An Invisible Man

A few years ago, a Christian friend of mine gave a Sunday morning teaching session at his church in which he talked about the story of the rich man and Lazarus. He entitled his piece ‘The Invisible Man’. He stated that the poor man, Lazarus the beggar, had been at the gates of the rich man’s house on many occasions, but that the rich man had
completely ignored him. He was almost literally ‘invisible’ as the rich man consciously or unconsciously chose to overlook the beggar. Of course, when the rich man died [so the story goes], he looked up from his fiery pit and exhorted the former ‘invisible man’ to go to his brothers and warn them of the awful fate that awaits them if they don’t repent. Funny how the formerly ignored man suddenly became an individual of extreme importance!
Anyhow, this isn’t intended to be a Christian sermon, but I can certainly relate wholeheartedly to the plight of the invisible man.
Time and time and time again I have tried to engage members of the media and received the cold shoulder from ‘busy’ people who just don’t have the time nor the basic courtesy to reply to my emails. If I am extremely lucky I am treated to the occasional terse response. Even allowing for the fact that members of the media are snowed under with emails, it is an act of bad manners to ignore this poor man, just as Lazarus the beggar was overlooked.
I am moreover slightly amused about the print media’s refusal to accept regulation, declaring that they can manage themselves and that they have learnt their lessons from the self-inflicted wounds of the ‘phone hacking scandal. I don’t see many lessons having been learnt. I find editors and their assistants to be unresponsive to the likes of me, but they would drop their newborn baby if an important personage sent an email or if there was a scandal or breaking story that they could get their teeth into. Perhaps liaising with the media is akin to swimming with sharks. I have had to reach the view that journalists are just not very nice people, a consequence of the culture of their profession.
Fool that I am, I have tried to engage the media in an effort to being appointed with one or two assignments that would make use of my expertise, an expertise that in many instances far exceeds that of their own staff. I incidentally receive £71 state pittance per week while lesser talents earn that amount or double that each day. How fair does that sound? It’s hard not to feel bitter when confronted with such injustice.
Last summer, the Independent’s Neil Robinson strung me along on the possibility that I could/might contribute to the Independent’s coverage of the Ashes series. Mr Robinson had even suggested the amount that I would receive, which I had agreed to. Well, no such undertaking came to pass. That was the latest in a litany of shabby treatment from the British and Irish media.
Again, this year, as a psephologist and elections numbers cruncher, I have attempted to engage various media outlets in the hope that they would recruit me to assist them with their election coverage, whether that merely be the election results and analysis of the forthcoming European poll. Well, again, Lazarus here is confronted with a wall of
silence. I am offering to help and add value and I am not even treated to an answer. I feel genuinely like the youngster in the school playground watching the other children play and not being permitted to join in the game. It’s bloody cruel.
I have much to offer as a knowledgeable and engaging writer, whose expertise can be filed under ‘sports statistician’ or ‘psephologist’. I have a nerdish attention to details and am extremely literate and numerate. Yet for all my apparent abilities, I am constantly snubbed while lesser talents prevail at various media organisations. A relative suggested the other week that I was “depressed”. It would be nearer the truth to declare that I am demoralised, as opposed to
depressed.
It’s a real tragedy, not just for me, but for others in the print media that my talents are not being utilised. Maybe I should finish with a famous bit of biblical scripture again: “The stone that the builders refuse turned out to be the cornerstone.”
My abilities can be scrutinised at the following sites:
http://whocomments.org/wiki/Gary_Watton
http://gw930.blog.com
http://psephologist.blog.com
http://sporthistorian.blog.com
http://ireland.rugbynetwork.net
http://yorkshire.cricketnetwork.co.uk
http://chelsea.thefootballnetwork.net
from: Gary Watton; invisible man

Britain's Dreadful Legal Shitstem by the commentator Gary Watton [http://gw930.blog.com]

