Why I'm not wearing a poppy.

Tomorrow is Remembrance Sunday. A day for remembering those fallen in war. Now I am aware this article may well make some people angry at me. Commenting your abuse to me is absolutely fine. If I couldn't take it, I wouldn't post this and I'd conform to something I have some issues with that I am about to note below.

1. The poppy remembers those who fell fighting for Britain and in some cases Allies in war. It does not remember significantly those innocent civilians who died in war or those who fought against is. Now maybe some think we shouldn't remember the people who fought against us, but in many cases, they did not have a choice. And how can we only remember our lost troops when some of our recent wars haven't exactly been legal (Iraq) and others we try to forget that the legacy of our war was to be bluntly honest terrible (Iraq and Libya)
2. Kind of on the same point as the first one, however one war we remember if the war in Japan. Now we remember those who died fighting for America, Britain and other allies, but we do not significantly remember the absolute horror of the nuclear bomb the USA dropped on Japan. We fail to remember those that would have had the most horrible deaths. Now yes, the bomb was dropped by America, but we still have a responsibility on it. We should not be happy that any country has ever dropped such a horrific catastrophe of a weapon, regardless of the circumstance.
3. The poppy has become political. The reality is a lot of people wear them to look good. It feels hypocritical for instance that David Cameron wears a poppy. Why you may ask, well the answer is clear. When we "won" the war, we created a welfare system including the NHS. That was a legacy made to care for all those in the country, to try and make sure we wouldn't have suffering families, women were given an education the equivalent to men and had won the vote for all women over 21 after the First World War. In the last few years we have seen the NHS mistreated, the welfare system damaged and inequality rise. So therefore if David Cameron is thinks about the legacy of the wars he is a hypocrite. 
4. The EU is not perfect, but to an extent the idea comes partly from Britain, even if we as a country weren't directly into it. Now we're being the brattish country trying to cut ties with Europe rather than helping on the inside. Churchill has a legacy in Europe and was quoted as saying "We must build a kind of United States of Europe". The EU has faults, but it was a legacy we created and despite all the lives we sacrificed in the wars we forget the legacies we tried to make and should try to improve. 
5. Everyone has a right to remember in their own way, we don't all need a poppy. And if we do, we don't need it any more than at the service of remembrance, which surely if you're so adamant on wearing a poppy, I trust you will be attending.
6. It's become normal so has lost it's effect. When football teams are going for the gimmick of an embroided poppy doing it, it proves a point. The poppy being worn from Mid October takes away any power it has.

One other point worth remembering that isn't a reason not to wear a poppy is, not wearing a poppy does not make you hate the military, just like not wearing the AID's ribbon doesn't make you hate everyone effected by AID's, just like not wearing the pink ribbon doesn't mean you hate everyone with breast cancer and just like not growing a moustache (if you're a male, obviously) does not mean you hate everyone with prostate or testicular cancer.

Now finally, one point that I think to an extent sums up my view and the opinion I will give anybody who asks me is the fact that people fought for my freedom. I am respecting them by remembering them, but I am also respecting them by expressing my freedom in having an opinion on the poppy. I respect them by my beliefs for a fair welfare system, for a top quality NHS, for nationally owned vital public services, by wanting and speaking for equality.

And that is more respect than wearing a flower of any kind on my shirt.

Rant

Fuck it, fuck it all. What's the fucking point?

What I've been thinking with all the job rejections I manage to get together.

Honestly, I'm not going to cotton wool feelings on this now. I've had enough.

The country is fucked. I'm fucked. So are many of the country.

Do a Criminology degree. Look for chances. Entry level. Ways in. Apply for PCSO job, essentially the entry level of the police here. Get to the first stage, that of an interview? No? Fuck off.

Apply for Tesco's. A supermarket. Once? No. 42 times. 1 store? No. 6. 5 in Cardiff, 1 in Newport. Interview? No. Just a casual 42 rejections in 5 bloody minutes.

Other places? Yes. Over 800 applications. Nothing. Treated like a number, sent a rejection email with no reasons, no "this is why". Just a "we had a lot of applicants and we are not taking you forwards".

