Here is a potted account of when I visited Upton Park for the visit of Newcastle United. Magpie songs consisted of “When the Mags go marching in,” “Geordie Boys are pissing around [during the team’s ascendancy],” lusty renditions of the “Blaydon Races,” “Shall we sing a song for you [shall we sing a, shall we sing a, shall we sing a song for you, shall we sing a song for you]” and, bravely, “Your support is f**king shit” – the Boelyn ground stood this provocation of the last chant for a fair while, no doubt disheartened by their lacklustre team, but eventually the Bobby Moore stand was roused to growl “Who the f**king, who the f**king, who the f**king hell are you, who the f**king hell are you,” but their full-throatedness lasted only one verse , as if they were embarrassed by all this fornication (coupled with the Magpie fans having a more effective punchline) and a second chanting of the ditty swiftly dissipated.
I am something of an expert at attending Newcastle United’s away games while sitting in the home end. Should the home team score or do well, I maintain an air of studied inexpression, while if and when Newcastle take the initiative, especially with goals, I exude from my visage baffled disgruntlement and disappointment, while burning inside. My exterior was as stone for both Newcastle’s goals, knowing any happy reaction would see my person ejected from Upton Park.
Newcastle, after going behind (the impressively intimidating opening to the match made this seem almost inevitable), gradually cam on stronger and stronger as the match progressed, underlining their good away form. By the end, the West Ham team were chasing shadows, black-and-whiters going on forty/fifty yard runs before a claret-and-blue put a tackle in. I was sitting near the dug outs and one West Ham in close attendance to me, stood up and shouted “Sort it aht, Avram!” The manager Grant turned from the touchline and looked visibly diminished – I nearly felt like shedding a tear for his sadness, but then he virtually always looks despondent.
As to the Boeyln Ground, the build-up and the opening ten minutes were fantastic if viewed objectively, really atmospheric, “I’m forever blowing bubbles” reverberating around the stadium. As Newcastle took an ever tighter grip on the match, especially after the woeful, slack defending for Newcastle’s second goal, with Ameobi – not closed down – passing to Barton – in acres of space – who crossed for Carroll to power in – completely unmarked – as the Magpies did this, the crowd went sullen and largely, eerily silent, bar sporadic and spontaneous hefty yet brief interludes of noise where the claret-and-blue went through their classic chants before the sound fell into abeyance once more. When people started leaving with twenty minutes to go, becoming a torrent with five minutes left, I was disgusted because their team was only 2-1 down and needed all the support it could get. One boy asked his dad why they had stayed so late at the stadium and his father responded by saying it was to avoid the crowds – the correct way to beat the rush and crush. I suppose though for a significant amount of people it is the modern way though, as is booing the defeated home team, though I was shocked that, with still a full minute of injury time to play, the fans showed their vocal disaffection, with the cue being the sponsors’ home man of the match being announced as Scott Parker (who had run his heart out for them). Talking about adding insult to injury (time). West Ham’s plight seemed to be summed up by the frontispiece name of the club emblazoned on the stadium, having the ‘I’ and the ‘T’ of United – as in West Ham United – failing to be illuminated with the rest of the title. Very shoddy from a top-flight club. The lights may be going out for West Ham, but I hope they stay up.
Other observations I had was how impressive I felt Cheik Tiote’s ball-winning skills were and how man-mountain Mike Williamson is to Chris Hughton when the latter gave the former a talk at the side of the pitch during a break in play, though I suppose Andy Caroll or Shola Ameobi standing next to the manager would have engendered the same. There were two superfluous televisions in the ground, one high in the stands, but also one nigh at pitch level and it was the lower one that proved quite distracting and rarely showed anything relevant – I’m sure Chris Hughton wanted to see himself unscrew a cap from a bottle of water.
Overall and at root, a good win for Newcastle United Football Club.

