Things I can't find out #1

Lots of Farage noise in the news has resulted in some questioning of whether the Rwanda scheme would actually have worked, given that the current government is apparently considering "return hubs" agreements with other countries. These are not the same as the Rwanda scheme; the latter was meant to send asylum applicants to Rwanda to be processed, return hubs are for those whose asylum claims have been processed and denied, as temporary holding areas pending deportation back to their country of origin.

It's not unreasonable to consider whether the Rwanda scheme, had it been deemed legal, would have worked. No asylum seekers were ever sent to Rwanda forcibly, but four individuals decided to accept the UK government's offer of £3,000 and a five year support package. Their identities cannot be disclosed by virtue of a High Court ruling which, probably reasonably, reflects normal asylum seeking practice in accordance with the Human Rights Act and the Refugee Convention.

Surely though, there would be some value in knowing what happened to them? Were they processed fairly through the Rwandan asylum system? Were they granted asylum? Were they granted residency/citizenship? Where are they now?

So much legislation is based on "here's an idea that we think might result in....". You can imagine both ministers and civil servants spending their lives with their fingers crossed. Sometimes there are pilot schemes. In a way, these four who went to Rwanda could be thought of as a pilot, so that we can learn lessons from it. We don't have to deny them their right to anonymity, and we don't want to ask subjective questions, just establish the facts as proposed above.

I'm not a journalist with sources and research teams but I tried, using various AI and search engine tools, to get some answers. But either no-one is interested or the authorities have no intention of following up. So I thought I should email the Rwandan government and the Home Office. Which I did.

Here's my email:

Can you tell me how I can get answers to the following questions about the four individuals who voluntarily went from the UK to Rwanda under the voluntary returns program? I don't want to identify the individuals, just to know:

1.Were they processed through the Rwandan asylum system?

2.Were they granted asylum?

3.Were they granted residency/citizenship?

4.Where are they now?

Thanks for your help.

I don't have high hopes of getting meaningful answers but, if I get any responses, I'll let you know.

I suppose there are other ways - Freedom of Information requests, Parliamentary questions - but I'm just some old bloke sitting on a sofa with his laptop.

How long between referenda?

We in the UK don't have much of a tradition of referendums, and we don't have a written constitution, so to the question of "should the Scots have another independence referendum?" or "should we re-run Brexit?", our politicians simply shrug and carry on as usual.

But is that really good enough? Both of those examples proved to be marginal decisions and circumstances change. But equally you can't just change your mind as a nation every few years; that would make long-term policy making impossible.

In the absence of a written constitution, our Great British Tradition of Keep Buggering On comes into play: kick the ball into the long grass (for the uninitiated, this is something Donald Trump does to his opponents at golf): too difficult, file it under Virtually Impossible and focus on more urgent matters. But perhaps the biggest problem in British politics is short term thinking.

If my main complaint about the above two referendums is the narrow victory margin, it seems logical that I can't justify a re-run if the margins remain narrow, even if in the other direction.

The biggest problems with both issues is that they were driven by fanatical ideology; maybe we shouldn't allow fanaticism to define our future.

My solution to this problem is:

• set a future date for a repeat of each referendum, perhaps 25 years hence (how's that for long grass?)
• subject to certain criteria being met, those criteria being measures of support in the relevant electorate for the poll; for instance in Scotland a 75% majority in the Scottish parliament for a party whose manifesto for the election for that parliament specifically included an independence commitment. Similarly, if parties with a specific manifesto commitment to rejoin the European Union were to, between them, get 75% of the seats (or perhaps 75% of the votes) in a UK General Election
• Once a referendum has been thus initiated and completed, whatever the outcome, the clock would be reset for a further 25 years
• These rules to be set in stone in a law, with a provision that the law would require a 75% majority vote in both Houses of Parliament to overturn it

What do you think, dear readers? Would you like a constitutional convention to consider these proposals? To plan effectively for the long-term future? Or would you prefer us to Keep Buggering On?

Footy updates 2025/5

As you can see, our two North London favourites are leading the way in the Premier League, albeit after just two matches. The Gunners hammered newly promoted Leeds United with two goals from new boy Viktor Gyökeres, two from the League's best right back Jurien Timber and an exciting Premier League debut for 15yo Max Dowman, who won a penalty and, later tis week, will return to school in year 11.

