Skip to main content

Year: 2016

Six Nations 2016: The Waiting is Nearly Over

Written by Toby Webb on . Posted in Sport.

This coming week has been a long wait for anyone connected with the England rugby team. While the wounds of their utterly dismal World Cup campaign are still fresh in the minds of fans and players alike, finally we have rugby again: a chance to begin the healing process. The imminent Six Nations could have suffered from a World Cup hangover. However, with England boasting a brand new coaching team, it will be an intriguing tournament for all involved. For England fans, a new chapter is finally upon us.

First, let’s talk about the new coaching team. I experienced an immense sense of vindication following the appointment of Eddie Jones as head coach, Steve Borthwick as forwards coach and Paul Gustard as defence coach. In my post-mortem of England’s World Cup campaign, I demanded that the RFU appoint a head coach from the Southern hemisphere and splash the cash on a high calibre support team. My prayers were answered.

The appointment of Eddie Jones has been almost unanimously praised. At last, England will be headed by someone with international coaching experience (the last two coaches, Lancaster and Johnson, had none), someone brought up on the Southern hemisphere diet of fast, flowing, full of flair rugby. Furthermore, he will be supported by two quality coaches. Borthwick was part of Jones’s coaching team with Japan, and Gustard’s efforts have resulted in Saracens being a dominant force in this year’s Premiership.

Although his first taste of international coaching was deemed a failure, heading the Australia team between 2003 and 2005 and being sacked as a result of poor performances, the rest of Jones’s CV will get England fans excited. He was technical advisor during South Africa’s triumphant 2007 World Cup campaign. His next foray into international coaching was with Japan. Taking over in 2012, Jones changed the face of Japanese rugby. He implemented an attractive, fast-paced style of rugby that culminated in the Japanese performances during the 2015 World Cup. No one will forget their much-deserved triumph over South Africa. Jones has proven pedigree as an international coach.

In the build up to the Six Nations, Jones has talked well. He has outlined his desire to implement a new English style, one that maintains the traditional qualities of good set-pieces, scrums and line-outs, while incorporating more modern aspects of offloading, utilising space and speed. Here, he has covered his bases. Telling us what we want to hear without committing himself to any specific style.

The squad announcement for the Six Nations was Jones’s first meaningful contribution as England boss. Household names like Geoff Parling, Tom Wood and Tom Youngs were left out, deemed too old to fit the long-term planning towards the 2019 World Cup. There was re-call for Manu Tuigali, someone tossed aside by the old regime. Seven uncapped players have been named, including the exciting prospects Maro Itoje and Elliot Daly. The prodigy Danny Cipriani was also left out, much to my dismay. While containing some intriguing decisions, the announcement was well in-tune with Jones’s rhetoric about the new chapter of English rugby.

Although it has been forecast, the decision to make Dylan Hartley England’s captain for the Six Nations is contentious. Hartley has an appalling disciplinary record, part of the notorious off-field antics during the 2011 World Cup, and around 54 weeks of suspension in his career. There are big question marks over his composure and ability to lead by example. However, in Jones’s defence, he has named him captain for the Six Nations only. This is a shrewd move, not only because of his questionable temperament but because his position as starting hooker is under threat from Jamie George and Luke Cowan-Dickie. Jones is avoiding a problem the old regime had, Chris Robshaw being in the team because of his captaincy role rather than his form. The tournament will be a trial of Hartley’s captaincy qualities.

The team for Saturday’s crunch game in Scotland will be announced later in the week. Jones faces a dilemma: does he select a team boasting youth, and risk an opening game loss to a Scotland side buoyant from a brilliant World Cup campaign? Or does he go with more experienced players, more likely to secure a first victory for the new coach? Jones’s first few games will inevitably be judged as experiments, whatever the results. However, one can not underestimate the value of getting victories under the belt. A victory should be the priority, using whatever players necessary. Jones has suggested he will err on the side of caution for the Scotland game, filling his 23 man squad with largely experienced players. However, uncapped players Ollie Devoto, Paul Hill and Jack Clifford are selected, and will be expected to play some part on Saturday.

Given this, my squad prediction, assuming that everyone stays fit in the run up to the game, is as follows:

15. Mike Brown, 14. Anthony Watson, 13. Jonathan Joseph, 12. Owen Farrell, 11. Jack Nowell, 10. George Ford, 9. Danny Care.
1. Mako Vunipola, 2. Dylan Hartley (c), 3. Dan Cole, 4. George Kruis, 5. Joe Launchbury, 6. Chris Robshaw, 7. James Haskall, 8. Billy Vunipola.

Owen Farrell gets the nod at 12. Jones sees him as a versatile player who can play both inside centre and his natural position of fly-half. His experience and precision from the kicking tee could be crucial in a tight game. Dan Cole gets the nod due to lack of a better option; if fit, Kieran Brookes would certainly be starting ahead of him. Chris Robshaw, relieved of captaincy duties, is in the team as a result of good club form. Finally, Danny Care beats Ben Youngs to the 9 jersey on form as well.

I expect Saturday’s game to be very tough. Scotland are fresh off the back of a great World Cup, narrowly losing out to Australia in the QFs; playing at home against the old enemy under a new coach will undoubtedly get them fired up. Despite this, I predict, after soaking up a lot of early pressure, England will be victorious by 6 points.

Top 5: Cheesy 80s films

Written by Georgia Welch on . Posted in Film.

5) Heathers

Perhaps the most sinister film on the list, cult classic Heathers is a darkly funny and twisted satire, deconstructing the high school hierarchy in a way that can only be described as ‘Mean Girls meeting Natural Born Killers’. Starring a fresh-faced Christian Slater and Winona Ryder, Heathers definitely makes for some slightly off-kilter Valentine’s Day viewing if the usual boy-meets-girl formula doesn’t take your fancy.

 

4) Labyrinth

There’s no doubt that Labyrinth features some of the cheesiest (or creepiest) puppet characters ever onscreen. Complete with musical numbers from David Bowie himself, this film is not only the pinnacle of his acting career, but also one of the most iconic fantasy films of the 80s—loved and renowned by viewers of all ages.

 

3) Ferris Bueller’s Day Off

Ferris Bueller’s Day Off was one of several great films by John Hughes that captured the sense of apathy and anti-authoritarianism shared by teenagers everywhere—in the most light-hearted and endearing way possible. Ferris Bueller’s narration, coupled with a suitably cheesy soundtrack, ensured that the film became as genre-defining as its titular character—whose plethora of cheesy quips and one-liners made him one of the most loveable characters in 80s cinema.

 

2) Ghostbusters

When discussing cheesy 80s films, who could forget about everyone’s favourite paranormal pest controllers? Ghostbusters is a truly great example of the perfect blockbuster, thanks to the perfectly placed jokes and unmistakably excellent onscreen chemistry between Bill Murray, Sigourney Weaver and others, too. Ambitious in its special effects and witty screenplay, Ghostbusters is endlessly entertaining and boasts one of the catchiest taglines in modern cinema. So, who you gonna call this Valentine’s Day?

 

1) The Breakfast Club

The Breakfast Club clinches the top spot due to its ability to pull off cheesiness juxtaposed with genuinely poignant themes. Easily John Hughes’ most famous work, the film ultimately spearheaded the teen film genre with its deceptively cynical examination of the social dynamics of high school. The film also contains its fair share of fun with dance sequences, an unforgettably 80s soundtrack and, of course, its timelessly quotable dialogue.

Tracks of the Week

Written by Patrick Grealey on . Posted in Music.

PJ Harvey – ‘The Wheel’ from The Hope Six Demolition Project

Island Records

This new single from PJ Harvey’s impending album The Hope Six Demolition Project has an insistent energy not unlike that that flickered at the heart of 2000’s Stories From The City, Stories From The Sea, albeit an energy tinged with the serious melancholy of its subject. Hands clap, drums hum, saxophones groan and guitars grind under Harvey and her band’s ceremonial chant, lamenting the fates of war-pinned children disenfranchised, disappeared, or worse, as restless and angry as a diaspora. England having been shook, it seems Harvey’s war on war has escalated to a new ferocity. Ceasefire pending.

