The Martlet - Issue 8

3

POLITICS

Controversy surrounding the Turkish prime minister

CHRISTMAS ISSUE

12

FILM

Is there an over-saturation of movie sequels

20

TECHNOLOGY

What’s behind the success of Apple?

Abingdon School’s Leading Newspaper

27

ICE HOCKEY

Find out about the lesser talked-about sport of ice hockey

ISSUE 08

HOUSE SINGING P.9

SPORT TO WATCH THIS CHRISTMAS P.24

JUMBO JETS: THE LAST ROAR P.17 COVER STORY

Can We Ever Eradicate IS?

Sam Chambers looks into the future of the struggle against IS.

On Friday the 13th of November, two suicide bombers blew themselves up in the Beirut suburb of Bourj el-Barajneh, killing 44 people and injuring 239 people.

Less than 24 hours later, 5 simultaneous attacks in Paris leave 137 people dead and 368 injured. With the so called ‘Islamic state’ claiming responsibility for both, is this the point where we stop ignoring IS and actually take action against the biggest threat to this country’s security since the Cold War? With recent concerns over terrorism, the surge of migrants into the country, and the radicalisation of many young

Muslims in the UK, it could be argued that delaying direct action of the required level is only letting the problem fester and making it increasingly difficult to maintain domestic security, therefore endangering the lives of hundreds or even thousands of British citizens.

IS has seemed to come from out of nowhere. It appeared in the public domain in late 2013 and early 2014 in the context of the Syrian civil war after it emerged that a large proportion of the opposition to President Assad were not in fact freedom fighters, but Al-Qaeda-backed extremist groups, IS included amongst them.

IS itself goes much further back. The Islamic state in its earliest form was actually an Al-Qaeda sponsored insurgency of 2003 with the aim of gaining control of Western Iraq in the chaos following the fall of Saddam Hussein and the Ba’athist government in 2003. The movement was then resurrected at the start of the Syrian civil war and has been getting larger and increasing its support ever since.

The problem, for the West at least, is nothing to do with the area they supposedly control in the Middle East; the problem is evidently the acts of terror that they have carried out beyond their bor-

ders and that they are supposedly going to carry out in the future. This is evident around the world, as the USA has over 1,000 counter terrorism operations relating to IS happening in all 50 of its states right now, and there have been over 70 IS related arrests in America in the past year.

The refugee crisis hasn’t helped matters at all, as IS has publically stated that it will exploit the flow of refugees by sending ‘fighters’ disguised as refugees across the Mediterranean from Libya

Continued on page 2

2

THE MARTLET CHRISTMAS ISSUE 8

News

Letter from the Editor Dear Readers, Welcome to this eighth issue of The Martlet. The quality of writing in all of these articles is remarkable and I give due credit to all of our writers for producing such insightful and informative work. I am certain you will enjoy reading it. I also have to thank Blake Jones and Pea Sermsuk specifically for being able to design the paper so quickly and allow us to create a wonderful Christmas issue, and also Henry Waterson who continues to combine his hilarious Dudley responses (Blake as co-author) with his diligence as Deputy Editor - he has even taken over quiz-writing duties for the time being!

Our cover story could be nothing other than the Paris Shootings of 13th November and the revolutionary cry of ‘liberté, egalité, fraternité!’ sounded by all in these previous weeks.

Facebook was flooded with ‘La Tricolore’ and I’m sure even non-sport fans must have been touched by the show of unity and defiance by the English and French national football teams during England’s 2-0 win at Wembley in November. Sam Chambers recounts the attacks, the refugee crisis and the problem of IS in general all within a wide-ranging current affairs piece.

Nick Harris’ news section contains a combination of world and domestic affairs ranging from topics of government, politics and territorial disputes. As I am sure you are already aware, the new 5p charge for plastic bags has been brought in recently and Piers Mucklejohn explains the reasons behind this and what it is hoped to achieve. Prolific writer Ben Ffrench has covered Turkish politics, government snooping and American gun crime in his articles, while Jacob Lillie climbs into the territorial disputes in the South China Sea. The house singing competition produced a typically high level of ‘enthusiasm’ from everyone involved, and Patrick Cole reviews the deserved victory of School House (I am in Cotton’s before I am accused of bias!). Nick writes his trademark comment pieces about British politics on the topics of David Cameron and the House of Lords.

With Blake as Features Editor our diversity of topics within the section only continues to expand, from a left-wing perspective on Trident to jumbo jets via movie sequels.

Dan Alcock investigates the over saturation of the movie industry, with Calum Egan focusing on Marvel’s dominance and Jonathan Lee celebrating the recent Back to the Future day by seeing how many of the ‘gadgets’ featured in the film have actually come to fruition. Blake explores the merits of play adaptations and ‘modernising’ them, and technology is adeptly covered by Tom Buckle. Saul Rea and Alex Thulin respectively look at Apple and cyber crime. The benefits of renewing Trident are thoroughly evaluated by Douglas Wilson and Pea argues that jumbo jets are soon to be a thing of the past. A rare history article is also featured, written by myself, about perhaps one of the more obscure eras in modern history, the Zulus.

