Never Confuse Music And Football

Recently, I noticed that I haven't updated this blog anywhere near as much as I should, especially considering my aspirations to be a journalist. So what could be a better way to return than with a post combining my two favourite things, music and football?

Those of you that have read my previous posts or know me personally will be aware that I like a moan about something now and then. Unfortunately for those of you who were expecting a calculated, methodologically and critically considered discussion of an intelligent topic, you might be a little wide of the mark. Don't let that put you off though.

As previously mentioned, I'm here to discuss music and football and particularly the former. One thing that really annoys me is when people mistake music for football. Hear me out.

You may be wondering what kind of dim-witted simpleton could possibly confuse the two, and come to think of it, so am I. What I'm referring to is when people treat music as if it's a competition, I can't say it's a major issue in my life but when it occurs, it's fairly annoying. I'm not one to care much about other people's opinions, but it's the principle of their beliefs that I'm bothered about.

Let me explain. The people I'm referring to are those that dislike the Rolling Stones because of the Beatles, or dislike Oasis because of Blur. I have no problem with people disliking these bands if they chose to (despite me liking all four) but their reasons seem invalid. The people I have an issue with are those that dislike a band because of the 'rivalry' that exists between the relevant band and a band they're fond of.

This kind of behaviour is perfectly applicable to football, it's expected that a Man United fan will dislike Man City; or a Liverpool fan will dislike Everton. This is because football is a competitive sport where teams are pitted against eachother. Music is not the same.

Music is there to be enjoyed, it's not to create rivalry or hatred.

I don't understand how one person can love Blur but hate Oasis (or vice-versa) simply because of this nonsense view that a likeness of both can't co-exist. This brings me back to the belief that you can't pick and choose what you like, especially music-wise. You hear what you hear and like or dislike it, you can't make a conscious decision to dislike something, it's something natural that you can't control. Blur and Oasis made similar music in the same genre, if you like one then it's practically impossible to hate the other.

Some may say that the personality of the band members is another factor. I simply reject this point. As a football fan, I dislike Luis Suarez. I think he's a cheating, diving little scumbag, but I can appreciate his world class talent. You can relate this to someone like Liam Gallagher, who isn't everybody's cup of tea to say the least. Some may debate his talents, but personally I think he's a great. Considering many feel he's among the greatest front men of all time I'm not alone either.

You can't deny that he played a major role in making Oasis who they were. Okay, he may not have had the creative influence Noel had but that wasn't his role. That's like saying Bobby Moore wasn't a significant part of the England 1966 World Cup winning team because he wasn't a creative player like Bobby Charlton. The fact that the High Flying Birds aren't as successful as Oasis lends itself to the opinion that Liam made a huge difference. How Beady Eye compare to NGHFB though is a totally different argument.

My point is, personalities shouldn't matter much in music. I like Oasis and if I did had heard them before I knew who Liam was and what he was like, I wouldn't suddenly decide to hate it just because I heard some explicit anecdotes. I think Oasis needed Liam's controversy and sharp tongue to compliment Noel's comparatively more calculated approach.

Back to my original point, I remember when I played an Arctic Monkeys track in the company of a mate (who's a Manc) and he responded with "What's this shite from Sheffield doing on?" Clearly, they weren't over the war of the roses and still held a grudge over Yorkshire. This predetermined that he couldn't like Arctic Monkeys before he'd even heard their stuff, simply because of where they were from. I'm fully aware his comments had a light-hearted tone underlining them, but the principle still puzzled me.

Maybe my point about competition not being the point of music is why X-Factor is becoming an increasing failure. Acts aren't developed to be entertaining, but the pressure of competition limits them to what their audience want to hear. This ignores to primary objective of music: to express yourself, but instead focuses on a desire to win. Acts are now brought up in the fashion 'to not play well but scrape a 1-0 away win at Stoke/Sunderland/Fulham' rather than forget what the average hormonal X-Factor voter thinks and do what they please.

In conclusion, music is an art, not a sport. And it should be treated accordingly.

Rant over.

Bands That Changed The World: The Beatles

Can you imagine four young, scouse adolescents with barely a few GCSEs between them knocking around Liverpool today? Quite easily I suspect. Can you imagine them becoming the most influential musical influence the world has ever seen? I suspect not, you're probably imagining Steven Gerrard, Wayne Rooney, Jamie Carragher and Joey Barton, aren't you?

Yet that's exactly what happened back in the late 1950s with a bunch of lads from Liverpool that wanted to make a difference.

How did it happen? George Harrison sums it up rather well: “We just had this amazing inner feeling of: ‘We’re going to do it’. I don’t know why... we were just cocky” And the rest is history really, or not quite...


Yet it wasn't as simple as people make out, four lads get together, form a band, run off to Germany and come back with the status of musical legends. Job done.

In reality, it was a lot different.