Fat White Family – ‘Satisfied’ from Songs for our Mothers

Without Consent Records

“I’m so easily satisfiiiieeed…” croon Fat White Family, with all the charm of Bing Crosby 12 large scotches deep, and so, it seems, am I. ‘Satisfied’ is little more than two slimy grooves that have been sewn into each other and left to soak in as much distortive filth as could be coaxed from the cistern, before being sent bouncing away astride a comically Casio drumbeat into druggy oblivion. It’s so T. Rex that I’m tempted to accuse FWF of exhuming Marc Bolan and reanimating him back into some Frankensteinian action, but T. Rex were never this filthy.

Savages – ‘Adore’ from Adore Life

Matador Records

The underpinning question of ‘Adore’ is a disarmingly simple one: “Is it human to adore life?”. Well, I confess I’ve never really thought about it, but Savages have made up their minds, and mine too. Singer Jehnny Beth interrogates her own romantic culpability, tip-toeing between doubt and defiance as she catalogues the overspills of her lust; “If only I didn’t want the world / I wouldn’t make you feel so sad” she promises at the song’s opening, only to end it unapologetically, as if to undercut her transgressions, with “D’you adore life? / I adore life”. Well, do you?

UK universities sign partnerships with Egyptian institutions

Written by Paul Scott on . Posted in News.

Last week, the British Council finalised agreements with Egyptian officials to create academic links with universities under military control.

Delegates representing the Egyptian government and education ministry met with the British Council in London to confirm ten new partnerships between universities in Britain and Egypt.

According to the British government website, the agreement was designed to boost “collaborative work and research” and “marks a strong political commitment from both the UK and Egypt to sustaining a long-term strategic partnership in research, innovation and education.”

The agreement, signed on the 20th of January, does not include any Manchester universities but will link Cairo University with King’s College London, Sussex University and Aston University; Alexandria University with London South Bank University and University of Dundee; New Giza University with UCL; and the Arab Academy for Science, Transport, and Maritime Transport with Brunel University, Staffordshire University, Aston University and Cardiff Metropolitan University.

The deal has been in the pipeline since 2014 when it was stated that 2016 would be the “Egypt-UK year of research, innovation and education.” Late last year, details of the partnerships were finalised and signed off during Egyptian President’s visit to London in November.

Since 2014, President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi has presided over a post-revolution Egyptian state whose 2011 uprising was one of many across the Arab world. Almost five years on from the protests against the regime of former President Hosni Mubarak, Egypt is ruled by el-Sisi’s military autocracy.

Many see the outcome for the country as a one of the worst of the Arab Spring, and activists claim that state repression is more severe than prior to the revolution. The country has grappled with significant security issues and political instability since 2011.

However, a close educational advisor to el-Sisi involved in the UK deal, hailed the President and his role in forging the new relationships between British and Egyptian institutions, saying:

“The President of Egypt is leading the country towards a modern learning society. It is a golden era for education and innovation in Egypt. The close co-operation between UK and Egypt is a prime example of national vision promoting excellence and international cooperation.”

While the official rhetoric of the Egyptian government acclaims to a “golden era”, according to activists the situation in the country is one of unparalleled state surveillance and control. This includes crackdowns and laws against political protest and activism—to which students have been integral.

Shortly after the imposition of military rule in 2014, protests at university campuses in Cairo were shut down by force and in the last couple of years, scores of students—amongst other activists—have been detained by the government for ‘political dissent’.

The nature of el-Sisi’s regime in Egypt will undoubtedly raise question marks amongst activists as to why the British Council and British universities are keen to form partnerships with institutions under the jurisdiction of his dictatorship. Campaigners will argue that since the incumbent government has been in place, Egyptian students have gone backwards in achieving the freedoms many of them passionately demonstrated for in the spring of 2011.

The University of Manchester currently offers partnerships with universities across Europe, Asia, Oceania and North America, however none with any Middle Eastern or African institutions (with the exception of Israel). The newly created links between British and Egyptian universities aims to help grow Egypt’s higher education system and will provide a “provision of technical and vocational education to young people.”

However, critics of the deal will argue that no agreement should be made between British academic institutions given the political conditions endured by Egyptian citizens and students under el-Sisi’s authoritarian rule.

Are you serious?

Written by Ryan Khurana on . Posted in Opinion.

I’m from Canada, a country that makes major political decisions based solely on the number on the front of the calendar. Life as a Canadian is so insufferably dull, boring, and inconsequential that we have become very funny people; comedians from Jim Carrey, Mike Myers, Russell Peters to Seth Rogen all call Canada their home. This led me to make an observation, that boredom and despair are the seeds that bear the fruit of humour. Canada is an example of the former, and one only needs to look at the large number of black and Jewish comedians to see the relationship with the latter. Despair is the cannon fodder of laughter, tragedy a vital ingredient. As Voltaire said, “God is a comedian playing to an audience too scared to laugh.”

With that let’s turn to Donald Trump, one of God’s great practical jokes. Trump should not be taken seriously, and the fact that every word that comes out his mouth becomes a meme helps to prove this point. The Trump does not propose policies, the Trump does not discuss important issues, the Trump does, however, make asinine, outrageous, and laughable comments. One wonders whether he is in on the joke, but it doesn’t really matter. I was told to believe that a Wharton School educated, multibillionaire entrepreneur has the intelligence to realise his own humour, but he’s funny either way.

The fact that I know so many people that realize he is a walking pineapple made me question the recent petition to ban him from the UK, and the debate that followed. Let us put aside the obvious hypocrisy of trying to ban a man for his opinion regarding banning people for their opinions, and simply analyse the implication. Are people actually taking Trump seriously? And if so, what in the world is motivating this?
A lot of commotion is built on the offensiveness of Trump’s remarks to Muslims, Mexicans and women, but it does no good to get worked up about them. First let’s look at his comments on Muslims, that the United States ought to ban all Muslims from entry. What a stupid idea, not stupid because of the offensiveness, racism, or unconstitutionality of the remark—but the type of Three Stooges stupid. It is an absurd, impractical, useless, unimplementable idea that is not even worthy of any serious debate.

So why has the American political debate, and the global debate turned closer to Trump’s statement than it was before? It’s because it was taken seriously. Trump does not believe what he said, nobody in their right minds thinks that he does, but for some reason that comment is taken seriously as opposed to being laughed at. We can either laugh with Trump at the fact that he said something stupid, or at him for thinking that we would take it seriously.

His comments on Mexicans follow a similar outline—offensive and inaccurate. To say that his statements are damaging however, is to assume that the large Mexican population of the states cannot laugh at their own expense. To somehow imply that Donald Trump could rob their self-respect seems quite implausible. His plan to build a wall that Mexico will pay for highlights his obliviousness, and also the fact that he thinks geopolitics is like the hotel business. It is not going to happen, so we might as well laugh at the fact the Trump thinks it will.

Finally, there is Trump’s 1940s-era misogyny that probably only connects with 90-year-old Southerners—who, for some reason, are politically active.

A lot has been made over his feud with Megyn Kelly. But Kelly, an intelligent journalist, did not have time to let his remarks get in the way of her work. The rest of the world should have done the same. We should either laugh at the fact that the Trump has not witnessed the last 60 years of progress for women, or how he had thought that the world hadn’t either—but we should not give him attention for it. Heidi Klum responded to Trump’s insult about her looks with a funny video, and Fiorina with a witty retort. They know better than to take the insults of a man who looks like an Oompa Loompa with a gerbil on his head. The public at large should take the same approach to everything he says. By taking this approach, we maintain our dignity, and are able to laugh at his expense.

After seeing how ludicrous taking Trump seriously is, let’s look at the damage it has done. Valuable time and money has been wasted on debating his ban, but more importantly, Trump is in the spotlight. Do not for a second mistake Donald Trump for an idiot, he is in fact a sly and intelligent political operator, as his polling should show.

If there is anything Donald Trump knows, it’s Donald Trump, and when the topic becomes Donald Trump, he shines. So by taking him seriously, he has been able to set the agenda; outrage has allowed him to be the centre of the public eye. He uses this to attack his fellow Republican nominees and make himself seem more viable as a candidate in the process. This is dangerous, and seriousness makes it so.
Humour cuts through rhetoric, increasing both empathy and logic. This is the reason why The Daily Show was able to make sense of American politics, and why after Jon Stewart’s departure that sense vanished. To lack humour makes one tense and rigid, making one closed-minded and off putting. Donald Trump’s opponents who take him seriously suffer from this condition, and have alienated a good chunk of the population.

