John Lloyd reflects on five straight Davis Cup losses for Great Britain

Late on Sunday afternoon, a small minority of internet viewers glared at a poor quality video on the Lawn Tennis Association website as Dan Evans fell to Laurynas Grigelis 6 – 4 in the fifth set of the final rubber in Lithuania. The Euro-African Group II tie was a world away from the World Group days of 2008 that Britain had enjoyed when Tim Henman and Andy Murray led the British pack against Croatia. When the score ticked over to 6 – 4, the tiny Vitas Gerulaitis stadium erupted as Lithunia celebrated beating the inventors of tennis on a day that could spell the end of John Lloyd’s tether as Davis Cup captain, and brings the LTA’s annual £40m budget under question once again. Great Britain, again, were not good enough.

However, I am not going to sit here late on a Sunday night ranting on about the matches and what went wrong. I am going to put myself out there, and suggest why it went wrong and what needs to change. I will discuss my own experiences of tennis in Britain, both from home and at University, and then attempt to answer why Britain fails so enormously on the biggest stages?

I have played tennis at both club level and University level and would like to offer some criticisms to the way I have experienced it being organised for young people. My local club was dominated by the ‘all white dress code’, the toffs playing the geriatric doubles, the excessive joining fees and the expensive tennis lessons. It was impossible to join the clique and I never tried.

Britain has got tennis all wrong. It feels like we are living in the 1930s. At University, the Priory club doesn’t set an example of a tennis facility that is hungry to discover young talent, by offering free membership for promising players or tennis afternoons where you can turn up and play. Even the student membership, if you get on the one team on offer that is, is a mere £200! Tennis, for young people, remains an elitist sport in Britain and there is no drive from the LTA to change this.

The Wimbledon Championships are another area where the LTA fails to galvanize young people. £20 day passes are not feasible for young people living on pocket money or a Saturday job pay cheque. Moreover, the £90 final tickets (that can only be obtained through an adult ballot) are not exactly attractive to the promising fifteen year-old amateur. For all the LTA gets from the Championships’ income, maybe it should let Wimbledon keep some of its revenue and lower the prices so that young people can afford to go!

But, I hear you cry, if tennis is so dreadful in this country then how did Andy Murray manage to succeed? Well, the answer is simple, when Murray was a fifteen year-old amateur he left Scotland and travelled to live in Spain to train with the Spanish professionals; jealous of Nadal’s training programme. He never returned to train in Scotland and now trains in Miami. On the other hand, James Ward, Dan Evans, Ross Hutchins and the rest train at Roehampton Tennis Academy; where, despite the high class facilities, they are not subject to the rigours of international tennis academy standards and feel no need to step out on their own; the way Murray did.

Furthermore, the comfortable lifestyles the British players, of recent years, have been the subject of media scrutiny. If a British player gets a wildcard at Wimbledon, and loses in the first round he still takes back a cheque for around five thousand pounds! I don’t even see five thousand pounds to live on at University for a year!

For as long as the price of tennis remains high and the funded players remain well fed and watered, there will be no tennis revolution in Great Britain. Changes to LTA funding need to happen drastically; John Lloyd must go, and a new hunger must enter British Tennis…I hear Greg Rusedski may take up the post as the new Davis Cup captain – HELP!

No related posts.

With such fantastic insights such as “in the ten commandments, God never said ‘Thou shall not fail’”, this is a fantastic piece of lyrical work if you’re not looking for your standard ‘boo-hoo, girls don’t like me’ status-quo, as currently seen in far too much popular music.

Perhaps my favourite song off the album is Market Square which is a fun, classic folk influenced tale of a search for a rabbit. I’ve listened to this song about eight times now and it makes me smile every single time. Layers of beautiful piano, and frank acoustic riffs topped with Chris T-T’s clear vocals make this album a joy to listen to. You’ll enjoy every second of it.

8/10

No related posts.

Jenson Button claimed the Driver’s Championship in 2009

After arguably the most eventful off-season in the history of the sport, the 2010 Formula One season kicks-off this weekend in Bahrain. A massive shake-up in teams and drivers has seen two of the top seven teams from last season leave the sport (Toyota, BMW-Sauber), and just one of those remaining five teams retaining the same driver line-up (Red Bull). This year also sees the return of two iconic names in F1: Lotus and Senna. Redbrick Sport takes a look at the regulation changes for this season and makes a prediction for what we can expect as we enter the new season.