Our ever-popular sport section under Dan Brown continues to broaden its reach with American sport, an area that seems to be forever working its way into the paper. A brace of football articles enclose the section, with Johnny Allison choosing the players to watch at Euro 2016 and the fate of Jose Mourinho predicted by Will Stewart. Themes of sport psychology and tennis make their first ever appearance in the publication. Francesco Cipriani researches Steve Peters’ theories and Calum relives the season of Andy Murray. James Morrell introduces the rather UK-unpopular sport of ice hockey while Jonny Hurrell and Freddie Bermingham discuss the ‘exchange’ of football (both possible meanings!) between America and Britain. Dan meanwhile previews the sport to watch this Christmas from horse riding to the most festive sport of all...darts!

We hope you enjoy the edition, Toby

COVER STORY

Can We Ever Eradicate IS? Sam Chambers looks into the future of the struggle against IS. Continued from cover page and Lebanon with the explicit purpose of reaching the EU via Greece and Italy and then infiltrating further afield into France, Germany and the UK. Their aim is to carry out acts of terror, made possible because those countries accept vast numbers of refugees. This announcement went relatively unnoticed within

ing public pressure on the governments in the West to move into military action beyond airstrikes and launch a full multilateral campaign against this insurgency, this is by no means a foregone conclusion. Firstly, it would be an expensive campaign, as the amount of high-tech equipment, vehicles, and manpower re-

IS wants to destroy the state of Israel the mainstream media, but shouldn’t be overlooked as a very real threat to the civilian population of all countries taking in refugees. Estimates as to the number of ‘refugees’ that are being sent by IS to Europe range reportedly from 4,000 to as many as 20,000 fighters.

So what should be done about the ‘Islamic State’? Whilst there is increas-

quired to take back Iraq and half of Syria would be enormous, and the likely death toll from the fighting would be extremely high. It could be like Afghanistan all over again; the insurgents wait until the coalition leaves and then resumes business as normal.

A full on ‘crusade’ would likely take funding away from arguably a more

important front in this fight: domestic security, and it would raise the terror threat to the UK. War may not be the best option in another sense, for if you look at the history of western intervention in the Middle East, it is clear that we don’t make the situation any better, and in the case of Iraq, only made things worse, as the overthrow of the Ba’athist government allowed an even worse regime to eventually come to power, plunging the country into a state of anarchy. The government remained non-cooperative with the countries that has deposed Saddam Hussein.

It could be argued that the best course of action is to worry about what is going on at home and cut involvement with the conflict. In the event of further expansion by IS, Iran and Israel could quite easily defeat IS with their military power as both of them have nuclear capabilities and well-funded armies.

Both of these countries have reason to try to defeat them, not only on grounds of national security but also religion as IS wants to destroy the state of Israel

because they do not see it as legitimate, and they have also been persecuting Muslims who follow Shia Islam (rather than Sunni Islam, as IS follows).

It is in the interests of countries such as Saudi Arabia, Lebanon, Jordan, and others in the region for there to be stability and confidence in their markets.

Therefore, letting the region sort out its own problem may be the best course of action, as it saves major spending by the government and does not leave chaos

Is this the point where we stop ignoring IS?

behind in the way that it did after the Second Gulf War. The fact of the matter is that this problem surrounding Islamic state is a real threat and it will be around for at least another five years, but we as the West should not kick in the proverbial front door this time, rather take a more conservative and measured approach.

In my opinion it will help to minimise the terror threat in this country and redeem our terrible reputation in the Arab world.

3

THE MARTLET CHRISTMAS ISSUE 8

News POLITICS

The Erdogan Problem

Ben Ffrench examines Turkey’s political struggles in the wake of the ruling AKP party’s latest victory

T

hey have done it again. In an increasingly fractious and divided country, the ruling AKP and their President Recep Tayyip Erdogan have fuelled the flames that led to Turkey’s divisions. Erdogan’s rule is becoming more and more autocratic, and he behaves just like a dictator, declaring his opponents ‘terrorists’ and controlling state media like never before. He rules through fear and threats.

So it is no surprise that in the recent snap election Erdogan led the AKP to yet another victory, regaining a clear, though not quite official majority of 317 seats out of out of 550 in the national assembly. Erdogan insists that the world must respect the election result, saying ‘Why don’t they respect the national will?’ In a regime like his, it is impossible to do this. So how has he established such a strong grip on what looks like a secure, forward-thinking, western democracy?

And is there any hope for Turkey?

I will say this now: November’s election can never be considered legitimate.

International observers have criticised the way the election was conducted, through a climate of fear and violence. In the run up to an election called by the President himself, Erdogan has manipulated his country to perfection, making an AKP victory imminent. On the 2nd September this year, 6 journalists from the Koza-Ipek media group were arrested, with a warrant issued for the chief executive.

Koza-Ipek are a group with many newspapers and Television stations, and are rightly critical of the Erdogan regime.

Erdogan accused them of close links with Islamic cleric Fethullah Gulen, a ‘terrorist’ according to Erdogan who also happens to be the main opposition to his rule and is in exile. This incident came a day after two British vice news journalists, Jake Hanrahan and Philip Pendlebury, reporting on an incident involving the the AKP and the PKK (Kurdish Workers Party) were arrested for ‘aiding a terrorist organisation’.

