WrestleMarkia Moments: #1: Good God Almighty!

In addition to my weekly recap of WWE TV, I will also look on a weekly basis at an event from WWE history. It could be a classic match, a memorable moment, or even a "What were they thinking" occurence.

The first of these is both a great match and a great moment: King Of The Ring 1998, Mankind vs The Undertaker, Hell In A Cell.

The previous Cell match on PPV, between Taker and Shawn Michaels, was groundbreaking for the era in the then-WWF. Eight months on, an old rivalry was renewed; but, having had so many encounters already, it seemed unlikely that UT and Mankind would have their greatest battle to date at KOTR.

Not to mention the fact that, unlike the UT-HBK match, this Cell encounter wasn't the main event of the PPV (that was a Stone Cold-Kane 1st Blood match for the WWF Title). In addition, Mankind had lost a lot of popularity in the weeks leading up to the show. So, the chances of one of the most memorable matches in company history occuring in Pittsburgh on June 28, 1998 were fairly low.

However, just over a minute into the match came an all-time incredible moment: starting the match on the Cell roof, both men exchanged blows, including chairshots by the masked one, before Taker hurled Mankind off the roof, 16 feet down through the Spanish announcer's table.

Unlike other moments that were to follow, there was no indication that this was about to happen; no dramatic build-up, no teasing the crowd of possibly doing the move. It just happened. And, whereas the tables are usually cleared of equipment such as monitors (to prevent injuries), the table was full of stuff; it wasn't prepared for the move. Had his head connected with a monitor, or if he missed the table, he probably would have been dead.

It was totally unexpected - and it shocked the world.

Fans in the Igloo stood up for minutes to survey the scene, even though a prone body was all that could be visible. The crowd reaction was huge, and chants reverberated for several minutes. But what really made this was Jim Ross on commentary: far from overexaggerating the impact of a move, JR seemed genuinely concerned for Mick Foley's wellbeing:

"Good God Almighty! Good God Almighty! They killed him!"

Mankind was attended to by referees, staff and Vince McMahon for several minutes. The match had already ended, it seemed, and Mankind was stretchered away.

Only, he came back.

The roar was amazing as both wrestlers reclimbed the Cell to fight some more. Within a minute, UT had chokeslammed Mankind through the Cell roof, down to the ring below.

At this point, the Hardcore Legend was knocked unconscious. He suffered many injuries on the night, and after this he seemed lifeless, a point not lost on JR and Jerry Lawler. JR demanded the match be stopped, whilst both the King and, backstage after the match, Taker believed at this point that Mankind was dead.

Somehow, even after this, the match continued, with Foley even coming close to winning at certain times. Then, the stakes were raised even higher as Mankind poured thousands of drawing pins onto the canvas from a bag hidden under the ring - the intention being, to make Taker a human pin cushion.

Except, it backfired: Taker countered the Mandible Claw by lifting Mankind onto his back and dropping him down onto the pins. A chokeslam into the tacks was next, followed by the match-winning Tombstone Piledriver.

Mankind left to cheers and chants of "Foley", at a time when the bad guys were very rarely praised. Astonishingly, he came down the ring during the main event to interfere (as did UT), despite taking a beating that would have killed most people.

I can remember watching this when it first happened, and telling people afterwards that it was the greatest match ever. Technically it wasn't, but it was an unforgettable war, and saw the most punishment that a participant has ever taken in a major wrestling match. Over 13 years on, it still hasn't lost any of its impact.

The stunts haven't been topped since, and it's doubtful they ever will. At KOTR '98, Mankind became the Hardcore Legend - and, despite being pinned, the reputation he gained from taking the falls off and through the Cell mean that he was the real winner.

It was voted #1 on WWE's 50 Most Memorable Incidents In History DVD, and if you can watch it on YouTube or somewhere else, it's worth it. Worthwhile for non-fans who assume that everything in wrestling is "fake", worthwhile for new fans who may not have seen the unbelievable match, and worthwhile for longtime fans who want to relive a match that, no matter what may happen in the future, will never, ever be forgotten.

Job Interviews

Job interviews. They are our passage to employment, but it's a bridge we struggle to cross. Many people would do anything for work, yet just as many, if not more, fear this short conversation.

But why do we get nervous? Is it because one mistake could spell doom? Is it in case we are given a question we don't have answer to? Or something else?

Let's consider the worst case scenario. You're late for your interview. Maybe your alarm clock never went off or you underestimated how long it took for the tennis to finish; either way, you're late. You get dressed, but your suit is still hung over from a night out, leaving you in a rainbow-coloured tie, a shirt with a button missing, and trousers that are tighter than the Coalition's budget.

You set off. Where's the bus? The old man who's telling the driver about his Farmfoods adventure is really delaying you. After 20 minutes, you start sprinting, and begin sweating profusely and losing breath. Stepping in dog muck and having water splashed on you by the same bus you were waiting for as it passes you by don't help, either.

You finally arrive and somehow you're on time, but compared to the others you look like you've been dragged through the hedges backwards. Your confidence is further dented when they discuss worldwide tours, five-year college courses and their experience working as a manager of a similar company.

Nevertheless, you go into the interview. Your sweaty palm leaves an unfortunate lasting impression on the interviewer. You bump your leg into the table. You’re still breathless from the great Liverpool Marathon, making your answers seem lazy and generic. Your CV still has a bite-mark from the dog. You struggle for answers even remotely resembling the question. And you call the interviewer "Lad" and describe your time at University as "sound".

As you leave, you wonder why you bothered turning up, and when you trip over the carpet as you leave, and go flying into the corridor where the other applicants are waiting, you wonder why you even bothered trying to get a job.

Okay, this is an exaggerated example of what can go wrong. But, to avoid a situation like this, remember these simple yet effective tips: manage your time well; dress smart; leave early; tell the other applicants about your unique skills; and at the interview itself, as hard as it is, try to relax, and speak as if you're talking to a friend but with more polite language. Oh, and don't leave your CV lying about near the dog.

So many people worry about interviews, but, if you're organised, punctual and calm, you've got a much better chance of getting the job.

As for me . . . I've been standing at this bus stop for over 20 minutes now in a multicoloured tie and a shirt with more holes in it than a goal net. I wonder if it's worth me running . . .

Deadline Day

When you think of how Sky has changed football, there are many positives to take. However, in recent years, one area of the game has been taken to the extreme - to the point where an event that was once fiarly irrelevant and hard to notice has suddenly become a highlight of the season - at least on Sky.

 

That would be Transfer Deadline Day.

 

In just over a week, it will be, er, the transfer deadline day, which means that after this date, no top-flight clubs will be able to sign players from other clubs until the next transfer window. (I think that's right; the actual definition of it still confuses me.)

