Is Noel Gallagher Worth the Money?

I, like many people, were excited by the return of Noel Gallagher and his High Flying Birds. His first album may have not been exactly the most ground-breaking or original, but it was very enjoyable and you could imagine it being great live.

So with the announcement of his second album, it was inevitable that a tour would follow and I was considering getting myself some tickets. However, I refused to join my friends in purchasing tickets when I seen how much one was going to cost me.

AT LEAST 60 QUID.

And from what I was reading, after booking and process fees, it was nearly £80 for a standing ticket at The Hydro. I was absolutely shocked and angry at the price he was charging his adoring fans.

I'll put this in perspective for you, I went to see The Libertines for £61 at Hyde Park at their comeback gig - something so rare that tickets sold out so fast. As well as The Pogues, you got to see a bunch of bands for the day - albeit it was hard to see half the bands due to lack of organisation from the crap promoters.

Now some might argue, "Well Noel Gallagher is an undisputed legend of rock music. He was in one of the biggest bands of the 90s (Oasis) and he's one of the best known musicians in the industry." They would be correct, but does that mean that he should sell his tickets for that much? Of course not! He may have been in Oasis, but is he going to play Oasis material at a show? You'll be lucky to hear two Oasis tracks and even at that, I'll be surprised if it's better than with the rest of the band. So you are basically paying at least £60 to listen to two albums worth of solo work.

This is a man who was part of a band who "stuck up for the working class", yet he won't make his shows affordable enough to satisfy the common man.

If you want a better alternative, go see Johnny Marr. He was in a band as big as Oasis (The Smiths) as well as later playing in bands such as The Cribs, The The and Modest Mouse. Marr is too on his second solo album, yet his tour tickets are unlikely to surpass £30.

If I was paying 60 quid to see Noel Gallagher live I'd expect Liam Gallagher to duet, monkeys on unicycles and a Kate Bush-esque stage presence. But if I'm honest, I don't think Noel G suits dramatically throwing himself across a stage.

In my humble opinion, he does not merit such a price tag as of yet. If you were to spend that kind of money, you'd expect Springsteen, not a two-album wonder.

The General Election: Why We Are Doomed No Matter What

You'd think that in a first world, civilised country like the UK, you could look at the upcoming general election with a smile and say "ah democracy".

But that doesn't seem to be the case for next year's vote where we seem to be stuck in an awkward place, no matter what we vote. These last few weeks have left us in a purgatorial state, especially those of us living in Scotland.

After Scotland voted to stay part of the United Kingdom, it was fair to say that a strong majority of citizens wanted Devolution Max - which would give Scotland all power except foreign and defence affairs. However, since the No vote, the parties in Westminster haven't been able to agree on Devo Max for Scotland, with Labour leader Ed Miliband saying that it isn't the number one priority for now. Not only do Scots have a dislike for the Conservatives, but there will also be a growing hatred for the Labour party who have stuttered on this issue.

Now, from a Scottish point of view - a generally socialist nation - they aren't going to vote for the party killing the welfare state (Tories), they aren't going to vote for the party who decided to sleep with the welfare killers and in doing so completely contradicted their manifesto (Lib Dems), they aren't going to vote for a the Conservatives' racist cousin (UKIP) and now they are going to find it hard to believe in a party who are increasingly becoming more and more like what they hated in the first place as the Labour party are becoming a less extreme version of the Conservative party. 

Who is left then? Well you have SNP and Greens really, both of whom I think are relate-able - but they are also never going to get in power (as part of the UK). The Scottish National Party aren't perfect either to be fair. They have truly effed up the police system in Scotland and have a few pieces of legislation that raise eyebrows (such as banning certain football chants). As for the Greens? Maybe they are more sinister than we think, only disguised by their lack of power. But the main point I make with these two left-leaning parties is, you wouldn't vote for them and expect them to cause many ripples.

That leaves us with no real parties that are worth voting for who have a chance. Some will vote Labour and still believe that they can actually do something, but it seems a little far-fetched. They have became out of touch with the people, which has made people turn to UKIP, who are no better than the Conservatives, but also have a very anti-immigration stance. If Lib Dems hadn't shown how capable they are of lying, they would have definitely been in my mind for next year. As for the Green? Tough to say that your vote would matter. This leaves SNP which are a good bet to vote for if you are more focused on who represents your constituency, rather than your country and this is the view I'm taking - but when I think of my constituency, I'm thinking of voting Labour.

Why after all that slating of the Labour Party? Because of an incident that happened last week. Up until a few weeks ago, I had nothing but dislike for my local MP Iain McKenzie and his lack of action in the area. However, his vote against the Iraq air strikes restored my faith in him. He turned his back on the party and lost his job as an aide to Shadow Secretary of Defence, Vernon Coaker. That's a job that could have really got him places later in his political career and after sacrificing that for what he or what his constituents believe is great. Yet again, if my opinion of him stays the same, I will only vote Labour for the candidate and not the party. 

But elsewhere, I feel for those who don't know who to vote for. Do you vote for who you really believe in and vote Green, SNP, UKIP or Lib Dem? Or do you vote for Labour or Conservative because you couldn't bare to see the opposite party in power? It's certainly a huge dilemma that we all need to think about.

Give me a follow on Twitter if you want: @TrainInVainn

Also let me know what you think about this and if you want, tell me who you will vote for and why.

Has Materialism Killed Society?

This blog entry isn't my inner pensioner talking, but my genuine, real-life nineteen year old self.

Just the other day, I was speaking to one of my university friends and we were discussing the new iPhone 6. I asked her "What's the difference between a 5 and a 6?"

She replied "Not much. A better processor and it's bigger".

I was baffled by the cost and after reading up about it, it seemed a little crazy to spend so much money for essentially a better processor, bigger screen, thinner phone, more memory and a slightly-improved battery life.

Confused, I asked "How can you justify paying that much for a slightly improved iPhone 5s?". Her reply?

"To say you've got an iPhone 6."

I was slightly saddened by her reply, but I do not blame her. It is so easy nowadays to care about your reputation and your possessions. I myself gave into materialism last year and bought an iPhone 4s as I felt my peers were moving with the times as I sat content with a phone that could only run one app at a time. It's not just about your phone though.

We live in a world where judgement surrounds us. Think about it. Hollister went through a stage where boys would be buying clothes out there because "the girls love a boy in Hollister gear". I also fell into this trap as a young boy thinking that I would somehow look better in a t-shirt modelled by male models and that girls would fall at my feet. Hilarious when you think back. But yet again, this is another example of peer pressure and materialism crushing what is society.

I'm sure a few people have heard horror stories of a poor family not having a penny to their name after the Christmas period and having to use food banks. Who's fault is that? To be fair, it is partially the fault of the poor family - they could have easily cut back the gifts for a year - but it is also the fault of society. How would you like to break the news to your young children that they can't have the new PS4 because they are poor? How would you like to tell your children that they are not normal and can't fit in at school because they don't have the latest trend? You can't. It's horrible.

A guy I was in school with was shy in primary school and his dad wanted him to make friends. So instead of letting the child be himself, he spoiled him and kept him up with technology to make sure that he fitted in at something - even if it was only having an Xbox 360 or the new Call of Duty game. It just shows how much materialism has taken over our lives.

So, what has caused this materialism? As much as I hate to say it, it is capitalism. The rich companies hypnotise you into thinking "this brand will make your life easy", "this top will make you the next Beyonce" or "all of the cool kids wear these jeans, you don't want to be left out do you?"

When you wake up on Christmas Day to open a present that you really wish you didn't get, materialism has caused that. The rich get richer with everyone needing fairly useless things like iPhones, whilst the normal people buy them to seem trendy or to not look too different.

