I just posted this to my social group to co-ordinate with my US friend
about today's sport on TV.

"I’m watching the Vuelta. When it’s over, I’ll switch over to either
the CPL or the SLv AFG depending on which looks like it’s going to be
most interesting. I shall not bother with the final of the 100, but
may well watch the CPL at 7pm ET."

Since they've insisted on showing the 100 in the evening, when I don't
watch sport, I've seen almost none of it and really don't care.

Cheers,

Mike

On Sat, 03 Sep 2022 14:29:08 +0100, Mike Holmans <spam@jackalope.uk>
wrote:

>I just posted this to my social group to co-ordinate with my US friend
>about today's sport on TV.
>
>"I’m watching the Vuelta. When it’s over, I’ll switch over to either
>the CPL or the SLv AFG depending on which looks like it’s going to be
>most interesting. I shall not bother with the final of the 100, but
>may well watch the CPL at 7pm ET."
>
>Since they've insisted on showing the 100 in the evening, when I don't
>watch sport, I've seen almost none of it and really don't care.
>
>Cheers,
>
>Mike

I watched the end of the 100 final, it was exciting. I hadn't a clue
what the comms were saying and the scoreboard took a bit of getting
used to.
That's about as much 100 as I have seen, it's ok but if you are used
to regular cricket it comes over as way too much contrived. There is
cricket in there on the field but the rest of it is just plastic.

max.it

On Saturday, September 3, 2022 at 2:29:11 PM UTC+1, Mike Holmans wrote:
> I just posted this to my social group to co-ordinate with my US friend
> about today's sport on TV.
>
> "I’m watching the Vuelta. When it’s over, I’ll switch over to either
> the CPL or the SLv AFG depending on which looks like it’s going to be
> most interesting. I shall not bother with the final of the 100, but
> may well watch the CPL at 7pm ET."
>
> Since they've insisted on showing the 100 in the evening, when I don't
> watch sport, I've seen almost none of it and really don't care.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Mike
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ... RH

On Saturday, September 3, 2022 at 11:18:21 PM UTC+1, max.it wrote:
> On Sat, 03 Sep 2022 14:29:08 +0100, Mike Holmans <sp...@jackalope.uk>
> wrote:
> >I just posted this to my social group to co-ordinate with my US friend
> >about today's sport on TV.
> >
> >"I’m watching the Vuelta. When it’s over, I’ll switch over to either
> >the CPL or the SLv AFG depending on which looks like it’s going to be
> >most interesting. I shall not bother with the final of the 100, but
> >may well watch the CPL at 7pm ET."
> >
> >Since they've insisted on showing the 100 in the evening, when I don't
> >watch sport, I've seen almost none of it and really don't care.
> >
> >Cheers,
> >
> >Mike
> I watched the end of the 100 final, it was exciting. I hadn't a clue
> what the comms were saying and the scoreboard took a bit of getting
> used to.

i saw the last hour in the pub and i should have found it exciting
given the twists and turns in the last 30 balls, but the trouble was, i
just didnt care who won.

> That's about as much 100 as I have seen, it's ok but if you are used
> to regular cricket it comes over as way too much contrived. There is
> cricket in there on the field but the rest of it is just plastic.
>

completly especially as the comms have to behave like there on acid,
and every player has to say how wonderful the 100 is. i wonder if the
lords staff decided to try and sabotage it all by producing a pitch
which gave assistance to anyone who could turn their arm over.

mike

On 04/09/2022 21:41, mike wrote:
[100 final:]
> i saw the last hour in the pub and i should have found it exciting
> given the twists and turns in the last 30 balls, but the trouble was, i
> just didnt care who won.

As a nominal TR supporter, I did care. To my surprise, so did
SWMBO, who is normally of the opinion that all sports are daft and
watching sport is terminally daft [despite being as competitive as
they come when playing games herself]; she was cheering as much as
anyone towards the end. Perhaps a new group of spectators is indeed
being attracted to cricket, similarly to T20.