As the old adage goes, “the enemy of my enemy is my friend,” and Donald Trump’s support is based on shaky grounds. He is nothing more than an angry tangerine who hates on the left-wing establishment and air of political correctness that many Americans detest, and in doing so he makes the populace his friends (Bernie Sanders does the same thing with a different target). Depriving him of the spotlight will let people look away and start thinking about issues rather than people.

For now, however, this is not politics, it’s ‘Keeping up with the Trumps’, a reality television show with a large audience and an illogical appeal. So just sit back, relax, and enjoy the show.

We’re all losers in the terrorist name game

Written by Joely Thomas on . Posted in Opinion.

IS, ISIS, ISIL, Daesh… it is not surprising that confusion surrounds the identification of the militant group. All part of the diplomatic dance that is the politics of naming, it was not that long ago that politicians and the media sought to completely deny the group the status they desired by using the phrase ‘so-called Islamic State’. Since then, a wish to lessen their significance has led to the use of ‘ISIS’ (Islamic State of Iraq and Syria) or ‘ISIL’ (Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant), with David Cameron requesting the BBC to stop using Islamic State, or IS, since the group is neither Islamic nor a state. The Arabic version ‘Daesh’ is also increasingly being used in Western media as a name disliked by the group both for its rougher sound and similarity to the word meaning ‘to trample down or crush’, which has sparked a number of puns by groups such as the Free Syrian Army.

Though language can be the most powerful of tools when used correctly, and the power of persuasion is certainly IS’s most dangerous weapon, is such a war of words really a display of power over IS, or rather of weakness as lost battles turn linguistic?

There is much to be learnt from a similar trend in the Israel-Palestine conflict that began with the Zionist movement’s declaration that Palestine was “a land without a people for a people without a land.” Now each side, through refusing to voice the other’s existence, seeks to deny an evolving truth. Mentioning the Palestinian Authority at Israeli airport security will guarantee a few hours of interrogation is added to your arrival despite the PA’s actualisation through the Oslo Accords. The West Bank is typically referred to with the Hebrew name of Judea and Samaria, and Palestinians are eradicated in Israeli tourism adverts. Meanwhile, many Palestinians try to avoid direct reference to Israel, instead using terms like 48 (the year of Israel’s founding) and al-dakhil (‘the inside’), in the belief that acknowledging the state’s existence is to accept the 1967 boundaries.

Yet stubbornly ignoring the reality presents an obstacle to conducive change, for refusing to acknowledge the presence of the other will only result in a situation of stalemate. If you close your eyes as your house is torn apart, you might be able to convince yourself that it still stands, but only will you be able to start rebuilding it once you open your eyes and accept that the damage has been done. There is thus something tragic in the sense of despair created when the reality is so offensive that you can only continue the struggle with one eye closed and your only remaining power is that wielded over the words that cross your lips.

This is true, too, of Israel, and is something Palestinians should find strength in, for their refusal to acknowledge the continuous presence of an increasing Palestinian population displays their anxiety that they are running out of options to deal with a threat they never imagined would prove so resilient. The attempts to redefine their oppressive regime, such as by reference to the separation wall as a ‘dividing fence’, even belie international law and shows they are living in an illusion.

Of course, the situation with IS is by no means contextually comparable, but the political name game that continues to be played exhibits a similar weakness. Politicians’ awkward changes to the group’s name as their regional power increases, not only makes for uncomfortable viewing but betrays the government’s fear of a group that eludes geographical control.

Attempts at linguistic delegitimisation also risk downplaying the strength of IS, and seeking out a name that denies their Islamic identity is counterproductive. Islamophobes certainly need to recognise that the form of Islam preached by IS is a radical one, unaccepted by the majority of Muslims, but whilst we might disagree with their concept of Islam, it is nevertheless a concept integral to their being, and that is something that cannot be addressed simply by renaming the group.

Though it might be true that IS detest the name Daesh, so much that they have beheaded those who use it, such games are therefore still ultimately reminiscent of playground name-calling. This is not to suggest that sticks and stones, or now cluster bombs and drones, are more effective than words, but that such futile attempts at control will also not help to address the causes of such a complex phenomenon.

Trump: To ban or not to ban?

Written by Romy Biscoe on . Posted in Opinion.

Over the past few months, Donald Trump has been somewhat of a sensation. People either love him or hate him. In my knowledge, with most people it’s the latter. Whether you agree with his politics or not, he has undoubtedly drawn attention to the US Presidential campaign and the alarming political apathy in the States. His rise in popularity has been remarkable, hitting 41 per cent in a recent Republican voter poll versus Ted Cruz’s 19 per cent.

In a Google search of ‘Donald Trump ban’ one of the first things that comes up, alongside the fake claim that Justin Trudeau had banned him from Canada, is the online petition that accumulated nearly 600,000 signatures wanting to ban Trump from entering the UK. This then made its way to Parliament for a three-hour debate in the House of Commons on 18th January. Although I would agree this is an excellent example of MPs listening to public opinion and acting on it, it seems absurd that the issue would even get debated, particularly since there are other important issues that need addressing in the Commons.

To some extent I can understand the reasoning behind wanting him banned and not having to confront him. To put it mildly, his policy of wanting to build a wall as a way of preventing Mexicans from entering the US is questionable, prompting The Telegraph to write a fact-checking article about his opinions on Mexican immigrants.

There is a fundamental issue, however, that I take with wanting to ban him. If the ban had got through Parliament, who would be there to question his views? Who would be there to mock his outrageous statements? Some of these views have caused numerous publications to write top ten countdowns of his most controversial comments. With a figure like Trump who has the ability to incite such debate, and include some of the most apathetic members in society to engage in the political sphere and conversation, surely it is a prime opportunity to challenge him and invite him to defend such views?

Any election is important, but the post-Obama years in the States will be particularly vital because there are issues that have become ever more prevalent since his election in 2008. Most notably police brutality and racial tensions, laws and the role of the infamous National Rifle Association. It is crucial, therefore, that Americans do not get swept up in the popularity of Trump, and instead think about who will be a sensible candidate to attempt to solve such deep-rooted problems in American culture.

Banning him will not change his popularity, instead it might add fuel to his campaign. It would only add to his condemnations of overly politically correct societies. It will not solve the damage that David Frum, in The Spectator, says he is doing to the Republican Party, either. He argues “the events of 2015 have horribly confirmed all those warnings, as Donald Trump chomps down one respectable Republican candidate after another.” Banning him would therefore be a wasted opportunity to highlight Trump as the unreliable candidate he is. Importantly as James Brokenshire, Home Office minister, argued, it could have damaged relations with our most important ally.

It seems there is a dominant practice in universities at the moment of banning figures deemed controversial or offensive that has transferred onto the political landscape. To some extent I understand a decision to not pay a speaker, such as Milo Yiannopoulos, to highlight that the university does not endorse what he says, even though it was still extremely difficult to get him allowed on campus.

To ban someone from entering the country, however, seems a step too far. It stifles debate around someone who seems the most obvious figure to start a debate about, seeing as his views are so distasteful to many people. He should be given the opportunity to defend them, because no matter how offensive someone’s views might be, they are allowed to have them.

Cutting off contact with Donald Trump by banning him would not make the problem go away. Instead, it would worsen the issue by halting an opportunity to challenge his views and force him to justify himself, which is surely the democratic and logical step, particularly if the whirlwind that is Donald Trump continues to unfold. Ultimately, he is showing no sign of cessation.

Klopperation: Celebration

Written by Harry Newton on . Posted in Sport.

Tamagotchis, vuvuzelas, and boot-cut jeans have all gone out of fashion. It’s usual—things become uncool. This is a usual process of life—your dad’s dancing was actually cool one day, believe it or not. However, some things are meant to be eternally cool and never go out of fashion; such as Michael Caine, Levi’s and Stella Artois. That being said, there is currently a shift in coolness that is seeing something become unacceptable that we never thought would, celebrating a football match. This article is here to act as your savior as we set out a mission to save football: Operation Celebrate begins here. And, it begins with Jürgen Klopp.

Jürgen Klopp has injected the Premier League with a sense of humour with his charismatic personality after recently taking the Liverpool job. Too long has it been that Premier League managers turn up to press conferences and churn out the same old clichés such as “taking every game as it comes,” “the referee had some tough decisions,” and “I do not talk about individual players,” but Klopp has come out with some classics already in his short stint.