My advice? Buy something if you think that it will be useful enough to warrant the price. Be yourself and save your money as much as you can so that you have money for your bucket list and you aren't left regretting decisions later on in life. Oh and if you haven't already, create a bucket list.

Independence Referendum: My Vote

As I begin to write this blog post, I have made my mind up. In fact, I made a decision last night as I blocked the propaganda coming from both campaigns and it wasn't an easy one.

For those of you who know me, I've been a proud Scot and Brit and have supported the union despite its flaws over the past couple of years, but in the last couple of weeks I have flip-flopped between yes and no. Here's the reasons why.

The Yes campaign have in most people's views, been the campaign with the momentum leading up to today. They have had an all-round better campaign but they have failed to answer what will happen in an independent Scotland exactly. If we vote yes, we are going into the unknown. It's scary. That's why a no vote sounds more ideal because it is a little more secure.

However in saying that, the Better Together campaign have patronised to the masses and made a bit of a mess for no voters. They may well be right on some areas, but they have failed to really reach the young people and the working class as they have been too middle-class orientated. I do believe that being part of the UK is in some ways undemocratic and we don't always get what we want, but I don't believe in the yes campaign's dystopian view of a no vote.

They scare you as much as the no campaign do. There will be a Tory/UKIP coalition apparently. They will scrap our free university (even though we have complete control over that) apparently. They will privatise our NHS (we control that as well) apparently. This sort of scare tactics has well put me off the yes campaign, but in the end my love for change and my socialist nature has just about made me over-come the negatives in the campaign.

I'm voting yes after two years of voting no.

In fact as I write this sentence I have just came back from the polling station. I think that the yes campaign have tried to fit everyone and it has worked to an extent. I just believe that Scotland is more left-wing than the rest of the UK and that makes it a very obvious reason to vote yes. However, do I expect this inequality gap to close significantly? No. When yes voters talk about leaving the UK to get rid of millionaires and greed, they do not realise that that also occurs on their front door step. When they talk about getting rid of the tories, they forget that if we do become a prosperous nation, greed will go hand in hand with that and a right-wing party will become popular. When they talk about poverty and helping us, they forget about the millions of others left behind from our neighbouring countries who are just as worse off as us. It is incredibly sad that yes voters believe that Scotland is worse off than all because that is not at all true. But in saying that, I feel we could do better with a more people-powered government. Also, a big point for me is that I believe in peace and a world without nuclear weapons, something that is possible in an independent Scotland.

I will always call myself British and will always be proud of my English roots, but I think it is time to leave the union. I love Britain and that will never change. I will always look out for my English, Welsh and Irish neighbours in times of trouble and give my support. I just hope that they will give us support too.

Whether it is a yes or no tomorrow, I hope that our country can unite as one and accept the result. We have a lot to lose, but at the same time we have a lot to gain. Vote how you feel is right by all means, but my vote is a yes.

Independence Referendum: Five Things to Love About Scotland and Five Things to Love About Britain

Whether we go independent or not on Friday, the majority of us will see what we love in Scotland and what we love in Britain. I've compiled a list of five things that I love about Scotland and five things I love about Britain.

Scotland

1. Irn-Bru

Goes hand in hand with a bacon sanny

The drink of a nation. The taste that you can't describe but you love. I was on holiday in Zante for a week last year and I drunk it more than I would in a couple of months back home. I think this is because Irn-Bru is such an important part of our national identity that we sometimes need it when we are abroad! And it cures hangovers. 

2. The Patter

Scottish people are just brilliant at comebacks, chants and talking shite. I went to T in the Park and Leeds Festival this year. Leeds was better, but it lacked the sort of patter that you heard first thing on a Sunday morning when you got out your tent. From the slightly cheesy "here wi fuckin go" to the 12 year old brilliance of "yir maw", we have some of the best patter in the world.

3. Scots 

Both in the meaning of the language and the people. We seem to be generally nice and a good laugh. We can be a bit dour, but that is our charm. Plus, the Scots language has been something of national pride. If you're Scottish and you've never started tae type like yir fae Scotland, yir missing oot.

4. The Commonwealth Games

Fachie and McLean winning the tandem cycling at the Games

I have never been so proud of my country than I was at the 2014 Games. There was something amazing about it. There was hardly a yes or no shout during the whole thing and it was just crazy to see our nation get behind the athletes. I heard Flower of Scotland a few times over the space of the games and cried a bit. I even had a wee greet whilst working at the games. Very professional Housty.

5. Nature

This picture still doesn't justify Loch Lomond's beauty

You don't need to go far in Scotland to witness some beauty in bonnie Scotland. On the west coast there is the amazing Loch Lomond with hills up at Arrochar and the Highlands. The Western Isles, the Orkneys and the Shetlands are isolated, but they show a completely different side to the busy central belt. I could go on forever of what beauty we have.

Britain

1. The Music

The Clash in their prime

We have arguably the best music culture in the world. The only one which is possibly better is the US, but then again - we created rock. The Rolling Stones, The Beatles, The Who, The Kinks, The Clash, Oasis, Blur, Pulp, The Libertines, Arctic Monkeys I could go on...We have some of the best lyricists and Britain still has a huge underground scene. It's probably the thing that makes me feel the most British.

2. Film Industry

The frightening Alex in Stanley Kubrick's "A Clockwork Orange"

It's the same as the music. We have such a great film industry which includes some of the best directors of modern times such as Shane Meadows, Richard Ayoade and Danny Boyle. Then you have to look to the likes of Ridley Scott, Stanley Kubrick and Alfred Hitchcock who directed some of our best films such as Alien, A Clockwork Orange and Psycho. 

3. London Olympics

Mo's win was one of the most memorable

Before the Commonwealth Games, there was London. The 2012 Olympics were incredible and the Super Saturday at the athletics was an amazing couple of hours of golds for Mo Farah, Jessica Ennis and Greg Rutherford. London Olympics was the first time that I experienced proper national pride. 

4. The British Empire

(In red) how much land Britain conquered

Even Russell Brand said the other day whilst talking about independence that whilst he wanted to see an independent Scotland, he had a sense of not wanting to let it go. And I agree. Growing up in Britain you celebrate the Empire in school and how powerful we used to be. We know that it was bloody, murderous and pretty much invasion (especially of countries like India, USA and South Africa) yet we don't want to let go of the idea of Britain. Certainly nothing wrong with that. I'll miss England, Wales and Northern Ireland if we go independent and I hope that they'll miss us.

5. The British Battles

UK, England, Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland

This one is a little closer to me than most, but when Scotland faces England, Wales and Ireland in any competition (whether sports, arts, academics etc) it's always really good fun to watch or take part. I wonder if we will continue this if we go independent? Some may argue that if we're on the same island, surely we will, but then would we compete in things like British championships? If the answer is no, I'll be pretty sad.

This post was nothing more than a bit of fun, if you have anything that you'd like to add, feel free to comment below.

Independence Referendum: Where Yes and No Have Gone Wrong

It's a two horse race and it's neck and neck (sorry)

So on the eve of one of the biggest political votes we will ever have to make, I've reflected on the past two years of campaigning from the Yes Scotland and Better Together campaigns. I think it is safe to say that both sides have their pros and cons and neither should be ridiculed for what they want from this referendum.

However, there has been incidents that have pushed me away from both of these campaigns and I'll list three faults that I see in them.

