Album of the Week - Dave Betton

Dave Betton - At Your Request (Denman DD106)

That's a pretty snazzy suit Dave has on I'm sure you would agree and the collar on the shirt would make Harry Hill jealous. Still I'm sure at the time it was very fashionable so lets over look that. The flowers are very pretty although I'm not sure they make for a very interesting background. But what really struck me about this album cover as is just why on earth he's standing in the flower bed and not on the path? Strange bit of composition that.

At your request starts off with Once in a Lifetime - Tonight, a song that sounds like the theme tune to a 1970's quiz show. The Al Jolson medley of songs will of course sit a little uneasy with a modern listener although it's a pretty good impression none the less. The rest of the album varies in style from country to jazz to crooner ballads.

It would be easy for us trendy hipster types to dismiss Dave Betton as nothing more than a club singer, the type you might find in Butlins. His style is very much that of a cabaret performer or entertainer. But to give him his due Dave does have a good voice. On some songs you get hit with a sudden blast of power or notice a note being held longer than one might expect. Clearly the guy can sing even if the songs do all have that same club singer style in the background. His voice is also rather versatile, there's a pretty good impression of Johnny Cash up on his facebook page (25 likes).

Yes that's right Dave is still going strong today and is available for bookings via Hawthorn Entertainment. And as "..an all round entertainer, amazing singer and comedian" has become one of the "..most popular cabaret performers with Thompson Gold Hotels in venues throughout the Mediterranean." Over the years he has played Blackpool many times and earned the nickname "Mr Blackpool".

It doesn't come as a surprise that he's a hit with the cruises and in Blackpool. Seems like something that suits his talents down to the ground. If you like that sort of thing I'd imagine Dave would be hard to beat and I'm sure those who see him have a good night.

"Dave’s act is a potpourri of all that is best in cabaret entertainment and on or off stage he is the ultimate professional." Things do seem to get a bit Alan Partridge at times though.

I might add that is a signed copy.

Dave Betton Facebook page

(all albums of the week have been picked form donations to my local Save the Children shop)

Why Harry Redknapp Should Not be England Manager.

Harry Redknapp might be the hot favorite to take the role of England manager but there are some good reasons why this might well turn out to be a bad idea.

The FA is seems insistent that their next employee be English and looking at a list of my compatriots it would be hard not to put Harry at that top of that list. He might only have one trophy to his name but I think only Steve Mcclaren can better that and he already had a go at the job. The others don't really inspire all that much, for whatever reason Englishmen have not really shown as managers in recent times.

Apparently there is now a shortlist of ten names that meet the requirements. Harry, Stuart Pearce and Roy Hodson would seem obvious. Like wise Alan Pardew and Sam Allardyce but after that you really start to struggle to think who else there really is. Not that people in lower leagues are not doing a good job but you can't really see Brian McDermott or Ian Holloway making the list. There's always Hope Powell who has actually take England to a major final but clearly that is never going to happen.

So it's not exactly a stellar list of the biggest names from football, not even from English football. But do we really need a big name or someone dripping with success?

It's far to say that England have tried all kinds of different approaches in the last few years. While some have provided more opportunities than others none have meet with success. Capello was as good as they come, Mcclaren was a friend of the players, Keegan a good motivator and Sven kept the players happy. You name it we've tried it.

What exactly does Harry have to offer? It's fair to say the Spurs are playing some great football at times but they do also come unstuck against better teams. Which might actually make him the perfect man for the job. He has always struck me as something of a wheeler dealer character. The sort of person who brings in players on free transfers or from aboard and gets the best out of them. I don't think he's as naive tactfully as he can come across but he does tend to come up short against bigger footballing brains. He deserves his place on the shortlist and it's hard to look beyond him but it strikes me that the skills that make him a good club manager are not ones that would work at the national level.

Perhaps my biggest concern with Harry is that he's not all that big on bringing through younger players and would I suspect prefer to stick to the old guard who have failed in the past. He did bring through some young players at West Ham, but that's kind of the law at the club. At Spurs Kyle Walker is getting a chance but is the only under 21 player in the squad. And during the last transfer window in brought in two players aged over 30. There is not really much chance of a good young player getting into the team at Spurs. Not to mention the talk of him bringing Scholes back into the team.

It worries me because I'd much prefer to see us fade out the old players and give the younger ones a chance to play. I don't really see Harry doing this at all. We shouldn't look to play like other nations but we can learn lessons from them. I'd present Germany as a prime example of this. They had a very good under 21 team and decided to fade out the older players. Look at what happened, they are now one of the best teams in the world. Joachim Low was not exactly a top class coach but he had a vision and a plan. The talented young players where given a chance and responded. I'd like to see England do this. All I am saying is give kids a chance.