Recently Klopp lost his glasses in a manic celebration with Liverpool, after a last minute winner against Norwich City. In the interview afterwards Klopp stated that “I usually have a second pair of glasses but I can’t find them because it’s hard to find glasses without glasses!” This week, he has added to GlassesGate, comparing his new look to a “serial killer.” Imagine all that in a fun German accent with big smiles and hand gestures; this man is great fun! In a PC era where this article has to be checked by four editors, three lawyers and the Queen of England before publication, Klopp is doing as he pleases, dancing around the touchlines, likening himself to a serial killer. Fantastic.

With the Manchester United manager Louis Van Gaal refusing to get out of his seat at Old Trafford, (and frankly who would at those prices?) the jumpy German has been throwing himself all over the Anfield technical area in order to spur his team on to a win, like a tactical cheerleader. While whether being an energetic manager on the touchline is more successful than sitting back and allowing your tactics to come to fruition cannot be concluded, Klopp is certainly more entertaining, leaves his heart on the pitch, and is much easier to forgive after a difficult display. Where one manager hasn’t seen his team score in the first half of a Premier League game at home since September, the other saw his team claw back to a 5-4 win after falling behind to a 3-1 score line, and the fans are loving Klopp for it.

Klopp’s Liverpool got an equaliser against a tough West Bromwich Albion recently and Klopp sent his players over to the away end to celebrate with the fans. Player-fan moments are hard to come by nowadays, as usually players don’t even make the extreme effort to turn and clap to the away fans from the half way line, and yet some other fans seem to find Klopp’s players celebrating with fans amusing. Against Norwich, Twitter exploded, mocking Liverpool fans for their zealous excitement after that last-minute winner. All of a sudden it has become uncool to celebrate goals that aren’t against massive teams, or in a cup final.

It’s possible that this is the effect of social media on fans of football. Social media, of course, has its positives—we are now more informed on everything, quicker than ever. You can feel like you are watching a game with the whole country simply by following a match on Twitter! However, the speed of social media has meant that fans need to find more things to mock about their rivals teams, and all of a sudden celebrating a win has become wrong, or worse, uncool. Fans belittling each other over Twitter is fun, it’s like being at work mocking your mate because he supports Stoke; however, I make a plea to all social media users to stop mocking your mate for celebrating when their team wins! That’s what they should be doing. Follow the Klopp way of life. You don’t need to go get a bad haircut and some thick glasses, just have a good time and let your emotions get involved with the game!

So this is a plea to all fans, whether it’s a last minute winner against Stalybridge Celtic in a pre-season friendly, or the Champions League Final-winning penalty against Bayern Munich, celebrate the win! There is no need to be embarrassed. There’s loads else to be miserable about: Piers Morgan’s on Good Morning Britain almost every day now.

Tough choices

Written by Jessica Chow-Lau on . Posted in Lifestyle.

One of adulthood’s most painful realisations is the magnitude of when your decisions affect the people around you. The same person whose previous adjudications were limited to soup or salad now has the influencing power to make someone’s day, to reciprocate the love of an interested mate—or to cause someone to spiral into a most dreadful place.

Of course our adolescent actions hold some weight, but as people take on inevitable obligations, the duty of making the best decision becomes concentrated to the atomised self. No more dilution of responsibility. Sometimes the question emerges: What if both choices yield unfavourable outcomes? A lose-lose situation, whatever action one takes leading to a confused sadness on the receiving end. A multitude of philosophies and religions could be brought up, all prescribing slightly different medications for the agony of bringing something less of happiness to someone. But they all (roughly) fall under similar lines of thinking.

Weigh the decisions to what values you hold dear—your interpretation of truth, friendship, serendipity. In a scenario where you have to hurt a friend with honesty, or have them discover for themselves that their partner is being unfaithful—take the road depending on how you define truth. Absolute truth: Tell them yourself. Conditional truth: Let the partner tell them. The only wrong answer is not owning up to what you do and not take the responsibility for the lives that you’ve affected. Standing idly by while an exterior forces make your decision—that’s the worst you can do.

Feigned comfort aside, there is no suggestion to put on a smiling face. You’re not supposed to feel confident (if you do, you are years ahead of me). But, there is a certain solace to be found in knowing that there’s nothing else you can do. When the waves are overhead, you would have done everything you could to prevent the tragedy. And when the time comes and when the storm has settled to conditions where you can once again enjoy the outdoors—apologise.

If it is truly a fault that came from you, say sorry for yourself. If you were the bearer of bad news, say sorry for the universe. Rebuild what was destroyed in the storm by acknowledging their pain by showing the pain it caused you, too. This is my apology. It won’t feel like it, but whichever road one chooses to go down will be the right one. Those familiar with Robert Frost’s poem The Road Not Taken will know that it’s usually seen as a panegyric method of self-assurance (“And that has made all the difference”). But if one is to examine the words in between the first and last famous lines, you’ll see that the two roads “equally lay” and both were worn “really about the same”.

When presented with a fork in the road, we will only tell ourselves that our decisions have made “all the difference” because our guilt assumes that our reality—and their reality—is the direct product of that choice. Dear reader, this is not the case. Yes you are hurt, and worse yet, you have hurt. But we know no other life. Dwell as you may, but there is no use in wishing for another truth. There is no comparison to another better outcome, only the one that the guilt has imagined. You lose sleep, you cannot bear eating—or perhaps worse. These are all okay. Just remember to keep walking down that road. Look back, but only do that to see what is ahead.

How bad does it get before we care?

Written by Tristan Parsons on . Posted in Opinion.

What a tedious subject to write on. I still don’t believe this was a conscious decision. Environmentalism is that thing that sits at the back of one’s mind, soaking up events and fact and news, but never really sitting up and coming to attention. Recently, we heard that 2015 was the warmest year on record (with El Niño finally overcoming the cooling effects of recent volcanic activity). But, in our temperate biome—unless, of course you live in this winter’s flooded areas—environmental issues don’t affect our lives too much. Earlier in the year, the world’s leaders met in Paris and they basically solved climate change. Either that or their collective and individual plans put the earth on course to peak at three or four degrees of warming. Before that, wild fire in Indonesia created a mess that will cost as much to clean up as the 2004 tsunami. I nearly wrote a piece about it, but I couldn’t think of anything interesting to say.

I hope I’m not boring you already. See, that is quite a common reaction. If ‘the biggie’, climate change, isn’t met with rolling eyes, the other three planetary boundaries that put humanity’s current level of existence at risk will soon send you to sleep. Nitrogen and phosphorous levels are in the danger zone, threatening crop production and ecosystem sustainability across the world. Biodiversity is also at high risk, and worse, some scientists are predicting a ‘cliff’ is to come. Even land use is at a more dangerous level than (current) global warming. There are still the issues of freshwater use and ocean acidification. Even if we were to save ourselves, there is a building consensus that human activity has created a new epoch in earth history, the ‘Anthropocene’.

It can be draining discussing these issues. Most opinion writers or journalists have roots in the social sciences, arts, or humanities. But this is science: There is no real arguing for these people to do. Anyone that actively stands in front of an overwhelming scientific consensus is a conspiracy theorist (see, Donald Trump) or has vested interests. This lack of debate is partly why environmental issues turn people off.

The more interesting bits are the economics and politics behind the issues, and that is what I think we should start to talk about more: The corporations behind palm oil and deforestation, the madness of the US cities that sit in the deserts, or the vested interests I have touched on. Of course, looking at the bigger picture, a significant section of the media has an interest in strangling debate about environmentalism. Maintaining an oil- and gas-based economy is essential to the fortunes of so many companies and individuals, even countries. This feeds into public discourse.

One thing I realised last year was that, if I was to be true to my cause, I should be vegetarian or vegan, because of the devastating impact the meat industry has on the environment. Amazingly, the beef industry has a bigger footprint than cars. The levels of water and land used dwarf the other meats as well. Sadly, and frustratingly, it’s too ingrained into my diet. However, it’s something I am becoming far more aware of. That’s a bit of a ‘hippy-dippy’, thing to say, surely? There’s another problem: We need to start consuming less stuff, or different types of stuff. And to a large proportion of the developed world, that is a frightening and frustrating proposal. Yes, the ‘tree hugger’ connotation still haunts us.

But what does the public see? Whilst a lot of environmental stories don’t hit the news, it is still difficult to correlate arguments about environmental change to the events that take place in the relatively small time-span of a year. This year, water stress and drought strangled California, northern Iran, and central Asia, amongst many areas. But people still refer to the hiatus in warming since the turn of the century as evidence against global warming (no, the long-term warming since the industrial revolution is still far out of place compared to observable patterns). And, scale is crucial to bear in mind: The impacts of climate change will not occur all over the world, rather, in specific regions.

