Big Brother comes to an end...

Quelle Surprise! Mediocrity wins the day again as last night Jamie won Big Brother 2006. In a surprisingly close race he beat Camilla by 6% to take the title for this year. I was always doubtful that a strong, opinionated woman like Camilla could win BB and I was proven right - the Big Brother's producer's decision to reunite Jamie with his in house love, Katie, before he exited the house no doubt helped him secure the victory (before that slushy moment happened him and Camilla were running at 50% each). Why are the two remaining housemates allowed to meet people from the outside until they both exit the house after the winner has been announced? Isn't that, like, the point of BB? Last night's show was absolutely awful - two hours of cringe inducing shite and the show gave Jamie a blatant push in the voting, disgraceful.

This has been a very disappointing Big Brother year for me. It's clear than Channel 10 are now simply using it as nothing less than a cynical tool with which to make a fuck load of money. I have no problem with the premium rate SMS costs, no problem with them charging people to spend $1 a time to phone up their premium rate phone line, no problem with charging people to access the 'premium' services on the BB website. What I do have a problem with is the outrageous use of the show to try and flog products that are sold by their sponsors - the integration of '3' phones into a few features of the show was blatant (such as getting Jamie to try out the new Eye Camera thingy around the house *plug!*), the pathetic 'surprise' appearance of the Rogue Traders performing in the BB backgarden was clearly a stunt dreamed up by the Rogue Trader's PR company to increase publicity for their latest piece of musical dirge. Do Channel 10 think their audience is really that stupid not to see through all of this?

Channel 10 also introduced gimmicks a plenty into this year's series. 'The Insider' idea was moderately appealing but others were simply awful. Top of the list has to be BB's decision to let the housemates' Mums go into the house a few days ago whilst the housemates were locked in the diary room. They exited to find their mums had made their beds, left them food and bought new clothes with them. What???? The point of BB is that the housemates are kept away from the outside world AND their friends and families.

Obviously, Channel 10 are introducing all of these gimmicks (and there were plenty more that I can't be bothered to go in to) as they want to keep the program 'interesting'. Well, I've got some advice for Channel 10 - instead of all these tacky gimmicks why not just choose some INTERESTING house mates? Of different outlooks, ages and backgrounds - rather than just 10 18-21 white, middle class girls and boys with a token gay guy and a token older woman thrown in for good measure. I won't hold my breath though - expect more identikit housemates next year and more cynical attempts to use the show as nothing more than a PR tool for corporations to flog their products/crap music.

Will I still watch? Of course I will. Expect a similar moan this time in 2007.

Until next year.

Paris in IBIZA

Paris Hilton was spotted at Space, Ibiza last week for Carl Cox's Tuesday shindig. If she was avin' it to Mr Cox then she's gone up in my estimations. I doubt she even knows who Carl Cox is though and probably spent her time ligging around the VIP area. I haven'tseen any pictures to confirm it either way but I can't imagine her front centre, all sweaty and having a bosh to some techno...Can you?

Hurrah! Goodbye David...

My faith in the Australian public and general humanity was given a massive boost last night when David was booted out of the Big Brother house. I was beginning to think that he may win the whole bloody thing as people would warm to his pathetic emotional bluster and his 'sincerity' and 'integrity'. I didn't buy it for a second and instead saw a completely emotionally retarded individual who was utterly incapable of communicating with groups of human beings, patronised people on a regular basis and was earnest to the bitter end. He did have some good qualities of course and I'm pleased for him that his coming out experience on TV went well and that he now feels accepted by the Australian public.

So, we're left with Camilla & Jamie for tonight's final. It really is a matter of choosing the lesser fuckwit of the two. I've not really warmed to anyone on this series of BB and there hasn't been a Vesna like character who has really made me want to back them to win. I'll be voting for Camilla tonight though, I think it would be good for a strong, opinionated person to win for a change rather than just a nice, boy next door type like Jamie. I don't think the public really likes bolshy women like Camilla so I'll be amazed if she pulls it off...More tomorrow.

Howard stays on

In the most predictable news story to emerge since the announcement that there were no WMD in Iraq, John Howard has announced that he will stay on and fight the next election. Peter Costello has also announced that he is staying on as Treasurer but when asked what he thought of the PM's decision to stay on he tellingly replied, "It doesn'’t matter how I feel. That's the outcome." I think it's pretty safe to say that Costello is feeling as sick as a parrot!

