Footy updates 2025/22

*******************************

Recent matches:

Slavia Prague 0 Arsenal 3

Charlton 1 West Brom 0

Ipswich 1 Watford 1

Tottenham 4 FC Copenhagen 0

*******************************

My forecasts for this weekend: (and ChatGPT's):

Arsenal Women 2 Chelsea Women 2 CGPT: 1-2

Tottenham 0 Manchester United 0 CGPT: 2-1

Wycombe 1 Leyton Orient 1 CGPT: 2-1

Swansea 1 Ipswich 2 CGPT: 1-1

Wrexham 1 Charlton 2 CGPT: 1-1

Infinity 0 Whitstable Town 3 (FA Vase 2nd round - Whitstable are the holders) CGPT: 1-3

Sunderland 0  Arsenal 1 CGPT: 0-3

Thanks, Tofiq

I had a bad day yesterday. It rained incessantly, so much so that I decided to skip my usual visit to Tesco where, lacking any shopping needs, I would have bought my newspaper and had a coffee whilst reading it. As soon as I saw the rain I knew that, come the evening, I would get no satellite signal to enable me to watch Arsenal in the Champions League. Meaning I had to get the match on my phone and cast it to the TV - keeping myself away from other notification channels so that I wouldn't know when a goal was scored before it appeared on my - delayed by a minute or so because wifi streaming is behind the live action - screen.

I do realise this is very much a first-world bad day.

Then there's chess. I'm in the middle of a game against my son and I don't know what my plan is. Or I have too many plans and can't stick to one. Chess is like boxing, in two ways. The first is the Mike Tyson way: "everyone has a plan until they get punched in the mouth". So I can't get too aggressive or that'll happen when I'm least expecting it. Which leaves me with the other option: rope-a-dope, made famous by Muhammad Ali. It’s a tactic where a fighter leans back on the ropes, covers up, and lets the opponent punch themselves out. The idea is to absorb or deflect blows, conserve your own energy, and then strike back once the other guy’s exhausted. Ali used it brilliantly against George Foreman in the 1974 “Rumble in the Jungle.” Foreman threw himself into endless power shots while Ali just soaked it up and talked to him — “Is that all you got?” — until Foreman was spent. Then Ali knocked him out.

That's what I'm hoping Dan will try.

Anyway, I'm back on track today, in my usual post-shower routine: shop, drink coffee, read paper, catch up on my chess games, do chess puzzles (which doesn't seem to improve me), solve (hopefully) the Times Quick Cryptic crossword, solve puzzles on the New York Times Games app - Wordle (got it in 4 today), Connections (got it with just one error) and Strands (always successful but try to do it without hints).

That takes me to about noon.

Which is when I get to thinking about whether I have any inspiration to write a blog post. And today I want to tell you about Tofiq Bahramov.

Tofiq changed history. Every English man or woman knows that our crowning glory was winning the World Cup in 1966. Which happened because Tofiq made an error. He was a retired footballer and a qualified referee from Azerbaijan (then in the Soviet Union) who was the linesman in the Final, when England played West Germany. He ruled that Geoff Hurst's infamous shot had crossed the line and was therefore a goal. But it actually hadn't, as shown in modern replay analysis.

Today, Tofiq is remembered by Azerbaijan's national stadium being the Tofiq Bahramov Republican Stadium in his honour.

If you think that our country is in a sad, sorry state today with widespread gloom and despair, just imagine how much worse it could have been if Tofiq had got his decision right 😧😧😧

Not such a bad day after all.

Footy updates 2025/21

How did my forecasts fare this weekend? (And ChatGPT's)

Burnley 0 Arsenal 3 CGPT: 1-3 Result: 0-2
Juggernaut

Charlton 1 Swansea 1 CGPT: 2-1 Result: 1-1
Solid

QPR 1 Ipswich 1 CGPT: 2-1 Result: 1-4
Climbing the table

Wycombe 1 Plymouth 0 CGPT: 2-2 Result: 2-0
Despite a late red card for Wycombe, they progress to the 2nd round of the FA Cup

Fisher 1 Whitstable 4 CGPT: 0-3 Result: 1-2
3 points clear at the top of the table with a game in hand

Tottenham 1 Chelsea 1 CGPT: 1-2 Result: 0-1
Spurs continue their inconsistency

Leicester Women 0 Arsenal Women 2 CGPT: 1-3 Result: 1-4

There are only 5 points covering the top 5 so all is not lost yet

Correct results: 5 out of 7 (ChatGPT: 4)

Correct scores: 1 out of 7 (ChatGPT: 0)

Match score this season so far: usedtobecroquetman 2 Chat GPT 2

***********************

Upcoming midweek games:

Slavia Prague v Arsenal

Charlton v West Brom

Ipswich v Watford

Tottenham v FC Copenhagen

Is it correct?