Tottenham had the easier task, away to a disjointed Manchester City, but a win's a win!

Elsewhere, news is simply awful. So bad I can't bring myself to show the tables. Charlton lost at home to one of the promotion favourites Leicester City. At least they have 4 points in the bag so no panic yet. The other promotion favourites Ipswich Town slipped to a defeat away to Preston and now have just 2 points after 3 games. It's not what we were hoping for. They are still making signings but they seem to be based on development and future resale value rather than improving the starting eleven.

Wycombe scrambled a 90th minute equaliser against Reading and both of them slid into the relegation zone at this early stage. Things can only get better.

Help - invasion!

I've been invaded:

I know that some of my readers are gardening fanatics and I need you to tell me - how do I get rid of this insidious stuff (I think it's bindweed) with minimum strain on my 81yo back and with a guarantee that it won't return?

Alternatively, is there a way I can create a pretty, Chelsea-worthy garden using its pretty white flowers?

My main gardening tool is a flamethrower (aka weedburner) but it doesn't destroy the roots.

Footy updates 2025/4

The mighty Wycombe Wanderers have had many ups and downs in their recent history. Managers came and went, promotion/relegation and some memorable nights under the lights. Notably a FA Cup semi final against Liverpool at Villa Park in 2001. We woz there! They've had some pretty decent managers on occasions - Martin O'Neill in the 1990s got them into the Football League, Gareth Ainsworth achieved promotion to League One in 2018 and to the heights of the Championship two years later. That lasted just one season before relegation and Ainsworth led them to the playoffs a season later, after which he left to become manager at Queen's Park Rangers. His successor Matt Bloomfield, like Ainsworth a Wycombe player legend, made them into a good side again and they competed (unsuccessfully, losing to blog favourites Charlton Athletic) in the playoffs again. Bloomfield left to become manager at Luton. They have started this season disastrously. Defeat at home to Exeter on Tuesday followed two defeats and a draw, leaving them one place above the relegation places. They are at home to fellow strugglers Reading on Saturday - a relegation six-pointer this early in the season?

Wycombe probably need to be better at holding onto good managers.

But the news of the day involves two clubs we are following on this blog series. 24 hours ago, it looked as if England star and chess champion Eberechi Eze was on his way to sign for Tottenham Hotspur. He'd have been a great signing for them but, in typical Daniel Levy style, Spurs apparently wanted to squeeze a few extra pence off the transfer fee. Meanwhile Arsenal's star striker Kai Havertz suffered a knee injury which it looks like would mean him missing a few months of the season. Sporting Director Andrea Berta leapt into action and clinched a deal to take Eze from Crystal Palace and out from under Tottenham's noses. It has to be confirmed but, as I write this, Eze has been left out of Palace's Europa Conference League team tonight, so he is expected to take a medical at Arsenal tomorrow. Oh joy😂

Proper interviews

I’ve become a fan of Amol Rajan’s interviews on his YouTube channel “I’m Amol Rajan”. Recently he interviewed Kemi Badenoch and before that John Major. His first question to Sir John Major was why he agreed to the interview when he rarely did so. The answer was that most TV interviews are short form and inevitably lead to sound bites rather than considered debate. In contrast, Rajan offers a one hour, thoughtful examination of past, present and future.

I like Rajan’s style. He doesn’t indulge in hectoring; his approach is genuinely to allow his interviewees the opportunity to inform the audience and he doesn’t treat them as adversaries. That isn’t to say he ducks difficult questions, just that he doesn’t treat such questions as attempts to trip them up. After Baadenoch dissed her old school as displaying "the soft bigotry of low expectations", he quoted the school principal as denying this; Badenoch responded with, "I don't know who that person is." Although she comes across as thoughtful and likeable much of the time, this dismissal came across as patronising. Her self-description as "culturally Christian" feels shallow.

He gives the feeling of actually liking his victims and relished spending an hour with them. His response to Badenoch's saying she snitched on a fellow 15 year old pupil at school for cheating (he got expelled) was "No wonder you were so unpopular, you sound really annoying", the kind of thing you'd say to a good friend, knowing they won't take offence. Does she do herself any favours in this interview? Not really; she's more like a think tank researcher than a politician. There was not much on policy, because she is still in the learning/thinking stage: "You can give easy answers if you haven't thought it all through. I do the thinking and what people are going to get with new leadership under me is thoughtful Conservatism, not knee-jerk analysis.” So more Keith Joseph than Margaret Thatcher, Anthony Giddens than Tony Blair, Steve Hilton than David Cameron, and who ever heard of them? If Kemi Badenoch is not careful, her innate caution will be swamped by her party's desire for - above all else - winning elections. And there is indeed a sense of vulnerability: "I'm somebody who people have always tried to write off, and I have always succeeded and I believe I can do that with the Conservative party".