Yes #1: Mindless Propaganda

Both sides can be accused of this, but for all of Yes' good points they raise, they also use scaremongering tactics that questions the motives of a well-ran campaign. We'll take two over-used pieces of propaganda: "A government we didn't vote for" and a "Tory/UKIP coalition". Deputy First Minister, Nicola Sturgeon, said in an article published today that "we have a Tory government we didn't vote for". As a United Kingdom, unfortunately we did - but you can't always get what you want out of democracy. If we had a Labour government in power at this moment in time, this quote would seen stupid. You could argue that every Labour voter in the UK didn't get a government they voted for. Fair enough, if we go independent we're more likely to have a socialist state, but this quote is a bit silly. As for the Tory/UKIP argument, if you really think that enough left-centre voters will change a vote to a right-wing party, then I don't think you have faith in the people of Britain. UKIP are nothing more than a phase in my opinion.

Yes #2: Keep Quiet, Figure Out Later

Of course, if we go independent it will not be so straight-forward. We technically still don't know what will happen in an independent Scotland. A number of talks will still have to take place to iron out key issues such as the currency and peace agreements. After reading Ewan Morrison's blog post "Why I Joined Yes and Why I Changed To No" I realised that the Yes campaign politicians are no different from any other politicians. They are evasive and will work things out after they win the referendum and confrontation won't be tolerated as the campaign has to keep happy and keep voters - meaning no negative talk in the Yes camp so that voters wouldn't turn to No. The Nazis used a similar bloody method: albeit to some incomparable extremes.  

Yes #3: The Utopia That Yes Are Creating

I'm not dismissing the campaign and what they want in an independent Scotland, but the yes campaign are talking about making a fairer, greener Scotland whilst relying on oil. They are talking about making a welfare state that gives everyone opportunity, whilst talking about becoming a country like Luxembourg and Switzerland - notorious tax havens. You can't please everyone.

No #1:  The Out-of-Touch Better Together Campaign

You would think that to reach out to voters, you would try and get a genuinely left-wing politician to mirror the left-wing Yes politicians, but instead Better Together pick Alistair Darling - a man who is a controversial figure in the UK. You would think that a campaign trying to get people to vote no for Devo Max would find someone who they can trust. Hell, I'd have preferred Gordon Brown or even the occasionally-batshit George Galloway to Darling. On top of that the campaign seems to look ever-so-patronising. *WOMEN! HEALTH! TOGETHER! COMMUNITY! FIGHT POVERTY!* Remind you of something?

German: Health, child protection, fighting poverty, aiding travellers, community, helping mothers.Again, not as extreme as this but you get the gist.

No #2: The BBC Bias

Seriously, even if every man and his dog that worked at BBC was strongly no - why couldn't they just keep it as impartial as possible? You could argue that some Yes campaigners were just being paranoid at first - and in some cases they have been - about the BBC, but Nick Robinson getting a little personal with Salmond the other day was surely enough to show that the BBC have been unnecessarily biased towards the no campaign. If they had kept the reporting so neutral that yes voters could have nothing to complain about, the no campaign may have had more voters at the moment.

No #3: Using So Many English People to Back up the Campaign

I have nothing against the English. I was born in England myself. My mum's English, I'm English, my little brother's English. Half my family are from England. However, if you are wanting people to vote for a union, you should be using Scottish people. It will make voters feel like they can relate to the person more in my opinion. There isn't an anti-English thing going on, but I feel there's a certain distrust towards our neighbours at this point in the referendum. 

To sum up, vote however you feel is correct. If you feel you are doing the right thing - do it. However, if you don't care - don't just vote for one side for the banter. For example, my mate Ryan has never been interested in politics and he's more pro-union than nationalist, but he isn't voting because he feels he doesn't know enough and he doesn't care enough to vote. And that is fair enough. 

Thanks if you have given this a read and I hope, like me, you support the country no matter what way it goes tomorrow.

F1: Is Nico Rosberg a Cheat?

Sunday's Belgian Grand Prix was brilliant from start to finish: throughout the 44 laps of the Spa-Francorchomps circuit we seen some world-class overtaking manoeuvres; action on every lap and a twist in the title race.

The twist I'm talking about is that of an incident that occurred on lap two of the race. Lewis Hamilton got himself into first at the first corner, whilst pole sitter Nico Rosberg dropped to third as countryman Sebastian Vettel got past him. By the second lap, Rosberg was past Vettel and was breathing down Hamilton's neck.

Rosberg went on the outside of Hamilton at Le Combes and managed to get slightly ahead. However, he didn't have the racing line so it would be likely that he'd let Hamilton go, however he committed to the next corner and that's when the two cars came together. Hamilton took his line expecting Rosberg to give space, Rosberg didn't give him space and clipped Hamilton's rear left tyre - which resulted in Rosberg also losing his front wing.

Hamilton had a puncture and was in dead last when he pitted. He realised that there was no point in continuing after a while and he retired the car. However, Hamilton went out to the press and told them that Nico admitted to him that he did it "on purpose" to "prove a point".

Since Monaco, the former best friends haven't seen eye-to-eye

Either the media took it out of context or Lewis was being melodramatic. Turns out that the Mercedes team heard it as he made the move to prove a point, not crashing into him to prove a point - and why not? Rosberg has came under criticism for not attacking enough so he tried it. Unfortunately, it all went wrong for Mercedes. Whether it was time and place to try an overtake is another matter, but the question is: Is Nico Rosberg a Cheat?

I do not believe he is. Why? Because I believe the British media fabricate to favour their home driver against one who is from Germany.

The only one I can really think of to be a possible form of cheating is at Monaco where in qualifying he went down an escape route because he apparently lost control of the steering a little and couldn't make the corner. This prevented Lewis having another lap.

Even that is a little far-fetched. If you watch Sky Sports F1, I believe you're more likely to be brainwashed into thinking "Britain is great, it's everyone else's faults" when there is more to it than that. Some paranoid Lewis Hamilton fans have went as far to think that Mercedes would tamper with their own driver's car to favour his rival team-mate. Obviously a German team are going to let their German driver win the title by sabotaging his team mate's, all at a cost of millions! Seems logical.

The reality is Nico tries to bend the rules a bit and sometimes gets away with it whilst Hamilton has been unlucky. As much as I dislike Hamilton (mainly because of those paranoid fans) he has been really unfortunate not to be leading the championship so far. Nico has been lucky, Lewis hasn't. But to go as far as sabotage is moronic. I wonder why Lewis fans don't complain when Sebastian Vettel suffers from the same number of mechanical misfortunes as their hero? Because it's just bias that people believe.

It can't be all down to the media though. Hamilton usually uses the media as a sob story opportunity to play himself as the victim of a crime. Crimes committed by Rosberg. Yes, Nico was more in the wrong because he made the move on Lewis that resulted in the crash and in other races he's involved in controversy, but Lewis' hero Ayrton Senna was worse yet Hamilton condemns Rosberg at nearly every race.

Anyway, opinions aside, it has to be said - with the exception of the lack of drivers fighting for the title - that this has been a really exciting year for F1 and whether you think Nico Rosberg is a cheat or not, I think most want to see this feud carry on for the sake of entertainment.

For updates, follow me on Twitter: @TrainInVainn 

Let me know what your opinion is on the matter by commenting below.

My Experience at the Commonwealth Games: Cycling

It was wheely good.

Sorry. That was a bad joke.

If those of you reading this don't already know, during the Commonwealth Games I got the opportunity to interview athletes as a flash quote reporter. Before I speak of my favourite moments, I just want to say I encourage anyone who gets the opportunity to do flash quote reporting to grab it with both hands because it is such a great (and stressful) experience.