Amongst the rule changes for 2010, there are two which have much greater importance than the others. Firstly, the points system has been significantly overhauled. Points are now awarded to the top ten finishers (previously top eight) and will be given as follows: 25–18-15–12-10–8-6–4-2–1. Secondly, refuelling during races is banned after fifteen years. Officials are confident that with fuel strategy no longer in the equation, drivers will be forced to be more aggressive and overtake more on the track.

F1 also continues to face the obvious pressure to try and be as green as possible, and create energy-efficient fuels. Personally, I am highly sceptical as to whether these changes will actually produce better racing or not. Given the trend in recent seasons, I have little confidence that this season will produce more overtaking. The 2009 changes proved to be a catastrophe, with Brawn running away with the title after just seven races thanks to their questionable diffuser. I would predict that the 2010 competition  could be even worse, if it wasn’t for the fact that pre-season testing has showed that there is almost nothing to choose between several teams.).

Of course, that same pre-season testing can all mean nothing. Certain teams might have been ‘sandbagging’ and not showing their hand, but (like last season) this proves somewhat unlikely due to the significant rule change regarding fuel. McLaren, Ferrari, Red Bull and Mercedes appear to have a slight advantage over Force India, Sauber and Williams. Toro Rosso had a somewhat inconsistent program of testing so their true pace is still in question, while Renault appear to be a bit behind.

This season also sees three new teams enter the sport: Virgin, HRT (Hispania Racing Team) and the aforementioned Lotus. A fourth team, USF1, became somewhat of a laughing stock. The North-American based team was the first of the new teams to announce their intention to enter the sport, but have spectacularly failed in building a car and raising enough money. YouTube founder Chad Hurley pulled out of his involvement in the team which has signalled its premature demise. Serbian team: Stefan F1, had pushed to take their spot but were denied entry by the FIA. Peter Sauber is also back, having brought his team back from BMW after four seasons. Bruno Senna, the nephew of the late, great, Ayrton, will drive for HRT – who will travel to the first race without having even tested their car, the only team not to have done so.

So, who looks the best bet for title glory? Personally, I think it will be between Lewis Hamilton, Sebastian Vettel and the two Ferrari drivers: Fernando Alonso and Felipe Massa.. And what of reigning champion Jenson Button? I think he’ll get absolutely crushed by team-mate Hamilton. With regard to Michael Schumacher, I can see the statistically greatest F1 driver of all-time adding to his 91 race wins; and I don’t doubt his ability to put in a Championship-winning performance, but I just feel that the Mercedes team might lack that little bit extra needed to actually win the driver’s championship.

Pre season performance suggests that the title-battle will go down to the wire at Abu Dhabi in November; but whether that same competition will be play out on the track remains a mystery until Sunday. Race-long processions, especially with low-fuel determining the grid anyway, could become a standard feature with fuel loads no longer in the equation… but it’s the running order within that processions changing week-to-week which will just about save the season. I hope I’m proved wrong, and that the drivers really do overtake more on-track this season. In any case, I want to see refuelling brought back for 2011; I loved the strategy element in races.

A quick note about Bahrain: the Sakhir International Circuit sees a new configuration for 2010, with nine extra corners between the old turns four and five, reducing the total laps by eight to 49. It should be an exciting, quick fire start to the season!

Amongst the rule changes for 2010, there are two which have much greater importance than the others. Firstly, the points system has been significantly overhauled. Points are now awarded to the top ten finishers (previously top eight) and will be given as follows: 25–18-15–12-10–8-6–4-2–1. Secondly, refuelling during races is banned after fifteen years. Officials are confident that with fuel strategy no longer in the equation, drivers will be forced to be more aggressive and overtake more on the track.

F1 also continues to face the obvious pressure to try and be as green as possible, and create energy-efficient fuels. Personally, I am highly sceptical as to whether these changes will actually produce better racing or not. Given the trend in recent seasons, I have little confidence that this season will produce more overtaking. The 2009 changes proved to be a catastrophe, with Brawn running away with the title after just seven races thanks to their questionable diffuser. I would predict that the 2010 competition  could be even worse, if it wasn’t for the fact that pre-season testing has showed that there is almost nothing to choose between several teams.).

Of course, that same pre-season testing can all mean nothing. Certain teams might have been ‘sandbagging’ and not showing their hand, but (like last season) this proves somewhat unlikely due to the significant rule change regarding fuel. McLaren, Ferrari, Red Bull and Mercedes appear to have a slight advantage over Force India, Sauber and Williams. Toro Rosso had a somewhat inconsistent program of testing so their true pace is still in question, while Renault appear to be a bit behind.