In the light of the miscarriage of justices that brought Nigel Evans MP to near-bankruptcy and all but ruined the names of Michael Le Vell and Bill Roache, may I humbly propose the following two suggestions.
First of all, there ought to be legislation [aside from libel and slander laws] which ensures that false accusers and false witnesses are penalised. It seems scandalous that anyone can denounce someone to the law and the CPS [the Crown Persecution Service] and such individuals get away with their half-baked accusations scot free, while the accused must suffer enormously during the pre-trial period as well as during their court ordeal. Nobody wants to deter witnesses or anyone speaking up against criminal activity, but by the same token there needs to be a mechanism in place whereby anyone who wrongly accuses someone is penalised with say a £1,000 fine if the accused is acquitted in a subsequent trial. It simply won’t do for all and sundry to be afforded carte blanche in future to accuse anyone on the back of dubious charges and flimsy evidence.
Secondly, I think that solicitors have a lot to answer for. Many solicitors are at least as reptilian as the much-reviled bankers and expenses-claimers. It strikes me that solicitors mischievously ‘egg on’ their clients to pursue legal action [irrespective of the potential outcome] safe in the knowledge that he or she has a big payday coming their way. It seems to be in the monetary interests of many mercenaries within the legal profession to pursue legal cases because they are a “nice little earner”. Again, some form of regulation is belatedly overdue to ensure that solicitors don’t gain enormously from other people’s suffering. At the opposite end of the spectrum, we frequently find solictors advising clients whose chances are clearly hopeless to plead not guilty and contrive to engineer a costly trial which is a drain on the public purse while solictors and barristers laugh all the way to the bank.
Just as there is a real need for regulation of bankers, and of newspapers, and of parliamentarians, so there is also a need to review and legislate against abuses and injustices in the law.

Double Standards From The Sinners!