Anyway, here are some moments from the cycling that I really enjoyed:

Jason Kenny's Silver in the Men's Sprint

As a back story, Kenny was one of the favourites for the men's sprint title, but his qualifying was below-par. He came up against the favourite and fastest man, Matthew Glaetzer, in the quarter finals. He managed to outsmart the Aussie and then Glaetzer's team mate, Peter Lewis, in the semis. Unfortunately, Kenny was stopped in the final over three races as New Zealand's Sam Webster, but when I talked to him he seemed pretty satisfied. He told me after a poor qualifying he really didn't expect to get into the final, but Jason's best quality when you interview him is not so much his words, but how friendly he is. Really nice guy and is comfortable to talk to.

The Only Guy From Brunei: Muhammed I'maadi Abd Aziz

I got the chance to speak to a timid cyclist from the minnow state of Brunei. He was a timid character, but at the same time such a nice guy to speak to. He just missed qualification in the points race where he finished 13th (top 12 went through) and he seemed awestruck about the other riders in the race. He told me that he looked tiny in comparison to them before speaking about his plans for the rest of the season (competing in the Tour of Brunei if you're interested) and what he planned to do whilst in Scotland. With a confused face he told me he was going to a castle (which turned out to be Edinburgh Castle) and he made me laugh when he said he was going to see a monster in a lake. However, he doesn't believe that Nessie really exists.

The Passionate Malaysian: Azizulhasni Awang

It took me ages to get a hold of one of the most entertaining riders but I finally got him. Awang managed to win bronze in the Keirin and done it in style. His tactics in the sprint were very exciting, but it was amazing to see him hold on to third in the Keirin despite having a bad line coming into the finish. He is a bit of a character - he was already in hot water for showing support for Gaza on his gloves and he really gets worked up when talking to you. He told me that his nation look to him to win a medal so he is very proud to represent the country. Has to be said, he's one of the biggest rebels in cycling. 

Danny Laud Gave Me a Laugh

When you're not interviewing the winners, you interview those who don't do so well in the road events. Anguilla's Danny Laud was telling me about how small his country is and how the climate is very different to race in. All of his answers were pretty average until I asked him what he was planning to do once he finished his racing in Glasgow and he replied "Well I leave early on Monday so I have a couple of hours at night to get myself into trouble".

Stephanie Morton On Her Friendship With Anna Meares

Aussie pair Stephanie Morton and Anna Meares finished one and two in the 500m Time Trial and the Women's Sprint. Meares took the time trial, but Morton took the sprint in a bit of a shock result. It's difficult to outsmart a legend like Anna Meares - but she did. She spoke about how they are room mates at the games and are the best of friends, but sometimes I find that hard to believe as some say it to diffuse any chance of the media making a big story. However, I was proven wrong when Morton invited Meares up to the top of the podium for the national anthem as she embraced her team mate and sang. 

Meeting Chris Froome's Old Coach

Well, allegedly. Kenya's David Njau could have kick-started the career of one of Britain's best cyclists or he is great at lying. The 43 year-old took part in the time trial and he told me that he dedicated this race to Tour de France winner Chris Froome. Thinking it was a bit strange, I asked David why. He told me "He made me famous". He then went on to tell me that he coached Froome from a young age and taught him about "training and suffering". 

Katie Archibald's Late Bronze

Although there was a scrap for the gold between England's Laura Trott and Wales' Elinor Barker (for whom I have a soft spot for), Katie Archibald grabbing bronze in the points race was brilliant. Katie managed to push Australia's Amy Cure down to fourth with a last burst of speed in the last points sprint. The silver-haired Scot was so happy to win a medal in front of a home crowd and she couldn't stop smiling. When a colleague of mine asked if she dyed her hair silver and blue for Team Scotland she replied "Well you wouldn't believe me if I told you it was an accident". One of my favourites after the Games.

The Edmondson Siblings

I didn't just love them because of their ultra-competitiveness (something that I can relate to with my inferior little bro) but they were just so eager to talk to you. For a couple of world champions, you wouldn't be surprised if they looked down on you a little, but they were genuine people. It turns out their family come from Elgin in the north of Scotland, so the country adopted them as the nations darlings when Scotland weren't having so much luck. Annette seems like she could talk forever and Alex is very approachable. A nice duo.

Christopher Symonds: The 40 Year Old Multi-Eventer

I was looking in our information system and came across a guy who was competing for Ghana in the Triathlon AND the road events. He unfortunately suffered pretty bad in both, but he told me he was suffering from a bug half way through the triathlon (which he thinks he picked it in the swim). He just about recovered for the time trial, but still felt drained. It turns out that he lives in London and works at the House of Commons as a doorman. After asking him if he thought those in the Parliament were, I'll go with "dislikeable" he told me that they're an all right bunch - much to my dismay. However, he told me that he decided to represent Ghana because he wants to be a pioneer for the country and get young people interested in triathlon and road cycling. He was probably the nicest guy I met there: he had a laugh and a conversation with me, he was going very well at 40 years young and put out his hand for a handshake. True gent.

The New Zealand Coach (a.k.a. Quote Machine)

Anthony Peden was put in the difficult position of answering a question about how he would conduct himself as two of his riders faced off in the semi finals of the Men's Sprint. He replied with "I'm just going to sit back and watch really. I've got to stand silent on the sidelines and that's the hardest thing for me, I'm normally pretty vocal and have arms going everywhere. You might see a bit of gaffer tape over my mouth and a zip tie around my hands."

Geraint Thomas' Bronze in the Time Trial

I waited for a good half an hour to find the Welshman who came back to the mixed zone long after the race. He is a confident character and he told me that getting the bronze in Glasgow was good enough for him and that he wouldn't be disappointed if he only came away with that. But just a few days later, he would add to that bronze with a dramatic win in the Road Race. He certainly looks like a potential replacement to Froome.

Namibia's Dan Craven

On paper, this guy would do a decent job in the road race but wouldn't do anything significant. Yet, Craven (based in Bristol I'm sure) secured a ninth place finish which is Namibia's highest placed  finish in a road race at the Commonwealth Games. But his position wasn't the best thing about him, it was how funny he was. He stopped talking mid-sentence to compliment my shorthand writing. I then thanked him and he then joked "I like your top". He then complimented how great the crowd was. Me and a colleague said thank you, before he replied "No thank you! It's been brilliant and Glasgow, you've done well". We thought so too.

Scott Sunderland's Emotional Win

You would have had to have a heart of stone not to hold back the tears listening to Scott Sunderland's interview after winning the 1000m Time Trial. He said that to defend his title here was something special, but also winning the same event in Delhi was just as special as he dedicated the win to his late grandmother who died as he spent his last days with her. Whilst listening to his story of heartbreak and death I told myself  "Just don't cry". Scott was one of the best cyclists on the track and he had many journalists saddened by his story. You could see how much it meant to him. 

Did you have any particular highlights? Leave a comment if you do.

Give me a follow on Twitter: @TrainInVainn

What Music Culture?: T in the Park: 10 Acts to Catch This Weekend

Now for all of you who are heading to T in the Park this weekend or are watching it on the TV, you'll know that the headliners are usually a must-see at Balado, so I've compiled a list of ten acts - some obvious, some not-so-obvious - that are worth checking this weekend.

1. Pixies

So on this list, Pixies are probably the biggest. I mean, they have had a rough couple of years - legendary bassist Kim Deal left the band and they released a slightly-above-average album with new bassist Paz Lenchantin. Even if you aren't a fan of the new stuff, tracks from their albums Surfer Rosa and Doolittle will show you how great Black Francis and co are. 

Key Track: Here Comes Your Man

2. Drenge

The Loveless brothers from the tiny village of Castleton in Derbyshire have grabbed the attention of critics with their debut album which was released last year. Their fuzzy garage rock is certainly a breath of fresh air to the UK indie scene, so if you like a mosh pit and a bit of a riot. Go see em.