And this was the year that was a good one for environmentalism, right? Well, although goodwill drooled out of world leaders’ mouths, palm oil companies were heavily criticised for not making enough progress on deforestation, Saudi Arabia flooded the oil market, assuring oil companies of their futures, and, closer to home, the Conservatives slashed subsidies for renewables and pushed on with the methane-leaking process, fracking.

Thank my lucky stars that that jargon-littered saga is over. Now I can relax my grey matter and fixate on the short term. I can go back to writing on sexy politics. I can do this guilt-free, because on planet earth, everything seems okay; everything is calm. Keep the people quiet and they’ll continue to drive to work, fly around the world, and buy vegetables that come from deserts. And when the storms and the seas and the deserts come, there will be those who can afford the luxury of escape and protection. But the masses, once afraid of change, are left isolated on a raft in the ocean, as the state slowly, quietly, but surely, recedes.

Review: Room

Written by Alasdair Bayman on . Posted in Film.

Room is room to five-year-old Jack (Jacob Tremblay). A life outside the protection of Ma (Brie Larson) and the cardboard walls of room are unknown to him. Life is a playground with his friends of wardrobe, sink, bath, bookshelf and egg snake all filling his daily life with joy, along with the tender love of Ma. This bubble of comfort is derivative of a grotesque act from Old Nick (Sean Bridges)—the captivity of Ma for several years.

Although some will see the premise of Room as a cinematic portrayal of such modern atrocities of the infamous Joseph Fritzl case, Lenny Abrahamson latest film in a catalogue of brilliance demonstrates the human race’s ability to endure, grow and love in the darkest of places. It must be stressed that Room is not the kind of film that seeks to distress, but it is a film that searches to outline the importance of life.

Based on Emma Donoghue’s 2010 book and subsequent screenplay—which has been nominated for an Oscar alongside Best Actress for Larson and Director for Abrahamson—Room could have easily slipped into realms of soppy filmmaking, as witnessed in My Sister’s Keeper, Lenny Abrahamson, in a recent interview with Empire Magazine, outlined the difficulties firstly faced in fending off competition from other directors to secure his position as artistic head of Donoghue’s book. Thankfully, the Irishman instantaneously places his fingerprints on the work and does not shy away from showing off his style—something which the screenplay could have overridden in the hands of different direction. The space in which he creates in Room is as magical as the fairytales told within them by Ma to Jack. Cinematically, the walls are as expensive and imaginative as the friends and thoughts in Jack’s head.

As the focal point and the main narrator, Jacob Tremblay delivers one of the most impressive child performances to date. Normally with child actors, there is a natural tendency for them to overact and to simply recount the dialogue given to them without any emotional attachment. It is fair to say that with every line of speech that Tremblay delivers is to utter precision. A sequential shooting of the film benefits his slow growth into the role, alongside avoiding awkward continuity of his feminine locks. The same brilliance can also be said of Larson, who has always seemed on the cusp of greatness. Her Oscar nomination is fully deserved, as should have been Tremblay’s. Both actors work in tangent with one another and the creation is one of true verisimilitude. Even the supporting cast of Joan Allen, William H. Macy and Tom McCamus extent this untainted realism.

The outside world that Ma and Jack face is as dangerous as the one they leave in Room. The confusion that Jack faces about the real world leads him aspiring to go back to the simple life of the past. All he has known is the ‘TV World’ and that of Room. The differentiation is hard to distinguish at first, but that is until he discovers the delights of Lego. The protection both mother and son hold is literally embodied in the framing and positioning of the camera. The lack of emotional crescendos, too, benefits the film—nothing feels heightened or overly dramatised. This can also be said of the score composed by Stephen Rennicks. Soft violins and the pianos create a continuous environment of the compassion both Ma and Jack share.

Ultimately, Room shines in a crowd of big-budget Hollywood releases like The Revenant and The Big Short. Its recognition in the Oscars and Golden Globes underlines the continual of growth of Abrahamson as a director—who deals in the absolute truths, also outlined by his 2014 film Frank. Centrally to this fine tapestry of film is Tremblay and Larson nonetheless. The mental challenges faced by their two characters is as arduous as the runner’s wall. The ending of Room will leave a cleansing feeling of your assured humanity and admiration for all those involved in creating such a beautiful piece of film.

5/5

Why Engels? Why Now?

Written by Mancunion on . Posted in Features.

“That a class which lives under the conditions already sketched and is so ill­ provided with the most necessary means of subsistence cannot be healthy, and can reach no advanced age, is self­-evident… How is it possible, under such conditions, for the lower class to be healthy and long lived?” —Friedrich Engels, The Conditions of the Working Class in England.

In 1844, Engels presented his recently-published Condition of the Working Class in England to Karl Marx. He had written the monograph from his apartment in what is now the Whitworth Park Student Halls of Residence. We wanted to know whether his statement would resonate with local students so we set out to summarise his work and to ask them.

Photo: The University of Manchester

A blue plaque fronts Leamington House, Whitworth Park. When they took up residence, Engels and Marx had just arrived from Brussels to visit the leaders of Britain’s Chartist movement. Having developed their philosophical position, Engels arrived at the conclusion that “the condition of the working­ class is the real basis and point of departure of all social movements of the present because it is the highest and most unconcealed pinnacle of the social misery existing in our day.”

According to a recent study, Manchester is one of Britain’s most “working class” cities with a high factor of so­-called “emergent service workers” and “precarious proletariat”. If Engels’ underlying thesis is still at all relevant, it should resound more with our peers than with any other random sample of British people.

We put this point to our peers with an initially mixed reaction. Most responses to the theme of Marxism, or even socialism, were somewhat apathetic. A substantial number had not heard of Marx, ­let alone Engels. To some, the ideologies of “Marxism” or “socialism” seemed intimidating. We saw plenty of tentative shrugs.

“The industrial revolution has simply carried this out to its logical end by making the workers machines pure and simple, taking from them the last trace of independent activity, and so forcing them to think and demand a position worthy of men.”

When pressed on the question of class more generally, however, people grew more vocal and, in parts, visibly angry. It is estimated that, nationally, one million people rely on food banks. Child poverty in Manchester is at a 120­-year high. Early last semester, Manchester hosted one of the year’s largest demonstrations. Over 60,000 people marched in protest against cuts to public services and the ‘austerity’ initiatives of the Conservative government.

It is commonly accepted that young people in England vote in low numbers. The political consequence of this is that government spending is directed away from youth initiatives; 350 youth centres have been closed since 2012 as a result of spending cuts. All the while the tax evasion and avoidance of large multi­national corporations have further focused the public eye on the subject of grave economic inequality.

Hence the landslide election of Jeremy Corbyn to the leadership of the Labour Party on an anti­-austerity platform. We witnessed, in micro­cosm, the national success of the latest radical Labour evolution on our local tour.

The positive embrace of Corbyn’s success was tangible around campus. The ‘Westminster bubble’ appeared synonymous with political injustice and inequality. The Corbyn brand was celebrated as a welcome alternative.

Political injustice was still felt to relate thematically to class identity. A marked separation of ‘elite’ and ‘non­elite’ was felt viscerally and appeared, until recently, to have no solution. Corbyn’s success was, to many, symbolic of a larger political fight—one for social justice—which they felt could now, feasibly, be won.

Why Engels? Why now?

The viciousness of the political non­-voting circle is unpleasant. Yet this has not stopped people advocating political positions in other ways. Though the political act of “non-­voting” is undoubtedly counter­productive, it is not so for want of trying. As a hub of political initiatives and ideas, Manchester overwhelmingly qualifies.

Flyers and posters for talks and marches are commonplace around the city. Students make up majorities at most events. Engels may well have been proud of the place he once called home, a century and a half down the line. Yet, one does not have to call himself a Marxist in order to recognise that the contradictions of capitalism that Marx and Engels once highlighted are once again emerging as issues of a public conscience. The observations, specifically of Engels, were markedly astute for their time and have not lost their relevance—his work, therefore, deserves revisiting.

Marx (with Engels’ assistance) took 17 years to complete his magnum opus, Das Kapital. The underlying point of the work, however, was summarised in Engels’ original Working Class in England back in 1844 in which he observed that “people regard each other only as useful objects; each exploits the other, and the end of it all is that the stronger treads the weaker under foot; and that the powerful few… seize everything for themselves, while to the weak many, the poor, scarcely a bare existence remains.” This line seems entirely relevant in today’s political climate where rampant inequality has emerged as—in Obama’s words—the “defining issue of our time.”