Sensing a pattern? When speaking the truth becomes aiding terrorists in the eyes of the state, something is seriously wrong.

And with more and more attacks on journalists and news agencies by AKP thugs, this is just the tip of the iceberg.

Intimidation and harassment of the press have become a common feature in Turkey; Erdogan has a lot to hide and it wouldn’t do to get unbiased news coverage.

But the media is not Erdogan’s only target.

Erdogan and his AKP party target the elec-

torate too. Erdogan frightens the people of Turkey into submission, through threats of terrorism. He links the peaceful, pro Kurdish group the HDP (People’s Democratic Party) to Kurdish insurgents, perpetuating fear. He also appears to suggest that unless the electorate votes for the AKP, bomb attacks like the recent one in Ankara will continue, portraying himself as a defender of Turkey against the PKK, when in fact it’s in his interest for the attacks to continue.

He feeds off the ethnic conflict between Kurd and Turk, suggesting the Kurds to be in favour of the PKK, a kurdish separatist group who Turkey and the EU call guilty of terrorism. Recent crackdowns have deliberately provoked the group, reigniting the conflict and fuelling more fear and divisions. He and Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoglu have also even dared to blame the recent Ankara terrorist attack on the PKK, when at the time of Davutoglu’s statement on the issue, evidence had already proved IS to be to blame. He should be ashamed of fuelling ethnic divisions in his own fragile country. But he isn’t; this war on the PKK will only benefit him in the long run.

If this is the case for the PKK, then they are not the only ones guilty of terrorism.

Recep Tayyip Erdogan: Turkey’s Master Dictator to clamp down his iron control on Turkey, aiming to achieve what HDP co chair Selahattin Demirtas describes as a ‘constitutional dictatorship’. In a sinister, chilling threat to the electorate, and democracy, Erdogan hinted last year that he ‘will not assume the traditional role of President in Turkish politics’. This very thinly veiled threat confirms what we all feared: Erdogan aims to be his country’s dictator. Erdogan aims to cement his legacy as Turkey’s greatest politician, with a system making him, as the President, chief executive, with

November’s election can never be considered legitimate The recent Ankara attack was attributed to IS, but many other HDP rallies have been targeted by right wing suicide bombers, with the culprit unknown. On 5 June this year a rally in Diyarbakir, led by the HDP was the subject of a bomb attack, coming just two days before the June elections were due to happen. 4 were killed, with over 100 injured. Suspicions again lay on IS.They may be right. It is in IS’ interest to increase attacks on the Kurds, who are bravely fighting them in Iraq and Syria and the group has kept playing the PKK and the government off in the three way battle for supremacy. However, some had a different view. Like in Ankara, the attacks muted the HDP election campaign. Rallies had to be cancelled because of fear of violence. And we all know who benefits.

But it isn’t enough. Erdogan is moving

much greater power over the government, and a move away from the ceremonial role that the President has played in recent decades. It would give him much greater power and control over Turkey, and will probably be put to a referendum in 2016.

He would undoubtedly win.

And this is without one crucial factor: IS. Yet again, the sinister terror group is active in Turkey, as recent attacks have proved.

The border between Syria and Turkey is weakly controlled, and IS fighters could easily slip through the confusion of the refugee crisis. And they have so much to gain.

Turkey’s war on the PKK is more of a terror threat than the Kurdish workers party will ever be. The more Erdogan fights them, the less stable Turkey becomes. And if Turkey’s resources are wasted on internal wars, they miss the much deadlier external threat. ISIS

can capitalise on this to great effect. Turkey is in enormous danger.

But there is hope. In Turkey the HDP is a voice for the voiceless and the oppressed. It is also a strong voice for the Kurds, and Turkish peace lies in their hands. With more than 10% of votes, and over 60 seats, they can save Turkey. Many times they have conducted peace negotiations between the PKK and the government, and they can do it again.

The AKP have claimed that the Kurdish insurgents deserve no part in the peace process - this is wrong. It is necessary for peace, and to calm ethnic tensions. They can and will get a solution. The PKK aim is for greater Kurdish autonomy in the southeast - is this not achievable? Erdogan knows deep down that he could achieve it if he wanted to. Erdogan will try to push on with his terror seeking war- pushing through legislation giving him greater and greater power - only the HDP can stop him.

But it is time for Erdogan to go. He has caused Turkey a lot of harm, ruling through fear and divisions, and destabilising a once strong country. He has presided over years of corruption and human rights violations, which can’t be covered in one article. The jailing of military officers for ‘plotting a military coup’ (no good evidence) is an example.

Erdogan became President in 2014. Under the current ruling, he is able to serve two five year terms. He could rule till 2024.

Turkey cannot take another ten years of Erdogan. It is time his power came to an end.

There is no easy way to do this; in Turkish politics, the President receives almost no scrutiny or accountability. But at the next election, the AKP must go. Parties like the HDP can do this, by exposing Erdogan and the AKP for who they really are. This will be difficult - the party receives idol worship from some. But it is possible. And it must be achieved, for the sake of Turkey.

