http://cartoon.0451.net/flash/ShowFlashFull.asp?FileUrl=/Flash/Files/dengmiaiwo.swf
http://cartoon.0451.net/flash/ShowFlash.asp?Id=6772
The 2 links are for the same thing. I had problems loading for the first one, so found the second link. Only difference is in screen size. But yeah, it illustrates my previous post perfectly. Enjoy. Apologies to those who can't read Chinese though...
Sunday, November 28, 2004
Friday, November 26, 2004
Economics of asymmetric information
Asymmetric information refers to a situation whereby one party to a transaction has some information about the transaction relevant to optimal decision making which the other party(ies) do not have.
For example, assume there are only 2 kinds of people in this world - sick or healthy. They are all interested in buying insurance. Obviously it seems intuitive that the insurance company should charge a higher premium for sick people since they are more likely to die and to charge a lower premium for healthy people who are less likely to die. However, that is only possible if the insurance company KNOWS who is sick or who is healthy. In reality, the insurance company won't know the Dick who walked into their company doors one day to buy insurance is a rock climbing enthusiast who runs marathons, or a good-for-nothing bummer who eats bacon and eggs all day, chain smokes and drinks alcohol like plain water.
So what happens? The insurance company, in order to remain profitable, is forced to charge according to the assumption that you are a sick person, or at least that you have half a chance to be a sick person. This then raises the premium for a healthy person from the optimal situation. And being the rational consumer that he healthy person is, he will choose not to buy insurance. The insurance company is then left with sick people as customers, and of course they are not going to sell insurance to sick people. And thus the end result is everyone is worse off with no insurance.
Yeah so what?
In life, situations of asymmetric information arise all the time. When you buy stuff from ebay, you are not certain whether the thing you buy is as good as described by the seller. When you are walking on a street with a shady looking character walking towards you, you do not know whether he is a normal person or has evil intentions. When a salesman is trying to sell you something, you do not know whether to trust all his words.
Uh-huh, SO WHAT??
Most importantly, in everyday interactions with people, you do not know what the other person is thinking about. You always have to second guess the real/hidden meaning of the other person's words. Take for example:
Guy: Hey, it's late, I think it's better if I walk you home. If not very dangerous.
Girl: Hmm, no need lah. Quite safe one. Very short distance only also.
*Pause*
What should the guy do? It all depends on his assumptions about what is the real meaning of her words?
For example, assume there are only 2 kinds of people in this world - sick or healthy. They are all interested in buying insurance. Obviously it seems intuitive that the insurance company should charge a higher premium for sick people since they are more likely to die and to charge a lower premium for healthy people who are less likely to die. However, that is only possible if the insurance company KNOWS who is sick or who is healthy. In reality, the insurance company won't know the Dick who walked into their company doors one day to buy insurance is a rock climbing enthusiast who runs marathons, or a good-for-nothing bummer who eats bacon and eggs all day, chain smokes and drinks alcohol like plain water.
So what happens? The insurance company, in order to remain profitable, is forced to charge according to the assumption that you are a sick person, or at least that you have half a chance to be a sick person. This then raises the premium for a healthy person from the optimal situation. And being the rational consumer that he healthy person is, he will choose not to buy insurance. The insurance company is then left with sick people as customers, and of course they are not going to sell insurance to sick people. And thus the end result is everyone is worse off with no insurance.
Yeah so what?
In life, situations of asymmetric information arise all the time. When you buy stuff from ebay, you are not certain whether the thing you buy is as good as described by the seller. When you are walking on a street with a shady looking character walking towards you, you do not know whether he is a normal person or has evil intentions. When a salesman is trying to sell you something, you do not know whether to trust all his words.
Uh-huh, SO WHAT??
Most importantly, in everyday interactions with people, you do not know what the other person is thinking about. You always have to second guess the real/hidden meaning of the other person's words. Take for example:
Guy: Hey, it's late, I think it's better if I walk you home. If not very dangerous.
Girl: Hmm, no need lah. Quite safe one. Very short distance only also.
*Pause*
What should the guy do? It all depends on his assumptions about what is the real meaning of her words?
- Did she really mean that it is safe for her to walk home?
- Did she just want to be polite and not want to trouble the guy?
- Or was she just politely telling him that she has had enough of him and asking him to fuck off?
In the first 2 cases, the guy should then insist on walking the girl home. The girl will be 99.9% safe and goes home with good impression of guy. Guy does a good deed and feels gentlemanly. Optimal situation.
And of course in the 3rd case, the guy should quickly just fuck off from her sight. Optimal situation.
But in the world of assymetric information, assumptions may be wrong. For example, if the girl means number 2, but the guy thinks its number 3, optimal situation would not occur. Guy goes home feeling sad. Girl goes home thinking the guy is ungentlemanly. If the girl means number 3 but the guy thinks its number 2, the guy insists on going home with the girl. Girl thinks the guy is irritating, guy probably won't get another chance with the girl next time.
Of course, if the relationship between the 2 individuals (generalising to between anybody now...not just boy-girl) had reached a certain level, the chances of making the right assumptions do increase. But that doesn't mean that he/she will get it right all the time. On a more fundamental level, how do you know what the other person is thinking? The person may say "it's all right", "I don't mind", "Sui bian", "Cin cai" but do they really mean what they are saying?
Are they really indifferent between the options available?
How many times have you made the decision then after a while realised actually they were not that indifferent after all?
How many times have you made a decision only to realise that it was not the optimal because you had the wrong impression (i.e wrong assumption in our model)?
In case you all haven't noticed, I have always been thinking about this. The recent work load, bad luck or just plain irritating incidents just seem to bring the kao peh side of me out. I hate not knowing what other people are REALLY thinking. I know the world would be very boring if everything is as clear as black and white, but I am really getting xian of wasting other people's time/getting people irritated/making myself miserable/generally just making the wrong choice or comment. It would be helpful if everyone had a traffic light somewhere telling me what to do. I may be colour blind but at least I know the light at the top is no-go, the one in the middle means "hey, watch it, it's coming close now" and the light at the bottom is "full steam ahead!".
I am dumb, socially inapt. So next time please at least give me some indication as to what you really think. On second thoughts, make that a big broad hint. It might just lead to a much much better outcome.
Rambling over. Need to prepare for presentation discussion tomorrow. Sigh I hate work, but I won't drop it because it's interesting. Back to workload vs interest again. Bummer
Wednesday, November 24, 2004
A Millenium
BBC's defining moments for Ferguson
Fergie's United managerial record
If you had saved 1 dollar for every match that Sir Alex Ferguson had managed United for, you would have had 1000 dollars in your piggy bank by the end of yesterday. Yes, that's the astronomical number of games that Fergie had been in the dugout as Man United manager. So how fitting was it that his team chose the perfect occasion to demonstrate to the world that Fergie is by no means past it, at least not by a long way yet.
I can't even begin to describe how pleased I was with yesterday's performance. So pleased I was that even when Carroll's mistake occurred, I did not explode (I am NOT lying! *Sompa*). The passing was short and sharp, the movements of Scholes, Rooney, Ronaldo and Smith in midfield were a joy to watch. Its amazing how smooth the play can be without Djemba Djemba or Bellion to fuck things up. The signs were there against Man City and Newcastle and this was a further improvement. It was by no means the best performance ever but it is a step in the roght direction. Roy Keane, Fergie's trusted lieutenant for the best part of the past 10 years, chose this occasion too to rise above his recent mediocre performance to provide the platform for the best present to his boss. Another of his quiet warriors Gary Neville marked the occasion with a goal too.
In the past few years, I had heard or seen quite a few people saying Fergie was past it, was losing it etc. I had criticised some of his decisions (selling Stam being number 1) but I had never called for him to be replaced or sacked (at least not since Sec 3 as far as I can remember). This is because you simply do not sack a man who had brought so much success and negate all his achievements with just one pink letter. Short of dragging United into a relegation dogfight, he must never ever be sacked. The club maybe more important than any single individual, but this is certainly one near exception. The amount of success since 1990 had been simply phenomenal. There were only 4 seasons in his reign where he did not win a single trophy (and I am only counting the major important trophies). Quite simply, he had earned the right to decide when he wants to step down.
So to see those people on manutd.com's forum calling for Ferguson to be sacked earlier in the season really pisses me off to no end. These people jumped on the United bandwagon because of the trophies (I was a bit like them...but I supported them because they were second, not because they were first at the time....but that is another story for another time...) and when the trophies and victories did not come, they began attacking the man who made all these possible. They did not understand that for 26 years, the United fans had suffered far more than they ever did now. What is a year or two without a title compared to 26 years? They called for his head, without stopping to think that who was responsible for elevating their expectations in the first place. Stupid comments like for example "dropping points to Boro and Blackburn etc is not good enough for a club as big as United" are made without realising that it was FERGUSON who made the club as big as it is now. For 26 years, inconsistency and dropping points against mediocre opposition had been the usual at Old Trafford. Ferguson was the man who made such inconsistency unacceptable.
I hope those idiots can take a long hard look at themselves and realise how foolish they had been. If not quite simply they should fuck off. United do not need such fans who attack the team and the manager when chips are down (though feel free to criticise Djemba Djemba and Bellion :P)
On that note, I would like to end off with a thanks to Ferguson for giving me so much joy over the last 10 years. Here's to many more landmarks and 1000 games.
Thursday, November 18, 2004
What? No football to talk about today?
I was incredibly bored today. Especially brain dead after finishing reading through 2 journal articles, no mean feat for me since the total number of journal articles I had read over the past 5 weeks is a hugely impressive 3. I am slowly confirming my belief that I am not smart, just hardworking. Throw me a well laid out textbook and I can absorb very well. Give me a journal article which is not clearly structured (at least to me) in the sense that there is no reason a, reason b, reason c which causes XXXX, and I struggle to make any sense out of it. Really I am just reading and underlining without any real understanding of what I am supposed to know and whether I AM supposed to know them at all. Not sure how I can cope with the exams even though it is an interesting course.
First Theorem of the Economics of Studying:
"There is a fundamental tradeoff between how interesting a course is and the amount of work you have to do"
TosH (Nov 2004)
My progress in going through the articles (using going through instead of reading as the latter requires more effort which I did not) was pretty rapid during the afternoon given that I had a mini virus scare and ended up scanning my lap top like 4 times in total which meant that I could not do anything with it for a few hours. However, my progress got significantly slower as the day went by.
Second Theorem of the Economics of Studying:
"Law of diminishing returns exist in studying. As you add more of the variable factor (information, textbook, articles) to the fixed factor (brain) the marginal product of the variable factor (learning) eventually declines (i.e. you end up just going through words)"
TosH (Nov 2004)
As if others had not already found out. Duh.
But yeah so I began to do some surfing around the net again and I began to go back archives of the column that I liked in Straits Times and came across the following article:
From: Straits Times
July 26, 2004
Wait, I forgot my accent
When an American friend visited me recently, I was forced to speak with an accent. I wasn't trying to be cool - I just wanted to be understood
By Karl Ho
STRAIGHT TALK
RECENTLY, I found out that I swing both ways.
Linguistically speaking, that is.
When I banter with friends here, I speak like a typical Singaporean.
But when Eric, a long-time friend from the United States, came to visit earlier this month, I found, to my surprise, my intonations running amok the moment I opened my mouth to greet him at the airport.
'How's it going?' became a bewildering 'Hau's id GO-urn?'.
'What are you talking about?' morphed into an incomprehensible 'Wad-er ye TAWK-in aboud?'
For some strange reason, I started speaking more slowly and my brain seemed to take a longer time to translate my thoughts into speech.
Worse, a long-lost American drawl - and a very cringe-worthy one at that - started rearing its ugly head when I spoke to my American buddy.
But when I got to talking to my local friends later, I sounded Singaporean again.
It was then that I realised that an age-old affliction had come back to haunt me: Bi-accentism.
This word, which I coined, will probably not make it into the Oxford English Dictionary.
But bi-accentism is a word I think has meaning to many of my peers.