Would have more respect if these read "You're shit. Fuck off. Don't apply here ever again".

Should the rich tell the poor how to control their money?

Okay, so this started with this news article that the Chancellor George Osbourne (also the man trying his best to get us a terrible deal in Europe because he doesn't like the facts that despite it's faults the EU as it stands makes us a far stronger country) wants to make a law with how future Governments do their budgets.

My Facebook post on the matter

We all know the perceptions of the two main parties, the Conservatives do stuff for the 1%, Labour are meant too (and I stress meant too, because they have failed numerous times since "New Labour"...Iraq, NHS, ID Cards, Royal Mail...but that's not the feeling members give you when you hear how they'd prefer the party to go and their might be a chance to change it in the coming months...a post for a later day) represent essentially the 99%.

• Of course the 99% needs a good level of policing, to keep it as a service rather than as an aggressive force, to keep the communities feeling safer, feeling like they can talk to Police Officers, or PCSO's etc. 
• They also need a quality NHS, that strives to be the best health service, not just possible for the taxpayers, but in the world, with good response times, quality doctors and brilliant nurses, regardless of any of those staffs nationality. 
• They also need a fire service that will be quick to respond to any times. 
• A quality education....(personally I'd close private schools, as it would allow the complete diverse culture to meet, to socialise and so on rather than create a divide with places such as Eton, or the majority of any local private school). To have a quality state education the state needs the best teachers to be in their schools. 
• Proper support for the jobless, homeless, disabled, elderly, victims of crime, victims of abuse, people with massive life changes (such as a divorce, death in the family, a newborn child), families who need that little extra so not to depend on foodbanks and many more. 
• Legal aid should be available to all people, forget means testing, the reality is lawyers would get pretty good incomes if legal aid covered everyone when going to court as an individual. The best lawyers should represent a wide range of people, not just the ones that can dig deep into their pockets.

Of course, this may come at a cost, especially initially and that cost could see any budget not run at a surplus I'm afraid. But it's about what is morally right for Great Britain, not about what costs more, what costs less. If you need the best teachers, maybe you have to pay a few percent more for it. 

Before the election 33% of MP's were privately educated whilst 24% were OxBridge educated. So bought up hugging elitism, rather than the hoodie David Cameron claimed to hug when he came Tory leader. 

We need to break these walls down, by making sure the items the state have an obligation to provide (and as a public we should make sure these things remain an obligation) and making the public services mentioned in the bullet points above the best they can be. It's basically making what was the American Dream into a British Reality. Then we can be proud of Britain. 

And I can also promise you, that maybe these things will run at a deficit for a while, but in the long term, well it would make you be able to run a sustainable balanced economy rather than the rubbish we have today.

Celebrity Culture - Is it killing Britain like it has America?

It is common that in the morning I look at Twitter, at the moment to see if my favourite football team has signed anybody to make me excited for next season and other pieces of news regarding current affairs, the issues around the world, the next political joke of a policy or finding out a few days late that Plymouth have sacked their manager (well he resigned, but he clearly walked before he was pushed if we're honest).

Usually though on Twitter at least one one of the following is trending:

• Justin Bieber
• One Direction
• Kim Kardashian

But what I ask is why does someone who drives under the influence, an artificial band or someone who as far as I know is only famous for their arse whilst ironically having the face of a slapped arse (and I guess married to an extremely average rapper who promotes the "n word" in his music) this consistently talked about?

Well I guess these people are a bit like religions. This said, religion is partly there to give hope to people that there is something after death, I don't know what hope these celebrities are giving other than the tweet announcing their 100% retirement from the "entertainment" industry. Also religions pass on morales, some of them incredibly outdated, I am aware, but they form a fundamental background to the laws countries around the world initially made that still form the backbone of society today. 