Amid all the febrile comment on the budget cuts (the right-wing papers moan that the middle-classes have been hardest hit, the left-wing lot extoll the miseries of the working-class - no doubt in Boris Johnson's view, the nation has become one big Liverpool), one ray of progressive light has been the increase in the international development aid budget. It's tiny in comparison to most other departments yet does immeasurable good in boosting Britain's image and just reminding others we are still around (in countries with nugatory education, don't underestimate that).
One woman interviewed by the BBC in Manchester (typical London metropolitan thinking that anywhere north of the Home Counties must be working class) was found to complain about this rise, even though we are edging towards the United Nations target of 0.7% of GDP, rather than over-achieving, something only Norway and Japan do in this regard. She said "Well, I'm glad it's not goinng to China [well, Singapore does have a significant ethnic Chinese population] or the Indies [not since the subcontinent had a king-emperor has it been referred to as that, unless she was still bitter about the other Indies as to the West Indies' dominance of cricket in the 1980s]. But the reason that Afghanistan is in such a mess in the first place is because we're out there." Yes, we pamper those Afghans with International Development aid of ballistic weaponry donated to their bodies and buildings. Aside, from the complete jump in logic, the reason the lands either side of the Hindu Kush are in a mess (Pakistan is to receive grants too) is not because of aid.

In the Champions League last night, Spurs almost completed the ultimate comeback. They were 4-0 down at half time, having to play 80 minutes with ten men, away at the home of the European Champions, Internazionale in Milan. All in all, they still lost and will absolutely knackered for their weekend game. I missed the opening 20 minutes as I viewed making a quick trip to the supermarket of more value and as I walked back, out of someone's window, I thought I heard that Tottenham were 3-0 down and dismissed thinking that it couldn't be so bad so quickly. Having reached home, I turned on the telly and so it was the case.
If I was Gareth Bale, I wouldn't know whether to keep the match ball (rendered not so symbolic in the days of multi-ball delivery) as a memento of a Champions League hat-trick (with three superb goals at that) or a painful memory of scoring three goals at one of the most intimidating of stadiums and still being on the losing side, a side that for 88 minutes looked like being humiliated. It was obviously his fault that Spurs lost. For his first 21 games or so after joining Tottenham Hotspur, his team never won a game, thereby setting a new Premiership record. Of course, he didn't play every game for Spurs and they invariably won when he didn't. Last season, it seemed that the curse had been lifted, but it must have returned. Tottenham would have beaten the European Cup holders had he not played, it's clear.
There was also a rather bizarre moment when, with his team four to the bad, Harry Redknapp made a double fist-curl on the touch-line, mouthing 'come on'. This is usually the reaction of a goal being scored, not when all hope appears to be extinguished. But I guess he couldn't be despondent for the sake of his team in preparation for the half-time talk and many managers are amateur thespians themselves, but he did look a bit silly doing that.

It may be coincidence but in the space of a few weeks, high-ranking individuals from two seemingly idyllic, pleasant societies. In Canada, an elite military pilot who was close to his country's defence staff and has flown prime ministers and Queen Elizabeth II, has been charged with not only killing two women, sexually assualting two more and committing dozens of break-ins to wear the underwear of females as young as 11. In Sweden, the top cop who was allegedly the inspiration behind Wallander, who had been a passionate promoter of women rights and the country's leading law enforcement officer for liasing with women, is accused of having been a senior member of a prostitute ring with all manner of illegality committed, as if he was a villain out of Red Riding or, indeed, Wallander. A lot of Swedish fiction now revolves about the dark undercurrents benath the placid surface, even before the allegations came to light. Switzerland had its stolen Jewish gold, Iceland has had its banks. Vancouver is still the best place in the world to live and many countries envy the Swedish welfare model, but complacency cannot set in among these near-perfect nations.

I am disappointed that one of the two new aircraft carriers will be purely a helicopter platform, making it essentially a super-cruiser, though less impressive than the sleek USSR-holdover Kiev employed by Russia. With spending stringency it was probably inevitable that it would be mothballed immediately it slips down the gangway, but for it to be sold would show that Britain does not take future naval operations on its own seriously. I applaud co-operation with allies and ironically, given their sound and fury over a European army, the Conservatives are paving the way for a European navy. Of even more concern is that the UK will not have a jet fighter naval presence until 2020, with HMS Ark Royal being decomissioned straight away and HMS Illustrious reduced to a mere helicopter platform before going the same way in 2014. Of course, this island nation is no longer a first-rate military power and hasn't been for decades, but it is with sadness that we are now slipping into a third tier status.