DOUBLE STANDARDS FROM THE 'SINNERS'
In Norn Iron, folk sometimes refer to members and devotees of Sinn Fein as the Shinners. At least when we're being polite, we do. However, maybe Sinners is much more apt. Along with many people on both sides of the Irish Sea, I have been horrified by the recent revelations that IRA suspects have been given written assurances that there is an amnesty on the unsolved crimes that they have been implicated in. It's all very well absolving the Irish republican terrorists of responsibility for a catalogue of atrocities and assorted offences, but surely the same standards must then be applied to the perpetrators of Bloody Sunday.
Don't get me wrong. The more that I've launched my own personal inquiry into the terrible events of the 30th of January 1972 [a much cheaper inquiry than the publicly-financed version], the more that I've been horrified by the trigger-happy soldiers who shot unarmed people in cold blood and sometimes from behind. The greatest tragedy of all is that there have been countless, yes countless, acts of compassion, courtesy, heroism, and humanity from the British security forces over the course of 'the troubles' but they never got reported or placed under the microscope of public scrutiny. Instead, the actions of the Paras totally undermined all that and provided the Brit-haters and Brit-begrudgers literally with the ammunition to embark upon a three-decade campaign of wickedness against the British citizens of Ulster and the rest of the UK. The Irish republicans have always harboured hostility towards the big bad brutal Brits but Bloody Sunday kind of legitimised their antipathy. In much the same way as the Islamic extremists truly wish to regard their American and British foes as worthy of their vile behaviour, so too the Irish militants share a similar perverted stance towards all agents of British rule.
The thing is that I now have much sympathy for the plight of the Derry families and extended community who were subject to this act of unacceptable aggression on that notorious winter's afternoon. Furthermore, I even buy into the rationale behind a thirty-two county state. I find it ludicrous after all that Ulster unionists would want to remain united to a 'mainland' that is remote both geographically and emotionally from the bothersome six counties of Northern Ireland. I mean, what on earth do the protestant, working-class loyalists of Norn Iron have in common with the middle-class, Middle Englanders of the shires and the home counties? Such folk are poles apart. Furthermore, where is the common ground between the almost exclusively, white smalltowners of Ulster and the cosmopolitan, multi-cultural burghers of L'Angleterre? Given the fact that the neanderthals of Ulster are so committed to their own culture, it seems illogical that they could accommodate a plethora of different cultures which are requisite in the large urban centres of the UK? Ultimately, the Norn Irish citizens have more in common with their southern counterparts, more than they care to admit. Even the age-old scaremongering about Dublin rule equates to Rome rule or Pope rule is now sheer and utter drivel. The Republic of Ireland has ventured away from its theocracy towards a secular society, partially driven by public disdain at the scandal-ridden catholic church, whose bunglings and incompetence have been much closer to the Craggy Island parody than even the writers of 'Father Ted' dared to imagine. The folks north of the border have little to fear from unity, other than financial meltdown! Given the recent economic incompetence of Paddy the Irishman, this remains the biggest deterrent to the re-unification of the Emerald Isle.
Right, so we have established that I am broadly in sympathy with Irish republicanism and with the victims of Bloody Sunday. However, the Irish republican constituency then proceeds to shoot itself in the foot with its insistence upon retribution against the English soldiers whilst shrugging their shoulders at the recent acquittal of John Downey and the news that Provo suspects will be 'above the law' in terms of the unsolved wickedness of past decades. Funny how the 'oppressed' Oirish demand their pound of flesh when they feel aggrieved but then equally call for forgiveness and no prosecution of their vile 'volunteers'. This is complete hypocrisy in all its ugliness.
The slippery Downey recently observed the well-rehearsed twofold policy of terrorist suspects.
Firstly, he denied responsibility. It's a pity that such heroes cannot be man enough to admit their culpability. Instead, they delude themselves that if they confess to their priest or to God behind closed doors, that this washes away the Shinner's sins. I guess that the bottom line is that in the affluent west, it simply won't do to spend an extended spell in prison as everyone is in the business of preserving their quality of life and keeping up with the Joneses or the O'Joneses perhaps. A stint in clink seriously jeopardises one's custodianship or aspirations towards another Chelsea tractor or semi-detached residence. So much for the socialism of James Connolly. The modern Irish republican is a capitalist wannabe. He hasn't the honesty or integrity to admit his part in Irish 'acts of war' because the family's place in middle-class society is at stake. Who says that crime doesn't pay? 
Secondly, Downey, we are informed, is a committed follower of the peace process. This is another piece of skullduggery practised by all terror suspects in Norn Iron. They are briefed by their 'brief' to tell the judge that they are innocent and that they are now devoted to the peace process. This double whammy, it seems, is sufficient to acquit any Ulster terrorist nowadays. Why bother arresting them now in the first place if they are such blameless pacifists?!
Oh it all stinks. The British soldiers must be prosecuted [or persecuted?] while a plethora of republican suspects go scot free. Where is the justice and equality there? It is still repugnant for many people that the past unsolved atrocities of the thirty years [or thirty thousand tears] conflict must be whitewashed while any British wrongdoing must be dealt with severely. Even more laughable is the Irish republican insistence upon their misbehaviour merely being excused away as 'acts of war' while the British response of shoot to kill in this same 'war' is deemed as beyond the pale. If the Irish republicans regard bravely shooting people from behind, or burying unarmed and innocent women, or bombing children in English shopping centres as legitimate acts of war, then how can they complain [as they interminably do] that the actions of Special Branch or the SAS are unjustifiable. It seems that the British were expected to treat the conflict as if it were a cricket match, with a whole host of rules and regulations to observe, whilst the enemy guerillas could run amok in west Belfast or south Armagh. Well, it's just not cricket. In fact, strictly speaking, it wasn't a war either. In the accepted sense of the word, a 'war' is a conflict between two states. However, the Republic of Ireland never declared war on the UK and indeed 'colluded' [that word again] with John Bull in their joint efforts to counter the insurgency of the Brit-haters. In fact, the Irish republicans have been getting away with the same, twisted terminology for way too long. Not only is it erroneous to speak in terms of a war, as if it were some military contest between two states, but just as preposterous has been the republican insistence upon 'collusion' between the British state and loyalist terrorists. I am not denying the practise of the latter. Far from it. However, has it never occurred to anybody to describe the teamwork between the Provos and Sinn Fein as itself a grand act of collusion? Ah yes, it's okay for them to collude and shoot to kill, but dearie me, the Brits dare not shoot to kill or collude. Smell the hypocrisy folks. It absolutely reeks.
I cannot quite decide who is the more repulsive: the union jack dinosaurs or their polar opposites in the militant republican ranks. Between the two of them, they seem to be in league to completely ruin any opportunity for the normalisation of the north.
Disgusted
Gary Watton; commentator

