What would a UKIP Britain look like?

UKIP are making the news. Putting aside all the more outlandish elements – like the major donor who thinks it should be illegal for women to wear trousers, or the councillor who thinks there’s a causal link between gay marriages and flooding, or the guy who thinks we should euthanize babies with Down’s Syndrome (these are all real things – Google them) – there is a chance of electoral success in 2015.

Certainly, what UKIP has done is drive an increasingly hostile political narrative around immigration. The way immigration is reported and the way immigrants are written about in the press is almost entirely negative. It’s as if wanting to live somewhere else is criminally immoral and anyone wanting to move overseas is a black-hearted monster. Which I guess is bad news for the one and half million British-born people sunning it up in Spain.

I have a stake in the immigration debate because my Grandmother was an immigrant. She met and married my Granddad while he was on active service during the war – getting married in 1945 before the war ended. She gave birth to my Mum just after coming to this country, in January 1946.

It was a difficult time to be an immigrant. Being Scandinavian, Grandma had an accent that sounded a bit German to many people. Many men had been killed in the war, so there was an imbalance in society meaning many women were unlikely to meet and marry someone. So there was resentment of a foreigner marrying a man, when men generally were in short supply. (My Grandma was told this.)

My Mum has told me that when she was little the other mums in her village wouldn’t let their children play with her. For no other reason than her mum (my Gran) was foreign.

These days we would call that racist. And rightly so, because it was.

But that racism is what I think of when I hear Nigel Farage braying on about immigrants. The narratives we listen to shape our thought patterns. If we really believe the wicked foreigners are after our jobs and our women and our comfortable lifestyles; if we think they are criminals and thieves, then that will shape how we respond to them.

Racism is subtle. We can easily find ourselves agreeing with comments like the one Nigel Farage made about not wanting to live next door to a family of Romanians. And the next thing is you’re not allowing your kids to play with their kids for no other reason than because you are racist.

And that’s what I think a UKIP Britain would look like. It’s sad so many people seem to think that would be a better place to live. I hoped people were better than that.

When people say ‘Please fund my experience of a lifetime’

I’m starting to get annoyed by some of the things people are contacting me about asking for ‘sponsorship’. Specifically, I’m annoyed by being asked to help them raise funds as they have an ‘experience of a lifetime’, usually in a far-flung exotic corner of the world.

Now, this is not a particular rant about short-term charity trips or missions. I have my doubts about the effectiveness of those, but they are often to less than glamorous places. One of my closest friends went to visit an orphanage in Uganda in the summer. A few years ago I contributed to somebody’s place when our church ran a soccer school with kids in Burkina Faso. So, I’m not entirely anti the idea of sponsoring someone on foreign travel.

But I think there’s a distinction between visiting an orphanage to produce a film about the kids there, to raise awareness and possibly funds back home, and, say, hiking up Kilimanjaro. Or walking the Great Wall of China. Or cycling from Boston to New York City. Or scaling Machu Picchu.

These aren’t particularly worthy endeavours in themselves. They are things that tourists do. And I don’t see why I should feel guilty about not ‘digging deep’ to support people doing them. In fact, the sheer shamelessness of people asking me to help fund their fancy holidays makes me want to go on a slapping spree.

I know, I know, it’s for charity. But charity would be better served if people didn’t fly halfway around the world and donated the equivalent money. It’s not for charity. It’s for you. If it was for charity you would do these things in this country. You can shave your head anywhere. I’ve known people brave the bracing waves of Barry Island on New Year’s Day. If you want to cycle from Boston to New York, you can do that without leaving Lincolnshire!

And I’d say, if you want to go do those things – climb Kilimanjaro, run the Great Wall, bike round the States, or see the sun rise over Incan pyramids – then go and do them. Go! Have a great time. Take lots of photos. This world is full of great experiences and you are allowed to experience them. You don’t have to dress it up as just doing it for a cause. You can just do it for the joy of doing it; realise your dream for nothing more than that.

Just, you know, pay for it yourself.