Mind you, the way the French are reacting to getting themselves in shape for the 21st century is amazing, though not unexpected. The fact that soon the French will spend a third of their lives in retirement in unsustainable. Nicolas Sarkozy knows that, even if he only serves one term, the oppostion Socialists will be loath to try to unscramble the ommelette of the pension reform, even though they can make hay now through the president's discomfort. It is not Thatcherite, nor Churchillian, let alone revolutionary, simply pragmatic. Try telling that to vested interests though. Seeing the rubbish pile up in Marseille is reminiscent of Britain in the 1970s and we view that period as a national embarrassment. All part of the Gallic way of life though. It seems our neighbours can't go two weeks without one set of French workers or other rustling up a reason to go on strike. Molotov cocktails flying outside a school in the Paris suburb of Combes-la-Ville, an angry, rifle-toting protestor making a cameo, bus shelters smashed, a fast-food cafe looted and several cars torched - is this the social model the unions are defending? It would be remiss to tar all the disgruntled civil disobedience as violent, but it does give cover to those who like nothing better than destruction then dress it up as moral high ground. At least the French can enjoy the peace of roads with fewer vehicles as Britain experienced ten years ago when fuel strikes reared their ugly head. There are not many ugly heads in France, but plenty of foolish ones.

Liked the tribute to The Ipcress File in Spooks (of which I saw the Sunday repeat last night. The meeting at the London bandstand in this episode involving double agents is the same setting as the film in which Michael Caine starred. Sir Harry Pearce even looks like the de facto boss of Palmer (Caine's character). I've only come to Spooks this series but it is so easy to slip into. Who says actioners can't be intelligent?

Also, good news that the two aircraft carriers are being commissioned, avoiding the mistake that the government made at around the same time The Ipcress File was released. The Labour government decided not to build a full-scale carrier, getting 'through-deck crusiers' on the cheap and it almost cost Britain in the Falklands War. When China hasn't got aircraft carriers, this will allow proper global deployment for British operations. The aircraft aren't ready but they will come. Two carriers were needed as well because one carrier would be immensely vulnerable to attack and if disabled, then a whole task force could founder. This is a wise, strategic, long-term decision.

Bygone recent cinematic outings

They’ve been out of the cinema for a fair few weeks now but the other day I saw a teddy bear (admittedly brown in colour) tied to the radiator grill of a dustbin truck and I’m sure the driver of this vehicle has seen Toy Story 3. The film sequel was cut above most popcorn fare, being a well-structured, character-driven plot with those of the population asked to make personal choices about what path they wish to follow and then to reconsider, apart from the heroic Woody who is entertaining all in himself. There are many humorous moments and tense situations. Overall, very enjoyable. However, the first two films analysed what is was to be a toy through the implicit prism of human philosophy. Toy Story 3 lacked the depth of its predecessors though was still a good-natured romp. When one of the good guys makes an impassioned political defence of democracy, it may be appropriate that she is wooden in a literal sense, but even with an ironic nudge and a wink, it felt stilted and out of place without any back story that she would be so intellectually inclined. So, overall, it didn’t reach the heights of its predecessors, but still worth the viewing.
Altaa and I saw Inception for a second time and things were added by going again, as well as getting pleasure from the atmospheric sound track. Saito calling Cobb’s first heist on himself ‘an audition’ suggests that the company Cobb is working for is actually owned by Saito, though middle management may be unaware of who controls its upper echelons. Also, I think apart from Cobb and Saito, they all wake up when the effect of the sedation wears off, for they had oxygen canisters prepared in the van for when they went into the river should the kick not wake them up straightaway (though it contradicts a certain explanation earlier in the film about being unbalanced). As for Cobb, even if he isn’t awake, he still gets to be with his kids and we are informed in the film, he will grow old with them (as he did with his wife, though how they spent 50 years in dreams and only a few hours in real life goes against the maths of how long dreams last alluded to elsewhere). If he isn’t awake, then his kids will grow up without him, but he himself in his dreams will at last be happy, unlike Saito in his lonely fortress. As I’ve said before, Christopher Nolan is too canny a director to say one way or the other, though when the picture fades to black and we hear the last few scratchy revolutions of the spinning top, it suggests that Cobb is awake, but we, being adults, are given the choice to make up our own minds.