John Lennon started out in a band called 'The Quarrymen' back in 1957, and invited George McCartney to join as a guitarist. Although these two were arguably the main men behind all the success, it wouldn't have been possible without the musical flair and personalities of Harrison and Starr.

It wasn't long until Harrison was a Beatle though, as a fourteen year old he joined after watching 'The Quarrymen'.

This poised a problem not many bands face, where they have three guitarists, no drummer and no bassist. Even someone with the musical knowledge of Louis Walsh could spot an issue there.

Those less educated on the Beatles may be thinking this is where Ringo Starr comes in to save the day as he joins as a multi-instrument playing genius who mastered the art of playing the bass and the drums simultaneously. This, unfortunately, wasn't the case.

What did happen though, was the introduction of a drummer, Pete Best and later a bassist Stuart Sutcliffe. The Beatles still weren't in their final, all conquering format and weren't even called 'The Beatles' at this point. I could easily have been sitting here typing about how 'Johnny and the Moondogs' or 'Long John and the Beetles' fired themselves to fame.

One thing led to another and both Best and Sutcliffe left the band, allowing Ringo Starr to join as the drummer, Paul McCartney learned the bass and from this point, the rest is history.

Again, not quite. The lads were all in their late teens by this point  and planned to travel to Hamburg to play gigs as some Liverpudlian bands were also based there. Their plans appeared to be scuppered when Harrison, only 17, was deemed too young to travel. In typical rock and roll style, he lied to German authorities about his age and the band travelled to Hamburg, and the rest is history, surely this time?

Nope, a few more obstacles stood between The Beatles and global stardom. The Beatles, despite their growing popularity in Hamburg, were released by their record label in Germany and went home regularly to play gigs at the famous Cavern Club. This is where they met Brian Epstien who was appointed as manager and was charged with the task of creating the legendary band we all know today.

Just to demonstrate the mountain they had to climb, they were rejected by record label Decca Records because 'Guitar music was on its way out'. Jesus, what a bleak future music would have had if that was the case. They also had a makeshift bassist and a drummer who had the ability equivalent to a novice.

The Beatles eventually signed up to Parlophone Records in 1962 and started their ascent to musical glory like no other before them. This was a significant moment and a breakthrough for the band as without it, there would be no famous moon glasses from John Lennon; no trend of people taking pictures of themselves walking across the Abbey Road zebra crossing and no gold digging swine known as Heather Mills.

Their first single, Love Me Do, was very well received and critically acclaimed and was followed by 'I Wanna Hold Your Hand' which saw them break America, which was no mean fete. They managed to shift 2.6 million records across the pond to demonstrate that maybe guitar music wasn't on the way out after all.

That's all well and good, you may be thinking, but how did this change music at all? Weren't they just another band? These are good questions and ones that are easily answered.

Firstly, it's important to realise that although rock and roll did exist before the Beatles (remember Elvis?), but The Beatles brought it to the mainstream audience and combined it with many other genres to keep it fresh, appealing and original to keep it popular.

The Beatles' unique hybrid of rock and roll crossed with pop was the best of both worlds, it showed off real guitar music by demonstrating it to the masses and mixing it with a touch of pop to keep it interesting and different. This is something that hadn't been done before, and hasn't since either.

This was a consistent feature of all of the Beatles' music, despite the constant backbone of rock and roll, other genres were introduced to make sure no two albums sounded the same.

They may have challenged the old theory of 'if it isn't broke, don't fix it', but the Beatles created different music with each album, but kept an underlying consistency that everyone loved: rock and roll. It was this concept that kept them in the public limelight.

The Beatles explored many different avenues, including pop ballads, classical and even psychedelic rock; there certaintly wasn't a case of groundhog day with the Beatles at any point.

In making guitar music so popular, The Beatles provided hope and inspiration to many who would otherwise have had none. For example, without the Beatles, there would have been no Pink Floyd, no Oasis, no Rolling Stones... Without them, guitar music may have possibly gone out of fashion as predicted by Decca Records.

For this, we must praise Lennon and co for pointing music in the right direction. If only we had somebody like that today to do the same, Dappy just doesn't fit the bill.

The remarkable thing about the Beatles is that they had nobody like them previously to aspire to, no direct influence that they could copy. They had to invent themselves by taking bits and pieces of everyone else.

Influences of the band cover a vast range including Elvis Presley, Chuck Berry, Buddy Holly and The Beach Boys. George Harrison even returned from a trip to India with fresh new ideas and even a new instrument (the sitar) which gave their music another unexpected twist, evidence that Indian Music provided influence for their music.


The Beatles took the best part of each genre out there and combined the lot to create a 'super genre'. Taking guitar music to the next level and providing an influential figure that has shaped music ever since. Any artists, no matter what style or genre, can take something from the Beatles to make themselves more appealing.

Such was the power of the Beatles, they not only effected future music, but fashion, attitude, hairstyles and religion too.

