But they can’t cast doubt on Mike Dean doing it…because he said he did it.
It’s one thing to put down rumours and second-hand allegations…but this is literally a referee admitting he did it.
Referee chiefs have cast doubt on Mike Dean’s claims that, 'for a laugh', he would have “mini-games” during Premier League matches where he would see how long he would go without blowing his whistle or leaving the centre circle ⬇️
https://t.co/dPboBmWClo
I’m deeply concerned about the potential adverse impacts of Heathrow Expansion on air quality, noise pollution, our environment and the transport networks in the capital and beyond.
While aviation plays an important role in our economy and helps to keep us connected as a global city, any growth must not come at the expense of Londoners’ health or our environment.
London is proud to be leading the way in tackling the climate crisis, but I see no evidence these proposals are compatible with a credible path to Net Zero. As we grapple with the sobering consequences of the climate emergency in the form of extreme heatwaves, drought and wildfires, the evidence suggests Heathrow expansion is a risk that we simply cannot afford to take.
We’ve made incredible strides to clean up London’s air in recent years, improving health and saving lives by bringing down levels of toxic pollution. A third runway at Heathrow would put this progress in peril, as well as increasing noise pollution to unacceptable levels, blighting local communities who are already suffering.
I’m also worried that Heathrow’s expansion could overwhelm transport networks in the capital and beyond, creating gridlock and forcing the taxpayer to pick up a multi-billion-pound bill for the necessary public transport improvements, which are left undefined and unfunded in the current proposals.
The truth is the whole case for Heathrow expansion relies on outdated evidence that fails to take into account the urgent challenges we face today. I will continue to vehemently oppose these plans as I seek to build a fairer, safer, greener, more prosperous London for everyone.
Former Premier League referee Mike Dean says he used set himself mini-challenges during matches "as a laugh".
BBC Sport understands that referee figures consider Dean's claims to be unfounded, which would be historical and go back to the pre-video assistant referee era before 2019 when Pro Ref was under different leadership.
As the new school term begins, we're helping keep costs down.
We’re putting limits on branded uniforms - helping give families a little more breathing space this school year.
It’s really important that society has institutions that can be trusted to tell the truth and to be fair and reasonable.
This editorial, which launders the reputation of an obvious conman, makes clear that Nature is no longer such an institution. What’s left?
When you consider what’s at stake, @Glinner ’s passion and occasional anger is entirely understandable.
We’re talking about vulnerable children being given puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones, and in some cases undergoing irreversible surgery. None of it can change a child’s sex. But it can wreck lives.
Who wouldn’t become angry trying to stop a child abuse scandal happening in plain sight? Who wouldn’t occasionally use intemperate language?
What frustrates me about people like you, David, is that you seem more concerned about Linehan’s manners and behaviour than the substance of what he has spent years campaigning about.
History tends to remember the substance of great moral arguments rather more than the etiquette of those who fought them.
I believe history will judge this period harshly. And when it does, what will matter is who stood up and tried to stop what was happening, who equivocated, who danced on pinheads, and who looked the other way.
I know which side I want to have been on.
One concern about the ‘entrepreneurial state’ is public money being ‘invested’ in politically-favoured activities while making no actual return.
Anyway,
@jessesingal And the prospective critics need to apply for a licence to criticise you, and provide a list of justifications for the criticism to ensure there is no hate speech.
I am bewildered, and not very impressed, by the visceral, naked, irrational hatred spat out by some defenders of Jason Arday. If a Cambridge professor is accused of being an unqualified charlatan, the accusation might be racially motivated. On the other hand it might not, depending on the evidence. The correct question to ask is not, ”What is the colour of his skin” but “Is it in fact true that he is an unqualified charlatan?” Please examine the evidence before leaping to the assumption of racism.
As for the idea that journalists “piled in on him” and “hounded him to his death”, most attacks were against Cambridge University. Jason himself was widely regarded as an unfortunate victim of foolish promotion way beyond his ability to cope. In appointing him to a professorship for which he was manifestly unqualified – in ludicrously describing him as “the best in the world” – certain senior members of the university showed a level of patronising condescension towards black people that could fairly be described as racism, while at the same time making him tragically vulnerable to such attacks as came his way.
Imagine being told back in the 90s, when you were reading The Quantity Theory of Insanity, that in thirty years Will Self would be publicly appealing for journalists to be arrested for exposing fraud in academia.
This is a really good point by Nick. Private Eye's position on Arday should be obvious. Mockery of public figures is fair game. Reporting on people who lied to gain exalted positions is absolutely the sort of thing journalists should do. The wider picture - that Cambridge might have elevated someone who didn't deserve it for reasons unrelated to the post... bread and butter to Private Eye, surely?
I recently watched some early episodes of HIGNFY and Hislop actually was a bit of a firebrand. He said things that made the audience gasp, things that were considered not cool to say on the BBC at the time.
And now look at the navel-gazing twat. He's learned that he can get as many notoriety points by blandly agreeing with idiots as he can by exposing stupidity of thinking and action by public figures.
And he's taken the easy route.
Because of Arday's suicide, "the police should be impounding computers" of journalists. "This is not an attack upon a free press—it is a necessarily immediate defence of one."
Useful to remember who does and doesn't want government agents impounding journalists' computers.
This fight is a classic case of what I've come to call the Marvel Toss. When an enemy who could easily kill the hero with no effort kind of just tosses them around and out of his physical reach in one form or another instead of instantly killing them like they logically should. Meant to keep the hero alive by virtue of writer fiat rather than a realistically written fight scene.
You really begin to notice it with post-2018 western media the more you look. It's the result of writers having no idea how to write a fight scene, and the fact fight choreography is a lost art in Hollywood.
Does anyone *actually* enjoy this format popularised by ‘News Agents’ and ‘Rest is Politics’ where the speakers are in constant vehement agreement with each other?
“It would seem impossible that the way Jason Arday was treated - as public enemy number one - did not contribute to where he ended up.”
Did the incessant coverage of Jason Arday, even after his resignation, cross over into a ‘full-blown witch hunt’?
@jonsopel | @lewis_goodall
Wow.
Thousands and thousands of people turned up. Turning up for human rights, for the environment, for the animals.
Turning up to imagine a better and kinder society that we can create together.
Delighted to share the stage with Juliet Gellatley - founder of @vivacampaigns