Coming out of the corner

Are we going to see more papers of Click Bait Kate "presenting" the trophy to the men's champion?

And are we going to see a picture of the men's champion in the said pictures?

My bet is that it's more likely, yes, because I don't know if you've noticed, but men tend to get more appreciation, more respect and more notice from the press.

When "Mistaken Identity" was originally introduced, it was supposed to be used for when a booking (a yellow card or a red card) was given to one member of a tea instead of another.

So if Number 10 commits a foul, and - for whatever reason - Number 5 was given the card, VAR could call up the referee and say "You dipshit, you gave the card to the wrong player"

This was kind of important, because it can have a huge impact on a match, and also it was kind of important because if you watch various videos on youtube you'll see most cases of mistaken identity happen to black players (I'm not going to suggest most referees are racist and have trouble telling black players apart, but....... anyway).

But it seems in The 2026 World Cup it's use has been extended - it can now be used to reverse - or over turn - a decision. We saw this last night in Argentina vs Switzerland, and we saw it in a previous game (America vs Paraguay). VAR can decide to overrule the referee's decision and say "We want the penalty to go the other way"

This isn't - by any definition - mistaken identity. This isn't a case of thinking you booked the wrong player. This is ACTUALLY, LITERALLY, changing the decision of the referee.

Now whether this is right or wrong, and whether it should be allowed or not, I think the least they can do is give it a different name. Because calling it "mistaken identity" is just a gross misnomer and doesn't describe what it does at all.

It's not "mistaken identity" - it's overturning the penalty.

Which, if you are unaware, is a common thing in American Football. It happens quite a lot.

So Linda Noskova, at the age of 21, wins Wimbledon - and in the process she wins her first grand-slam title.

This is quite an impressive feat as feats go.

So what does The Times do?

They show us a picture not of this very impressive young woman - a woman who has done something very few other women have done, and something most of us will never be able to do in our lives.

No. They show us a picture of a woman whose biggest achievement is presenting a dish to the woman who won her first Wimbledon Title and her first Grand-Slam title at the age of 21.

I cannot apologise enough for my previous post.

At the time I wrote it I was not aware of the circumstances of her death, and while I am not going to suggest that anything I wrote was untrue, there are things you write, and things you don't.

The North of England, Scotland and Northern Ireland barely got about 30 degrees. It was only the Midlands and the South East that got above 30, and only the South east that hit anywhere near 35.

So the phrase "UK bakes in 35C highs" is incredibly misleading and incredibly South of England centric.

https://news.sky.com/story/neo-nazi-who-had-kill-list-of-customers-and-colleagues-at-tesco-jailed-13561349

You know what you don't see in EITHER of these articles?

Any mention of this guy being referred to as a terrorist.

He was convicted of various terrorism related offences, he was clearly acting in relation to an ideology, and he was going to kill a whole bunch of people.

But somehow the white guy is not referred to as a terrorist in either article. The police don't call him that. The security services don't call him that. The judge doesn't call him that.

It's almost as if being white means you get a pass on the whole "being a terrorist" thing, even if you are caught with guns while profession support for Hitler and wanting to kill people because of their religious beliefs.

But if you are a person with dark skin and you even suggest that you want to look funny at someone else............ then trust me, you are fucked. You will be off to jail before the idea of a trail even occurs to someone.

Every major political party has announced it is boycotting the coming Clacton By-Election.

Nigel Farage resigned to show that he, and he alone "COULD TAKE ON THE ESTABLISHMENT AND STAND UP FOR THE COMMON MAN" but apparently "the establishment" want fuck all to do with this clown show of a publicity stunt.

Kemi Badenoch called it a "fake by-election" and made it clear they won't put up a candidate.

Labour echoed this.

The Lib Dems were the first one to call for people to boycott this, calling it a "vanity project"

It is becoming apparent that The Green Party and Restore are also veering to towards boycotting it as well.

However Count Binface is going to stand, which would mean the election is going to be contested between a total clown of a candidate that no one in their right mind should take seriously and who has repeatedly lost previous elections........ and Count Binface.

Nigel Farage has resigned as an MP, but is standing in the by-election in his constinuency.

This is breaking news from the BBC, so this is about all I have.

When England get knocked out of various tournaments, the Prime Minister of the day sends them message of consolation, and goes to the press to say they performed admirably.

Even if they thoroughly humiliated themselves, and made themselves look like total prats, our beloved leader spouts pointless platitudes about how they have made their country proud and are an inspiration to the youth of today.

And I am sure - although I've never had a cause to pay much attention - other countries leaders (France, Egypt, Belgium, Spain, Portugal, Italy, Germany and so on) do the same. Because their football teams are a pride and hold a place of importance in their country.

So it does make me wonder why there is apparently no statement, no pointless platitudes, no messages of consolation, no announcements from The White House today.