The top teams are prepared to spend money and give chances to the likes of Jones, Henderson and Chamberlain. So why not give the chance at national level? Of course they are not as good as the players they would replace yet but if you never give them the chance they never will be. Take all the kids to the Euros, let them get a feel for it. Defoe and Crouch might well do a good job but I'd rather Welbeck and Strurridge played. They might well fail but do we expect anything else currently? Let the exuberance of youth have some fun and learn for the world cup.

Admittedly I have no idea who could do this, perhaps Pearce as he has worked with them all before. Hopefully at the interviews someone might actually have a vision and a plan of how to develop things and build for the future. Harry might give a short term boost but he's not really one for forging a grand plan. Harry would be a very short sighted appointment.

Female Representation in Politcs.

Which country has the best representation of women in its parliament?

Take some time to to think about that one. Surely it must be one of those right on free thinking liberal countries where every one is happy and they have great cheese? Yes that's correct, the answer is Rwanda.

You read that right, because with 56.3% of its lower house being women Rwanda tops the table for female representation. Which for a country that for three months in 1994 saw between 250,000 and 500,000 women raped is a hell of an improvement. 67% of those women raped contracted HIV via the use of infected males as a weapon of genocide. So some where along the line Rwanda gave up this horrifying trend and now has something to be proud off with regards to its treatment of women.

The table comes from the Inter Parliamentary Union and is based on information given by the various national parliaments. Unsurprisingly Scandinavia takes up four of the top ten spots with Sweden (45%), Iceland (42.9%), Finland (42.5%) and Norway (39.6%) all proving just how nice they are in that part of the world. Andorra (50%), South Africa (44.5%) The Seychelles (43.8%) and Cuba (43.2%) all make it into the top ten. Surprisingly so does Nicaragua (40.2%) a country that bans abortion and doesn't bother to investigate crimes against women.

Disappointingly one has to do a lot of scrolling down to find the UK. All the way down to 49 in fact with a score of 22%. Things are worse for the USA as you need to drop down to 71st place. Both countries come below Afghanistan which is a country where rape victims get put in jail. Of course any Afghan woman who stood for election in the face of death threats should be praised. In fact it's surprising the number of countries that have poor human rights records that are in the top half.

But does this actually mean anything or matter at all? After all the UK and USA are not terrible places for women to live in, certainly much better than Afghanistan one would suggest. And is this actually an example of sexism at work? Do we and our dear cousins need to sort this out?

Just because there is not a 50/50 split of male to female in a Parliament does not in itself mean things are unfair. One would always hope that the best candidate is voted in to power. Sometimes there might be a reaction against a party such as with Labour in the last election. Both of these could cause a higher number of men to get power with no hint of sexism at work.

It could just truly be the case that at the moment men where the better persons for the job. Although the fact that it never goes the other way to mostly women might disprove this. Perhaps the number of MPs is not the key thing here. Perhaps its best to look at the all the candidates who stood for election. After all you can only vote from those that are picked by the parties.

Figures from the Centre for Advancement of Women in Politics show that out of the 3223 candidate who stood 23% were women. The Green Party put up 32% female candidates and UKIP had the lowest with 15%. Not one party had a 50/50 split of male to female. So there is already an imbalance due to lack of choice and representation before the elections. In Northern Ireland some places had no females standing for election at all.

Statistics are all well and good but they might be misleading in the strange world of politics. Not every candidate put forward by a party is expected to win by them. For a variety of reasons it's not realistic to expect every party to put up a male and female candidate in every area. Would there even be enough women interested in politics to make this happen? and if not why not?

David Cameron's cabinet has just 17% women in it. No one wants to see a woman given the job based purely on her sex, those who get the posts should be the best people for the job. But given the number of Public School pals, Tony Cronies and Brownites that have made up the cabinet in recent years can we say that people have not already been getting posts they did not merit?


It's not like UK politics has been devoid of talented and capable women in the past. Clearly there is something holding them back. I find it hard to believe that there are not enough women who could do the job to make up the short fall. And I'm not sure that society in general is against the idea enough to not vote for them if they wanted to. It's hard to come to any other conclusion that its the political establishment it's self that is preventing women from becoming part of it.

Whatever the cause and effects might be women are under represented in Parliament and politics in general. Perhaps we need to push forth and smash down the last out dated barriers of sexism in the UK. Or perhaps those barriers fell long ago and we just need to encourage women to take up the opportunities. Although I strongly suspect the former to be the case and I think it's an institutionalised sexism were things are just accepted and assumed to be true. The problem with institutionalised inequality is that it's much harder to prove than out right hate.