One of the three I mentioned, Kim Kardashian is also a terrible role model to youn girls, making them think they should get plastic surgery to look "perfect". Honestly though, is there an ounce of beauty to Kim Kardashian? She looks like a badly gone wrong Madam Tussauds waxwork that's so bad it's hidden in the basement of it's Blackpool museum! Children shouldn't think this is the way to look. What we should be celebrating is people who accept themselves, who aren't spoilt brattish adults deciding they  want their nose this way, nor should we be celebrating artists who formed their band in an easy manufactured way like they're gods gift, or a "pop star" who simply is just a monumental f*ck up.

I know what some of you are thinking "But James, people including your good self, worship football clubs amongst other things". Maybe so. But a football club isn't an individual, if a player leaves Liverpool, in my case, I won't support the club where they are at because they played for Liverpool (for instance, I'm having a hard time picking who I want to win the Champions League, the underdog or a team that includes Suarez amongst others, not just picking Barcelona on players). Sport is also competitive, last time I checked being plastic or a distinctly average singer/group of singers wasn't competitive, it wasn't something that gave you a real satisfaction of winning. Football does this. As do many sports (particularly team sports domestically and internationally, individual sports just don't give you that, plus eventually they retire etc that is unless they're representing their nation). Therefore I don't buy the idea of that at all. Plus sportsmen usually have talent, some can even be humble, very few but there are one or two. They also can be a role model to someone as well to have a fit and healthy life.

Two of the three people/groups I mentioned don't do this. You can't live like a Kardashian and have a fit and healthy life, you'll always be in having balloons put into your gluteus maximus. You could be drink driving if you wanted to be like Justin Bieber with tattoos that can only be poorly based on Martin Skrtel. And unlike Justin Bieber, you won't afford bail and won't afford the best lawyer in the state and will have some time in a prison, whether in the UK or the USA.

So on the day where the Kardashians try to press some of the most insignificant news I have heard (news that makes me see Royal Babies as major) let's not worship them, lets try to get some real talent on TV, some real talent on TV and most importantly, some women on TV that won't make girls think they need surgery to look good! Let's create an accepting culture where nobody feels down because of their natural looks or personality. 

The Queens Speech - Are These Tory Bills good?

So today is the queen speech. Luckily the BBC have a page on the policies the speech will use, so I shall use it's descriptions for each and then explain what I, as a reasonably normal young person of the UK makes of each possible bill.



EU Referendum Bill





This is high up on the list of the government's priorities. David Cameron has promised to renegotiate Britain's terms of membership of the European Union and put it to a public vote by 2017 at the latest. To do this he'll need to publish a parliamentary bill to pave the way for a referendum - so it's a definite to feature in the speech.


James Thinks: This is not a good idea, we have already seen how the British Electorate vote and for too many people, life depends on being within the European Union. Cornwall and Wales are two places that have a funding match from the EU and without this these two relatively deprived places would be further deprived. Therefore a vote on this matter isn't a good idea as it seems that far too many people will vote with a severe misunderstanding. Some will argue the EU needs change, but you can't change anything from the outside. Plus it could mean removing the free movement we currently have around Europe.




Income Tax Bill





During the general election campaign, David Cameron vowed to introduce a law guaranteeing no rise in income tax rates, VAT or national insurance before 2020. He said workers already paid enough tax and he would focus on other ways of clearing the deficit, such as reducing the welfare bill and tackling tax avoidance. The PM has also pledged a law to ensure that "no one working 30 hours on the minimum wage pays any income tax at all". Writing in the Sunday Telegraph about his first 100 days in office, he said: "It is a permanent measure to re-write not just the laws of this country but the values of this country. And it will be there as the centrepiece of the first Queen's Speech of my new government."


James Thinks: You shouldn't need a law to ensure you won't increase taxes. It's therefore ridiculous and the question that then comes out ends up being "where are you going to cut to make up for this". If the answer is welfare, health, public services or education then it's nothing short of a disgrace.




Immigration Bill





The government is promising a crackdown on illegal immigration, and has already set out a number of new offences to try to "control and reduce" migration to the UK. These include a specific offence of illegal working - with police given the power to seize the wages paid to illegal workers as the "proceeds of crime". Among other proposals being considered are new powers for councils to deal with unscrupulous landlords and to evict illegal migrants more quickly, while all foreign criminals awaiting deportation will be fitted with satellite tracking tags. It will also become an offence for businesses and recruitment agencies to hire abroad without first advertising in the UK - a policy which featured prominently in Labour's election manifesto - and a new enforcement agency will be set up to tackle what the prime minister called "the worst cases of exploitation".