Because, like it or not, many of us shift linguistic gears whenever we move from talking to Singaporeans to ang mohs.
And unlike a certain local celebrity whom I hear got his American accent while working at a Subway restaurant here, I'm not trying to be cool when I adopt a twang.
I'm just trying to be understood.
It's the same with a friend who works in bank relations.
She says she changes her accent all the time when dealing with foreign clients.
'I'm like a walking United Nations of accents, but my speciality is the English Northern accent,' she says.
'Once you stress different consonants or syllables, they'll not understand you,' she adds. 'And I can't have that because I'm reading them important numbers and instructions over conference calls all the time.'
MANY of the Speak Good English campaigns here are based on the presumption that once you toss out Singlish and speak grammatical English, everyone will understand you.
Well, when I spoke up in class at the American university I studied in in the mid-1990s, I made sure there were no 'lahs' or 'lors'.
But not everybody understood me anyway.
That's because in mid-western America, where many people have very little contact with the outside world, much less know where Singapore is, a Singaporean accent is probably as alien to them as a D24 durian.
Eric, my American friend, should know. Although he's had to endure my Anglo-Singlish mutant twang in school and is a three-time visitor to Singapore, he's still getting used to how we speak.
Over dinner one day, he told me about his encounter with a girl from a travel agency while he was booking a trip to Malacca.
'She was going on and on, and while most of the parts I understood, the others, like putting on a sticker so that the tour people can recognise you, I kind of deduced only when she pointed at the sticker.'
He adds: 'My brain just takes a longer time to process the words because the pronunciations are different. But if my friend from the Chicago suburbs were to talk to the girl, he'd be like, 'huh'?'
So, in order to blend in and not stick out like a sore thumb, the young and clueless international student that I was learnt to speak 'American'.
In fact, Peter Tan Kok Wan, a senior lecturer at the National University of Singapore's English language and literature department, says that 'bi-accentism' is a perfectly understandable social coping mechanism.
In sociolinguistics, there's a theory called 'convergence' where a speaker moves towards the speech style of his interlocutor so as to reduce social distance, he says.
Mr Colin Goh, founder of the satirical Singapore website TalkingCock.com, also professes to be a 'linguistic chameleon' himself.
Currently based in New York, he says that it's easier to be yourself there because 'almost everyone has a different accent'.
Nonetheless, he switches speech patterns when he's with friends in Singapore.
'Sometimes with old 'Hokkien peng' friends, I also become more Beng than I would otherwise be,' he tells me in an e-mail.
To him, bi-accentism is more acceptable than those who affect a foreign accent even among fellow Singaporeans.
'You know the type - lived all their life in Singapore, then go study overseas for a couple of years and come back with a potato stuffed in their mouth - the annoying 'Hellew, dew yew play Polew?' sort I used to encounter when I studied in England,' he says.
'Now, that's a real sign of cultural (and personal) insecurity.'
THEN again, being able to switch accents isn't necessarily the mark of a confident individual either.
I, for one, will readily confess that I still have years to go before I become a truly self-assured man who's not afraid of being himself.
Maybe my haphazard American accent is part of a bigger cultural debate: that despite Singapore's progress as a nation, Singaporeans still subconsciously emulate the West.
It is a topic that linguists and sociologists can debate about.
Meanwhile, I believe that switching accents is the most pragmatic way to be tapped into the global village yet not lose my identity as a Singaporean.
Ultimately, the best way to speak, as Straits Times TV editor Jennifer Lewis will tell you, might be a 'consistent Singaporean sound with clear and precise speech'.
After all, if ambassador-at-large Tommy Koh can cruise through the United Nations with his very Singaporean accent, then why not me?
So if I ever visit Eric at his home in Phoenix, Arizona, I'll try my Singaporean accent there, just for the heck of it.
And if it draws blank faces, then I'll just revert to 'Wad-er ye TAWK-in aboud?'
This is something that I myself had experienced before. But I do not try to talk with an ang moh accent. Rather when I am talking to mainland Chinese, I try to use their kind of Chinese. You know the kind where you need to curl your tongue. When I speak in English to Hong Kongers, I speak in their kind of English. Don't really know how to describe it, maybe a bit Jay Zhou-ish kind of drawl and unclear in pronounciation. When I speak to Malays, I put on the Mat accent, but I don't think I am close to imitating them. They are just, well, too Mat.
I don't know why I do it, but it just comes naturally to me. Depending on who I am speaking to, I try to speak like them. The only exception is with the ang mohs. I CONSCIOUSLY do not use words like "mate" and "cheers" because I know they are used more by ang mohs than by Singaporeans. Maybe I am scared of being accused of "fake". Another reason might be because I cannot catch what they are saying at all. Scottish, Mancunian accents belong to one group for me. Italian, Spanish accents belong to another group. But the common thread which runs through them is I find it hard to catch what they are saying. Instead of the writer's problem where he has to pause and then speak, I have to pause and think about what the other person had said. Perhaps this has contributed to my lack of willingness to interact with ang mohs (exceptions being football fans) for fear of exposing my slowness and also the fear of irritating the other party. And it all becomes a vicious cycle.
Or maybe there is a very fundamental explanation for it all. I am a true blue hawker centre eating, neighbourhood school going, SBS bus/MRT taking Singaporean. The world of RJ/AC and jiak kan dang people just isn't for me.
Mat accent rocks.
First Theorem of the Economics of Studying:
"There is a fundamental tradeoff between how interesting a course is and the amount of work you have to do"
TosH (Nov 2004)
My progress in going through the articles (using going through instead of reading as the latter requires more effort which I did not) was pretty rapid during the afternoon given that I had a mini virus scare and ended up scanning my lap top like 4 times in total which meant that I could not do anything with it for a few hours. However, my progress got significantly slower as the day went by.
Second Theorem of the Economics of Studying:
"Law of diminishing returns exist in studying. As you add more of the variable factor (information, textbook, articles) to the fixed factor (brain) the marginal product of the variable factor (learning) eventually declines (i.e. you end up just going through words)"
TosH (Nov 2004)
As if others had not already found out. Duh.
But yeah so I began to do some surfing around the net again and I began to go back archives of the column that I liked in Straits Times and came across the following article:
From: Straits Times
July 26, 2004
Wait, I forgot my accent
When an American friend visited me recently, I was forced to speak with an accent. I wasn't trying to be cool - I just wanted to be understood
By Karl Ho
STRAIGHT TALK
RECENTLY, I found out that I swing both ways.
Linguistically speaking, that is.
When I banter with friends here, I speak like a typical Singaporean.
But when Eric, a long-time friend from the United States, came to visit earlier this month, I found, to my surprise, my intonations running amok the moment I opened my mouth to greet him at the airport.
'How's it going?' became a bewildering 'Hau's id GO-urn?'.
'What are you talking about?' morphed into an incomprehensible 'Wad-er ye TAWK-in aboud?'
For some strange reason, I started speaking more slowly and my brain seemed to take a longer time to translate my thoughts into speech.
Worse, a long-lost American drawl - and a very cringe-worthy one at that - started rearing its ugly head when I spoke to my American buddy.
But when I got to talking to my local friends later, I sounded Singaporean again.
It was then that I realised that an age-old affliction had come back to haunt me: Bi-accentism.
This word, which I coined, will probably not make it into the Oxford English Dictionary.
But bi-accentism is a word I think has meaning to many of my peers.
Because, like it or not, many of us shift linguistic gears whenever we move from talking to Singaporeans to ang mohs.
And unlike a certain local celebrity whom I hear got his American accent while working at a Subway restaurant here, I'm not trying to be cool when I adopt a twang.
I'm just trying to be understood.
It's the same with a friend who works in bank relations.
She says she changes her accent all the time when dealing with foreign clients.
'I'm like a walking United Nations of accents, but my speciality is the English Northern accent,' she says.
'Once you stress different consonants or syllables, they'll not understand you,' she adds. 'And I can't have that because I'm reading them important numbers and instructions over conference calls all the time.'
MANY of the Speak Good English campaigns here are based on the presumption that once you toss out Singlish and speak grammatical English, everyone will understand you.
Well, when I spoke up in class at the American university I studied in in the mid-1990s, I made sure there were no 'lahs' or 'lors'.
But not everybody understood me anyway.
That's because in mid-western America, where many people have very little contact with the outside world, much less know where Singapore is, a Singaporean accent is probably as alien to them as a D24 durian.
Eric, my American friend, should know. Although he's had to endure my Anglo-Singlish mutant twang in school and is a three-time visitor to Singapore, he's still getting used to how we speak.
Over dinner one day, he told me about his encounter with a girl from a travel agency while he was booking a trip to Malacca.
'She was going on and on, and while most of the parts I understood, the others, like putting on a sticker so that the tour people can recognise you, I kind of deduced only when she pointed at the sticker.'
He adds: 'My brain just takes a longer time to process the words because the pronunciations are different. But if my friend from the Chicago suburbs were to talk to the girl, he'd be like, 'huh'?'
So, in order to blend in and not stick out like a sore thumb, the young and clueless international student that I was learnt to speak 'American'.
In fact, Peter Tan Kok Wan, a senior lecturer at the National University of Singapore's English language and literature department, says that 'bi-accentism' is a perfectly understandable social coping mechanism.
In sociolinguistics, there's a theory called 'convergence' where a speaker moves towards the speech style of his interlocutor so as to reduce social distance, he says.
Mr Colin Goh, founder of the satirical Singapore website TalkingCock.com, also professes to be a 'linguistic chameleon' himself.
Currently based in New York, he says that it's easier to be yourself there because 'almost everyone has a different accent'.
Nonetheless, he switches speech patterns when he's with friends in Singapore.
'Sometimes with old 'Hokkien peng' friends, I also become more Beng than I would otherwise be,' he tells me in an e-mail.
To him, bi-accentism is more acceptable than those who affect a foreign accent even among fellow Singaporeans.
'You know the type - lived all their life in Singapore, then go study overseas for a couple of years and come back with a potato stuffed in their mouth - the annoying 'Hellew, dew yew play Polew?' sort I used to encounter when I studied in England,' he says.
'Now, that's a real sign of cultural (and personal) insecurity.'
THEN again, being able to switch accents isn't necessarily the mark of a confident individual either.
I, for one, will readily confess that I still have years to go before I become a truly self-assured man who's not afraid of being himself.
Maybe my haphazard American accent is part of a bigger cultural debate: that despite Singapore's progress as a nation, Singaporeans still subconsciously emulate the West.
It is a topic that linguists and sociologists can debate about.
Meanwhile, I believe that switching accents is the most pragmatic way to be tapped into the global village yet not lose my identity as a Singaporean.
Ultimately, the best way to speak, as Straits Times TV editor Jennifer Lewis will tell you, might be a 'consistent Singaporean sound with clear and precise speech'.
After all, if ambassador-at-large Tommy Koh can cruise through the United Nations with his very Singaporean accent, then why not me?
So if I ever visit Eric at his home in Phoenix, Arizona, I'll try my Singaporean accent there, just for the heck of it.
And if it draws blank faces, then I'll just revert to 'Wad-er ye TAWK-in aboud?'
This is something that I myself had experienced before. But I do not try to talk with an ang moh accent. Rather when I am talking to mainland Chinese, I try to use their kind of Chinese. You know the kind where you need to curl your tongue. When I speak in English to Hong Kongers, I speak in their kind of English. Don't really know how to describe it, maybe a bit Jay Zhou-ish kind of drawl and unclear in pronounciation. When I speak to Malays, I put on the Mat accent, but I don't think I am close to imitating them. They are just, well, too Mat.
I don't know why I do it, but it just comes naturally to me. Depending on who I am speaking to, I try to speak like them. The only exception is with the ang mohs. I CONSCIOUSLY do not use words like "mate" and "cheers" because I know they are used more by ang mohs than by Singaporeans. Maybe I am scared of being accused of "fake". Another reason might be because I cannot catch what they are saying at all. Scottish, Mancunian accents belong to one group for me. Italian, Spanish accents belong to another group. But the common thread which runs through them is I find it hard to catch what they are saying. Instead of the writer's problem where he has to pause and then speak, I have to pause and think about what the other person had said. Perhaps this has contributed to my lack of willingness to interact with ang mohs (exceptions being football fans) for fear of exposing my slowness and also the fear of irritating the other party. And it all becomes a vicious cycle.