But I didn't care /very much/. I think the authorities missed
a trick. TR /could/ have been an East Midlands side, put together from
the EM counties plus two or three imported stars. But half the Notts
side seemed, both this year and last, to be playing elsewhere, and
conversely several TR players /should/ have been playing elsewhere.
It's too hard to keep track! At least the T20 squads bear some
resemblance to the usual county sides.

FTAOD, this is not an RH-style rant. I recognise that the
overseas stars add something to the sport, and that players are going
to switch between counties, in much the same way that footballers get
transferred. But county players playing for random Hundred sides with
which they have no geographical connexion is a different level. The
idea was initially "sold" as eight regional teams; which at least
makes some sort of sense.

--
Andy Walker, Nottingham.
Andy's music pages: www.cuboid.me.uk/andy/Music
Composer of the day: www.cuboid.me.uk/andy/Music/Composers/Daquin

On Sun, 4 Sep 2022 23:20:18 +0100, Andy Walker <anw@cuboid.co.uk>
wrote:

> But county players playing for random Hundred sides with
>which they have no geographical connexion is a different level. The
>idea was initially "sold" as eight regional teams; which at least
>makes some sort of sense.

Looking at the development of all the other franchise competitions
around the world, the "regional" connection was only ever likely to
last for one season.

The target audience for the 100 isn't supposed to care whether the
players are local. It only lasts a month and they don't necessarily
care what happens to those players in any other games for anyone,
though no doubt some will be interested to see them playing for
England.

If this bothers you, then you don't understand how wonderful the 100
is. I'm sure that any of a dozen hysterical TV commentators would be
only too happy to inform you how misguided you are.

I'm aware of your view that Londoners don't understand local pride,
and as far as my generation goes, you're probably right.

But what does "local community" mean in the age of WhatsApp and
TikTok? Do people under 40 really feel an identity with people outside
their own town with county councils now being unable to do anything at
all meaningful to give a county some identity?

Cheers,

Mike

In message <1bk7hhptsitrojoh82kmui99t9b3n1qce3@4ax.com>, max. it
<max@tea.time> writes
>I watched the end of the 100 final, it was exciting. I hadn't a clue
>what the comms were saying and the scoreboard took a bit of getting
>used to. That's about as much 100 as I have seen, it's ok but if you
>are used to regular cricket it comes over as way too much contrived.
>There is cricket in there on the field but the rest of it is just plastic.

The scoreboard is a bit of a disaster, given that it's supposed to be
readily understandable by someone who is new to watching cricket. It's
also sometimes very show to update the facing batsman's and the bowler's
stats. Using different colours to distinguish the two teams is a good
idea, though.

I saw the last 30 balls or so. It was a good finish, if not quite so
exciting as Ebony Rainford-Brent and Nasser Hussain on Sky were trying
to make it sound. (I wonder if commentating on the Hundred rather than
on the first two Tests against SA was Hussain's choice or imposed on him
by Sky, who may have been worried that without him their Hundred
commentators were mostly a rather lightweight bunch.)
--
John Hall
"Home is heaven and orgies are vile,
But you *need* an orgy, once in a while."
Ogden Nash (1902-1971)

In message <tf38b2$r0i$1@gioia.aioe.org>, Andy Walker <anw@cuboid.co.uk>
writes
<snip>
> But I didn't care /very much/. I think the authorities missed
>a trick. TR /could/ have been an East Midlands side, put together from
>the EM counties plus two or three imported stars. But half the Notts
>side seemed, both this year and last, to be playing elsewhere, and
>conversely several TR players /should/ have been playing elsewhere.
>It's too hard to keep track! At least the T20 squads bear some
>resemblance to the usual county sides.