James Thinks: We need to take people who need sure that all people who need to get away from their country due to issues are able to come. For instance Iraq, where some of the blame of what's going on has to come down to the United Kingdom for destabilising the country. It's about human lives, not anything else. And we owe a duty of care. It would be a more productive thing than to waste resources sending people out to fight.




Policing Bill





Home Secretary Theresa May has pledged to ban the use of police cells for the emergency detention of mentally ill people under the Mental Health Act. In a speech to the annual conference of the Police Federation in England and Wales, Mrs May also outlined plans to extend police-led prosecutions, overhaul the complaints system, and change the use of bail.


James Thinks: The Coalition couldn't be trusted with the police making them considerably weaker, I have a horrible thing this will happen again. They cut 34,000 police staff in the last election and many think it'll be similar again. This means that anything that happens within a police bill is likely to actually end up not being able to be enforced successfully as the stress of the job gets higher and higher.




City Devolution Bill





We know that proposals to devolve more powers to England's cities will feature in the Queen's Speech. Chancellor George Osborne said as much in first post-election speech, in which he outlined his vision to give English cities powers over housing, transport, planning and policing. He said Greater Manchester - which will take on the powers when electing a mayor in two years - should become a blueprint for other large cities.


James Thinks: It should be regional...not city. How can Devon or Cornwall have devolution by City? Or many other smaller places. Also Newcastle and many other Cities voted against elected Mayors.




Strike laws reform





The new business secretary, Sajid Javid, has said it will be a government priority to reform strike laws. Specifically, it is proposing to ban strike action from taking place unless 40% of all eligible union members vote in favour of industrial action. The government also wants to lift a ban on use of agency staff when strike action takes places. "That's something we'll give more detail on in the Queen's Speech but it will be a priority," Mr Javid told BBC Radio 4's Today programme earlier this month.


James Thinks: It's removing employees rights, at times there may be a legitimate right for a few to enter. Also ironic that a Government elected by less than 40% of the British Electorate who voted and less than 25% of those eligible could demand 40% of the vote for a strike...




Employment Bill





The Conservatives have said measures on work will be at the heart of their legislative programme, with David Cameron saying during the election campaign that the UK should aspire to "full employment". He has pledged legislation on "day one" of the new Parliament. Among the priorities will be a push to create two million more jobs and three million more apprenticeships over the course of the Parliament. The boost in apprenticeships is to be paid for by reducing the benefit cap from £26,000 to £23,000.


James Thinks: They haven't succeeded with employment issues and I know it...This'll probably at some point see workers rights fall like the bill above.




Schools Bill





The prime minister has pledged to bring in a bill to "deliver better schools - with more radical measures to ensure young people leave education with the skills they need". He said the legislation will "include new powers to force coasting schools, as well as failing schools, to accept new leadership, continuing the remarkable success story of Britain's academy schools". The Conservatives want to expand their free schools programme - which Labour opposes, with Mr Cameron committing to creating an extra 270,000 free school places by 2020.


James Thinks: Two words Michael Gove. They saw that man fit to deal with the education system 5 years ago. Now, how can things get better...well let's start with scrapping free schools and making academies go back to schools run by Governors and the more successful systems before these changes 5 years ago?




Childcare Bill





Another stated key priority of the Conservative government is childcare. Currently, all three and four-year olds in England are entitled to 570 hours of free early education or childcare a year, which works out as 15 hours each week for 38 weeks of the year. During the election campaign, the Conservatives promised 30 hours from 2017. The prime minister has also said he wants to introduce tax-free childcare for every child.


James Thinks: Three words: Labour offered better




Enterprise Bill





The government has outlined plans for a bill to cut red tape for British business by at least £10bn and, for the first time, independent regulators will be expected to contribute to that target. The bill is also expected to propose a new Small Business Conciliation Service, to help settle disputes between small and large businesses, especially over late payment practices.


