Wow. Just, wow

Not often am I lost for words. I'm going to let Representative Michele Bachmann (Republican, Minnesota) have her two minutes of fame on here. If you followed the US Elections last November, she was the person who suggested that journalists who didn't present the Republican point of view should be branded 'un-American'. Enjoy these pearls of wisdom, on Earth day, of all days.



I can't think which is worse: that she wrote this herself, or that someone else wrote it and she accepted it at face value. Be very afraid that such an empty headed loon can be a cog in the gears of the government of the most powerful nation on Earth. Be very very afraid.

North American Words

An occasional series I think; devoted to words that I'd never hear back home. In some ways, the language here in Canada is much closer to the Queen's English than it is American than I thought it would be. So, for starters:

asinine

adjective

1) foolish, unintelligent, or silly; stupid: It is surprising that supposedly intelligent people can make such asinine statements.

2) of or like an ass: asinine obstinacy; asinine features.

Tinkering

I've made my first foray into the nefarious world of editing HTML tonight, in an attempt to make the blog entry column wider. While this has worked, the images for the nice rounded corners are for a column of specific width. This has ultimately meant a total width to the blog of 980 pixels, which might be pushing the screen resolution of some older monitors. Can you all read it out there (all five of you, or whatever it is)? Or shall I go back to the old version?

Beating the Locals

So given today was the end of the hockey season, how did I finish in the pool? In the money! Thanks to my guru, who guided me through the various players on offer largely successfully (we'll ignore Montreal players in the future), I have finished third, and stand to make about $50. Not a lot, but enough to plot how to spend it. For posterity, here's the top of the table and my final team scores. In a final, grand splash, you'll see from the far right column that I managed to score zero points at all today! Finishing ahead of 32 other teams is quite funny when you think they are probably mostly locals. Beaten at their own game.....

NHL Playoffs

Today is the last day of the regular season in the NHL before the playoffs begin on Wednesday evening. As I write this, the last couple of issues to be resolved are sorting themselves out. It wouldn't be a blog of mine without hopeless sporting predictions littering the place, so here we go. For the non hockey fans, the top eight teams in each conference play each other in best-of-7 contests for the right to progress to the next round. Ultimately the winner of each conference contests the Stanley Cup final in late May/early June. Living out west means I see relatively little of the Eastern conference, so I think there is more room for spectacular error.

Eastern Conference:

Boston Bruins (1) vs Montreal Canadiens (8)

Boston have led the conference from virtually day one. This is a rematch of the same series at the same stage last season, in which, oddly, the seedings were reversed. This is I think indicative of the season Montreal have had; powerplay has struggled, Carey Price in goal has struggled (and will probably sit in favour of Jaroslav Halak), and the late-season firing of coach Guy Carbonneau has had only marginal positive effect. Nevertheless, the biggest arena in the NHL and 21,000 screaming Quebecois means Montreal is a tough place to play. And these teams hate each other, so possibly fights galore. Verdict: Boston in 6.

Washington Capitals (2) vs New York Rangers (7)

Critics of Washington generally cite the fact they play in a weak division for their high attacking stats. There may be some truth to this (who would't fancy playing Atlanta, Tampa, and to a lesser extent Florida 6 times a season), but who would argue that a top forward line of Ovechkin - Backstrom - Semin isn't a really dangerous one? Add defenceman Mike Green (73 points in 68 games is a record most top line forwards would be happy with) on the powerplay and they are a formidable attacking force. New York started like a train, but spluttered to such a degree that coach Tom Renney was fired mid season in favour of John Tortorella, winner in 2004 with Tampa (booo!). They have improved, but not enough to win the series. Verdict: Washington in 6.

New Jersey Devils (3) vs Carolina Hurricanes (6)

The Devils went on a tremendous run starting at about Christmas, and ran away with the Atlantic division. Zach Parise and Patrik Elias have filled their boots in the run. With hall-of-fame goalie Martin Brodeur, they'll be very hard to beat. Carolina came from seemingly nowhere midseason with the sacking of Pete Laviolette and the hiring of 2006-winning coach Paul Maurice to score goals for fun in a 14-3-2 tear down the stretch. Nevertheless, I think NJ are a much stronger side. Verdict: New Jersey in 5.