Dr Olivia's Guide to A&E

Enjoy this film folks - and keep your eye out for the patient with toothache!

The team I wanted to win the World Cup final won!

So, Germany won. It was a tense game, settled by a flash of brilliance from the youngest player on the field deep in extra time.

I'd wanted Germany to win from the outset. England were uninspiring from the off and, apart from the USA, there was no one else I really wanted to root for. In any given game I'd go for the underdog - which was tough when Germany went up against Algeria, a genuine underdog that divided my loyalties slightly.

But generally the best team won, playing the consistently best football of the tournament. They scored the most goals (helped by the crazy 7-1 thrashing of Brazil). Their totemic oldest striker broke the record for goals scored in finals. Their goalkeeper won the tacky-looking Golden Glove award. All round they performed at a level worthy of world champions.

They also have a young team that is still growing and maturing together. They have got to be favourites to win the European Championships in France in two years time, and I think they have every chance of retaining the World Cup in Russia in 2018.

But for now the World Cup is over and normality resumes. What will we watch now?

Sad times as Cathy takes down the World Cup wallchart!

Brazil 1 – Germany 7: Watching history being made in a World Cup semi-final

Previously I’ve blogged about how I wanted Germany to win the World Cup and about my antipathy towards Brazil. So, the semi-final had an edge for me, mainly because this was the test whether Germany were going to have their fragilities exposed in a harsh, partisan arena.

The general reaction to the result and the manner in which it was achieved has been a semi-stunned ‘Wow’. A lot of people thought Brazil were poor (for Brazil), and that Germany were good, but this was the kind of epic walloping nobody ever thought possible.

The sequence of the German second to fifth goals was so fast the TV replays couldn’t keep up. They would cut from the slow motion to real-time and the Germans were passing it into the net again. It reached a point where the Germans seemed to stop celebrating. It felt awkward; embarrassing even.

So, what went so ballistically wrong for Brazil. Here are my thoughts:

1.  They weren’t very good. This sounds simplistic, but you can achieve quite a bit in football without being particularly skilful as long as you are well-organised and calm (see the USA in this World Cup for an example of that). Brazil weren’t a very good team, but they didn’t know that. So they were poorly organised and hot-headed, particularly David Luiz, who has to be one of the most wayward defenders ever.
2.  Brazil let the emotion get to them. From the way they held up a shirt as a tribute to the injured Neymar in a way that looked like they were mourning the fallen war dead, through to the bellowing of the national anthem’s second verse once the music had stopped, the team were being governed by their emotions. The game-plan, if they had one, went south early on, people forgot what they were meant to be doing, and they couldn’t compose themselves once the Germans started tapping the goals in.
3. They couldn’t regain their balance. Losing five goals in the first 30 minutes is terrible. But the reason Brazil let in so many is that after the third goal – a wonder strike from Toni Kroos – they didn’t get their heads together. They looked to be in shock, uncoordinated, almost in denial of what was happening.
4. Germany were ruthless. Although it has subsequently emerged that the German players decided not to push too hard in the second half, there was no hesitation in the way they took advantage of Brazil’s multiple failings before the break. Some teams might have eased up earlier, but Germany weren’t screwing up in the semi-finals again.

This match was historic. Brazil’s biggest ever defeat. It was the biggest ever victory in a World Cup semi-final. Someone said that it was Brazil’s first home defeat for 25 years. Miroslav Klose’s goal made him the all-time top scorer in World Cups, overtaking the Brazilian legend, Ronaldo – just to add extra despondency to the Brazilian defeat.

There’s a sense when you watch an event like this unfold, that you get the feeling you are watching something a bit special. It’s a moment that will become iconic in the history of the World Cup and maybe football itself. I can’t remember the last game that felt this way – maybe the England semi-final against West Germany in 1990, the one with Gazza’s tears. Like that, this game has now been burned into my memory. A historical moment I was lucky enough to see.

World Cup secret confession: I'm supporting Germany

It started in South Africa in 2010. The team of the tournament for me weren't the Spanish game-stranglers with their tiki-taka yawn-off brand of non-football. It was Germany.

