I'd say Revidge has summed up the McCarthy situation extremely well. He isn't doing is job and we see it live on the pitch at every home game.

Regretably this is very true. I have attended supplier's conferences with major retailers, (this is when they tell supliers how it's going to be in the next 12 months) where the opportunities presented by the green or environmental market are openly discussed as just that. Simply a way to make more money and create a new market. Climate change is a marketing opportunity for major retailers make no mistake about that. My experience is the "green" claims made by UK retailers are total rubbish and contain no more substance than a desire to avoid being pilloried in the tabloid press. All the re-used plastic bags and extra club card points in the world won't make a jot of difference. Industry will only react when consumer demand and / or government forces it to. However this doesn't change the fact we face significant environmental problems of which global warming is just one. Neither does it alter the position where "greener" industrial processes can be both economically and environmentally sound and therefore do stand up to scrutiny. Are you dismissing the scientific community as "rank amateurs?"

This is easy, I think you'll have to come up with better questions. Answers to these points are available to anyone in general education, who waches the TV or reads a paper. We know, Geography "O" level, the earth goes through periods of warming and cooling; a couple of examples I can dredge up from my O levels, we had the Medieval Warm Period (800 - 1300) and the Little Ice Age (1500 - 1850). I think (could be wrong) we are technically in an Ice Age at present though this is more to do with a scientific definition than wooly mammoths roaming the planet!! This was taught in schools 40 years back and I don't think is open to challenge. Throughout history there have been natural increases in CO2 in the atmosphere. The current rapid increases in CO2 levels are thought to be primarily responsible for global warming, i.e a more rapid warming than would occur under "natural" circumstances, without man's influence. Now I'm surmising with this, I can't give you a link but I've read it on several occassions; natural stores of CO2 are oceans and forests. World warms up, water temperatures rise, oceans' ability to store CO2 is reduced consequently there is an increase in atmospheric CO2 after a period of warming. CO2 is stored in carbon sinks in forests, temperatures increase, wild fires become more common, forests burn releasing stored CO2 and fewer trees available to store CO2 afterwards, natural CO2 concentrations increase after a period of warming. Scientists are simply extrapolating data based on knowlede gained from historical studies.......btw you'd be surprised how accurate weather forecasts are! If scientific opinion is 80% correct we still have an 80% chance of facing real problems, would you bet against it? Just as an aside why do you generally use the word "liberal" in a derogatory manner? It regularly slips into your arguements. At one time or another I've met many people from the MB and liberal is not a word that springs to mind to describe them. There just people. The use, usually out of context, tends to undermine your arguement considerably. On the whole global warming /environmental / planetary resources issue it to treat our environment in a better, more sustainable way is simple commonsense. It's not sandal-wearing, Guardian- reading, wooly-minded liberalness, just a good idea. Forecasts suggest world population will increase to 9 billion in the next 50 years, an increase of 50%, if we don't begin to manage the environmental impact, global warming or not, it must be obvious to anyone that such growth will have enormous influence on our planet. To take one small example. My travel to work time has doubled in 10 years. Providing a decent public transport system would cut traffic congestion, benefit the economy, benefit society and help reduce carbon emissions. Global warming may never happen, the scientists could be wrong, I've no problem agreeing with you on that, however to stick our heads in the sand and do nothing is inviting disaster. Scientific opinion says we have 80-100 years before the real impacts occur and now is the time to take action - it's a very short timescale. Using your weather forecast arguement there is an 80% likelihood they will be right. Awful odds for those who say do nothing.

I do hope that's tongue in cheek.

Love the avatar theno

It was downright embarassing. I just hope we aren't going to have to put up with this every time an England player comes to Ewood. Still Carson made three good saves to keep Villa in the game at 0-0 so he got his revenge. Lot of good the booing did.

Don't be precious I wan't picking on your post and even apologised for selecting that particular post. However it characterises the general attitude amongst fans and football professionals who seem to feel because we have some talented players we are better than many other sides. Which we clearly are not. No you did not. Here is what you posted, in full: In this post you do not even mention Croatia, let alone state they are a better team than England. In fact you do say "Yet I have to disagree with the usual suspects when they say that other teams are SUPERIOR" Exactly, England are a poor team for all / because of the reasons you have stated. It doesn't matter how one makes the decision. Personally the only Croatian I had heard of was Bilic, I still can't name any of their team. I watched the game, I look at the group results, I observe the England players reactions and listen to what they say. I read the papers and listen to the radio. Oh and I reacll England have done nothing exciting for 5-6 years. On this basis one can reach an opinion. England are out, Croatia are above them in the world rankings ( I think), clearly Croatia are either a better team or extraodinarily lucky.

You do understand this is a team game? Raw talent is irrelevant it is the team performance that counts. You have rated Gerrard as a world class player, and I imagine would say the same about Lampard. Stick those two pieces of raw talent into the same midfield and they both disappear for 90 minutes. Therefore the raw talent is wasted, one of them has to be dropped to allow the other to flourish. Talent alone is not enough.

No I don't for a whole variety of reasons. As for are England any good or not, see neekoy's post just above who sums it up very well. There are 3 or 4 England players who give their all, the rest just turn up and make the right noises before going home while another manager gets sacked.

Well I don't think Gerrard is a top international, more of a run all day, good PL player. You have taken my point completely the wrong way round. I said the TEAM, I even put it in big letters for the hard of hearing. There are some good, even international class players in the team, but it is a very poor TEAM and it's a team game.

Sorry to pick on this particular post. All the excuses in the world cannot hide the fact the England TEAM is crap. People can spout on all they want about talent, golden generation, this, that and the other but it all boils down to one thing. The team is rubbish and has done nothing of real note since beating Germany 5-1 six years ago. They just aren't any good, it doesn't matter, more important things happen in football but it's clear England are very poor when playing as a team.