At least I've been able to feel some connection to the Oval Invincibles,
who seem to have made an effort to include a strong Surrey presence. So
we've had Roy, Jacks, both Currans, Reece Topley, and even Rory Burns,
though unsurprisingly he didn't get a game. Also Gus Atkinson was signed
as a replacement player, but was injured so didn't play.
--
John Hall
"Home is heaven and orgies are vile,
But you *need* an orgy, once in a while."
Ogden Nash (1902-1971)

On 05/09/2022 01:05, Mike Holmans wrote:
> Looking at the development of all the other franchise competitions
> around the world, the "regional" connection was only ever likely to
> last for one season.

But this one didn't last more than ten minutes.

> The target audience for the 100 isn't supposed to care whether the
> players are local. It only lasts a month and they don't necessarily
> care what happens to those players in any other games for anyone,
> though no doubt some will be interested to see them playing for
> England.

The Hundred followed a series of T20 matches at TB; all sold out
[but, allegedly, TH /more/ sold out than T20, if that makes any sense].
What is a youngster supposed to make of being told in one match that X, Y
and Z are the local heroes [hooray!], while P, Q and R are stars for the
opposition [boo!], and the next match that it's the other way round?
Isn't hero worship /supposed/ to be the way teams turn youngsters into
long-term supporters, both as spectators [most of us] and as the next
generation of players, at all levels? How is that supposed to work if
your heroes are villains in alternate matches?

> I'm aware of your view that Londoners don't understand local pride,
> and as far as my generation goes, you're probably right.

Not "Londoners", but Robert. I don't know enough Londoners to
be able to generalise, tho' I could hazard some guesses.

--
Andy Walker, Nottingham.
Andy's music pages: www.cuboid.me.uk/andy/Music
Composer of the day: www.cuboid.me.uk/andy/Music/Composers/Spindler

On Mon, 5 Sep 2022 23:40:47 +0100, Andy Walker <anw@cuboid.co.uk>
wrote:

>On 05/09/2022 01:05, Mike Holmans wrote:

>
> The Hundred followed a series of T20 matches at TB; all sold out
>[but, allegedly, TH /more/ sold out than T20, if that makes any sense].
>What is a youngster supposed to make of being told in one match that X, Y
>and Z are the local heroes [hooray!], while P, Q and R are stars for the
>opposition [boo!], and the next match that it's the other way round?
>Isn't hero worship /supposed/ to be the way teams turn youngsters into
>long-term supporters, both as spectators [most of us] and as the next
>generation of players, at all levels? How is that supposed to work if
>your heroes are villains in alternate matches?

Ask the ECB. Ask the Mumbai fans who see their heroes playing against
the Mumbai Indians in the IPL. Or the NSW fans who see NSW players
appearing against both of the Sydney sides in the BBL. And so forth,
because this is how the franchises work.

Since they put the men's matches on at the same time as dinner and the
women's have mostly been competing with international T20s, Test
matches, and bike races for my attention, I've not been watching very
much of it and I'm not very interested either.

I don't bear any ill-will towards the competition, and I'd rather it
made money than not, but frankly, I don't see the point of it.

Cheers,

Mike

On Sunday, September 4, 2022 at 11:20:22 PM UTC+1, Andy Walker wrote:
> On 04/09/2022 21:41, mike wrote:
> [100 final:]
> > i saw the last hour in the pub and i should have found it exciting
> > given the twists and turns in the last 30 balls, but the trouble was, i
> > just didnt care who won.
> As a nominal TR supporter, I did care. To my surprise, so did
> SWMBO, who is normally of the opinion that all sports are daft and
> watching sport is terminally daft [despite being as competitive as
> they come when playing games herself]; she was cheering as much as
> anyone towards the end. Perhaps a new group of spectators is indeed
> being attracted to cricket, similarly to T20.
>
> But I didn't care /very much/. I think the authorities missed
> a trick. TR /could/ have been an East Midlands side, put together from
> the EM counties plus two or three imported stars. But half the Notts
> side seemed, both this year and last, to be playing elsewhere, and
> conversely several TR players /should/ have been playing elsewhere.
> It's too hard to keep track! At least the T20 squads bear some
> resemblance to the usual county sides.
>
> FTAOD, this is not an RH-style rant.