They played with verve and vim, bursting forward with pace to hit teams on the break. They hammered England. They stuffed Argentina. Then they were stifled by Spain, who won with a header at a corner from a defender coming from deep. I was gutted.

So this time around, I wanted Germany to do well. Even though this left me very conflicted in the second round when they faced genuine underdogs Algeria. I have that compulsion to support the little guys against the behemoth. But anyway, they won.

How did this happen? When I was a kid I, along with everyone else, regarded the Germans as the ultimate villains. (Argentina threatened their position as most hated international opponents for a while. Maradona's hand of God and all that. But it always came back to the Germans.)

There was the penalty shoot-out in Italia 90 and at Euro 96. There was Jurgen Klinnsman who was your typical continental diving cheat in the late 80s and early 90s although he has redeemed himself in later life. There was just the boring, automatic progression to final after final. The moment of respite that we all enjoyed was the defeat to Bulgaria in USA 94.

Funny story, that game took place on a Sunday when we had an evening service at our church. Like many others I was a few minutes late to the service because I stayed to watch the last few minutes of Bulgaria's win. As others sheepishly drifted in after us, I remember making eye contact and mouthing 'Bulgaria?' to them, receiving nods and smiles in return. Everyone was happy to see Germany lose. Twenty years later, "Letchkov!" still brings a smile to my brother's face.

I guess my change of heart is a sign of the way Germany changed their game. Although with the forward-running gameplan, they no longer look invincible at the back. In fact, against Algeria, a team prepared to run directly at them, they looked distinctly vulnerable. They have swapped that stereotypical German rigidity for resourcefulness, cheerless grit for exciting guile. Above all the tag 'efficient' no longer applies as it did for several decades. It's not about being efficient - the German trait that makes every BMW look like a lurking Decepticon - it's about entertaining.

So maybe that's it. Maybe it's because they now look beatable. When they were titans they were our enemies. But now we can see they are human and flawed they are easy to love. #

I don't think they will win this World Cup. Someone will exploit their tendency to go forward and punish them for their forwards not tracking back and protecting the defence. But I would love to be proved wrong.

World Cup controversial viewpoint: Brazil are over-rated

I'm not sure when I first realised how much I disagreed with the mainstream view that Brazil are the kings of world football, playing the game beautifully in a 'samba style'. Brazil is everybody's 'second team', we are told by the media and the football pundits.

But they aren't my second team. In fact, I was gutted Chile didn't knock them out a couple of nights ago.

So, why am I less than enamoured with Brazil. Here's a few reasons.

The sense of entitlement bugs me. I know it's being played in Brazil but the way the commentators talk about Brazil playing in 'their World Cup' irks me. It's the sense that Brazil somehow has a greater claim on the World Cup than any other nation. It's as annoying as the Arsenal fans bleating on about 8 years without a trophy (thank the maker that's over!) or Manchester United fans carrying on about finishing seventh.

The entitlement overflows in the way they get treated by referees. The opening game of this world cup was notable for the blatant favoritism shown to the host nation. Croatia were unjustly denied the chance to compete on an equal footing with Brazil because the refs were over-awed by the occasion.

I'm annoyed at the way the cloggers get overlooked. Yes, Brazil often have flair players who they give free rein to and that can be excting, but for every genuine world star they always have a colleciton of cloggers backing them up. Ramires is the same sneaky thug for Brazil as he is for Chelsea. David Luiz wouldn't look out of place hacking people down as part of a Uruguay team. Even Neymar got away with a blatant elbow to an opponent's face in the game against Croatia. (Which goes back to the referee's reluctance to take action against Brazil.)

People also overlook the play-acting. Hulk is one of the most guilty of the current crop of players. He seems to be wearing the slippiest boots on the planet given how many times he ends up on the floor. Athough the classic bit of Brazillian cheating was Rivaldo playing against Turkey in the 2002 World Cup. A Turkish player kicked the ball at him. It bounced off Rivaldo's knee and he went down clutching his face, getting the Turkey player red carded as a result. What a toe-rag. (He also made history as the first ever player to be fined by FIFA for simulation - yes, that's right, the first official diving cheat was a Brazilian.)