Almost exactly eight years ago, an unheralded country from the former Yugoslavia with the name of ‘M’ arrived to play the England national team at Southampton and secured a draw. Much hand-wringing followed at how the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (FYROM) had managed to achieve a 2-2 draw and how England weren’t good enough at developing future talents. Eight years on, we’re still bemoaning the inadequacies of the English coaching system, the absence of a winter break, the overloading of the football schedule, the lack of English players worthy to be called up to the national squad and so on, after another unheralded country from the former Yugoslavia with the name of ‘M’ came to England and gained a draw, this time Montenegro.
Nothing has changed. David Seaman was made the scapegoat for the 2002 draw, that match being his last ever cap. And the England team went on as normal ultimately qualifying for Euro 2004, without solving any of the underlying problems because that would take strategic vision, resolve and butt-kicking. Five years after the Hampshire humiliation, FYROM came to England again, this time Manchester at Old Trafford, where the Field of Dreams lived up to its name with a most snooze-worthy fixture of 0-0. It was one part of a patchwork that led to England not making Euro 2008. The manager was sacrificed at the end of the campaign, yet still nothing was done to correct the serious issues.
Who knows what the effect of failing to beat Montenegro, a nation with half the population of Northern Ireland, on home soil will be. Richard Scudamore, chief executive of the Premier League, continues to play the traitor, selling out his country for money, saying a winter break would be a fine thing while ruling out all options to make it a reality. He’s also allowed clubs to be loaded with debt or run by unsuitable people. In the first few months of 2010, he cited Newcastle United and Leeds United as undergoing renaissance – tellingly, at the time, neither club were under his jurisdiction. The Football Association remains rudderless, electing not to elect a chairman or chief executive because… er... um… Not for any worthwhile reason. Honestly, it’s Swiftian. And all the while England get worse and worse and worse. The 1990 class was not as good as the 1966 team, the 1998 team that drew in Rome to finish top of their qualifying group was not as fine as 1990 and the team that was put out last night, although paid much more than any of their forebears is not even fit to lace up the bootstraps of those that went before. A spine of Wayne Rooney, Steven Gerrard and Rio Ferdinand could not provide inspiration or relief.