Anyway, even though I don't like Howard I think he was right to stay on - it's clear that he has massive support still in the Liberal Party and more importantly, in Australia. There is no doubt in my mind, that baring a major economic downturn, Howard will romp to victory next Autumn and another three years of Liberal government will be secured. Why risk that and try out Costello? There's no way that Blair would be going in the UK if he enjoyed Howard's level of support. The saying is that all political careers end in failure, is John Howard destined to become the exception to this rule?

The banana shortage in the People's Republic of Australia continues. The Australian has more....

Election Day?

It appears that the traditional election night fest that occurs at the end of a British general election may be under threat - this is because of proposed changes to how postal votes are counted and verified. If the changes are enacted then the results will be announced in the afternoon after election day was held.

A massive big BOO to this I say!!! The Guardian's editoral today explains why it would be a shame to change this tradition...

Reasons to vote Labor

I can't vote in next years federal election (as I won't be a citizen by then) however, if I did have that privilege then Labor would have just given me the first reason I've seen thus far to vote for them (other than hating Howard/Liberal Party of course).

The current system of full fee paying students being able to get into university courses with marks lower than Govt supported students is a disgrace and an anathema in a supposed merit based society. Labor is absolutely right in it's proposal to abolish these places and right to pledge to make up the funding gap. Maybe they could use the $112 million pledged by the Govt to subsidise anti-porn filters as start...

Subsidising the rich

The true Tory party agenda, to make rich people richer, is being suppressed by David Cameron who wants to portray his party as a movement in the mold of Continental European Christian Democrats. The problem with this, as I have mentioned before, is that the true beliefs of his 'comrades' keep coming to the fore. The latest is a ridiculous proposal from the Bow Group to replace council tax, inheritance tax, capital gains tax and the TV license fee with a single flat rate tax equivalent to 1% of the value of the payer's home.

Ross Clark superbly pulls apart this proposal in today's Times. Spot on, Ross.

Here in Australia we've seen a rightwing government introduce scheme after scheme which have resulted in the poor of society subsidising the lifestyles of the wealthy. I can only hope that Labour in the UK doesn't implode and realises that it must do all it can to prevent the Conservatives regaining power. This means an end to it's squabbling, an end to any hint of corruption and a concentration on what really matters: governing well and selling it's progressive message to the UK populace.

It's a Scorcher!

Britain has experienced it's hottest July day ever - temperatures peaked at 36.5c in Wisley, Surrey. Of course the UK has gone into meltdown over this as it once again reasserts it's claim to be the country in the world that is the most incapable of coping with extreme weather.

One great thing though about the onset of the extremely hot weather is that it has heralded the annual appearance of a quintessential British classic - The Sun's 'Phew What a Scorcher Guv'nor!' splash.

All the boxes have been ticked...

- Is the temperature in the headline expressed in Fahrenheit rather than Celsius as this makes it look like really really hot ? Tick!

- Is there a picture of some fit bird probably called Denise on her lunch break from Natwest, frolicking in a bikini in a fountain in Trafalgar Square / Lake in Hyde Park / Random waterfall? Tick!

- Is there reference to how the temperature in the UK was better than that in [insert Caribbean / Mediterranean resort] ? (That'll show Johnnie Foreigner who is the boss when it comes to super soaraway scorchers!) Tick!

- Have some Page Three girls been wheeled out to perform some wacky stunt in the sun for the benefit of the hardworking lads of the world? Tick! (go here)

ha ha - it's so predictable but still gives me as much joy as in previous years....Go the Sun! ha ha

Middle East Crisis? No Comment

I've been wondering if I should post a blog about the Middle East crisis but have kept hesitating since I simply don't know enough about the situation to comment with any sense of logic or reason.

I am also baffled by the black and white views espoused by the left and right - that either Israel is a peace loving guardian angel who is being attacked by evil men all around her OR that Israel is the devil incarnate and those fighting her are fearless, brave, freedom fighters. Both views to me seem prepostorous - surely neither 'side' is blameless in any of this?

Anyway, I came across this Matthew Parris article in the Times today and it perfectly sums up my feelings on the issue. Go Matthew!