John Major, in contrast, has no pressure on him; he's been there, done it, he is free to speak to truth. He comes over as despairing about modern British politics; about Brexit in particular of course but the standard of public discourse and of political debate too. He dismisses a question about Boris Johnson and "partygate" as completely unworthy of his attention. On the Conservative government's Rwanda policy: “I thought it was un-Conservative, un-British, if one dare say in a secular society, un-Christian, and unconscionable and I thought that this is really not the way to treat people. We used to transport people, nearly three hundred years ago, from our country. Felons, who at least have had a trial … I don’t think transportation — for that is what it is — is a policy suitable for the 21st century.” Brexit was “the most divisive thing in our party in my lifetime...Britain has become “weaker, poorer,” isolated from European alliances and diminished on the world stage."

Rajan finishes his interviews with some quickfire questions:

What time do you wake up in the morning? KB: 5.45 (weirdly precise) JM: Around 5.30–6.00am

What time do you go to bed? KB: midnight JM: Usually around 10.30–11.00pm

Greatest achievement in politics (so far)? KB: "getting the postmasters' convictions overturned" JM:  “I think the peace in Northern Ireland is the thing I would most like to be remembered for … though it was not mine alone, it was the work of many hands.”

How would you like to be remembered? JM: fondly

What would you still like to achieve? JM: "I think I’d like to live long enough to see my country at ease with itself"

What's your guilty pleasure? KB: taking my shoes off. JM: lemon drop martinis (to Amol Rajan's confession that he doesn't know what that is, JM: “Then your life needs to be enhanced”)

What makes a good leader? KB: "Honesty, grit, determination, conviction" JM: “You need to carry people with you — the country, your colleagues, sometimes even your opponents. If you can’t, you don’t really have leadership, you just have noise.”

Making a comparison between the Conservative party's (and the country's) past leader and the new, as yet unproven, manifestation, might be unfair. Kemi Badenoch is at the beginning of her journey and I'm sure the ever-courteous Sir John Major might have some helpful advice on how best to succeed in her goals; does she yet have the experience and wisdom to seek it out?

I look forward to more of these ever-courteous encounters.

Blessed are the peacemakers

If I were to ask you to estimate how many nominations there were for the 2025 Nobel Peace Prize you might, based on an assumption of seriousness, guess maybe 10-20. The actual number? 338. 

Who are they? We don't know and we won't until 2075, since the names are held secret by the Norwegian Nobel Committee - which is different from the Swedish bodies responsible for the Physics, Chemistry, Medicine, Literature and Economics prizes. Alfred Nobel was Swedish but he stipulated in his will that the Peace prize be judged by a committee of five chosen by the Norwegian Parliament. The 2025 Committee members are:

• Jørgen Watne Frydnes – Chair, a former nonprofit leader & businessman, youngest ever committee head. 
• Asle Toje – Vice Chair, a foreign policy scholar and longtime contributor to peace and geopolitics. 
• Anne Enger – Former Centre Party leader and culture minister. 
• Kristin Clemet – Former Conservative Party cabinet member. 
• Gry Larsen – Former Labour Party state secretary and political adviser.

Despite the "50 year" secrecy, Roger Boyes in the Times of 12 August reported that Donald Trump was "nominated by Pakistan, Israel and Cambodia". Now there's a bunch of happy campers. Boyes doesn't reveal how he came about this information - perhaps an email from Netanyahu?

It seems to be a media "given" that Trump is seeking (maybe even expecting) the prize this year. Indeed, there has been much recently from the White House trumpeting (no pun intended, it just came out) that he has "stopped six wars" or he's "just ending five wars" (maybe one of the original six has started up again). Only the other day the obsequious White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt (no offence Karoline, it's a requirement for the job) said that "President Trump 'deserves' the Nobel Peace Prize." She went a step further, declaring that "it's 'well past time' he be awarded the prize". 