Take any part of modern day culture and one way or another, and it can be linked back to the Beatles.

Liam Gallagher's outlandish attitude? The Beatles were at it way before him.

Typically scruffy hairstyles and image of youth, the Beatles again.

Kevin Keegan's transfer from Liverpool to Hamburg? The Beatles had done that back in the sixties.

The Beatles have also been cited as catalysts for the encouragement of gay rights and environmentalism. 

God himself, was inspired by the Beatles of course.

"Christianity will go. It will vanish and shrink... I don't know what will go first- Rock and Roll or Christianity. We're more popular than Jesus now. Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. It's them twisting it that ruins it for me." John Lennon

That's what made the Beatles, the Beatles and the Beatles are what has made society the way it is today. Just don't expect it to happen again soon.

Why Mugs of Tea and Plastic Bottles Aren't as Innocent as They Look

If there's one thing that annoys me more than most common day inconveniences and hardships, it's people that think they know everything about things they in truth know very little about. 

I remember a rather unspectacular occasion in the not so distant past where myself, my mum and sister were watching the television in the evening, accompanied by the typically British mugs of tea and hot chocolate.

Out of the blue, my sister rather spontaneously proclaimed after taking a sip of her hot chocolate: "You know, I'll probably get throat cancer when I'm older, because I drink so many hot drinks?"

From memory,my reaction to this was rather confused. Where on earth did that come from? And what on earth did it have to do with anything we were doing at the time?

The Cup of Tea: You've been warned

As you can imagine, it didn't work as a very effective ice breaker and made me wonder if she'd gone a tad loopy, either that or the programme we were watching must have been incredibly boring.

However, the point of my bringing it up is how can she know that there's a link between drinking hot drinks and getting throat cancer?

I've not researched this so I'm not sure if there's any validity behind her claim, but I bet she read it in a newspaper or saw it on TV and assumed that it must be true. Without question.

It's rather typical of us Brits as a nation, although generalizing a little, it does frustrate me how so many people believe anything they read without even a hint of doubt. This is why rumours and myths with very little logic or evidence behind them become 'facts' so easily and quickly.

This is because for some reason, people lack the ability the question things when they're written in a newspaper, told by a 'specialist' or have a statistic in them.

This is why Derren Brown is so successful, people believe that he is actually 'magic' just because he says he is, and he throws a few random stats in there just to add to the reliability.

Here's a fact for you, did you know that 76% of statistics are made up?

The biggest victim for this method of spreading false information is cancer.

Take a look into your daily newspaper and there will no doubt be a small article about cancer with some sort of theory about how it's caused or how it could be cured. 99% of them are inevitably bullshit.

This doesn't stop people believing them though.

I've just looked in today's Daily Telegraph and low and behold, on page 12 I found a piece on how 'bacteria in soil could cure cancer.'

The fact that the article lasted only 100 odd words and had very little scientific evidence to support it suggests that the idea is still at the drawing board stage, with the Cancer Myth Creators Committee still debating whether this is crazy enough to fool the gullible British public into believing. Before you Google it, I can assure you that it's a genuine committee, I read about it in a newspaper, so it must be real.

Secondly, considering the article only appeared in a tiny corner of page 12 of the newspaper suggests that it's not likely to have groundbreaking results anytime soon. If it was, then it would surely make the front page ahead of an article on rising energy bills?

The claim was that harmless bacteria in soil could be treated and inserted into cancer cells to cure the disease, or something similar. Because there's so little detail given it's hard to question it, it's like trying to question whether the moon is made of cheese. It's probably not true but it's such a vague idea that it's hard to prove it's false.

So, this strange claim about soil being cancer's latest potential cure is another that probably won't bear fruition and will be thrown into the bin of cancer myths which sits in the corner of the Cancer Myth Creators Committee HQ office, next to a syringe full of soil, probably.

I'm not saying every idea/theory about cancer is incorrect, but in the same way a stopped clock is correct twice a day, one in about 100 cancer theories has an element of truth behind it.

The list of those that have no truth yet are commonly believed is very long: 'There is no cure for cancer' obviously not 100% true hence why not all cancer patients die as a result of the illness. Other myths include how cancer makes you lose your hair. Again not true, certain treatments such as chemotherapy can have that effect, but not cancer itself. Apparently only women can get breast cancer, mobile phones cause cancer, cancer can be genetic... I could go on...

Look so innocent, don't they?

Yet the craziest I've heard is from a friend (I use that term lightly) called Will who once claimed to me that reusing plastic bottles gives you cancer through a chemical which is produced or something stupid. I mean, come on Will, really?

It's all just a game of Chinese whispers. I could develop that story and say that the plastic over time reacts with water to produce a chemical called Cancerbullshitious which eventually, increases the temperature of the water bottle and therefore the drink, and we all know that hot drinks give you throat cancer. Who's to say I'm wrong?

Well technically, anyone with half a brain might realise that it sounds a little fishy, and then then they might challenge the name of the chemical. Besides that, I think I've got a pretty good cancer myth made up there.

I'm emailing the Cancer Myth Creators Committee Chief Executive with it right now...

Judging the Judges, X-Factor's Latest Laughing Stocks

The X-Factor, like it or not, is back. So queue the generic episodes and a carbon copy of every previous series this time round, will it ever change?

Technically yes, this year it has changed. Simon Cowell has decided that he can't be bothered to judge on his own show which is fast becoming a laughing stock, so he's got some generous friends to do his job for him. I'm sure he'll take the all the money that the show makes though.

The familiar voice of Dermot O'Leary created a warm welcome to what otherwise became a show that did nothing to convince you to watch again.

"The wait is over, and the X-Factor is back" O'Leary proclaimed, thank god the wait is over I thought to myself, thank God. I was disappointed not to hear that 'my Saturday night starts right here' maybe even he realizes that his old catchphrase is a blatant lie and bit of unjustified optimism.

Despite the similarities with previous series, there's changes to the X-Factor this year. The most striking was the judge's choice of transport to the o2 arena.

Ditching their usual flash 4x4s, Walsh and co decided to show off even more than I thought was humanly possible by flying in helicopters to their venue. Is that really necessary? I bet Bill Oddie would have had a fit if he'd been able to get a Freeview box in his badger hole.

In typical X-Factor fashion, everything was dramatized for extra effect. Give the X-Factor directors a video of Louis Walsh opening a packet of crisps and I'm sure with some special effects and over dramatic music, it would have the atmosphere of a Westlife concert.

We had the usual props of fire and explosions to provide an erotic backdrop for the new judges to burst onto the scene, after they'd parachuted out of their helicopters of course.

The whole show had a very generic feel, so much that I had a serious case of deja vu, I swear the same thing happens in every X-Factor audition episode.

Dermot then went about over complimenting the new judges over the incredibly dramatic music, I was convinced at one point that he'd burst out 'Louis, I am your father!' It was that dramatic, it truly was.

The first judge to be introduced was Kelly Rowland, I thought to myself 'Christ, Danni's plastic surgery has gone to a whole new level.' It turned out that Danni Minogue wasn't a victim of the 'MJ effect in reverse' but in fact, she'd just been replaced, because she was crap.

The new panel in all their glory

To satisfy the judge's egos, as well as making them seem endearing to the loyal X-Factor faithful, hundreds of compliments had to be thrown at them, I would have preferred bricks to be honest.

'International pop superstar' and 'Kelly started out alongside Beyonce in Destiny's Child, one of the world's biggest girl bands.' were what O'Leary claimed to be a fair description of Kelly, whether they're true or not is up to opinion, but it's funny how Beyonce is used to show how successful Kelly is.

In comparison to Beyonce, Kelly Rowland's success is like comparing Chesterfield to Manchester United. It could be worse though, at least Kelly gets a mention. You have to feel for ' the other one in Destiny's Child' who doesn't even get a mention because nobody knows who she is. Surely 'one of the world's greatest girl bands' members would be known by most?

Kelly's typically cheap cliche in her VT was "It's hard work to get to the top, and it's harder work to stay there." My reaction to any cliche is, shut up and give me some bloody information which doesn't sound like generic bullshit, and my reaction to Kelly was the same. And Tulisa, and Louis...

The second judge to be introduced was Tulisa from 'biggest hip hop band N-Dubz.' Queue every single viewer cringing to the core and most saying 'who the hell is she?'

Hardly a household face, Tulisa had to reassure the viewers that she knew what she was on about, which is very hard. Stating that you're a fan of N-Dubz is basically like admitting you're a former drug addict and have an ASBO, admitting you're part of N-Dubz is like suicide.

As predicted, Tulisa's VT was filled with cliches as well: "I want to bring some fireworks to the judge's table." My immediate reaction to that was that I'm not sure it's too safe to let off fireworks indoors, and the security men might have something to say about it. Then I realised it was just another crappy cliche. Typical X-Factor I suppose.

Tulisa then turned her VT into a laughing stock by admitting to the watching public that she has no life what so ever and had a drastic childhood, basically anyway.

"I've been in N-Dubz since the age of eleven." What a poor soul.

Tulisa then reassured viewers that she has some talent and determination by stating "We have worked our but off to be where we are. We script our videos, we write our songs." Well Done. Do you want a medal?

It's clearly apparent that Tulisa isn't on the panel for her knowledge of music, but simply to replace the sex appeal lost in the absence of Cheryl Cole, as if Louis Walsh wasn't enough...

Speaking of the Irish bombshell, he was next up for O'Leary to drown in pathetic comments.

As usual, the arrival of Louis on the screen could only mean one thing, a Westlife montage was played in the background just to remind us all of his obsession with the Irish; his great mentoring skills and finally, Westlife's fourteen number ones!

Louis' cliche was 'The new panel has given me new energy, it's like I've got new batteries!' I wonder if we take his batteries out he'll shut up?

The viewers then had the pleasure to be filled with a constant supply of bullshit, just like every episode. With Louis proclaiming 'I was the first to spot JLS,' No, correction: you were the only one that got picked out of the hat to mentor them. Another one who deserves a medal there.

The final part of the eccentric quartet is Gary Barlow, who takes the record as the slowest talking human ever. Whenever I hear his name, I have the urge to repeat it in an incredibly slow fashion, verging on the retarded. A bit like Matt Damon on team America.

Dermot  put his neck on the line and risked a raging Louis Walsh when he said that Barlow was from 'the biggest boy band on the planet.' I could just imagine Louis storming into the shot screaming 'Fourteen number ones! Fourteen numbers ones! And you still say Take That are bigger then Westlife!?!' Now that, would be good television.

Barlow, due to his obsession with speaking like the world's in slow motion, took half an hour to complete his VT. His cringe-worthy cliche was "I'm bringing a ton of experience, and I'm willing to share it with all these people." In what was meant to sound like the inspiring words of Jesus, he actually sounded like Steven Hawking. That sentence took him seven minutes to complete by the way.

As the show went on, it was hard not to notice that Barlow was attempting to replace the brutality lost without Simon a bit too much. He was trying too hard to be harsh and give an exaggerated judgement, which sums up the X-Factor really.

"If I don't think they're good enough, I'll be brutally honest. People's perception of me is about to change" That's probably for the best Gary, anyone that isn't Take That's biggest fan thinks you're a bit of a dweeb.

It wasn't all bad though, after each judge had been introduced, a montage that we see every year was shown. This was filled with even more cliches from talentless contestants which is almost enough to make you want to change channel and watch the cricket, almost.

This two minute video contained clips of people swearing, judges and contestants crying, sudden aggressive outbursts and freeze frames on ugly faces (usually Louis Walsh's).

The funniest moments of the whole show were found during this video, with a contestant saying Tulisa was very rich for saying that she couldn't sing. Who else felt a great deal of satisfaction that common sense had prevailed at that point?

Despite the obvious bullying towards Adele, it was hard not to see the funny side when one contestant claimed she wanted to be 'Bigger than Adele.' What does she want? A free year's supply of McDonald's and Mary Byrne as a dietitian?

It was hard to sit through all the cliches as they kept on coming: 'I want this so much'; 'Music is my life' blah blah blah.

It was incredibly refreshing to hear some truth when amongst these comments, a contestant claimed he wanted to be on the X-Factor, not because music is his life or he wants a new start in life, but because he 'wants to sleep with as many girls as possible.' Well said that man!

Frankie Cocozza provided the audience with a laugh at his sheer arrogance and refreshing tone to accompany his scruffy teenage image, oh and the names of seven girls' names tatooed on his bum. Classy.

He's the kind of contestant viewers either love or hate. At least if you do hate him, you can tell him to stick his microphone right between his Katie and Natasha (up his arse if you were wondering).

Let's hope that Franky is a sign of things to come and the contestants actually have some character and laughability, otherwise, it could be another long series. Let's just hope this series doesn't mark the conception into the music world of another Cher Llloyd, or even worse, Tulisa.

It's Crystal Ball Time

With the new Premier League season less than twenty four hours from kick off, it’s about time I looked into my crystal ball and made some predictions. So here goes, month by month.

August: After thrashing both Norwich and Swansea 5-0, Wigan storm to the top of the Premier League with fans determined that this season will be theirs’. After a shaky start and a 3-0 defeat to West Brom, Alex Ferguson is worried and orders his scouts to find a like for like replacement for Paul Scholes. When he heard his scouts had came back with a ginger central midfielder with an eye for a simple pass, Fergie was delighted. He was a little more concerned when it turned out to be Ben Watson. In a similar scouting exercise, Martinez replaced Watson with their fan of the year for the last 10 seasons, Darren Orme. Wigan promptly lose 4-1 to QPR and fans are fearing a relegation battle once more.

September: With United struggling for form and Wayne Rooney banned for six months due to allegations about a long term affair with Will Young, Fergie looks to Gary Neville to provide the firepower. It turns out to be a shrewd decision, with United beating Chelsea 4-0 thanks to a Neville hat trick and a strike from loanee Mauro Boselli. Following that defeat, Chelsea sack Andres Villas-Boas despite being four points clear at the top of the league. The goalless Fernando Torres is sent out on loan to Cheltenham to find some form but returns after just one game because ‘there’s nowhere to buy alice bands in Cheltenham.’

October: With Blackburn dead last in the Premier League, Steve Kean is sacked and Big Sam is reinstated as manager at Ewood Park. His first move is to bring Kevin Nolan back with him from West Ham despite the transfer market being shut, as a result he has to wait until January to sign the entire Bolton Wanderers squad from 2007. Meanwhile, Delia Smith introduces a new idea to increase the amount of players per team from eleven to twelve, proclaiming: ‘We need a twelve man, where are you? Let’s be ‘avin you.’ Needless to say the idea is rejected by the FA.

November: By November, Wigan are slipping down the table without a win in six, injuries hit the squad hard and with Darren Orme the only remaining fit midfielder; Roberto Martinez decides to bring himself out of retirement and partner himself in midfield with new arrival Joey Barton. When interviewed about his latest signing, Dave Whelan claimed ‘He’s my kind of player, he didn’t cost us a penny.’ With Martinez’s man of the match performance against Wolves earning Wigan a 2-1 away win, there’s speculation about an international call up. This speculation is quickly extinguished when Jordi Gomez takes the final spot in Spain’s midfield ahead of Martinez.

December: Not even the Christmas spirit could lighten the mood on Tyneside as Newcastle mourn the loss of yet another sacked manager. Despite being surprise Champions League contenders in fourth place, Mike Ashley decides that ‘twelve months in charge is far too long for a manager and it’s time for a change.’ Joe Kinnear is reinstated as Newcastle boss and starts his reign with a 4-1 defeat to Norwich. Yet the Canaries are deducted three points for going against Premier League rules and playing twelve players for the fixture, Delia Smith just won’t give up with her insane new idea. Everton are bottom at Christmas, yet David Moyes insists there’s nothing to worry about as the Toffees are just ‘biding their time for a late surge into Europe.’

January: The transfer gossip is rife again and this means the old can of worms regarding Carlos Tevez is opened once more. Owen Coyle persuades the striker to move to the Reebok after stating that ‘Bolton is very close to Argentina and he’ll be very close to his family... in Manchester.’ Bolton don’t pay a transfer fee but promise to pay all of Mario Balotelli’s parking tickets in return. This is a crippling financial blow as by March, Garside has no choice but to sell the Reebok Stadium to the council who demolish it immediately; Wanderers are forced to ground share with Burscough Athletic as a result. Liverpool continue their tradition of paying triple the required amount to land English players by taking Ben Watson off United’s hands for £3 million, they follow this up with the signing of Teddy Sheringham to ‘provide experience up front.’ Finally, Martinez sends Mauro Boselli out on loan to Macclesfield insisting that ‘after one more loan spell he’ll be ready for top flight football.’

February: Everton finally sack David Moyes after 13 games without a win and reappoint Joe Royle who decides to hire relative Jim Royle as his assistant; being an avid Liverpool fan this causes uproar amongst the Everton faithful and sparks more riots on Merseyside. All Everton’s games are called off in February as a result, when asked about his thoughts on the matter, Joe stated: ‘I think it’s great, this month has been our longest unbeaten run of the season' whilst Jim states 'Riots? Relegation? My arse!' Elsewhere, with his new look team of Bolton oldies, Big Sam’s Blackburn win all of their games this month, firing themselves up to the dizzy heights of 17^th.

March: Alex Ferguson sues the Daily Mail as he claims to be the victim of phone hacking, the headline in the Mail the next day reads ‘FERGUSON IN HOWARD WEBB BRIBERY SHOCKER.’ The Sun responds by announcing ‘BARROW AFC FAIL WITH BID TO SIGN MESSI.’ Both headlines turn out to be correct, so you can’t knock either paper for reliability I suppose. Following Tevez’s departure, Man City struggle for form and Roberto Mancini is sacked following a 3-0 defeat to Bolton, in which Gretar Steinsson scores a hat trick. City carry on this season’s theme of appointing former managers as Kevin Keegan returns to the helm.

April: Newcastle sack Joe Kinnear and start their pursuit of Kevin Keegan, despite joining City just days earlier, Keegan accepts Mike Ashley’s offer of ‘we’ll keep you for as long as you rant at Fergie.’ After failing to land Joe Royle, City appoint Liam Gallagher as Keegan’s replacement. Gallagher sparks uproar as he releases Sergio Aguero with the reasoning of ‘his hair is too girly.’ City end the month with a 3-0 win over Man Utd in the derby to heat up the title race, with Gallagher stating he’ll ‘Love it if we beat them, love it!’ in a heated rant directed at Alex Ferguson and Man Utd.

May: Come what May, Man Utd are crowned champions again with a win over Sunderland on the final day. United claim a 4-0 victory with former players Wes Brown, John O’Shea, Kieron Richardson and Phil Bardsley all scoring mysterious own goals. Gary Neville thought he’d bagged the Golden Boot with an impressive 45 goals, but a hat trick on the final day meant that he missed out to 47 goal Emile Heskey. At the bottom, a last minute winner from Darren Orme earned Wigan a 1-0 win over Wolves and Premier League survival once again. The watching Fabio Capello was clearly impressed and rewarded Orme with a place in his Euro 2012 squad. Even the Royles’ best efforts couldn’t save Everton from an unlikely relegation, they were joined in the bottom three by Blackburn and Fulham. Yet Fulham are saved by the FA’s decision to relegate Swansea by default because ‘It’d be wrong to have a Welsh team in the Premier League.'