A COLUMNIST without an opinion is a pitiful thing, like a windsurfer without wind. As the Israeli bombardment of Gaza and now Lebanon has intensified, I have wondered whether holding forth on every subject but this might look feeble — though Heaven knows the world is not short of ranters on the Middle East. But when I try to compose my thoughts, the resolution to write keeps slipping: doubly undermined.

First from a feeling of boredom. The boredom arises from neither carelessness nor apathy, but the quiet anger we may feel when a subject is endlessly and passionately debated by disputants who are unlikely to change their minds and — if the truth be known — mentally armoured against opposing thoughts. The rest of us wish we could walk away.

This conflict has flickered and flared across the daily news through most of my adult life, and I have sometimes wondered whether it will be viewed by future historians rather as the ancient battles over the Corn Laws or Catholic Emancipation are now seen: intrinsically important issues of vast consequence for some, but where even the uninvolved took sides with a passion that succeeding ages have found hard to share. I have even wondered whether, if we in Europe could agree to take no further notice of the story (as we have taken no notice, for instance, of the uncounted dead in the conflict in Congo) it would make matters any worse.

The second is a desperately tricky thing to express. I steer clear because I have too many friends who are Jews whose feelings I don’t want to hurt. You will wish to remind me that to be Jewish is not to be a supporter of everything (or anything) the state of Israel does, and of course that’s true. You will point out that among the harshest critics of Israeli policy are Israeli and Jewish voices, and of course that’s true too. But it’s a personal observation which one cannot just brush aside that, on this, those who are Jewish tend to have much stronger feelings than others, and that they are overwhelmingly if not universally sympathetic to the Israeli cause, more inclined than most to justify the actions of Israel, and prone to feeling personally wounded if one disagrees. Such feelings inhabit some of the people I like and respect best in my life.

The problem is that I cannot agree with them. The past 40 years have been a catastrophe, gradual and incremental, for world Jewry. Seldom in history have the name and reputation of a human grouping lost so vast a store of support and sympathy so fast. My opinion — held not passionately but with little personal doubt — is that there is no point in arguing about whether the state of Israel should have been established where and when it was because it has become a fact. To try to remove it now would be at least as great an injustice as the one originally done to the Palestinians. But Israel’s best and perhaps only security for the future would be to rest upon a settlement that everyone the whole world over — everyone but the anti-Zionist fanatics — could see was reasonable. There would need to be no room left for argument. Then Israel would be able to feel confident of the full-hearted support not just of governments but of their peoples.

That settlement has to be a return to her pre-1967 boundaries. Precisely because Israel is by no means forced to make so generous a move, the international support (even love) this would generate would secure her future permanently. It would bring her back within the pale.

Sadly, nations and individuals tend, by moving only when forced and never quite far enough, to keep resentments burning which, by going the extra mile, it lies within their power to extinguish.

The truth hurts

The fallout from a South Australian Democrat MP telling the truth about the club scene continues.

Truly pathetic.

Blogger's block

I haven't posted for over a week now. I know, I know.

It's not as if there hasn't been anything going on. There is apparently some small disturbance occurring in the Middle East at the moment and in Australia, Peter and John got all worked up about who is going to lead the Liberal Party into the next election. For some reason I have not felt the need to comment on either. The Middle East thing is frankly too damn complicated for me to comment on - my rather quaint view is that all the protagonists there are cunts. But I'm not sure what value that adds to the debate.

As for the Peter and John ding dong it's obvious to me that Johnnie is clearly going to stay on for the next election and Peter has probably blown his chance of ever becoming Liberal leader. But that's just pointing out the obvious surely?

Mmmm...I will post something properly tomorrow - this period of inaction cannot continue. I think I can count on one hand the amount of times when I've had nothing to say (in fact it's once - this time) . I'm sure I will bounce back...

For now I'll leave you with my favourite lyrics of the moment from the slightly bonkers 'Underwear goes inside the pants' tune by Lazyboy...

We’re in one of the richest countries in the world,
an and the minimum wage is lower than it was thirty five years ago.
There are homeless people everywhere.
This homeless guy asked me for money the other day.
I was about to give it to him and then I thought he was going to use it on drugs or alcohol.
And then I thought, that’s what I’m going to use it on.
Why am I judging this poor bastard.
People love to judge homeless guys. Like if you give them money they’re just going to waste it hes gonna waste the money.
Well, he lives in a box, what do you want him to do? Save it up and buy a wall unit?
Take a little run to the store for a throw rug and a CD rack? He’s homeless.
I walked behind this guy the other day.
A homeless guy asked him for money.
He looks right at the homeless guy and says why don’t you go get a job you bum.
People always say that to homeless guys like it's always that easy.
This homeless guy was wearing his underwear outside his pants.
Outside his pants. I’m guessing his resume isn’t all up to date.
I’m predicting some problems during the interview process.
I’m pretty sure even McDonalds has a “underwear goes inside the pants” policy.
Not that they enforce it really strictly, but technically I’m sure it is on the books.


How very very true.

All over the shop

Brendan O'Neill has written one of the most ridiculous blogs I've read in some time on today's Guardian Comment is Free site.

As a way of background, Brendan is a member of the deeply suspect Living Marxism sect details of which can be found here, here and here.

Brendan today writes about the cancellation of a concert in Brighton, UK due to be performed by the Jamaican reggae artist Buju Banton. This has given Brendan an excuse, like he ever needs one, to rant and rave against the liberal left which he claims is hypocritical and racist.

The reason the gig was cancelled was because of protests from gay rights groups about the hateful anti-gay lyrics that are contained in Banton's work (and in many songs performed by Jamaican performers.) These aren't just anti-gay but actually encourage people to go out and harm homosexuals. Banton himself was charged in 2005 with gay bashing (and acquitted after a botched police investigation).

Now, we can have a debate about how far free speech should be extended and whether people like Banton have a right to air such views in a public concert. That's a fine debate to have.

But Brendan, being Brendan, can't help using the whole episode as an excuse to attack the liberal left. According to him the real reason white liberal (for some reason he associates liberalism with being white) people wish to see these performances stop is because they are racist. They believe that young black music fans are 'a potentially excitable horde whose access to inflammatory material must be restricted by the authorities.'

It is interesting to see how Brendan is injecting a racial element to this when he has absolutely no evidence at all to suggest it is true - all that is guiding him is his pathological hatred of the liberal left. In fact I think this theory exposes his own ingrained prejudices towards black people. This has nothing to do with the fact that the reggae scene is 'black', if these songs were bought by exclusively white people there would still be a valid argument made by the 'liberal left' against them.

The really ridiculous thing about his article though is that he tries to draw a parallel between the left's attempt to clamp down on anti-gay performers and their opposition to religious hatred laws. The two things though are not comparable and Brendan knows it full well. He states that liberals like Rowan Atkinson and Joan Bakewell were against the religious hatred laws - and yes they were. They were concerned, rightly in my opinion, that the law would prevent people from insulting someone's religious beliefs or mocking them. None of the terms in the shoddy bill were defined and so it had the real potential to end free religious debate in the UK. There are a couple of important points to make here:

1) There is no contradiction at all between wanting to prevent a law that may have criminalised valid criticism and comic parody of religion and wanting to clamp down on entertainers that espouse the murder of gays. If a singer produced songs that advocated the killing of Muslims then I somehow doubt that the 'liberal left' would be rallying to their defence. The point is that it's fine for people to criticize homosexuals but when they start to incite hatred and violence towards them it really is on a different level. The liberal argument against the Religious Hatred bill wasn't that it sought to criminalize inciting hatred but because it was an attempt to prevent critical discourse about religious belief. The Religious Hatred bill sought to criminalize 'insulting' religion - the term 'insulting' was left undefined. The liberal objectors to the bill did make clear that if this was removed and the bill was more tightly drafted to just cover incitement to hatred and violence against religious people then this would have been acceptable. Banton has expressed the desire to douse gays in acid, that's not an 'insult', that's threatening behaviour and incitement to violence which is illegal in all decent societies.

2) How does Brendan know that just because the likes of Rowan Atkinson and Joan Bakewell protested against the religious hatred laws that they are also for preventing homophobic reggae singers performing in the UK? Has he asked them? Or is he just stupidly suggesting that all liberal people have exactly the same views on each subject?

I had no firm opinion on whether these performers should be banned from performing in public. Then I thought about if a singer was due to perform in a concert in which they advocated killing all black people or dousing Jews in acid . Would they be banned from performing public concerts? Of course they would and I would agree with such a decision. Why is vitriol against gays deemed less bad?

No country in the world has pure free speech. The debate to be had is how free the speech should be - that's a debate worth having. I think that Western countries probably have it about right. But Brendan is not seriously interested in having this debate. He is only interested in creating straw man arguments so he can rant about the 'liberal left'.

