Jump to content

May 2011 Election


xbl

  

498 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 5.9k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

The problem being, of course, is that then there would be literally no left of centre mouthpiece. I can see it from a competition perspective, but frankly the Murdoch empire gets quite enough government help to continue in its sleazy, amoral, partisan way.

Frankly, as a centre lefty, I say f**k the lot of you and pay up. :D

That's a load of shite. If anything the BBC stifles left of centre mouthpieces by swamping them all with just shy of 40% of the country's ENTIRE media consumption. If you lefty cunts want a television channel to spout your rubbish, get the Cayman Islands based Guardian Media Group to start up television channels.

I cannot stress enough that Murdoch's media "empire" is not even 2/3 as big as the BBC in terms of news readership/viewers. Murdoch, ITV and ITN added together are smaller than the BBC. And with broadcast news they are all bound by actually quite similar impartiality requirements. It's not as though they're doing a Fox News thing.

If you want media plurality, break-up the BBC and let left-wing televisual media fund itself.

:huh: They ARE British you tosser. :1eye

:lol::D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:lol:

I an see him spitting feathers about cricket being an "English" game. :lol:

Why? I actually quite like cricket. This year has been the first time in a long time that I haven't followed the Ashes, but I normally keep an eye on proceedings. You'll find me glued to the tv during the ODI and 20/20 world cups. Take your lazy, craven speculation elsewhere please.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why not? Isn't it financially viable? If it isn't then why should the taxpayer fund the politics of the left?

It is financially viable, but not in this form. And the free market results in the lowest common denominator in Sky - both subscriptions and advertising. It probably isn't fair, but as the right are always happy to tell us, life isn't fair.

I do pay up for it and I would continue to pay up through choice. But I'd like to have the freedom to choose all the same.

You wouldn't get the same thing. On the one hand you might end up with a UK version of HBO (which would be good), but alongside it you would have another commercially funded news provider at the mercy of its sponsors. Another Sky or Fox News in other words. No thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why? I actually quite like cricket. This year has been the first time in a long time that I haven't followed the Ashes, but I normally keep an eye on proceedings. You'll find me glued to the tv during the ODI and 20/20 world cups. Take your lazy, craven speculation elsewhere please.

Good. I actually represented my country playing against the b*****d English a couple of times. :P

And yet I actively support England at cricket. It's a weird world right enough.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Evidence please?

And how would you like me to provide evidence of many encounters in the last 20 years of my life? Particularly around ashes time.

As we aren't followed around by a secret camera our entire lives (which as a former big state authoritarian, you would have supported, thankfully you've allegedly changed now), you'll just have to take my word.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And how would you like me to provide evidence of many encounters in the last 20 years of my life? Particularly around ashes time.

I meant on here you muppet.

Get your knickers out of a twist, honestly.

The English and Welsh cricket team is British. This does NOT require you to support them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Really? So are they run by the British Cricket Board?

According to you, the European golf team that takes part in the Ryder Cup is evidence of a European identity. With me so far? Good.

Now, if one year that team doesn't contain a Scot, I would imagine that you would have little problem in still hoping they win, correct? And in fact, if it never contaqined a Scot, it wouldn't matter to you, because your identity is European, correct?

So. At least three Scots in my lifetime that I can remember have played for England at cricket. THe rest have been English and Welsh, and first generation immigrants. My identity is British. Ergo, I am happy to support England at cricket, because that is my identity. Please keep your whiny chippyness to yourself in this regard. You just end up looking daft.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

strictly speaking the English cricket team is a British Commonwealth team. We have two South Africans at present (continuing a long tradition of South Africans, including the Smith Brothers, Allan Lamb, Robin Jackman etc etc), and an Irishman (Morgan); and in the past we have had folk of Australian (the absolutely dreadful Martin McCague), Zimbabwean (Hick) and Caribbean origin playing for the side (Norman Cowans).

Mike Denness, Dougie Brown and, fleetingly, Gavin Hamilton, have all represented England since the 70s being of Scots origin, as have innumerable Welshmen.

It's weird in that regard, cricket. I have followed the England team closely since the first series I can remember (the 1981 Ashes- what a start). The Scotland team is light years behind and I doubt will ever play test cricket as an independent nation. The best Scots will continue to represent England at test level, whilst the national team will continue to operate at roughly the level of a minor county.

It's really not a problem and would struggle to see why Scots fans following England at cricket would be called into question. Of course I like to see the Saltires do well, but I just can;t get so excited by them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...