New speed-dating venture [SEE ALSO http://firstimpressionsdating.blog.com]

A new speed-dating company has been established. Of course there are several in operation, and good luck to them. However, this latest incarnation's mission is to take speed-dating to various towns and provinces, and to demonstrate that it's not merely a vehicle for city slickers, and that such events don't always have to be held in expensive and posh venues. The company is called First Impressions and their events take place on any night of the week and typically last from 8pm to 10pm, so don't feel that you have to stay out until the early hours. You won't be ruining your work routine next morning. Instead, you will have a chance to go out for a few hours during the week, without having to restrict your socialising to the weekend. There are a number of speed-dating companies operating at present. First Impressions are not aiming to compete against them or to undermine them. Check out their website at http://firstimpressionsdating.blog.com

Here is the itinerary for March for First Impression's speed-dating events:
The next First Impressions outing will be held at
Venue: Everglades Hotel; Prehen Road; L'Derry
Date: Friday 7th March 2014
Time: The event will begin at 7pm sharp.
Format: A series of five minute 'dates'
Age range: 25 to 45
There will be one interval of fifteen minutes.

The next First Impressions outing will be held at
Venue: the Ramada Hotel; Portrush
Date: Saturday 8th March 2014
Time: The event will begin at 8pm sharp.
Format: A series of five minute 'dates'
Age range: 25 to 45
There will be one interval of fifteen minutes.

The next First Impressions outing will be held at
Venue: the Eryl Mor Hotel; Bangor; North Wales
Date: Monday 10th March 2014
Time: The event will begin at 8pm sharp.
Format: A series of five minute 'dates'
Age range: 25 to 45
There will be one interval of fifteen minutes.

The next First Impressions outing will be held at
Venue: La Tasca Restaurant; Broadgate; London
Date: Tuesday 11th March 2014
Time: The event will begin at 6.30pm sharp.
Format: A series of five minute 'dates'
Age range: 25 to 45
There will be one interval of fifteen minutes.

The next First Impressions outing will be held at
Venue: Lucozade Powerleague; Newham; London
Date: Wednesday 12th March 2014
Time: The event will begin at 8pm sharp.
Format: A series of five minute 'dates'
Age range: 25 to 45
There will be one interval of fifteen minutes.

The next First Impressions outing will be held at
Venue: the Royal Hotel; Bangor; County Down
Date: Thursday 13th March 2014
Time: The event will begin at 7pm sharp.
Format: A series of five minute 'dates'
Age range: 25 to 45
There will be one interval of fifteen minutes.

The next First Impressions outing will be held at
Venue: Lucozade Powerleague; Hamilton
Date: Monday 17th March 2014
Time: The event will begin at 8pm sharp.
Format: A series of five minute 'dates'
Age range: 25 to 45
There will be one interval of fifteen minutes.

The next First Impressions outing will be held at
Venue: the Portmann Hotel; Kilmarnock
Date: Tuesday 18th March 2014
Time: The event will begin at 8pm sharp.
Format: A series of five minute 'dates'
Age range: 25 to 45
There will be one interval of fifteen minutes.

The next First Impressions outing will be held at
Venue: the Parkway Social Club; Middlesbrough
Date: Monday 24th March 2014
Time: The event will begin at 8pm sharp.
Format: A series of five minute 'dates'
Age range: 25 to 45
There will be one interval of fifteen minutes.