 

That is noteworthy, no doubt; but in years gone by, the majority of teams had concluded their business long before the window ended. Mind you, this was in the days when clubs could sign players up until about April, so only the fledgling, smaller teams would sign a few new faces to try and help them survive or win promotion.

 

The rules changed, though, so that there were two windows: July-August and January. It has its pros and cons; teams can't just go and panic buy someone in November because of a dodgy result, but for a side riddled with injuries, having to wait a few months before adding to the squad can wreck a season.

 

This has meant that clubs have less time to complete major transfers - and, due to the complexities surrounding wages in the modern game, some of these deals - even huge ones - are left up until the very last moment. Sometimes, afterwards (which I genuinely cannot explain).

 

All this is fair enough - but what has heightened the "importance" of all this has been the way in which deadline day has been elevated into a cornerstone of the season by Sky. This, depending on your point of view, is either a good thing or a bad thing.

 

On deadline day, Sky Sports News seems to hold all the power. There are reporters in the studio, reporters at training grounds, reports at Timbuctoo - just about everywhere in the country is (roughly) covered by a roaming reporter.

 

Normally, if a major transfer (or, indeed, a not-so-major transfer) is about to go down, a reporter will often be present at a club's ground or training ground to provide the latest. Yet, on deadline day, reporters are basically waiting around for deals that may or may not go through in time - and, sometimes, are waiting for deals that aren't even in the pipeline.

 

When a deal comes through, the Breaking News flashes up as the hopes for supporters of all 92 sides are raised, only for at least 91 to be dashed (since not all signings are welcomed). As the day goes on, there are usually a few marquee stories that provide the base for the day's reporting. Often, they are left until the last minute - which means the reporters that would normally provide an update every few hours could be required to literally speak dozens of times on camera, with the final diagnosis of "He's signed" only coming through at about 3 minutes to midnight.

 

The best (or worst) part, though, is the rumours that are spread. This could be something plausible (e.g. Fernando Torres has just been seen arriving at Stamford Bridge), something a little less likely (e.g. Riquelme has been spotted at Everton) or just plain ludicrous (e.g.

 David Beckham has been spotted buying ciggies at an off licence in Kirkby). These "spots" are supposed to be designed to inform fans of the latest goings-on - yet the majority of them are linked to deals that won't happen, and would never happen, and some of them are likely to be, well, false.

 

To be fair, this isn't always by reporters; fans will occasionally email the studio with their sights, although some of them are clearly taking the mickey. This doesn't happen any other time of the year; it happens on deadline day because Sky have created an event, essentially, out of nothing, and people who recognise this make fun of it.

 

As a Liverpool fan, the vast majority of events on the day have no relevance to me. Not that I'm not interested; just that they don't affect Liverpool. The exception was last January, with the Suarez-Torres-Carroll saga, but otherwise the Reds usually leave it to the others to fill up Sky's air time. This leads me to the sides who seemingly build their transfer budget around deadline day (have you ever noticed that Tottenham ALWAYS try to sign someone on deadline day, and usually in the late hours?). This may be exciting to their fans, but if you think that they've had weeks to sign some players, they're either disorganised, greedy for attention or they've spotted someone else is up for sale and try to hijack the deal in an attempt to hurt their rivals, regardless of whether it benefits them (e.g. Spurs trying for Charlie Adam last January). I understand that some deals are forced to be settled in the closing minutes, but when it happens all the time, you start to question the club's policies.

 

Anyway, as the final moments tick down it feels like New Year's Eve. You want the seconds to tick down, but at the same time you wish it could go on longer. Only, when the clock strikes 12 on deadline day, you don't get balloons, party poppers, boats hooting or Auld Lang Syne; you just get some over-the-top graphic (e.g. SSN had new players wearing strips they'd never worn before on the side of Big Ben) and Sky Sports News telling you the deals have/haven't gone through - which makes following the big stories all day rather pointless, since you could just wait until midnight and get everything confirmed then.

 

And, as I said, some deals don't get completed for a day or two afterwards - which makes the whole point of deadline day seem a bit irrelevant.

 

However, the day itself has provided memorable moments over the years. Not necessarily from SSN's point of view, but in general, some major deals - amongst the biggest of the season - have gone through in the dying moments of deadline day. From Robinho shockingly signing for Man City, to Berbatov's transfer to Man Utd, to Torres going to Chelsea, nothing can be ruled out on deadline day. You'd think that the club chairmen could NEVER buy anyone ever again after deadline day for the ways in which deals that were nonexistant at 8 pm are suddenly all over the back pages by mdinight.

 

And, in fairness to Sky, they are the masters of hype - making anything sound exciting, From the Breaking News ticker to the messages that someone with an awful lot of contacts has just had on their phone to the quick cut-aways to your favourite team's training ground, Sky have managed to create an event out of something that once came and went without notice.

 

Deadline day is actually most enjoyable for the armchair fan, whose club isn't about to lose a major star, or who isn't in danger of missing out on a top deal due to time running out. If your club is essentially doing nothing, you can sit back and relax, and if a late deal does come through, it's a pleasant surprise and you only have to wait a few minutes for it to be confirmed/rejected, as opposed to the hours other fans anticipate a deal that eventually falls through. And if your club doesn't conduct any business at all - well, there's always next time.

 

So, whether your club is buying, selling or sitting back, deadline day should provide compelling viewing. Sky Sports News may have taken a basic rule and made it an over-the-top extravaganza, but it undoubtedly provides the channel with higher ratings than usual, and gets the fans of most clubs excited. As for whether I'll be watching - well, I may flick over to channel 405 on the Sky+ now and again, but I doubt I'll spend the entire day doing nothing more than sitting as close to the TV and possible and begging for a deal to go through in time.

 

Unless my team sign anyone, of course.

WrestleMarkia: August 20 2011

I have been a wrestling fan, particularly of the WWF/WWE, for over 20 years now. As the above title suggests, this is my weekly blog looking at the latest developments on WWE TV and PPV. Note that this is a quick overview of all the week's key events, as opposed to show or match reports.

 

Before I get started, I realise that not everything in WWE is real. So, I will look at events as a fan, but at the same time not under the impression that certain events aren't somewhat prearranged.

 

I also want to state that, as I live in Liverpool, England, most WWE action doesn't come on TV until the end of the week. So, expect this to be a report that you read every weekend.

 

Finally, I do watch the other shows like NXT, Superstars and Vintage Collection (which is sometimes the highlight of the week's WWE viewing, to me anyway), but as many fans do not, I will concentrate solely on Raw, SmackDown and any Pay-Per-Views. That said, I'll make passing references to the other shows, if necessary.