Pittsburgh Penguins (4) vs Philadelphia Flyers (5)

Last year's finalists Pittsburgh were in danger of not qualifying for the post season at all in early March. The firing of Michel Therrien seems to have had the desired effect; since late February they are 16-2-3. The trade-deadline acquisitions of Kunitz and Guerin meant Sidney Crosby actually has proper wingers to play with. Consider Art Ross trophy-winning Evgeni Malkin in addition and a fit Sergei Gonchar on the powerplay (19 points in 26 games), and they look set for another deep run. This is a rematch of last season's conference final, and I don't think the outcome will be any different Verdict: Pittsburgh in 5.

Western Conference:

San Jose Sharks (1) vs Anaheim Ducks (8)

A case of the irresistable force meets the immovable object? The Sharks' 53-18-11 record was the best in the league; goals come from all over the team, and they have a top goalie in Evgeni Nabokov. The Ducks won the Cup in 2007 based on miserly defence, and both Niedermayer and Pronger remain on the blue line. The Ducks were another team in danger of not qualifying at the trade deadline, but improved drastically down the stretch. With the Ryan-Getzlaf-Perry line and Selanne on the powerplay they will always score goals, but will their shaky goaltending and ageing defence still be up to the job. The Sharks have flattered to deceive for many years in the playofs, and I think this one might go the distance. Verdict: Sharks in 7.

Detroit Red Wings (2) vs Columbus Blue Jackets (7)

Reigning champions Detroit finished only marginally behind San Jose in the standings and still remain a tough proposition. With Hossa, Datsyuk, Zetterberg and Franzen on the top lines, goals aren't a problem and any defence that contains Nicklas Lidstrom is difficult to beat. Only one chink in the armour, and that's their horrible goaltending. Both Chris Osgood and Ty Conklin have not, to be frank, covered themselves in glory this season and could derail the team. Compare this to Columbus, who's rookie goalie Steve Mason has appeared from nowhere and carried his team to the playoffs for the first time in franchise history. With star forward Rick Nash, they could prolong the series, but I think, ultimately Detroit may just have too much firepower. Verdict: Detroit in 5/6.

Vancouver Canucks (3) vs St. Louis Blues (6)

The Canucks pipped the Flames to the Northwest division title by a single point in the end. Fair's fair: their record of 24-7-2 from February 1st onwards is phenomenal and they eventually overhauled a hobbled-by-injuries-and-salary-cap Calgary (once 13 points clear!!) decisively last Tuesday. With Roberto Luongo between the pipes, goals against should be low and they have a miserly defence. Goals have come from all over the team; the Sedin twins have been on fire down the stretch, and Burrows and Kesler have had career years. Can they carry it on in the postseason? Mats Sundin has been, relatively speaking, a bit of a bust (9G, 19A, -5 rating in 41 games) and will need to step things up. St Louis are the cinderella team in this years playoffs. They were dead last in the new year, and have had terrible injury problems. As the team regained some of the injured players, results have improved and a scary powerplay carried them over the line in the last week. They are unheralded, and have few 'name' players; can they carry on? Verdict: Vancouver in 6.

Chicago Blackhawks (4) vs Calgary Flames (5)

Which team is the real Calgary Flames? The one that went 30-11-5 between November and February, or the one which limped out the blocks and hobbled over the line? To be fair, the team has been crippled by injuries in the last 6 weeks and last night was missing Bourque, Phaneuf, Regehr, Sarich, Giordano, Roy and Glencross. The salary cap meant that no players could be called up to replace them, resulting in the Flames being the first NHL team to win a game with only 15 skaters for >20 years last night. Hopefully, some of the injured are back for Thursday. Sadly, it appears Regehr and Sarich are long term absentees and may only play in later rounds, should the Flames even get there. Plus points from the dismal last week are the return to form of Cammalleri, and the performance of rookie defencemen Adam Pardy, Matt Pelech and John Negrin. A big huge negative is the Flames powerplay, now 0-43 in ten (TEN!) games. But what of the opposition? Chicago are brimming full of young, skilful, fast-skating talent, and won all 4 games against Calgary this year. Add to that goalie Nikolai Khabibulin's 22-5-2 lifetime record against Calgary - including the 2004 Stanley Cup Final for Tampa - and it's a troubling matchup. More seasoned watchers than I liken this year's Chicago team to the Pittsburgh team of 2007; similarly talented but very playoff inexperienced, and ultimately knocked out in the first round by Ottawa. I hope this is a good analogy. Verdict: in a way hard, since I have no idea who is fit from a Calgary point of view, and who will be called up from the farm team. There are even rumours that Rhett Warrener (out all season on LTIR) and Anders Erikkson (in the AHL all season for being, er, useless) could be called up. So my head says Chicago in 6, but given last night's glimmer of hope, I'll say my heart says Calgary in 7. And that I probably shouldn't listen to it.