James Thinks: It's not easy to set up a business and many can't afford to it, where is there help? It's important we see people do well, but we need to do this in ways that also help people who don't own their own business. Also Labour also offered help to small business whilst keeping in mind those who don't have their own.




Scotland Bill





The prime minister has pledged to include a bill on devolution which would be based on the cross-party Smith Commission agreement on Scottish devolution. The Smith proposals included giving Holyrood the power to set income tax rates and bands, as well as control over a share of VAT and some welfare benefits.


James Thinks: Scotland's going to be better to live in than England very very soon.




Human Rights Act Repeal Bill





The Conservatives have pledged to abolish the Human Rights Act and replace it with a British Bill of Rights. The Conservative manifesto says: "This will break the formal link between British courts and the European Court of Human Rights, and make our own Supreme Court the ultimate arbiter of human rights matters in the UK."


James Thinks: It's a disgrace that we even consider removing this. It is Churchill's legacy and it's an important act. Only one country in Europe isn't signed up to this and this country is also the only dictatorship.




Counter-extremism Bill





The government is expected to bring forward a new bill to crack down on radicalisation. It will include new immigration rules, powers to close down premises used by extremists, and "extremism disruption orders". Mr Cameron has repeatedly stressed the need to confront and defeat the "poisonous" extremist ideology. The proposals are likely to encounter some opposition in the new Parliament on the grounds that some of the plans could infringe people's right to free speech, BBC home affairs correspondent Danny Shaw said.


James Thinks: This simply comes down to whether it effects our privacy. Which is a right.




Communications and Data Bill





This was the bill that the Conservatives' smaller coalition partners, the Liberal Democrats, refused to back in the last Parliament. Current legislation expires in 2016 and will have to be renewed. So now the Conservatives are governing alone, they can bring back what opponents call the snoopers' charter. The previous plans proposed to extend the range of data communications companies have to store for 12 months. It would have included, for the first time, details of messages sent on social media, webmail, voice calls over the internet and gaming, in addition to emails and phone calls. Officials would not have been able to see the content of the messages without a warrant. Currently communications firms only retain data about who people send emails to, and who they ring.


James Thinks: And this is exactly what I mean when I said it comes down to the privacy. We should not live in a society where people can see everything we are sending. It's not private and could be used for the wrong reasons. The Snoopers Bill can't happen. End of.




Housing Bill





Housing was a hot topic during the general election, featuring in all of the parties' campaigns. One of the Conservatives' key pledges was an extension of Margaret Thatcher's Right to Buy scheme to 1.3 million housing association tenants in England - and the government has confirmed this will feature. Under the plans, housing association tenants will be able to buy the homes they rent at a discount. Communities Minister Greg Clark told the BBC the government wanted to extend the opportunity for people to own their home. There will also be help for first-time buyers, with 200,000 starter homes made available to under-40s at a 20% discount - another Conservative manifesto pledge.


James Thinks: See this article.




NHS Bill





The Conservatives made several commitments on the NHS during the election campaign - and David Cameron used his first major post-election speech to focus on his plans for the health service in England. He has pledged to boost funding by at least £8bn extra a year by 2020 and to create "a truly seven-day NHS". The government is also promising to recruit 5,000 new GPs.


James Thinks: Let's wait and see, I have a funny feeling we could be waving goodbye to our NHS sooner rather than later.




Wales Bill





David Cameron has pledged to implement "as fast as I can the devolution that all parties agreed for Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland". Wales Secretary Stephen Crabb has said his officials were writing legislation to transfer further powers to Wales, so these could be included in the Queen's Speech.


James Thinks: I've got a feeling this won't go brilliantly for Wales. But again, could this mean the Government just wiping their hands and trying to set a rival party up. It wouldn't surprise you.