What a cunt.

MP in nightclub shocker!

South Australian Democrat MP Sandra Kank did a remarkable thing recently. Rather than believe the fountain of lies and distortion regarding the nightclub scene, she thought she'd go along and take a look at it herself. Rather than seeing ghoulish drug fucked freaks trying to murder & rape people whilst simultaneously trying not to collapse from double dropping she saw a bunch of people having fun and dancing to music (although the former scene is of course seen at hard house clubs across the world on a weekly basis). She said she learned that 'there are a lot of happy people [at dance parties]' and that if she had the choice of going to the pub or going to a club she'd 'go to the rave party every time'. Brilliant!

Of course this small slice of reality about drug use in the political world went down like Grossi in an Australian penalty area and the South Australian health minister John Hill said 'if people want to know about the impacts drugs have they should go to some of our emergency departments Saturday nights and they should go to mental health institutions as well'. I'm sure if she had visited a hospital her assertion about preferring clubs to pubs would have been confirmed as there would have been many many more people there seeking treatment for alcohol related injuries/diseases than there would be people affected by drug usage.

In fairness the Education Minister did sound more sympathetic to the MPs adventure saying ' I think it's always a good idea to find out what it's actually about and get the facts'. Indeed.

If only more MPs were prepared to do this. I can see it now. Peter Costello up on the podium, shirt ripped off, reaching for the lasers. Little Johnnie Hunt scurrying around trying to score some drugs. Tony Abbott gurning at the front waving his glowsticks around. Maybe even Amanda Vanstone could be there - the fat girl that is a bit *too* sweaty and that everyone avoids standing next to on the dancefloor. Ah, just imagine....

More World Cup Post Mortem

Simon Hattenstone writes an excellent piece about the World Cup in today's Guardian blog.

He writes that he knows he should be getting over it but he can't. I feel much the same way, Simon. I'm still thinking about it about every 45 minutes which is an improvement on Sunday (every minute) and yesterday (every 30 minutes). Soon it'll be down to hourly and then daily before tapering off when it will be mainly forgotten until Euro 2008.

He also writes about some of the tabloid headlines regarding Sven's departure:

They [British Tabloids] might be bilious, intrusive, venal gratuitous soul-suckers, but they sure as hell know how to reflect the national mood. My favourite headline of recent days: Goodbye tosser: end of an error - Sven's reign of shame. You're probably looking for the clever pun on "tosser", but I think you'll find it isn't there - this is pure abuse. My theory is that the Sun ultimately settled on "Goodbye tosser" because "Fuck off wanker" - if you'll pardon my French - didn't fit. The Mirror opted for the more subdued He banked, he bonked, he ballsed it up. It took me back to the glory days: It's Swedes 2 - turnips 1 (News of the World, 1998).

Great stuff!

The Beeb doing what the beeb does best

Oh how I've missed the BBC coverage of this world cup. I'm sure I'd have been sobbing (like I did at World Cup 1998) if I had seen this just after the match had finished on Saturday.



HT: Andrew Sullivan

Revolting!

The moral outrage over the Big Brother 'incident' is getting louder and louder.

Little Johnnie Hunt has joined the chorus of 'middle Australia' and has called for the program to be axed. Of course a man who lied about refugees throwing their children off boats knows all about upholding fine moral standards.

Yes, the incident (rather amusingly known as 'Turkey Slapping') was unpleasant but the Big Brother producers took the right action and evicted the boys involved. What else were they meant to do? No criminal charges are being laid on the boys and Camilla herself has said that it was just a joke that got a little out of control and as soon as she asked them to stop, they did. I'm not trying to excuse what they did but let's not blow this out of proportion eh?

The best quote so far comes from Queensland Premier Peter Beattie when asked if he believed the program should be taken off air:

'Look, we have so much American crap on our television I think a bit of Australian nonsense doesn't do any harm, frankly.'

Quite.

The Age

The Age's inferiority complex regarding AFL reaches new heights of ridiculousness in this front page article.

A few days ago the Age were printing 5am specials celebrating Australia's wins in the 'soccer' world cup now they are doing the very predictable 'we only watched it because there was no AFL on' rubbish.

