Alexander Hawkins

I wonder if the pair of them sensed/are sensing a slide, irrespective of their own games? I think Arsenal are in an awkward patch just now (although as I type, 2-0 up against Wigan!).

I think they're past their prime, despite the recent return of Nedved. Their performances in their qualifying group (won by the Netherlands) weren't very impressive. ← True - although a swansong? This Czech team in its prime would never have 'commanded' odds at 28!

Looking a bit harder, I especially like the Czech Republic at 28/1. On their day, a superb team.

Rumor has it that Thierry Henry will be leaving for Barcelona next year. That would be another blow for Arsenal/Wenger... ← ...and for the Premiership, of course. ← There's a few defenders who'd sleep better on Friday nights, for sure. Barcelona would then presumably be on the sell - they'd have a ridiculous array of strikers...and a frighteningly pacy one as well.

Couldn't agree more. The date's got a great feel to it. Sounded like it was fun to make!

Also, the twin departures of Keane and Vieira, alongside the hot-and-cold performances of Gerrard, have only made Frank Lampard's rise appear all the more meteoric.

Andy - you're either a 'citizen' or a Leeds fan. If a City fan, then . If the latter, then I'm Chelsea, so let's just talk about something else, ok?

I think(I may be wrong) in the last world cup rankings took previous performances in World cup finals into account. ← Pretty sure you're right there... Of course, it occurs to me that I may still have enough 'rosy glow' from Chelsea winning the Premiership to render me immune to England results in the summer I agree though, knowing England, they're bound not to deliver. I agree - the US look peculiarly low in those odds. For example, if I were to have an each-way punt on a team getting to the semis (say), I'd far soooner take the US at 80s than the Serbians at 50s.

Tell you what though - although he's losing it, as an avowedly non-United fan (sorry!), I'm still relieved to see him go. Especially in the big games, his presence is almost worth an extra player if he's up for it.

Is there a recommended place to pick up those two Byas sides? I heard Rhythm... on the radion a couple of months ago and was blown away... BTW, this is an interesting question - I was wondering about it only this morning, by coicidence!

Very shocking news. Timing-wise, I mean - we all knew it was going to happen, but at this stage? Bizarre. I wonder what the story is here? It's a really peculiar situation. I have to say, I see it as more of an emotional wrench for United - losing a formerly great player and a still-inspirational leader - than a footballing one. Keane is not nearly the player he used to be (not that United necessarily have the answer yet to how to replace him!). Now for a replacement...with Ballack, they'll get a similarly good footballer, and another raving egomaniac! He seems to me to be the obvious choice. Any other ideas? The ultimate two fingers to Arsenal would be to sign Vieira from Juventus, but I'd have thought this is almost out of the question. We'll see...with a few notable exceptions (Rooney, Ronaldo), Ferguson's transfers of late have been dubious to say the least...

I'm game, please! Email to follow. Enjoy London!

I think I'm right in saying that Braxton's only the composer here, rather than appearing as performer...

I'm not sure I understand that comment. It would make more sense to me if a term such as "elite" or 'upper tier" or somesuch was insterted before the word "teams". Jim - absolutely. I apologise and again plead tiredness . I should have said 'upper tier' or 'elite' etc. And, to make myself clear, I don't think anyone could argue that there aren't a majority of teams in world football whom the USA wouldn't start against as heavy favourites (what an ugly sentence that was..!) For instance, of the home nations (despite the game against Scotland - I was on a gig at the time - did it finish as a draw?), the USA would fairly comfortably see off N.Ireland, the Republic, Scotland, and Wales. And although they'd be underdogs to England, they'd be a dangerous match-up (I don't think that pre-season tour really taught us anything in this respect). And - to make myself clear (first time for everything, etc. etc.) - I think the US would be clear favourites against the Aussies. All I meant to suggest was that the Aussies would (should) look on that as a game they might take something from with a concerted performance (as opposed, for example, to a game against (say) Brazil, Argentina, Italy, etc. - against all of whom it's possible to play exceedingly well and come away empty-handed). In any case - I hope I've extricated myself from any holes here. Didn't mean to sound like an EPL-centric 'Old Europe' guy. Believe me, English parochialism p*sses me off more than anything, and I'd be delighted (and you may quote me when in happens, as I hope it does) for England to be beaten by almost any side come the Summer. This country will be INTOLERABLE if we win. Believe me, I suffered it through a rugby world cup win, so if we do it in the footy... -_-

I wasn't basing that opinion on one result. It's a marathon and not a sprint to qualify out of South America. It takes more than just one lucky result make the cut. ← Fair point. I'd forgotten about the S.American system (too caught up in our recent qualifiers over here!). Maybe my point was more historical/emotional/impressionistic than empirically based at the present time: it somehow feels like the Aussies should beat teams such as Ecuador/Paraguay...For example, the only Ecuadorian internationals I can think of playing in England (there may be others whom I'm forgetting, of course), are on the bench at (Championship) Southampton [or have they left? I can't remember!]. But - I eat humble pie here. Your point is definitely well taken with respect to the marathon S.American qualifications!