Let's have a look at the criteria for awarding the prize. Nobel's will requires the winner to be "...the person who shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses." From the point of view of Trump's claims, I'd say there's a difference between stopping a war, as in a ceasefire, and building a lasting peace. Having said that, some of the past recipients haven't scored too well on that metric. Abiy Ahmed, Prime Minister of Ethiopia, received the Prize in 2019 for "initiating a peace agreement with Eritrea, ending a decades-long “no war, no peace” standoff by agreeing to hand over the disputed border town of Badme and reopening diplomatic and travel links." In practice, nothing happened and a year later Ethiopia erupted in a brutal civil war. Aung San Suu Kyi (1991): Honored for non-violent resistance to military rule in Myanmar but later faced global condemnation for inaction—or complicity—in the Rohingya genocide. in 1973 Henry Kissinger & Lê Đức Thọ were jointly awarded the Prize for "ending the Vietnam War". Which not only didn't happen but Lê Đức Thọ, the Viet Cong leader, refused the prize, saying there was no peace.

Against these egregious examples of misguided decisions there are a few that remain widely respected (at least by the liberal intelligentsia) as being deserved and long-lasting, such as Martin Luther King and Nelson Mandela alongside F.W. de Klerk, the latter showing a prediliction for "shared peacemakers" which horrifyingly might lead to Trump and Putin jointly winning for "stopping a bloody war in Ukraine". Although I'm not sure Trump is prepared to share the glory with anyone.

There are also interesting examples of organisations that have won, for instance the International Campaign to Ban Landmines (1997) and Médecins Sans Frontières in 1999. To me it seems more appropriate to honour the ongoing work of the hundreds of people in organisations that work peacefully, often in war-torn countries, than to feed the egos of politicians out for personal glory.

You can tell I'm probably not a fan of the whole circus. There are better things for the five people on the Committee to be doing with their lives for the next two months than shuffling paper in an almost certainly flawed exercise. But - hope for the best, plan for the worst!

By now the original 338 will have been whittled down to a dozen or so and extensive expert research will have been initiated. The winner is announced the second Friday of October—for 2025, that’ll be 10th October. The award ceremony is on 10th December.

Footy updates 2025/3

How many times have we Arsenal fans seen the team dominating possession and other stats in a game and then not win? Over the last few seasons, far too many. Yesterday, away to Manchester United, the opposite:

This is very un-Arsenal. Only 39% possession, only completing 74% of their passes, not what we'd expect. But only two metrics matter: goals conceded: 0, points gained: 3. Suck it up, critics! Defences win titles.

As for the Tractor Boys, yep Southampton are our nemesis, said it before. Two games, two draws. Badly needing some top level signings, not confident about promotion. I need cheering up.

For Charlton, a home win and an away draw is a great start after promotion through the playoffs. As for Wycombe, one point from three league matches is not promising.

I suppose I am obliged to mention Spurs. Good start to their Premier League campaign but we know Burnley are going to be bottom of the table so don't get too excited! Next up is away to Man City, we'll talk again after that.

Africa is bigger than you think

Cartographers in Africa are up in arms. They think the Mercator projection of the word

shows Africa as a tinpot little area they say. Whereas the real size Equal Earth map

"shows how important we are". 

Unfortunately the United States customs authorities are now on the case and threatening to impose 75% tariffs on all African countries unless they reduce their size. This has led to some countries reverting to Mercator, others proposing a combined Mercatequal Earth projection. US Customs have since withdrawn the tariff threat.

In other news, Belgian cartographers......

Footy updates 2025/2

I've had the flu. Still have it but slowly improving, enough to update you on all things football.

Wycombe Wanderers are away to Bromley in the second round of the EFL Cup, who dumped Ipswich out in round one. Charlton away to League Two Cambridge, so every chance for optimism.

Spurs were back to being Spursy against PSG in the UEFA Super Cup on Wednesday; 2-0 up at 85 minutes, they collapsed and allowed their opponents to draw level then win the penalty shootout. They went gung go physically for those 85 minutes whereas PSG were clearly rusty after almost no pre-season. Spurs then ran out of steam and, if there is anything we know about PSG, it's that they can spot a weakness and exploit it. Spurs will benefit from a proper pre-season match.

Liverpool start their defence of the Premier League at home to Bournemouth tonight. I'm hoping they will be as defensively porous as they were against Palace in the Community Shield.