Hunting Ban Repeal Bill





Could David Cameron throw a bone to his Conservative backbenchers and introduce legislation to repeal the law that bans fox hunting with dogs? The ban has been unpopular in many rural areas since its introduction by Labour in 2004 - and David Cameron has indicated he would like to undo it. Their manifesto stated that a Conservative government "will give Parliament the opportunity to repeal the Hunting Act on a free vote, with a government bill in government time".


James Thinks:Fox hunting is wrong and elitist. We should be trying to eradicate elitism. Watching the Queens Speech we are a long was off being successful with removing elitist rubbish. First elitist establishments that would need sorting are Eton (close the place) and a bit of a nudge on Cambridge and Oxford who have no right to regard themselves as supreme to others (I would make the boat race have a week of time trials before a race between the top 2 or 3 rather than the Elitist rubbish that it is).




Legal highs ban





Legislation to introduce a blanket ban on so-called legal highs is expected to feature in the Queen's Speech. The proposal was included in the Conservatives' general election manifesto, which stated: "We will create a blanket ban on all new psychoactive substances, protecting young people from exposure to so-called 'legal highs'." A Home Office source told the BBC that the proposal would be enacted upon.


James Thinks: If you cut the police, good luck enforcing this!

Liverpool FC Season Review 2014/15

Initially this post was going to be about the European Cup Liverpool won ten years ago after a magical night in Istanbul, however yesterdays performance meant that a radical rethink and an earlier season review post.

Yesterday saw the end of the 2014/15 Barclays Premier League season for Liverpool FC, where the team took part in a match, if you can call it that, at the Britannia, where Liverpool suffered their record Premier League defeat losing 6-1. Definitely the most embarrassing defeat I have ever known as a Liverpool FC fan. 

But what about the season overall? Well it all started to go downhill right at the death of last season where Liverpool lost their chance to win the league accumulating in a shoddy defensive display against Crystal Palace, letting a 3-0 lead slip to only draw the game now known as "Crystanbul". The defensive displays all through that season led to concern, however the one thing Liverpool had was the goals, experts at outscoring their opponents. Then Luis Suarez left. And in came what turned out to be pretty inadequate and/or overpriced replacements such as Lambert, Lovren, Markovic, Moreno, Lallana, Balotelli, Can, Manquillo. Liverpool also signed Origi, who for some reason went back to Lille on loan, Origi has just finished in Ligue 1's worst team of the season.

Now I'm not saying all these players need to go, now we have Lallana we should keep him, but we paid far too much, Can, Markovic and Moreno all have some brilliant potential, but have either been misused or underused. And these players were meant to take Liverpool to a next level with Liverpool knowing they could attract a certain calibre of player being back in the European Cup since 2009/10. 

I'm trying to think of matches now that I can be positive about, matches that I can say Liverpool turned up. I can find one match and that was the away game against Spurs where Liverpool won 3-0. That was really the only time the Liverpool that myself and many other Liverpool fans had come accustom too.

Now negative games, losing 3-1 to City was argued as "oh it's the champions and it's away" yet a week later Stoke won there, then there was a 1-0 home defeat to Paul Lamberts Benteke-less Aston Villa, a 3-1 defeat to West Ham at Upton Park and at this point the only positive was how badly United had started. Then there was that Champions League campaign where Liverpool mustered a measly 5 points, 4 of them earn't against Ludogorets from Belarus and the final point in what was a piss poor performance against Basel in a game Liverpool had to win, yet other than Gerrard the team looked content to lose. Then there's the humiliating 3-0 defeat to Manchester United before Liverpool went on a welcome unbeaten streak, even if it included poor results against teams such as Swansea, Bolton, Blackburn and Burnley. But after another defeat against United and a hugely controversial interview from Raheem "I need a dollar" Sterling everything capitulated and the season died, losing 4-1 at the Emirates but then it got even worse as Liverpool's one chance of silverware remaining disappeared as the team lost 2-1 despite briefly having the lead against Aston Villa.