Or maybe there is a very fundamental explanation for it all. I am a true blue hawker centre eating, neighbourhood school going, SBS bus/MRT taking Singaporean. The world of RJ/AC and jiak kan dang people just isn't for me.
Mat accent rocks.
Tuesday, November 16, 2004
Gripes about Straits Times part II
From Straits Times :
Nov 14, 2004
Civil war at Man United
Old Trafford is reeling after tycoon Glazer removes three directors, players face wage cuts
MANCHESTER
MANCHESTER United may insist on calling themselves the biggest soccer club in the world but even they can no longer afford to pay for the best players.
The club's biggest earners have been warned to expect wage cuts and a shift to performance-related pay if they want to stay at Old Trafford.
The startling admission came as American tycoon and renegade shareholder Malcolm Glazer used his £205 million (S$627.3 million) stake to force out three club directors during Friday's annual general meeting as revenge for the board's rejection of his takeover bid last month.
It capped what has been a tumultous two seasons at Old Trafford.
United were badly hit because they got a smaller share of the European Champions League pot after finishing a modest third in the English Premiership last season.
And chief executive David Gill claims that players will have to pay the price for their recent failures following a fall in profits of £8 million.
Roy Keane is one of a number of players - along with Ryan Giggs, Ole Gunnar Solskjaer, Roy Carroll and John O'Shea - whose contracts are up for renewal because their current deals expire at the end of next season.
Captain Keane currently earns £90,000 a week, but United are ready to make up to 25 per cent of wages incentive-driven.
Giggs has already rejected the offer of a one-year extension and United's new tough stance could further weaken the club's position in the transfer market when competing against the likes of Chelsea and Real Madrid.
Last summer, United lost Ronaldinho to Barcelona. A year later, Chelsea stole PSV Eindhoven's Arjen Robben from under the nose of manager Alex Ferguson by offering him more money.
The Dutch sensation said on Friday: 'I had a meeting with Ferguson and it was very good. After that, the clubs had to come to a deal and it took a long time for United and they didn't come to a deal.
'It's not difficult for me because Chelsea came in.'
United, seventh in the table after their worst start to a Premiership campaign, need quality signings badly given their lacklustre bargains like Eric Djemba-Djemba, Kleberson, Liam Miller and Tim Howard, and the latest news will worry fans.
Gill said: 'We can't ignore what's happening. The players need to understand that the economics of the game have changed over the last few years.
'Wage cuts would depend on the player. We'd like, particularly for the younger players, to have more appearance-based money.'
At the same time, Gill has to find a way to deal with a takeover campaign by Glazer, which is growing more hostile.
The American, who sent an associate to vote secretly on his behalf at the AGM, removed legal adviser Maurice Watkins, who has been on the board since 1984, commercial director Andy Anson and non-executive director Philip Yea in an open declaration of war.
The board has now been reduced to just four members.
Equally worrying was how John Magnier and J.P. McManus, the biggest shareholders with 28.9 per cent, did not do anything to stop Glazer, despite an appeal from the board, reported The Telegraph.
The Irish millionires could have saved the three members. Instead, they abstained in the vote, an indication that it is only a matter of time before they sell their shares to the American, giving him sole control of United.
But Glazer did not have it all his own way after JP Morgan, one of the world's largest financial firms, announced that it had ended its association with him as it was uncomfortable with the aggressive approach. His public relations adviser, and Allen & Overy, the law firm he used in the negotiations, also resigned.
The Glazer family, who own 28.11 per cent of the club, were furious at United's Oct 25 decision not to recommend their takeover, which would have left the club with debts of £500 million, and without Old Trafford, which was to have been sold to raise a further £175 million.
The stadium, United's home since 1910, would then be leased back but be renamed in a sponsorship deal to raise further funds for the club.
All the United board could do in the aftermath of the dismissal of the three directors was to say it was 'disappointed' by the outcome of the vote and urge Glazer to stop his guerrilla tactics.
I just love bashing Straits Times nowadays, see what I mean about shitty journalism? This is yet another case about cutting and paste whatever there is without ANY effort to check out what is right and what is just pure bullshit conjecture.
But first I have to agree that Glazer's actions are nothing short of declaring war on the Man United board. There are only 4 directors left now (though the 3 who were axed can still be reinstated but confirmation would have to depend on ratification at the next AGM). He could very well push for his own representative on the board (thereby creating more problems for the board) but that of course would be subjected to a vote as well.
However, most of the rest of the article is bullshit.
Firstly, the difference in the prize money between second and third place is less than a million pounds. Hardly what you would call a big difference, especially for a club like Manchester United. It is true however that money from television deals had declined but that is true for every club in the country as the Sky money declines. It does not affect Manchester United alone.
Secondly, United had not paid the highest wages in the world ever. It is nothing new. It was there when we could not sign players like Ronaldo and Zidane simply because the wage structure in place did not allow it. It had not prevented United from achieving success (even if you do pay high wages and make big signings, you are not guaranteed success, look at Veron, look at Real Madrid).
Famous people in the football world (Bolton chairman for one) had already said that its a good thing that United are taking the lead on having performance based contracts and that this is the way to go for football clubs in the future because the days of huge inflows of television money is gone. Getting your finances in order is hardly what I would call a disadvantage. If anything, this is better as players who come to United would genuinely want to succeed and do well instead of being here for a big pay day.
Man United did not lose Arjen Robben to Chelsea because of the player's wages. It is because they could not even agree a fee with PSV. As I have said before, Peter Kenyon fucked around with PSV and they got fed up and sold to Chelsea. The PSV chairman had come out after the deal was done to criticise the way Kenyon fucked around with them. And of course Arjen Robben was going to go to Chelsea because it is the only club he could have been allowed to discuss terms with. Yet again, shitty journalism without checking out the facts.
But perhaps my favourite piece of shitty journalism had to be the following:
The Irish millionires could have saved the three members. Instead, they abstained in the vote, an indication that it is only a matter of time before they sell their shares to the American, giving him sole control of United.
Could you follow the logic there? I for one could not. How can you arrive at that conclusion? It is just pure bullshit from a journalist (and ST copied it wholesale without thinking) who was desperately trying to paint a picture of a crisis at United. The Irish guys (hardly angels themselves though) had ALWAYS ABSTAINED from voting at AGMs. This is nothing new. So how can you arrive at the conclusion that they are going to sell to Glazer? This is just pure taking material out of context and anyhow putting an inference to it. If anything, speculation is that the Irish guys do not really think much of Glazer though that is also pretty much speculation and the situation would change if Glazer comes back and offer them much better terms.
The conclusion of the article also attempted pathetically to try and induce the reader to think that it is all over (the use of the words "All the United board could do...), and Glazer had gained the upper hand. This is simply not true. If anything, he had been weakened since Friday when JP Morgan pulled out as mentioned in the article. What was conveniently left out was the reason for the pull out was that JP Morgan had ADVISED Glazer not to vote against the resolutions but he went ahead and did it anyway. And so they pulled out. The board can also ask the Takeover Panel to force Glazer to state clear his intentions to either bid for the club or leave it alone in layman's terms. There are also other things that the board and the fans (don't underestimate them) could do. Glazer's path to takeover is far from smooth. It might have been inevitable if he was rich as Abramovich, but he is no Roman.
I hate bullshit journalism.
Nov 14, 2004
Civil war at Man United
Old Trafford is reeling after tycoon Glazer removes three directors, players face wage cuts
MANCHESTER
MANCHESTER United may insist on calling themselves the biggest soccer club in the world but even they can no longer afford to pay for the best players.
The club's biggest earners have been warned to expect wage cuts and a shift to performance-related pay if they want to stay at Old Trafford.
The startling admission came as American tycoon and renegade shareholder Malcolm Glazer used his £205 million (S$627.3 million) stake to force out three club directors during Friday's annual general meeting as revenge for the board's rejection of his takeover bid last month.
It capped what has been a tumultous two seasons at Old Trafford.
United were badly hit because they got a smaller share of the European Champions League pot after finishing a modest third in the English Premiership last season.
And chief executive David Gill claims that players will have to pay the price for their recent failures following a fall in profits of £8 million.
Roy Keane is one of a number of players - along with Ryan Giggs, Ole Gunnar Solskjaer, Roy Carroll and John O'Shea - whose contracts are up for renewal because their current deals expire at the end of next season.
Captain Keane currently earns £90,000 a week, but United are ready to make up to 25 per cent of wages incentive-driven.
Giggs has already rejected the offer of a one-year extension and United's new tough stance could further weaken the club's position in the transfer market when competing against the likes of Chelsea and Real Madrid.
Last summer, United lost Ronaldinho to Barcelona. A year later, Chelsea stole PSV Eindhoven's Arjen Robben from under the nose of manager Alex Ferguson by offering him more money.
The Dutch sensation said on Friday: 'I had a meeting with Ferguson and it was very good. After that, the clubs had to come to a deal and it took a long time for United and they didn't come to a deal.
'It's not difficult for me because Chelsea came in.'
United, seventh in the table after their worst start to a Premiership campaign, need quality signings badly given their lacklustre bargains like Eric Djemba-Djemba, Kleberson, Liam Miller and Tim Howard, and the latest news will worry fans.
Gill said: 'We can't ignore what's happening. The players need to understand that the economics of the game have changed over the last few years.
'Wage cuts would depend on the player. We'd like, particularly for the younger players, to have more appearance-based money.'
At the same time, Gill has to find a way to deal with a takeover campaign by Glazer, which is growing more hostile.
The American, who sent an associate to vote secretly on his behalf at the AGM, removed legal adviser Maurice Watkins, who has been on the board since 1984, commercial director Andy Anson and non-executive director Philip Yea in an open declaration of war.
The board has now been reduced to just four members.
Equally worrying was how John Magnier and J.P. McManus, the biggest shareholders with 28.9 per cent, did not do anything to stop Glazer, despite an appeal from the board, reported The Telegraph.
The Irish millionires could have saved the three members. Instead, they abstained in the vote, an indication that it is only a matter of time before they sell their shares to the American, giving him sole control of United.
But Glazer did not have it all his own way after JP Morgan, one of the world's largest financial firms, announced that it had ended its association with him as it was uncomfortable with the aggressive approach. His public relations adviser, and Allen & Overy, the law firm he used in the negotiations, also resigned.
The Glazer family, who own 28.11 per cent of the club, were furious at United's Oct 25 decision not to recommend their takeover, which would have left the club with debts of £500 million, and without Old Trafford, which was to have been sold to raise a further £175 million.
The stadium, United's home since 1910, would then be leased back but be renamed in a sponsorship deal to raise further funds for the club.
All the United board could do in the aftermath of the dismissal of the three directors was to say it was 'disappointed' by the outcome of the vote and urge Glazer to stop his guerrilla tactics.
I just love bashing Straits Times nowadays, see what I mean about shitty journalism? This is yet another case about cutting and paste whatever there is without ANY effort to check out what is right and what is just pure bullshit conjecture.
But first I have to agree that Glazer's actions are nothing short of declaring war on the Man United board. There are only 4 directors left now (though the 3 who were axed can still be reinstated but confirmation would have to depend on ratification at the next AGM). He could very well push for his own representative on the board (thereby creating more problems for the board) but that of course would be subjected to a vote as well.
However, most of the rest of the article is bullshit.
Firstly, the difference in the prize money between second and third place is less than a million pounds. Hardly what you would call a big difference, especially for a club like Manchester United. It is true however that money from television deals had declined but that is true for every club in the country as the Sky money declines. It does not affect Manchester United alone.
Secondly, United had not paid the highest wages in the world ever. It is nothing new. It was there when we could not sign players like Ronaldo and Zidane simply because the wage structure in place did not allow it. It had not prevented United from achieving success (even if you do pay high wages and make big signings, you are not guaranteed success, look at Veron, look at Real Madrid).