4

THE MARTLET CHRISTMAS ISSUE 8

News DOMESTIC

Want a plastic bag? You’ll have to pay up.

Piers Mucklejohn investigates the introduction of the plastic bag fee, why it was put into place and under what circumstances it applies.

A

s of the 5th of October 2015, a new plastic bag fee of 5 pence has been enforced in England, making us the last nation in the UK to do so. The number of plastic bags handed out by supermarkets during 2014 in England rose to 7.64 billion (200 million more than in 2013). The new law means that whenever you shop somewhere with 250 or more full-time employees, you need to pay for your plastic bags as well.

Ministers think that the introduction of the 5p charge will stop shoppers from using as many bags and encourage them to reuse old ones. Some campaigners argue that one big reason to add the 5p charge is to lower the amount of plastic bags that are thrown away, blighting the countryside and streets. Plastic bags can also damage wildlife on land and in the sea, not to mention the sea itself. The coastline is also harmed by plastic bag littering. The government hopes that the change will lead to an 80% reduction in plastic bag usage in supermarkets, and a 50% drop on the high street. Over the next ten years it is hoped that the charge will save £60million in litter clean-up costs and £13million in carbon savings, which is the amount of money spent on carbon. Home deliveries from companies with over 250 employees are also affected by the charge.

There are two easy ways to avoid it: visiting smaller shops with fewer than 250 full-time employees will mean that plastic bags at that shop will not cost unless the shop has a special policy about it, and the second, and most obvious, solution is to reuse plastic bags. The government has set up an official Twitter hashtag to pro-

mote the policy: #reusebags - a very simple solution.

There are a few exceptions to the charge even if the shop has more than 250 employees. Paper bags are exempt from the charge along with any plastic bags bought in airports or onboard trains, aeroplanes or ships. Bags containing only

The charge will save £60million in litter cleanup costs and £13million in carbon savings

certain items are also exempt from the 5p charge. You will not have to pay for the bag if it contains: unwrapped food, fish (alive or dead), raw meat, prescription medicines, seeds, bulbs and flowers or uncovered blades.

The charge is not a tax and therefore the money will go to the retailers. However, the government requires that they are informed of how the proceeds are spent each year by all retailers that charge for their plastic bags. Although it is not compulsory, some of the money is expected to be donated to charities and other

good causes. Over the next ten years the government hopes the charge will raise £730m for charitable causes. Wales, which has already implemented this change, has already generated millions of pounds for good causes.

Some people have raised concern over whether or not biodegradable bags should be exempt from the charge since they shouldn’t damage wildlife. The Department for Environment, Food, & Rural Affairs, however, has said, ‘There is currently no exemption for biodegradable bags, but we are reviewing industry standards for the biodegradability of lightweight plastics. We also need to know which types of biodegradable bags could be recycled during normal waste management and recycling operations, and which types would need to be identified and separated. We will publish a report on the findings from the review in due course.’

Shops charging for their plastic bags are also to be inspected regularly. Inspectors can visit shops or stores and make test purchases. They can also speak to staff and demand records. Inspectors are allowed to carry out these inspections as ‘secret shoppers’ and aren’t required to give warning in advance. If inspectors find a problem they can issue a non-compliance notice stating what you must do to fix the problem, order you to publicise (through adverts in local papers or posters in your store) that you’ve broken the law, what your penalty was and how you’re now complying.

They can also impose a variable or fixed penalty. These fines depend on what rule you have broken, there is a fixed fine

of £200 and a variable maximum fine of £5,000 if you have not charged for bags appropriately, a fixed fine of £100 and a variable maximum fine of £5,000 for not keeping records and a fixed fine of £100 and a variable maximum fine of £5,000 for not supplying records. In addition to this, giving false or misleading information to, or otherwise obstructing or failing to assist the local authority can result in a maximum penalty of £20,000. Fines are reduced by 50% if paid within 28 days but increased by 50% if you fail to pay within 56 days.

The change was sparked partly by a public survey which showed that 62% of people in England think that 5p is a reasonable price for a plastic bag. This

The charge is not a tax and therefore the money will go to the retailers

shows that, although many people dislike the change, the majority of English citizens agree on the pricing. The plastic bag charge may be a slight inconvenience in everyday life but, at least in the eyes of the government, it’s for the greater good.

5

THE MARTLET CHRISTMAS ISSUE 8

News

The government is breaking down the barriers of privacy, step by step

GOVERNMENT

The Surveillance Revolution Ben Ffrench investigates the alarming growth of GCHQ.

T

hey have access to everything. Emails, phones, calls and texts. And following the revelations of Edward Snowden and Julian Assange, why do we put up with this? The government has gone far enough. But people either don’t care, or realise, and the government is getting away with ‘blue murder’ as Tory rebel David Davis likens it. Recently Home secretary Theresa May unveiled the new investigatory powers, the next step in the infiltration of our privacy.

The bill is horrifically intrusive. The 300 page, odious and deliberately hard to read document requires internet and phone companies to store records of websites visited for 12 months by every citizen to be accessed by police, security services and other bodies. In other words, anyone and everyone can see what websites you have been on. In the wake of the recent Ashley Madison scandal, where a list of email addresses of all the users were leaked, is this really appropriate? As we have seen, exposure like this can mean shame and embarrassment to many. The bill also makes explicit in law the security services’ powers to collect and hack communications data.