This season also sees three new teams enter the sport: Virgin, HRT (Hispania Racing Team) and the aforementioned Lotus. A fourth team, USF1, became somewhat of a laughing stock. The North-American based team was the first of the new teams to announce their intention to enter the sport, but have spectacularly failed in building a car and raising enough money. YouTube founder Chad Hurley pulled out of his involvement in the team which has signalled its premature demise. Serbian team: Stefan F1, had pushed to take their spot but were denied entry by the FIA. Peter Sauber is also back, having brought his team back from BMW after four seasons. Bruno Senna, the nephew of the late, great, Ayrton, will drive for HRT – who will travel to the first race without having even tested their car, the only team not to have done so.

So, who looks the best bet for title glory? Personally, I think it will be between Lewis Hamilton, Sebastian Vettel and the two Ferrari drivers: Fernando Alonso and Felipe Massa.. And what of reigning champion Jenson Button? I think he’ll get absolutely crushed by team-mate Hamilton. With regard to Michael Schumacher, I can see the statistically greatest F1 driver of all-time adding to his 91 race wins; and I don’t doubt his ability to put in a Championship-winning performance, but I just feel that the Mercedes team might lack that little bit extra needed to actually win the driver’s championship.

Pre season performance suggests that the title-battle will go down to the wire at Abu Dhabi in November; but whether that same competition will be play out on the track remains a mystery until Sunday. Race-long processions, especially with low-fuel determining the grid anyway, could become a standard feature with fuel loads no longer in the equation… but it’s the running order within that processions changing week-to-week which will just about save the season. I hope I’m proved wrong, and that the drivers really do overtake more on-track this season. In any case, I want to see refuelling brought back for 2011; I loved the strategy element in races.

A quick note about Bahrain: the Sakhir International Circuit sees a new configuration for 2010, with nine extra corners between the old turns four and five, reducing the total laps by eight to 49. It should be an exciting, quick fire start to the season!

No related posts.

Here is a list of the films that are so mind-numbingly boring or just plain bad that they make you want to walk out of the cinema and ask for a refund. Firstly I would like to be in an honourable mention for Burn after Reading, which was one of the worst films I saw last year, with the only funny moment being Brad Pitt getting punched. I’d also like to mention Ocean’s Twelve which was almost bad enough to tarnish my love of the brilliant Ocean’s Eleven. Now onto the real list:

10. Quantum of Solace – Having just watched Tomorrow Never Dies, I think I can pin-point exactly what is wrong with this new generation of Bond Films. They have been stripped of all their silliness. There are no longer ridiculous gadgets, witty one-liners; the villains are not the bizarre, terrifying supervillians they used to be and the car chases last only a few minutes before Craig destroys a beautiful car. These were the iconic features that made the Bond films what they were. Now it’s just another mundane spy film.

9. Sideways – Paul Giamatti and his friend explore a mid-life crisis. Far too much ‘intellectual’ character development and not enough humour or action. I don’t know about you, but I like things to actually happen in films I watch.

8.   High School Musical – In terms of things to hate, we are spoilt for choice in this film. There’s Zac Efron singing through his nose for the entire film and the utter predictability of the plot, but for me the most annoying thing is that I can’t get the fricking songs out of my head. Plus the more it is on, the more despite yourself you start to quite like it.

7. Save the Last Dance – If you must see this film, time it so that you just watch the last dance at the end. It’s the only remotely entertaining part.

6. In Her Shoes – AVOID AT ALL COSTS. I only watched this because I was on a plane and there was no other option. One of the most boring things I have ever had to watch with a stale predictable plot.

5. Chicago –Dry; depressing; repetitive and all that jazz.

4. Perfect Storm – Only George Clooney, who let’s admit it is nice to look at even in a rubbish film, saved this film from being number one on my list. Like Titanic, this revolves around a boat disaster and the only action occurs in the last half hour. However unlike in Titanic I was rooting for the storm.

3. Battlefield Earth – Filled with plot holes and budget sci-fi effects, the best thing I can say about this film is at least they weren’t allowed to make a sequel.

2. Babel– A random mish-mash of a plot with no direction, no humour, in fact really not much of anything, just an over-sexed Japanese girl and Brad Pitt crying. How did that win an Oscar?

1. Disaster Movie – I could have filled this list with spoof movies – the creation of writers who have no ideas of their own, but for the sake of diversity I only included the worst of these.

No related posts.