Famous people in the football world (Bolton chairman for one) had already said that its a good thing that United are taking the lead on having performance based contracts and that this is the way to go for football clubs in the future because the days of huge inflows of television money is gone. Getting your finances in order is hardly what I would call a disadvantage. If anything, this is better as players who come to United would genuinely want to succeed and do well instead of being here for a big pay day.
Man United did not lose Arjen Robben to Chelsea because of the player's wages. It is because they could not even agree a fee with PSV. As I have said before, Peter Kenyon fucked around with PSV and they got fed up and sold to Chelsea. The PSV chairman had come out after the deal was done to criticise the way Kenyon fucked around with them. And of course Arjen Robben was going to go to Chelsea because it is the only club he could have been allowed to discuss terms with. Yet again, shitty journalism without checking out the facts.
But perhaps my favourite piece of shitty journalism had to be the following:
The Irish millionires could have saved the three members. Instead, they abstained in the vote, an indication that it is only a matter of time before they sell their shares to the American, giving him sole control of United.
Could you follow the logic there? I for one could not. How can you arrive at that conclusion? It is just pure bullshit from a journalist (and ST copied it wholesale without thinking) who was desperately trying to paint a picture of a crisis at United. The Irish guys (hardly angels themselves though) had ALWAYS ABSTAINED from voting at AGMs. This is nothing new. So how can you arrive at the conclusion that they are going to sell to Glazer? This is just pure taking material out of context and anyhow putting an inference to it. If anything, speculation is that the Irish guys do not really think much of Glazer though that is also pretty much speculation and the situation would change if Glazer comes back and offer them much better terms.
The conclusion of the article also attempted pathetically to try and induce the reader to think that it is all over (the use of the words "All the United board could do...), and Glazer had gained the upper hand. This is simply not true. If anything, he had been weakened since Friday when JP Morgan pulled out as mentioned in the article. What was conveniently left out was the reason for the pull out was that JP Morgan had ADVISED Glazer not to vote against the resolutions but he went ahead and did it anyway. And so they pulled out. The board can also ask the Takeover Panel to force Glazer to state clear his intentions to either bid for the club or leave it alone in layman's terms. There are also other things that the board and the fans (don't underestimate them) could do. Glazer's path to takeover is far from smooth. It might have been inevitable if he was rich as Abramovich, but he is no Roman.
I hate bullshit journalism.
An away day tale
A whirlwind of events during the weekend meant that I was able to fulfill another 2 of my football watching wishes, that of going to St James Park (Newcastle United's home ground) and going to an away game in the Manchester United end.
Friday night 8+ pm:
Read on the forum that 2 tickets for Newcastle vs Man United were available. 1 had already been taken. The Liverpool fan that I know is helping to collect the tickets. He said he might help to get rid of the other ticket.
Next 20 minutes:
Spent deliberating about whether to call up the guy and ask whether the ticket is still available. Didn't want to disturb someone I barely know.
9+ pm:
Heck, decided to sms him.
Anxious 15 minute wait later:
Beep beep, 1 message received: "The one this Saturday?"
Aberthen?
Another message: "If you can get it up to Newcastle then it is all yours mate"
Sweet music to my ears!!
And so the next hour or so was spent on arranging when to meet and collect the ticket and the travelling up to Newcastle. Caught up in the euphoria of getting the ticket, I overpaid 12.67 pounds for my coach ticket. Moral of the story: Always check the price again before you click 'book' over the internet.
Saturday:
Played football, generally just praying for time to pass by quickly.
Saturday 1015pm:
I got the ticket!!!!! And at face value too! What a bargain.
Saturday 1115pm:
Boarded coach to Newcastle. They really should have those frequent rider miles kind of thing. I am sure I am qualified to travel platinum class by now. Good luck always seem to come together. The coach was not full, I had 2 seats to myself entirely =)
Sunday 0530am:
God damn it, when you do not want the coach to arrive early, it does arrive early. 45 minutes earlier in fact. It is no fun to be wearing 3 layers but still shivering. My teeth were chattering too. Didn't even know where to go at that unearthly hour. Memories of Cardiff 2003 come flooding back to mind. Only difference is I had a ticket this time around. Would it all end in tears again at the end of the day?
0550am:
Finally decided to take the 10 minute walk to the train station in search for some warmth.
Newcastle Central Station
The station was devoid of any human beings at all. In total contrast to the stream of human beings at Euston Station pretty much all the time. I walked around the station in search for some warmth. Unfortunately the station is actually open so it was still pretty cold. Sat on the floor beside a pillar but my butt got too cold. Got up to go to the toilet. And it was in the toilet that I found warmth. Was seriously considering whether to stay in the toilet for 2 hours, it was that warm that the smell didn't matter. But decided it was too pathetic and came out again. Felt 100% like a homeless beggar on the streets. Began to have some new found respect for them. It's hard to stay on the streets everyday in the cold. But you want my spare change? Not a chance in the world.
0640am:
First signs of human activity. The ticket office was soon open, went inside to sit down to get warmth and eat sandwiches.
0800am:
Decided it was bright enough outside to walk around. Some pictures around town:
University of Newcastle compound. They have some students' Halls of Residences beside the stadium, how cool is that?
St Thomas Church near University of Newcastle
Old Eldon Square War Memorial. Would they one day add Iraq War 2003-20XX to it?
Castle Garth. The castle which gave Newcastle its name. Replaced the original castle and so aptly named New Castle.
Left: Tyne Bridge Right: Swing Bridge.
Me and Millenium Bridge. The Millenium Bridge was the first bridge over the Tyne River that was specially built for cyclists and pedestrians. When need be, the bridge can be tilted to allow bigger vessels in the river through.
Me and Tyne Bridge. The symbol of the city (the bridge, not me!!). Connects Newcastle-upon-Tyne to the north and Gateshead to the south.
Don't be fooled by the sun, its anything but warm.
Aptly named high level bridge. Over 100 years old now. First bridge in UK to allow pedestrians, road and rail traffic through.
0130pm:
Finally finished with the sights and got down to real business. Met the other guy to pass him the other ticket.
Sign outside the megastore at St James Park
I was quite impressed with the stadium. It is huge from the outside, even though its capacity is smaller than Old Trafford.
Leazes Park beside the stadium
St James Park as seen from Leazes Park
My view, was quite pleased with it.
A visibly apprehensive me.
I love stadiums with a view of the outside surroundings. But this time I wasn't going to be distracted by the scenery.
0400pm:
Match about to kickoff
Players lining up before the match.
Few interesting points:
Celebrating after Rooney's second goal, which killed off the game.
A visibly more relieved me after the game. Yeh! I was at an away game!
The Millenium Bridge at night.
Coach left Newcastle
Monday morning 0515am:
Coach reached London
Monday 9am:
Woke up for my lecture at 9am. :S
After note: A pretty good article on Soccernet which partly explains the lack of atmosphere at some stadiums.
For article click here
It seems pretty true, especially from United's point of view. I myself have sometimes felt that games like Charlton, Blackburn were just another league game. The atmosphere at big matches like against Man City, Liverpool and Leeds had never failed to inspire, but the ones against so called small teams can be very poor at times. Its an increasing sign of the times that fans who are going for matches these days need to be quite well off and there is a negative correlation between how well off you are and how loud you sing generally. Hardly expect an investment banker in general to sing as loudly as say an electrician. Pretty worrying trend.
Friday night 8+ pm:
Read on the forum that 2 tickets for Newcastle vs Man United were available. 1 had already been taken. The Liverpool fan that I know is helping to collect the tickets. He said he might help to get rid of the other ticket.
Next 20 minutes:
Spent deliberating about whether to call up the guy and ask whether the ticket is still available. Didn't want to disturb someone I barely know.
9+ pm:
Heck, decided to sms him.
Anxious 15 minute wait later:
Beep beep, 1 message received: "The one this Saturday?"
Aberthen?
Another message: "If you can get it up to Newcastle then it is all yours mate"
Sweet music to my ears!!
And so the next hour or so was spent on arranging when to meet and collect the ticket and the travelling up to Newcastle. Caught up in the euphoria of getting the ticket, I overpaid 12.67 pounds for my coach ticket. Moral of the story: Always check the price again before you click 'book' over the internet.
Saturday:
Played football, generally just praying for time to pass by quickly.
Saturday 1015pm:
I got the ticket!!!!! And at face value too! What a bargain.
Saturday 1115pm:
Boarded coach to Newcastle. They really should have those frequent rider miles kind of thing. I am sure I am qualified to travel platinum class by now. Good luck always seem to come together. The coach was not full, I had 2 seats to myself entirely =)
Sunday 0530am:
God damn it, when you do not want the coach to arrive early, it does arrive early. 45 minutes earlier in fact. It is no fun to be wearing 3 layers but still shivering. My teeth were chattering too. Didn't even know where to go at that unearthly hour. Memories of Cardiff 2003 come flooding back to mind. Only difference is I had a ticket this time around. Would it all end in tears again at the end of the day?
0550am:
Finally decided to take the 10 minute walk to the train station in search for some warmth.
Newcastle Central Station
The station was devoid of any human beings at all. In total contrast to the stream of human beings at Euston Station pretty much all the time. I walked around the station in search for some warmth. Unfortunately the station is actually open so it was still pretty cold. Sat on the floor beside a pillar but my butt got too cold. Got up to go to the toilet. And it was in the toilet that I found warmth. Was seriously considering whether to stay in the toilet for 2 hours, it was that warm that the smell didn't matter. But decided it was too pathetic and came out again. Felt 100% like a homeless beggar on the streets. Began to have some new found respect for them. It's hard to stay on the streets everyday in the cold. But you want my spare change? Not a chance in the world.
0640am:
First signs of human activity. The ticket office was soon open, went inside to sit down to get warmth and eat sandwiches.
0800am:
Decided it was bright enough outside to walk around. Some pictures around town:
University of Newcastle compound. They have some students' Halls of Residences beside the stadium, how cool is that?
St Thomas Church near University of Newcastle
Old Eldon Square War Memorial. Would they one day add Iraq War 2003-20XX to it?
Castle Garth. The castle which gave Newcastle its name. Replaced the original castle and so aptly named New Castle.
Left: Tyne Bridge Right: Swing Bridge.
Me and Millenium Bridge. The Millenium Bridge was the first bridge over the Tyne River that was specially built for cyclists and pedestrians. When need be, the bridge can be tilted to allow bigger vessels in the river through.
Me and Tyne Bridge. The symbol of the city (the bridge, not me!!). Connects Newcastle-upon-Tyne to the north and Gateshead to the south.
Don't be fooled by the sun, its anything but warm.
Aptly named high level bridge. Over 100 years old now. First bridge in UK to allow pedestrians, road and rail traffic through.
0130pm:
Finally finished with the sights and got down to real business. Met the other guy to pass him the other ticket.
Sign outside the megastore at St James Park
I was quite impressed with the stadium. It is huge from the outside, even though its capacity is smaller than Old Trafford.
Leazes Park beside the stadium
St James Park as seen from Leazes Park
My view, was quite pleased with it.
A visibly apprehensive me.
I love stadiums with a view of the outside surroundings. But this time I wasn't going to be distracted by the scenery.
0400pm:
Match about to kickoff
Players lining up before the match.
Few interesting points:
- You are searched before going into the stadium as an away fan. Things which are no no's include cans and glass bottles.
- Unfortunately, away day travel is still pretty much exclusive to ang mohs. I looked around my section and there was just 1 other middle aged Chinese. There were no black guys or other races.
- A camera holding Chinese man sitting in away stand = he paid ridiculous amount of money for his seat. An ang moh guy came over to ask me how much I paid for my ticket. When I told him 35 pounds he seemed genuinely surprised. Hmmm...
- You pay 35 pounds to STAND and watch a match. My butt only got acquianted with the plastic seat at St James Park twice, before the match and during halftime. The rest of the time I was standing all the way. I even had to jostle with other people for space when some of them just came in and stood in front of me.