Sweet (unsubsidised) child of my-ee-ay-ee-ine

I have waited to see David Cameron’s reaction to the predictable fulminations from the right-wing press over the cutting of child allowance for earners in the highest tax band – the so-called ‘middle’ of the country that only represents the top 15% richest people (some people need to go back to school) – though The Guardian had a worthless front-page headline of George Osborne cutting “child support for all,” a pernicious twist on how this child grant is no longer universal, with the false implication that everyone will lose it. Cameron’s response that the married couples’ allowance is to be restored to offset the loss to those families where at least one individual earns £45,000 or more is welcome. The Labour Party deride this proposal as ‘social engineering’ (pot, kettle, black, anyone?) and Vince Cable, among others, has called it ‘a bribe’ – like child allowances aren’t ‘bribes’ at all, are they? Restoring marriage allowance furthermore is a socially cohesive policy that helps children as the overwhelming majority of studies (as close to consensus as you can get in social sciences) suggests that children benefit when parents stay together and couples stay together, on average, longer than if they are unmarried. It is a clever announcement by Cameron while giving two-fingers to the liberal establishment who way too materialistic. And, Harriet Harman, it’s proven in previous recessions that when households experience financial strain, the divorce rate goes up (the last credit crisis bucking the trend, maybe because marriage rates were already low anyway). People say most marriages so often now are not for life, so what’s the point of it at all? Most jobs are no longer for life; if you take the same attitude to employment as you do to marriage, are you going to throw yourself on the dole your whole life (some people find no hardship in this)? This country is becoming increasingly selfish, everyone thinking only of what benefits them – how is that progressive?
But back to the main issue at hand. On Monday night the BBC pulled off the impressive trick of making the government minister look sympathetic. Philip Hammond, Transport Secretary, was hauled on largely because before the general election he had defended universal child allowance. His argument here was that this was fairer than means-testing parents and Osborne’s policy was fairer still – facing down Jeremy Paxman’s fusillade that this was sophistry. But the brutality of Pax Jeremia was not the crucial factor in giving kudos to Hammond. Two other guests invited before a select group of Tory activists were Polly Toynbee and some Wall Street Journal hack. Toynbee is renowned as a standard-bearer of the (occasionally smug) journalistic left so she could be expected to be as snidey towards the current Government as the Guardian header and was, while the WSJ is as far right-wing as you can go whilst still staying in the mainstream. From what I have read from their contributors, they practise intellectual rigamortis, than rigour.
The Tories in the audience weren’t particularly fazed by the top 15% wage-earners losing their child allowance – maybe because if you want to pay tuition fees to get your child through public school or you want to take that annual holiday to Thailand and you don’t like big government, perhaps, just perhaps, you shouldn’t rely on government handouts. With this model of moderateness, the extremism of Toynbee and the WSJ man was more evident. Paxo’s pronouncement that they had been ‘struck dumb’ as he tried to whip up the ‘controversy’ was not inclined to win them over to his style. Toynbee argued the Marxist angle of universalism, the WSJ guy said over and over again “Margaret Thatcher and Tony Blair understood the middle classes. I don’t think this new government does,” with nothing to back this up – proof that thick, rich kids don’t need to have thousands of pounds extra to push them through private education just so they can go on to have positions of prominence at the Wall Street Journal. The middle-classes are those who earn in the middle-range which in the UK per capita is £27,000 per annum, far below the £45,000 threshold above which child allowance will not be paid. Take away the top 15% and that figure drops considerably. Just because you are not of the aristocracy and therefore not upper-class does not make you middle-class while you earn a packet – nouveau riche is the closest approximation. This Coalition understands the other 85% of this country – the true middle-classes amongst this. The right-wing press have incorrectly inflated the average wage band to reflect their own ideas of status – when a Daily Telegraph commentator says that to live on £100,000 a year in London is a pittance, even a struggle, it is reminiscent of Alan Duncan’s ill-advised remark that after the expenses scandal MPs had to live on rations. Duncan gets a dressing-down but the right-wing papers march on.
One member of the audience, reflecting on that it is mothers to whom the child allowance is paid, said that we had moved on from the 1960s when husbands might waste the money on booze, womanising and drug-taking. Toynbee tore into this saying that there are still men who booze, womanise and take drugs, to which Hammond wryly interjected “on the highest tax wage band,” utterly routing Toynbee in the eyes of all but herself. That brought it back to the fact that only the 15% best-off will suffer in this situation and that universalism is a blunt instrument to redress social imbalances.
Paxman took Hammond to task over that this policy wasn’t means-tested – but when benefits are means-tested it is the poorest, least well-educated who lose out because they are discouraged by the forms in the first place or cannot complete them through a lack of understanding and will not ask an anonymous outside agency to help them. It is the wealthy, confident and/or intelligent who find them a doddle or aren’t afraid to get help if they stumble. Means-testing is anti-working class. Paxo gave a remarkably easy ride to the two other journalists present and one suspects that he too is miffed by the policy. As Boris Johnson did earlier in the day when he tamed Paxman, in between the clownish ad hominem attacks that left Paxman with bemused grinning, he questioned the BBC pitbull’s salary when it threatened to (de?)generate into another Paxman vs Michael Howard encounter.
Ultimately, what swung it for Philip Hammond was that the two printhounds in Toynbee and the WSJ representative agreed that Osborne should not be carrying through this policy, without giving any caveats. A key case of when the political spectrum is a circle as extremists agree and nullify themselves in the process.