The next First Impressions outing will be held at
Venue: Harrogate Cricket Club; Harrogate
Date: Tuesday 25th March 2014
Time: The event will begin at 8pm sharp.
Format: A series of five minute 'dates'
Age range: 25 to 45
There will be one interval of fifteen minutes.

The next First Impressions outing will be held at
Venue: the Romany; Northampton
Date: Wednesday 26th March 2014
Time: The event will begin at 8pm sharp.
Format: A series of five minute 'dates'
Age range: 25 to 45
There will be one interval of fifteen minutes.

SCUM by the commentator Gary Watton

I was watching one of my favourite films the other night, 'The French Connection'. There is a remarkable scene mid-film in which Charnier and his heroin-smuggling associate are both seated in a New York restaurant, indulging themselves in helpings of fine wine and cuisine, like a couple of respectable bourgeois gents. However, this duo represent evil. Across the road, sheltering from an icy cold winter's day in the Big Apple is detective Popeye Doyle and his partner Cloudy Russo. These guys purportedly represent the forces for good, namely the law. Well, the good guys are huddled in a doorway, drinking tea from a plastic cup. This scene is something of a microcosm of modern society as it expertly reminds us how perverse our world is. The criminals are enjoying an extravagant lifestyle while the law-abiding, hard-working souls suffer hardship by comparison. This regrettable disparity must not be allowed to prevail - but it does.
Meanwhile, I was particularly struck by a characteristic outpouring of vitriol from Kelvin Mackenzie, the fomer tabloid newspaper editor, who was appearing on 'Pienaar's Politics' on Radio Five Dead. Motormouth Mackenzie described the looting and rioting perpetrators during the street disturbances of early August 2011 as "scum." There may be some validity to such a remark, but I would venture to suggest that such an unenviable epithet need not be confined to the so-called 'feral underclass'.
Fast-forwarding to recent days, the British nation (and beyond) has been treated to the unedifying spectacle of Nigella Lawson and her ex-husband Charles Saatchi having their dirty linen washed very publicly, at Isleworth Crown Court to be precise. From the court proceedings we learn that Charles Saatchi appears to be a horrible, nasty, vindictive megalomaniac (perhaps not a new discovery for those in the know). Futhermore, we are also informed that Nigella's pampered lifestyle features a regular intake of such substances as cocaine. Now, Nigella isn't the first and won't be the last rich bitch to partake of some illegal, naughty 'medication', so her misbehaviour is scarcely exceptional. However, what is more revealing is just how trashy the lives of the wealthy and famous really are. I guess that there have been sufficient tabloid exposures since Profumo's scandal in 1963 to reinforce this. Maybe indifferent Joe Public has grown immune to the shock value of such sensational stuff. Well, for me, the sorry episode of Lawson and Saatchi's private lives perfectly encapsulates the fact that when you strip away the glossy veneer of the opulence of the rich and assorted celebrities, one finds murky, trashy lives lurking underneath. I would therefore argue that people who present themselves in slick suits, shirt, and tie, and elegant frocks and gowns are probably at least as scummy as the 'feral underclass'.
Mick Jagger once sang "raise your glass to the hard-working people/say a prayer for the lowly at birth" in the excellent 'Salt Of The Earth'. I totally concur. Meanwhile, it is high time that people woke up to the fact that our so-called superiors and the high-fliers in our society and expenses-claiming fraudulent members of the Establishment are indeed just as worthy of the word "scum." Of course, one could go further and state that our greedy financiers, politicos , and bankers are on a par with pedophiles - or is such a comparison too harsh and disrespectful towards child molesters?

