its earliest days, and has been largely untroubled by sleeze until now. The Conservative Party, when it presents itself as a One Nation party, something it hasn't done since the time of Ted Heath as Prime Minister, also sees itself as a keeper of moral values. Mind you, Cameron is once again trying to appeal to everyone. However, it is inevitable that, with a party that has always had a slight sleeze tag attached to it, openly dating back to the Profumo Affair, and subtley way before then too, the mud will slide off quicker, and the public won't be so damning. Of the two parties, Labour has most to lose here. Sadly, in the first-past-the-post voting system, the relatively squeaky Liberals won't get a look in, as usual. Which, as always, disenfranchises a whole wealth of voters. Incidentally, I applaud Gordon Brown for possibly heading down the street towards a form of proportional representation.

Well said, BTF []. Myself, I've had the misfortune of listening to Talksport during this week, while working. I say misfortune, because I've had to put up with it, but it has been oddly entertaining too. To hear the presenters everyday, harp on about the tabloids biting into the scandal, and yet they are just as culpable in their own way, by bringing it to the public attention, ad nauseum. I don't buy the claim that there is infinite public interest for this. This is the most overhyped story since the last overhyped story. Capello thought it a non-story, as he took 12 minutes to end his part of it. In the real world people are still dying from the Haitian earthquake. I don't expect TalkSPORT to bring that to anyone's attention [although an appeal featuring John Hurt rang out once or twice a day, and NO, I don't pick that example because I was reminded by the appeal], but I do expect programme directors to realise that the Terry/Bridge type of issue has been ruminated through time and time again, and they need to start to take their own responsibility for getting it into perspective. Apparently, there is a continual public call for this news. I don't believe it. I think people talk about things that the media massage us into talking about. Sadly, we are all media sheep, to a greater or lesser extent. But some of us are well aware of the fact.

I've been watching it. It's not as if you learn anything new, but the reminders and the presentation by Dan Snow is quite refreshing. And it has made me reach to the shelf for my copy of Sam Pepys diaries. Mind you, that was to find the entry where he can't find the cheese he had buried in his garden. Good series though.

If you mean Lidl, you can get McVitie's Digestives there. But you pay less for them. As one notable supermarket chain always says... Every Lidl helps..!

What a brilliant story, and what a superb imaginative gesture by Nicola Cortese and the club. It slightly makes the head spin trying to work out if this is the same club I have been following these recent years. The transformation is amazing. Oh, and congratulations to the parents of little Jessica too. I wonder how long it will be before she takes her seat..?

Shouldn't think it'll be a problem. Their standards already appear to be too low, as it is.

Another link: http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/p/portsmouth/8497491.stm

I'm not a huge motorway user, preferring the roads they replaced, as they they are generally empty. However, I can estimate I've seen 3 trucks across a motorway, as I suggested earlier, at least half a dozen times, or more.

The playoffs.

It's the olive branch scenario.

Journey Into Space - The World In Peril.

For complete idiot proofness, you'll probably want a feature called Lane Assist. This not only tells you where to go, but in which lane you should be, to go in your chosen direction. Pretty useful, for those occasions when you're going somewhere fairly strange and you're approaching a large and busy junction, with many lane options. There still aren't many Sat-Navs with this feature, by my memory, but I know one manufacturer who does offer it in their range - Becker. Good enough for Mercedes and Ferrari, as standard equipment.

How about no cars on the road unless all the seats are filled..? Seriously though, it is about time something was done about trucks and the outside lane. I think we've all see the scenario of 3 trucks across the motorway, all on the 55mph limit, with the the 2 overtaking trucks unable to pass the inside truck unless it slows down appreciably, which the driver is unwilling to do. The fact is, there have been far too many trucks on the notorways and major roads for years now. How on earth there is still not a coordinated network of rail freight, which passes on to short distance delivery-to-destination trucks, I don't know.