Without the ­involvement of the 19th century’s great capitalist sceptics, serious debate about a world in which the richest 1 per cent owns as much wealth as all others has been stymied. Engels’ legacy, forgotten so often, lives on—if sub­consciously—in Britain’s radical heartland. This is the time to bring it back.

Another New Year, Another New You

Written by Louisa Hall on . Posted in Lifestyle.

In a very reliable survey (of roughly five housemates, two overheard conversations and a five-minute Skype chat with granny about “Perfect” Cousin Sophie), as many as ten different New Year’s resolutions were vowed upon with great sincerity and a painful repetition of “…and I’m NOT going to give up this time…”

Without needing any professional training in telepathy, it is clear to us all that by the dull days of mid-February, all resolutions will have been deserted (apart from those of Perfect Cousin Sophie who will continue juicing spinach and kale until at least Easter).

C’mon, people! We need to be realistic with our plans.

Photo: bertholf @Flickr

Dieting: After the gluttony of Christmas, it is nearly impossible to go completely cold turkey (pun absolutely intended) on all of the rubbish you have been eating. To switch from four meals and 27 snacks per day for a month (“because it’s Christmas”) to half an apple and a shot of kiwi pulp per day in January just isn’t realistic. In colder months, we need warm and filling food to stay and feel healthy—a more sustainable resolution might have been ‘only 2 squares of chocolate a day’ or ‘3 pieces of fruit for lunch’. At university, especially, we give up easily on expensive eating habits; so a dairy-free, fat-free, fun-free diet is simply not sustainable. Yes, continue making those smoothies with the Food Musher 2000 that you got for Christmas, but forcing it upon yourself at every meal is eventually going to have the opposite effect.

Exercising: Don’t be a New-Year Gym cliché. I beg of you, either pay-as-you-go for a few weeks or wait until you know your timetable and can work out the feasibility of going to the gym ‘every day at 6am after my morning marathon’. Exercise is great, but trying to force yourself into a strict regime by investing a harsh chunk of the student loan into memberships and gym kit galore is bound to tempt fate.

Photo: ♥Lemon-kisses♥ @Flickr

Productivity: “I’m going to go to all of my lectures this year AND do the compulsory reading”… this is all well and good, but just because you are in the lecture or you have opened the PDF, it isn’t automatically more worthwhile! Sitting in a lecture and boosting your Yakarma, or investing in seven shades of pink highlighter to skim read and mark a few words that take your fancy, is not what you had in mind. Motivate yourself—”a Haribo for every paragraph I read and take notes from,” “if I explain this lecture back to Course Buddy correctly I’ll go on a night out of my choice, if I get it wrong…”

The message here isn’t to abandon the pledging of New Year’s resolutions, but merely to keep them within reach and reason. Go outside at least once a day; cook a healthy, hearty dinner at least three times a week and invest some serious motivation into your work. Think properly about your plans before announcing them to everyone that will listen (or overhear), and don’t get too carried away in the falsely optimistic young days of January.

Review: Creed

Written by Imran Bukhari on . Posted in Film.

A majority of sports have always proven a problem when transitioning to the big screen. Filmmakers generally struggle to find the necessary additional drama in a restrictive narrative structure when just watching the sport itself live can provide as much—if not more—suspense and excitement. Try and find a decent film about football or tennis for example, and you’ll understand. The exception to this rule, however, has always been boxing. The sport has become a recurring vestibule for channelling gripping stories, whilst simultaneously placing other more important themes subtly in the background—so much so that “boxing movies” has become itself a genre. There is an enduring quality behind the visceral pleasures of witnessing the hero of the story pummelling another human being in a spirited competition; combine this with the cathartic nature of an underdog rising against the odds and you’ve got yourself a winning recipe.

There’s no argument that Raging Bull is the undisputed heavyweight champion of them all, but the formula was first perfect in 1976 with the original Rocky. Rocky went on to win the Oscar for Best Picture and made Sylvester Stallone a household name. Exactly 40 years later, and remarkably Rocky Balboa is still present in popular culture as Rocky’s story lives on with this year’s Creed. This was something that not even Stallone himself anticipated—even after recalling in 2006 that he was sure Rocky Balboa would be his last outing in 2006.

The main difference this time around, however, is that Rocky is now, smartly, only a supporting character to the main attraction—as Apollo Creed’s illegitimate son, Adonis Creed. This shift in focus mirrors Rocky’s own state of mind as he has become a sideline in his own life. Dejected and crippled both physically and mentally and no longer driven by any anger or malice, this is a very different Rocky—one who has seen all of the people he has loved move on without him. Creed tackles a universal issue not seen in any film of its kind before—loneliness. His performance is easily the finest of his career and would be highly deserving of an Oscar for Best Supporting Actor in February. Fans may be disheartened to not see ‘The Italian Stallion’ in the ring himself, but Stallone finds the same fire and drive in the corner.

Director Ryan Coogler’s sophomore effort has proven to be just as compelling as his debut, Fruitvale Station. As a result, he is off to even bigger exploits directing Black Panther for Marvel. During a fight midway through proceedings, Coogler employs an angle over the shoulder angle that swoops around the younger Creed and his opponent in an unbroken 360-degree motion, allowing full immersion into every punch and weave.

In Michael B. Jordan, we have a new star. The actor has wavered in a few of his past projects, including the much derided Fantastic Four and the highly forgettable That Awkward Moment. Creed, however, is so far the finest showcasing of his talents. Much has been made of the diversity issue regarding the Oscars, and the absence of such nominations for actors like Will Smith and Idris Elba. But if anyone has any reason to be aggrieved, it is Jordan. He gives nuances to a character dealing with the weight of living in his father’s shadow and the simple search for acceptance. In fact, the greatest triumph of the film is the creation and development of the honest connection between Adonis and his new trainer. The pair form a symbiotic relationship, relying on each other to help with overcoming their own personal demons and finding the courage to fight their own battles.

Ultimately, the film finds the perfect balance between nostalgia and paving the way for a new protagonist to carry on the franchise. And there is no better example of this in the film than the duration of the iconic training montage—expertly updated for the new character whilst also retaining the essence of Rocky’s legacy. The baton has successfully been passed, so much so that when the original theme does finally bellow out in all its glory, it is as if the theme was made for Creed himself. The point is ladies and gentlemen, that Creed—for want of a better word—is good. In fact, it’s very good. It’s a total knockout.

4/5

Guardiola is a Blue

Written by Harry Newton on . Posted in Sport.

In what is possibly the least surprising news to enter the football world, Manchester City have formally announced that Pep Guardiola will be joining the club as first team manager at the start of the 2016 – 17 Premier League season. In other news, water is wet, the North is cold, and Tomáš Rosický is still playing football.

Despite how Manuel Pellegrini sees his team sitting in a pretty comfortable position in all four competitions, this will be his last season in charge of them. Manchester City interrupted a dull transfer deadline day—saving Sky Sports News from pretending anything interesting was happening—to announce the news. It described how they had managed to acquire Guardiola after having discussions which had stretched as far back to 2012.

The way in which Pellegrini has conducted himself in his reign as manager of Manchester City has been nothing short of commendable. Despite constant questioning about the worst kept secret in football history, the Chilean has been calm and collected. When instated as manager, Pellegrini was described as a “holistic” choice by City, and as his reign is nearing to an end, it is clear that this is a fair statement. The Chilean will continue to manage the first team for the rest of the season and will leave the club with a Premier League trophy and a Capital One Cup from his first season in charge—and possibly, one to four more trophies will be won this season.

Guardiola will also continue managing Bayern Munich until the end of the season. This opens up an interesting prospect if both teams continue to progress in the UEFA Champions League, as the two could potentially meet in the next stage. Despite how Pellegrini has behaved with the utmost respect for the club, his players and even Guardiola himself—that would be a match he would love to win. Pellegrini has previously insisted in interviews that he would welcome Guardiola to the club in the future and believed that he would one day manage Manchester City.

Guardiola’s record speaks for itself as to why he is being touted by the blues. With only 19 league losses in his managerial career, and officially Barcelona’s most successful manager in terms of trophies, it dwarves many other records. The 45-year-old will join City on the 1st July 2016 on a three year deal.