 

I'll start with SummerSlam last Sunday. Beforehand, it didn't seem like a major event (not compared to past 'Slams, anyway), and prior to the World Title Match it felt like it bit of a disappointment. Fortunately, the No Holds Barred match was a memorable one, and assuming that it is the end of the Christian/Randy Orton feud, it was a great finale. Edge's appearance beforehand was a surprise, although it wasn't so unexpected that The Viper won the championship from Captain Charisma. There may have been one more bout left in the rivalry, but after four months, it may be time to go onto new things, for both Orton and Christian.

 

The main event, Cena vs Punk with HHH as referee, was a good one, although a bit inferior to the Money In The Bank headliner. I had a feeling Punk would win, since the pre-SummerSlam developments may have made a Cena victory too obvious. That said, Kevin Nash's return to powerbomb the new/still champ afterwards was a shocker, which led to Del Rio cashing in MITB and winning the WWE Title. It's interesting to ponder events in retrospect, and realise the subtle hints thrown for such an unexpected occurence (Del Rio's failed attempt at MITB, Punk beating Alberto on Raw).

 

However, on Raw Punk basically ended any sort of involvement with Del Rio and the Title - at least for now. Instead, he interrupted Kevin Nash's explanation for what he did, and although a few humorous insults were fired, the interview never really answered any questions - nor did Triple H's speech at the beginning. Speaking of which: he entered John Cena's locker room - and we know nothing else about it. As for Cena himself: he attacked Del Rio after he beat Rey Mysterio and attempted to injure him, which appears to set up a Cena vs Del Rio Title showdown in the short-term. Long-term, though, anything could happen.

 

The above paragraph may seem confusing, but that's mainly because Raw was, well, confusing. Recent events look like the early stages of a major WWE development - and it appears at this point like anybody could be on either side. Are Nash and HHH together? If so, are they aligned with Stephanie and John Laurinitis (who is popping up more and more on Raw)? Where does Alberto Del Rio fit in? Are John Cena and CM Punk now aligned? And has everything (from Punk's initial attempt to leave WWE, to Vince McMahon being "relieved of his duties", to the SummerSlam controversy) all been designed to allow HHH a full-on takeover of WWE - which could lead to some shocking twists, turns and comebacks?

 

It's hard to say. At this point, I would guess that HHH, Stephanie, Nash and Laurinitis are secretly aligned, with Del Rio being their crown jewel Champion. If they were to recruit other stars, like Dolph Ziggler and Jack Swagger (who could both be managed by Vickie Guerrero soon), and oppose the likes of Cena, Mysterio and Punk, who would be led by a dominant leader (Vince McMahon? Mick Foley? Shawn Michaels?), it could be one of the biggest stories on Raw in a long time. It would be even better if it included a major gang fight at, say, Survivor Series, wherein someone like John Cena turned on his partners and joined HHH's alliance - which just happens to be the night where we will apparently hear from Cena's WrestleMania 28 opponent, The Rock. So, although this week's show was a bit hard to follow, it does seem like the intention was to leave more questions than answers - answers which look to be provided, in a big way, in the near future.

 

As for SmackDown: without Christian, the show felt it was lacking something - especially when Mark Henry won the Number One Contender's 20 Man Battle Royal. I can understand that Orton and Christian couldn't fight for the rest of 2011 on every PPV, but after 15 years of not doing much in WWE, I doubt there are many people who tune into SD to see Mark Henry. Hopefully, if it leads to a PPV match, Orton will beat Henry at Night Of Champions - and then move on to a different opponent for Hell In A Cell. Could that see Christian have "one last shot" at the Viper, finally ending their rivalry? It may sound repititive, but I bet it'd be better than a Cell match with Orton and Henry. Besides, the Cell was originally designed to end major feuds - not give an excuse for a contender who probably won't become Champion to get a(nother) shot.

 

Daniel Bryan fought Del Rio on SD too, in a match which was an improvement on their display last week (partly because it seemed Bryan got injured on the SD before SummerSlam when fighting the "Mexican Aristocrat".) Although DBryan lost, which doesn't bode well for a MITB winner, other briefcase holders, like CM Punk in 2009 and The Miz in 2010, had losing streaks before capturing the title. Incidentally, I have a sneaking suspicion that Bryan may not wait until WM 28 to cash it in. Something tells me he will cash it in on an unsuspecting champion (e.g. Orton) a few weeks before Mania, turn into a full on bad guy in the process, and then defend the title, rather than hope to win it, at WM 28. But you never know.

 

So, an interesting week in WWE. SummerSlam 2011 wasn't the greatest SS ever, nor was it likely to be - but did create a few memorable moments. The Punk-Cena story is over - but the HHH storyline has taken a new direction, and there are many different ways it could go. It could lead to comebacks, betrayals or even retirements. It's definitely a story that will develop slowly, and once everything is in place, it is likely to dominate Raw for the remainder of the year. SmackDown looks less inspiring, due to the absence of Christian and the fact that Mark Henry has yet another World Title shot lined up - but SD has always been about wrestling as opposed to stories, so if the same amount of quality matches are on display (such as Bryan vs Del Rio last night), it should chug along okay.

 

I conclude this column with a few choice quotes from WWE TV this week.  You can decide which one is the funniest of the week - whether intentionally or unintentionally. (By the way, they're not word-for-word.)

 

CM Punk to Kevin Nash: "Do you wanna see the text message my sister sent to me? Here it is: 'OMG, Kevin Nash, WTF, thought he was dead, LOL!'" - CM Punk with a darkly comical dig at Kevin Nash

 

"Eventually, Del Rio, you are going to have to defend that Title." - John Cena to Alberto Del Rio, moments after he HAD successfully defended the title (and successfully) against Rey Mysterio, in Rey's hometown, and without cheating

 

"I celebrated my 25th wedding anniversary this year. I remember my wedding like it was yesterday. If it was tomorrow, I'd cancel it." - William Regal to Todd Grisham on NXT

 

I finish with words that you'll often hear on WWE TV: "We'll see you next week, good night everybody!"

iPhone

I want an iPhone.

Why?

That's what I'm trying to work out.

For a couple of weeks now, I've been thinking about getting one. I can't remember whether it was because of failings with my current phone, or whether I saw someone else using it and thought it was much better than mine, or if I was simply brainwashed by the advert saying "If you don't have an iPhone, you don't have an iPhone." (Whoever thought of that line was a genius, eh?)

But regardless, for the last few weeks I have been trying to save up a bit of money, with the intention of - soon - getting an iPhone.

As stated, I'm not sure why. The iPhone looks good, no doubt. From the typical capabilties of a modern-day mobile to the huge amount of memory, and further advanced features, it just seems like, the next time I require a new phone, I should get this one.

But what makes the iPhone better than mine, or any others? And do I really need it?