More Footballing Thoughts

So as I mentioned before, yesterday was a day off. It didn't begin in the most cheering fashion given the mighty BCFC suffered yet another defeat. Listening in from 4,500 miles away, it's difficult sometimes to get a real picture of what has happened, particularly at away games where I have no spies. Yesterday, Bradford went 1-0 up having played pretty well, had a second called off in the second half (when even the opposition players say the ball went it it's a good indication; all the linesman said was "I hope I got it right". You hope?). Almost immediately afterwards, a goal against. Followed by zero response, followed by going behind. And still no response. That's 8 points from the last 33. Having spent the whole of the first half of the season in the top 3, they now lie 9th, and would be 11th but for Darlington and Rotherham's points deductions. The last manager, Colin Todd, was run out of town for such a sequence of results.

Stuart McCall came in as manager after the subsequent relegation to the footballing dungeon. He said that he wanted (and I paraphrase) "a young, hungry, passionate team that plays good football". Yet most of the players brought in have been, generally speaking, thirty somethings in the autumns of their careers. I often wonder if they see the club as one last pay day before retirement, and so are unable to raise themselves for trips to (with respect) Dagenham, Morecambe, Barnet, Macclesfield and so on. Looking around at the teams that are doing well in the table: Brentford, Rochdale, Exeter; all teams with a core of youngsters with a smattering of older, experienced heads. The same could be said of Stockport and Peterborough last season. Teams with the dynamism and energy of youth. Look at Bradford themselves...the best three players this season have been Luke O'Brien (19 when the season began), and loanees Nicky Law (20) and Dean Furman (20). Is there any coincidence that a relatively older team, compared to most other sides in the league, struggles and concedes so so many late goals?

The thing I don't understand is that the formative footballing experience of Stuart McCall's career - the 1984-85 Third Division title - was built on the blueprint that the current top three in the division are following. Look back at that side, and the overall impression was one of youth. The team varied little from week to week: McCall was 20 when the season began. John Hendrie was 20, Greg Abbott 20, Chris Withe 21, Mark Ellis 22, Peter Jackson 23. Don Goodman was breaking into the side aged 18. Older heads such as keeper Eric McManus (34), defender Dave Evans (26) and strikers Bobby Campbell (31) and John Hawley (34) provided the experience. In addition, most of the young players had been rejected by clubs much higher up the leagues; McCall in trials for Leeds for being too small, Hendrie and Abbott from Coventry, Jackson by Burnley, Withe by Newcastle. Players with points to prove to the world. Ellis, Jackson and Goodman were local lads, desperate to represent their 'own' side.

I think the fans would be altogether more patient with the side right now if they could see that the mistakes being made by the team were ones of inexperience and youth, rather than seasoned professionals who should know better by now. I think McCall would have been cut a bit more slack by a small section of the support that is vociferously demanding his head if fans could see he was trying to build something for the medium to long term, rathering than culling large numbers of the squad each season and replacing them with more thirty-somethings. I also think we'd see more '90 minute performances' with a much younger, fitter team. We could actually press the other team in the midfield for a change....