More Andrew-related opinion 🙀 [that's a cat sighing]. The Times leader on Saturday discussed the saga and included the phrase "It is correct that the couple's daughters, Eugenie and Beatrice, caught up in this drama through little fault of their own, remain princesses." What? Are they 8yos, crying themselves to sleep at night if they are no longer princesses? These are mature women in their late 30s who contribute little or nothing to British public life and the only justification for their grandiose titles is the technicality of being the offspring of a person who is the son of a monarch.

But my issue isn't about these two women - I couldn't care less about them. My problem is with my newspaper. It's reasonable to expect reasoned argument from the leader writers. "It is correct" is stated as though it's fact. It's the kind of specious assertion I'd expect in the Sun, Express or Guardian. Not from the erudite journal of record. You need to say why it is correct.

And "through little fault of their own"? Little? Not "no fault". Is the Times implying that these young women could have had some influence on their father's behaviour?

Honestly, if they have any moral integrity, they should renounce their Princess-ships and we would all recognise they've progressed beyond the age of 8.

That's enough on this sorry tale.

Footy updates 2025/20

*******************************

Recent matches:

EFL Cup 4th round:

Wycombe 1 Fulham 1 (Fulham won on penalties)
An excellent effort against a Premier League team

Arsenal 2 Brighton 0

Really nice to see a 15yo and a 17yo make their first starts

Newcastle 2 Tottenham 0

Spurs' first away defeat of the season

The draw for the quarter finals: Arsenal v Crystal Palace

Also a match I didn't expect (it's apparently in the Challenge Cup, whatever that is):

Whitstable 2 Bearsted 3
Bearsted are Whitstable's main challengers for the league title

*******************************

My forecasts for this weekend: (and ChatGPT's):

Burnley 0 Arsenal 3 CGPT: 1-3

Charlton 1 Swansea 1 CGPT: 2-1

QPR 1 Ipswich 1 CGPT: 2-1

Wycombe 1 Plymouth 0 CGPT: 2-2

Fisher 1 Whitstable 4 CGPT: 0-3

Tottenham 1 Chelsea 1 CGPT: 1-2

**EDIT - The Womens Super League is back after an international break

Leicester Women 0 Arsenal Women 2 CGPT: 1-3

Floating budgets

It seems to have become common practice for the Treasury to "leak" possible budget measures to see what reactions ensue - from economists, political parties, the media, lobbying groups - without necessarily intending to include them in the budget.

It started with George Osbourne. He leaked the pasty tax proposal; cue high street (and Cornish) anger, leading to a much milder form in the actual budget of 2012. Ditto a "caravan tax", which enraged Conservative voters and their MPs and never appeared in the budget. In an earlier budget the department floated information about child benefit and welfare cuts; the responses enabled him to decide which, and to what extent, measures were finally enacted. The practice has continued through Philip Hammond, Rishi Sunak and Jeremy Hunt.

Now Rachel Reeves is at it. In recent weeks we've heard about freezing tax thresholds, property and wealth taxes, breaching manifesto promises and pension entitlements.

This is no way to run a government. In the old days (cue 1970s sound track) the concept of budget purdah prevailed - no knowledge of budget proposals outside a small government circle and definitely no discussing of, publishing of or even hinting at them before budget day. MPs of all parties were not "in the know". The rationale was to protect markets from insider knowledge, respect Parliament’s primacy and to avoid confusion and pre-emptive lobbying. In other words, grown up government rather than schoolboy politics. Gordon Brown was the last to adhere to the traditional secrecy, allegedly to the nth degree.

The old ways feel better, don't you think?