Local clubs in trouble

The current dire situation down the road at Fratton Park has been well publicised. Two other small local clubs are both seemingly facing tough times as well, each for different reasons.

Andover FC's current financial situation is, relatively speaking approaching the level of trouble Portsmouth are finding themselves in. The club have a debt of around £15,000 and have recently had to tell the players and management that they would be unable to pay their travel expenses. From a supporters point of view, the rumours that have been floating around the Portway Stadium seem to suggest the clubs plight has been a gradual one over the course of the season. With the recent announcement, understandably, players that have not been prepared to travel to Andover two or three times a week from Southampton, Portsmouth and Newbury amongst places, have moved on to other clubs. The excellent commitment from the management staff and remaining players has been plain to see with some very encouraging performances on the pitch. But it's the situation off the pitch that is the greatest worry, with talk of voluntary relegation popping up in the local paper. Without investment and outside parties coming in and rescuing the club worse might be yet to come for the club.

Onto Winchester City, where supporter unrest is the problem. Ironically it is the consortium that effectively rescued the club just over a year ago from near extinction that is being targeted. Supporters have become disillusioned with the running of the club and many have since boycotted attending matches, some opting to attend the matches of local neighbours Alresford Town. The Hampshire Chronicle featured an article last week outlining how owner Paul McCarthy and has board have set their sights on improving the clubs image in the town and attracting more supporters through the gates after spending a reported £10,000 on a new club website. However, an unofficial supporters forum has seen a huge backlash from fans slamming the new website and the current regime at the helm. Some stating that there wouldn't be the need for this PR exercise if the club was being run correctly in the first place.

Two clubs, who in previous seasons have held a fierce rivalry, with two very different but quite serious problems.

Orwellian analysis of adverts

I am unable to get my hands on a camera to do a video blog, so I will have to do the Orwellian advert analysis with the written word, rather than speech. Looking at adverts with the specific intention of criticising the way in which they use the English language was quite interesting, with it being a common occurrence for things that Orwell disapproved of to appear.



The first line for this Fifa 10 advert: "10 thousand hundred heartbeats skipping..." wastes no time in using too many words. Why not just say "1 million heartbeats skipping"? This pattern continues throughout, with "10 hundred thousand scarves need knitting" being the next line. The whole advert seems intent on opposing Orwell. The use of similes and metaphors is also common. Stating that the game has "more wall than China" and "more battles than Genghis"....really? I don't think so. The slogan of both the advert and EA sports itself both come into criticism, when analysed: "How big can football get?" - a total ambiguous question. It wouldn't make me any more likely to buy the game and seems like a total waste at the chance of including a decent slogan. EA Sports' famous line "Its in the game" also doesn't make a whole lot of sense. Whats in the game?

I will also analyse a couple of other adverts briefly. Firstly a visually clever advert from Barclaycard, that features a grand total of 2 spoken lines; both of them making next to no sense.



Firstly, "contactless technology from Barclaycard". Contactless technology, a phrase that wouldn't be out of place in 'Horries Bullshit Generator' it needs that much explaining to fully understand what they are talking about. Secondly; "Making payment simpler". Whats not simple about payment? I give my money, for which I receive goods or a service. This advert really does need to be explained further to make any sense to a normal person, otherwise the average viewer will simply remember it as "the advert with the water slide".

Finally, Iggy Pop tries to tell us why we should use Swiftcover, well sort of.



The first point I will raise is not necessarily about the use of language, more the idea that having everything done online saves a huge amount of time. You still have to trawl through different insurers finding the best quotes, it simply seems to be the case that rather giving someone your details over the phone, you type them in yourself, hardly a massive difference in time taken. The final slogan "Get a life. Get Swiftcovered" also brings up questions. By saying "Get Swiftcovered", I assume he means "Use Swiftcover". Secondly, by suggesting that without Swiftcover you don't have a life can be seen as simply mocking the viewer with "you re not good enough unless you use us". Obviously, the phrase probably is intended to illustrate the tedious point that with Swiftcover you have more time to yourself, but why leave it open to somewhere to read the advert in the opposing way?

These are just a few examples of adverts showing disinterest in the way that Orwell suggested the English language be used. But in practice, adverts are primarily used to sell products and if using tacky slogans and open ended questions are the best way of making money, companies are not going to give too much of a thought into the way they use language.

Poverty, anarchy and destruction

Having failed to put aside time to read Emile Zola's Germinal during the term, I promised myself that I would make sure that I would read it over Christmas. Following completion, I thought I would write a short review/report of the novel:


Germinal tells a bleak story of suffering, destruction and death, in Zola's style of realism. Description of the events are told in such a way that you can really see a picture in your head of what Zola is describing.