I acknowledge that I've solved nothing here but have merely tried to explore what the above statistics might mean. In any case if you find yourself below Afghanistan in a table that focuses on women and equality you clearly have a problem you need to address.

The IPU table can be found here -
http://www.ipu.org/wmn-e/classif.htm

Date from the Centre for Advancement of Women in Politics can be found here - http://www.qub.ac.uk/cawp/election.html

Information on human rights records of all nations can be found here.
http://www.amnesty.org/en/annual-report/2011/country-data

Application for job as new England Manager.

Dear FA I would like to formally apply for the job of England manager. I know I might seem like an unknown but I am in fact the most successful football manager ever. While playing FM2008 I led Liverpool to 10 league titles and 7 European Cups, not to mention a vast number of lesser cups. Then I went to Real Madrid and won 5 leagues and 3 European Cups. I'm sure you will agree that having a person with 10 European Cup trophies to his name can only be a benefit for the England team.

I also have plenty of international experience with 3 African Cup of Nations Trophies and a North American Gold cup trophy with Nigeria and the USA respectively. While in charge of England I lost one game in 10 years, to Croatia in a friendly, and won 2 World Cups and 2 European Cups. Again I'm sure you can see how this will be a plus, I am after all the most successful manager ever. Better than Fergie or Paisley or Gary Neville.

My teams play an expansive, quick moving attacking style of football. I pick the most talented and skillful players and look to entertain the public. We might conceded 3 goals but will score 5 and have a lot of fun doing it. Any player who doesn't perform gets shouted out and told to buck their ideas up. I ony accept the best

I have some ground rules I must insist on, these have been the basis of my undoubted success.

1 Steven Gerrard will play in every game, even after he retires from club football.

2 No Man Utd players will ever play for England (many point to my insistence that all English players leave Man Utd as one of the main reasons the club has not won the league for so long and I'm sure we can all be happy about this)

3. My star player is Clive Simpson, who currently does not exist. As such we shall need to clone him. If we start on this now he should be ready by the Euros.

4. At some point in the future I will get bored and restart my managerial career in another dimension. Don't worry I won't delete your dimension, it shall serve as a memorial to my greatness.

I look forward to hearing form you soon

Before Watchmen

DC have confirmed that a series of prequels to Watchmen are set to be published and will focus on telling the story of each character. It's proven to be quite the hot topic in the comic book world with much debate focused on whether revisiting this classic is a good idea or not.

Alan Moore and Dave Gibbons, the original creators of Watchmen are not to be involved in any of the project. Al tough given how Moore feels about DC that was never going to happen. He effectively turned his back on the company over his mistreatment at their hands when the Watchmen was first brought out in 1986.

A new batch of creators have been brought in to work on it and its a mighty impressive roll call of some of the best in the business today. The likes of Brian Azzarello, Darwyn Cooke and J. Michael Straczynski involved it's unlikely any of the books will actually be bad. (If you like comics you owe it to yourself to read Darwyn Cooke). I'm not going to start hating all these people for it as they have done things I've loved. They've also done things I didn't like or just plain didn't read due to lack of interest. You have to let the creators do what they think best and then pick and choose from that. Even if it is a little bit disappointing that they are doing this.

So what are people complaining about?

Well for me it doesn't really matter who they get to work on it or how good the books are, I'm not interested in it at all. I don't hate it or think it shouldn't be allowed, I'm just not interested in it. For the same reasons I wouldn't buy a Before War and Peace book or Before Highway 61 Revisited record. There really is no need for them and it's diluting a thing of genius in order to make money. I really can't see what they will add to the original.

Watchmen stands as a high water mark for comic books. If ever comics are to be thought of as art then this is one of its master pieces and Alan Moors is it's Da Vinci. It would have been nice if DC had treated the book with the respect it deserves. By all means bring out fancy editions of it and I guess if you want to make a bad movie version then fine, but could you not just leave it alone and let it sit as the crown jewels in your library of work?

Moore himself had this to say "I tend to take this latest development as a kind of eager confirmation that they are still apparently dependent on ideas that I had 25 years ago,"

Which frankly is a good point. DC has just refreshed the industry with the whole New 52 thing do they really want to go back to Watchmen? Or are they just hoping for a second movie? Having gathered all this talent why not get them to create new things?

Apparently DC have long been asking Moore and Gibbons to do more Watchmen stuff but they always refused. The fact that they said no should have been an end to it. They both felt they had said all they wanted to. Watchmen is a one off piece of work, not an ongoing series, it's already complete so why try to shoe horn in a load more stories? We already have the back stories of all the characters so why elaborate on them?