End of Season Awards 2011/12

Golden Boot: Emile Heskey, 47 goals

PFA Players’ Player of the Season: Gary Neville, Man Utd

Surprise Package: Aston Villa, fuelled by Heskey’s goals, manage a fifth place finish

Disappointment of the season: Everton’s surprise relegation and neighbours Liverpool, despite spending £100 million, fail to make the top 10.

The Problem With The Music Industry

Listening to the radio is fast becoming a thankless everyday task which you'd prefer not to endure but sometimes, the pain is just unavoidable. Like seeing a plumber's arse crack, standing on a plug or being stabbed.

There was once a time where you could turn on the radio and actually hear music which wouldn't make Mozart turn in his grave, the talentless junk that litters the radios of today and attacks your ears like a parasite is simply beyond a joke.

The greatest issue I have with the artists in the charts is that they're not musically talented in the slightest. They can't play an instrument and they can't sing to save their lives, think Rebecca Black, N-Dubz, Chipmunk...

People may make the point, well after the singing's been autotuned to death and a simple bass line from 'Garage Band for Dummies Volume 1' has been installed, the song sounds good even if it requires little talent.

The fact is, it doesn't.

It sounds so bad in fact, that it makes my ears bleed. I'm a firm believer that people should only gain respect and be recognised for what they're good at, singing into a computer like a drowning cat on crack cocaine and then autotuning it to make it sound like you can sing isn't talented, it's cheating. Earning a living off cheating and attempting to gain money from something you're incompetent at is quite frankly fraud and I'm not an avid believer that fraud is the way the music industry should be going.

It makes sense though, because being incredibly judgmental and prejudiced; I'd guess the likes of Dappy have got far more ASBOs and criminal offences to their name than they have qualifications in music.

Furthermore, the fraudsters are so lacking in musical flair and creativity that they can't even create their own music, they have to steal what's been done before, and it's not even subtle. Let me give you an example. I'm sure, like me, you've had the misfortune to have heard LMFAO's terrible 'song' titled 'Party Rock Anthem'. If you're lucky enough to have not, here it is:

Listen to the melody at 2:24, don't you think it sounds a little like that from the song 'No Speak Americano' by 'Yolanda Be Cool'?

Fast forward to 0:48 and you'll hear what I mean, I think they're a little but too similar to be a mere coincidence. In fact, 'Party Rock Anthem' is just 'No Speak Americano' in a wig and a false mustache, nice try, but it was a poor attempt.

It's not just that, but the lyrics are terrible and have obviously been written by someone with the lyrical skill of a five year old and the musical diversity of a bluebottle. For example, 'Party rockers in the house tonight, Everybody just have a good time.' and 'Everyday I'm shuffling.' Genius, just genius, that's all I'm going to say.

Yet it doesn't end there either...

Take Katy Perry's newest song titled: 'ET' featuring Kanye West, those of you with no so short memories might realise it sounds a little like a song by Russian Lesbians 't.A.T.u' names 'All The Things She Said'. If you haven't heard it, take a listen, the resemblance is frightening, I think anyway, especially the choruses.

Does nobody else's ears bleed at the start of E.T due to the tedious synths and terrible lyrics where Kanye West rhymes 'ways' with 'Milkyway'? Oh dear.

I could think up of countless other examples, Chris Brown's 'Yeah 3X' sounds so much like Calvin Harris' 'I'm Not Alone' that Calvin should be named as a co writer to Brown's pathetic copy and Brown should be locked up in the jail of music forever for attacking the nation's poor ear drums. it makes a change from attacking Rihanna I suppose.

Also, one of the top comments on the video to 'E.T' is a gentle reminder as to why I hate the charts, with a few desperate links to songs that would struggle to attain a 1 out of 10. here it is in all its glory: 

Bruno Mars had a Grenade, and Tiao Cruz had Dynamite, so they both threw them at Katy Perry who exploded like a Firework. The bang was so loud that the Black Eyed Peas forgot The Time, while Rihanna had memory loss and ran around saying Whats My Name. Eminem looked around and said Im Not Afraid then Willow Smith began to Wip Her Hair, which started a Far East Movement. They then crashed their G6 into a club and stopped Party Rocking. Luckily for Nelly it was all Just a Dream.

And that my friends, is why the music industry is the truly embarrassing mess we find it in today, but it's not all bad, oh no.

Music nowadays no gives us all hope that one day we might earn a hell of a lot of money out of a something we're actually incredibly bad at, thanks to the invention of computers. To take advantage of this, I'm now going to video myself playing the guitar and then photoshop myself doing it whilst juggling and rollerskating down a hill, which are three things I'm not very good at. Then I'll send it into Britain's Got Talent and earn a packet. Isn't fraud brilliant?