- There was non-stop singing in the away stand throughout the whole match except for a 5 min spell before halftime when everyone had their hearts in their mouth as United continued to fuck themselves. Fantastic atmosphere throughout the match in the away end.
- The famous atmosphere at St James Park is just a myth. Throughout the match, the only time when I heard the whole stadium cheering was after Alan Shearer scored. The so called best fans in the country are only like that after all. You can say I can't judge after one game but if you can't muster more than a murmur of noise when Man United comes visiting then something is wrong. Chants like "Where's your famous atmosphere?" and "Sunderland, Sunderland give us a song" showed what the United fans in the away end thought. This writer (link) summed it all up perfectly.
- The Geordie night did not seem so cold after the game =)
Celebrating after Rooney's second goal, which killed off the game.
A visibly more relieved me after the game. Yeh! I was at an away game!
The Millenium Bridge at night.
There was still time to kill after the game. Had dinner at Chinatown which was so so and walked around town and along the river for a while. Glad that I did not wear my jersey or scarf to Newcastle as the bar code shirts were everywhere. :S
1110pm:Coach left Newcastle
Monday morning 0515am:
Coach reached London
Monday 9am:
Woke up for my lecture at 9am. :S
After note: A pretty good article on Soccernet which partly explains the lack of atmosphere at some stadiums.
For article click here
It seems pretty true, especially from United's point of view. I myself have sometimes felt that games like Charlton, Blackburn were just another league game. The atmosphere at big matches like against Man City, Liverpool and Leeds had never failed to inspire, but the ones against so called small teams can be very poor at times. Its an increasing sign of the times that fans who are going for matches these days need to be quite well off and there is a negative correlation between how well off you are and how loud you sing generally. Hardly expect an investment banker in general to sing as loudly as say an electrician. Pretty worrying trend.
Saturday, November 13, 2004
An additional note
Forgot to attack one more point in the "It's now Manchester Dis-United" article. Criticising Ferguson's transfer record is nothing short of "taking things out of context". Simply copying wholesale from anti-United British articles without thinking.
Tim Howard is a flop? He was named in the Premier League team of the season for fucks sake. Made tonnes of brilliant saves too! Against Man City in the FA Cup and against Bolton Wanderers from Okocha remember?
Liam Miller had barely played for 3 months and he is already considered a flop? Give me a break.
"And how he must rue his failure to sign Patrick Vieira..." Did Arsenal want to sell Vieira? Get some perspective here all right?
And similarly, Ferguson wanted Ronaldinho and Robben badly. But he does not control the purse strings. Peter Kenyon, the former CEO, fucked around with Paris St Germain (Ronaldinho's former club), and PSV Eindhoven (Robben's former club), not giving what the other clubs wanted and even offering derisory amounts. Of course the clubs broke off negotiations! And Kenyon subsequently jumped to Chelski. Good riddance. It is definitely no coincidence that after Kenyon left, United could pay 27 million pounds for a player (Rooney).
Tim Howard is a flop? He was named in the Premier League team of the season for fucks sake. Made tonnes of brilliant saves too! Against Man City in the FA Cup and against Bolton Wanderers from Okocha remember?
Liam Miller had barely played for 3 months and he is already considered a flop? Give me a break.
"And how he must rue his failure to sign Patrick Vieira..." Did Arsenal want to sell Vieira? Get some perspective here all right?
And similarly, Ferguson wanted Ronaldinho and Robben badly. But he does not control the purse strings. Peter Kenyon, the former CEO, fucked around with Paris St Germain (Ronaldinho's former club), and PSV Eindhoven (Robben's former club), not giving what the other clubs wanted and even offering derisory amounts. Of course the clubs broke off negotiations! And Kenyon subsequently jumped to Chelski. Good riddance. It is definitely no coincidence that after Kenyon left, United could pay 27 million pounds for a player (Rooney).
Friday, November 12, 2004
Gripes about Straits Times
From: http://straitstimes.asiaone.com.sg/sub/football/story/0,5597,284567,00.html?
Nov 12, 2004
SOCCER
It's now Manchester Dis-united
Ferguson blames some players, but there are fingers pointing at him
Manchester - A FEW weeks after declaring he was in the process of building his fifth great team at Manchester United, the foundations once again appear to be crumbling under Alex Ferguson.
Eleven points adrift of Chelsea after their worst start to a Premiership season, even Ferguson, facing a trip to Newcastle United on Sunday, admits his side, seventh in the table, are not good enough to win this season's title race.
Blame is the one thing United suddenly have plenty off and those in the club are busy handing it out.
Ferguson had harsh words for those who performed ineptly in the 0-0 draw against Manchester City last Sunday, most of them reserved for his £68.8 million (S$210 million) strikeforce - United's most impotent for 31 years.
'We cannot accept the chances we are missing,' said Ferguson, who even considered picking himself.
'The form we are showing is not good enough to win the championship.'
The statistics are damning. Wayne Rooney (£30m), Ruud van Nistelrooy (£19m), Louis Saha (£12.8m) and Alan Smith (£7m) have mustered a pitiful six of the paltry 11 goals United have scored in their opening 12 Premiership games.
The last time a United side fired as many blanks as that, they ended up being relegated.
That was back in the 1973-74 season, when they netted just 10 times in their first dozen matches, reported The Sun.
Here is another awful set of numbers: Only Chelsea (167) and Arsenal (159) have had more shots on goal than United (156) this season, but United are bottom of the League at converting their chances - at a measly rate of 6.5 per cent.
Which explains why they have failed to beat the lesser lights of the Premiership - City, Middlesbrough, Bolton, Blackburn - and even lost to Portsmouth. The United fear factor is truly gone, reported The Telegraph.
'To miss the chances we had is some kind of disgrace,' said Saha, who only broke his season's duck with a brace against Crystal Palace in the League Cup on Wednesday.
'It has got to change. Everyone knows we have the ability to score and people say it is just a matter of time.
'We keep saying that, but we have no more excuses now.'
Even Rooney, despite his tender age of 19, has come under fire. He has managed just one Premiership goal since his switch from Everton.
'For �30 million you would want Rooney to be performing every week and he is not,' said ex-United legend George Best.
But there are those who believe that the problems at United lie deeper, and the fingers point at Ferguson.
He has had wonderful success in the transfer market over the years, but the last two summers have not been his best with flops like Eric Djemba-Djemba, Kleberson, Liam Miller and Tim Howard, reported The Evening Standard.
Allowing David Beckham to join Real Madrid was one thing. Permitting Nicky Butt to move to Newcastle in the summer, when the cover for Roy Keane and Paul Scholes was below United's high standards, quite another.
And how he must rue his failure to sign Patrick Vieira from Arsenal in 2001 and, more recently, the PSV Eindhoven starlet Arjen Robben who now plays for Chelsea, and Barcelona's Ronaldinho.
With next summer's transfer budget already spent on Rooney, reinforcements are not going to come in the January transfer window, as Ferguson has pennies rather than pounds to play with.
When key players are not performing, selection can become difficult. Ferguson has admitted struggling to identify his strongest side, and his tactics are being questioned.
In the absence of the suspended van Nistelrooy, United could have used Rooney at his predatory best against City. Instead, Ferguson started him on the bench.
Even his players have started to doubt their boss.
Phil Neville has publicly admitted he does not know why he started just three League games all season, despite despite being rewarded for his 43 first-team appearances last season with a new five-year contract.
'I have played three games in six months, which isn't good enough really,' he told MUTV. 'I played against Arsenal and Portsmouth and thought I did okay. But then I found myself out of the team again.
'It is frustrating and I don't know why it has been like that. I came back for pre-season training fully fit and have not missed a day's training since, but I have not been selected.'
Another problem area has been goalkeeping. Ferguson took a gamble with the American Howard; it has not paid off. He has been forced to turn to Roy Carroll who, like Howard, is no Peter Schmeichel.
Such is the desperation at Old Trafford that Ferguson is doing all he can to not lose the Northern Ireland international, who is insisting on the guarantee that he remains as first-choice.
'We have made Roy the offer of a new contract that his agent has turned down,' said Ferguson yesterday. 'Hopefully there will be a change of mind and he will stay, as I am not looking for a new goalkeeper.'
And that is causing Howard to feel resentful.
'A goalkeeper is a very convenient scapegoat,' said the 25-year-old, whose high-profile blunders against Bolton and Lyon in the Champions League saw him lose his place. 'But I'm always going to own up to my mistakes. Did I lose us games? No, no.
'Did I contribute to it? Yes. But it takes 11 of us to win and 11 of us to lose.'
Captain Keane believes the team ethic that had long been United's greatest strength is lost.
He said: 'The talent is there, there's no doubt about that. But it's doing it in a match that matters. It's about all the players performing and working together as a team to get the right results.'
The feeling is that the Premiership may already be a two-horse race between Arsenal and Chelsea.
And, if United continue their poor run of results and drop points at Tyneside on Sunday, their challenge could be well be dusted even before Christmas.
There is nothing more disgusting than shoddy journalism. If there is one area I had changed since I came to the UK, it is my attitude towards football journalism in Singapore. It is pure shit. When I was young, The New Paper used to be my bible. I read it daily, digesting every bit of football news carefully, thinking it was the absolue truth. Slowly and slowly, my friends and I began to realise football journalism in Singapore consists of just cutting and pasting from internet sources, and a few articles here and there from "renowned" journalists. Who can forget Edwin Yeo? I even thought that Godfrey Roberts and Rob Hughes wrote good articles in general.
But all that changed when I came to the UK. Sensational journalism is the order of the day here. I began to realise that The New Paper and The Straits Times carried football articles that are nothing short of sensational journalism. The above is a very good example. What it did was to lump all the various comments made by the players and manager in the past 1 month into 1 article, and claiming United were falling apart. Just as I did not believe the Arsenal camp are falling apart just because they are on a bad run, United are not falling apart just because they are not scoring goals!
FOR FUCKS SAKE. Please stop trying to dupe Singaporeans. Roy Keane had been moaning about the commitment of his team mates since the beginning of time. It was there in 2000, 2001 and 2002 (in his autobiography). That did not stop United from winning titles. Players coming out and saying they are unhappy when they are not playing is nothing new! It happens at every club! In addition, they are PROFESSIONAL players, there is something seriously wrong if they are happy with not playing. The best has to be the following line:
'We cannot accept the chances we are missing,' said Ferguson, who even considered picking himself.
Again I must say WHAT THE FUCK?!?!?! They wrote that Ferguson considered picking himself as a matter of factly like its real. It was a tongue in cheek comment for goodness sake. And yet they wrote it like its the absolute truth.
This is just one example of shoody and sensational football journalism in Singapore.
I would like to take this chance to rectify yet another lousy piece of football journalism in Singapore.
THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS MAN U.
Yes, there is no such thing as Man U. It is NOT a proper term to use when referring to Manchester United. True British football fans NEVER refer to Manchester United as Man U. Just because the Singapore newspapers always use it doesn't mean that its right. The origin of the term came from London newspaper journalists, who were jealous of United's success and began to be anti-United. They started to use Man U to refer to Manchester United because of the similarity in spelling with the term MANURE, which means cow dung. It is NOT a convenient short form. Do you ever hear of people referring to Newcastle United as New U? Or Leeds United as Leeds U? Or Sheffield United as Shef U? Do you ever hear (for those who had gone to Old Trafford) the fans cheering "Man U *clap clap clap* Man U *clap clap clap*"? The answer is NO NO NO. So I repeat again, Man U is NOT a short form. It is a derogatory term used by ABUs (Anybody But United) to refer to Manchester United.
So what does that have to do with local football journalism? The problem is, local football journalism has no originality. They ALWAYS copy from other sources. And they copied the usage of the term MAN U without understanding how the term came about and why it was used. COPYING LIKE BLIND IDIOTS. It is a huge shame that a well respected and generally well produced publication like the Straits Times has such a poor football journalism section. And in the process, they have duped so many generations of Singaporeans (me included) into yakking Man U here, Man U there. Oh my god, the horrors of shitty journalism.