The novel tells the story of the mining town of Montsou and follows the main protagonist Etienne Lantier. Poverty stricken Montsou is faced with yet more suffering when the mine owners announce plans to lower their wages. Etienne, portrayed as young and naive political activist, takes the role of leader of the miners. He convinces the miners to strike. Days follow and the bosses fail to give in to pressure from the group, until one day, the miners can take no more and a furious riot takes place. Soldiers and police turn to gun fire when the can no longer control the crowd, leaving some dead and others arrested. Admitting defeat some miners can no longer take the poverty and give in, returning to the mines. In the meantime Etienne's friend Souvarine, an anarchist focused on the fact that society can only be pure when there is nothing and destruction is the only way to go about that, begins his plans by damaging some of the mine shaft. Disaster strikes when some of the shaft collapses and leaves Etienne and others trapped in the mine, leading to a dramatic rescue to save the failed strike leader.

Zola's description of the suffering and destruction really stands out as a brilliant piece of literature. The way that a chapter can go from description of the Montsou people, struggling for warmth or soup, straight into a chapter surrounding the Hennebeau family's lavish lifestyle that owners of the mines enjoy, creates such a dynamic juxtaposition.

Destruction and anarchism are two of the key themes to the story. Souvarine's ideas that destruction is the only way for the workers to redeem their rights are at first dismissed by Etienne, but once the workers decided that there was no other way Etienne was turned on and seen as a failure and blamed for the increased suffering of the colliers. Following the violent rampage of the miners, including the castration of shop owner Maigrat, Souvarine's ideal seemed to be becoming the similar wish of the miners, yet whereas the colliers were so non-bourgeois, Souvarine was against society and power structures on the whole.

Germinal is a brilliant tale of sorrow, community spirit, power and wealth divide and rebellion, painting such a vivid picture of the life of a miner in North France.

A day in the life of an Andover FC fan..

Yesterday was a nightmare. Supporting Andover you don't get a brilliant day out, and come home with 3 points very often, and yesterday didn't change that.

Setting off at 1:30 thinking; away to Mangotsfield. Fairly easy hour and a quarter drive and the possibility of 3 points. Wrong. Getting lost in (one of the) arse end(s) of Bristol, nothing to do with my map reading, means we are late to the game. I get a text at 3:03 saying we are 1-0 already, bollocks. Finally we find the road the ground is on, and within 5 minutes I get another text to say 1-1, game on. We pull into the car park and find no spaces, so have to make due with a space in the rugby club car park next door. Scampering out, we turn a blind eye to the signs stating the car park was for patrons of the rugby club only, and make our way towards the turnstiles. We are greeted by a loud cheer from the home supporters. 12 minutes gone and we are 2-1 down. Thinking we have missed all the goals there were to be, we take our spot and cheer on the team. The rest of the first half is just as open as the first 12 minutes sounded and Andover head in at half time leading 3-2. Half time pint down, confidence high, back out for the second half.

In terms of possession and opportunities, the second half was fairly even, that was apart from the 2 Mangotsfield goals. Here we go again, leading a game, only to be beaten late on, until.....penalty. A Mangotsfield defender handballs in the area and the Andover captain has a chance to equalise. Does he? Does he balls...The keeper falls to his left to collect the ball fairly comfortably. Oh well...a good performance, a narrow defeat, always next week and all that.

That should of been the end of the annoyances. That was until a wrong turn ended up taking us on a 10 mile detour, through some Postman Pat villages, in the pissing rain. Once in Bath we were at a stand still in traffic for a good half hour, until it dawned on us that we had hit the traffic coming out of Bath City's FA cup match and the traffic going into Bath Rugby club for their match. 2 and a half hours later I am home. Cold, tired and disappointed. Ah...the beautiful game.

Orwellian views on English language

According to George Orwell;

"Political language -- and with variations this is true of all political parties, from Conservatives to Anarchists -- is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable, and to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind."

It is this political language that Orwell blames for the failings of the English Language. Combining "Politics and the English Language" and the lecture last Thursday, we can see how the use of this bad English is having a huge effect on the way that we speak and write. It is from political speeches and the unwillingness to state plainly what we mean that people are taking new ways of speaking and writing and employing them on the English language.

Orwell described major issues in the way language is used, describing three common faults:

1. Dying Metaphors - The use of metaphors that are either no longer relevant in the context in which they are used, or where the meaning of such metaphors is lost or not fully understood by the writer.
2. Verbal False Limbs - Using verbs in phrase, rather than using single verbs that could be used just as easily. Orwell uses the example of using the phrase "render inoperative" instead of simply saying "break".
3. Pretentious Diction - The use of words used purely to dress up simple statements and to give the writer a sense of self importance.

In my opinion, it is the use of pretentious diction that is easiest to spot being used in speech or writing. Sometimes, if not all time, you get a sense that the use of such words and phrases is merely an ego boosting opportunity, and that using this language gives the writer a sense of self worth and cultural importance.

Back at school we were always told to describe things in detail, but surely as Orwells work implies, we should get to the point as quickly as we can. Being on a journalism degree, this is even more important. Get the facts; who, when, where, what, and eventually why. There is simply no need to mess about describing something in ridiculous amounts of detail.

