Ploughendplonker

Well that's nice to hear, and I know talking about too much bureaucracy is a bit angry-red-faced-bloke-on-Question-Time behaviour but when you see desk jobs that pay north of 70k p/a you can't help but wonder whether that could be better used.

I can't help but wonder what a 'Director of Fairness' does and why it commands a 75k a year salary. I think it's right to question the necessity of these jobs considering it's taxpayers money that pays for it and, more importantly, it commands a salary roughly five times what a frontline nurse earns.

I'm no Tory, but the amount of pointless desk jobs doesn't help (e.g. I recently saw a role advertised for 'Director of Fairness' at 75k a year, around 5 times what a nurse earns). If another party was in charge they'd just throw money at the issue, meaning there'd be more desk jobs like this and very little (if any) of the money would actually filter through to front line care, and the front line care workers. Firstly someone needs to either make these pointless desk jobs obsolete or, probably more doable, cap any HR, administrative, etc.. desk jobs at no more than £30,000 p/a (more than generous). Once this is done, then investment is key because significantly more of the money will be going to help those on the front line.

Why should the employee get fined anything at all? Also would be interesting to see what happened if someone was stopped in the street and fined and they just chucked it in the bin and walked off.

As eluded to I'm pro-vaccine (indeed I haven't come across anyone who is hesitant about it), however the scapegoating of those who haven't got the vaccine is so widespread I'm surprised they haven't been blamed for our poor performances in the Ashes so far. I get that it can reduce transmission but vaccines don't stop people getting it, the idea of the vaccine is if you do get it, it either doesn't affect you or at worst is similar to a bad bout of flu or cold. As a result cases, which is being used as the reason for further restrictions, are always going to be at a reasonably high level even if, hypothetically, the whole population was vaccinated. Trouble is there's no opposition to it. Labour are pro-control of society so are always going to vote for more restrictions at every turn. It's in the media's interest to be pro-lockdown as it means that more people will be at home reading their articles, meaning they can earn more money from advertisers. I imagine this is why the only questioning of lockdown during this whole process has been along the lines of 'why didn't we lock down harder' or 'why didn't we lock down sooner'. That's why SAGE can go on TV and say unsubstantiated guff like 'if we'd locked down a week earlier we would've saved 20,000 lives' or similar and no interviewer will dare challenge them.

Don't mean to sound too much of a cynic but some are going to wonder what the point was in getting the vaccine if more restrictions come in. It was promised it was the path to freedom, but suggestions of further restrictions show this isn't the case. Not going full Le Tiss here, I've had my first two and have booked in my third after Christmas, but if I'm going to get my third with restrictions either in or incoming, it will be the equivalent of me attending an interview to become Duncan Goodhew's barber.

2-1 win for us at the weekend at home to Concord Rangers. Very much in the 'not great but we'll take it' category of games and it breaks a streak of four defeats in a row for us.

Currently reading a book about how football changed in the 50s/60s, and there's a chapter that basically focuses on society immediately after the war. Such was rationing in the post-war period that, on the Ashes tour of 1946, two England fast bowlers actually put on two stone.

I don't mind it, but don't like McGuinness as host. Can see why they got rid of Dawson and Tuffnell, but wasn't sure why they got rid of Sue Barker.

What have people thought of the new Question of Sport (apologies if this has been raised in another thread)?

I had no problem hearing fireworks from the comfort of my own room.

We've got Hungerford away tomorrow. It's cliched but you feel it's the kind of game title challengers win. Sounds a bit silly as surely every game is one title challengers should win, but I've seen enough to believe that we're good enough at home and will win an overwhelming majority of our home games. It's trips like tomorrows which will give a better insight into whether we're title challengers or perhaps just playoff contenders.

Sitcom pilot on BBC Iplayer worth checking out called 'Mammoth'. Interesting reverse Life On Mars Style premise where a PE teacher from the 70's is catapulted into a modern school.

You might have seen the advert on the BBC for the new sitcom 'The Outlaws', the one with 'I fought the law' by the Clash as the background music. Having watched the show, an inappropriately jovial accompanying song if ever there was one. It's well-written but the storylines look incredibly bleak.

Perhaps that's why there were so many dramatic chases which, if they're turning up 5/6 times a film, lose their drama and intrigue pretty quickly.