As someone who has a tattoo based on a piece of art itself, my view is immensely biased but also multi-layered. This is something on my skin which is not only an impersonation of a painting, a copy which no matter how good it is (15 hours of solid needle-work went into this) it’ll never live up to the original copy.

At the same time, something which is unanimous of all ink, is the knowledge that this is something that will age, decay, loose colour, wrinkle. In short it will become something less beautiful then what it originally is.

So tattoos as art are worthless right? Wrong. Regardless of whether you’re a fan or not, the fact that you can literally transform your body, paint the canvas of your skin is a feat that is incredible.

The amount of time and craftmanship that goes into tattoos nowadays is exemplary, with many tattooists being artists and painters within their own right.

There will always be trends and fads such as tribal squiggles and stars but to say these do not do the craft justice is to undermine the romanticism of tattoos. To have something on your skin for life, whether it is significant, with or without meaning is a reminder of times past, how you once were and the journey you’ve made since. This could be dismissed as sentimental bullshit but it is the human condition to feel this way and a few momentos of a life well lived is nothing to be ashamed of. For this reason a tattoo that has decayed is nothing to feel bad about.

I would argue that as epic as the craft of tattooing is nowadays, it is the conceptual side that counts.

To read the other side of the argument go to:

http://www.redbrickonline.co.uk/arts-culture/on-tattoos-and-art/

No related posts.

‘Every girl has a story.’ The worst tattoo I have ever seen, etched down the arm of a distanced school friend, punctuated by a climactic symbol, which looked more like the result of a busted ink cartridge.

This made me think, should all art tell a story? Unfortunately the only story that my friends tattoo made apparent was one of desperate rebellion and pathetic conformity.

Defining art has been a contentious issue and has plagued literary essays for centuries. For the purpose of this argument I will define Art as a static aesthetically pleasing object, which should mean something to somebody.

Most tattoos are empty gestures of self-assertion. The Chinese symbols, baron trees, speckled stars, hearts, birds of liberty amount to nothing more than a mark of youth, much like a birthmark. Worse still are those who argue the intrinsic sentimentality of their chosen tattoos (usually family related issues) to justify the indelible mark they have stamped upon themselves.

Yet even the tattoos, which may use colour in an interesting way, show some structure or design, would probably be left wanting on paper. I challenge any tattoo to hold it’s own in exhibition, next to Francis Bacon or Whistler. The only reason they evoke any interest is because they are stained into human flesh. Yet humans are inappropriate canvases. Under scrutiny the human frame falls apart and so does the tattoo. The art is stretched and creased beneath time, quite literally. Art must be removed from the human condition otherwise it is destroyed, as Dorian’s portrait proves.

To read the other side of the argument go to:

http://www.redbrickonline.co.uk/arts-culture/on-tattoos-and-art-2/

No related posts.

The Government recently intervened on the issue. Parliament is currently debating a bill that would oblige schools to teach about contraception and stable relationships and ban homophobia in the classroom. But it would also allow faith schools to teach sex education ‘in a way that reflects the school’s religious character.’ Ed Balls, the Schools Secretary, said ‘there is no opt-out for any faith school from teaching the full, broad, balanced curriculum on sex and relationship education.’ He added, ‘Catholic schools can say to their pupils that, as a religion, we believe contraception is wrong, but what they can’t do is therefore say they are not going to teach about contraception.’

I am pro-choice on abortion, loathe homophobia and see contraception as a crucial component of safe sex, but the deeply-held beliefs of some with a religious faith cause them to disagree with me on these points. It is problematic to simultaneously call for tolerance regarding abortion, sexuality and contraception and intolerance regarding faith-based values and beliefs. The Government’s bill strikes the pragmatic balance of accepting these religious beliefs and promoting accurate and balanced sex education.

No related posts.

On a recent road trip, I pondered why it is exactly that I have this impulse reaction to get away – and why others may not. While gazing out the window at the blur of country landscapes, I realised that this inclination often stems from the need to escape; the desire to leave trivial stresses of the habitual, structured life behind and to distance myself from some unnecessarily tangled web of social complication. So it wasn’t a world stopping revelation; most of us love to get away from it all and it’s common knowledge that a change of scenery does the world of good.

A travel writer once termed this longing to escape the Urge . Almost all of us possess it but what differentiates, say, a tourist from a traveller is just how far the Urge carries you. Many people fully appreciate and are satisfyingly chilled with the help of a short getaway, a package holiday or a spa weekend. However, call me greedy – or plain pompous – but nothing hits the spot like a prolonged and testing travel experience that I can really sink my teeth into; my Urge would not be satisfied by a two-week, five star hotel holiday in Cancún.