I've nothing against either man but when fans begin to discuss Jack Charlton (72) and Robson (74) in the same breath as the England managership it only goes to demonstrate the poverty of English talent and the depths the English game has plumbed. They have had great careers but these men are in their 70s, hardly going to take English football forward into a brave new world are they?

I feel it also has a detrimental influence on club football for the players, the fans and the club in general. Look at Rovers. We've been flying, interest is on the up, then we get almost a whole month between home games (if Villa wasn't re-arranged it would be a month) followed by 4 home games in 22 days. For anyone planning away trips we have 6 games in 26 days. it's just plain daft and all so a second-rate England team can have a meaningless get together. For Rovers it would be far better if those games were spread evenly throughout November and December. Interest would be maintained, the players would be in the groove of playing an winning etc.

Well I did mention Rooney, Owen and Gerrard but outside of those three there is hardly a player in the England team that would make you think "oh sh1t don't let him through". On the other hand when we play Utd, Arsenal etc there's a whole bunch of foreign players that have me worrying every time they get in our half. That I feel is the difference between England and other national sides. Hardly had the colly wobbles every time Crouch got the ball for Liverpool a couple of weeks back!

I take your point and it's quite right but I think I read SGE has actually been paid off finally in recent months. Didn't he have to stop taking the FA's money when he found a new job?

Think you'll find in the big, bad real world most people take the money. If I knew I was to be publically humiliated, probably unemployable, and made to carry the can for everything wrong with English football I'd take my employer for every penny I could before settling into a comfortable retirement. Honourable reignation is all very well.............if you can afford it.

One way of looking at this is to ask yourself a question. Saturday afternoon, Rovers at home to a PL side containing an England interntional or perhaps two, would you be worried? It's a serious question. If Utd come to town Rooney is always going to be a threat, probably Hargreaves as well, possibly Owen with Newcastle, maybe Gerrard with Liverpool. After that? Name player who has the "don't let him run with it," or "close him down quick" factor. There isn't one and therein lays the poverty of English football, all the star players in the PL are foreign.

Eddie you're going to have to give up on this one. This supposed golden generation is not good enough. Sure as individuals they perform well in the PL but as a team they are simply second-rate. With, what we now have to recognise as, a decent manager in charge all the team could manage was losing in quarter-finals of every competition. The only thing golden about this group is their pay packets, when the chips have been down they have failed on each occassion. Anyway a nice peaceful summer next year will come as a relief.

So you'll be happy to put up with England "bigging themselves up" for months if they qualify on Wednesday? With luck Croatia will win and spare us all another 6 months of media hype.

"a Short History of Tractors in UKRAINIAN" by Marina Lewycka. Funny and sad from one sentence to the next this is a rather extraordinary book dealing with ageing, family feuds, sinelity, second world war attrocities, the contribution of immigrants to the UK, Eastern Europe's view of the West and of course a short history of tractors! It's very difficult to give a precise so I'll just nick the bit on the back cover: 'Two years after my mother died, my father fell in love with a glamorous blonde Ukrainian divorcee. He was eighty-four and she was thirty-six. She exploded into our lives like a fluffy pink grenade, churning up the murky water, bringing to the surface a sludge of sloughed-off memories, giving the family ghosts a kick up the backside' Valentina with her proclivity for green satin underwear and boil-in-the-bag cuisine will stop at nothing in her pursuit of Western wealth. Read it!

I should have expanded a bit, but didn't want to earlier. Firstly the book seems to be kicking around on a 2 for £10 offer in lots of places. Seen it in three motorway services this week. The story, set in the USA, begins in 1964 and works its way through to 1989, centres on five main characters and the impact on their lives of one man's decision. David Henry is a doctor whose wife gives birth to twins, the boy is "normal" but the daughter has Downs Syndrome - so you see my interest from the start. Almost immediately after the birth Henry makes the decision to tell his wife their daughter was still born. Over 25 years we see the impact this has on Henry, his wife, their son, daugher and anther character who I won't name for fear of spoiling the book. It took me a while to pick up the book and read it, I wasn't sure of the subject matter. Having said that the daughter's Downs Syndrome, while central to the story is not the dominant aspect of the book. It is much more about people's relationships. I feel this is a tremendously well written piece of work, the author's insight with regard to the challenges and joys of raising a disabled child are staggering, though she has no direct experience and for this alone it is well worth reading. Overall an excellent page turner with two serious themes running through it, well written, very descriptive and at no time does it slip into the potentially wishy washy sentiment that it would be easy to employ.

My memory is they were around 28-29000

It would simply give us more empty seats and a crap pitch. The way Ewood has been built contributes enormously to the pitch quality and to block the corners would be foolish. Would give us all something to moan about though

Starting with the Villa we have five home games in 25 days, all against PL opposition - 4 PL games and one Carling Cup. I'd guess the Arsenal game will be priced around £10 - £15 and of the PL games only Chelsea will be top whack. Could be a good test of the ticketing policy. Reasonable prices against attractive opposition in WHU, Newcastle and Villa plus a very big match against Chelsea, if we can keep winning I'd hope we get very good gates for these matches. Just realised from Villa to City we have six games in 27 days to attend. Hmmm probably btime to be very helpful at home for a couple of weeks!

I'm not sure that follows. Prior to yesterday the average gate was 22000 for PL games. The two biggest away followings I guess would be City and Arsenal who I think were both allocated the DE but didn't fill it. Doesn't that mean the arrival of 8000 scousers has had a greater influence on the gate than the ticket price? The home crowd was probably up by around 2000. What I think it proves is John Williams oft repeated point that success on the pitch is the simplest way to improve attendances. Liverpool, Utd are going to be 29 - 30,000 attendances it's the others we need ot improve.