Just because football is the most popular and most watched sport in the world does not mean the tiny niche sport of AFL is threatened. They can both co-exist perfectly well, even in Melbourne. Articles as pathetic as this only show up the inherent insecurity of the AFL journalists of the Melbourne press - as does the name of the mini site on which this article is hosted, 'realfooty.com' and indeed the headline of the article itself: "'our' football returns".

63,000 people turned up to watch Collingwood V Richmond on the weekend. The sport is very popular (in Melbourne) and deservedly so - it has a rich history and is followed passionately by millions. About that number stayed up till 3am and braved the cold to watch Australia V Italy on big screens across Australia. Just because one is hogging the headlines does not mean the other is 'threatened'. We all know that Melburnians love their footy, we've been told a billion times. Enough already.

England are out.

ARRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!

No more. Not again. Not like this.

Against my better judgment I was cautiously optimistic – Portugal didn’t look that great, they had key players missing and Rooney was getting into his stride for England. All of the teams left in the tournament looked beatable. It was possible, I hoped. And as I said in my previous blog, it’s always the hope that kills you – and killing me it is.

I’m sure everything that needs to be said about the game has been said – England put in a ‘gutsy’ passionate performance that ‘deserved’ a goal whilst the Portuguese played a cynical, underhand and negative game to force a penalty shoot out. Whilst that’s the favoured view no doubt of the News of the World etc it does hide the severe shortcomings of England’s failure at the World Cup.

England were utterly woeful in their first 4 matches and won purely due to the poor opposition. The first good team they came up against held them at bay with relative ease and once it went to penalties they had no chance of winning it. It’s clear that we are never going to win a penalty shoot out again (unless it’s against Spain!) and so I hope that if McClaren ever finds himself in a situation where England are 10 minutes away from going to a penalty shoot out he throws caution to the wind and changes things so that England really try and win in extra time. Don’t bring on a defender to take penalties, as Sven did with Carragher, bring on two more strikers and try and win the game before it gets to the dreaded 12 yard kicks.

But England didn’t go out of this World Cup due to our inability to take penalties. We went out because our supremely talented players were utterly mismanaged by a man who was making it up as he went along. He deserves the blame for this debacle and the FA should be ashamed that he has collected £25million and has simply not delivered – nowhere near.

I felt very deflated after the match but the grimness of it all only really sank in when I woke up, slightly hungover, the next day. My brain appeared to have been replaced by an internal DVD player which was stuck on a loop replaying the missed penalty kicks over and over and over again. I literally thought of nothing else all day. I felt numb and physically sick at times. Of course I spent the day trying to take my mind off it by pouring over every single word written about it in the English press. The post mortem of the game. The Wife kept telling me to stop but I couldn’t – it’s all part of the mourning process, it’s a necessary catharsis.

Today I’m feeling a bit better but it’s still there, painful, right in the guts. The pain will dull over the next few weeks of course and I can start looking forward to it happening all over again in Switzerland & Austria in 2008. That’s if we get there of course and with McClaren in charge that’s by no means certain.

These are dark days for an English football fan. The Sunday Express summed it up in their simple front page headline:

‘It’s the end of the world.’

And so it begins....

It's begun.

The low level feeling of uneasiness that has been apparent in me for the last few days has now morphed into an all encompassing queasiness - my legs are shaking, my stomach is tied up in knots, I'm chewing pen lids like there is no tomorrow. It's that familiar feeling I get every two years when England start reaching the higher stages of the World Cup or European Championships.

I've ranted and raved about the way England have played so far but now I really don't care how we play - winning the next three games is all that matters and if we have to do that playing like Watford then so be it. Greece did it in 2004 after all.

I think by this time tomorrow I will be found gazing at a pack of Malboro Lights in a newsagent seriously considering taking up the habit again just to stop my body going into uncontrollable spasms of nervousness and excitement.

This is it. The business end of the tournament. The bit that really matters, that really hurts. When not even a cuddle from your mum can make it alright.

But I'm ready, I'm ready to cry tears of bitter disappointment once more, ready to curse Ericsson, ready to feel hollow for the next month. I'm prepared.

Fuck, who am I kidding? I'm not ready at all. I'm all over the shop. Why? Because no matter how many times it's happened before there's still an optimist in me - still some hope that we can do it this time. The hope is always what kills you. Always.

So let's hope that this year is the year when our dreams can be realised. At last.

Come on England!