Finally a history lesson. Arsenal came 2nd to Manchester United in the 1998-99 Premier League season. And again the following season. Again in 2000-01. Then they won the League and FA Cup double in 2001-02. Zooming forward to more recent times, Arsenal came 2nd in 2022-23, 2023-24 and 2024-25. It's an omen!

Away to Man U on Sunday; a tricky start. Following the Tractor Boys' first home match this season, vs Southampton who have been a nemesis for a while. Hope they are 400% better than they have been so far. Omari Hutchinson has gone to Forest but Maybe Chuba Akbom will befit to start.

Footy updates

Just thought that the way to keep my football-loving readership up to date with events in the world's most important sport and at the same time give the others a get-out is to include 'footy' in the title. You'll know what you're going to get and can read the post or not, according to your inclination.

I've always thought that treating cup competitions with disdain by playing your second string and academy players is a stupid idea. I get it for clubs in the top third of the Premier League, which have European competitions and hence busy fixture lists, and whose second string and academy players could probably beat the first elevens of most other clubs, but for Ipswich Town of the Championship and Bromley of League Two surely it's a chance to progress in a competition, give the supporters some joy and make a bit of money. But no, Bromley made 7 changes from their usual starting eleven and Ipswich 8. Effectively saying "this competition is completely unimportant and peripheral to our season-long goals so we're not going to treat it seriously and we don't care whether we win or lose." So I tuned in to the game more out of loyalty to my team (Ipswich) rather than an expectation of quality football.

It was an awful, disjointed match and Ipswich got what they deserved - defeat. I'm worried about them based on their performances so far. Their squad is thin and not of a level which is likely to lead to promotion. It's true that they have some players coming in but not yet match fit (surely this was an opportunity to get them some minutes?) but they need more incomings. They've already lost their top striker and are likely to lose their most creative player Omari Hutchinson. Momentum is important and a lucky draw in their first league match and a defeat to a team two divisions lower is the wrong kind of momentum.

In the same competition, Wycombe got a 95th minute winner (where have we heard that before this season?) away to Leyton Orient and Charlton smashed Stevenage 3-1, so they'll both be in today's draw for the second round. Presumably Ipswich will be relieved not to be in it.

Elsewhere, Tottenham Hotspur play Paris Saint Germain in the European Super Cup - a definite step up for a team finishing 17th in the Premier League last season. Let's see if new manager Thomas Frank can improve them. As an Arsenal supporter I had no intention of mentioning our North London rivals but there was outrage that I didn't mention them, so I'll try not to be too rude.

We need to support Brazil

This is not about football 📣. It's about açaí, specifically Brazilian açaí (apparently pronounced ah-sigh-EE). Açaí is a small, dark purple fruit that grows on the açaí palm tree in the Amazon rainforest. It's low in sugar, high in antioxidants, healthy fats and fibre. So it's a kind of superfood and you can get it (if you can find it and afford it) frozen or powdered for use in smoothies or juice blends. I checked out Tesco online and they sell, through their marketplace, Açaí body butter, Açaí body mask (neither of which I'll be buying because I wouldn't know what to do with them) and Organic Açaí powder, which I guess you might chuck into smoothies instead of whey protein powder and I think I might be able to get in my local Holland and Barrett. Alternatively, Ocado does scoopable frozen Açaí sorbet, Organic Açaí Drops, smoothie packs, the TriActive Super Good Bar "with Benefits" Almond & Acai Berry and smoothie bowls. I've never actually used Ocado [any recommendations or otherwise?] so maybe I'll give some of these a try for my debut purchase.

Why should we care about this? Because the great United States of America has slapped 50% tariffs on Brazilian imports into the USA and this threatens the livelihoods of farmers in the northern Brazilian state of Pará, which supplies 90% of the açaí sold to the US. I feel the world should stand up to bullies and we in Cornwall must shoulder some of the burden. Go buy your açaí and support the Amazonian farmers!

Late News: Ocado don't deliver to my area, it says. Although I'm sure I've seen their vans around. Bummer. H&B it is...

I shall report in due course.

Quiz Night answers

First, last night:

-Mastermind specialist subjects:

• The playing career of Sunil Gavaskar
• The Hunger Games
• Leonard Bernstein
• Edvard Munch

-Only Connect from the Sequences round - what comes next?

North: Air - East: Kisser - South: Dumps - ?