Orwell describes how the decline of good English has spread and become the convenient norm. He talks how effects can become a cause and a vicious circle can begin. He uses the analogy of a man turning to drink;

“A man may take to drink because he feels himself to be a failure, and then fail all the more completely because he drinks. It is rather the same thing that is happening to the English language. It becomes ugly and inaccurate because our thoughts are foolish, but the slovenliness of our language makes it easier for us to have foolish thoughts.”

Despite being written over 60 years ago, Orwells article is still relevant today. As a reader we accept all these little inaccuracies and sloppy language, but it is only when you contrast this unnecessary language with plain, straight to the point speech that you can really see how improper the English language has become.

The Dreyfus Affair

Following the defeat to Prussia in 1870, a proud French nation set out to discover the reason behind their defeat to a supposedly inadequate Prussian army. Some 24 years later saw Jewish army officer Alfred Dreyfus stripped of his medals in front of a Paris crowd. The French army accused him of spying for the Prussians, and in turn, causing the defeat of France. He was sent to Devil's Island, a penal colony of the coast of French Guiana. The evidence that was used to convict Dreyfus was a document detailing French army secrets, that was found by a cleaner. The root of this document was then traced back to Dreyfus. Some thought that Dreyfus was being framed by military top brass, merely an illustration of French Anti-Semitism. Major Ferdinand Walsin Esterhazy, another French army was the man who was accused by Georges Picquart, the new chief of army intelligence. However, Esterhazys trial which took place behind closed doors, was widely believed to have been a farce, and saw him walk free. This prompted anti semitic riots throughout Paris. This lead to Emile Zola's famous newspaper front page; "J'accuse!", in which he denounced the French President Felix Faure and the highest order of the French Army.

The Dreyfus affair was not the first time anti-semitism was seen in France. Just two years earlier, the French government lost nearly a billion francs, during the Panama Canal scandal. It emerged that French government officials took bribes to keep quiet about the financial failings of the company hired to build the Panama Canal. Two of the officials who were accused of taking the bribes were French Jews, Jacques Reinach and Cornelius Herz. Their involvement was seized upon by Eduard Drumont, whose anti-semitic newspaper La Libre Parole, took every chance it had to attack Jews. During the Dreyfus affair the headline read "The Traitor Convicted", "Down with Jews".

Consequences of the Dreyfus affair were huge. 19th century France had seen anti-semitism become prominent, perhaps the most illustrated account that had been seen. As we all know, anti-semitism was even more in the forefront of a nations thinking during Nazi Germany, with six million Jews losing their lives.

The birth of Zionism emerged from the whole Dreyfus scandal. Journalist Theosdore Herzl was assigned to wrie a report about the trial and the aftermath. His book Der Judenstaat, or The Jewish State, outlined how in order to avoid anti-semitism in Europe, an independent Jewish state should be formed.The World Zionist Organisation claimed that this independent state would be known as Israel and be located in what was known as Palestine. In 1948 their wish was granted and the state of Israel was declared. The creation of the Israeli state sparked the Palestinian war which still rumbles on today, with the Israelis on one side and the Arab occupation that was originally in place.

The Dreyfus affair may have happened over 100 years ago, but the effects it had are still relevent today.

The shape of things to come? Or a failed experiment?

Yesterday Fabio Capello's undefeated spell as England manager came to an end with defeat against Ukraine in Dnipropetrovsk. But perhaps the biggest talking point surrounding the match, had nothing to do with events on the pitch. Since the demise of Setanta TV, which originally held the rights to show the game, no other TV channel were willing to pay the asking price in order to show the game. Step forward 'Perform', a digital media group, who eventually bought the rights.

The premise was simple, subscribers would pay a fee which would allow them to watch the game over the internet through a specially created website. The fee would begin at £4.99 and gradually increase the nearer to the matchday, eventually reaching £11.99. Now we were always going to discover something about how the media was shaping up, depending on how successful this was. Were we seeing the future of broadcasting? Or just an experiment failing badly?

I would suggest it was more toward the latter. Almost all the people I spoke to about the matter felt it would not work, and that England games should not be shown on pay per view internet streaming. Around 300,000 people paid the fee to watch the game, and I would make a completely uneducated guess that the same number of people watched the game via other, shall we say, less legal streams.

There were so many things that could have hindered the interest in this game. For a start, England had already qualified, so nothing was really at stake here. Secondly, surely the whole nations "traditional" way of watching England games was at the pub with a few mates, cheering on your country over a few beers. Despite some pubs showing the game, most went without.

Media convergence is undeniable, but was this a step too far, too quickly? Sites that stream live sports from around the world for free are always going to be most peoples preference when torn between that and paying £11.99 to watch one game. With these sites around this form of media will struggle to make much impact on the way in which football and sport is consumed by the public.