And finally, there's the simple fact that often Brazil are incredibly boring to watch. The 1994 World Cup Final in the USA is the prime example of this. I remember being told it was going to be the best game ever as Brazil faced Italy. Instead it was a turgid defensive affair that ended 0-0 after 120 minutes. One of those five stars on the Brazil badge is down to Roberto Baggio missing a penalty in the shoot out, not because Brazil were any great shakes.

So, there you go. They win with dodgy penalties gifted by awe-struck referees. They kick and elbow and dive their way to narrow wins and no one cares because of the stars on the shirt above the badge. After all, they are Brazil.

My 21 favourite things about the FIFA World Cup 2014 so far

We are into the knockout rounds of the World Cup and I've yet to blog about it, so here's a quick round-up of my favourite bits so far up to and including the second round game between Holland and Mexico.

1) Robin van Persie's equaliser against Spain. Quite simply one of the best diving headers I've ever seen and if you watch it in slow motion you can see he watches the ball into the net until his face hits the grass. When he scored his second he then ran around celebrating with his tongue out like a loon. I'm not a huge fan of RVP, but he is definitely growing on me.

2) Spray-foam at free kicks. It's simple. Ref marks where the ball should be. Then he draws a line on the pitch in front of the wall and they can't move beyond it. It comes in a neat hip holster and is simply a genius idea. One of the first games the ref sprayed it over a Holland player's boots and he was quite clearly protesting saying "My shoes!!" We laughed at that a lot.

3) James Rodriguez's first goal against Uruguay. Taken on the chest, back to goal, thirty yards out, he spun and hit it so sweetly it was untrue.

4) Spain being rubbish. Hopefully this is the death-knell for soul-destroying tiki-taka.

5) Mario Balotelli posting a picture of the Italy page in the Panini World Cup album filled with pictures just of him. That was a step beyond his normal hijinks into ironic subversion art.

6) FIFA stepping up and banning Luis Suarez.

7) Holland 5 Spain 1. What a game that was.

8) Pepe versus Muller in Portugal versus Germany. I have no idea what Pepe was thinking, but he basically threw the game Germany's way there.

9) Chile almost putting Brazil out in the second round. I was gutted they didn't manage to do it. They were the width of the crossbar away in extra time and then failed in the shoot-out. Also the Chile manager looked like Louie Spence, especially the way he prowled the edge of the technical area with one arm held rigid behind him.

10) Speaking of lookalikes, Cathy pointed out that the Mexico manager looked like Nathan Fillion in a fat-suit. She's not wrong.

11) Tim Cahill's goal against Holland. A moment of beauty.

12) The red, white and blue shirts worn by the USA against Ghana. Even nicer than the German white shirts with the red V.

13) Finding out the Mexican goalie has six fingers on one hand and had to have his gloves specially made.

14) The Columbian team's funky dance moves when they score. Play as a team. Dance as a team.

15) Alan Shearer losing it and finally showing some passion as a pundit, after England's pathetic showing. Gary Lineker said "We didn't expect much..." and Alan practically shouted "We expected more than that!" He looked seriously miffed.

16) But Daniel Sturridge's goal against Italy was one of the best England goals at a World Cup Finals that I remember.

17) Wesley Sneijder's goal for Holland against Mexico. Superb control to keep his team in the game with two minutes to go. Then Klaas van Huntelaar kept his cool under pressure to net a penalty in injury time to send Mexico out. An action-packed last few minutes that kept us on the edge of our seat.

18) The TV shot of a player taking a throw-in where 'WORLD CUP BRAZIL' on the advertising hoardings was cropped down to 'D CUP BRA'.

19) Gabby Logan and Phil Neville's in-ground discussion of the England game while the sprinklers soaked them. Twice.

20) Cathy referring to Adam Lallana as Adam the Llama. It would be a much cooler name.

21) Thierry Henry in his role as studio pundit talking about how a player was "really smelling the game." What?