It absolutely fills me with dread to see some clueless Singaporeans fill the pub that I went to for the United vs Arsenal game (they were nowhere to be seen for the Birmingham game previously and the Man City game last week, fucking muppets) and proclaiming proudly that they are 'Man U' supporters in full view of the British people. When you say that you are a 'Man U' supporter to a local, he would look down on you. Not only are you degrading the club you support, you are showing to him that you are a clueless supporter (by using an inappropriate term to refer to United). And the origin of all that? Shitty football journalism in Singapore. If you are not a fan, it is perfectly all right to refer to United as Man U. But if you are a fan and talking within ear shot of ang mohs, PLEASE use Man United, United, or Manchester United and not Man U. Do not make other Singaporeans beside you cringe with embarrassment.
And no, I do not think its fake to purposely change the way you always use to refer to United because our way is WRONG. Just because past generations of Americans used the term Negroes to refer to blacks doesn't mean its acceptable. It is derogatory. Period.
And do not give me that shit about no need to be embarrassed in front of ang mohs and having that inferiority complex in front of ang mohs. That argument holds no water. The game came from England, we jolly well use the proper term (their term) to refer to it.
One last gripe about the Straits Times Online. Ever since it changed the website and required you to log in, it has become much much slower. And there are lots of errors in the text. One example:
From: http://straitstimes.asiaone.com.sg/sub/topstories/story/0,5562,284508,00.html?
Mr George Cui, 33, from Dalian in China, and Miss Deepthi Cannot distribute vertically Prabhakar, 22, from Bangalore in India, made their way here on Singapore government scholarships and education grants.
Who the hell is Miss Deepthi Cannot distribute vertically Prabhakar? This is not the only example. There are lots of grammatical (the grammar must be really shit for me to even spot it) errors and spelling errors which I suspect may have to do with the HTML too. And once again, I must repeat what I said a couple of months ago, if you are going to change something, make sure its good for the consumer before going ahead with it. For fucks sake, cut out the red tape and improve the quality first before introducing stupid changes and requiring stupid information like how much do you earn so that you can register and read the newspaper online.
Nov 12, 2004
SOCCER
It's now Manchester Dis-united
Ferguson blames some players, but there are fingers pointing at him
Manchester - A FEW weeks after declaring he was in the process of building his fifth great team at Manchester United, the foundations once again appear to be crumbling under Alex Ferguson.
Eleven points adrift of Chelsea after their worst start to a Premiership season, even Ferguson, facing a trip to Newcastle United on Sunday, admits his side, seventh in the table, are not good enough to win this season's title race.
Blame is the one thing United suddenly have plenty off and those in the club are busy handing it out.
Ferguson had harsh words for those who performed ineptly in the 0-0 draw against Manchester City last Sunday, most of them reserved for his £68.8 million (S$210 million) strikeforce - United's most impotent for 31 years.
'We cannot accept the chances we are missing,' said Ferguson, who even considered picking himself.
'The form we are showing is not good enough to win the championship.'
The statistics are damning. Wayne Rooney (£30m), Ruud van Nistelrooy (£19m), Louis Saha (£12.8m) and Alan Smith (£7m) have mustered a pitiful six of the paltry 11 goals United have scored in their opening 12 Premiership games.
The last time a United side fired as many blanks as that, they ended up being relegated.
That was back in the 1973-74 season, when they netted just 10 times in their first dozen matches, reported The Sun.
Here is another awful set of numbers: Only Chelsea (167) and Arsenal (159) have had more shots on goal than United (156) this season, but United are bottom of the League at converting their chances - at a measly rate of 6.5 per cent.
Which explains why they have failed to beat the lesser lights of the Premiership - City, Middlesbrough, Bolton, Blackburn - and even lost to Portsmouth. The United fear factor is truly gone, reported The Telegraph.
'To miss the chances we had is some kind of disgrace,' said Saha, who only broke his season's duck with a brace against Crystal Palace in the League Cup on Wednesday.
'It has got to change. Everyone knows we have the ability to score and people say it is just a matter of time.
'We keep saying that, but we have no more excuses now.'
Even Rooney, despite his tender age of 19, has come under fire. He has managed just one Premiership goal since his switch from Everton.
'For �30 million you would want Rooney to be performing every week and he is not,' said ex-United legend George Best.
But there are those who believe that the problems at United lie deeper, and the fingers point at Ferguson.
He has had wonderful success in the transfer market over the years, but the last two summers have not been his best with flops like Eric Djemba-Djemba, Kleberson, Liam Miller and Tim Howard, reported The Evening Standard.
Allowing David Beckham to join Real Madrid was one thing. Permitting Nicky Butt to move to Newcastle in the summer, when the cover for Roy Keane and Paul Scholes was below United's high standards, quite another.
And how he must rue his failure to sign Patrick Vieira from Arsenal in 2001 and, more recently, the PSV Eindhoven starlet Arjen Robben who now plays for Chelsea, and Barcelona's Ronaldinho.
With next summer's transfer budget already spent on Rooney, reinforcements are not going to come in the January transfer window, as Ferguson has pennies rather than pounds to play with.
When key players are not performing, selection can become difficult. Ferguson has admitted struggling to identify his strongest side, and his tactics are being questioned.
In the absence of the suspended van Nistelrooy, United could have used Rooney at his predatory best against City. Instead, Ferguson started him on the bench.
Even his players have started to doubt their boss.
Phil Neville has publicly admitted he does not know why he started just three League games all season, despite despite being rewarded for his 43 first-team appearances last season with a new five-year contract.
'I have played three games in six months, which isn't good enough really,' he told MUTV. 'I played against Arsenal and Portsmouth and thought I did okay. But then I found myself out of the team again.
'It is frustrating and I don't know why it has been like that. I came back for pre-season training fully fit and have not missed a day's training since, but I have not been selected.'
Another problem area has been goalkeeping. Ferguson took a gamble with the American Howard; it has not paid off. He has been forced to turn to Roy Carroll who, like Howard, is no Peter Schmeichel.
Such is the desperation at Old Trafford that Ferguson is doing all he can to not lose the Northern Ireland international, who is insisting on the guarantee that he remains as first-choice.
'We have made Roy the offer of a new contract that his agent has turned down,' said Ferguson yesterday. 'Hopefully there will be a change of mind and he will stay, as I am not looking for a new goalkeeper.'
And that is causing Howard to feel resentful.
'A goalkeeper is a very convenient scapegoat,' said the 25-year-old, whose high-profile blunders against Bolton and Lyon in the Champions League saw him lose his place. 'But I'm always going to own up to my mistakes. Did I lose us games? No, no.
'Did I contribute to it? Yes. But it takes 11 of us to win and 11 of us to lose.'
Captain Keane believes the team ethic that had long been United's greatest strength is lost.
He said: 'The talent is there, there's no doubt about that. But it's doing it in a match that matters. It's about all the players performing and working together as a team to get the right results.'
The feeling is that the Premiership may already be a two-horse race between Arsenal and Chelsea.
And, if United continue their poor run of results and drop points at Tyneside on Sunday, their challenge could be well be dusted even before Christmas.
There is nothing more disgusting than shoddy journalism. If there is one area I had changed since I came to the UK, it is my attitude towards football journalism in Singapore. It is pure shit. When I was young, The New Paper used to be my bible. I read it daily, digesting every bit of football news carefully, thinking it was the absolue truth. Slowly and slowly, my friends and I began to realise football journalism in Singapore consists of just cutting and pasting from internet sources, and a few articles here and there from "renowned" journalists. Who can forget Edwin Yeo? I even thought that Godfrey Roberts and Rob Hughes wrote good articles in general.
But all that changed when I came to the UK. Sensational journalism is the order of the day here. I began to realise that The New Paper and The Straits Times carried football articles that are nothing short of sensational journalism. The above is a very good example. What it did was to lump all the various comments made by the players and manager in the past 1 month into 1 article, and claiming United were falling apart. Just as I did not believe the Arsenal camp are falling apart just because they are on a bad run, United are not falling apart just because they are not scoring goals!
FOR FUCKS SAKE. Please stop trying to dupe Singaporeans. Roy Keane had been moaning about the commitment of his team mates since the beginning of time. It was there in 2000, 2001 and 2002 (in his autobiography). That did not stop United from winning titles. Players coming out and saying they are unhappy when they are not playing is nothing new! It happens at every club! In addition, they are PROFESSIONAL players, there is something seriously wrong if they are happy with not playing. The best has to be the following line:
'We cannot accept the chances we are missing,' said Ferguson, who even considered picking himself.
Again I must say WHAT THE FUCK?!?!?! They wrote that Ferguson considered picking himself as a matter of factly like its real. It was a tongue in cheek comment for goodness sake. And yet they wrote it like its the absolute truth.
This is just one example of shoody and sensational football journalism in Singapore.
I would like to take this chance to rectify yet another lousy piece of football journalism in Singapore.
THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS MAN U.
This message is worth repeating a lot more times, especially to those in England. So here I go again.
THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS MAN U.
What the hell I hear you say? But newspapers always 'Man U' here 'Man U' there, what do you mean by there is no such thing is Man U?
Yes, there is no such thing as Man U. It is NOT a proper term to use when referring to Manchester United. True British football fans NEVER refer to Manchester United as Man U. Just because the Singapore newspapers always use it doesn't mean that its right. The origin of the term came from London newspaper journalists, who were jealous of United's success and began to be anti-United. They started to use Man U to refer to Manchester United because of the similarity in spelling with the term MANURE, which means cow dung. It is NOT a convenient short form. Do you ever hear of people referring to Newcastle United as New U? Or Leeds United as Leeds U? Or Sheffield United as Shef U? Do you ever hear (for those who had gone to Old Trafford) the fans cheering "Man U *clap clap clap* Man U *clap clap clap*"? The answer is NO NO NO. So I repeat again, Man U is NOT a short form. It is a derogatory term used by ABUs (Anybody But United) to refer to Manchester United.
So what does that have to do with local football journalism? The problem is, local football journalism has no originality. They ALWAYS copy from other sources. And they copied the usage of the term MAN U without understanding how the term came about and why it was used. COPYING LIKE BLIND IDIOTS. It is a huge shame that a well respected and generally well produced publication like the Straits Times has such a poor football journalism section. And in the process, they have duped so many generations of Singaporeans (me included) into yakking Man U here, Man U there. Oh my god, the horrors of shitty journalism.
It absolutely fills me with dread to see some clueless Singaporeans fill the pub that I went to for the United vs Arsenal game (they were nowhere to be seen for the Birmingham game previously and the Man City game last week, fucking muppets) and proclaiming proudly that they are 'Man U' supporters in full view of the British people. When you say that you are a 'Man U' supporter to a local, he would look down on you. Not only are you degrading the club you support, you are showing to him that you are a clueless supporter (by using an inappropriate term to refer to United). And the origin of all that? Shitty football journalism in Singapore. If you are not a fan, it is perfectly all right to refer to United as Man U. But if you are a fan and talking within ear shot of ang mohs, PLEASE use Man United, United, or Manchester United and not Man U. Do not make other Singaporeans beside you cringe with embarrassment.
And no, I do not think its fake to purposely change the way you always use to refer to United because our way is WRONG. Just because past generations of Americans used the term Negroes to refer to blacks doesn't mean its acceptable. It is derogatory. Period.
And do not give me that shit about no need to be embarrassed in front of ang mohs and having that inferiority complex in front of ang mohs. That argument holds no water. The game came from England, we jolly well use the proper term (their term) to refer to it.
One last gripe about the Straits Times Online. Ever since it changed the website and required you to log in, it has become much much slower. And there are lots of errors in the text. One example:
From: http://straitstimes.asiaone.com.sg/sub/topstories/story/0,5562,284508,00.html?
Mr George Cui, 33, from Dalian in China, and Miss Deepthi Cannot distribute vertically Prabhakar, 22, from Bangalore in India, made their way here on Singapore government scholarships and education grants.