Key Track: Face Like a Skull

3. Bombay Bicycle Club

Another band that have been around for what seems like forever, Bombay Bicycle Club released their fourth album So Long, See You Tomorrow with world music influencing it. Feel sounds straight out a Bollywood film and Luna is dreamy and euphoric. They always know how to put on a live show and should be an exciting watch on the Radio 1 Stage.

Key Track: Shuffle

4. Disclosure

Where do you start with Guy and Howard Lawrence? They make up Disclosure, who have absolutely booted a fairly-generic genre of music up the arse. Dance music has been given a makeover since they emerged at the end of 2012 with White Noise. Now, they are collaborating with everyone and mixing it up on the live stage too. If you like the Slam Tent, but don't want to bump into someone with an "eccy jaw", go see these guys on the Radio 1 Stage on Sunday.

Key Track: Latch

5. Chance the Rapper

If you like Danny Brown's weird rapping, Chance the Rapper might be your new favourite guy. His aptly-named mixtape Acid Rap may be the best description of his music. The beats he makes resemble early Kanye West and he knows how to make a hit. There's a reason Justin Bieber is mates with him.

Key Track: Juice

6. Tame Impala

Arguably one of the most underrated bands going, Aussie psychedelic band Tame Impala haven't released an album since 2012's amazing Lonerism, but now they have enough tunes to satisfy neutrals live. Lonerism was trippy and gave a sense of escapism, so maybe their live set will sound the same. 

Key Track: Elephant

7. Baby Strange

The Glaswegians are pretty much brand new and the trio's debut album should be around the corner. They've toured with the likes of Palma Violets so a lot is expected of them. Friend is two minutes of complete jumping-about fun. Wanna say you've seen a band before they are big? Check em out.

Key Track: Pure Evil

8. Wolf Alice

They are NME darlings right now - which isn't always a good thing, but I think they have got this one right. Their recent EP Creature Songs has been applauded and the debut album is coming soon. The cliche "girl fronting a band" thing actually works here and isn't just a "LOOK WE HAVE A GIRL IN OUR BAND, WE ARE SO DIVERSE". Ellie Rowsell is a great front woman and can keep things slow or flipping hard.

Key Track: Fluffy

9. Neon Waltz

Going to be honest, there isn't much to judge this band on. However, from what I've heard this sextet from Caithness (if you aren't sure where that is, it makes Inverness look south) are worth a listen. They have played local to me (Gourock) and I've been told they are great. A band surrounded by isolation (in comparison to the Central Belt of Scotland) certainly show that you don't need to be around bands to be a great band.

Key Track: Sombre Fayre

10. John Wizards

This South African band have finally broke through in the UK following a critically acclaimed debut album. They mix South African house with R'n'B and reggae to make an incredibly unique sound. At least you can say that they aren't "generic shit". 

Key Track: Muizenberg

Give me a follow on Twitter: @mickyhaitch or my university Twitter: @michaelhgcu

If you are going to T in the Park, tell me who you enjoyed or who you're excited to see.

What Music Culture?: LIVE The Boys In the Band are Back (Temporarily) But What Was It Like?

2004 was a turbulent year for The Libertines. They released their second and last album - a confrontational and tragic tale of the relationship between front man Carl Barat and guitarist Pete Doherty - and later that year The Libertines were no more. Pete's drug addiction had left him frozen out of the band and in December Barat broke up what was left of the band stating that there wasn't much point in continuing without Doherty.

Ten years on and the London quartet play their biggest show in the heart of the capital. As a build-up they played two nights at The Barrowlands - one of Glasgow's greatest venues - where reviews were generally positive. However, there's a difference between playing an intimate gig to performing in front of 65,000 people in one of the most famous parks in the world - so would they pull it off?

But there was one question that was more important - would Pete turn up/perform well/be taking heroin? 

Well he did turn up, God knows if he took heroin prior to the show, but if he did, he definitely masked it better than he usually would. As an individual, Pete performed well. However, if we compare him to 2003 Pete he was fairly average, but can you ask for much from a smack addict? I was satisfied with his energy and interaction even if his vocals were a little below par. So yes, I believe he performed well. In some ways I think his fans mean more to him than Pete is to his fans. He seemed desperate to get back out to do an encore after the encore and despite looking worse for wear, looked almost rejuvenated. 

As for the rest of the band, they have all matured. John Hassall gets his job done quietly and tries to settle the crowd with drummer Gary Powell to get things a little stable again. Yet, you can see throughout the performance that Hassall does not care for over-the-top pushing and tensions seem to be high due to that. Who could blame him?

Gary Powell is a little less reserved. In times where the crowd are out of control he screams down the microphone pleading to fans to move back and when he's not being a huge personality he's battering away at his drums - showing that he hasn't lost it despite only playing four shows in ten years. Powell is a rare type of drummer. The fans absolutely love him as an individual and if it wasn't for the spotlight constantly being focused on Barat and Doherty, you would assume he would get quite a bit of press. His humour is rare and has always been approachable to fans. It would almost be a waste if The Libertines didn't stick around a bit because he's the unsung hero of the band.

Front man Carl Barat looks as if he has came straight out of 2004. He has hardly aged and he sings just as well as he did in the band's prime, but he isn't as wild as he once was. He has since - as mentioned above - matured and quietly performs. There's not a lot of stage banter until nearer the end from Barat, but that may be thanks to the negativity radiating from the audience. He seems stressed at the start, but seems to ignore it as the set goes on. 

As the band come on at 9.30, there is pandemonium in the air. For locals, they already know (as of half past eight) that The Libertines will play two dates at Alexandra Palace in September, but the focus returns to tonight. A ten minute montage of the band, featuring snippets of their songs, plays before they walk on stage. The crowd are jumping around already and a note hasn't been played. They start off with Vertigo their opener to their debut album "Up the Bracket" and is quickly followed up by fans favourite Boys In the Band. But there is already trouble brewing. 

Due to excitement/obsession/drunk fans/dickheads in general a number of fans are on the floor already because of excessive pushing. Barat and Hassall are asking the crowd to calm it down a bit, but their plead falls on deaf ears. Unfortunately, the band are powerless in controlling the crowd this evening. Boys in the Band is interrupted twice with the second plea coming from Pete Doherty. If a man who has been carefree on heroin tells you to calm down, he's probably got a point. 

B Side The Delaney comes next and crowd surges soon cause a third interruption. During Time For Heroes they have to stop once again, bringing a little irony to their lyric "Did you see the stylish kids in the riot?" as a bunch of "LADs" crushed those in front of them into the barrier. Begging seems like a cry for help from some members of the audience as the Barat looks disengaged after all the pushing. Music When the Lights Go Out on paper would have been a beautiful moment (everyone I spoke to said that they couldn't wait to hear this) but not even a slow song could tame the fans and one of their best overall songs was wasted.

The Boy Looked at Johnny, Can't Stand Me Now and The Last Post on the Bugle all go down well due to their high energy. However, arguably their biggest hit doesn't stand out much. Can't Stand Me Now - a song which focuses on the friendship of Carl and Pete - doesn't stray from the norm which is a little disappointing. Death on the Stairs is one of the highlights of the night as the crowd turn a little friendlier for this riotous track. 

As the night comes near the end, next up is Radio America which yet again, despite its low tempo, includes a lot of pushing. Even though the pushing has become the talking point the song is still well played and well received. Up the Bracket keeps the tempo high after Tell the King as they reach the end of their set. The crowd by this point are exhausted but continue jumping around like mad. They finish on What a Waster to a delighted 60,000 people as it sparks a sing-along, which again caused it to be stopped as some fans climbed the PA tower. Some are relieved that that's that, but the majority want more music.