This is wrong. When the phone hacking scandal came, everybody was rightly in uproar at the media intrusion. This is no different. It gives the government and security services access to a whole range of inappropriate data, and has no place in a developed country.

It’s got too bad already. In 2014, there were over 517,000 authorisations of requests from the police and security services for communications data. Does this

translate to 517,000 crimes? Of course not.

The powers on the table are not justified and are over the top. The new investigatory powers bill is full of gross excesses and abuses, and these are just some of them.

This is uncharted territory, taking us one step closer to the reality of 1984. This might seem over the top, but it is all in the same direction. Full, round the clock surveillance of all citizens. But this is nothing new. It has been going on for years, and the government’s mission creep has

ting to do much more intrusive things.

The Government has been doing much more than we ever thought, all behind our back. Since 1995, the NDNAD (UK national DNA database) means that DNA samples from 2.7 million people (5.2% of the population) are stored on the police database, despite many not being guilty of any crime. MTI (mastering the internet) is an initiative that began the snooping process, slowly moving its tentacles over the whole of the internet. Finally, this

This is harking one step closer to the reality of 1984 become ruthlessly efficient.

At a little known address in Cheltenham, the most dangerous threat to people’s freedom lurks. It is home to the powerful and the unaccountable; that’s right, you probably guessed it. This is the home of GCHQ (Government Communications Headquarters). It is deadly powerful, with full control over what you get to see, and all the media around you.

The government is inhibiting the right to freedom of speech, and controlling our life. A look on GCHQ’s website reveals a carefully spun and tightly run operation, full of propaganda. This is the reality for Britain now. And with the security threat level at ‘Severe’, spooks at GCHQ are get-

year the government drafted the Communications Data Bill, dubbed the ‘Snooper’s Charter’, continuing the surveillance of people’s private lives in phones, emails, social media and all the usual data. It represents far too much control, and has been slowly creeping up on us.

But the biggest danger of this defeats the whole point of surveillance: keeping people safe on the internet.

The Government insists that companies such as Whatsapp and My Space should not use end to end encryption. But as a leading group of computer experts have argued, this is the only thing protecting the privacy and security of people’s details. With these locks removed, a whole

range of groups: businesses, criminals and terrorists can use these details for their own advantage. Think of all those spam emails you get - these are the result of details getting into other companies’ hands, and are given to them, presumably for large amounts of money, from other countries who have your details.

The Conservative party has interestingly gone on the offensive with this: Tory party emails now land in people’s emails every five minutes. This is bad enough, but with encryption lifted, spam emails from businesses and fraudsters would increase. This may be why the Government want encryption abandoned: they can hack your details. And with an increase in cybercrime, this would not bode well.

And the Government’s new ‘Snooper’s Charter’ (oh sorry, the Investigatory Powers Bill) will also have significant costs. And in a spiteful two fingers to the electorate, Internet Service Providers told a Commons select committee that broadband costs would have to go up tenfold. And according to home secretary Theresa May herself, the bill would cost £247 million to implement in a tenmonth period, which strikes me as a disgusting waste of money, considering the misery of what many have to go through on a daily basis as a result of the government’s austerity programme.

So there we have it. The extent of surveillance is unimaginable. GCHQ has risen to a w far beyond its importance in keeping people safe. Labour needs to act quickly and join the Lib Dems in opposing the bill before it’s too late. We are all fed up of the flip-flopping displayed by timid, status quo politicians such as Andy Burnham - the shadow home secretary first strongly agreed with the bill, then soon later said he had ‘concerns’. The investigatory powers bill is just the latest in a string of privacy breaching bills, and this is probably only a precursor for something worse. The right to privacy is a key principle in modern Britain and must be upheld.

6

THE MARTLET CHRISTMAS ISSUE 8

News

Does ‘Cameron-ism’ Really Exist?

COMMENT

Nick Harris investigates the somewhat disguised ideology of our Prime Minister.

T

he NHS continues to be an increasingly common discussion point for the party leaders in the General Election, but going to hospital could be more of a nightmare than a lifesaver. With progressive cuts being announced and overcrowding becoming a prevalent issue, can the NHS still provide adequate healthcare for all the citizens of the UK? From December 2014 to this January, budget cuts have to the NHS cancer budget and other departments have been announced. Funding to 25 different cancer drugs and treatments has been cut due to the NHS overspending £100 million in 2014-2015. NHS England stated that they had to make ‘difficult decisions’ so that they could fund new research projects. Professor Clark, Chair of the Cancer Drug Fund said, ‘There are drugs that do not offer sufficient clinical benefit so we simply cannot go on funding those.’ The NHS will supply such medication to cancer sufferers in serious cases only. However, the fund will increase next year to £340 million to reduce the chance of overspending happening again.

Over-stretched and under-resourced hospitals are among those that have suffered the most. In some cases fire engines have to be used as makeshift ambulances and patients have to wait on trolleys for hours on end for their medical examination. The Fire Brigade Union was outraged by these faults on behalf of the NHS and has commented that the use of the fire brigade as a makeshift ambulance service has diverted firefighters from doing their own work to cover for mistakes by the NHS. The Fire Brigade Union General Secretary, Matt Wrack, said: ‘The A&E crisis is a direct result of the government’s failed austerity agenda. The public are being put at risk because the government have cut staff, resources and equipment in both the NHS and fire and rescue service.’

Amid the cuts and the pressure facing the NHS came a hardly-surprising fall in life expectancy in people above 85. According to the Office of National Statistics, Women who live over 85 are expected to live less. This has decreased from 6.81 years in 2009-2011 to 6.79 years in 2011-2013. Over the past four years there has been a £3.5 billion cut to adult social care; with 16.5% of the population being

over 65 as of 2011, cuts to their care is potentially disastrous. This is going on at a time when the number of people receiving state care outside of hospital is dwindling. This raises concerns over how well elderly people are looked after outside of hospital, and whether this is bordering on neglect.

‘We know we need to work differently to respond to the challenge of our ageing population.’ The spokesman from the Department of Health said. ‘Our Care Act

What is Cameronism and how will it be remembered? and the £5.3 billion Better Care Fund, the first ever national programme to join up health and social care, will focus resources on helping people to live independent-

Cameron woos the Chinese

David Cameron has been Prime Minister since 2010 ly which will save money and prevent people from needing more support.’

Furthermore, many people check into hospital with very minor issues such as coughs and common colds, which wastes time and money. Such patients are being advised go to the chemist before hospital. These crowds coming into hospital with negligible complaints bring longer waiting times for those who actually need urgent medical treatment - a waste of money and a waste of time. Individuals who have a problem that does not require immediate medical attention are also being instructed to call 111 instead of 999 - the number for non-urgent issues.

In addition, waiting times in Accident and Emergency are at their worst for a decade. On top of this, yet more problems are spreading around the health service; more departments are facing setbacks rather than technological triumphs. For

example, the number of operations that were cancelled from November 2014 to January 2015 was up by a third - which represents a return to 2013 cancellation rates and a step backwards.

Another problem is that the proportion of in-patients waiting longer than 18 weeks for treatment rose to 12.5% in November - the highest level since this target was introduced in 2008. John Appleby, the chief economist of the health charity, The King’s Fund, said: ‘While recent attention has focused on the problems faced by A&E units, performance against waiting time targets and other indicators has continued to worsen.’

In conclusion, the NHS is indeed facing huge problems. Suffering budget cuts and departmental issues, the NHS is losing ground. Though it saves lives on a daily basis, the government must crack down on the issues challenging its progress.

7

THE MARTLET CHRISTMAS ISSUE 8

News COMMENT

Does the House of Lords Need Reform?

Nick Harris debates whether our Upper House is out of date.

O

n the 21st of October the House of Lords blocked a financial bill which had been approved by the Commons, breaking a precedent of not interfering with the monetary decisions of the elected house which has been established for centuries. This just one example of the problems which have faced every government over time in dealing with such an out-dated institution. So does it need reform and if so what is the future of the House of Lords?

Throughout political history, the Lords had retained a prominent role although it’s power began to wane over the 19th Century as more and more common people were enfranchised and the Commons gained more control over the government. A symbolic act of curbing the Lords’ power was during Lloyd George’s chancellorship in 1909 in which, in his budget, he had proposed sweeping new taxes on the aristocracy.

Since at that time the aristocracy was the House of Lords they were quite understandably very irritated and were set to block the bill. However, instead of acquiescing to their request, Lloyd George threatened to flood the House with Liberal peers in order to pass his budget and so, fearing this, the Lords let his bill pass allowing the seeds of the welfare state to be sown and also setting the precedent of the Lords not denying the Commons’ will on financial matters.

The next step against Britain’s aristocracy came with the House of Lords Act of 1999 under Tony Blair’s premiership. This act ended hereditary right of some peers for passing on their seats and removed all but 92 of the originally hereditary peers who remained as life peers. This left only life

The problems with the UK’s upper house have reached breaking point peers, appointed by the government, and the Lords Spiritual who hold the right to their seats as Bishops of the Church of England. The following decade was, however, relatively quiet on the subject as no-one could think of a way of reforming them which would satisfy all groups involved. A few ideas were proposed such as an entirely elected Senate or a partially elected chamber retaining some appointed peers and the Lords Spiritual.

The most recent attempt to reform the House of Lords came in 2012. As part of the Coalition agreement, the Liberal Democrats had been allowed to introduce a bill which would cut the size of the house in half and have

Nick clegg made some attempts to reform the Lords during his tenure as Deputy PM

majority of peers elected using the single-transferable vote for 15 year terms whilst retaining a percentage of the peers to be appointed by the government and a reduced share of the Lords Spiritual. However, when Nick Clegg introduced this bill in the Commons, David Cameron, probably in fear of offending too many financiers, friends and relatives, got cold feet about the idea and withdrew the support of his MPs from the reforming law.

So that has left us where we are today. With an upper chamber which is particularly unique in the world: completely undemocratic and far too large. It does need change. The only question is how and the main points often turned over are about whether the Lords should be fully or partially elected and whether some appointed and religious Peers should remain.

Our neighbours in Europe have this problem too. The French upper house is elected by a collection of rural and urban officials such as councillors and mayors whilst the German upper house, the Bundesrat, remains entirely appointed by the national government.

For those who favour an entirely elected upper house, it is only the Americans who seem to have got it right with an elected chamber of exactly 100 seats.

So, it’s not only us with the problem.

The fact is that it would be wrong to let go of the House of Lords as it is today as that would be an affront to our heritage, whilst even the staunchest of pro-

elected House of Lords campaigners would concede that any change needs to be phased in or risk offending too many groups. The most stable course of action would most likely be to begin by putting a term limit of 15 or so years on what are now called life peerages.

This would allow some of the mass of peers to shift out of the Lords through both arithmetic and natural causes and once the numbers had thinned down somewhat we could hold our first elections to the upper house, most likely of a small number to start with.

Then the next election, once you had fewer unelected peers, you could raise the number of elected ones and so on.

In this way, the number of unelected Lords would slowly diminish whilst the number of elected ones would increase. Once you had a number of elected peers you were happy with, you could iron out the other issues such as the retention of life peers (or rather 15 year peers now) or not, whether to keep the Lords Spiritual or not, and other cosmetic issues such as it still be called the House of Lords. Although this would be a slow and arduous route to fixing what is in essence a broken upper house, it would be far easier and face far less opposition than tackling it head on and trying to suddenly supplant the peers with a sudden upheaval of 50% of them suddenly being elected.

It would be something that would take a long time but in the long run, most likely worthwhile.

8

THE MARTLET CHRISTMAS ISSUE 8

News WORLD

Contention in the South China Sea Jacob Lillie examines disputes in the South China Sea and what it means for the countries involved

Q

uarrels surrounding the ownership of territories in the South China Sea have been an issue for centuries, but have only heated up within the last 10 years.

Such territorial claims have been a pervasive cause of tension between countries in the region, all of whom believe that they have sovereignty over these areas. Within this body of water, there are three major areas of contention: The Spratly Islands, The Paracel Islands and Scarborough Shoal. Fuelled by claims of mineral and oil wealth in these areas, countries have been keen to claim them, even if they don’t fall within their territory.

Following the handover of the Spratlys and Paracels to the Chinese at the end of the Second World War, China has tried to assert its territorial dominance in the region and push aside rival claims to these lands. Under the basis of UNCLOS (Law of the Sea Convention), it is valid that the Chinese should have sovereignty over the Paracels. But likewise, they fall within Vietnam’s territorial waters as well.

But under the basis of this legislation, it seems that China’s claims to the Spratlys and Scarborough Shoal are invalid. The Spratlys fall under the lands of the Philippines, Brunei and Malaysia, and Scarborough Shoal is solely Filipino property (claims from Malaysia and Brunei are so small that they are almost neg-

ligible). Thus it would seem China asserting possession of certain areas is illegal.

But China justifies its supposed ownership of these islands through the “NineDash Line”. A self-asserted boundary which stretches from its south coast and encompasses all three territories, which it views as “integral” to China, claiming the vast majority of the South China Sea for itself in the process. The line itself is so wide reaching that it strays incredibly close to neighbouring countries to the point where it infringes on their legally defined waters. Disputes of territory wouldn’t be a problem if progress and negotiation was made suitably through diplomatic channels, but China has been regarded by many to have bullied and strong armed its way into achieving its aims instead.

Whilst violent military confrontation is not something that has occurred recently on a large scale, there have been various flashpoints in the not so distant past. Take for example in 1974, where China seized the Spratlys and killed 70 Vietnamese soldiers in the process. But much discontent has been fueled in recent years by what some would argue as attempts at colonisation in order to cement China’s claims such as in July 2012 when China erected a barrier to Scarborough Shoal, at which is has been turning away foreign ships since. Subsequently the Philippines has said it would take the Chinese to a UN tribunal concerning the

The Territorial Claims of the Various Nations

issue but there is little that it can do as China would not be compelled to abide by any ruling.

Then in May 2014, it came to light that China had built an oil rig within the Paracel Islands where a Chinese ship allegedly rammed and sunk a Vietnamese vessel. These actions drew criticism from ASEAN leaders who dubbed it as a “serious concern”. Similarly in May 2015, China was spotted building an airstrip on reclaimed land in the Spratly Islands.

China here has reclaimed 3000 acres of land in one year whilst other countries combined have reclaimed 100 acres in 12 years.

However the most recent, and probably most significant, development came in October 2015 where a US Naval vessel sailed 12 miles away from the Spratlys.

This evoked a slightly bitter response from the Chinese who said that the US ‘Should not act blindly or make trouble out of nothing’. Clearly it is evident that the dynamics and implications of such disputes stretch further than just within the region.

Many countries such as the Philippines look towards the US as their main ally against Chinese aggression. Likewise the US looks to these nations in order to try and reduce Chinese influence in the region from overshadowing its own. If China is able to carry on reclaiming land and build more airstrips, it will greatly increase its military capability in the region. Through such methods like warning China to ‘not elbow aside’ other countries though, it has achieved very little. A war of rhetoric doesn’t seem like the right solution to fight such a regime.

