My Little World10

i love boxing day, especially the football (ok for the football) - chelsea-villa was the best game ive seen in a while, and it denied chelsea 3 points which is always good - so here's my look at the now half-gone 07/08 season

top: MU played 19 - 45 

      Ars played 19 - 44

      Chel played 19 - 38

      Liv played 18 - 36

Pretty big gap emerging between the two pairs, Liverpool have a game in hand but that still leaves a six point gap if you take that as 3 points, to the outsider it looks a two horse race but i think it's too early - liverpool and chelsea are hanging in, i think the pool are too inconsistent, awful performance against lowly derby today, probably one eye on the city game - yes they got 3 points in the end which is jose-esque and they can destroy teams when they feel like it, but the 3-1 at reading? i think they'll snap at united's heels til the end, arsenal as well, i think they'll struggle, especially through the african cup so united will eventually win, but without the huge gap they had last year - chelsea are going to drop somewhat methinks - several african players, JT and Lamps injured, Carvalho and A. Cole on 3 match bans, they may weather it because they have nice fixtures coming up - spurs at home the toughest 

the question is will someone come up? let's have a look at the challengers

5 Man City -  pl:18 p:34

6 Everton - 19 p:33

7 Portsmouth - 19 p:31

8 Villa - 19 p:30

city looking good, 2 points behind 4th - but it's their home form that's keeping them there - an unrivalled perfect win record at home, but only 1 win away this season - they will come unstuck if they don't improve on the road, i think they'll be in the top 8 at least - blackburn could be a problem, theyve been on a poor run lately but they have quality, probably a city win again - but liverpool visit next week

Everton - i think it's everton who are the best team here, they play some great football, and theyve got cahill back - very dangerous team, i love their passing game and some great players in arteta, lescott, yakubu, - arsenal visit next and then a trip to boro - i'll root for a win over the arse

Pompey - poor at home, despite holding the arse tonight, which they also did against liverpool (football is strange) but boro visit soon and i can see a straightoforward result there - the african cup will probably hit them hardest so i think they'll slip, but a top 8 finish just like the rest (basically the league has taken its shape IMO)

Villa - up there with the toffees, very dangerous, great english based team as well - lots of goals, play very fast attacking play down the wings - it'll be them and everton pushing for 4th spot - it was done in 05, it can be done again (just not at the expense of the pool i hope)

the middle 

so who've we got then - west ham, blackburn and newcastle occupy the middle with 26 points, and then there's reading and newcastle coming up the rear - the strongest teams are blackburn and spurs, blackburn should be in the top 8 but theyve had a poor run recently - but with players like bentley and santa cruz theyll be pushing their way into 7th or 8th, certainly a top 10 side - and then we have spurs, i doubt they can reclaim the giddy heights of 5th this season but i think 10th is realistic - new manager, ledley king back - theyre 9 points behind which is too far i think to get back into uefa territory

then we have west ham and newcastle - the middling boys - both very inconsistent, curbishley has done a great job and saved them from relegation, they won't have that problem this year but they're not good enough yet - improving but like newcastle need a season to see some real development, allardyce did great at bolton, give him a season and see

Reading and Bolton will occupy 13th and 14th i think - theyve both declined a fair bit since last season, but reading are hanging on and can only get better under coppell - they are quite fragile tho, and their away form is what keeps them down, likewise bolton were ruined by the loss of big sam and if they lose anelka they will scrap their way out of relegation, both will be reasonably comfortable

and now the fun part, the relegation hopefuls:

Boro and Birmingham sit together quite safe by their standards at the mo, but brum did just soundly whip boro today - i think they have enough quality to find the goals they need - kapo, forsell, mcshreffrey, jerome all good players and a new manager who's competent - boro are really the only team who have kept faith with a manager (i'll discount roy keane - would you sack him?) and they just claimed 7 out of 9 before todays fixture, 3 from arsenal! so maybe they will survive - but they need at least another 17 points from somewhere i think and i can't see it happening, despite recent form

Wigan are on the up under steve bruce it would seem - can they survive yet again? got a bit of talent in bent, sibierski, heskey, poor at the back but they have enough goals i think..maybe