[i should say sorry if anything I've posted here seems petulant - got in VERY late from a gig last night and was keen to get stuck into some football! Put it down to the 'emotional venting' bit in the thread title! ] Scott - when you put it like that, I agree. McBride has been treated pretty shabbily, and Bocanegra too. But, I'm still not sure it's to do with any anti-American bias...I just feel that Premier League clubs are too cut throat, too hell bent on winning, to care about stuff like that! There are so many other players who've been treated like dirt as well, that it's difficult to pin down any overriding principles. I agree, Bocanegra is probably a better player than the (let's face it) decidedly average Zat Knight.

I don't what kind of bogus point system they use to determine these rankings but I promise you the US is NOT in the top ten best national teams. I think they are probably in the top 20 and at that level on a given day they can beat just about anyone. Similarly, Australia could beat just about anyone on a given day as well, but they would do it as underdogs. Agreed. I don't know how the FIFA system works, and I don't subscribe to it, really. What I would say is that there are several teams who the USA could beat, certainly, but this would be as underdogs. I'd suggest this is illustrated by your choice of a 1-0 defeat as illustrative of US pedigree! I certainly don't take the view that Americans suck at football (Canadians? Yes ). But contributions to European teams? I'm not sure about that...Who were you thinking of? The Americans in the Premier League are average at the very best (and incidentally, I would have thought, not as good as the Australians in the EPL, although at present, they are fairly ordinary. To his credit, though, Cahill was very good last season). To an extent, I think this European vs. American thing is a bit of a straw man. I don't know how any other Europeans feel, but it's not really an issue in the UK as far as I'm concerned. I think to the extent that there is - or has been - any bias, it's an anti 'Non-European-or-South American' [i.e. encompassing Australia and the US] bias rather than an anti US bias. But, as I say, it's not an issue over here. [i don't know - might the same be true of basketball? We have an inferiority complex over here - but are UK players treated with any degree of scepticism/disdain in the NBA?] Well, it's clear that it doesn't work like that! Northern Ireland beat England a couple of games ago. England just beat Argentina. We don't figure Northern Ireland to beat Argentina, though...Likewise, Spain had to qualify through the playoffs as you know, but we don't figure the Serbians (who qualified automatically) to be a better team. The examples could go on and on. I don't think Europeans (English people? I don't know, I can't speak this generally!) typically underestimate European teams. ANY English fan will tell you how tough the Poles are, and always have been. Likewise, we remember the Bulgarians and the Romanians of the mid-90s and the Croatians and Ukrainians (to a lesser extent) of the late 90s... the Czechs now, etc. etc. No, I'm aware of how good (or otherwise) many of these European teams are. Goodness knows I watch too much football. BUT, many are beatable, and Australia have undoubted quality in their ranks (even if some is fading slightly).

Yeah, especially since all the viable discoveries that can be made in the realm of traditional, tonal, harmony have been made, at least as far as tertiary and quartal harmony goes. Beyond that, I think it all gets too "unnatural" to ever become a working model (Bill Barron being a notable exception), although I'd love to be proved wrong on an ongoing basis... But even if everybody's playing the same notes, more or less, that still leaves tone, phraseology, and structure as outlets for meaningful personal expression in what has become a less than personalized medium. But finding that within yourself, if it even exists within yourself - by no means a sure thing - is a difficult task, and the jazz world of today (not least of all within the musician's community...) is not set up to encourage difficult tasks, no matter how great the potential rewards. ← It's probably a separate thread to ask about what Bill Barron did, is it??? I hadn't appreciated he was onto anything different in that respect!

Fair point! I guess not everyone's going to be 'restructuralist'. Thinking about it, I think imitation is just a particular problem in this post-bop sound world, which with it's chords/scales is just particularly amenable/susceptible to rote playing. But I wholly take your point!

Brad - I take the point to an extent. Of my original list: Croatia Poland Switzerland Ukraine Ecuador Paraguay Costa Rica Trinidad and Tobago United States Angola Ghana Ivory Coast Togo Tunisia Iran Japan Saudi Arabia, and South Korea I think several are tough games, and we could probably argue about underdog status. The US would be one team for sure. Tunisia as well. Conceivably Ghana if Essien gets his thing going. But I stand by my assertions for the others. Croatia are most certainly not what they were a few years back. Poland? Decent, but no better than average! Ukraine - again, not what they were a few years back. Switzerland? Hats off to anyone who can beat Turkey that well, but really... Management always seems to be a problem for the Socceroos. I mean, if you look at some of the players at their disposal, they are VERY good Premiership players. They just don't seem to meld as a team.