Oh dear, DR B-M mistakes assertion for argument. RH

On Saturday, 3 September 2022 at 14:29:11 UTC+1, Mike Holmans wrote:
> I just posted this to my social group to co-ordinate with my US friend
> about today's sport on TV.
>
> "I’m watching the Vuelta. When it’s over, I’ll switch over to either
> the CPL or the SLv AFG depending on which looks like it’s going to be
> most interesting. I shall not bother with the final of the 100, but
> may well watch the CPL at 7pm ET."
>
> Since they've insisted on showing the 100 in the evening, when I don't
> watch sport, I've seen almost none of it and really don't care.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Mike

Priorities?

Has to be, **has** to be your wife Mike.

There's more to life than posting pro-English bullshit to newsgroups that nobody reads.

Go and pay your very lovely wife the attention she deserves?

On Mon, 5 Sep 2022 23:40:47 +0100, Andy Walker <anw@cuboid.co.uk>
wrote:

>On 05/09/2022 01:05, Mike Holmans wrote:

>> I'm aware of your view that Londoners don't understand local pride,
>> and as far as my generation goes, you're probably right.
>
> Not "Londoners", but Robert. I don't know enough Londoners to
>be able to generalise, tho' I could hazard some guesses.

Well, we don't have a county. Middlesex's ghostly presence now covers
those parts of NW London which are outside the London Postal Area as a
geographical description. And that's it.

I was born in Middlesex 7 years before its abolition in 1965, but 3
months before my moving to Essex, Norfolk and then Yorkshire,
returning to Westminster 12 years later, which to all intents and
purposes I've not left since. Lord's Cricket Ground has always been in
Westminster.

Westminster became part of the county of London in 1889. The last
vestige of a connection between the Middlesex of yore and the City of
Westminster was probably swept away in an NHS reorganisation in the
80s or 90s (ISTR getting a letter from a Middlesex Regional Health
Authority in the early 80s). The same goes for the London Borough of
Camden, home of the other bloke you mentioned.

It is inconceivable that I (or he) could have the same psychological
connection to "Middlesex" that you have to Nottinghamshire. I've never
lived there to my actual knowledge, although history records that I
did, and now it doesn't exist anyway.

The "county" of London may have existed for nearly a century and a
half, but calling it a "county" is the equivalent of calling a wing
commander a major (or colonel or whatever it is) - it just established
where the authority sat in the local governance hierarchy; it doesn't
make it anything much like the counties such as Norfolk or West
Yorkshire in which I lived as a child and acquired some idea of what a
county might be.

England is not the only country where there is some hostility between
metropolitan capital and the other regions - France, Italy and Spain
come readily to mind. Notts v London has some semblance of being a
match where West Bridgford or Rushcliffe v London doesn't, so I can
understand how county identities matter even if I have no real
conception of it.

But born and bred Londoners, especially those north of the river who
can't even pretend to be part of an extant county even if you ignore
the 1889 reorganisation, literally have no frame of reference by which
to understand counties.

Cheers,

Mike

On Tue, 06 Sep 2022 19:38:51 +0100, Mike Holmans <spam@jackalope.uk>
wrote:

