Jump to content


Rugby League World
League Express
Garry Schofield Testimonial Brochure (Signed)


John Drake

Member Since 10 Nov 2008
Offline Last Active Yesterday, 04:01 PM
***--

#3184401 29/8/2015 RL Challenge Cup Final Hull Kingston Rovers v Leeds Rhinos, Wembley...

Posted by John Drake on 30 August 2015 - 04:05 PM

So does this mean that discussion of a game in which a team in a city bigger than that of its opponent (who are the smaller of the 2 sides from said city) demolished their opponent from a smaller city in an essentially free market system (the bigger side paying a lot more on playing salary than the smaller side) we cannot discuss the possibility that this demographic and economic disparity may have influenced the result in a direct fashion?

With respect, this is exactly why we are where we are and the sport has little hope of any dynamic future in this country, while it continues to ascend to new heights in Australasia (our only hope).

If there is a way to discuss a 50-0 slaughter of this fashion in a benign, matter-of-fact manner then fine but it is surely to miss every pertinent point raised by the occasion - something rugby league has done better than any other sport for decades.

This is a match thread. About the match. Y'know, what happened on the pitch.

You're free to discuss any other issues arising from the match, the event, mergers, or anything else, but just not in this thread, because it'll end up not being about the match anymore.

Just start another thread. It's easy. People do it all the time without causing such a fuss.

Get over yourself.


#3181862 Threads moved

Posted by John Drake on 24 August 2015 - 02:16 PM

Blimey, the internet, eh.

 

It's a minefield.

 

Can't do right for doing wrong.

 

:banghead:

 

I've moved the merged Jarryd Hayne thread in here from AOS/AOB, if it means that much to people.




#3178998 Calais: what to do.

Posted by John Drake on 19 August 2015 - 11:17 AM

Here's an example of what we risk getting.

 

On Sunday, I caught a bus the three miles into Bradford city centre. Halfway there, a black African woman in traditional dress and her four kids got on .... three boys aged up to about nine and a baby in a pram. The boys were all eating chicken in cartons from a takeaway.

The (Asian) driver asked her how far she was going (the bus goes on beyond the city centre). The woman intimated that she couldn't understand what he was saying . (Funny, because all the takeaways in that area are owned by Muslims). He told her what the fare would be into town. The woman  shouted at him that she wouldn't pay more than one pound (for all five of them). The driver gave up and let her on.

 

Her journey? About 800 yards.

 

I read stuff like this and get the urge to throw my computer at the wall in sheer frustration.

 

I live in the same city as you. Have done all my life, and yet I feel we must actually inhabit parrallel universes, so different are our perceptions not only of Bradford, but of life in general.

 

I'm locking this thread, because right now, I'm really busy working on deadline on the next issue of RLW, and haven't got the time or patience to decide what else to do with it.




#3178820 Labour leadership contest

Posted by John Drake on 18 August 2015 - 09:43 PM

I'm sorry John but your naivety is exposed in that you think Burnham really likes Rugby League. Before he was a PPC for Leigh he had no interest in TGG at all, his only interest was being elected.

I'm afraid, like most on the right of the Labour Party, you are completely missing the mood. Corbyn will win, because only Corbyn can win a General Election. Corbyn is most popular amongst LP membership and the electorate. You will see.

 

How incredibly patronising of you to call me naive for holding a different opinion to you.

 

I'm not left or right, Blairite, Brownite, Corbynite or Burnhamite, I'm just Labour and will remain so, whoever wins the leadership.

 

I joined the party in 1992, when Neil Kinnock was still the leader, and have stayed in it under John Smith, Tony Blair, Gordon Brown and Ed Miliband, just as Jeremy Corbyn and all the other leadership candidates have managed to do, even though none of them - nor me - will have agreed with every policy, every decision, every action, every utterance made on behalf of the party in all that time. No party, and certainly no faction within a party, has all the right answers to everything. You get some stuff right, you get some stuff wrong, you live, you learn.