Fun Ways to Spend a Public Holiday

Given it's Easter time, yesterday was a public holiday (though Monday is not, or at least not for me). It was 17C, feeling warm, and clear blue skies. A lovely day for being out and about? Absolutely. But not for me. I had the fun task - put off for a couple of weeks - of filling in my tax return, due at the end of the month. I can't ever recall doing one in the UK, but you're never too old to try exciting new experiences. So after having spent a couple of hours reading the 60 page guide booklet, here's what my (broken) coffee table looked like yesterday afternoon:

Yes, for someone who has only been in the country for 13 months, and has only two sources of income (my salary and interest on my savings account), I need nine pages! I'm glad that I've not decided to claim various items as tax-deductable given seemingly every claim needs another two-page form to fill in. So after a couple of hours of checking, subtracting and pro-rating, I owe the CRA less than I thought I did; a cock-up in payroll meant my tax for last May wasn't deducted at source and I needed to work out how much I owe. The final result came as a pleasant surprise; I owe nearly $150 less than I thought. Less tax to pay = more fun things!

Champions League

There's been a complete lack of discussion about the beautiful game here over the last few months. I'm currently watching a re-run of today's 3-1 Chelsea win at Liverpool in the Champions League; the ESPN commentary is terrible as per usual. But the chant from the away end has just amused me greatly. Now as some of you know, I am of a very unfavourable disposition to Chelsea, and had to generally bite my tongue seeing thousands of the blue hordes in London Village. The site of the Jolly Malteser (or whatever it was called) bursting at the seams with tattooed cock-er-nee wideboy types resplendent in ill-fitting blue nylon was never good for the blood pressure. But sometimes sporting karma catches up with people and so the denouement of last year's CL final I found hilarious. But hats off to them, just this once (and only once), for belting out, as the ground is silent:

"where's your famous atmosphere?"

Maybe I'm just amused by small things. Manchester United struggled last night it seems; they weren't very good last Sunday either, needing a last minute goal by a 17 year old to scrape out an ill-deserved win. I still think they need a proper centre-forward, and Berbatov hasn't come close to filling the role. Liverpool were very poor tonight/yesterday (depending on your timezone); the rest of the top sides must be licking their lips at Benitez's contract extension. One FA Cup and an outrageously fortuitous Champions' League win in 2005 is hardly a good return for the amount of money he has spent/squandered.

You might argue with the likes of Biscan, Traore, Smicer, Dudek, Josemi, Nunez and Luis Garcia in the squad that night they'd come quite near the top in the "worst team to ever be European Champions" title. Benitez is too negative; always one striker, two very defensive central midfielders and at least one square peg in a round hole (hello Dirk Kuyt!). All very well for beating mid table sides, but not a recipe for a title win. As they chant in American elections, "FOUR MORE YEARS!"

Barcelona look like the team to beat this year. Six points clear of the pack in Spain and a complete annihilation of Bayern Munich this evening, in which a 4-0 home win was apparently hugely flattering to Bayern. With Messi, Henry and Eto'o banging the goals in, who can stop them?

Falling Over the Finish Line

Tonights sporting happenings, by the numbers:

• Shots on target: 47-25 Calgary.
• Score: 4-1 Vancouver.
• Calgary powerplay: 0-39 in 7 games.
• FOUR blown 5-on-3's in 2 games.
• Calgary record in second night of back-to-back games: 2-10-1.
• Number of seconds between Calgary equaliser and bone-headed clusterf**k by Phaneuf coasting behind his own net to present possession back to Vancouver to score: 22.
• Number of posts on tonight's Calgary Puck game thread: 1,223.
• Number of posts in said thread calling for the head of the coaching staff (and specifcally the PP coach): about 300 of them.
• Number of posts in said thread cursing errant finishing/hitting the post/Luongo standing on his head: about 600.
• First star: Vancouver goalie Roberto Luongo. He is in the Flames heads without doubt.

A flattering scoreline, to be sure. This was an excellent performace 5-on-5. But until something is done about the Flames apocalyptically bad powerplay, they can dominate games for 50 minutes all they like; the inability to put teams away when well on top means there will not be the desired end result. And do they practice this powerplay? Answers need only be two letters long....

This Is Not a Late April Fool

Colorado Avalanche 4 - 1 Vancouver Canucks

bwhahahahahahahahahahahahahahaaaaa!

It seems neither Vancouver nor Calgary want to tie up the Northwestern Division of the NHL. Here we are in the six days of the regular season; I'm sat listening to NHL.com with the beautiful silence of GM Place and a distinct lack of Canucks colour commentator Tom Larscheid spouting his usual biased drivel. After a defensive horror-show in their 5-3 defeat in Edmonton last evening, what could be better than a home game against a Colorado side that had lost 8 in a row before tonight? A Colorado team thought to be deliberately tanking to try and get the #1 draft pick in June. Except the evening isn't going to plan.