>On Mon, 5 Sep 2022 23:40:47 +0100, Andy Walker <anw@cuboid.co.uk>
>wrote:
>
>>On 05/09/2022 01:05, Mike Holmans wrote:
>
>>> I'm aware of your view that Londoners don't understand local pride,
>>> and as far as my generation goes, you're probably right.
>>
>> Not "Londoners", but Robert. I don't know enough Londoners to
>>be able to generalise, tho' I could hazard some guesses.
>
>Well, we don't have a county. Middlesex's ghostly presence now covers
>those parts of NW London which are outside the London Postal Area as a
>geographical description. And that's it.
>
>I was born in Middlesex 7 years before its abolition in 1965, but 3
>months before my moving to Essex, Norfolk and then Yorkshire,
>returning to Westminster 12 years later, which to all intents and
>purposes I've not left since. Lord's Cricket Ground has always been in
>Westminster.
>
>Westminster became part of the county of London in 1889. The last
>vestige of a connection between the Middlesex of yore and the City of
>Westminster was probably swept away in an NHS reorganisation in the
>80s or 90s (ISTR getting a letter from a Middlesex Regional Health
>Authority in the early 80s). The same goes for the London Borough of
>Camden, home of the other bloke you mentioned.
>
>It is inconceivable that I (or he) could have the same psychological
>connection to "Middlesex" that you have to Nottinghamshire. I've never
>lived there to my actual knowledge, although history records that I
>did, and now it doesn't exist anyway.
>
>The "county" of London may have existed for nearly a century and a
>half, but calling it a "county" is the equivalent of calling a wing
>commander a major (or colonel or whatever it is) - it just established
>where the authority sat in the local governance hierarchy; it doesn't
>make it anything much like the counties such as Norfolk or West
>Yorkshire in which I lived as a child and acquired some idea of what a
>county might be.
>
>England is not the only country where there is some hostility between
>metropolitan capital and the other regions - France, Italy and Spain
>come readily to mind. Notts v London has some semblance of being a
>match where West Bridgford or Rushcliffe v London doesn't, so I can
>understand how county identities matter even if I have no real
>conception of it.
>
>But born and bred Londoners, especially those north of the river who
>can't even pretend to be part of an extant county even if you ignore
>the 1889 reorganisation, literally have no frame of reference by which
>to understand counties.
>
>Cheers,
>
>Mike
>
>

Pakistani lad with a Tyrone county GAA shirt is spoken to by an oul
lad outside a shop in Scotch street near Portadown (Co Armagh) and Moy
(Co Tyrone). The oul lad said "we don't like your sort around here".
The Pakistani lad said "you must be an Armagh supporter", the oul lad
replied "you think that's funny you fat fenian bastard", The Pakistani
corrected him - "Fat Muslem bastard you mean".

That might only be funny to peoples from around here.

max.it

On 06/09/2022 19:38, Mike Holmans wrote:
> On Mon, 5 Sep 2022 23:40:47 +0100, Andy Walker <anw@cuboid.co.uk>
> wrote:
>
>> On 05/09/2022 01:05, Mike Holmans wrote:
>
>>> I'm aware of your view that Londoners don't understand local pride,
>>> and as far as my generation goes, you're probably right.
>>
>> Not "Londoners", but Robert. I don't know enough Londoners to
>> be able to generalise, tho' I could hazard some guesses.
>
> Well, we don't have a county. Middlesex's ghostly presence now covers
> those parts of NW London which are outside the London Postal Area as a
> geographical description. And that's it.

Counties aren't an official part of postal addresses these days, so it
doesn't really exist in that regard any more either.

--
David North

On Tuesday, September 6, 2022 at 5:53:24 PM UTC+1, Nasti Chestikov wrote:
> On Saturday, 3 September 2022 at 14:29:11 UTC+1, Mike Holmans wrote:
> > I just posted this to my social group to co-ordinate with my US friend
> > about today's sport on TV.
> >
> > "I’m watching the Vuelta. When it’s over, I’ll switch over to either
> > the CPL or the SLv AFG depending on which looks like it’s going to be
> > most interesting. I shall not bother with the final of the 100, but
> > may well watch the CPL at 7pm ET."
> >
> > Since they've insisted on showing the 100 in the evening, when I don't
> > watch sport, I've seen almost none of it and really don't care.
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Mike
> Priorities?
>
> Has to be, **has** to be your wife Mike.
>
> There's more to life than posting pro-English bullshit to newsgroups that nobody reads.
>
> Go and pay your very lovely wife the attention she deserves?

Oh dear, has master Unwholesome been cutting out page three girls again ... RH

On Wed, 7 Sep 2022 06:48:04 +0100, David North
<nospam@lane-farm.fsnet.co.uk> wrote:

>On 06/09/2022 19:38, Mike Holmans wrote:
>> On Mon, 5 Sep 2022 23:40:47 +0100, Andy Walker <anw@cuboid.co.uk>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 05/09/2022 01:05, Mike Holmans wrote:
>>
>>>> I'm aware of your view that Londoners don't understand local pride,
>>>> and as far as my generation goes, you're probably right.
>>>
>>> Not "Londoners", but Robert. I don't know enough Londoners to
>>> be able to generalise, tho' I could hazard some guesses.
>>
>> Well, we don't have a county. Middlesex's ghostly presence now covers
>> those parts of NW London which are outside the London Postal Area as a
>> geographical description. And that's it.
>
>Counties aren't an official part of postal addresses these days, so it
>doesn't really exist in that regard any more either.

True.

It's also commmonly used round these parts to differentiate between
Ashford (Middx) and Ashford (Kent) because it's very embarrassing if
you go to the wrong one for a meeting.

Cheers,

Mike

On 06/09/2022 19:38, Mike Holmans wrote:
>>> I'm aware of your view that Londoners don't understand local pride,
>>> and as far as my generation goes, you're probably right.
>> Not "Londoners", but Robert. I don't know enough Londoners to
>> be able to generalise, tho' I could hazard some guesses.
> Well, we don't have a county. Middlesex's ghostly presence [...].

You've gone from a generic "local pride" to a very specific
"my county has gone". But it's not merely about counties or about
cricket. Do you not have a football team to support? A school or
university? A music society or chess club? Just as you support
[I assume] England when playing Oz at cricket, do you not support
Spurs [or whoever] against Liverpool [or whoever]? Do you not
prick up your ears when your school/university/... gets a mention
on the news? People like me aren't opposed to "London" in the way
you portrayed it; but if Forest play Spurs, or if Notts play Middx,
I support my local side. I equally support my locals against L'pool
or Lancashire or .... Don't most people? Do you not have any "local
pride" in any of your affiliations?

--
Andy Walker, Nottingham.
Andy's music pages: www.cuboid.me.uk/andy/Music
Composer of the day: www.cuboid.me.uk/andy/Music/Composers/Couperin

On Thursday, September 8, 2022 at 9:32:11 AM UTC+10, Andy Walker wrote:
> On 06/09/2022 19:38, Mike Holmans wrote:
> >>> I'm aware of your view that Londoners don't understand local pride,
> >>> and as far as my generation goes, you're probably right.
> >> Not "Londoners", but Robert. I don't know enough Londoners to
> >> be able to generalise, tho' I could hazard some guesses.
> > Well, we don't have a county. Middlesex's ghostly presence [...].
>
> You've gone from a generic "local pride" to a very specific
> "my county has gone". But it's not merely about counties or about
> cricket. Do you not have a football team to support? A school or
> university? A music society or chess club? Just as you support
> [I assume] England when playing Oz at cricket, do you not support
> Spurs [or whoever] against Liverpool [or whoever]? Do you not
> prick up your ears when your school/university/... gets a mention
> on the news? People like me aren't opposed to "London" in the way
> you portrayed it; but if Forest play Spurs, or if Notts play Middx,
> I support my local side. I equally support my locals against L'pool
> or Lancashire or .... Don't most people? Do you not have any "local
> pride" in any of your affiliations?

MH has said;

"Looking at the development of all the other franchise competitions
around the world, the "regional" connection was only ever likely to
last for one season."

I'm not so sure. He seems half-right.
Every single IPL team has a regional name, and a regional identity; eg Mumbai Indians.

I think the issue with franchise cricket is it's so NEW. There's no history to be attached to.
So fans get attached to players, rather than a history-less club.
Then when players change teams, some fans follow.

Most fans of an established competition like the EPL, or CC, are probably Team-over-Players.
Perhaps in the modern world more and more fans will be Players-over-Team.