Now for the answers you all have been waiting for...

Connections round:

• 14
• 39
• 50
• 55

Answer: The start years of 20th century wars:

1914 WW1

1939 WW2

1950 Korean War

1955 Vietnam War

The connecting wall round gives you 16 words and you have to group them correctly in four groups of four. Example:

• maroon, volume, horse, desert
• count, vanilla, strand, weight
• dump, chocolate, age, standard
• measure, matter, plain, normal

Answer:

(Taken from yesterday's NYTimes app, which is similar)

That's it for quizzing for a while, you'll be pleased to know!

Not my kind of movie

Teenage girly, musicals, three hours long. All no-nos for me in choosing a film to watch. So why I watched Wicked is a mystery. But I’m glad I did, it is very entertaining. It’s a prequel to the Wizard of Oz and contains much that is familiar from the land of Oz, such as talking animals - Peter Dinklage speaks for the history teacher goat. This is not incidental - a rebellion occurs in support of the animals after the school decides to terminate their services.

I've never understood why the Wizard is central to the title of the book and the earlier movie. He's just a fake with no magic powers; it's the witches which are the central characters - the good one and the wicked one. 

The show begins with a spoiler - Galinda (Ariana Grande) announces to the audience that "the Wicked Witch of the West is dead". Here's where I have to confess to a large degree of ignorance about female pop singers. If you played me a song by Taylor Swift, Beyoncé, Ariana Grande, Lady Gaga, Dua Lipa, Rihanna or even Madonna I wouldn't know which is which. In my ignorance I dismiss them as under-dressed popular artists pandering to a teenage girl audience making appealing but limited music [Ed: patronising old git].

But I stand corrected. Ariana Grande can actually sing. Startlingly well, with a huge vocal range. A little bit lacking in oomph but then I'm comparing her to operatic sopranos that I'm more familiar with and who probably possess larger lung capacities. After listening to her I read some stuff about her and learn she has a vocal range of at least four octaves and she can use the whistle register (the highest soprano frequencies). She is joined by co-star Cynthia Erivo. I'm aware of her from a weird and scary Stephen King adaptation The Outsider, where she plays a savant-like private detective and steals the show. I didn't know she was a singer but this is my loss because she has won an Emmy, a Grammy and a Tony award as well as having an Oscar nomination.

These two make the central focus of the film. Initially from wildly different backgrounds - Erivo as Elphaba, the sister of wheelchair-bound Nessarose who is due to enrol in Shiz University and the Dean of Sorcery Studies sees an accidental magic trick by Elphaba and enrols her too. Elphaba has green skin and now that she needs a room she is paired with bubbly blonde Galinda (who becomes Glinda for no apparent reason). Popular Glinda grates on reclusive Elphaba but, in true romcom tradition, they eventually become best buddies, even though they both rather fancy connecting with the same classic all-American boy. Elphaba is enraged by the sacking of the animals who teach in the university and decides she needs to go see the Wizard in the hope that he will change the situation. She and Glinda board a spectacular life sized train and go to Oz. The Wizard proves to be useless and Elphie flies off into the distance on a broomstick leaving Glinda pretty baffled by what's going on.

I tried to get the essential points, as I understand them, in that synopsis. Much that is enjoyable revolves around the outstanding visual production and the strength of the musical and dance numbers; the storyline is pretty incidental.

This is where the film ends, but obviously not the story.

The only real issue for me is it’s a stretch at nearly 3 hours, despite being only the first half of the movie adaptation of the stage musical (I watched it over two evenings). The second half - Wicked: For Good (I'm so glad they didn't lazily go for Wicked 2) - comes to the cinema in November. I'll be there, queuing with the teenage girls.

Quiz Night

I love quizzes. To be fair, you wouldn't want me on your pub quiz team because I know next to nothing about the staple diet of those - popular music, soap operas, celebrities. Although there's always a bit of sport where I might be able to contribute. 

But Monday night is Quiz Night on BBC2. Mastermind at 7:30 followed by Only Connect and finally University Challenge.

When I was a teacher at Chetham's School, as Head of Sixth Form I organised a team to compete in the Manchester Schools' Challenge. I got my good friend who was the physics teacher to build the electronics required to enable the buzzers and we had a lot of fun. I don't think we won anything (musicians don't know much about normal life) and one of the teaching staff, a dour Scottish Presbyterian, denounced us as "prostituting our knowledge", which I found difficult to answer because (a) I was shocked and (b) I didn't know what that meant.

