Skip to main content

Tories admit little chance of winning (2-0 down)

Michael Howard the Tory leader has said that his party is now 2-0 down at half time. I am told that on an analysis of last season's Premiership and Football league games there were 214 games in which one side was 2-0 down at half time. In only 5 instances did the side losing at that stage win. It is rumoured that on each of those occasions it was against Southampton, but no-one has sourced that rumour.

What Howard actually said was:
"I am a football fan. You often find if you are a football fan there is a team that might be two goals down at half-time, [but] they win the game."

So "often" is 2.3% of the time.


PoliticalHack said…
I did wonder how often that happened myself. Apparently, it has happened a grand total of twice in this season's premiership so far, so Howard is being rather economical with the truth.
Bob Piper said…
The last time was only 10 days ago when Aston Villa gloriously defeated... Southampton 2-3 after trailing 2-0 at half-time. However, I can find no instances in the history of the game where a team has been losing as drammatically as the Lib Dems are at the moment and coming through to win. Did anyone see Charles Kennedy on the Jonathon Dimbleby programme last night? Even the Lib Dems in the audience seemed aghast! A real rabbit in the headlights when quizzed on ANY detail of Lib Dem policies. Truly embarrasing.. even I was cringing for him. Stick to the comedy shows Charlie.
PoliticalHack said…
I thought the LDs WERE a bunch of comedians.
Unity said…
You know John, the real problem with applying footballing analogies to politics comes when you start looking for the Lib Dems and find that they're not even in the same competition as Labour and the Tories.

Still if this general election really were a game of football, at least we know exactly what positions you'd play..

Left Back (in South Yardley) and Right Back (where you started).

Popular posts from this blog

Statement re false allegations from Esther Baker

Statement by John Hemming
I am pleased that the Police have now made it clear that there has been a concerted effort to promote false criminal allegations against me and that the allegations had no substance whatsoever.
I would like to thank Emily Cox, my children, Ayaz Iqbal (my Solicitor), my local lib dem team and many others who supported me through this dreadful experience. There are many worse things that happen to people, but this was a really bad experience.
It is bad enough to have false allegations made about yourself to the police, but to have a concerted campaign involving your political opponents and many others in public creates an environment in which it is reasonable to be concerned about ill founded vigilante attacks on your family and yourself. Luckily there was a more substantial lobby to the contrary as well, which included many people who were themselves real survivors of abuse, which has helped.
I am normally someone who helps other people fight injustice. …

Statement re Police investigation into Harassment and Perverting the Course of Justice.

It was recently reported that the police were not investigating the allegations of Perverting the Course of Justice that I had made. This came as a surprise to me as I had been told for some time that my allegations were to be considered once the VRR had been rejected. I have now had a very constructive meeting with Staffordshire police on Friday 29th June 2018 and the misunderstandings have been resolved. At that meeting the evidence relating to the perversion of the course of justice and the harassment campaign against my family were discussed. The police have decided to investigate both the perversion of the course of justice and also the harassment campaign. I would like to thank them for changing their decision and I accept their apology for the way in which they did that. I am also in possession of written confirmation a police force would be investigating allegations that a vulnerable witness has been harassed for trying to expose the campaign against me. I hope that the aut…

R v SUSSEX JUSTICES ex p McCARTHY [1924] 1 KB 256

I have only just found this one which I think is accurately reported below (but if it is not please give me an accurate report).


R v SUSSEX JUSTICES ex p McCARTHY [1924] 1 KB 256

November 9 1923

Editor’s comments in bold.

Here, the magistrates’ clerk retired with the bench when they were considering a charge of dangerous driving. The clerk belonged to a firm of solicitors acting in civil proceedings for the other party to the accident. It was entirely irrelevant that there had been no evidence of actual influence brought to bear on the magistrates, and the conviction was duly quashed.

It is clear that the deputy clerk was a member of the firm of solicitors engaged in the conduct of proceedings for damages against the applicant in respect of the same collision as that which gave rise to the charge that the justices were considering. It is said, and, no doubt, truly, that when that gentleman retired in the usual way with the justices, taking with him the…