Sunderland - i had high hopes for sunderland, came up strong, started well against spurs but now theyve fallen into the drop zone, altho they just played united so maybe that makes it look worse than it is - put simply they need to stop drawing and win

Fulham - fulham fulham fulham - no manager at present, i thought lawrie sanchez would do better - they started well but were unlucky and kept coming unstuck, now theyre becoming whipping boys but for dempsey essentially - if they get a good manager and some decent buys in january i think they could survive with a bit of organisation

and then there's derby - it would be legendary if they came back from this - 9 points from safety - not that huge, paul jewell could well do his trademark rescue job but i don't think they have enough - no quality and they are woeful at the back - be lucky to beat watfords 28

so in short as always it's open - last year we saw sheffield fall at the expense of wigan, the older teams like to hang in so maybe one of sunderland or birm will fall but personally i see boro and wigan going down - derby are a cert, i really want boro and wigan to go down - clear out the rot i say

so a united title, and villa, everton and city to be in europe 

well it's that time of year again, the time when christians pop their heads up and decry the masses for using christmas as an excuse for a capitalist orgy, or something

of course, i exagerrate - British christianity is pretty tame, a bit of moral outrage here and there, and they like to chip in before we all tell them to shut up - the British will allow a bit of religious spiel around christmas, but i'm very happy to live in a country that realises letting any politician use religion is a very bad thing

i have talked on my dislike of religion many times before, and i'm pretty much a broken record, so i have a new angle

now the story starts at me hearing a report on local radio about a supposed government scheme to regulate censorship (at present it's an independent body) - which they said could see more things being banned, a very strange idea to take from the scheme in the first place, but i oppose the gov taking control anyway

now i looked this up for a while - BBC had no mention of it, fairly small i figured, so i went to the hate press (daily mail) - found nothing, but i figured theyd approve of protecting the children (although they also hate government involvement in anything) - nothing there, so i went to the ever decreasing liberal-loonie brigade (the guardian) - again nothing

so here was me all fired up ready to fight the government to the death over censorship and it turns out it's probably a red herring - likely to be a tabled proposal or private bill destined to fail which the local radio for some reason got hold of, there is of course the view that these things tend to get ignored when the government loses loads of discs, is getting in trouble over donations, facing an economic downturn and the crazy muslims are arresting our citizens over the 'muhammed bear' thing

but i stumbled across this gem: http://observer.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,,2220424,00.html (might need to copy/paste)

and it's been bugging me lately, the secularists seem to be getting the 'oppressor' label more and more these days - is this correct? are we too forceful with our views? the British in particular love being thought of as tolerant (true or not, we do) and now the christians are on the defensive, saying we don't tolerate their views - now i know the standard stock internet answer is "poor christian who dominates the west being oppressed" but i've been wondering, the secularists, like dawkins and most rational people, are pretty forthright in their views - we 'know' evolution is right, we know the bible and its equivalents are crocks, we know the contradiction and idiocy behind religion - but if we are so close minded with our logic doesn't that make us just as bad as them with their closed minds about jesus?

i have no intention of defending religion, the logic is so over-whelming i struggle to understand how anyone with a shred of intelligence cannot question religious dogma, just one look at history will tell you what religion is really about, and i have no qualms about keeping religion so far away from government it's not even on the radar - but of course i also support freedom of conscience, speech and religion - so i tolerate that people have their beliefs, just don't let them impact on anything that affects me, thankyou very much

but is my view that religion is so very wrong just as bad as them calling us heathens and condemning us? one of my friends is christian, and to be honest with you i have never met a real CoE christian, i went to a catholic school and grew up openly questioning catholicism and the few actual catholic teachers we had - but my friend says she is offended by me and my other friends constant snide remarks about religion whenever it pops up, saying how foolish it all is - this is apparently offensive to her...when she defends her beliefs we naturally rebutt them as you would do in any normal argument - but for us to do this is an intolerant act and we should be accepting her views - basically agree to disagree - i like a good argument and being told to not question someone's beliefs is a pretty alien concept to me, i admit i'm pretty cold and don't exactly get 'offended' - but of course her twist on this is that we present our stance as fact, we are the closed-minded ones and should just accept her beliefs as her own as she is not trying to convert anyone - this to me is a very weak position, i'm all for tolerance and whilst i disagree with her i'm not trying to ban what she believes, i  merely question it - in essence she believes that her personal beliefs shouldn't be attacked (or realistically - mildly questioned) by us non-believers, we should all respect each others views - yeah, nice in theory but that is a namby-pamby idea - do we question others' political views? of course we do, do we question their views on paperclips? yes! (if need be) - but question belief and we are oppressive nazis, when i argue with, say a tory, over something, i want an argument - a position based on the relevant facts and why they have come to that conclusion, and i wish to put forward my argument, which will usually be in opposition - chances are we will not agree, i will say he is wrong, he will say i am wrong, maybe one of our minds will be changed - but it's unlikely most of the time, and it'll end up in us disagreeing and respecting that fact, we won't resort to banning that viewpoint or getting in a fight to the death - that is tolerance!

now what she is saying is that we attack her beliefs with no provocation, she doesn't force them upon us, but when religion comes up we question hers - sounds reasonable enough, maybe we are being a little intolerant - but is that the full story? do we jump at her shouting: "your god doesn't exist!!!" at every opportunity? - not really, we generally get insensed at americans being retards on the news, or muslims imprisoning someone over a teddybear and denounce religion in a dawkins-esque manner, now here is my point - she will defend her religion, now that is when we ask for the argument - why do you belief what you do?? we see no logical reason to believe it, she will inevitably go for the fact that you can't disprove god - she is entitled to her views, fair enough, but i won't be agreeing with the bible based on that logic - we say she's wrong, but do we force her to convert to the dark side? no, the reason we go for it is because she defended it, therefore starting the whole bloody thing - she is faced with a brick wall and goes into her shell and calls us offensive and intolerant, and that to me actually hurts, i'm not trying to be offensive - i'm trying to understand a view which makes no sense to me - maybe i'm a little closed minded in that respect but to my mind i'm seeing two arguments and making my conclusion, she then decides this is intolerant and i have no right to question her beliefs - the bit that really annoys me is that the root is almost always when she cites her religion, not me going in unprovoked - if i believed in something, say man child love or something, and believed the word of a paedophile would anyone have the right to question it when i brought it up? i believe so (you can insert a more legal example there if you wish) - that to me is freedom of speech, yes you should be tolerant and respectful but you also have a right to question anything you wish

lets say gay marriage came up, and i believed in it and she didn't, would questioning my beliefs be offensive? yes i am entitled to them no matter what, but if she wants to attack that view, go for it - i think i take a dawkins line here when i say if we don't fight and argue then nothing will change, don't we have a right to attack religion on the basis of logic just as they have a right to attack us over heresy?

we say they have been oppressive for centuries and now it's turned into them saying we're disrespecting their views and doing exactly what religion once did (and of course still does - just not here) - let them practice in peace - i'm fairly certain we do! i don't see people barricading a church on sundays, i don't see turbans being ripped off - but what i do see is when people mention their religion is other people questioning it, and why the bloody hell not?

i understand where the woman (presumably - checking...yup, it's a woman) is coming from, we shouldn't let atheism  and secularism block peoples personal beliefs but to turn religion into the victim, which is clearly her aim, is to me, objectionable and while she thinks it's intolerant, i think she is undermining free speech

*******and you thought i'd pick up on the failings of my government, or at least the muslim teddy bear - or even the oxford  union debates, well i didn't

for the record - i hate party politics and have little interest in scandals and ineptitude, i'm fairly disilusioned with the political process, it's bad they lost all that data, but scrap id cards however and i won't mind in the end

second with the muslims and the bear in sudan - it's retarded, unfortunately we can't undermine their justice system, even if it is completely objectionable to us

and the oxford union debates - i'm a freedom of speech hippy: yeah they're wankers but to deny them their platform is against the basic right of freedom of speech, it's not illegal what they believe or say so shut up and let them talk or you're just as bad 

/hoping someone will read this, one day