As they return to the stage for their encore, a projection stating "Please get down from the delay tower" is slapped on the background of the band's set. Doherty encourages them to get down before playing a duet with Barat as the crowd go silent for France. A cover of Babyshambles' Albion then proceeds before more familiar territory is found in I Get Along which ultimately finishes off the 24 song set - if we don't count the 30 second chant of the Hokey Cokey. At the end, Pete and Carl recite "Suicide in the Trenches", a poem by Siegfried Sassoon as everyone watches in awe as they get to see how close these two individuals are. Their friendship is borderline romantic and they are in kissing distance of each other as they talk down the mic. When they finish they embrace in a hug and they leave. Some may call it an underwhelming way to end, but it was pretty unorthodox and special too. 

What was not to love though? Oh right, the attitude of a minority of the crowd.

I am all for moshing, pushing, forming human pyramids, even punching people in the face (as long as they are cool with that) at gigs, so what made this different?

Well, many lives were at danger. I managed to stay on my feet quite a lot - my balance has some purpose - and yet I came out of Hyde Park with multiple bruises, a swollen toe, a sore knee and a strain on my achilles. I witnessed a teenage girl of around the same age as me (17/18) being trampled on and a guy having trouble breathing because he sort of had ten people piled on him. Another dislocated his bloody arm. Sure you could say "Fans were going to react like that when a band makes a comeback gig" but that doesn't excuse some fans' actions. On multiple occasions I was too busy trying to survive that I missed the performance. On multiple occasions people were on the ground, yet some knowingly continued to push despite pleas from those around them. I thought the flares were a pretty good touch if I'm honest, but those climbing the delay tower were just idiotic. They didn't know how to work that thing or how much weight it could take. That could have ended up with people dying.

The organisers were awful too. Why have such a huge VIP area at a gig that celebrates being working class? Why was it a fiver for a pint? Why were only 700 people out of 65,000 allowed to see bands like Swim Deep and Blur legend Graham Coxon? The layout was awful, but I have to give G4S a round of applause. They done all they could up the front - including giving out drinks to the dehydrated. Top lads.

As for the band, they hardly put a foot wrong. Sure the glaring omission of What Became of the Likely Lads? and Good Old Days could be criticised, but that was partly down to the stupid half ten curfew. 

What can be said? The band were pretty great and it was amazing seeing them live, but a couple of hundred fans ruined this momentous occasion with utter stupidity and a lack of humanity for others. I did not expect to come back from London and think "that was a 3 out of 5 performance". Oh well, they can't always be great I guess.

Give me a little follow on Twitter for more updates: @mickyhaitch or @michaelhgcu

If you have your own opinions about Saturday night, feel free to share.

Fifa World Cup - Predictions For the Biggest Show on Earth: The Groups

If I guess this all perfectly, name me the bookie's worst nightmare.

However, the reality when it comes to predicting games is usually you get them right, but occasionally the odd underdogs will turn the predictable on its head. So, to show you what I think will happen in the World Cup, I'll give you a run down of my predictions for the greatest show on Earth which starts tomorrow.

Group A

Hosts Brazil will kick off the World Cup against struggling Croatia, who started their qualifying campaign well, before a poor last few games in their group. The only reason why they qualified was due to a slow starting Scotland and an average Serbia side. To top it off, they got the easiest draw in the play offs as they overcame Iceland.

Brazil are going to be hard to predict.

On paper they are one of the favourites to win the trophy, but they have left out some experienced stars like Ronaldinho that may weaken their team in the long run as they seem to be going for a defensive side this year. I think they'll ease through the group. Their friendlies boast a 100% record, but they haven't came up against the strongest of sides.

Then the match that could decide everything - Cameroon vs Mexico. If Cameroon win, I think they'll go through, however I am leaning towards Mexico at the moment. After a poor qualifying which seen them finish 4th out of 6 teams in the CONCAF region, they thrashed New Zealand to earn a place. Their defence may be a little leaky, but they have reached the last 16 in their past 5 World Cups and Cameroon's strikeforce may not be up to the task. It will be close between the two, but I fancy Mexico this year.

Brazil
Mexico
Cameroon
Croatia

Group B

Poor Australia. What an awful group to get! Chile is a tough ask as a third seed as it is, but they also play the finalists of the last World Cup - Spain and Holland. I think it's safe to say that Australia are pretty much out of the competition. If they manage to qualify, manager Ange Postecoglou deserves some recognition - maybe even a knighthood.

Elsewhere, we will see a repeat of the final in the first match. Although Spain's golden generation are beginning to wither, they still have a tough team who are expected to get to at least the quarter finals. Spain are a certainty to go through - unless something disastrous happens. Holland on the other hand, are going through a regeneration period. their side lacks a lot of experience and have slipped up against the bigger teams (see their loss to France and draw with Colombia) but they seem to cope with the smaller sides. In hindsight, maybe playing Wales before playing Spain wasn't the best preparation. It will be close between them and Chile.

You'd wonder how great a team Chile could be if there were more Chileans that played football. Their team lacks depth - so much that Championship players such as Gonzalo Jara and Jean Beausejour are in the fold - yet they can spur upsets everywhere. They lost solely to a single goal to Germany and Brazil away from home as well as beating a bunch of teams including England and Costa Rica by a few goals. Without sounding boring and predictable, I'm sure that Chile will fail to beat the Netherlands despite their good use of tactics. 

Spain

Holland

Chile

Australia

Group C

Ah, the group of opportunity. This is the most unpredictable group in the tournament and no wonder. We have: Colombia, Greece, Ivory Coast and Japan fighting for two spots where no one is safe or out. The favourite for the group will be Colombia after their great qualifying campaign. Their side boasts a bunch of big names and if they play the way they have been, they should finish top of the group. 

The other three. Greece were squeezed for first by Bosnia and Herzegovina and had to settle for a play off spot, beating Romania in the process. They drew with Portugal in their friendlies, but apart from that they've been pretty unimpressive. Japan finished top of their group in qualifying and they have a 100% winning streak in friendlies, albeit against weaker opposition (most of the time). With a little luck and some stand out performances, they could make it out of the group. Finally, Ivory Coast made their debut in the World Cup in 2006 and returned in 2010. Both groups that they featured in were groups of death, so this is an opportunity to qualify for the last 16 and they have what it takes.

Colombia

Ivory Coast

Japan

Greece

Group D

Arguably, this is the 2014 Group of Death. England's choice in who to play in friendlies before the draw cost them dearly as they were unseeded from Europe and given an out-of-form Uruguay and solid Italy side. Costa Rica finished off the group. However, I think it looks a lot worse than it actually is. The Three Lions haven't had a good run of friendlies, but neither have their rivals Uruguay and (especially) Italy who drew with Luxembourg and Ireland. Personally, I think England will win the group due to Uruguay's awful qualifying campaign and Italy's inconsistency at World Cups. Many think England will struggle in the heat, but they should make it through the group, despite what the majority say. Uruguay will get by if Luis Suarez can bang in the goals like he did last season for Liverpool.

Italy showed last time around that they can have a strong team and still be humiliated. They drew with Paraguay, then held to another by minnows New Zealand. They ended their disastrous 2010 campaign with  a 3-2 defeat to Slovakia, despite attacking late. This sums up Italy as a team who don't usually lose, but don't usually win either as most of their games end in draws. I haven't spoken much about Costa Rica. Mainly because they - just like Australia - are stuck in a group with teams that are more than likely to whip them. It'd be a great underdog story if they managed to go through, but I really doubt their chances.