What happened to the tambourines?

When I was a kid Sunday mornings were a bit of a dash trying to get into the car and to church by 10am. Dad always had a bag of stuff he needed to talk to people about, like creationist comics to give to the kids, we all took a Bible for some reason, and usually just as we were leaving my mum or dad would suddenly cry out ‘Have we got the instruments?’

The ‘instruments’ were mum’s tambourine and my dad’s – wait for it – triangle, and possibly a couple of other things like shakers. The church we went to was very interactive and a lot of people brought along similar things to join in with the music.

I’m not sure when this stopped. I can’t put a date on when we weren’t scrabbling around looking for wherever we had dumped the plastic bag with the instruments in after church the previous week. But at some point it stopped being the fashionable thing.

It’s odd that we took them at all. We weren’t a particularly musical family, despite my parents’ good intentions in trying to get me and my brother learning to play the piano and the trumpet respectively. My dad literally never put a record on. Even now I have never known him to sit down and listen to music or even have it on in the background.

Dad’s non-musicality is why he had the triangle, running on the debateable theory that you don’t need much musical ability to master it. He used to ping it at key points in the more upbeat songs – usually whenever ‘Jesus’ or ‘Lord’ appeared in a song line. I suspect he also liked the fact that he was the only triangle-player in the congregation. Lots of people had shakers and tambourines. He was unique.

The ‘joining in with the music’ thing seems to have passed. I think this is possibly because of the higher expectations people have now of musicians in churches. Back in the 80s, in a charismatic non-denominational church, the ‘worship’ was fairly simple. There would be one or two acoustic guitars, a keyboard for the older hymns that were written for the organ and didn’t translate very well to acoustic guitars, and maybe a person leading the singing.

Gradually new instruments were added to the mix. First electric guitars and basses, then a drum-kit, then whatever else people played – some churches effectively have brass and string sections. The music is much more rounded out and enhanced by proper PA systems. Instead of just a couple of loudspeakers at the front, there are now amps all around the room.

As the ‘worship’ has grown from what was once quite amateur to something much more professional, maybe people don’t want to join in as much. Sometimes it does feel that you have Christian songs performed at you. Taking your own instruments might feel a bit silly now. ‘Make a joyful noise’ is no longer the mantra of churches like the one I grew up in.

Still, the old ways are hard to kill off. My brother told me recently that he was just about to welcome everyone to a Sunday service he was leading when he noticed the woman in the second row immediately behind his seat had brought her own acoustic guitar and was obviously planning to play along.

He had never met her before and I think he recognised that it takes a certain kind of person to turn up at a church for the very first time with your own guitar ready to join in. So he didn’t say anything to her except Hello.

The Online Influence #Oi14 Conference – some bits that stood out

Yesterday I attended the Oi (Online influence) Conference in Cardiff. Here are some bits that struck me as useful during the day. I have tried to include one quote and one tip, although not everything on the programme made the cut here.

David Hieatt, Hiut Denim, Keynote speaker

Quote: “It’s your job to make your ideas happen. No one else will.”
Tip: Fail fast. If something doesn’t work, kill it quickly and try something else.

Dennis Bree & Dave Shaw – Twitter masterclass

Quote: “Twitter is the live second screen.”
Tip: Plan for the ‘moment’ and be ready to act on it.

Diana Memic & Michael Complojer - Google+ masterclass

Quote: “Everyone is posting into a noisy space.”
Tip: When posting, pause and clarify your goals.

Dan Spicer – Hootsuite masterclass
Quote: “Do one platform really well, not five badly.”
Tip: Empower your team and turn all staff into advocates for your brand on social media.

James Eder – Student Beans, Keynote
Quote: “Stop marketing and start mattering.” (I really liked this line!)
Tip: Face-to-face is costly, but incredibly valuable.

Michael Brackpool & Ben Hackett – Brandwatch masterclass

Quote: “Just because you have a larger haystack doesn’t mean you’ll find more needles.”

Tip: You need to know if negative comments are significant.