A Flames win tomorrow against the LA Kings could mean that the Flames could clinch the division in Vancouver on Tuesday. How good would that be? Really very good. But the way the Flames are playing right now I won't make any predictions; they missed three of their top 5 defencemen in a hideous 4-0 defeat in Minnesota on Friday. Once again it wasn't the stand in players to blame, but the complete no-show of the established stars. None more so than Miikka Kiprusoff who probably couldn't stop a beach ball on Friday. He looks shattered, having played 70+ games. Hopefully he gets rested tomorrow to keep him fresh for Tuesday...

Scientific Funding

I'm not normally the sort to sign petitions; generally speaking I am quite apathetic to such things. Last evening was different, as I signed a petition about blacklisting by the British government's scientific funding body, EPSRC.

Simply put, although there is funding towards PhD students as part of the grants that pay their wages (if I understand correctly), it isn't nearly sizeable enough to run large research groups and purchase large items of equipment. Researchers are expected to obtain further funding from research councils, industry and so on if they wish to expand their groups. The government distrubute money, raised from the taxpayer, via EPSRC towards this end. Academics submit research proposals based on ideas they have and results their students/researchers obtain. These proposals are then sent to a panel of their peers - generally speaking people who have received such grants in the past - for assessment and ranking order. At some point, a line is drawn where the quality of the proposals is deemed 'unworthy of funding'. All applications above the line are then funded, while those below the line are kept anonymous.

All fair enough? Up to a year ago, I would say yes. Since that time, the number of successful grants has been much reduced. In the last year, taking the numbers from the EPSRC website, 40/319 standard 'responsive mode' applications were approved; a success rate of 12.5%, much below the ~25% it was generally before that. The first grant scheme for junior academics saw a similar fall; down to 13/44 applications, rather than the roughly 75% it was before. Look closely at the recipients of the grants in the last year and you'll notice that most of the money is now being absorbed in large, programme grants to established full professors. In effect, money is being more concentrated into the hands of the few.

Bad enough? Yes. Better write and submit more research proposals? You'd better be careful, as now EPSRC have hit applicants with a new hurdle; if you have three applications ranked in the bottom 50% of the ranked order in a two year period, you'll be banned from applying for a year. After a year's mentoring programme - a nebulous concept not fully explained yet - you'll be able to apply again, but fall foul of the 'three strikes' again and you'll be banned for a longer period. Draconian to say the least. This has the community up in arms, chemists particularly. The mood isn't helped by David Delpy, chief executive of EPSRC saying "chemists would complain, they write the most unsuccessful applications". What would they have people do? If the above scenario is played out, ten years from now a chemistry faculty at the University of Somewhere could have a significant number of it's members barred from applying for grant money.

Grant money is the lifeblood of research-oriented departments. If the money isn't coming in, the department becomes very visibly loss making and the financial powers that be deem them a ripe target for closure. It seems like chemists are damned if they do apply for funding, damned if they don't. In the last 15-20 years enough chemistry departments have either been closed (Exeter, Kings:London, Swansea, Salford, Stirling, Essex, Canterbury) or threatened with it (Sussex). How is this beneficial to 'UK PLC' in the long run when Universities in the middle and far-east are opening chemistry departments vastly larger than the ones here? Industry will move where the graduates are.

As someone who is thinking of jumping into the shark-infested waters of an academic career, it gives me considerable pause for thought. Do I want to go back to the UK and possibly end up barred from applying for money within two or three years? How bad would that be, reputation wise? Should I stay here long term, where it seems good research proposals are recognised? A cynic would probably say "write better research proposals then". And here's another part of the problem; chemistry is so subjective sometimes. What's fashionable and 'hot' right now might not be two years hence. It's the luck of the draw; get someone on the peer-review panel that's into the same sort of chemistry you are and you stand a good chance. Get someone who doesn't like you and you're probably sunk.

Hopefully, EPSRC has a bit of a rethink. But this being a government organ, I very much doubt it.