The Art of Abbreviations

It's not too hard to find fundamental issues with the English language if you search a little below the surface, and one way to improve it in a convenient and light hearted manor is to create your own words basically, via the art of abbreviations (abbrevies).

To some, the thought of such an idea is nonsensical and pointless. Personally, I'm of the opinion that they're creative, smart, intelligent and utterly brilliant.

This is a simple way of personalizing the English language yourself with everyday phrases, and it's brilliant fun.

For example, words that are a bit of a mouthful like 'achievement' and 'underestimated' can easily be shortened down to 'achevvy' and 'underezzied'.

The spell check on here is going crazy by the way with all these abbrevies, and there another red jagged line has appeared...

Lets be honest, dropping random words that nobody else knows the meaning of into an everyday sentence is pretty cool, and also makes you feel superior to them in a way as they try and get their head around simple phrases such as 'I dunna reck if I'm hon'. The confusion on their face is truly brilliant.

The aforementioned phrase has been created by shortening words that aren't even a mouthful to make them quicker to say and make simple phrases roll off the tongue. The full phrase in standard, boring English is 'I do not reckon if I am honest.' Be hon, you read that in a posh accent, didn't you?

This whole process should be treated as nothing more than a lighthearted bit of humour and nothing too serious, yet look around and abvrevvies are all over the place, littering society with the utter pointlessness.

Simple examples include everyday nouns such as 'pub', 'PC' and 'loo' which are used instead of their full names of 'public house', 'personal computer' and 'lavatory' respectively.

This shows that abbrevies are part of everyday life and without them the English language would be far less convenient and would sound very different.

For example words such as 'won't', 'don't' and 'can't' are all abbreviations commonly used to shorten terms like 'will not', 'do not' and 'cannot'. These abbreviations have been accepted into society because they are convenient, simple and speed up the process of an everyday sentence. Yet if you thought my abbrevies were stupid, then technically these are just as bad.

For starters, why is an apostrophe needed? It's utterly pointless. The apostrophe is there is indicate that at least one letter is missing from the phrase. For example, 'don't' is missing an 'n' and an 'o' from its original form 'do not'. What is the point in stating that a letter or two isn't there? I think it would be quite clear from the word 'dont' that there are letters missing from the term 'do not' hence why it reads 'dont' instead of 'do not'. it's common sense.

If this logic was consistently used in life there would be apostrophes in the FIFA headquarters stating that there was once a non-corrupt, competent leader and now there is not, only Sepp Blatter. The same theory would mean apostrophes would be found in the charts, stating there was once tolerable and reasonably talented music here, now it is missing and we have the displeasure of listening to N-Dubz making us cringe until you stab your ears to the state of deafness. Or simply turn off the radio, whichever is easiest.

The problems don't end there as the abbreviations aren't even technically correct. Can anyone explain to me how 'won't' is a shortened version of 'will not'? Surely, based on the rules that create 'don't' and 'can't', it would be 'willn't' instead of 'won't'?

The whole process doesn't make sense and means that sentences that contain the original term in its full form 'will not' appear not to make sense.

Say the phrase: 'Won't you shut up?' and it seems perfectly plausible, yet repeat it in its form of inception: 'Will not you shut up?' and it appears to be total nonsense, simply because nobody says it that way anymore and the abbreviation is nothing like the original.

'Do not you want to go and get some dope Leroy?'

The same applies for the terms 'Do not you want to go?' and 'Can not you go?'

That brings the thought of a mindless, drunk chav starting on one of their victims and intimidatingly asking, 'Do not you want to go?' That would be classic.

Abbreviations are also used to create hidden or secret nouns for certain items, this is obviously so nobody listening knows the topic of subject. This is commonly used in the world of drugs as terms such as 'Cannabis' tern into 'weed', 'puff' and 'dope'. Technically, these are more substitutes than abbreviations, yet their existence is still for a similar achevvy.

My point is, as silly as the logic of 'abbrevies' might be and how unbelievably crap some of them might sound, they have been accepted as a part of modern day language through the process of word of mouth where the habit has spread.

The most successful ones are used on a daily basis and aren't seen as abbreviations but an official term. Ask people if they want to go to the 'public house' and they'll look at you with a tilted head and crumpled eyebrows in a look of confusion; yet ask them if the want to go to the 'pub' and I'm sure they'll know what you're on about immediately.

What I would encourage anyone to do is be creative and create as many confusing and pointless abbrevies as possible to add to the English language's infinite collection. That way you're contributing to society in your own little confusing and pointless way. Like an MP I suppose.

Maybe one day I'll create an abbrevy dictionary, publishing my genius breakthrough in language to the whole world. Would it be a hit? I reck if I'm hon, obvs.