DC have said they always need to revamp their characters and keep them up to date. Sure, that makes sense for your ongoing books that never stop but not for a stand alone work. Also if that is they case then why do some characters get dropped never to be seen again?

Some would argue that Alan Moore has himself taken other peoples characters for his own work. True enough but he's was creating something new in the process and not simply extending the stories the borrowed characters originally come from.

One wonders where DC, or comics in general, would actually be with out Alan Moore. He ushered in the modern age and the era of the graphic novel. If DC can have success with the Batman movies then Moore helped make it so. He gave the industry a credibility and artist flourish that has made it possible for comics to be seen as something an art form. Perhaps DC should show him a little bit of respect, you know, given that they kind of owe him.


Sure these days Alan Moore can often come across as a grumpy old man and out of touch with the way things are in comics these day. But if he says he doesn't want this to happen can't DC just say OK and leave it at that? Just because they can make these books doesn't mean they should. Just because you screwed the guy out the rights to the book doesn't mean you should try to wring ever last dollar out of it.

The word prequel will always conjure up horrible images of the Phantom Menace. Star Wars is actually quite a good analogy here. George Lucas made something wonderful and then spent the rest of his life trying to make as much money as he could of the back it. Does Phantom Menace make Star Wars a worse film? No, but it does rather cast a horrid Jar Jar shaped shadow over it. And the name Star Wars doesn't have the same prestige it once did.

Of course every comic book geek thinks they know best about how to run the industry. And we as a group can get very defensive over things. I don't really expect DC to pay any attention to what I think is best. I'll just ignore the books and stick to annoying friends by lecturing them about how great the original is and why Alan Moore is a genius.

FIFA and the Poppy

The English nation football team plays and game against Spain on this Saturday, which just happens to come a day after Armistice day and a day before Remembrance Sunday. These of course being the days we pay respects to those killed while serving in the armed forces. To fit in with such events the English Football Association wanted the team to wear a poppy on their shirt. Poppys of course being a symbol of respect and remembrance for the dead. However FIFA, the governing body of the sport have refused the request and public outcry has followed.

On the face of it this seems rather daft. What, after all, could be wrong with remembering those who gave their lives to stop the Nazi's? Or protected us from other threats. It won't upset the Spanish as we had stopped fighting them long ago.

But no, FIFA refused. They don't let anything appear on the shirt that is political or commercial. They do have a long history of being corrupt, stupid and out of touch but for once they are spot on with this.

I'm not really sure they are worried about this causing offense to people. Germans would be happy with us paying are respects. Indeed there are a great many examples of Germans paying their own respects to our dead during WW2 itself.

Perhaps some Muslims might not like it given the current wars but those that did take offence are likely just looking for an excuse to do so. And I can't really see any actual governments making a fuss expect perhaps Iran and that guy is nuts anyway.

There might not actually be any thing wrong with the poppy at all but if you allow that you have to allow a lot of other things and this is were trouble can brew. FIFA are simply trying to keep football neutral and avoid political issues growing out of a simple game.

What would be the reaction of the UK if Argentina wanted to remember its dead from the Falkland Wars? Our view might be that they were invaders and how dare they. Of course for them, given that we stole it in the first place, they could legitimacy be seen as liberators.

Japan has shrines to its dead from WW2, how would we all feel if they used their shirt to pay respects to people who have a less than healthy reputation for human rights?

How about if North and South Korea played each other or Vietnam and the USA? They are lots of potential examples of an "international incident" occurring. By having a blanket ban FIFA avoid this.

Its important that football does all it can to not be tools of governments and leaders. Saddam, Gaddafi and Hitler all tried to use the national football to promote and further their government and ideology. If you allow things on shirts you run that risk.

Of course that is an extreme example and perhaps not the same as the humble poppy. But red flower would be pushing the door ajar and once open how do you control what else goes through?

Is this political correctness gone mad? Well at the 1938 Berlin Olympics the England team gave a Nazi salute to honour Hitler. So perhaps a little bit of PC is a good thing these days.



The other point is to avoid things being commercial. We should not forget that the poppy is actually a corporate logo. Its the symbol of the Royal British Legion, sure they are a charity but its a logo none the less. If you let one logo why not let others? why not charge? Best to avoid running the risk of shirts being rented out. Even if you just stick to charity logos you can cause issues as some of them are political motivated. China want want you playing in Free Tibet shirts.

Given that there will be a minutes silence, a wreath and members of the armed forces at the game I don't think FIFA are stopping anyone from remembering things. They are just trying to protect the integrity of the game. I guess to do that they need to be a little bit firm on a cause that might not warrant such stance if seen on its own merits.

