Month: December 2018

Langer should tell selectors to keep Warner out

Just do it? There are two options. Aussie cricket coach Justin Langer knows a thing or two about opening batsmen. He was one of our best. Yes, if we want a better chance of winning sooner we could easily insert David Warner post his ban. However at 32 years and 64 days (154 days when the ban ends), isn’t there an argument to develop new talent for the long term? This is merely putting expedience ahead of principle.

We can argue that Warner will have served his punishment but does the team need to risk diluting its rebirth by reintroduction of a toxic force? Are we to believe Warner will return to the team as a reformed choirboy or play his hand at being the same ruffian who believes in his own mind he’s still a rightful veteran? Proof of the pudding was his trademark celebration after scoring a century in local grade cricket. He has changed not a jot.

Yes we lost the 3rd Test today but despite the woeful batting efforts in the 1st innings, Pat Cummins (who deserved man of the match) showed what grit means. 9 wickets and approaching 100 runs with the bat. We deserved to be flogged when bowled out for 151 runs but Cummins took out the top order including India’s highest scoring batters in the 1st innings for zero in the 2nd. He single handedly rallied his team to believe mentally it wasn’t over when they would have otherwise folded. He made Aussies proud.

Justin Langer has worked some miracles with the gutted side after taking the reins from Darren Lehman. Aussie team captain Tim Paine has also been impressive. Stephen Smith has none of Paine’s tenacity. Smith was made captain for being the best batsman in the world. Ability and leadership aren’t axiomatic. Smith’s weakness was evident. He allowed Warner to bully him into burying his judgement. It speaks volumes of why Smith should never captain again. His only real crime was to be a wimp.

It is also questionable whether Smith has the mental side to regain his top spot. He may well succumb to the pressure. He wouldn’t be the first gifted sports star to fall into a deep and prolonged slump post a scandal.

Warner can play 20 over big bash leagues (BBL, IPL) to earn his keep and feed his family but do we really want to send a message to kids that cheaters can prosper in our national side? His actions were disgraceful. Cheating is cheating and no rush of blood to the head is acceptable when earning millions let alone representing one’s country. It is a privilege to wear a baggy green, not a right.

CM would prefer to lose honorably than win with players who were only ever in it for themselves. Matches like today bear out how fighting as a “team” is so much more admirable. The taste of victory will be that much sweeter. No better opportunity to cast the net wide for sleeper talent who would probably have been overlooked otherwise. Make sure current players are kept on their toes to earn their spot.

It should be impressed upon incumbent players as a deterrent that cheating means life long bans. It would also be a stronger signal that the terrible governance of the farcical former Cricket Australia board is over.

Time to start afresh. Langer should take the option of keeping Warner out of the dressing room. It’s the only sensible choice.

Doing what it says on the tin

How often do we buy products that don’t do what they claim? In the case of “Start ya bastard” it is a question of whether they spent more on the marketing than the R&D. Let’s hope the compelled speech brigade don’t attack this Aussie icon! CM is sure Nulon can make some fruitier arguments to protect the brand.

What an accolade!!?

For the first time in 17 years, someone other than Hillary Clinton was named the most admired woman in America. The Gallup poll asked 1025 people across America who were the most admired people in the US. For Clinton to win for the last 16 years makes one wonder who Gallup was asking? Heavy concentrations in inner city zones in NY and CA perhaps?

We shouldn’t be surprised. How often have vloggers entered US campuses and filmed students who can identify Kim Kardashian at 100 yards in a picture but can’t identify any US politician outside of the President.

Was Kylie Jenner, the 21-yo cosmetics queen, who has become a self made billionaire not in with a shot of aspiration and admiration?

What about Simone Biles, the rubbery gymnast who blew the competition away at the 2016 Rio Olympics?

Even Serena Williams, despite her tantrums, surely was in to take this award once in the last 16 years for her tennis prowess.

What about Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez? The young 28-yo blitzed the incumbent to steal the primary in NY and then win the mid term with 80% of the vote. She may have absolutely no idea about economics or reality but goes to show that even a “Latina from the Bronx” (as she calls herself) can pull off miracles. A note to Republicans – slagging her off for stupidity is not a winning strategy.

Nikki Haley? Without doubt a hugely impressive UN Ambassador and likely a future POTUS.

It is probably a reflection of the terrible polling of Gallup to have a 16 year consecutive winner. Then again the Obamas are no stranger to receiving awards for things undeserved like the Nobel Peace Prize 9 months into Barack Obama’s first term after achieving nothing remotely notable of mention to world peace. Even afterwards red lines were drawn in invisible ink. I’m

Who could forget Michelle Obama’s hashtag #bringbackourgirls after 300 school girls were enslaved by Boko Haram? America’s foreign policy impotence revealed in one twitter handle.

Melania Trump was never in the running especially after the mainstream media took umbrage at her wearing Timberland boots to Iraq on Christmas.

Congratulations Michelle. Now you can tell all those women you said voted the way their husbands forced them to that you know best and have an award to prove it!

More important issues than analyzing Corbyn’s lips

CM is no fan of Jeremy Corbyn from a policy perspective but the “stupid woman” slur is just trivial. Surely the debate is to focus on the shambles that is Brexit rather than spend all this time focusing on what he muttered under his breath. If Corbyn had used more fruity language there maybe cause to question his decorum in the House of Commons.

Theresa May is in fact a woman and even in this day and age it is safe to assume she identifies as one. If he thinks she is stupid then it is grammatically correct, not sexist. Surely if May called Corbyn a “stupid man” no one would bat an eyelid.