At home when the kids got older, University Challenge was a regular watch (it's been going for over 60 years, only one year less than Coronation Street) and involved a cushion.

Anyway, back to tonight's quizzes. Mastermind is my least favourite because half of the questions are unanswerable except in very specific circumstances, i.e. you actually need to know something about the specialist subjects chosen. Here are those from the most recent three episodes:

• Stage plays of Sir Tom Stoppard
• The music of Led Zeppelin
• Penguins
• The Empire State Building 
• The Glorious Revolution
• The career of Novak Djokovic 
• Caravaggio
• Premier League Darts
• Inside No. 9
• Grace Hopper

See what I mean? Esoteric doesn't come close. The contestants also answer a general knowledge round, which starts with a very easy question and gets progressively harder. Which is OK for me as I'll get a few. Of course for the contestants it's much more difficult because there is clock pressure.

Then there's Only Connect, probably the most difficult quiz show around. You have to work out the link between four apparently unrelated clues (or sometimes three and you have to guess what's coming next). Pure inductive reasoning, of the type used for solving cryptic crossword clues. They're often deliberately misleading. Try this:

• 14
• 39
• 50
• 55

The connecting wall round gives you 16 words and you have to group them correctly in four groups of four. Example:

• maroon, volume, horse, desert
• count, vanilla, strand, weight
• dump, chocolate, age, standard
• measure, matter, plain, normal

It's fiendishly difficult (contestants are on the clock too) but fascinates me. Answers tomorrow!

Finally, University Challenge is basically a pub quiz for nerds. I guess that's me. 

I'm the archetypal couch potato.

I'm really sorry...

...to all my readers who couldn't give a monkey's about football. But...

Here we go, the new football season has started. The last kick of a football of any consequence was on 27th July in Basel, when Chloe Kelly scored the winning penalty against Spain to win the women's Euros 2025. Great joy in the Whitstable household. Since then just...dreary summer. But this weekend we're back.

Ipswich Town started their promotion challenge on Friday with a very lucky 95th minute equaliser against newcomers (but for me predicted challengers) Birmingham City. Exactly the same minute in which Charlton Athletic got a deserved winner in their Championship debut the following day. We can't wait for the big match between the two on April 22nd at the Valley.

Yesterday title-chasing Arsenal won their final pre-season friendly at the Emirates, showing off their new signings. There are apparently other teams involved in all these competitions but you shouldn't expect me to refer to them too often. At the other end of the scale (no offence), Whitstable Town begin the defence of their FA Vase title on 8th November.

So much to look forward to....roll on those dark winter nights.

If you want me to feature your team this season, post a comment below.

It's August

You know it's slow-news-time August when croquet appears in a half page spread in the Times. The deck [technical term - look it up] says "The game has taken a mallet to its aristocratic image to make a global impact". What a load of guff; I played croquet for many years and the total number of aristocrats I encountered was precisely zero. Why do they have to be so ignorant and patronising? It's an elite sport, of course - only super clever people can even understand it let alone play it. When have you ever met a clever aristocrat?

To be fair, the article talks about the growth of the game in Hong Kong, Mexico and Estonia - it's always had an Anglocentric base (including the Americans although typically they play their own rules) so maybe it's us croquet players who are the patronising ones, surprised that third world countries can embrace it. I have played croquet in almost as many countries as I have visited racecourses but my score in Hong Kong is currently Racecourse 1 croquet 0.

The August haul of important news includes the Cornish Seaweed Company ("spaghetti seaweed" is a gluten-free pasta alternative), a Labour MP has created a chatbot so that he doesn't need to bother with a face to face surgery, Wallace and Gromit are back with MasterChef and Italy is planning to build the world's longest suspension bridge to connect Sicily to the mainland. The distance is 2 miles. The shortest distance between the Scilly Isles and the Cornish mainland is 25 miles. We should go for it! Boris would do it, but I hear he's holidaying in Sicily.

Just don't expect daily blog posts in August. Although you could always write your own contribution.

Beyond Reasonable Doubt?

I watched an ITV documentary: Lucy Letby; Beyond Reasonable Doubt? It’s an analysis of the evidence used to prosecute the NHS neo-natal nurse for the murder of seven newborn babies and the attempted murder of eight more. She is serving 15 concurrent whole life sentences.