Ultimately if England want to play a game sanctioned by FIFA they abide by the rules or don't bother playing.

What seems a shame is that the media and general public have made such an issue out of this. Yet seem to not really care about the causes the poppy raises money for. Its not just about respecting the dead but helping the living. High numbers of former soldiers are homeless, in jail or mentally ill and there is a very high suicide rate. Little is done to help them but instead of lobbying the government and trying to change this people complain about the lack of a poppy on a football shirt. Missing the bigger picture somewhat.

And yes I freely confess to being a left wing liberal who loves political correctness and hates war. But I've also bought a poppy every year. In fact I've been to memorial services in Europe, stood at the graves of the fallen and viewed the fields were there fell. I just don't think FIFA are being unjust or disrespectful.

The New DC 52 - Review of What I Read

So a month has passed since DC's grand relaunch of its comic books and we have had the chance to read all of the 1st issues. On the whole it seems to have been a grand success, sales have gone through the roof and some issues have gone to 2nd and 3rd prints already. There has been a lot of excitement generated and people have been enthused about comics again.

Certainly from my point of view I've been looking forward to getting my various comics in the post. I've never subscribed to new comics before so its been a new experience for me and one that I've enjoyed. Now as we hit the next month I'm having the fun of getting issue 2 turn up for me to continue on with the adventures.

It also looks like people have been attracted back to reading comics with all the interest. And fresh, readers have also wanted to take a peek at whats happening. Also good to see positive reception from female readers because lets face it, comics have not always been that friendly to them.

Hopefully this will make Marvel sit up and take note because they have become very stale and really need to do something to gee themselves up. Perhaps they will stop worrying about films and get back to comic books. They need to do something as DC have just taken up a huge chunk of my reading time and never used to bother reading them at all.

Although I'm sad that so far my beloved Power Girl seems to have been left out of things.

To be honest I didn't pick up the full 52, think I went for about 13 in the end. I will never read Batman or Superman and don't really care about Flash. A lot of the other stuff just didn't interest me. But on the whole what I read impressed me.

There are three Green Lantern related books and all of them were good with out really impressing. You kind of need to just sit and wait for things to unfold but it should be worth the wait. The main book is written by Geoff Johns who is one of the top writers and he always does good stuff with Green Lantern. Things are still waiting to take shape but I like the characters so will stick with it.

Sort of going with this is a Red Lantern book. It looks pretty good but I'm not sure it will keep my interest for too long. Nothing wrong with it per say its just how many Lantern books do I need right now?

Wonder Woman had stunning art work, really blew me away. The story is just setting things up at the moment but for the art alone I recommend this. Plus every one should read Wonder Woman, she is awesome.

Wonder Woman - Awesome

As a rule I hate all bat related stuff so I was wary of Batgirl but its written by Gail Simone who I like a lot. It seems like things could be head in a good direction and I'm happy to stick with it to see what Gail does.

Aquaman has also been seen as a huge joke in comics, a dumb character who no one cares about. That's pretty much why I picked up this comic. I've never read him before so wanted to see for myself. Geoff Johns turns up again writing this one and he really knocks it out the park. I like how he dealt with the previous image by having the criminals laugh at Aquaman only to see him take a bullet to the face with out blinking. This book totally turns around the character from the joke he once was. The art is also very good, I loved how his fish scale armour seemed to shimmer in every frame. Another must buy.

Alan Moore's run on Swamp Thing is for me one of the best things comics have done. So I picked up the title eager to see what they have done. Once again very impressed with what they have done. The art and layout are very much in keeping with the style of previous Swamp Thing books and they do a very good job of keeping that "horror" vibe it always had. I'm having slight issues with the continuity but this is another that gets my seal of approval.

Suicide Squad is looking like a lot of fun, we need more comics with sharks in them. The Frankenstein book also looks like it might be worth sticking with. Alas the same can not be said for Birds of Pray which really did nothing for me at all. Was disappointed with Stormwatch, might pick it up as trade later but for now I'm dropping it.

This one panel is more than enough reason to pick up Suicide Squad

Still waiting for my copy of Animal Man to turn up as I was late ordering but once I saw the art work in it I decided I had to pick it up. It looks fantastic.

So out of the 52 I'm left with around 8 that I'd like to carry on reading. I know I've not tried everything so perhaps I've missed a gem which I need to get. And ignoring Green Lantern whom I'm loyal to regardless, there are 5 books which have greatly impressed me and got me excited about comics, well more excited than normal.

It might not sound much but its actually a pretty good hit rate for me, better than Marvel are doing anyway. Cheers DC.