Obviously, since January 2nd the second we all were aware that Steven Gerrard had decided to end his career in the MLS, but in May all we found ourselves playing for was Steven Gerrard, to send him off in style. Something you would imagine would fire up the players. But did it? No, Liverpool conceded 9 goals, scoring 2 in their last two games of the season going down 3-1 to Crystal Palace, again despite having the lead briefly before the biggest defeat in over half a century against Stoke City leaving Gerrard humiliated as he left Liverpool. This was subsequently followed by the majority of the squad going on a holiday to Dubai whilst fans were left absolutely furious by the lack of passion, desire, character or whatever else you want to call it!

But who can you blame for such a disastrous season? Well you start with the manager. Any manager that signs a right back and refers to another less than a year before as "one of the best", regardless of anybody disagreeing, should start with one or the other rather than a midfielder like Emre Can who is utterly exposed there. His last team used him once or twice, as a left back, but only as a last resort, however it is quite obvious that despite his talent, he is as bad as it gets as a right back. Any manager that doesn't realise the talent that a team like Palace have on the wings and therefore plays no full backs is also a big factor to his blame. A manager that changes nothing as a match goes from 0-0 to 5-0 down is completely unacceptable (especially when it's completely obvious it's not working at 1-0 down, never mind 3,4 or 5 down!). A manager who spends £116m but gets 22 points less, regardless of "mitigating factors" is appalling. Especially when you have a whole summer to sort one of those factors out (Suarez) and the other one is well known about before (Sturridge - spent a lot of last season out - people just don't notice because a certain Suarez went on a mental scoring run). Therefore this makes both less of a mitigating factor. So honestly, I didn't say it until yesterday this season but Brendan Rodgers has to go. Klopp is my first choice on the basis Carlo Ancelotti at Real Madrid has said if sacked he will take a year out, Benitez is another option and even Big Sam would be an improvement putting some iron and brute into the performances, his defensive way of playing with West Ham, Bolton or Blackburn wouldn't be so much the case either, being that he is a brilliant manager and makes the most of whatever he has, still he's a way off top choice with the others mentioned being considerably preferable and much more "Liverpool".

Regarding players, I'll start with Sterling, if he wants over £100k a week, sell him, he's overrated, he can't shoot nor can he cross, Suarez made him look so much better, Sturridge helped too, without them, he is dreadful, so get as much as you can and run to the bank. Regarding new signings, Balotelli and Lamberts use depends really on who manages Liverpool next season, if they somehow don't change the manager, it's clear neither will suit the tactics, to the other new signings, they probably all need an extra year, some need a different manager who will use them though. Six months ago I'd have told you Mignolet needed to go, but he has massively improved since and warrants a season, however Jones is being released, rightly and Liverpool need a very good keeper to challenge Mignolet, like Chelsea, United and Arsenal have. I would also release Toure, no pace left, makes mistakes, but apparently he's getting a new deal. I'd consider keeping Johnson if Liverpool didn't have enough money for a new right back as this season proved that four at the back is better than three. 

In conclusion though, ten years on from the greatest night of football in my lifetime, ten years on since the pinnacle of my Liverpool supporting life, rather than celebrating we as fans should be looking at how it's come to this shambolic state of affairs and asking how can this be fixed. Because right now another night as great as Istanbul looks centuries off. 

Aidy Ward

In recent days the whole Sterling situation has taken a turn. Apparently now he won't even sign for essentially £1m a week at Liverpool. All this according to agent Aidy Ward. Also according to Aidy Ward, Jamie Carragher, long term Liverpool vice-captain and Champions League winning defender is a "knob". Is there really a place for Aidy Ward and agents in football or are they just a waste of time.

Whilst this was happening, Jordan Ibe another Liverpool youngster signed a new five year deal for Liverpool. About a week before this deal, Ibe was quoted in the media as saying "I don’t believe in having an agent. I don’t really see the need for one to be fair. My parents do the same job and they are my family which is number one to me. I can trust them and they are the best people.".

In fairness, I agree with Ibe, parents and family, maybe even friends are better to talk to than a man, like Aidy Ward, who know that a move will also see them get a big pay day. This is especially the case when agents try to ruin the clubs name, which Mr Ward did say he didn't care about.

To finish this I thought I'd include Liverpool fans views on Aidy Ward: