Football confusion

This is the article in the recent edition of the Express.  It is poorly thought out and researched, even by Mr Barlkow's well know low standards!

http://menmedia.co.uk/macclesfieldexpress/comment/blogs/s/1462143_ban-is-off-the-ball-incident

 
Are there other children in the playground by any chance? You know, smaller kids? Kids not involved in the football? Kids who don't want to be hit with footlballs when they are doing something else? Kids who don't want to be hit on the head by someone else's football?


There is a considerable body of research on injuries to young children in the playground; a few seconds with Google  suffices to find plenty.

We are not just talking about a few knocks and bruies here but things like brain damage.

Presumably she hasn't banned real footballs on the football pitch, but just where there may be a risk to other people.

The Ofsted report on the school is interesting:

"The headteacher has had an enormous impact on quality and standards in the school since she took up her post. She has secured the well-being of staff and pupils and established clear and effective structures for leaders and managers to monitor and evaluate the school's work. This has led to significant improvements in pupils' attitudes and the effectiveness of teaching and learning. Combined with the exceptional pastoral care provided, the impact on progress and standards is rewarding. The school's commitment to inclusion ensures that pupils are cared for and supported equally whatever their particular needs. Governors challenge and support the school well. They are strong critical partners in helping to plan its future progress. They watch over finances carefully and ensure that money is spent wisely on school improvement. Together, leaders amply demonstrate their ability to bring about good improvement and there is good capacity for the school to improve further."

Perhaps this is a head teacher to be praised.

As for:

"Far better to stay indoors on the computer learning to be a violent psychopath."

This is just silly. I suggest that we see more violence from football supporters than other groups of people in our society!

Rules are only to be obeyed in Mr Barlow agrees with them!

The latest scribblings from Macclesfield's least consistent hack are here:

Clicky

Mr Barlow seems to have problems with children keeping to the school rules here.
Presumably the boy was aware of the rules before he started selling junk food.
We wonder what other school rules would Mr Barlow be happy for someone to break?

Mr Barlow also seems to have overlooked the fact that shools are there to educate children, and that should include how to live healthy and long lives.
Popularity has never been the  prime factor in deciding what schools shoul do; would Mr Barlow would be happy for the school to drop mathematics and history in favour of X-box and iPad lessons? They would presumably be more popular that the former!

Pewrhaps he will contribute here and share his thoughts with us. Watch this space.

Street lighting trial

Mr Barlow has written this article about a street lighting trial and, as usual. contributes his own, unique blend of ignrance and sarcasm disguised as wit.

This is what I have posted in reply; let's see if the Express publishes it or censors it.

A few seconds on the Cheshire East site produced this:

"Street Lighting Energy Saving Trial in Wilmslow

As part of Cheshire East Council’s commitment to reduce carbon emissions and energy usage, it is intended to carry out a series of short term trials in the Thorngrove Road, Longmeade Gardens and Cragside Way residential area of Wilmslow, starting in the first week of February 2011.

Phase one of the trial will involve switching-off 80% of the street lights in the area between the hours of 11pm and 6am, leaving 20% lit as normal, at road junctions and remote footpaths, in order to provide minimum lighting. This will reduce the energy consumption of each lamp by 50% and will produce a combined carbon emission saving for the scheme of 4.22 tonnes per year.

Phase two of the trial will involve including the other 20% of lamps in the switching-off trial between the hours of 11pm and 6am with resultant increased savings.

The Council welcomes feedback from individuals and service providers affected by the trials and this feedback will help determine future policies within the Council.  Your feedback can be provided by one of the following means:-
Online using the Street Lighting Questionnaire.
By telephone: 0300 123 5020, or
By letter to: Cheshire East Council, Street Lighting Trials, Westfields, Middlewich Road, Sandbach, Cheshire CW11 1HZ

The roads affected are:- Thorngrove Road, Thorngrove Hill, Thorngrove Drive, Longmeade Gardens, Land Lane and Public Footpath, Cragside Way, Burnside Close, Leaside Way, Glenside Drive and Croftside Way."

Seems quite reasonable to me.

It's a TRIAL, which means that it is being tried out.

Minimum lighting is being maintained.

There are multiple ways to express a view about this.

Also anyone can call the council or their Councillor to talk about this.

What did they say when you called them Mr Barlow?

You did call them, didn't you?

Update: Well, well, well, the Express has started publishing my posts again. Now, let's see if they will control  the inevitable responses from Mr Barlow's puppets and disciples. Cue "David Davies"........