My current mobile is a Nokia 3200 slide (or something like that; I can't remember its exact name). It has a camera, video mechanism, sound recorder and Internet access, amongst other stuff. It also has (with a memory card anyway) a lot of storage space, and other functions that make it a good phone. I've had it for over two years and, besides a week where it went all funny because of heavy rain (made worse by the fact it happened right after Liverpool's embarrassing defeat to Northampton), it's pretty good.

Yet I want an iPhone.

I know I am 23, and not 3. I know that I have a 20 GB MP3 player, which would probably have more room than an iPhone. Even the 20 GB is too much: I've got 1200+ tracks on it, and barely half the memory is taken. And that's after four years with the thing. I know that I have a digital camera, which takes much better pictures than an iPhone. As for videos: unless I wanted to live my life via YouTube, I don't need anything more than a basic recorder.

In other words, everything an iPhone appears to do, I already have devices that do these things - maybe even better.

But I still want an iPhone.

The reason?

Everyone else has one.

Well, nearly everyone.

Back when I got my first mobile, everyone - and I mean, everyone - else I knew had one. The actual model I got was good enough for me, yet still lagging behind the others. It was like Doctors to Coronation Street, or Daybreak to GMTV, or Matthew Hatton to, er, Ricky Hatton.

My second phone was brilliant - did everything you could ask, given the standards of the time - but then broke. My next two phones were good, but had frequent slowdown issues. (Does that make sense? I don't know.) And so I then went onto the phone I have now.

Each one got better as I went on: there was always an increase in the storage of pics, songs and clips; there was always an increase in the quality of the pictures themselves; and there were always new and exciting features (I felt like I had won the Lotto when I discovered a phone that allowed you to play Monopoly. Even if it was someone's else's, I was proper chedded,)

But the best today is never enough for tomorrow. There is always a newer, better version to come. Even with a device where you think, "They couldn't have done anymore" - well, they usually do.

Which may explain why I want an iPhone.

The camera is much better - I have tried it and the pics look as they would on a digital camera, unlike my current phone wherein an object has to be very close or it goes a bit fuzzy. There is far more room for music; I have the MP3, but I like to store my "current" favourites on my phone, for which there is only room for a couple. And I would imagine that the Internet access is far better than on the Slide, where you wait 5 minutes for your emails to show up, only to be told that due to some error you can't see them, and have wasted credit while waiting. As for the apps: I know too little about them, but needless to say my current phone doesn't have those, either.

This doesn't just apply to phones. It applies to TV's (did we need HD or 3D years ago?), computer consoles (I used to think the graphics on Goldeneye 007 were amazing, even when some fella's arm magically went halfway through a door), PC's (80GB was more than enough for me in 2006; now I'm only considering getting laptops with 500GB or more) and virtually everything else in life. You may have the best that's out now, but it won't always be the best. But that's life: you get what you want more than anything, and still want more.

And no doubt, in years to come, we will consider even the iPhone to be a relic of a bygone era.

So, for that reason, I have lost interest in buying an iPhone. Sure, it's great and advanced and all that, but it wll still end up being inferior to something else, and costs hundreds of pounds anyway. (Actually, that's probably more of a deciding factor than everything else). And besides, it may have all the fancy features, but it still does the same as my current mobile - and every other one currently in existence.

That is, to call and text people.

So, I shall stick with my Nokia 3200 slide, at least until it breaks. It may not have apps, the normal memory (as in, without memory cards) may be a little stingy and the camera may only work if you're practically touching the face of the guy whose picture you're taking, but this only seems inferior because the iPhone is available - and even if I get the iPhone, that will someday be second best too.

Therefore, I no longer want an iPhone. The guy said "If you don't have an iPhone, you don't have an iPhone." Well, I don't have an iPhone, and I no longer want to have an iPhone.

Well, not as much.

X Factor

A few days ago, I discussed Big Brother. Here, I look at another phenomenon, even bigger than BB, that is just days away from its new series: The X Factor.

 

No, not the finishing move or gang created by the wrestler X-Pac (don't worry, only those who watch WWE will get that); it's the show that has grown from a showcase for new talent to the biggest talent show of all-time! Well, that's what ITV would tell you.

 

Depending on who you speak to, X Factor 2011 will either be a huge letdown, due to the absence of Simon Cowell and Cheryl Cole, or the start of an exciting and, perhaps, improved chapter in the show's history, due to the absence of, er, Simon Cowell and Cheryl Cole.

 

But regardless of whether ratings remain high and if the bickering between judges gets better or worse, the question must be asked: after seven years, how much life is left in the X Factor?

 

A look into its background may help . . .

 

The show that we know today began life as Popstars in 2001. This was very different to the modern programme: this was designed to find five singers and put them all into one final group. It was every man (and woman) for himself; the band members may not have even lived in the same region of the country, yet they would end up performing together. Another important element was that everything was pre-taped, from the auditions to the judge's selection of the final band members to the release of their first single. Lastly, the general public had no - as in, zero - input into the programme, besides buying the song and watching the show. For those who complain that their favourite never got enough votes nowadays, consider the time when, if your hero never made it, well it was tough.

 

This met with tremendous success, leading to Pop Idol later in the year - wherien solo artists would be found, then the audience would keep its favourites in via live trials (albeit in a studio wherein only judges were present), and finally the live shows wherein, week by week, the field would dwindle until only one remained. This was even more successful, and made stars not only of the winner (Will Young), but those who weren't victorious (Gareth Gates, Darius). Both shows returned between 2002 and 2004, before the arrival of . . . ta da! The X Factor.

 

This allowed for most age ranges, and all combinations (young, old, group). The judges included Simon Cowell, who had by now become a bigger star than most of the previous acts, if not all of them.

 

Long story short: since then, each series has garnered huge ratings, and many successful acts, whether they won or not, have been established. The judges themselves have become bigger names than they already were: for all their wealth, people like Cowell and Louis Walsh weren't really known before these programmes. Now, people can't help but recognise them.

 

But this is a big year - oh, yes! There are new judges, as Simon takes up the "special appearance" role and Cheryl Cole has - well, you probably know already about her. The changes have led some to speculate that this year's X Factor will tank, and possibly be the beginning of the end for the show.

 

And there are a few reasons why this may actually be a good thing.

 

Don't get me wrong, it remains compelling viewing, but after seven years of the same format, to me the show has gotten more than a little stale. Granted, there are new judges - but I don't think that this will make a big difference. If anything, it may dilute the entertainment that comes from the frequent disagreements.

 

Oh, yes, the judges. At one time, they lived up to their name: Nigel Lythgoe in 2001 was there to judge talent, not to create a TV moment every time he spoke. In the last few years, however, a show can't go by without a pantomine performance that allows the good guys and bad guys to shine. Okay, some of their banter is funny - but isn't the show about the acts? Or do they merely provide a base for the "hilarious" Louis Walsh to insult a fellow judge in a way that even kids in Year 5 would deem embarrassing? After years of this, I am a tad bored.

 

As for the acts themselves: I like how the show provides a format for the singers to finally make it big. But, again, the structure is staler than last week's Hovis. For instance, the "sob story" is so common, it was used to mock the show by Peter Kay in his 2008 spoof (the name of which is too long for me to write here). I haven't got a problem with someone who has a troubled past and tries to make a better future for themselves. But, by watching X Factor, you'd think that most of the UK population had all just recovered from a terrible moment mere hours ago.

 

Even the production has become dull. Have you ever watched an act audition, and wondered if they'll advance - only for some positive Westlife song to fade in, thereby ruining the suspense and giving away what happens? That it's often the same song (and one produced, not so coincidentally, by Louis Walsh) also doesn't help.

 

But the worst part is its effect on the music industry, and television. To start with, ITV tailor their whole year around the August-December marathon, which means their Saturday night line-up for the rest of the year reeks of laziness. (Some would say that applies to ITV as a whole, but that's besides the point.) What gets me, though, is how the prestige of the Christmas Number One has been shattered. This used to be the big one for musicians: it was like winning the FA Cup Final. But, since 2005, every year but one has seen the winner get the Xmas #1.

 

Some may say that shows the power of the, er, show. But I say it's because X Factor exploits the modern-day "social network" audience, who are easily influenced by the show and are brainwashed into immediately purchasing a single online that, deep down, they may not even like but, because it's X Factor-related, they get it. It means now that bookmakers take odds on who will finish #2, because X Factor has padlocked the #1 spot and thrown away the key.

 

Only a Facebook campaign (for a track even worse than the X Factor hit) stopped the show getting #1 in 2009. That may indicate that the programme is not invincible, but it does show how desperate people are to stop it, and how fed up people are that the X Factor winner gets - not earns - the biggest musical prize of the year before, in many cases, fading into obscurity. Heck, even music channels, when listing the Xmas #1 of the last few decades, end their list before the X Factor started. People complain that only Celtic and Rangers can win the SPL, but at least there are still two potential winners - not one.

 

I haven't written this to be a misery, by the way; just to express some opinions. I don't hate the programme, but feel some aspects could be improved, or removed. X Factor does have its benefits, of course: it rakes in millions of viewers at a time when we have more channels than ever before; it provides undiscovered talent, who otherwise may never have made it, with a chance to become a huge star within weeks; and it provides Gary Barlow with a job while Take That write their next album. And, for all its faults, it provides entertainment, glamour and talent in a way that no other show does.

 

However, there is a chance that the bubble has burst. This isn't 2001, when the concept was a novelty. In 2011, the format has been used repeatedly and, although ratings remain high, I can't imagine that the show has gotten better by the year, unless the acts have talent.

 

And that's what it's really about: showcasing talent. Never mind the auditions, the judges, the loveable antics of Olly Murs: the show exists, primarily, to promote and build new stars. But what if X Factor disappears?

 

ITV won't want this to happen, of course, nor do many others. Britain loves the X Factor, and couldn't cope without it. But the same was said of Big Brother - and, although it is coming back, it was eventually cancelled, mainly due to lack of interest in a stale format.

 

Could this happen to X Factor? I don't know. I can see the benefits of such an occurence, but wouldn't say that I wish for it to become a reality (Pun intended). At this point, it's extremely unlikely. But you can't rule it out: even the greatest concept eventually grows old.

 

So, whilst the judges may add a new coat of paint, the house still looks the same. (Wow, that was poetic.) I think this has to be a big year on-screen for X Factor, because if the show turns out to be far less appealing than in previous years, it's the X Factor that will face the judges. Enjoy this year's show, if you can - because, if you don't, and don't in the years to come, not even ITV will have the X Factor.

Mark’s Match Thoughts: Liverpool vs Sunderland, 2011/2012

I normally do blogs about a variety of subjects, and will continue to do so, but I am also starting a series of blogs wherein I provide a report of Liverpool’s most recent match.

A few things to begin with: firstly, I am a Liverpool FC fan, and live in Liverpool, which explains why I am doing this (just in case you think I’m from Newcastle or something). In addition, whilst I have written “proper” match reports in the past, and continue to do them, consider this more of a personal column as opposed to a moment-by-moment breakdown.

Think John Aldridge’s column in the Echo – except I never played for the Reds. Or managed Tranmere Rovers. Or played in the World Cup. (Fun fact: the stadium where Aldo had a bit of a tiff in 1994, the Citrus Bowl in Orlando, is the same venue where I attended WrestleMania XXIV in 2008.) Or had any type of a professional football career.  Or . . . oh, never mind.

Anyway, on to the first game of Liverpool’s season, against Sunderland.

I attended the match, and hope to be at all of Liverpool’s home games this season (I am a Member, not a Season Ticket holder, so it’s down to availability for me). Sitting in the Kop, you could feel the energy and excitement of the supporters as kick-off drew near. We had waited months for this day, this match, this moment – and considering the changes made to the squad, there were plenty of reasons for optimism.

The two sides came out to an almighty roar. Within a few minutes of the match starting, Luis Suarez earned a penalty. From where I sat (seat 191 on row 15 of the Kop, to be exact), it looked a clear penalty. Very few disagreed, but referee Phil Dowd disagreed that the foul, by Kieran Richardson, was worthy of a sending off. He was the last man, after all, and as for the claim that Suarez wasn’t preparing to shoot – what else was he going to do, take the ball to the corner flag and burst it with the pole?

Anyway, Richardson got away with a booking, and Sunderland got away with it too as Suarez ballooned it over the crossbar. Despite the disappointment amongst the fans, though, things looked promising, and I said to myself, we’ve still got loads of time to get a goal.

That came on 12 minutes; a header from Suarez from a Charlie Adam free kick. Anfield roared, and Suarez had redeemed himself in the best way possible. It takes some players weeks to recover from a glaring error; the Uruguayan had taken just a matter of moments.

Oh, I forgot to mention: having previously noticed this, I decided to time exactly how long it would take before it inevitably happened here. When it occurred, I glanced at the scoreboard, which read 2:12. Two minutes, twelve seconds, for . . .

“Steve Bruce, he’s got a big fat head. Steve Bruce, he’s got a big fat head. Steve Bruce . . .”

You have to laugh at a chant like this. Last season, I noticed that even Sunderland players warming up on the touchline were chuckling at this one. It didn’t beat the record set at the Stadium Of Light (where the travelling Liverpool fans took just 12 seconds to unleash the chant), but it was still fairly quick, and was repeated a few times as the game went on.

The rest of the first half, to me, was memorable for two moments: a disallowed goal for Andy Carroll, and a brilliant run by Stewart Downing that would have earned him Goal Of The Season (well, so far). Carroll’s strike was disappointing because, as replays showed, the decision to disallow it for a slight nudge on Anton Ferdinand was up for debate. New faces may be seen on the pitch, new stadiums may be built and new ways may be available to criticise a team’s strategies (hello, Twitter), but in terms of the refereeing decisions, and whether or not they are correct, some things never change.

Mind you, at half time, the fans weren’t too bothered. LFC were 1-0 up, and the team generally looked sharp, and miles ahead of Sunderland. If the Reds got another goal early in the second half, I doubt Liverpool wouldn’t have ended up with three points.

But in the second half, things changed. I feel that some players may have assumed they had the victory secured, and sat back. Or maybe Steve Bruce gave him a bit of a roasting at half time. Whatever the case, Sunderland looked a lot more threatening in the opening stages of the second half, and the Black Cats equalised through a stunning strike by Sebastian Larsson.

From there, the game kind of fizzled out, at least from the perspective of a Liverpool fan in the stands. As I said in a previous blog, I wasn’t getting my hopes up that we were going to challenge for the title this season – but the first half display was good enough that anything besides a win would be a disappointment on the day.

A few chances for Carroll were squandered, and I feel it wouldn’t have been the case had his earlier goal counted. A player’s confidence has a major impact, in my opinion, on their performance; that goal could have made him more daring, more willing to give it a go. Instead, the chances created barely came close. Once Suarez went off, I felt Liverpool’s chances of getting the win had evaporated.

In fairness, it wasn’t just Carroll; a few players looked a bit exhausted towards the end. Even those who came on, like Dirk Kuyt, didn’t make much of a difference. In the end, a game of two halves described the day’s events, as a sure-fire defeat for Sunderland ended up being a well-deserved draw.

It would be unfair to say that Liverpool threw it away; Larsson’s goal was very good, which few goalies would have kept out. Some criticised John Flanagan for not marking him, but sometimes these things happen and, due to his frequent inclusions in the squad, it’s easy to forget that Flanagan is young and fairly inexperienced. Besides, every defender makes a mistake at some point, as does every player, for that matter.

It’s also worth remembering that the two key decisions had an influence. A ten-man Sunderland losing 2-0 after half an hour would have had a far smaller chance of nabbing a point than the 11 men who benefitted from Phil Dowd.

That said, it was still a bit of a let-down leaving Anfield after the final whistle. I’ve always thought with games like this that you’d rather be losing 1-0 and equalise, or to just play out a goalless draw. You may have a less comfortable viewing experience, but you’d feel a little better when it’s all over.

But overall, I felt pretty positive about the game. The new signings played well, on the whole; Suarez showed character by quickly making up for his penalty miss with a goal; and even though the second half was subpar, it’s still only the first game of the season. Not everyone is fully fit, and there are others waiting to return to the squad.

The season isn’t always decided in May, but it definitely isn’t decided in August. A showdown at the Emirates with Arsenal is up next, who are just starting life after Fabregas, and I feel it’s a good time to play them. By the time I next visit Anfield for a League game, against Bolton Wanderers, hopefully there will be more smiles on people’s faces, and more reasons to believe that, in regards to this past Saturday, it will be the first half, not the second, that is a sign of things to come.

18

There are upsides and downsides to being 23 years old. On the one hand, many of the things I enjoyed doing when I was younger have either disappeared, or the sight of me doing it would now look strange.

On the other hand, though, being over 18 has its advantages. There are new things to do, new places to see, new challenges to overcome. One can do almost anything, within reason, once they pass Dirk Kuyt’s squad number.

But there are still times when I am led to believe that I am still 15 or 16. One of those occurred today, when I entered a shop and went to purchase two DVDs, one of which had an 18 rating.

I was asked for any ID, and had my old student cards with me, which I keep for occasions such as this. This wasn’t good enough, though, and I was asked for my passport.

Now, when I left home this morning, I didn’t expect to end up on a flight from John Lennon Airport, nor was I en route to some sort of drinking excursion to advertise Bargain Booze. In other words, I didn’t have my passport with me.

Eventually, I could buy one DVD, but not the 18-rated one. I actually wasn’t that upset; it’s not like my whole world will crumble in because of it.  And to such an age-conscious person as myself, it was a nice reminder that, to some, I still look, well, under 18.

But I wondered why I couldn’t get the item. After all, I did have two cards, from University, with my photograph on them. The thought that someone would go and make a mock-up ID card for the sake of buying a DVD didn’t seem that realistic to me.

In addition, I pondered the issue of the passport. As I said, I didn’t intend to go on a one-way flight to the Caribbean, so I felt it unnecessary to bring my passport. And it’s an important piece of equipment, too: I wouldn’t want to risk losing it, and missing out on a proper holiday abroad, just to satisfy one person behind a shop counter.

And then there’s my appearance. One cannot see exactly what I look like on this blog, because I didn’t think any were worth seeing in relation to any of my posts (see http://www.facebook.com/#!/marmstrong3 if you do), but let me give a brief description. I am fairly tall, as in approaching Peter Crouch. In addition, I had a reasonable amount of stubble, which I assume not many under 16s would have. And, judging from the deepness of my voice, you’d assume I get my tonsils removed on a daily basis. What I’m saying is, I don’t look under 18; so this is why I questioned the decision to refuse me the sale.

None of this would matter if I genuinely was underage. But, not only am I not underage, I am five years over the limit. It’s not like I’ve just got over the birthday party yesterday.

To be fair, I understand why the shops do it (to prevent under-age people buying products featuring loads of swearing, violence etc), and realise that a passport is the definitive way to check one’s age. But haven’t there been cases on the news wherein fake passports have been used? I had the student card which, to be fair, was a few years out of date, but it was genuine. What’s to stop some kid slapping a picture of his mug on a passport that says he was born before 1993? It isn’t hard, and you will get some scallies who would try it.

And I also recognise that you will get some staff who will check customers for ID, even if the chances are remote that they are trying to be sly and sneak off with something they aren’t old enough to even understand, never mind watch.

In my previous retail experience, I always got a little bit nervous as to who may be of the correct age and who isn’t. The vast majority of those who tried to buy alcohol were over 18, and for those who I was a little unsure of, I asked for ID.

Yet I had the sense to realise who needed questioning. As such, the al fellah with grey hair spouting out of his ears didn’t require a check, but the student who had his hair done like someone in Green Day and a ring through his lip probably did. Very few didn’t have ID; and, in those cases, I didn’t do the sales.

But it’s just annoying when you’re not sold the product, even though you’re of the right age, just because the exact form of ID is not at your disposal. I’m at that awkward age where I’m old enough for almost everything, but don’t look old enough.