It's very disturbing for a number of reasons. It's told from the perspective of Letby's latest barrister, Mark McDonald and appears to be part of his strategy to draw attention to her defence case and to his application to the Criminal Cases Review Commission. There is no pretence of balance but maybe that's not the intention of the programme; it's trying to balance what is suggested was an unbalanced prosecution.

The current problem is that the Criminal Cases Review Commission can only review a case if new evidence has come to light. McDonald's case is built on the (unstated but inferred) assertion that the defence team in the cases was at best incompetent, failing to call expert witnesses whose testimony would have contradicted the state's expert witnesses. Indeed they called only one witness in her defence, a plumber testifying to sewage issues. Further, evidence of two of the state's main witnesses now having rowed back on their statements is presented, which I guess you could argue is "new" evidence.

McDonald assembled a team of "world-renowned" (and to me, a lay person, convincing) experts who produced a substantial report which essentially claims the convictions were based on circumstantial ("she must have done this because she was around at the time") evidence and misleading medical and statistical claims and are therefore unsafe.

It's a powerful case but I found myself wondering how I, if I were on the jury, could make sense of the medical data as presented. If there were no alternative opinions presented by the defence, I would have to believe the doctors, wouldn't I? As a person with both a brain and a sceptical bent, I'd have liked to question some of the evidence but that isn't the role of a juror. Is a lay jury really the best way of deciding such a case? It it were a civil case and you were required to make a judgment on the balance of probabilities, perhaps. But I can't see how twelve lay persons, as "good and true" as they may be, can judge a prosecution's case proven beyond reasonable doubt in cases where medical evidence is the primary basis of the case. Section 43 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 provides for a trial without a jury in serious fraud cases if "It would be too burdensome or unfair to expect a jury to follow the evidence." Are medical cases not similar?

There's more to this programme than I've written here but I came away feeling that there are questions that need to be answered and, if our justice system in the form of the CCRC is more concerned with following its rules rather than searching for truth and offering Lucy Letby a fair hearing, I don't like it at all.

Indian, Singaporean or Brazilian?

I woke up at 5am, went to the loo and checked my phone. My chess opponent had made a move. In the middle of the night? No, he's from Kazakhstan and it's 9am there. I go back to sleep and later - around 11am - make my move. I eventually checkmated him at 4pm Kazakh time.

I don't actually know whether he's from Kazakhstan, or even a 'he'. Here's his chess.com profile:

In common with many online games, you can select your own attributes to build your profile - choose your flag, upload a photo of your dog, whatever. For all I know I could have been playing a 10yo Swedish kid, although the time zone thing suggests his country may be correct.

Here's my profile:

Resplendent in my Ipswich Town gear, ready for the start of the new season on Friday. When I joined chess.com I didn't bother to set my profile so I had the default USA flag for a while. Didn't make me play any better,

I'm thinking of changing for a bit. This morning I watched  the fantastic ending to the England v India cricket series. When I was younger I followed cricket avidly but there was a period when the England team were a pretty unpleasant bunch of spoiled brats and the Australians were the world's leading sledgers and so I stopped. This test match has lasted four and a bit days and I switched on by accident - searching for something else- and I was gripped by a thrilling finish, which India won. That, combined with the fantastic results being posted by India's men and women chess players, makes me feel I should identify (we can all do that now, right?) as Indian for a while. Although I wouldn't be getting up at 5am to make a chess move. Maybe it'll confuse my opponents and I'll gain an edge.

But I'm also thinking about Brazilian. There's been a recent upsurge in my blog views from around the world:

I don't really know what this means. I suspect these aren't real people, since I've not received any Brazilian or Vietnamese comments, but even if they are bots scraping the web, why now and why Brazil? I tried to get some help from Google Analytics but - possibly because I've been nasty about Google recently - it was of no help. Nevertheless, I think I should perhaps identify as a Brazilian for a day - they did give us Pele, after all - to help the blog along.

There was a recent upsurge in "views" from Singapore, so maybe that should be an option. Although I'm a bit worried I might get deported if I'm no longer British. But a free flight to Bangalore wouldn't be bad, right? And the UK has a new trade deal with India, which includes visas, so I could probably get back in.

What do my regular contributors think - should I try Indian, Brazilian or Singaporean? I'm not really feeling English today, after the cricket.