UB40: A Critique [by the author, historian, and musicologist Gary Watton]

A couple of months ago I rescued about eighty of my old vinyl albums from almost ten years of captivity in my late mother's attic. (Actually, she's never late nor even dead.) Anyhow, I have proceeded to re-acquaint myself with the music that entertained me during my 'bedroom years' of bygone days of yore. In the last ten days I have bravely endured my collection of UB40 LPs. Regrettably, I now find such product rather dreary and uninspiring from a combo that I once held in the highest esteem in my mistaken youth.
What strikes me most about this Brummie outfit is the unremitting politicising, pontificating, preaching, and downright gloom that characterises the large majority of their own compositions. They basically set the tone on their debut album with the delightfully cheerful 'Burden Of Shame' (a critique of British imperialism) and well ever since, their output has been almost exclusively a musical rant. Each track appears to remind us that capitalism is wicked and poverty is wicked and Apartheid is wicked and inequality is wicked and racism is wicked. Oh come on fellas. Change the record, please. You don't have to perpetually persuade me of such dogma. The truth is: I believe you, and indeed most of your listeners are presumably equally sympathetic. I doubt whether the UBs feature prominently amongst the musical preferences of bankers, financiers, and racists!
The only occasions when UB40 mercifully strayed from the tiresome evangelising was when they ventured into the territory of cover versions of classic reggae love songs on the outstanding 'Labour Of Love' project and its inferior successor, 'Labour Of Love II'. There has probably been a mark III and maybe even a IV. Happily, I am blissfully unaware of the group's post-1990 material, with the exception of the awful karaoke rendition of Elvis's 'Can't Help Falling In Love' (a 1993 UK chart-topper which just about sums up the poor musical taste of the British record-buying public.) Oh yes, I did chance upon a new UB40 offering from 2005, 'Who You Fighting For?' which the Mail On Sunday (or possibly the Daily Malice) cruelly supplied as a freebie to every lucky (or unlucky) reader. Not surprisingly (to quote another west Midlands singer, Mr Robert Plant) "the song remains the same". Unfortunately, the Campbells and their cronies just cannot resist the temptation to revisit the same old themes in almost every track.
Not surprisingly, my favourite UB40 tunes hail from their earliest days when they treated the listener to a whole array of fine reggae instrumentals on their debut 'Signing Off'. Then they atoned for the typically depressing 'Present Arms' project by releasing the marvellous (and largely undiscovered gem) of 'Present Arms In Dub' when the lads jettisoned the left-wing wailing and merely provided the tunes in instrumental dub versions.
In my semi-humble opinion, the UBs missed a trick when they failed to take a leaf out of the book of their contemporaries Madness or such luminaries as the Kinks by providing observations of modern life and the quirky individuals that they encountered along the way. Whilst Madness delivered the anecdotal 'Bed And Breakfast Man' and 'Mrs Hutchinson', UB40 were providing the non-joyful 'One In Ten' and 'Don't Do The Crime'. However, don't get me wrong. UB40 have composed the occasional gem. 'Tyler' was a worthwhile tribute to an unjustly convicted murderer, Gary Tyler. However, their song-writing formula almost always seems to be confined to pouring scorn at the same old injustices. The gang rarely stretch their creativity towards mini-dramas and soap operas about everyday people and places and events. The guys may be uneducated [a fact that they certainly don't hide] but you don't need to have gone to Oxbridge to be able to compose a variety of very different songs about a whole range of non-political subjects.
When UB40 did wander into film-making with their half-hour 'Labour Of Love' movie, the result was distinctly drab. The flick lacked any originality and culminated in a scene of police brutality and racism that even the most ardent Trotskyite dramatist might not have conceived for a Channel Four late-night production. The only redeeming feature was the glorious video to the perennial favourite, 'Red Red Wine' in which Ali comes to the pub to meet the woman of his dreams, only to find her arrive afterwards with his brother [and rival]. As if that isn't bad enough, Ali gets his car keys nicked whilst being hoodwinked at the bar by a couple of chancers, masquerading as friends. All of this would be enough to drive anyone to drink, and Ali C doesn't disappoint, as he ends the tune doing a fine impersonation of a drunk, down on his luck, being helped home by his Dad. T'was superb stuff.
For me, UB40 were okay musically until they added the brass sounds of the Tenyue brothers in the mid-80s which only succeeded in drowning out Robin's lead guitar and Mickey Virtue's fine keyboards. Admittedly, the big brass sound of the poptastic 'If It Happens Again' was a glorious exception, but thereafter the band just got submerged in an over-reliance on brass instrumentation.
Sorry UB40, but I have long since fallen out of love with you. Perhaps this is symptomatic of a 'maturing' codger who is no longer easily impressed by anyone or anything, musical or otherwise.
Yours Insincerely,
Gary Watton (a former fan)

