Calling Red Rain: Ahead of the Minority Report..........

Good Evening Your Lordship.

Were you heartened by the late switch to 4-5-1 to protect the lead? I think that in previous threads we may have overlooked Stefan Payne, who looked well up to the lone striker role this afternoon. Whether that would be a formula to get you in front in a game, as opposed to protecting a lead you already have is a different matter?

On a more philosophical note, do you think it is better to watch football emotionally or rationally?

 

I'd like to think (without being pedantic) that it was more a 4-4-1-1, with Scowen behind Payne.

It seemed to work earlier on in the season prior to Payne's injury, as shown with the late winner against QPR, and the nearly winner away at Huddersfield.

Dare I say that it could even be a formation in the future which sees the introduction of George Moncur who I can't accept has become a bad player overnight. Or even Ryan Williams.

Either way, I think Stefan Payne is the strong centre forward we've lacked.

#TeamsLikeBarnsley

 

I have just posted Minority Report before I noticed your contribution below. Many thanks for your kind sentiments.

To be honest, our backs were well and truly against the wall when we made the switch that I saw it as inevitable, and predicted the exact change 5 minutes before it was made, much to the disgust of my companion. Scowen had been added to Hourihane and Morsy down the centre for the 10 minutes before the switch because that was the focus for their dangerous attacks. Our front two had become detached from the rest of the team, and there seemed little prospect of them being able to get further forward to reduce that gap. PH seemed merely to be reacting to the inevitable. How many times must Adam Hammill have been introduced to a game as a defensive move? Not many.

There is a time for 4-5-1, and surely no-one would disagree that this was one of those times. Norwich played 4-5-1 until near the very end and it seemed to serve them well in the second half as an attacking formation. It all depends upon how you arrange the 5 in mid-field as to whether it is attacking or defensive. If the midfield players support the striker in numbers, it can be very attacking, as they proved. Or it can be very defensive, as we proved. As has been pointed out many times, when you count up the players, there are always eleven on each team. It is simply a question of arranging them to outnumber your opponents formation in certain selected areas of the field as certain times of the game. All this talk of formations is no more and no less.

Today I watched the game emotionally. I enjoyed it from first whistle to last. My report this week contains little analysis and quite a lot of prose, because that is what emotion does to me. I enjoy emotion at the time, but when the brain takes over again, I reject it out of hand because it represents a lack of control. However, not all games are like today, are they? Some games are tedious, and if I am not getting stimulated in one direction, I seek it in another. That is when I start analysing. When I am not emotionally stimulated, I seek my satisfaction in other directions.

How about you? I sense that your search for a way out of our disastrous vote to leave the EU serves as your intellectual stimulation. After all, we all need something to stimulate us don't we.

 

Horse racing first, last and always for my 'intellectual stimulation' RR, except that that probably overplays my available brainpower! Just watching the Group 1 racing from Sha Tin (Hong Kong) as I type. Maurice should have little trouble winning the Hong Kong Cup at 8.30, by the way.

There is no easy way out of the collective act of self-harm we have inflicted over the EU, and I've become more invested in the legal struggle it has provoked. I read in this morning's Sunday Times that a High Court action is about to be launched demanding seperate parliamentary approval for an exit from the European Economic Area (single market) agreement - arguing that Teresa May cannot trigger Article 127 of that agreement either. This one is going to run and run! Amid all the debates about 'hard brexit v soft brexit' there seems to me to be little if any sign that our EU partners are prepared to even entertain any compromise to the 'four freedoms', so I think we may all be whistling in the wind.

I undoubtedly watch football more emotionally than rationally. It's less hard work that way! I too enjoyed yesterday's game enormously. I think though that it was a very good example of your point about the distance between our midfield and attack in the second half - until the switch was made. I'd have been happy with three points from this run of games against Brum, Norwich and the S6 mob. So six already is happy days indeed!

 

My own view on all these legal challenges is that they are merely time wasters. In the end Parliament would not dare reject the stated will of the people, unfortunately. Sadly, negotiations must take place. Like you though, I believe these are likely to result in a hard Brexit because we approach the bargaining table without a viable strategy. My hope is that when the terms of Brexit are explained to the British people, and when it is clear what the likely effect of those terms will be on the British economy, jobs and standards of living, there will be a call for a revote, based upon the known terms of our exit. In due time, when more information is known, and when the vote takes place on the basis of known terms, I fully expect a reversal of the vote to leave.

As you can probably tell, I have effectively closed my ears and eyes and am making ineffective noises in order to insolate myself from the disastrous consequences of our vote. I do have my fingers permanently crossed though. That is the one and only active step that I have taken towards fighting the decision.