Who the hell is Miss Deepthi Cannot distribute vertically Prabhakar? This is not the only example. There are lots of grammatical (the grammar must be really shit for me to even spot it) errors and spelling errors which I suspect may have to do with the HTML too. And once again, I must repeat what I said a couple of months ago, if you are going to change something, make sure its good for the consumer before going ahead with it. For fucks sake, cut out the red tape and improve the quality first before introducing stupid changes and requiring stupid information like how much do you earn so that you can register and read the newspaper online.
Wednesday, November 10, 2004
Pissed up beyond words
8 minutes more before I leave for Manchester once again. Weirdly enough I was looking forward very much to the match today but events in the previous 12 hours had pissed me off utterly. A short summary:
1. Spending less days in Austria, all because they changed the date of a match
2. My ticket STILL hasn't arrived and I would have to queue at the Ticketing Office today in the cold.
3. I am not sitting in Stretford End, still never mind, but I am sitting in NE quadrant...behind the corner flag...I can't think of a more fucked up position than that stand.
Will elaborate more when I get back. Hope Giuseppe Rossi makes his debut. He is cute *wink*
1. Spending less days in Austria, all because they changed the date of a match
2. My ticket STILL hasn't arrived and I would have to queue at the Ticketing Office today in the cold.
3. I am not sitting in Stretford End, still never mind, but I am sitting in NE quadrant...behind the corner flag...I can't think of a more fucked up position than that stand.
Will elaborate more when I get back. Hope Giuseppe Rossi makes his debut. He is cute *wink*
Tuesday, November 09, 2004
Glasgow 051104-061104
On 041103 (4th November 2003), I saw United put 3 goals past Rangers. On 031104 (3rd November 2004), I watched United put 4 goals past Sparta Prague. So so performance, great result, and an enjoyable day but I had a shitty view despite paying for the most expensive ticket. And some other lucky dudes get to sit in the Stretford End for their first visit to Old Trafford. Life is grotesquely unfair.
Arrived back in London on 4th Nov at about 6am, attended lessons from 10am to 6pm, and then off I was on the 11pm coach to Glasgow. No prizes for guessing the objective of my trip. Its to watch Glasgow Celtic take on Kilmarnock (it's all right if you have never heard of Kilmarnock...) on 6th November. Since I did not have any lessons on Friday, I decided to go to Glasgow a day earlier to do a bit of touring since I had never really been there before (never really coz I had been there for a couple of hours in my first year but only hang around in the bus station...).
After an 8 hour coach ride, i arrived in Glasgow at about 730am on 5th Nov. After finding my hostel (which turned out to be further away than I had imagined it to be), I proceeded to my first stop - Hampden Park, home of Scottish football.
Hampden Park is the home ground of the Scottish national team and the price of the stadium and museum tour was pretty cheap and so I decided to go in. When the tour started, I was the only person there and thus I was free to ask the guide any question and it was really nice. The most satisfying stadium tour I had been on thus far. He told me lots of small stories and details, especially regarding
Rangers and Celtic. These 2 clubs were from Glasgow and had afierce rivalry divided along religious lines (Protestants vs Catholics). The 2 clubs were by far the most dominant in Scottish football and thus contested a lot of Cup finals in Hampden. So much so that the 2 sides have their own dressing room in the stadium. Celtic would take the away dressing room and Rangers would take the home dressing room. This is because of tradition. A long time ago, people used to walk from their homes to the stadium. Ibrox (home ground of Rangers) was in the west and Celtic Park (home ground of Celtic) was in the east and so most Rangers fans would come in from the west side and most Celtic fans would walk to the stadium from the east. Thus, it made sense for Rangers to come into the home dressing room facing the west rather than face the wrath of Celtic fans in the east and vice versa.
The picture above is the away dressing room but it made no difference actually. Hampden is a stadium accredited with 5 star status and one of the requirements was that the 2 dressing rooms must have the same facilities. There were 22 lockers in each dressing room, another requirement for 5 star status because there were 22 players in each team for international matches. Another requirement was that there had to be individual shower heads (not a communal bath tub) presumably for hygiene reasons. There were also 2 separate rooms for ball boys (and girls) and 2 separate rooms for male (and female) referees. The guide also told me that during halftime, referees are allowed to watch their decisions on tv in their rooms but they have to watch it without sound. This is to prevent them from being influenced by the commentators on TV....very interesting.
Another thing that the stadium had was an indoor artificial training pitch. It had goals at 2 ends and a curtain separating the pitch into 2 so that both teams could use it simultaneously. Apparently the artificial turf made the ball bounce more naturally or something like that. But the best thing about the place is that it had an equipment to measure how fast you can shoot the ball into goal. It's that black thing behind the goal. Since I was the only one, I had 4 tries and managed to record 45mph. Really wonder how the hell those professional players strike balls at over 100kph or mph.
The picture above is the trophy presentation area. Again due to special circumstances, the direction of the players going up and down is different in Rangers vs Celtic matches. Normally the players would go up from the left and go down on the right (from the view of the trophy presenter) but if Rangers wins, they will go up from the right and go down on the left side. This is because Rangers fans are always sitted on the left side (because the left side is the west side_ and it would not be nice to have it the other way and have Rangers parade the trophy to Celtic fans.
The guide also told me that Queens Park are the club side that uses Hampden Park for matches regularly. They are the oldest Scottish football club and in the first match between Scotland and England, all 11 Scottish players came from Queens Park. It was probably the only time in international football history that all players in an international side came from only 1 club. The demise of Queens Park came when they refused to turn professional (their players nowadays are still amateurs) stating that their players play for the love of the game and not money. As a result, nowadays only a few hundred watch their games in the Third Division or something, a sad situation for a historically very important club. An interesting sidenote is that when the ball gets hacked out of play, the ball boy has to run up the steps and seats to fetch the ball back as the stadium is empty in most areas because only a few hundred people will be watching. Exercise anybody?
The real Scottish Cup
Reconstructed commentary box from the old Hampden before it was pulled down to make way for this new stadium
After Hampden, it was off to Ibrox, home ground of Glasgow Rangers FC. Between Celtic and Rangers, I like Rangers more(because I like the colour of their jersey). But other people are more interested in watching Celtic and so decided to watch Celtic instead.
The old blue gates of Ibrox
Inside this building is the marble halls of Ibrox? (lousy English)
I had wanted to go for the stadium tour of Ibrox as well but in the end I didn't. It was about 145pm when I reached there and the person told me the tour would start at 230pm. I figured by the end of the tour I would only have about 1 hour of daylight left for walking around and thus I decided against it. Would I be back in the future for a match? Maybe....
So off I went for some non-football related sights around. I went to the Botanic Gardens which I found to be surprisingly huge and very peaceful.
The small little river in the picture above is the River Kelvin that flows through the Botanic Gardens.
City Chambers and George Square in front of it.
The above picture is that of the Glasgow Cathedral, passed by George Square on my way there. I did not know which way to go to go near the cathedral and ended up walking into a cemetery :S (note the creepy darkness descending) and the worst thing was that the cemetery had only 1 entrance. I walked on and on thinking that there would be an exit at the other side (which was nearer the cathedral) but there wasn't. Luckily I managed to get out before it was completely dark. I am most afraid of ghosts :S.
Yeah but just when I wanted to go into the cathedral (it was about 430pm at this point, supposed to be open), I saw this:
Seems like you can't run away from British inefficiency and cock ups, not even in Scotland, not even when you are working for a cathedral.
On my way back, I passed by George Square again. Really like the following picture...
It was dark and cold by now. And I began to hunt for some food for dinner. I kept walking down this street trying to find something which I think I would enjoy eating. However, I did not find anything and thus decided to walk back in the opposite direction. However, I soon discovered it to be close to impossible to walk in the opposite direction because I was walking against a lot a lot of people. I thought that something might be happening in the original direction in which I was heading and thus decided to follow the crowd. I felt like one of those mice who followed the Pied Piper's music but luckily I did not need to jump into River Clyde or anything like that. Instead, I found the
Glasgow Fireworks 2004 was on! Lucky me. Not sure if I had mentioned Guy Fawkes' Day to you guys whereby people are allowed to set off fireworks for one week each year. Presumably this fireworks display is to celebrate Guy Fawkes' Day in Glasgow. Lucky me, now I had something to while away my time.
There were a lot of people there, the TV presenter said that there were 92000 people there including those at the fun fair beside Glasgow Green. And judging from the number of people I saw, I would hardly dispute that number. At 730pm, rain drops began to fall but finally the fireworks was about to start! 3....2.....1......
huh? where's the fireworks? The theme music from the 70s blasted from the amplifiers and loads of stupid people like me looked up to the heavens for some semblance of sparks and light. But the only fireworks were those set off by ordinary people far away in the distant evening sky. Yes its the return of the British cock up again *applause*. No matter where you go, no matter where you run, from London to Lincoln, from Glasgow to Greenwich, you can be assured that you best friend, British cock up, will be with you all the way! The stupid countdown happened not once, not twice, not even thrice but a total of FOUR times. Apparently the guy who is setting off the fireworks ran out of MATCHES. I rest my case.
Just when I was contemplating whether to go back, the music suddenly restarted and the fireworks finally appeared!
It last for a good half an hour I guess. 70s music from ABBA, Gloria Gaynor and Rod Stewart (I am no music expert, only repeating the names that the TV presenter mentioned) blasted from the amplifiers and people were ooooohing and aaaaahing, dancing and busy snapping photos. As if on cue, the rain also stopped the moment the fireworks appeared. Last year at this time, I was at Clapham Common watching fireworks (again unintentionally) and this time I am at Glasgow Green. This time next year, will I be somewhere in UK watching fireworks, or will I be watching fireworks of a different kind in the form of ammunition in SAF? We shall see....
Also went to take a look at the funfair beside Glasgow Green. It's been ages since I last went to a funfair. The last time I went I think was to the Chinese New Year one beside the Singapore River. But somewhere along the line, my parents decided it was too crowded and perhaps I gave the impression that I was too cool for this kind of thing. But a strange sense of nostalgia did overcome me as I went through the funfair looking at the rides. After it got too crowded and the ground too muddy, I decided to go back to my hostel. But not before some good old oily and salty fish and chips for dinner. I love fish and chips :)
The next day, my friends reached Glasgow. Bummed around the city centre for a while and had 2 breakfasts because the first one absolutely sucked big time. Then it was off to Celtic Park to watch the match.
Jock Stein Stand is where I am sitting
An institution over 100 years old.
Irving, me and John outside the stadium.
The above picture was kindly taken by a couple who APPROACHED us and asked whether we needed help in taking photos. Really nice of them. I had a very good impression of Scottish people from my first trip to Edinburgh in my first year and this trip merely reinforced this impression. Shortly after this photo was taken, yet another couple approached us and asked us whether we needed help. Really really wonderful of them. Think they must have found it interesting that 3 Asians had come to watch a Celtic match.
Shots from inside the stadium:
Nice scenery outside the stadium, which distracted me from the poor match
Players coming out
The freekick which led to the opening goal
The Alan Thompson penalty which turned out to be the winner.
Me, John and Irving
The match itself was pretty poor, mainly because Celtic were playing well within themselves and made Kilmarnock look good. Henri Camara is a First Division player while John Hartson looked really good. But Celtic really miss Henrik Larsson. That said, Celtic still took a 2-0 lead before Kilmarnock pulled one back late on to set up a frantic finale. I was secretly rooting for Kilmarnock to score an equaliser so that Rangers can have a chance to catch up in the league. But obviously I could not voice such an opinion out loud if I wanted to be in 1 piece. In addition, the atmosphere was the worst I have ever experienced. Granted this wasn't a big game at all but it was still very very pathetic as there were no proper songs and cheers lasted less than 5 seconds. The pre match rendition of "You'll Never Walk Alone" was much much poorer than that at Anfield too. If I were to go to Ibrox, I think it would be for an Old Firm game.
However, there was at least something to cheer the 3 of us up before we boarded the 8 hour coach back to London.
This is seriously the best curry I have ever had in the UK. It smelt so nice that I didn't even bother to stop and take a picture of it before devouring it. Loads of people know I don't really like chicken, but I had no qualms about eating the chicken kahir dish, it was that good. Even though the restaurant was filled and we had to da pao and eat it at the bus station, it was worth every penny. Forget maths and algebra, curry is the best contribution from Indians to mankind.
And that just about concludes my Glasgow trip. Overall it was a nice weekend break, reinforcing my good impression of Scotland in general. There's just something in the air about Scotland which gives me the feeling of a nice and friendly environment. It's not too hectic like London, not too well developed like Rome etc, but yet not backward like Cyprus. If I had to choose somewhere to move to away from Singapore, it would be a toss up between Scotland or Barcelona.
With that I end off this post. Most of you in Singapore are probably busy mugging for your exams. And I congratulate you on managing to finish reading this post. Good luck to all of you for your exams. While I slack in my bed for the whole of this week because its reading week and I have no lessons. :)
Arrived back in London on 4th Nov at about 6am, attended lessons from 10am to 6pm, and then off I was on the 11pm coach to Glasgow. No prizes for guessing the objective of my trip. Its to watch Glasgow Celtic take on Kilmarnock (it's all right if you have never heard of Kilmarnock...) on 6th November. Since I did not have any lessons on Friday, I decided to go to Glasgow a day earlier to do a bit of touring since I had never really been there before (never really coz I had been there for a couple of hours in my first year but only hang around in the bus station...).
After an 8 hour coach ride, i arrived in Glasgow at about 730am on 5th Nov. After finding my hostel (which turned out to be further away than I had imagined it to be), I proceeded to my first stop - Hampden Park, home of Scottish football.
Hampden Park is the home ground of the Scottish national team and the price of the stadium and museum tour was pretty cheap and so I decided to go in. When the tour started, I was the only person there and thus I was free to ask the guide any question and it was really nice. The most satisfying stadium tour I had been on thus far. He told me lots of small stories and details, especially regarding
Rangers and Celtic. These 2 clubs were from Glasgow and had afierce rivalry divided along religious lines (Protestants vs Catholics). The 2 clubs were by far the most dominant in Scottish football and thus contested a lot of Cup finals in Hampden. So much so that the 2 sides have their own dressing room in the stadium. Celtic would take the away dressing room and Rangers would take the home dressing room. This is because of tradition. A long time ago, people used to walk from their homes to the stadium. Ibrox (home ground of Rangers) was in the west and Celtic Park (home ground of Celtic) was in the east and so most Rangers fans would come in from the west side and most Celtic fans would walk to the stadium from the east. Thus, it made sense for Rangers to come into the home dressing room facing the west rather than face the wrath of Celtic fans in the east and vice versa.
The picture above is the away dressing room but it made no difference actually. Hampden is a stadium accredited with 5 star status and one of the requirements was that the 2 dressing rooms must have the same facilities. There were 22 lockers in each dressing room, another requirement for 5 star status because there were 22 players in each team for international matches. Another requirement was that there had to be individual shower heads (not a communal bath tub) presumably for hygiene reasons. There were also 2 separate rooms for ball boys (and girls) and 2 separate rooms for male (and female) referees. The guide also told me that during halftime, referees are allowed to watch their decisions on tv in their rooms but they have to watch it without sound. This is to prevent them from being influenced by the commentators on TV....very interesting.
Another thing that the stadium had was an indoor artificial training pitch. It had goals at 2 ends and a curtain separating the pitch into 2 so that both teams could use it simultaneously. Apparently the artificial turf made the ball bounce more naturally or something like that. But the best thing about the place is that it had an equipment to measure how fast you can shoot the ball into goal. It's that black thing behind the goal. Since I was the only one, I had 4 tries and managed to record 45mph. Really wonder how the hell those professional players strike balls at over 100kph or mph.
The picture above is the trophy presentation area. Again due to special circumstances, the direction of the players going up and down is different in Rangers vs Celtic matches. Normally the players would go up from the left and go down on the right (from the view of the trophy presenter) but if Rangers wins, they will go up from the right and go down on the left side. This is because Rangers fans are always sitted on the left side (because the left side is the west side_ and it would not be nice to have it the other way and have Rangers parade the trophy to Celtic fans.
The guide also told me that Queens Park are the club side that uses Hampden Park for matches regularly. They are the oldest Scottish football club and in the first match between Scotland and England, all 11 Scottish players came from Queens Park. It was probably the only time in international football history that all players in an international side came from only 1 club. The demise of Queens Park came when they refused to turn professional (their players nowadays are still amateurs) stating that their players play for the love of the game and not money. As a result, nowadays only a few hundred watch their games in the Third Division or something, a sad situation for a historically very important club. An interesting sidenote is that when the ball gets hacked out of play, the ball boy has to run up the steps and seats to fetch the ball back as the stadium is empty in most areas because only a few hundred people will be watching. Exercise anybody?
The real Scottish Cup
Reconstructed commentary box from the old Hampden before it was pulled down to make way for this new stadium
After Hampden, it was off to Ibrox, home ground of Glasgow Rangers FC. Between Celtic and Rangers, I like Rangers more(because I like the colour of their jersey). But other people are more interested in watching Celtic and so decided to watch Celtic instead.
The old blue gates of Ibrox
Inside this building is the marble halls of Ibrox? (lousy English)
I had wanted to go for the stadium tour of Ibrox as well but in the end I didn't. It was about 145pm when I reached there and the person told me the tour would start at 230pm. I figured by the end of the tour I would only have about 1 hour of daylight left for walking around and thus I decided against it. Would I be back in the future for a match? Maybe....
So off I went for some non-football related sights around. I went to the Botanic Gardens which I found to be surprisingly huge and very peaceful.
The small little river in the picture above is the River Kelvin that flows through the Botanic Gardens.
City Chambers and George Square in front of it.
The above picture is that of the Glasgow Cathedral, passed by George Square on my way there. I did not know which way to go to go near the cathedral and ended up walking into a cemetery :S (note the creepy darkness descending) and the worst thing was that the cemetery had only 1 entrance. I walked on and on thinking that there would be an exit at the other side (which was nearer the cathedral) but there wasn't. Luckily I managed to get out before it was completely dark. I am most afraid of ghosts :S.
Yeah but just when I wanted to go into the cathedral (it was about 430pm at this point, supposed to be open), I saw this:
Seems like you can't run away from British inefficiency and cock ups, not even in Scotland, not even when you are working for a cathedral.
On my way back, I passed by George Square again. Really like the following picture...
It was dark and cold by now. And I began to hunt for some food for dinner. I kept walking down this street trying to find something which I think I would enjoy eating. However, I did not find anything and thus decided to walk back in the opposite direction. However, I soon discovered it to be close to impossible to walk in the opposite direction because I was walking against a lot a lot of people. I thought that something might be happening in the original direction in which I was heading and thus decided to follow the crowd. I felt like one of those mice who followed the Pied Piper's music but luckily I did not need to jump into River Clyde or anything like that. Instead, I found the
Glasgow Fireworks 2004 was on! Lucky me. Not sure if I had mentioned Guy Fawkes' Day to you guys whereby people are allowed to set off fireworks for one week each year. Presumably this fireworks display is to celebrate Guy Fawkes' Day in Glasgow. Lucky me, now I had something to while away my time.
There were a lot of people there, the TV presenter said that there were 92000 people there including those at the fun fair beside Glasgow Green. And judging from the number of people I saw, I would hardly dispute that number. At 730pm, rain drops began to fall but finally the fireworks was about to start! 3....2.....1......
huh? where's the fireworks? The theme music from the 70s blasted from the amplifiers and loads of stupid people like me looked up to the heavens for some semblance of sparks and light. But the only fireworks were those set off by ordinary people far away in the distant evening sky. Yes its the return of the British cock up again *applause*. No matter where you go, no matter where you run, from London to Lincoln, from Glasgow to Greenwich, you can be assured that you best friend, British cock up, will be with you all the way! The stupid countdown happened not once, not twice, not even thrice but a total of FOUR times. Apparently the guy who is setting off the fireworks ran out of MATCHES. I rest my case.
Just when I was contemplating whether to go back, the music suddenly restarted and the fireworks finally appeared!
It last for a good half an hour I guess. 70s music from ABBA, Gloria Gaynor and Rod Stewart (I am no music expert, only repeating the names that the TV presenter mentioned) blasted from the amplifiers and people were ooooohing and aaaaahing, dancing and busy snapping photos. As if on cue, the rain also stopped the moment the fireworks appeared. Last year at this time, I was at Clapham Common watching fireworks (again unintentionally) and this time I am at Glasgow Green. This time next year, will I be somewhere in UK watching fireworks, or will I be watching fireworks of a different kind in the form of ammunition in SAF? We shall see....
Also went to take a look at the funfair beside Glasgow Green. It's been ages since I last went to a funfair. The last time I went I think was to the Chinese New Year one beside the Singapore River. But somewhere along the line, my parents decided it was too crowded and perhaps I gave the impression that I was too cool for this kind of thing. But a strange sense of nostalgia did overcome me as I went through the funfair looking at the rides. After it got too crowded and the ground too muddy, I decided to go back to my hostel. But not before some good old oily and salty fish and chips for dinner. I love fish and chips :)
The next day, my friends reached Glasgow. Bummed around the city centre for a while and had 2 breakfasts because the first one absolutely sucked big time. Then it was off to Celtic Park to watch the match.
Jock Stein Stand is where I am sitting
An institution over 100 years old.
Irving, me and John outside the stadium.
The above picture was kindly taken by a couple who APPROACHED us and asked whether we needed help in taking photos. Really nice of them. I had a very good impression of Scottish people from my first trip to Edinburgh in my first year and this trip merely reinforced this impression. Shortly after this photo was taken, yet another couple approached us and asked us whether we needed help. Really really wonderful of them. Think they must have found it interesting that 3 Asians had come to watch a Celtic match.
Shots from inside the stadium:
Nice scenery outside the stadium, which distracted me from the poor match
Players coming out
The freekick which led to the opening goal
The Alan Thompson penalty which turned out to be the winner.
Me, John and Irving
The match itself was pretty poor, mainly because Celtic were playing well within themselves and made Kilmarnock look good. Henri Camara is a First Division player while John Hartson looked really good. But Celtic really miss Henrik Larsson. That said, Celtic still took a 2-0 lead before Kilmarnock pulled one back late on to set up a frantic finale. I was secretly rooting for Kilmarnock to score an equaliser so that Rangers can have a chance to catch up in the league. But obviously I could not voice such an opinion out loud if I wanted to be in 1 piece. In addition, the atmosphere was the worst I have ever experienced. Granted this wasn't a big game at all but it was still very very pathetic as there were no proper songs and cheers lasted less than 5 seconds. The pre match rendition of "You'll Never Walk Alone" was much much poorer than that at Anfield too. If I were to go to Ibrox, I think it would be for an Old Firm game.
However, there was at least something to cheer the 3 of us up before we boarded the 8 hour coach back to London.
This is seriously the best curry I have ever had in the UK. It smelt so nice that I didn't even bother to stop and take a picture of it before devouring it. Loads of people know I don't really like chicken, but I had no qualms about eating the chicken kahir dish, it was that good. Even though the restaurant was filled and we had to da pao and eat it at the bus station, it was worth every penny. Forget maths and algebra, curry is the best contribution from Indians to mankind.
And that just about concludes my Glasgow trip. Overall it was a nice weekend break, reinforcing my good impression of Scotland in general. There's just something in the air about Scotland which gives me the feeling of a nice and friendly environment. It's not too hectic like London, not too well developed like Rome etc, but yet not backward like Cyprus. If I had to choose somewhere to move to away from Singapore, it would be a toss up between Scotland or Barcelona.
With that I end off this post. Most of you in Singapore are probably busy mugging for your exams. And I congratulate you on managing to finish reading this post. Good luck to all of you for your exams. While I slack in my bed for the whole of this week because its reading week and I have no lessons. :)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)