England

Uruguay

Italy

Costa Rica

Group E

Group E is a little like Group C, there are opportunities for all to qualify, but I think that it will be more straight-forward than expected. Switzerland to top the group over France is my tip as the Swiss defence will be organised enough to keep France at bay in their match. Honduras are a surprise package, but just like Chile, they lack depth and an injury to one of their stars could ruin their chances. They showed against England that they are a competitive team, a team that can secure third place over Ecuador anyway. France will go further than Switzerland in my opinion, but they won't beat them in the group.

Switzerland

France

Honduras

Ecuador

Group F

There's a big battle behind Argentina for a place in the knockout round. Argentina have been handed a pretty easy group and I would not be surprised if they come out that group with 9 points. Bosnia were very impressive in qualifying, but my bets are on Nigeria. The climate will suit the Africans better and their qualifying was solid too. Iran also came out of qualifying impressively and this will be their best chance of making the last 16. I just think Nigeria will be the best of the rest of the bunch. An open group nonetheless and definitely one of the most unpredictable. 

Argentina

Nigeria

Bosnia

Iran

Group G

I'm about to make a bold statement about Group G - I think that Ghana will go through. 

Germany will win the group. They are a team that hardly have a weakness. Their defence is probably the weak link, but Germany have always been an organised team and will be strong going forward, making this group a piece of cake for them.

USA have a nightmare draw and will be very lucky to make it through. Their team is never short of passion, but this is no group like 2010. Ghana are just as ambitious and Germany and Portugal are heavyweights in this competition. Very unlikely to see them past this stage. 

As for Ghana and Portugal, Portugal are a side that slip up on many occasions. In qualifying, Paulo Bento's side had to come back to defeat Luxembourg, drew with Northern Ireland and drew twice with Israel. Ronaldo may be in that team, but one man doesn't make a team. Ghana on the other hand, hammered Egypt to get to Rio and look like they can upset Portugal if things go their way.

Germany

Ghana

Portugal

USA

Group H

The final group is made up of European group winners Belgium and Russia, as well as South Korea and Algeria. Four years ago, this group would have been a free-for-all. However, the times have changed and Belgium have become the dark horses of the World Cup and Russia's side has looked pretty menacing as of late. Algeria have bad luck written all over them at World Cups as they always struggle to make an impact, but South Korea will go into this tournament with an awful record after such a successful qualifying. In 2014 they have played five matches and lost four - winning against Greece in March. Last night's defeat to Ghana shows that they are not much to worry about in the tournament, despite their respectable track record.

Belgium should win this group. Russia are a better side than four years ago, but they partially won their group due to Portugal's mistakes. They're unbeaten in friendlies this year, but most came against teams like Morocco and Armenia. Belgium's players have been inspiring this year. Romelu Lukaku and Eden Hazard took the Premier League by storm last season and they'll be backed up by arguably the best goalkeeper of last season - Thibaut Courtois who was a rock in goal for Atletico Madrid last season. Belgium could realistically go as far as the final if they play the way their players have been performing this year. 

Belgium

Russia

South Korea

Algeria

Next Time: I Predict the Knockout Rounds.

Follow me on Twitter: @mickyhaitch

 

What Music Culture?: Are Peace Sell Outs or Earning an Honest Buck?

"Mum, want to put it on E4, Made In Chelsea is on."

I never thought these words would ever come out of my mouth, but they did on the 19th of May 2014. A date for the history books.

Some reading this might wonder why a left wing, "Reality TV" hater would say such words, but it's because of one word.

Peace.

For those unfamiliar with this band, they rose to critical acclaim at the start of 2012 and were relatively well-known by the summer of 2013 after the release of their debut album In Love. They have arguably become one of the most exciting new bands in the UK, leading the up-and-coming music scene from Birmingham. 

However, yesterday I was skimming through my endless Twitter timeline and I came across the band's Twitter page, telling their thousands of their indie darlings that they were playing a few songs - including their new single Money - on the popular posh programme. You only had to go on NME's Facebook page to see the mixed reactions:

"Gash sell out shit"

"I don't care if The Beatles are playing, nothing will ever make me watch that shite!"

"It seems odd and maybe as if they are selling out. But actually good for them! We have no top of the pops anymore, bands have got to break into the mainstream somehow"

"Fuck off Selena Jackson" (Ok, that one was in reply to a spammer).

So I decided to watch it anyway. They show started with them playing Lovesick and then Wraith, but mainly in the background whilst the MIC cast argued about who nicked the last caviare ready meal. Then they played Money, a little ironic playing a song about not needing it in front of millionaires, but getting to the point: are they or are they not sell outs?

Of course they aren't. 

Sure, they might feel like they sold their soul to the devil, but put yourself in the situation of these four young lads.

You are in a band with your mates and you are making the music because you love the music. Ok, girls and money is a bonus, but you genuinely love making music. Then, one day you get noticed, you get a record deal, you release an album, you have a huge (on the new band scale) fan base and your songs are used on things from Match of the Day to adverts. However, you only have that group of fans who know who you are and like most bands, you wouldn't mind being more famous. Then you get some TV coverage to promote your new single and you get paid handsomely. Where did they sell out?

Peace simply gained some TV time and got paid. At no point did they change their music to suit the weak-minded (you know, that lot that think Mumford and Sons are the 21st century answer to Bob Dylan), but simply earned some money to do what they love doing and mingling with a couple of celebrities. Plus, not all of MIC is bad, I've heard that Proudlock guy is a laugh.

Those who call them sell outs are forgetting that bands hardly make money off CDs these days and playing live is where they make their money. A huge number of people watch Made In Chelsea as well, why not let them hear you if they haven't already? You may gain a few fans and you may make them want to search for other bands. That's a win-win-win. 

And to finish, sell outs don't play three free (that's hard to say) shows for their fans. They have a great personality towards music and they don't compromise to appeal to the boring rock fans. Hell, I'd do it to get some money and let everyone know about my band.

So to Harry Koisser and co, Peace x

Sportsman: F1 - How My Predictions Look So Far

So two races have passed in the 2014 season with the third race taking place this weekend in Bahrain. So now after two races I have a decent idea of what will happen this year. I predicted what would happen this season here if anyone wants to see my predictions:  http://modernlifeisrubbissh.blogspot.co.uk/2014/03/sportsman-f1-predicting-unpredictable.html

So what have I got wrong so far?

Ferrari Aren't As Strong As I Thought

I predicted Alonso and Raikkonen would finish third and fourth with the team finishing third. I still think they will probably finish third, however Fernando Alonso and Kimi Raikkonen have struggled so far. Kimi may have been unlucky in Malaysia, but Fernando was struggling to take over a Force India, even if Nico Hulkenberg was driving it. 4th and 7th in Australia wasn't exactly amazing either, but then again, Ferrari can't get much worse than they are currently.

Rosberg and Ricciardo Could Win the Title

I placed Nico in 5th and Daniel in 6th in my predictions and already they seem head and shoulders above the Ferrari pair as well as scaring their team mates. Rosberg is currently leading the championship and Ricciardo could easily have been in 2nd right behind him if he didn't have the luck of a Kennedy. A questionable disqualification and a botched pit stop has ruined any chance of points so far this season, but it can only get better from here.

I Under Rated Some Drivers

So far there have been many drivers that have wowed me. I certainly underestimated Ricciardo's ability to adapt to the Red Bull who now looks like a genuine title contender. Then there were the rookies. Kevin Magnussen managed a podium on his first race and Daniil Kvyat has managed to get himself into the points in his first two races. I wrote both of them off as weak links in their team, when in reality they are contributing a lot to their teams. Valtteri Bottas and Nico Hulkenberg have also impressed me this season. Bottas was hit with a poor car last year so we didn't get to see much from him, however, now he is keeping up with team mate Massa. Hulkenberg has a pretty poor car and I assumed that would lead to poor results, but Hulkenberg exceeds expectations as usual, showing that he should be in a quicker car.

