Asbos for Dogs….

Yep, that was the news this week in the UK. Unbelievable isn’t it?
The British media, long heralded among their peers as being the standard bearers for impartial, in-depth quality reporting, ran with a story about Asbos for dogs on Wednesday.

An Asbo, for those who don’t know (and after reading this don’t care) is the short form of Anti Social Behaviour Order. For the last few years Asbos have been issued to the kind of people who drink cider on street corners, terrorise old dears in shopping centres, tuck their tracksuit bottoms into their socks and wear hooded jumpers 24/7. The kind of people, in short, that most of us would avoid given half a chance. In essence an Asbo is a banning order, issued by the police, to stop people doing whatever it was that got them the Asbo. There was also an Asbo issued to a woman who screamed too loud during sex much to the amusement of most.

Anyway, back to the point. This week, apparently due to a lack of anything better to do, certain people who make these decisions (I’m thinking former Oxbridge graduates who made it to Westminster on Daddy’s coattails…) floated the idea of unruly dogs being issued with an Anti Social Behaviour Order. Clearly, the number of dogs harassing pensioners in public while wearing a hoodie and swigging strongbow must be on the rise….or else the world really has gone mad.

I could go on about the ridiculous nature of this particular initiative – the paperwork alone must be a giggle, “ Name and address?” “Woof, Woof!” – but the thing that really gets me about this is what it implies about my country. Do the French waste time and money working out how to create the necessary bureaucratic process to deal with unruly canines? Do the Germans, in their own efficacious manner, spend their days issuing admonishing letters to man’s best friend? I think not. They have better things to do.

And so, dear reader, do I.

TTFN

Der Ball ist rund.....

OK, football. It would seem appropriate to comment given all the coverage this weekend, so deep breath and here goes.

Firstly, the whole Bridge/Terry issue. I applaud Bridge for sticking to his guns and not shaking John Terry's hand at the game, why should he at the end of the day? If only half the speculation is true then clearly Bridge has been wronged and is within his rights to refuse to shake hands before the game. That being said, I sincerely hope the whole matter can now be forgotten, or as near to as possible with the British press. The only thing that should really matter in my opinion is the England team and the World Cup in summer. If Bridge says he cant play in the same team, then so be it. Decision made, move on.

Talking of England, I can't help but be a bit pessimistic, and that is nothing to do with our hopeless record in the last 40 odd years, but more to do with our lack of a decent first 11.
Hypothetical as it may be, imagine the tournament starts tomorrow.....

Who is the keeper?
Defence - Johnson (injured), Ferdinand (injured), Terry, Cole (injured)
Midfield - Lennon (injured) Barry (out of form), Lampard, Gerrard
Strikers - Rooney, Heskey (really?)

So we have half a team, and of those only Rooney is really playing well. Look to the bench then, who is second choice right back? stand in centre half? left back? right wing? I could keep going.
Thankfully, the tournament doesn't start tomorrow, but still, hardly bodes well now does it.

The other big football story is the plight of Portsmouth and their now confirmed administration.
Somehow the world of football seems to think that it is exempt from the rules of business, and moreover, the rules of capitalism. Indeed the very rules that helped football as an "industry" to grow into a multi-billion pound business in this country.
The rules I am referring to are simple - spend more than your bring in, and you will soon be in trouble. Portsmouth have done just that, to the tune of around £70 million apparently. Hardly surprising that the administrators have been called in. Yet what is surprising is that due to the rules of the Premier League, in such circumstances, the first people to get the money owed to them are the players. Not the tax man, or the banks, or the guy who runs the bar in the stadium, or washes the kit, or drives the coach - no the multi-millionaire players. In any other industry the workforce are among the last to get what is owed to them, and even then they are unlikely to get the full amount. If a construction company goes under owing a supplier £150k that supplier will be lucky to get 10p in the £1 as payment, if at all. I know, because it just happened to me. yet in the cartoon world of professional football things are different. But they shouldn't be, if football wants to be a business and attract the billions it craves, then it has to play by the same rules as everyone else. More on this another day.....that is a rant in itself.

Right, that's me for today...more soon.

Sorry for the delay.

Right kids, it's about time I got back into the swing of writing this blog. My commitment over the last 18months or so has been verging on non-existent, so here I am. There was no reason for the ridiculously long hiatus, no holiday, no illness, no infidelity with a twitter shaped mistress, nothing at all. I just didn't post anything. And when I think of the opportunities I missed....ah well, regrets are for people whose dreams are distant memories, and I am not that old yet, so as one (or more) opportunities may have been missed, plenty more will present themselves shortly I'm sure.

So, short as it may be, and indeed fairly uninteresting, consider this the beginning of the comeback......

'till tomorrow then. or the day after. maybe