There's a niche sport I follow (too ashamed to mention :), and I got into it because of one star player. He's stayed in the same team for the past ~decade, but there's been constant talk about him changing teams. If he did, I'd change my support to his new team, even though it would feel strange.

* I'm not too ashamed. His name is Faker, and he plays League of Legends e-sports. A computer game. The last team that tried to buy him offered USD$20m a season, which he rejected.

On Thu, 8 Sep 2022 00:31:57 +0100, Andy Walker <anw@cuboid.co.uk>
wrote:

>On 06/09/2022 19:38, Mike Holmans wrote:
>>>> I'm aware of your view that Londoners don't understand local pride,
>>>> and as far as my generation goes, you're probably right.
>>> Not "Londoners", but Robert. I don't know enough Londoners to
>>> be able to generalise, tho' I could hazard some guesses.
>> Well, we don't have a county. Middlesex's ghostly presence [...].
>
> You've gone from a generic "local pride" to a very specific
>"my county has gone". But it's not merely about counties or about
>cricket. Do you not have a football team to support? A school or
>university? A music society or chess club? Just as you support
>[I assume] England when playing Oz at cricket, do you not support
>Spurs [or whoever] against Liverpool [or whoever]? Do you not
>prick up your ears when your school/university/... gets a mention
>on the news? People like me aren't opposed to "London" in the way
>you portrayed it; but if Forest play Spurs, or if Notts play Middx,
>I support my local side. I equally support my locals against L'pool
>or Lancashire or .... Don't most people? Do you not have any "local
>pride" in any of your affiliations?

Having reviewed them, I haven't since I gave up drinking in 1997 and
therefore haven't had a local pub. The other sport I follow
obsessively is bike racing, which happens to be based on
multi-national teams nominally based in various countries. I don't
think there's a single UAE native in the UAE team, and none of the
team live there.

My local football team is Chelsea: their fans are so obnoxious that I
wish them only ill. I couldn't care less who beat who at football,
having deliberately watched less than five minutes of the stuff in 20
years.

My other interests and activities are organised, if at all, on a
national or international basis. I'm watching the CPL game at the
moment, exchanging comments with a guy in New Jersey and a woman in
Minnesota. I first met my American wife on Usenet. The guy who test
solves my crosswords lives in NZ. My local political party made no
real headway for 30 years (until Brexit), so most of my activity in it
was at the regional/national level. My trade union branch was based
round a workplace, and our members lived all over the home counties
and the employer was national and we negotiated at the national or
functional business division levels - there wasn't anything local
except problems with the building. I prefer it if the bridge players I
meet online speak English or German, but it's not entirely necessary.

From my point of view, geography is only relevant to whether I can
meet my friends and colleagues in person.

Cheers,

Mike

On 07/09/2022 16:45, Mike Holmans wrote:
> On Wed, 7 Sep 2022 06:48:04 +0100, David North
> <nospam@lane-farm.fsnet.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> On 06/09/2022 19:38, Mike Holmans wrote:
>>> On Mon, 5 Sep 2022 23:40:47 +0100, Andy Walker <anw@cuboid.co.uk>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 05/09/2022 01:05, Mike Holmans wrote:
>>>
>>>>> I'm aware of your view that Londoners don't understand local pride,
>>>>> and as far as my generation goes, you're probably right.
>>>>
>>>> Not "Londoners", but Robert. I don't know enough Londoners to
>>>> be able to generalise, tho' I could hazard some guesses.
>>>
>>> Well, we don't have a county. Middlesex's ghostly presence now covers
>>> those parts of NW London which are outside the London Postal Area as a
>>> geographical description. And that's it.
>>
>> Counties aren't an official part of postal addresses these days, so it
>> doesn't really exist in that regard any more either.
>
> True.
>
> It's also commmonly used round these parts to differentiate between
> Ashford (Middx) and Ashford (Kent) because it's very embarrassing if
> you go to the wrong one for a meeting.

Yes, although Ashford (Middx) has been mainly in Surrey since 1965.

--
David North