Politics is a dirty game. Those that play have thick enough skin otherwise they don’t survive. CM is sure that Theresa May will cope and won’t require hours of therapy to get over the murmurings of the opposition leader.

It is not to suggest Corbyn’s behaviour was warranted, fair or otherwise, rather just to question why the media has to run stories to enforce public morality on such a pathetic scale. Let’s be honest on a President Trump scale of 1-10 for saying harsh things, Corbyn would barely budge the needle with this infraction. Must have been a quiet news day.

To think how few in the media reported the incident last year when a female British Labour Party member, Naz Shah, suggested in a tweet that “Those abused girls in Rotherham and elsewhere just need to shut their mouths. For the good of diversity.” For uttering such absurdities, most can agree that Corbyn’s words would be right on the money. Or would claims of rampant sexism outweigh the destroyed lives of children at the hands of monsters to outraged feminists?

Do Brits really want people like this in control?

EC President Jean-Claude Juncker has managed to find himself drunk again before an African-EU dinner this week. He last embarrassed himself ahead of a NATO dinner where he had to be propped up by those EU member state leaders around him. Poor old Boris Yeltsin would feel outdone by this.

How wonderful that the man who refuses to yield to PM May on Brexit can’t seem to show any leadership in public. Why would Brits want to cede power to unelected bureaucrats like Juncker who take no responsibility in public for their inebriated behaviour? While his term is nearing the end, there is no doubt he’ll retire on a juicy state pension courtesy of member states.

We shouldn’t forget that in July 2016, Mr Juncker sent a letter to all 650 UK MPs claiming the referendum was not a real exercise in democracy and should be disregarded.

No Deal is the absolute best outcome for the Brits. It respects the result of the referendum as it breaks all ties with Brussels. The UK has always been a friend to the continent but the EU is treating the Brits like hostages. Apart from Project Fear it would be fair to say the world’s 5th largest economy will find trading partners soon enough. The auto industry will be the first to ask for a deal with the UK. Others will follow. The EU doesn’t want to lose a big contributor to the coffers.

It was soon after the referendum that we were told the UK economy would collapse. Nothing could be further from the truth. So why pay the Bank of England any mind with its prophecies? Former BoE Governor Mervyn King has publicly stated No Deal will be the best outcome.

Juncker proves again why the Brits should revert to type and be plucky. They just need a leader who is prepared to have a spine and respect the will of 17.4 million voters.

UN hit with yet another scandal

Kết quả hình ảnh cho Michel Sidibé

Independent experts have concluded that UN AIDS Executive Director, Michel Sidibé,  has been responsible for creating a toxic environment that promoted “favoritism, preferment and ethical blindness.” Sidibé accepted no reponsibility for any sexual harassment, bullying or abuse of power that occured under his watch.

The investigation started after Sidibé’s deputy was accused of  forcibly kissing, groping and trying to drag a colleague into his Bangkok hotel room in 2015.

In a survey of the 670 staff members at the UN agency conducted by the independent investigators, 18 admitted they had experienced some form of sexual harassment in the previous year and a further 201 said they were on the wrong end of workplace abuse.

One staff member went on the record saying, “U.N.AIDS is like a predators’ prey ground…You have access to all sorts of people, especially the vulnerable: You can use promises of jobs, contracts and all sorts of opportunities and abuse your power to get whatever you want, especially in terms of sexual favors. I have seen senior colleagues dating local young interns or using U.N.AIDS resources to access sex workers.

UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres, who made it clear he had a zero tolerance policy with regards to sexual harassment when he took office,  has refused to fire him. Despite his term ending in January 2020, Sidibé has offered to quit in June 2019 in order to ensure a stable transition period! In what world does a person outed for turning a blind eye to such a poisonous culture get to leave on his own terms? Sacred cows.

Sidibe admitted in an email after the investigation was published, “not all of our staff, in all their diversity, are experiencing the inclusive work culture to which we aspire.” Choice words.

Why do governments continue to fund the UN when it shows time and time again that it operates without any form of governance or ethical code? Remember it wasn’t that long ago that certain people at the UN thought former Zimbabwean dictator Robert Mugabe would make a sensible ambassador for the World Health Organization (WHO). Why would any country seriously want to sign over sovereign powers to the UN with respect to the compact on migration? The UN isn’t fit to run anything of substance.

Why after all the scandals with the IPCC do people put faith in their ability to manage climate change summits? The Delinquent Teenager, written by Canadian investigative journalist Donna Laframboise chronicles how the IPCC participants are picked by governments, not for their scientific knowledge and expertise, but for their political connections and for “diversity.” You can read some of the ridiculous selection processes for lead authors here.

Note the UN promised to streamline. As CM noted 15 months ago,

“The latest U.N. regular budget, while superficially smaller than the previous budget, made no fundamental programmatic or structural adjustments—e.g., reducing permanent staff, freezing or reducing salaries and other benefits, and permanently eliminating a significant number of mandates, programs, or other activities—that would lower the baseline for future U.N. budget negotiations. Despite the Secretary-General’s proposal to eliminate 44 permanent posts, the 2012–2013 budget actually increased the number of permanent posts by more than a score compared with the previous budget. The failure to arrest growth in U.N. employment, salaries, and benefits is especially problematic because personnel costs account for 74% of U.N. spending according to the U.N.’s Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions (ACABQ). Without a significant reduction in the number of permanent U.N. posts or a significant reduction in staff compensation and related costs, real and lasting reductions in the U.N. regular budget will remain out of reach.”