It’s happened before, though. I remember being devastated in 1999 when, aged 11, I couldn’t go into the Odeon to see Austin Powers 2 (although, since it was a 12-rated film, the staff were correct to stop me). Ironically, the 12A certificate now would have made that legal.

The worst instance was last year, the day before I turned 22. I went to put on the Lotto, and was rejected because I didn’t look 16. 16! If I genuinely was under 16, I would have been in school at the time, and since I surely didn’t look 14 or below, I would have been ripping my hair out panicking about GCSEs. Not messing about, trying to steal a Lotto ticket at ASDA.

And besides, it was for a lottery that my odds of winning were comparable to Rupert Murdoch being given the Noble Peace Prize, where even the kid who has just started Year 11 and bunks his way on the bus home without paying could legally be allowed.

Amazingly, the same thing happened just a week or so ago. Now that I think about it, they didn’t even ask for my passport, or ID; they just basically said, well, you can’t put it on. Over seven years since I turned 16, I apparently don’t look 16, or 18. But I am 23. I could also mention the incident involving me and a bookmakers – but you get the point.

So, how to solve this problem? It isn’t necessarily a dilemma for shops, or those who look their age so that it’s clear how old they are. But for those who lie between 18 and the mid-20s, who are old enough but can persuade others they are a teenager, it’s annoying.

I would suggest a new ID card, designed primarily for moments wherein age restricted products are purchased. There’s no point having something like a University card or an NUS card if, outside the college, it does nothing but display you at your worst; and a passport should be used only for holidays. Since, you know, that’s what a passport is for.

I think a new ID card should be implemented, designed for shops, bars etc. It would ensure that anyone who bought something that they may get asked about knows what evidence to provide. It would reduce the likelihood of important items such as passports being lost over the purchase of Saw V. And it would mean that shops couldn’t say “Oh, that card’s not the one; we need the other one.” It would also help to add something wherein cards couldn’t be forged when they’re allocated to people, like a thumbprint.

To be fair, there are more pressing matters for the Government right now, and the recent riots will hardly play second fiddle to ensuring that someone has no problems buying Call Of Duty. But, once there is a little more peace restored to our country, perhaps this idea could be looked into and developed. Because, in a few years, if I am about to celebrate the big 3-0 and I still can’t buy that DVD, I’ll be longing for the days when you just got your mum to buy it for you.

BB

I predicted it would happen. Even if it wasn’t this year, it was bound to occur, sooner or later.

Big Brother is coming back.

It doesn’t have a major cash prize (well, compared to some shows). It doesn’t offer much exposure once the show ends. And it doesn’t provide a forum for participants to show their talent such as X Factor (although you’ll always get someone who tries, and fails). And yet, it attracts an audience of millions that are thoroughly entertained by the barmy antics of the housemates.

Or so it seemed.

When BB launched in the UK in 2000, the talking point was the Nasty Nick saga which earned front page coverage on national newspapers. You don’t get that from Come Dine With Me.

It was also a novelty at the time to have such a show. Most programmes involving an element of competition were either quiz shows, game shows (there is a difference) or sports events. There were probably others, but I’m just emphasising that there were very few reality shows.

Big Brother changed that: the concept of regular people living with each other for weeks on end, in front of ever-present cameras, grabbed the attention of many viewers. So much so that it is partly responsible for most reality shows that have come along since. Today, the majority of TV programmes have a reality-based element to them, from I’m A Celebrity to, er, Show Me The Funny.

From 2000 to 2002, BB entertained many, but then in 2003 the first drop came. The housemates cast were considered “too boring”; there were very few notable events. Translated: there weren’t many arguments. Everything from an inter-show deal with the South African Big Brother to a secret room were implemented (don’t worry, I’m using the Internet to research much of this) and yet, viewers didn’t seem to care.

BB5 was definitely more eventful than BB4, with the “peak” being the first ever proper fight between housemates that saw one evicted. However, it seemed desperate that those in charge had to resort to situations that were likely to cause major antagonism to get people watching. (And, if bosses were “so sorry” to police that the situation happened, why try and relive it in 2006?)

The personalities of the housemates were also a hindrance: some seemed to have been picked for the sole purpose of causing trouble. This was due to a clash of extreme personalities. The same could be said of any team who uses El Hadji Diouf, but that’s another story. And some of them were a bit, well, strange. Big Brother, in 2000, used people that viewers could relate to. In 2004, this wasn’t entirely the case.

Over the next few years, the housemates got odder, as did the names of those who participated. Kinga? Science? Sunshine? I doubt I’d end up calling one of my kids by any of those names, assuming I ever have any. (Incidentally, if you are ever bored, try and come up with a list of some fantasy names for Big Brother housemates; it’s surprisingly humorous).

Anyway, by 2008 the novelty of weirdos living with each other on live TV had wavered. It’s telling that, from this point on, rumours began about BB’s cancellation. It didn’t matter what the challenges were, how long it lasted, or what hilarious music was used to awaken housemates; the novelty had finally worn off. Big Brother may be watching, but many were no longer watching Big Brother.

In 2010, it was finally cancelled. Whereas in 2002 it was Channel 4’s biggest show of the year, by 2010 people were glad to see it go. Except, I had a feeling that it would return. After all, look at its appeal.

Exactly.

What is the appeal of Big Brother? I admit, I used to enjoy sitting on a couch watching people sitting on a couch (as Billy Connolly put it). It didn’t matter that many episodes concerned trivial issues such as who buttered the toast; it was entertaining to see.

But was it? Not much was really going on. There were few laugh-out-loud moments, and not many housemates possessed a hidden talent. Really, to many, BB was at its most entertaining when the housemates were embroiled in arguments and/or fights.

I wouldn’t entirely turn my face away from the TV if the housemates started moaning at each other, but at the same time it says a lot about Britain as a nation, in terms of its viewing demands – or at least, in the minds of TV producers. After all, what is the highlight of the X Factor live finals each week? Is it the acts themselves, or the bickering between judges? (I’ll go into X Factor more in an upcoming blog.)

Not everyone is like this, of course. But a lot of people do enjoy arguments and/or disturbances. The fact that shows like Shameless and Geordie Shore are very popular with young people is an example of this, and could also explain why many youngsters enjoy the odd pint, even if they’re too young to be legally drinking. Would it be too controversial to say that they also could explain why we may currently live in a “Broken Britain”?

Er, where was I? Oh yes, Big Brother. So, BB finished, and that was that – except Channel 5 bosses exploited the same notion that I’ve just mentioned: many people like seeing arguments and disturbances.

As a result, Big Brother returns in a matter of days. And, once the novelty of its comeback wears off, I dread to think how the channel that once had Rebecca Loos (She was a celebrity? Really?) and a pig on The Farm would try and spice things up.

I wonder why people bother entering BB any more. I can understand X Factor, and other shows where people actually have something besides money that is worth winning. But Big Brother seems intended to promote only those who don’t mind completely humiliating themselves in exchange for some fame and press coverage. Type in George Galloway on Google and you’ll know what I mean.

In fairness to the celebrities, they are going in to either revive a doomed career, or are new faces trying to boost their profile, or are simply cash-strapped. Strangely, I sympathise more with those who are already famous (well, their Mum knows them, anyway) than those who aspire for fame. I understood why in the early years; but in 2011, most people realise that only the vast minority of housemates remain famous, post-Big Brother. For the sake of a few weeks of publicity, combined with the post-eviction Sunday scoop, it seems that some people are willing to do anything just to get a bit of fame. The fact that people in 2011 are only discussing Imogen Thomas because of a fling with a footballer says it all.

Whatever your opinion of Big Brother, whether you believe it makes stars out of nobodies, revives the careers of old celebrities (although it didn’t work for Leo Sayer), or is the low point of television, it is coming back. In the hands of Channel 5, it may reach new heights, it may sink in record time, or it may have a few years before being cancelled again. At which point, Sky One or Living will probably take it. But you never know.

Whether you love it or hate it, though, the majority of TV shows today are based on elements of reality. For that, you largely have Big Brother to thank/blame. And that, above the arguments, the Diary Room and Jon Tickle on Brainiac, is Big Brother’s true legacy, and one that cannot be taken away. Even if Channel 5 bring in Rebecca Loos as a surprise housemate.

Predictions

The new Premier League season is just days away. Many are wondering who will win the title, which teams can make Europe and the sides that face the drop.

But it’s harder to predict the other events that happen during a season. The matches are guaranteed, as are the awards; it’s everything else that’s up for debate.

You know, stories like the Andy Gray/Richard Keys saga. Stories like the FIFA World Cup voting farce. Stories like the situation involving Twitter and . . . well, let’s not get into that one.

Anyway, I have my own thoughts on who will finish where, but I am now going to present a list of what I call “alternative” predictions. They may happen, or they may not happen. But if those I’ve already referenced can take place, then so can the ones listed below. I have focused on teams first, and then will come some general ones. Don’t take them too seriously, but don’t necessarily rule them out either. Enjoy!

-         Arsene Wenger signs up to a deal with Specsavers, but irks sponsors by still claiming, with the glasses on, that “I didn’t see it.”

-         In an attempt to reboot its youth system, Aston Villa open a new training facility, naming it after its owner – the Early Lerner Centre.

-         After the commercial for Venky’s, several Blackburn players receive what they hope is an April Fool’s joke when they are asked to become the new face of Go Compare.

-         Bolton Wanderers’ club shop, believing fans will buy anything, unveil “Tin Coyle.”

-         New Chelsea manager Andre Villas-Boas is sacked for failing to win the Champion’s League in a game with Roman Abramovich on the PS3.

-         After a summer of frustration due to a lack of funds, David Moyes finally makes a signing – on a youngster’s autograph book in the Goodison car park.

-         Fulham fans are left scratching their heads when the Craven Cottage’s family enclosure is filled with statues of Michael Jackson and the Jackson Five.

-         Liverpool win the Premier League. (I hope.)

-         Manchester City’s excess spending reaches new heights when its owners put in a record £195 million bid . . . for Titus Bramble.

-         A Manchester United-initiated change in the law means that all referees assigned to “big” games must receive Alex Ferguson’s permission first.

-         Newcastle United’s hopes finally appear to be realised when Mike Ashley sells Newcastle and buys Sunderland . . . only for the Black Cats to win the Premier League.

-         Norwich City’s Premier League comeback is delayed when a swarm of bees come onto the pitch to attack the yellow-shirted players.

-         QPR boss Neil Warnock actually manages to compose himself and praise a match official after a League game. Well, one in 38 isn’t bad.

-         Tom Jones turns up five months late for a request to record Delilah as Stone’s FA Cup Final tune. Those who question the delay in his response are told, “It’s not unusual.”

-         Steve Bruce vehemently denies allegations that Sunderland are simply buying players that Man United don’t want. That night, United have seven players on their bench, all of whom are Sunderland players by January.

-         As Welsh side Swansea make their PL debut, Celtic and Rangers fondly reminisce about the days when the concept of two Scottish sides entering the English Premier League was considered outrageous.

-         Tottenham boss Harry Redknapp makes history by becoming the first manager to bid on every player in the world during the final hours of the summer transfer window. In January, he turns his attention to non-football players.

-         West Brom boss Roy Hodgson ponders how he has been with Fulham, Liverpool and WBA in little over a year. Seven new clubs later, he celebrates Christmas 2011.

-         After being sacked by Wigan, Roberto Martinez vows revenge on Dave Whelan and, to try and compete, opens his own shop, called Doc Martinez.

-         Mick McCarthy is eager to stamp out the threat of player power at Wolves, so he turns into an old friend who can calm any situation . . . Roy Keane.

And some extra expectations; consider them bonus predictions.

-         Honourable chairman David Gold turns up as a judge on the new series of X Factor. He sacks the winner from his record label within seconds of the Final ending. In a portable toilet at the ITV1 studios.

-         A contestant loses at the final stage of Who Wants To Be A Millionaire for being unable to correctly answer the question of why Mark Hughes left Fulham.

-         Andy Gray and Richard Keys suffer embarrassment when, low on funds, they agree to back a Funny Football Moments DVD – and find footage of the Wolves-Liverpool 2011 game plastered on the front. On the plus side, though, Andy Gray has a great new computer to give his kids for Christmas.

-         A supporter becomes a YouTube sensation for drying his hair on camera whilst a substitution is being made.

-         A fan sues Sky for complaining that he wasn’t hit in the face with a football while watching a match in 3D.

-         Goal Of The Month finally returns in its old form; as a telephone competition, wherein fans are told there will be absolutely no problems whatsoever. This proves to be correct when every goal for all ten months is scored by Didier Drogba.

-         Sky introduce a new interactive feature wherein if you’re watching a game and are bored, by pressing the red button you can actually jump into the television, run onto the pitch and score twenty-seven goals. Unfortunately, you can only score for Man United.

-         England qualify for Euro 2012, but the papers spend months running Fabio Capello down . . . and then wonder why England bomb out at the group stages.

-         A major manager retires after many successful years. Many realise he can’t achieve more, but others believe he still has what it takes to be the very best at what he does. Nevertheless, fans young and old wave a fond farewell . . . to the Fat Controller from Thomas The Tank Engine.

-         And, finally, best of all, Sepp Blatter agrees to a Panorama special during which he speaks honestly about claims of corruption and resigns as head of FIFA, whilst simultaneously forfeiting the next World Cup to England.

Okay, this is an absurd prediction.