 

I'm sick of the labelling and the insults, no matter which direction they've been coming from.

 

As for Andy Burnham, believe it or not, I'd vote for him even if he didn't know anything about Rugby League. But just for the record, I managed to grab a personal conversation with him about Rugby League at a recent hustings event, and he knew what he was talking about, no bluffing. I speak as I find, not as I'm told by others.




#3178380 First Professional RL Player Comes Out

Posted by John Drake on 17 August 2015 - 10:15 PM

78 posts removed from this thread which is, I think, a TRL record. That's nothing to be proud of.

 

Here's the rule from now on.

 

If you want to offer a few words of support and encouragement to Keegan Hirst and his family, please feel free to post on this thread.

 

If you want to engage in repetitive arguments, personal abuse or general trolling, please stop typing, move away from the keyboard and go have a cup of tea.

After that, if you still want to engage in repetitive arguments, personal abuse or general trolling, please find another website to do it on.

 

Thank you.




#3175973 Crowdwatch - (Merged threads)

Posted by John Drake on 14 August 2015 - 08:56 AM

I've merged the crowdwatch threads together as it is getting confusing having multiple threads for different rounds all ultimately discussing the same topic.

 

Please don't start any more individual threads on crowds, just add them on to the end of this one.

 

Anyone who is interested will find it, and those who aren't will find it easier to bypass.

 

Thank you.




#3175499 Former minister says the UK is becoming a 'one-party state'

Posted by John Drake on 13 August 2015 - 12:23 PM

http://www.frontpage...niel-greenfield

 

This is where I meet Ron McKay.

He is Galloway’s close aide and “best friend” for 38 years. He is said to wield a lot of influence in Respect. He is from Glasgow, and has a puffy face...

“It would take me much longer than I’ve got to explain biraderi politics in Bradford, clan-based politics, and people actually do deliver 20, 30, 50 votes. Through their extended families, what tends to happen is, the kind of head of the household, or the kind of head of the clan, makes a decision how they’ll vote. So if somebody, in I don’t know, Penge (South London) said I could deliver you 50 votes you would laugh. But here . . . it’s true. They deliver bundles of votes.”

 

Oh don't get me wrong, I'm no defender of biraderi politics in Bradford, quite the opposite, I think it absolutely stinks, but Naz Shah was far from a beneficiary of it in Bradford West. If she had been, there would have been no anti-Galloway landslide in her favour.

 

She wasn't the candidate chosen by the local CLP, and didn't have the support of many within it during the election campaign - to their absolute discredit. She hadn't even been a member of the Labour Party for that long. But she won, against all expectations, by building a wide coalition of support against Galloway's nasty, poisonous brand of politics that has done nothing for Bradford whatsoever, and she has the chance now to represent the whole constituency in Parliament, not just certain vested interests within it.

 

Whether she delivers on that in the next 5 years is up to her, and she'll be judged on her performance, but to dismiss her purely because of her religion, as you seek to do, is utterly nauseous in my opinion.




#3175408 Former minister says the UK is becoming a 'one-party state'

Posted by John Drake on 13 August 2015 - 10:35 AM

I've posted before that Bradford was supposed to get a Central & East constituency that followed no historic or geographical profile. Instead of just incorporating all the area inside the ring road, it zig-zagged to take in a maximum of the Muslim enclaves. This was because, right up to this election, Bradford had three constituencies and a 30% Muslim population. However, no Muslim had ever been elected as an MP for the city. When the Lib Dems withdrew their support for the boundary changes, that plan was scuppered.

 

Following the 2015 election, we now have two out of the three MP's who are Muslim ... Naz Shah and Imran Khan. Many (most?) non-Muslims in my constituency have reservations about the number and voting patterns of postal votes in Bradford West. George Galloway has challenged the result because he lost to a landslide after winning by a landslide in 2010. Both the 2010 and 2015 campaigns featured some pretty nasty tactics involving personal attacks on rival candidates.