How long has Manuel Pellegrini been aware of City’s communications with Guardiola is uncertain, although he was keen to defend the club in his press conference on Monday. “The club are not doing anything behind me. I knew this one month ago but I don’t think it’s good to have rumour or speculation about these things” he said in their defense. He then goes on to say how the players were informed on the same day as the press. The decision to tell the press was made two weeks ago between Pellegrini and the club. In the official statement from the Premier League big boys, they also stated that Pellegrini is “fully supportive of the decision to make this communication, [and] is entirely focused on achieving his targets.”

Pellegrini has been a rare phenomenon in the Premier League, as a manager at a big club who likes to keep himself to himself, and a man who does not make any rash statements about any other club or manager. Despite Alan Pardew graphically insulting the Chilean last season, Pellegrini rose above this and never turned to insult Pardew himself. Never one for controversy, he will definitely be missed from the Premier League, and it would be surprising if he didn’t feature in the league again in the future.

A question that may be asked, however, is how will the players react? Although every footballer loves to win trophies, surely the news that their manager is already a dead man walking will affect their future performances—whether this will be negatively or positively is an uncertainty. Weeks will tell whether this has any effect at all; it may spur the team on to go and win a trophy for the man that has shown faith in them for this long, or it may even demotivate the team playing for a man with no future at the club.

Ignoring this season for a moment, this is certainly fantastic news for Manchester City and the Premier League for next year! Guardiola is a proven winner and will no doubt rise to the targets set before him, and will not give in to any pressure that will definitely be present. With City currently finding themselves with quite an aged starting eleven, the Guardiola era is likely to begin with a massive change to the squad to bring in players more suited to his style of play. City’s starting eleven at weekend against Aston Villa, in the FA Cup, consisted of six players aged 30 or over: Willy Caballero, Pablo Zabaleta, Bacary Sagna, Gaël Clichy, Fernandinho, and Jesús Navas. These players are regular starters for City, and big omissions such as Yaya Touré and David Silva are also over 30. As Touré was sold by Guardiola to City during his reign as Barcelona FC’s manager, it is most likely that this will spell the end to the controversial Ivorian’s Manchester City career.

Manchester City have always been a big football club, but 2008 saw them shift into a global brand that could bring in all sorts of names from around the world. 2016 has the potential to spark the next step in this evolution for Manchester City—as of now, they have the hottest property out there at a time where Guardiola can mold any team he so wishes. Exciting times are certainly ahead for them.

Rayman 3: Hoodlum Havoc – Retro Review

Written by Josh Goldie on . Posted in Games.

Previously I reviewed the game Rayman 2: the Great Escape on the Nintendo 64. It was Ubisoft’s first attempt at taking their platforming hero Rayman into the third dimension. Like other games in the series before it, the transition was not incredibly smooth, though the game still turned out enjoyable for the most part. Now a year later, I had the opportunity to play the games sequel, Rayman 3: Hoodlum Havoc for the Nintendo GameCube. This title is very similar in style and idea to the previous game, so I thought it would be a fun idea to look at the two games and compare them in order to judge whether Rayman 3 was a good successor or not. I will be referring back to my Rayman 2 review—so I urge you to give it a proper read before or after reading this article.

We will start with the story. In the previous game, Ubisoft attempted to dive more into the lore of the franchise and give a grand tale where Rayman had to save the whole world. The story was fitting as the series had gotten much larger in its jump to 3D and the game reflected that. So it comes as rather baffling that the storyline for Rayman 3 is non-existent. There is a story, don’t get me wrong—but because it was so low key, so inconsequential and so poor that it came across as an excuse to get Rayman to these locations rather than trying to detail out the world of the game. He may as well have been rescuing a princess or something. The story is this: the Lums from the previous game (fairies which give Rayman health and power) have turned evil and begin hunting the denizens of Rayman’s world. But Globox accidentally swallows their leader and so the two travel around in search for a looking a doctor who to remove the villain from Globox’s belly. That’s the premise that takes up all but the last tenth of the game.

The game has not changed much in its most basic controls from Rayman 2. All of Rayman’s abilities like climbing and gliding return here and you receive them all right from the get-go. These aspects have been tweaked however, and it is all for the better. Platforming no longer feels like a game of risk and everything is actually responsive. I never ran into problems like I did with the previous game. The cages return in this game and by collecting eight you are rewarded with Rayman’s health increasing. Some of these are optional while others mandatory. Combat is more common in this game and thankfully the battle system has been greatly improved, too. There are not many enemy types, but each one has some kind of unique way in order to defeat them which is nice.

Photo: Ubisoft Entertainment S.A.

Rayman 2 was filled with gimmicks in every level and Rayman 3 tones this down slightly. The rocket levels return from the previous game and are slightly easier to control this time around. Other than that, you get grinding levels in between chapters which I can only describe as ‘psychedelic’ in design but are fun nonetheless. The final gimmick is also the biggest focus of this game and that is the power-ups. Rayman can find 5 power-ups in this game that is frequently required to solve puzzles and move from area to area. These range from just increasing Rayman’s strength and copter abilities to giving him a rocket arm, grappling hooks and a punches that cause tornadoes on impact. These power ups appear everywhere and thankfully they are implemented seamlessly without fault. Using them is very simple and very easy to grasp and they make good editions to the game.

Unfortunatly that was the last positive thing I had to say about this game. Although the power-ups are great, it comes at the detraction that the game begins to feel very same-y. The level progression is more linear here than it was in the previous games which are emphasised by the removal of a map screen and the side levels. Each level is connected through the previously mentioned side areas and is split into segments. Each segment ends with a point of no return which means if you are exploring and accidentally end up on the games designated path, then the only way to return is to restart the whole level. This can be really frustrating at times and whilst this was present in Rayman 2, it was so uncommon that I couldn’t really complain. But now it happens all the time. Add this with the lack of new gameplay elements happening and you’ll find that the game truly becomes a bore to play at times.

Finally, we have the sound design which I only have one proper thing to say. The voice acting in this game is awful. Rayman 2 had a bit of English voice acting, but it was fine and underrepresented. Here, Rayman and Globox especially would not shut up and they have some really annoying voices. The dialogue is not funny and the quality of it dates the game hard. I found myself just lowering the volume outside of story important cutscenes and listening to my own stuff so I did not have to hear them talk anymore.

Photo: Ubisoft entertainment S.A.

This next paragraph contains spoilers. I will be talking about the last boss much like I did in the Rayman 2 review and if you would rather wait and see it for yourself then just skip to the end paragraph. Otherwise keep reading.

This boss sucks. I did not think they could make a boss worse than the one in Rayman 2, but they somehow managed. The problem I had with the final boss in Rayman 2 was the controls of the rocket but here it is the monotony of it all. The final boss is a gauntlet, having three forms that are designed to utilize all of Rayman’s power-ups and it sucks so badly. The first part is hard to dodge his never-ending onslaught of attacks while you run around desperately trying to grab the right power-up and then attack him while also jumping up and down to avoid his attacks. It is a pain. But it is the only hard part of the boss as the rest is just dragged out instead. Next he turns giant and you are put into a mock 2D section. The problem here is that to get the power-ups needed, you have to run all the way to one side of the level and then run all the way back. Three times. All while dodging again. The third part involves using the propeller power to scale a bunch of platforms that are falling and it is just poorly designed. You fall way too easily and some platforms are just unreachable. Of course, ending off this nightmare is another rocket section. Though easier to control, it is still not great and just takes forever to do enough damage. Only after that do you win. And did I mention that you have to do it all without dying? If you do die then may the divine help you because you start all the way back to two rooms before the first part of the boss fight. I hated this and it amazes me that Ubisoft could be so bad at designing this. It just tarnishes the whole experience.

Overall, I have to admit I was disappointed with this game. While the gameplay was a lot more polished than Rayman 2 and the gimmicks were a lot more controlled and refined; the whole experience just feels like a step backwards. Everything else is worse—from the story, to the pacing, to the sound, and in the end I only felt compelled to beat this game just so I could write this review. That is not the sign of a good game and it’s a shame that this was the last original 3D Rayman title before the Rabbids took over for all those years. But if the series was continuing in this way, then maybe that Rabbid takeover was not really a bad thing after all.

Rayman 2: The Great Escape – Retro Review

Written by Josh Goldie on . Posted in Games.