My UB40 albums and my favourite song on the LP:
Signing Off (1980) - King
Present Arms (1981) - Don't Let It Pass You By
Present Arms In Dub (1981) - The Return Of Dr X
UB44 (1982) - The Prisoner
UB40 Live (1982) - Sardonicus
Labour Of Love (1983) - She Caught The Train
Geffery Morgan (1984) - D.U.B.
Baggariddim (1985) - Demonstrate by Admiral Jerry
Rat In The Kitchen (1986) - The Elevator
UB40 (1988) - Where Did I Go Wrong?
Labour Of Love II (1989) - Kingston Town

Tags: ali; astro; brian; earl; jimmy; mickey;

England's Poor Starts In Australia by G Watton

http://www.cricketnetwork.co.uk/main/s740/st184618.htm

England's perpetual woes in Australia [a few notable exceptions aside]
all appear to stem from an inability to hit the ground running in the
first test of each series. Or, if that sounds too simplistic, then
there is a massive body of evidence that reinforces the apparent fact
that England go missing at the business end of the Ashes which is
actually the first three tests and then only arise from their slumber
when a series is done and dusted, and the Poms proceed to console
themselves with triumph in a so-called 'dead rubber'. To be slightly
fair to England, there is no Australian cricket XI past, present, or
future that will happily concede defeat to England in any test match,
irrespective of whether the Ashes is still at stake or not.

However, the horrendous truth prevails that England simply do not
excel at the outset of many overseas test series, and this is patently
the case in Australia. If one looks back [in anger] at England's last
nineteen test series in Australia, the tourists have dismally only
recorded a victory in two opening tests in a spell dating back to
1945. This shocking statistic needs to be addressed and remedied
sooner rather than later, or Australia can look forward to re-visiting
their growing tendency of settling an Ashes series at the third
skirmish in Perth, long before the tests arranged for the hallowed
venues of Melbourne and Sydney even appear on the horizon.
Furthermore, equally of grave concern for the English cricketing
contingent is that since 1900, the English visitors have only twice
lost the first test of an Ashes series in Australia and bounced back
to win the series, achieving this cricketing equivalent of Halley's
Comet in 1911 and 1954 - and not since! In future England needs to
face up to the perils of the first test and recognise that
historically when they go behind in a series in Australia, they stay
behind, and indeed go further behind.

Whether this all indicates a lack of preparation ahead of the first
contest is open to question. Surely if England are flopping in the
first battle in Brisbane, the logic must be to begin in Australia one
week earlier the next time. Regrettably, England's hapless cricket
warriors are all too often engaged in one-day internationals for much
of September or first-class fixtures at the tail-end of the County
Championship. This leaves our weary troops only a few weeks in October
to recover. Is this adequate? History would suggest otherwise.

Alternatively, there ought to be an argument proposed for England
playing a pre-Ashes warm-up test in New Zealand or the Indian
sub-continent en route to their Ashes commitments. If England are
going to maintain their time-honoured bad habit of being all too rusty
at the start of a winter's test series, then let that
under-performance be exposed in a pre-Ashes test, before the main
course is served, and England end up well and truly cooked in Perth,
long before the Christmas turkey.


ENGLAND'S RECORD IN THE FIRST ASHES TEST IN AUSTRALIA SINCE 1945:
The following is an appalling chronology of 11 defeats, six draws, and only two wins!
2013 Lost
2010 Drew
2006 Lost
2002 Lost
1998 Drew
1994 Lost
1990 Lost
1986 WON
1982 Drew
1979 [non-Ashes series] Lost
1978 WON
1974 Lost
1970 Drew
1965 Drew
1962 Drew
1958 Lost
1954 Lost
1950 Lost
1946 Lost