 

It would certainly suit me if the previously proposed Bradford Central constituency was introduced. Though probably not the Muslim community because they would probably lose one of their MP's.

 

http://www.boundaryc...pdown_form=TRUE

 

George Galloway lost Bradford West because he was an utterly useless MP who used the constituency to further his own interests and nothing more.

 

Bradford West now has an MP who is from Bradford, who lives and grew up in the constituency and who managed to attract votes from all sections of the local community, even from Tories voting Labour to get shut of the odious Galloway, hence the landslide result.

 

That's a significant improvement, I'd say.




#3175180 Labour leadership contest

Posted by John Drake on 12 August 2015 - 11:04 PM

Just out of interest, I read the Labour Rule Book (2013 and current edition).  There's no rule in there about members being not accepted for simply having different views, the list of exclusions is fairly simple and easy to understand so I wonder what justification they're using for banning applicants like Steel.  I can understand those who are Tory members as they are easily caught by an exclusion.

 

 

This is in the Labour Party rule book and will exclude a lot of the people seeking to join now:

 

A member of the Party who joins and/ or supports a political organisation other than an official Labour group or other unit of the Party, or supports any candidate who stands against an official Labour candidate, or publicly declares their intent to stand against a Labour candidate, shall automatically be ineligible to be or remain a Party member.

 

It's worth pointing out to those who have spent their time campaigning against the Labour Party for years in other parties, but now somewhat hypocritically seek to join it, that the person they hope will win the leadership has been in the Labour Party for several decades, even managing to remain a member under the leadership of a certain Tony Blair.

 

If you've campaigned against Labour in the past, you can hardly be that surprised if your membership application is treated with more suspicion than those who haven't.




#3174220 The Life Scientific

Posted by John Drake on 11 August 2015 - 07:26 AM

Given that this thread has (somewhat ironically given the original subject matter) now descended into personal abuse (now removed) and endless 'he said, she said', I'm locking it.




#3174177 Labour leadership contest

Posted by John Drake on 10 August 2015 - 11:24 PM

Hmmm, thought it was a bit odd that a 'newbie' would dive straight into a political thread in AOB on what is, after all, mainly a Rugby League forum. And sure enough, a little investigation reveals JohnG69 to be a several times banned former member.

Bye. Again.

TRL is better than the Labour Party at detecting fraudulent membership applications!!


#3173977 Labour leadership contest

Posted by John Drake on 10 August 2015 - 04:22 PM

You dont look that old :tongue:

 

What are/have they done for you to make this statement?

 

Well, there's stuff like this going on.

Conservatives promised to protect the ‘most vulnerable’. How’s that going?
http://www.theguardi...osborne-reforms

Two Tory MPs question scale of planned tax credit cuts
http://www.theguardi...cuts-bebb-percy

UK tenants staring down the barrel of £1,000 rents
http://www.theguardi...l-of-1000-rents

There's the deliberate dismantling of the welfare state, the continuous attacks upon trades unions, the unchecked growth of zero-hour employment contracts, the privatisation by stealth of the NHS and, to top all of that, a new foodbank has just opened up near me. A foodbank. In 2015. Just one of several hundreds in the UK, but the Prime Minister doesn't know (or care) how many foodbanks there are operating in the country he is in charge of.

Read this and weep.
http://www.trusselltrust.org/stats

Of course, some people are doing ok, which is nice for them, and the Tories will always aim to make sure that there are just enough of those people to keep voting them back into power while damning the rest.

"The rich man in his castle, the poor man at his gate..."

That's not the kind of country I want to live in.

 

But, keeping this thread on topic, I don't believe Jeremy Corbyn has a realistic set of policies to deal with any of this or a cat in hell's chance of persuading enough people to vote for a party he was leading either.




#3172772 Labour leadership contest

Posted by John Drake on 08 August 2015 - 09:41 AM

corbyn-1.jpg


Ok, so I went to hear Jeremy Corbyn speak in Bradford last night, and very rousing stuff it was. He is a good speaker, very fluent, articulate, done without apparent reference to notes, telling people exactly what they want to hear. And that, for me, is the problem. In my view, he is promising stuff he cannot possibly deliver and raising hopes beyond reasonable expectation. It may well be enough to deliver him the leadership of the Labour Party, but it'll never get him any further than that.

There was lots of stuff from various speakers about how they'd kept their principles, campaigned against Thatcher in the '80s, etc, but little apparent recognition of why Labour spent so long out of office having to protest from the sidelines the last time their brand of politics held sway in the party.

Corbyn also speaks of conducting a campaign based on policy, not personal attacks, which would be fine if his supporters weren't routinely branding those in the Labour Party who don't support him as neocons, Tory-lite or 'viruses' needing to be eliminated. We're either all Labour, or we're not. You can't talk about unity at the same time as allowing this sort of stuff to go on in your name without people doubting your sincerity on the subject.

At the end of the rally, this 'man of the people' was bundled away from the crowd by a bunch of heavies without explanation, despite lots of people wanting to talk to him or grab a picture. That may be down to those who organised the event on his behalf in Bradford, it wouldn't surprise me, but it did leave a bad taste and is at odds with the image being presented. Contrast that with the Andy Burnham event I attended in Leeds, where Burnham stayed behind for ages after his speech, talking to anyone who wanted to have a word with him until the hall was almost empty - and there were as many at the Burnham event as there were at Corbyn's last night too, just to put things into perspective.

I don't doubt Corbyn is a man of principle, who believes in what he says and has a role to play in the party, but my view remains that if he is elected leader Labour will be reduced to a perpetual protest movement rather than a potential party of government. Is that what the people who suffer the most under the Tories really need?

Look, I may be wrong, who knows, and we may well soon have the opportunity to find out for real what will happen to the Labour Party led by Jeremy Corbyn. In some respects, I'm less worried by the prospect than I was before I attended last night's event, because he is an articulate advocate for his beliefs, not quite the pop-eyed, loony-leftie caricature of popular misconception, and he clearly does have the ability to draw many disillusioned people back into politics.

But I just do not believe enough of the British public outside these meetings and outside the newly-joined members of the Labour Party will want to buy the solutions he is selling - more borrowing, higher taxes, unilateral nuclear disarmament - and they are the people he'll need to convince in order to put anything he says into practice.

Having heard all four of the candidates speak in person, I'm sticking with Andy Burnham as the only likely potential Prime Minister in the Labour leadership contest, with Yvette Cooper as second preference.




#3171980 Labour leadership contest

Posted by John Drake on 06 August 2015 - 04:15 PM

But in 2015 the Tories didn't win at Labour's expense, in fact both main parties increased their vote share.

 

Indeed. The collapse of the Lib Dem vote did not aid Labour in the way many assumed it would (as the Tories won lots of seats from them) and the loss of Labour votes to UKIP was severely underestimated too.

 

Vote shares are not static, and they are not necessarily made up of the same voters.

 

Lots of people switch between various parties these days.

 

It's a dangerous assumption being made by many already that the share Labour achieved under Miliband in 2015 is somehow ringfenced and can only be added to under a new leader.




#3171479 Rugby League World Magazine - Feedback Thread

Posted by John Drake on 05 August 2015 - 04:13 PM

Waiting for my subs copy - finished last month's one recently and really enjoyed it actually. The article about the disciplinary was the standout read for me, but over the past few months it does seem to be a lot more reading packed in which is only a good thing.

 

One - hopefully polite - request. The mag is looking really good at the moment inside with some great pictures - can we please have something different on the cover rather than a player just standing there in a kit?

 

We'll ask the next one not to fold their arms. ;)