Being the insatiable notion it is, the more I feed my Urge the more it craves; once I could quench it with a two-month visit to Costa Rica but now dream travel plans are filling up more and more pages of my calendar (funds permitting, obviously). As much as I still enjoy a short break, like many travellers, I thrive upon not just seeing the world, but living it in a different way.

What I love about my now ingrained Urge is that by living away from the norm, I can almost begin new chapters of my life; outside of a world of preconceptions, I can be whoever I want to be and on return to reality, each time I seem to come back a slightly changed –for the better, I’d like to think – person.

No related posts.

In addition to all the above, he would probably also bring a jumbo pack of condoms, a guide to all the local casinos and business cards to a series of highly expensive female escorts. We’re in Archer’s world now.

The show is a new, animated, comedy series to hit Fiver. It depicts the adventures of Sterling Archer, a spy at fictional intelligence agency, ISIS. Archer’s motives are directed not by any sort of moral compass or sense of duty, but by social luxuries like gambling, alcohol and beautiful women (usually prostitutes).

The first episode sees Archer breaking into the comically under-protected ISIS mainframe, in order to cancel the expenses he has racked up in the name of ‘genuine’ intelligence work.

The premise of this first instalment is enough to sum up the ludicrous nature of the entire programme.

However, the animation itself steers away from the visually absurd presentation of Family Guy, or The Simpsons, opting for a more realistic look that channels the designs of 1960s comic books. This retro-realism allows for the dry delivery of the jokes to be more resonant, making them zing with sharp acidity.

The voice casting is brilliant. The dialogue bounces along with a feel of semi-improvisation and the resulting chemistry between the actors makes for hilarious back and forth exchanges.

Perhaps the funniest relationship is between Archer and his aging butler, Woodhouse, who is continuously verbally abused. Woodhouse has been desensitised and emotionally hollowed out by Archer’s bullying, which makes for a tragically comic on-screen rapport.

The show also boasts some of the most politically incorrect humour on television. Archer’s racial, sexual and generally all-inclusive insensitivities are met with expressions of disgust and repulsion by the other characters, revealing the cartoon’s ever-present irony.

The repulsion is usually communicated by Archer’s ex-girlfriend and fellow agent, Lana, voiced superbly by Aisha Tyler, recogniseable from her role as Charlie Wheeler, in Friends.

However, for all his flaws Archer seems to get surprisingly good results, straddling the line between incompetence and luck, in an almost Inspector Clouseau-esque fashion.

The show is a fantastically original piece of animation and comedy. It will certainly appeal to anyone who enjoys the darker shades of South Park or Family Guy. However, if you are easily offended, I would strongly advise sticking with Rugrats.

No related posts.

Stephen Fry may be set to step back into his former role as BAFTA host after Jonathan Ross’ abysmal job at last week’s event. His contract with the BBC will have ended by 2011 and producers hope Fry will inject a little bit of class back into proceedings.

Things aren’t all bad for Wossy, though, as newly separated Cheryl Cole will be doing a tell-all interview on his Friday night show later in the series. The slot had been booked before the break-up, but producers say that she will appear on the show as planned.

There’s a double helping of Glee gossip this week, starting with the news that Grease icon Olivia Newton-John will be guest starring in an upcoming episode of the hit oddball show. The star will be partaking in what can only be described as an unmissable duet of Let’s get physical with resident baddie Sue Sylvester. If that wasn’t enough, the entire cast have been invited to perform at the Whitehouse for the Obamas’ Easter event. Who knew that such a bunch of misfits would be brown-nosing with the President after just one series?

In reality news, Kerry Katona has reportedly signed a lucrative deal with Channel 4 for a documentary about her endless drug/divorce/alcoholic shenanigans. Can they really fill an hour long slot with things we don’t know about this woman? Well, there will be advert breaks I suppose.

Frank celebrity talk show Piers Morgan’s Life Stories will air an interview with media mogul Simon Cowell in the first week of March. Tipped to discuss his recent engagement, we’ll be tuned in to hear what the original Mr Nasty has to say for himself.

And finally, broadcasting figures for the premiere of ITV’s latest programme Married Single Other were impressively high. The show easily led the prime time ratings battle, with a quarter of telly fans tuning in to see homegrown favourites Ralf Little and Lucy Davis in their new roles. It’s certainly nice to have some fresh British drama on our screens for a change.

No related posts.