 

Hard or soft Brexit to some extent is out of our control , unless there is a deal to be done , as Redstar suggested in the " wheels come off " thread , over the wording or practical application of ' free ' movement of Labour as opposed to free movement of People . This may be critical .
I had a long conversation with a German journalist this week , he was clear that the Germans are devastated over Brexit , they appreciate not only the massive financial hit they will have to bear in a hard Brexit, but also the loss of " our best friend " in The EU on political and economic strategy . The German position in these negotiations will be critical , as they will be reminding other partners that the financial costs of an inflexible insistence on the 'four freedoms' ( which could be resolved by a sleight of interpretation) will need to be shared , that could well concentrate the minds of the bulk of the 27 who are only benefactors of the EU and have never paid in a penny . This not only is the ( German estimate ) of 10 billion per annum just to service the agreed budget for the next few years , but also the potential loss of Britain's capital in the European Investment Bank , the fund that provides the finance for European infrastructure projects . Apparently the UK investment in this is vital...we are one of the largest contributors...but the lowest drawer ....the difference between the two figures provides the finance balance that keeps the project on track .
As to the Govt . having no plan , that to some extent is true, but they will be putting together a list of probably thousands of 'what ifs ' in relation to arguments put by EU negotiators , but we are only looking inward there , the EU is in a similar situation , despite Juncker coming out and telling May to get a rift on as 'we' are impatient to get started , that patently is not the case and similar discussions going on here are going on with many added complications between the 27 .
When you say
" My hope is that when the terms of Brexit are explained to the British people, and when it is clear what the likely effect of those terms will be on the British economy, jobs and standards of living, there will be a call for a revote, based upon the known terms of our exit. In due time, when more information is known, and when the vote takes place on the basis of known terms, I fully expect a reversal of the vote to leave."
You are making the assumption that there will be long term economic damage and that the British people will drop their many objections to The EU that prompted them to vote out , but in essence it would be no more than a rerun of the months of campaigning , where both sides were guilty of untruths and lies , and every expert or world body will be passing an opinion . The establishment clearly told us then it would be economic armageddon , in the case of Cameron and Osborne they told us incessantly that would happen
the day after we voted to leave...their arguments then have been undermined , not only by the fact that 6 months on the effects have been negligible (apart from a drop in the value of the pound....the Euro though has also suffered in relation to the Dollar ) , but that all the quoted disastrous forecasts from the OECD , The IMF and Mark Carney himself have been significantly downgraded to a degree that could suggest their initial forecasts were not necessarily well founded or either totally impartial .
The other significant factor the Germans recognise as a game changer is the likelihood of a UK/ US/Canada trade deal...Der Spiegel said that from the EU point of view " negotiations have suddenly become a lot more difficult ."
It seems to me that further arguments will only be made by the same people pushing the same line as before....with no real evidence , evidence that can only be provided by experience of actually leaving...and that applies to both sides .

 

From your reply, you are clearly better informed than I am. My arguments are all from the standpoint of, "what would I do if I were in charge". In the case of a hard Brexit, as I understand it, we revert to WTO rules, and once again, as I understand it, that means a standard 15% import duty on both sides of the divide.

The car industry is still a large employer in the UK, even though hardly any of it is British owned. The question is, if I were a foreign manufacturer with UK based manufacturing, would I want to pay 15% to import my cars from the UK to Europe, or vice versa. Either way, you are reducing your competitiveness in one market or the other. You see, I know what I would chose, and I think that many manufacturers, service providers and bankers will face that same choice in the event of a hard Brexit. It can only act as to lower the standards of living throughout the EU, but in the UK especially. Do you think that the British people would chose to vote for a reduction in their standard of living?

This view might be incorrect. As I say, I am by no means qualified to give my opinion and expect that others should take any notice. But it is what I think.

 

Totally objectively, I do think "the day after we voted to leave" should be read as "the day after we actually leave". Cameron et al might still be wrong, but that is when we will be able to judge. As Tekktyke has reminded me, the actual protection for workers whilst we have been in the EU is questionable. And yet I can't help but feel that if we go for trade deals with other world economies that are low-wage based (India, China etc) then our own workers will suffer still more from the competition. In fact, what will we flog to them that they can't do cheaper?

 

That's a fair point of view RR...and the first thing I would say in agreement , it is unlikely most people would vote deliberately for a lowering in standards , the issue though will be the same as before , but as I say the suggestions of disaster are far less credible after recent forecasting , the previous head of the OECD predicts a rocky 1-3 years but a 4-6 stabilisation and positive after that . It will though come down to who we collectively believe .
It is undoubtedly complicated but there is also scope and precedents already for deals .
WTO rates on cars are 10% , if , (big if of course ) car sales between The EU and UK remained the same as now , we have a £13.5 b deficit meaning HM Govt would have a net gain of £1.35 billion to play with ,.
I assume Theresa May has told manufacturers that this money will be used in some way to make up the shortfall, without the
' running commentary ' it's difficult to imagine any other way Nissan would have carried on with the planned investment unless the deal was right. But obviously they are satisfied with the answers they got .
There is though a precendent of tariff free trading on cars from outside the EU already with South Korea .
On other products WTO tariffs can be negligible , but the list is extensive .
Trade in itself does not appear to be a game breaker for our economy , particularly if the North Atlantic trade deal materialises with US and Canada , that Trump appears to be keen on , although it would be ridiculous to underestimate the initial difficulties .