Ubisoft has recently been taking Rayman back to his platforming roots with Rayman: Origins and Rayman Legends. These games are 2D platformers much like the original Mario games and, much like Mario, Rayman also took a step into the 3D realm on the Nintendo 64. Rayman 2: The Great Escape was not Ubisoft’s first attempt at a 3D game but you can tell that they were really trying to experiment in this title. Sometimes these experiments pay off and sometimes they fail miserably.

In this game, the evil robot-pirate Admiral Razorbeard is imprisoning all of the inhabitants of the world. This includes Rayman who starts off this game in prison with his powers stripped from him. It is not until Rayman’s friend Globox gets captured that Rayman has a chance to escape. Why? Because Globox has brought with him a silver Lum from the fairy Ly which gives Rayman just a bit of his power back. It is in Rayman 2 that Ubisoft decided to dive deeper into the lore of the Rayman world, and many of the characters found in this game will reappear in later Rayman games.

Now, Rayman 2 is a 3D platformer and because of this it has many tropes that you expect from 3D platformers at this time. The core gameplay of Rayman 2 has you running through each level in a mostly linear fashion while collecting golden lums and rescuing freedom fighters from cages. Lums are a necessity to unlock the later levels, but the caged people are just there as collectibles (except for a few that must be got).

Getting all of the lums and breaking all of the cages gives you a bonus mini-game at the end of each level that can get Rayman more life or a power-up. These bonus levels are the worst thing in this game; they have you rapidly tapping A+B on the controllers consecutively in order to race a pirate to the end of the level and it is impossible. Add to the fact that every one of these levels is the same and you have the most unlovable mini-game I have ever played. It made me not want to care about collecting everything—a real first for me.

Photo: Ubisoft entertainment S.A.

Rayman 2 as a platformer works really well at times and then other times it really doesn’t. Rayman can climb, hover, jump and punch enemies which will all come in handy throughout the adventure; but just once or twice did I find myself messing up because of something out of my control. Occasionally Rayman will not grab a wall or ledge and fall straight to his death; you must be precise. Jumping too can be a pain because if you are not moving fast enough Rayman will not jump far at all. You notice this in the racing stages as you run and jump a lot, while combat is fine, though very uncommon. In Rayman 2 every enemy feels like a sub-boss and requires a lot of punching and dodging. The camera and misjudging jumps are occasional problems in this game although this is nothing uncommon for a 3D platformer.

In order not to become stale, Rayman 2 throws new things at you in almost every level, whether they are puzzles to solve or an item to ride. An example of a good mechanic is the bouncing fruit that appeared in the first game. Here, it functions much in the same way: To cross surfaces that would otherwise kill you and to reach higher ground. Another example of a gimmick that works is, surprisingly, the underwater sections. One level has you following a whale and having to swim through his rings in order to get oxygen. This mechanic works fairly well and they manage to add to it without causing frustration.

So what doesn’t work? The rocket sections. Throughout the game you have sections where you ride on a missile with legs. You are given very little control except the ability to speed up and sometimes jump off. Most of these sections are fine but I did find the game bugging out once or twice due to the games physics. However, when they added flying to the mix it became horrible. You have very little control over a rocket that will always accelerate and blows up on the slightest touch.

Warning: There will be spoilers until the end of this paragraph so skip this if you do not want to know. I did not expect every idea that Ubisoft has to work in this game but this one in particular is horribly frustrating for one big reason. This is how you fight the final boss. The final boss is already hard enough in this game but you are given very little room to manoeuvre, you can only attack on certain points, and you will die in one hit. This rocket riding section just did not work and so the fact you have to do it while fighting the final boss is infuriating.

Overall I did enjoy my time with Rayman 2. It has a lot of character and is fairly enjoyable. It tries to change up each level so that the player is never bored and this does work for the most part. However when it does not work it really causes this game to suffer. Ubisoft were obviously very ambitious with this game and must refer to it as a success, as it has been ported multiple times. I played the Nintendo 64 version of this game, the original version, and since then this game has been ported to all the other competition and was also remade on both DS and 3DS. It is an OK game but I strongly feel Rayman should stick to the 2D realm as shown in Rayman Legends.

Winter Dressing

Written by Sarah Kilcourse on . Posted in Fashion & Beauty.

January and February are generally the heavy hitters of winter. It is now that the temperature can be sub-zero, as cold winds fill the air and clouds turn the rain into snow. While in our houses, we can turn up the heating and wrap up in blankets, unfortunately at some point we have to venture outside into the cold.

Personally, the most important areas for warmth are hands, feet and head. If I can keep these toasty, chances are the rest of me will be just fine. I can’t deny that I am continually cold and do take cold weather dressing to the extreme—thermals are a necessity from November to March, but it’s fine, you would never know. Or so I hope.

Back to hands, feet and head. Boots are the answer to cold feet; be it ankle, riding or over-the-knee, all are equally stylish and give you the chance to vary your look throughout the chill of winter. Just because it’s two degrees outside doesn’t mean I want to spend the next month in one outfit. The current trend for chunky soles creates an extra distance between your feet and the ground, another way to keep feet warm. Boots can be an expensive purchase but keep an eye out for extra student discount offers available at this time of year. Retailers know that we get our loans in January and are trying to tempt you to spend with 20 per cent off, make the most of it.

I’m not the biggest fan of hats, what with the effect they can have on your hair, but they really do keep you toasty. In the likely event of rain/sleet/snow/hail, hats can even be your hair saviours, providing a layer of protection from the invading moisture in the air.

We can look forward to the upcoming fashion weeks providing some serious winter style inspiration; already at the men’s fashion weeks we have been given some master classes in winter dressing. The main look street styler’s have been sporting to combat the cold is the jacket/coat combo. A fantastically modern throwback to old school overcoats, the new version is less ‘Crombie and suit’, more ‘leather jacket with duster coat on top’.

The layered element of winter dressing is a good way to combat the ensuing chill after being caught in a shower, no matter what type of precipitation; its always comforting to know you can remove a layer and still stay warm. Throw on all the knitwear you have over jeans, skirts, dresses, jumpsuits—you name it, the more layers the better. With every piece removed, a new outfit is created.

TEDxManchester Ticket Giveaway

Written by Nicole Tamer on . Posted in News.

In association with TEDxManchester, The Mancunion is giving away 24 passes for the sold out event for the final session at 3:30pm on the 14th of February. After a two-year break, HOME is hosting the popular event which will feature a wide range of inspiring live talks.

The audience can expect engaging and provocative speakers from the arts, technology, media, science, academia, industry and more. The event’s innovative and thought-provoking talks inspires the masses with over 3 million subscribers on the TEDx youtube channel which boasts over 30,000+ videos from organisers in more than 130 countries.

TEDx is based on the model of the TED conferences which are comparatively very expensive. TEDx talks are organised independently of TED conferences and inspired a more local approach in the spirit of the TED conferences’ mission: ‘ideas worth spreading’. Each event curates speakers on their own, but based on TED’s format and rules.

Fill in your details here and you might be one of the lucky 24 people who can have some food for thought on Valentine’s day!

Preview: Earth Week

Written by William Brown on . Posted in News.

This week, Earth Week will be hitting the University of Manchester Students’ Union for the third year running. Lectures, events and giveaways will be scheduled throughout the week, all centred on the theme of preservation of the planet—with the aim of challenging climate injustice.

The week will kick off on Monday 8th February at 6pm in Room 6 of the Students’ Union building with a general debrief of the week. There will also be a pop-up vintage charity stall in the Students’ Union foyer all day.

Tuesday 9th February is called ‘Capitalism is climate change’. There will be a panel discussion on the topic discussing ‘Why fracking spells disaster for society and for the environment’ at 6:30pm in Room 2 of the Students’ Union. Local fracking activists and members of the People & Planet network will be present.

Wednesday 10th February will be based around the topic of food waste and poverty. At 5pm there will be a campaigning session on the social and environmental implications of the prevalence of food waste in the Council Chambers at 5pm and a pop-up charity vintage shop all day inside Owen’s Park Café.

On Thursday 11th February, there will be a free cyclists’ breakfast from 8am – 12pm in Biko’s Café. Also, at 1pm at Manchester Museum there will be eco-action climate games with the aims of raising awareness amongst the general population.

Friday 12th February will centre on discussions of the recent floods across much of England, and how cuts and climate change are increasingly endangering the UK. At 7pm in Manchester Club Academy, there will be a benefit rally and gig. According to the event’s Facebook page, proceeds will go to the local victims of climate change in Salford and Greater Manchester.