Chris: I'm not sure that would make that much difference. Let's face it - for each the strugglers, there is going at least of the super teams per group. It's the other two the likes of Australia will be hoping to beat. Is there always a group of death? How are the group lineups decided? Anyone? ← Yes, there always seems to be one. Sorry if I got you offended but you're no different than most fans. As far as Red's comment about Australia not being an underdog to several teams, including the US, that has to be a joke. The US side is one of the better teams, with realistic chances of making the quarters. Australia and teams like Trinidad and Tobago will be teams happy to be there. As far as rooting for the blue bloods, I make no excuses for rooting for the likes of Spain and Brazil and, as I am a fan of the Premiership, England. If I have to choose Spain always comes first on my list. Viva Espana! ← Don't get me wrong - I would never need any excuses for rooting for Spain and Brazil! I shall be watching both very closely, and would genuinely love both to do well. I suspect the Brazilians will be phenomenally hard to beat. However many they may concede, it will take a fantastic defence to shut them out (one reason I think John Terry may loom disproportionately in England's campaign in Germany). As for Spain, history dictates that they will fail to trouble the scorers again in a major tournament, but I'm all in favour of them doing well. Argentina - another Hispanic country I really fancy this year. Riquelme!!!!!!!!

Far too young, unfortunately, but there was a wonderful documentary about the North Koreans on TV over here about a year back. The people of Middlesborough - contrary to various parochial tendencies in the country at the time, especially with regards to 'foreigners' - completely took the Koreans to heart, and supported them fervently throughout the tournament. And then Eusebio's performance to knock them out...One of the greatest in the history of the game? It'd have to be there or thereabouts! Actually, I should have qualified what I said. I completely agree with you - the final was a great game, and, much as it pains me to say it, we probably deserved it . But I do think that game was aberrant for our campaign that tournament. I mean the French played such beautiful stuff, and it didn't seem fair that we could just blunderbuss our way through play like that. [Mind you, maybe aesthetically speaking the French were more beautiful for being the heroic losers .] I like the Welsh a lot, but I was really sorry for the Fijians there! The rugby league final - if it does shape up that way - will be feisty after that Vagana tackle. The All Blacks Union side though at the moment...My god. Frighteningly good. Again, my mistake - I didn't make my point well. I've got no time for this lack of grace either...Mine was only a defence of the odd 'industrial tackler' within the context of the game! No - certainly you're right - I don't go for gamesmanship in the slightest.

I agree that this is a wonderful recording - although I seem to remember some here being a little lukewarm about solo Sun Ra in general. But I'm with you here - I think if Ra in a lineage with Tatum, Ellington, Monk, Hope, Nichols - even also people like Jimmy Yancey when he (Ra) plays the blues. Although probably the most 'retro' track on the album, I can't get enough of 'Easy Street'. The feel is really special. Interesting what you say about Ra being first and foremost a pianist. I think of him as similar to Ellington - would have been known just as a pianist, but with such extraordinary bandleading skills that this is the only realistic way I can frame them - AS bandleaders. I feel that Ra probably would not have been served well by too many more solo recordings. I think perhaps pianistic (not musical) shortcomings would have shone through after a bit. But the legacy as it is I love. The Teatro La Fenice concert is a particular favourite.

I agree to an extent...I just find that some players end up like 'painting by numbers' imitations of the innovators. Running the same scales, licks, etc...Sounding like the innovator becomes a guiding principle, from there a set of rules, and ultimately hinders freedom of expression (a freedom which is presumably the core attraction of the innovation in the first place)... Interesting exchange on Land...I'm off to have a listen!

Well, to set the cat amongst the pigeons (and I write this as an Englishman): I believe the entire Australian nation should have stood up after the rugby world cup and said 'this is a f*cking outrage that such a boring, lifeless team can kick their way to success in a sport which is predominantly about picking the pill up and running with it'. We were so dull it was a joke. P.s. on the brutality thing, I think it's part of the romance of the game. So many of the great sides (an exception that comes to mind is, I think, the Dutch team of the 70s) had the hard man: the Austrians of the 30s, the Hungarians of the 50s. The Milan side of the early 90s had Baresi; the Argentines of the 70s had Rattin. Hell - look at some of the challenges Carlos Alberto put in in the World Cup in '70 etc. etc. etc.