The biggest most complicated issues seems to be those surrounding financial services and I won't pretend to fully grasp them...but Xavier Rolet in October (CEO of The London Stock Exchange) was very positive that London's position is safe , mainly because no European City can clear , now or in the foreseeable future at rates that would attract world business . ( for some incredibly technical reason ) .
On a more down to earth level apparently one of our biggest advantages is that the cables that connect the stock exchanges are between New York and London , allowing deals to be done here first , just fractions of a second before the data reaches Frankfurt et al. It seems almost faintly ridiculous that micro seconds are the difference between success and failure in high finance , but it is an advantage that cannot be replicated .

 

I was thinking again about the issue this morning as I got up. I voted to remain. I did so for the reasons that I outlined in my last post. Those reasons are mostly commercially based, because that is what I know and that is where my working life was spent, although it must be admitted that perhaps my understanding of the issues is not as clear as I thought it was. However, it was the British people as a whole who voted to take us out, and I do not think that the majority of those who voted had a better understanding of the issues than I did. Indeed, I think that many of those who have voted for us to leave have a much poorer understanding of those issues. In fact, I think that for many, their vote was cast on a whim or on the basis of economic migration at best. Even from the government point of view, the vote was conceived as a way of stopping the rise of UKIP by a concerned Conservative Party leader, and not because anyone in power at the time, or even near power at the time, thought that leaving may in any way be a good idea. As Orsen Kaht points out, the campaigns on both sides were based upon lies and speculation, so the vote result can only be seen as a result that is based upon a tissue of untruths. The whole decision to leave was taken in a way that is completely unsustainable for any logical decision-making process. And yet, the government and its negotiators are expected to abide by it, and under no circumstances, to question it.

In a nutshell, my position is this. I am quite happy to stand behind a decision when it is made by a government, and government experts who know more about a subject than I do. I am not happy to stand behind a decision when it is made by a set of individuals who I think know less about a subject than I do, and who I suspect were tricked into voting the way that they did by false information. I question what those people will do once we leave and their expectations of a country that looks like Britain in the 1960s, with a welfare state that works, full employment and a health service that is the pride of the nation does not actually come to pass. You cannot turn the clock back, and that is what many have chosen to try to do.

 

I agree with this, and it has been the most alarming thing about recent political campaigns - the seeming acceptability of lying. I know that political parties haven't always managed to live up to all the pre-election manifesto promises they made, but it always felt like they were made on a best intentions basis - however starting from the Scottish independence referendum I would say there has been a significant move to a tacit acceptance of genuine lies, on which there were absolutely no intention of following up on (Trump's wall, Pizzagate, Leave's £350m back into the NHS, the UK governments list of "independence concessions to Scotland", Remain's scaremongering) that is just alarming and bodes poorly for everyone

 

I can certainly see where you are coming from there , and some of the arguments are undoubtedly true , but I don't believe ( despite there being some very simplistic positions ) that Remain supporters had any more proven arguments than Leave supporters , numbers of young Remainers said their reasoning was because they liked the freedom to travel , apparently unaware the Brits travelled freely before The EU . Even Ed Miliband did not know you need a visa for more countries now than you did before we joined .
You say you are happy to stand behind a decision made by a Govt . and it's experts ...but if that meant a guarantee of competence on the Govt's part we wouldn't have the need for party politics , few if any issues don't have another side to the story , HM Govts ( like all others ) have dropped some incredible clangers over the years , and enforced many things that we , I'm sure , would not consider competent or fair . Take the current Hs2 debacle , an idea spawned back in the late 90's that both major Party's jumped on to support , mainly because not supporting it at that time could have been perceived as weakness , despite the fact that no-one at the time had even the slightest idea of the costs or benefits or
drawbacks , leaving us now in a situation of going ahead with a £60billion and rising project of little benefit to the North of England , the very area the back of a *** packet plan was supposed to regenerate .
If given a referendum on Hs2 , I believe the person in the street would reject it...likewise Gordon Brown's incredibly bad decision to sell off a large part of our gold reserves , advertising it well in advance causing the price of gold to drop to an all time low and losing out on 75% of it's true value ....would any of us on here done something so stupid ? I doubt it .

 

I support your view about the argument regarding HS2, but frankly the argument about leaving the EU is far more complex and difficult, and I have not even mentioned the age profile of the post war baby boomers, and the difficulty in meeting their pension, NHS and end of life care expectations without increasing the size of the economy and the active labour force through economic migration. These decisions are far too complex to be taken upon a whim, or because of insufficient or inaccurate information or by people not qualified to make them.

We are in a mess, and there will be an awful lot of **** to shift before we have dug our way out of it. But that is just my opinion, and at the end of the day, that is all it is. I do hope that my opinion is wrong though.

 

There seems to me to be a gathering current of opinion amongst politicians behind the need for us to remain within the single market. I attribute this to people beginning to peer into the abyss of what a so-called hard brexit would look like. Whether this is achievable will depend on 1) whether our current EU partners are prepared to compromise - the signs are not good - and 2) whether Theresa May can cobble together a story for the public at large suggesting she has regained 'control' of immigration - even while it is mainly still permitted. She may need to delve into the Cameron book of ways in which to present miniscule gains as major concessions.

I'm minded of the first verse to U2's 'Wake Up Dead Man'!