Toro Rosso Have Improved, Sauber are in Danger of Becoming a Number

Toro Rosso were looking like a car constantly finishing just outside the points and getting the odd one here and there. They already look like they will improve on the team's 8th place finish in the Constructors' Championship. Meanwhile over at Sauber, it feels like they only go backwards (in the words of Tame Impala). They have became the back team out of the competitive ones if we take away Lotus - and even at that, Grosjean seems to be enjoying his season more than Adrian Sutil and Esteban Gutierrez. Sauber havea  habit of picking it up in the second half of the season, but with the regulation changes, will they be able to keep up? They certainly look like the way Williams were last year.

So what can I expect to happen? I think Red Bull will catch up with Mercedes, but it won't be for a few races. Ferrari need to get into (sorry for the pun) gear as McLaren can look deadly on a good day and Williams may improve, although it is unlikely. Toro Rosso should be focusing on beating Force India and Sauber, whilst Lotus should be trying to beat some of them cars and get back to competitiveness. And to end this post, I think Kamui Kobayashi could spark a surprise at the back if Caterham can improve the car like they said they would.

Sportsman: F1 - Predicting the Unpredictable

The season started today, but I refer to it starting tomorrow as practice doesn't determine anything other than what state your car is in.

The last few years have hardly spun any surprises. Mercedes and Lotus improved slightly, McLaren and Williams had a shocker last year, but apart from that it was a pretty standard year. Red Bulls at the front, Marussias and Caterhams at the back. Straight forward.

BUT F1 giant (metaphorically speaking of course) 'Lil Bernie Ecclestone threw a curveball into this year's rules and regulations. Here are some:

• Drivers have permanent numbers for commercial reasons.
• There is a fuel limit of 100kg, down from 150kg
• The 2.4L V8's have been replaced with 1.6L turbo engines.
• The "ugly" noses are now only 15cm long.
• And finally, the last race is, bizarrely, worth double points.

This has made the title race more open than it has been in years - probably since Keke Rosberg (father of current driver, Nico) won the 1982 Championship. Of course, this is a good thing for F1, if we forget about the ludicrous double points race at Abu Dhabi. If you are not a Red Bull fan like myself, you can get bored of seeing the greatest domination of the sport since Michael Schumacher's 5 in a row in the earlier 2000s. 

Anyway, how did pre-season testing look? Williams looked like a different team who could really push for race wins, Mercedes looked almost unstoppable and Lotus looked shaky. But what was worst of all?

The reliability issues with the Red Bull.

Vettel didn't get a time in the third test, despite the fairly promising look of the car. I say "fairly" because it still looked competitive, but no longer with that blistering pace of the past three years. They needed a miracle after being one of the worst teams in testing.

They didn't quite get that miracle in the first two practices, but they done all right. Both Ricciardo and Vettel finished inside the top eight in the first practice and top six in the second. Caterham had a miserable time over the two practices as they failed to set any times. Maldonado of Lotus was the same, with team mate Romain Grosjean only finishing 18 out of 22 in Practice 2. Marussia seem to be sitting in the same position as last year, but they may be a bit closer than before.

Moving up the field, middle-of-the-grid cars Force India, Toro Rosso and Sauber failed to make any impact with 10th being the highest any of the three cars placed in practices. Then the two most improved teams: McLaren and especially, Williams. As I have said before, both teams had an awful 2013, but McLaren were consistent, with both of their cars finishing inside the top ten on both occasions. Williams were blazing in Practice 1 finishing third and fourth. Their second practice wasn't as strong as they finished 8th and 12th, but the car could easily do what Lotus did last year. 

I've already mentioned Red Bull in the elite cars, so let's talk about Ferrari and Mercedes. First, Ferrari enjoyed Practice 1 when Alonso came out top of the pile, but Raikonnen was a disappointment in ninth. Practice 2 was encouraging as they finished third and seventh respectively. Mercedes were looked a little shaky in first practice as Rosberg was sixth and Hamilton failed to put down a time, but in Practice 2 they hammered the opposition finishing in a one-two, led by Hamilton.

From what we've seen in practice, not a lot will change over a season, but this season that could well happen. The likes of Red Bull, Sauber and Lotus last year were hugely impressive in the second half of the season and with double points in the last race, this could benefit slow starters who upgrade their car well. For a good bit of fun, I will predict the Drivers' Championship as well as the Constructors:

Constructors

1 Mercedes

2 Red Bull

3 Ferrari

4 Williams

5 McLaren

6 Sauber

7 Force India

8 Toro Rosso

9 Lotus

10 Marussia

11 Caterham

Why Mercedes? They are strong already, Hamilton and Rosberg have worked together already and are both experienced. Vettel and Ricciardo however, have not. We are still to see if Ricciardo can get the most out of the car due to his lack of experience in a faster car. Ferrari seem to have the same speed as Red Bull, but I doubt they will be able to develop their car as well as RB, plus Alonso and Raikkonen may be a bad pairing. It could easily go well, but if they are sniffing around at the title it may get heated.

Williams I feel will just squeeze McLaren, but that's the romantic in me talking. The other big surprise there is Lotus in ninth. I feel that they're already in a bad financial position and this won't be a good year from them after some poor testing and practices. I mean, if they have a stroke of luck they could go as high as sixth, but I don't think that they can do any better than that.

Drivers

1 Vettel

2 Hamilton

3 Alonso

4 Raikkonen

5 Rosberg

6 Ricciardo

7 Massa

8 Button 

9 Magnussen

10 Bottas

11 Hulkenberg

12 Perez

13 Sutil

14 Grosjean

15 Vergne

16 Gutierrez

17 Kvyat

18 Maldonado

19 Bianchi

20 Kobayashi

21 Chilton

22 Ericsson 

Right start at the bottom. Chilton and Ericsson are very young, I think that Kobayashi - a risk taker - will beat the two of them. Bianchi will finish ahead as he is a quality driver who deserves recognition. Maldonado is an all-talk driver who won't make an impact, only backed by money. I think Kvyat will struggle with his team mate Vergne not being far away as he really lacks that X Factor in a driver. Gutierrez looks like he may struggle again with the current car, which doesn't seem to be doing much. Grosjean is a brilliant driver - as we saw in the second half of 2013 - but a limited car may well set him back. Sutil will finish behind the Force Indias, who should stay ahead because of two quality drivers - especially Hulkenberg who may struggle to catch the Williams and McLarens in his average car.

Into the top ten. Bottas is a decent driver with a good car this year, but I think he'll struggle with the quality of the other drivers, including Magnussen who may or may not have a good car this year. The Dane is driven, but may be limited by his car, only to be beaten by Button due to his experience and ability in a McLaren. Massa looks like a born-again driver after his last few races and if the Williams is quick, he will be too.  

Ricciardo may struggle to get into the top five and who can blame him? Four of my predicted top five are world champions with the exception being Nico Rosberg who I think will also be outdone by the four world champions. Then come the Ferrari pair. Alonso will beat Raikkonen just because Fernando is the best driver in the field, plus Kimi can be a little inconsistent. Top two - Hamilton will be defeated by Vettel for many reasons: Vettel is a better driver who can battle through a field (as seen a few times last year); Vettel seems more driven towards a title without taking anything away from Hamilton; and Red Bull's car will be the best in the second half. Last year, Mercedes looked the strongest and we all seen how that ended up. 

Overall, this is going to be an exciting year and I can bet that of my predictions I guess eight drivers positions and four constructors positions correctly because it is just that unpredictable.

Here's to another year of great Formula One. Lights out.