Update 2. 1 point on the puppet bingo sheet. It's "Junior" who has appeared this time

Trolls, sock puppets and disciples

Regular viewers of the V Barlow's section on  the Macclesfield Express website will have noticed that, whenever there is criticism of Mr Barlow's views, various names pop up to atack the commenter.

So, now we have "Junior". This looks like just another version of one of the tedious sockpuppets that infest that place.

Same approach (personal attacks and no discussion of the article or opinions)  and even the same phrasing etc.


Sat 6th

Well they're still there.

There is "Four Twenty Wherever" accusing others of trolling and "Junior" with the usual bile. He can't even change the record; we now have the familiar attempt to impose his own rules on what can and can't be said.
I imagine Mr Barlow must be rather embarrassed by the actions of his disciples.







Ah, the disciples do hate anyone disagreeing with Vic, don't they.
I have no opinion on him but do disagree with some of his ideas and views. It is fascinating that there are soman that would want to stop people expressing their views about what he says.
It is certainl looks like Vic either missed the point of the article or didn't read it properly. An of the rest of you got comments on that or will there just be more ad hom attacks? It would be great to have some discussion about it.
Four twenty, perhaps you didn't understand what I wrote.  And  commenting on an article is not trolling, unless someone has a hidden agenda in suggesting it. 
Interesting isn't it  the names that crop up whenever there is an criticism of Mr Barlow's views.........

In competition with the Telegraph????

These are the Trinity Mirror Group's national titles:


Daily Mirror
Sunday Mirror
People
Daily Record
Sunday Mail


And they are worried about links to Telegraph articles in a small and declining local paper!




Hmmmm

Mr Barlow recently produced an article which made some rather odd claims about immigration and the Government's recently imposed restrictions. The article can be seen here.

There has been some comment on the menmedia.co.uk/macclesfieldexpress website.

Now, Mr Barlow's unevidenced opinions are being contradicted by a number of people and institutions, people and bodies who may know rather more about it then him.

So, in the interests of local debate in what claims to be a local newspaper, I attempted to post this:


There seems to be quite a lot of difference between Mr Barlow's unevidenced opinion and the thoughts of those actually affected.


See these reports from the Telegraph:


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/jobs/8035406/Immigration-cap-a-headache-for-UK-companies.html


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/science-news/8047509/Immigration-cap-could-damage-Britains-reputation-for-scientific-excellence-Nobel-prize-winners-claim.html


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/science-news/8047622/Britains-immigration-laws-favour-footballers-over-scientists-Nobel-prize-group-say.html


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/jobs/8068745/Immigration-cap-is-bad-for-UK-business-say-government-advisors.html


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/businesslatestnews/8038792/Immigration-cap-damaging-the-UK-warns-services-group.html


I would be interested in Mr Barlow's comments

Having repeatedly tried to get this up in the comments section today, I then received an email from somebody called Mark Richardson from men-news.co.uk.  He does not say what his role is or, even , if he lives in the Macclesfield Express distribution area.

He stated:

We will not be publishing comments containing links to the Daily Telegraph as they are a competitor 

Ludicrous!  The thought of the Telegraph being in competition with a small and declining local newspaper is laughable.

So, the message is that they will allow Mr Barlow to say whatever he wants but will stop alternative points of view being put because where they can be seen.

The Express' bizarre and arbitrary censorship of posts, particularly concerning Mr Barlow, has taken an intriguing turn.
They seem recently to have been blocking any criticism of his articles and then they have let this comment appear:

note that the end of Vic Barlow’s column (who is he anyway?) is suffixed with
"The views on this page are Vic Barlow's and not necessarily those of the Express’’
Perhaps, as the publishers of this newspaper, you should be more circumspect in the
quality of journalists you employ and publish.
I was dismayed to read his recent trash leveled at Cheshire police and their charity
cricket match. It was a disgrace and shame on you for publishing such ill informed tripe.
Unlike Vic (whoever he is) I commend these men and women giving there all to precious
free time to raise such a fantastic amount of money, over £3000, for Help for Heroes.
We need more people like them.
He should be ashamed of himself for writing such a mean spirited, small minded piece of
drivel about local heroes who put there own safety on the line every day in the course of
making our towns and cities safer places to be.
Perhaps he should try a real job for a living, we can do without his offensive comments
regardless of how ‘funny’ or ironic (I doubt he is capable of this)he is trying to be.
The Police deserve our respect and support and as a local newspaper you should be giving it.
Shame on you Vic Barlow (whoever you are)! Go crawl back under whatever stone you came from.
Mrs Helen Millard
Taunton
Somerset


The original can be seen here:

http://menmedia.co.uk/macclesfieldexpress/comment/blogs/s/1323894_an_arresting_sight#comments 

Maybe  things are changing.....