But really, there is little that they can do without resulting in confrontation, and neither side has the appetite for such an event. And what about the people in the specified countries themselves? What do they think? Certainly, there has been

a stirring up of anti-Chinese sentiment throughout, like anti-Chinese protests in Vietnam in 2014. Many feel that China is using its regional power in a way that pushes other countries out of contention by force and intimidation, which is something that needs to be addressed if China wants to become a truly respected and influential country, and not one that relies solely on “hard power”.

If it carries on as such, it will be increasingly feared and resented. Such suspicion and fear threatens to undermine regional stability by encouraging escalation. If countries put more and more resources into defending their claims, the risk of a certain incident occurring whether intentional or unintentional, could lead to an uncontrollable spiral of events which would not bode well for security in the region. But China continues to push aside fellow countries, through actions such as pressuring oil companies not to engage in exploration with Vietnam and Philippines in the South China Sea. By having such an ability to hinder and hassle these countries, it is little wonder that they have done little about it.

With weak naval capabilities in both Vietnam and the Philippines, defence of these territories in the past has born little success. Looking past this idea of having the ability to overpower other countries, it is important to note that China is also still a major trading partner for all these countries. Upsetting her wouldn’t be economically rational.

But at cost to national pride and security, is it wise for countries to allow themselves to be constantly marginalised? Or is it time for them to come together and find a suitable way to deal with this problem? As China tightens its grip over these territories though, any chance of a breakthrough seems to be slowly fading away.

9

THE MARTLET CHRISTMAS ISSUE 8

News

SCHOOL

Solos, Harmonies and Ndebelean Chanting Patrick Cole recounts this year’s House Singing

F

or the third time since I’ve been at Abingdon, I find myself writing an article on the House Singing competition, the recurrent highlight of my winter term. Unlike the competition itself, which has evolved from the block of unison three years ago to include harmony, soloists and Zimbabwean chanting, I shall stick to a tried and trusted formula and go through each house in turn.

First though, a mention of the adjudicator: Peter Allwood. Peter has been head of music at multiple schools, as well as a composer of musical theatre, and has done work for one of Britain’s top national youth musical theatre organisations.

Mr Allwood said of the competition as a whole that is was a ‘high order indeed’ and stated ‘any one of the houses could be winners’.

The first to rise to the challenge of their rivals was James’ house. With them having to cut down on the famous guitar introduction so it was clear it was a singing competition, we got an energetic start and subsequently energetic performance from all the singers of the house; such power and surety that I’m sure that if it were a combat situation they would all have been survivors.

Next into the hall we had Austin’s house. Another really organised and energetic performance, perhaps the only disappointment being the (admittedly wise) decision not to attempt the octave

jump going into the climax of the piece.

Of course it was up to the adjudicator as to whether they were in fact the greatest or even the best.

Returning champions, Southwell Sander’s, came next and, to quote myself from last year, ‘I’m still bemused by the dog’, which seems to be a certain motif of theirs and they certainly had style. Their

clicks, claps, harmony, housemasters, and percussion: the works.

With no one to stop them, Lower School came next. Starting with a smaller ensemble, growing to the whole house and ending with a magnificent solo performer who will hopefully go into Morgan’s house, it was clear that everyone was ‘having a good time’. As an audience, we were certainly ‘having a ball’. That is to say it was an energetic, fun and highly entertaining performance. Were I the adjudicator, I would be hard pressed not to give the competition to Lower School, if not at least second or third. Unfortunately I’m not, I just write sarcastic commentaries.

Standing in the wings as my house was next on, I was only able to hear Christodoulou’s as they boasted of the previous night’s exploits. From where I was however, it was clearly an accurate performance of quite an amusing song choice

One cannot say Franklin’s weren’t innovative - it was the first time I saw them not stand in a perfect square

song was captured effortlessly and it was a very strong performance, including, as Mr Allwood mentioned, ‘a particularly brave opening’.

Following on, the ‘night’ had come for Cotton’s, who produced a very accurate rendition of their song, right down to their triangle, which did its best at times not to ‘stand by’ its player. All in all Cotton’s gave quite an impressive performance; they threw everything they had into it. We had

with some successful harmony and dynamic contrast, thought the adjudicator did think ‘perhaps the song could have been sung in a higher key’.

It wasn’t the end of everything, but it was my house on next. The adjudicator said that we ‘really made [him] sit up and listen’ and, a completely unbiased member of Morgan’s staff, who I asked to hold my pad while we were on, kindly filled the section I had left for Morgan’s with: ‘We

Woz Great’.

Attempting to best Christodoulou’s anecdote by telling us what they did during the summer, was Crescent house. This performance was a lot of fun and clearly enjoyed by the majority of the house. The adjudicator referred to it as both ‘very precise’ and ‘not quite together’. Despite this confusion, he did think the ‘harmonies really worked well’.

Penultimately, and clearly keen to make the competition go forward, was School House. I count myself as fortunate to be the only member of my house inside the theatre for this performance as it was truly impressive. It was so outrageously different that I’m sure I’m not alone in thinking that it felt like cheating!

Needless to say it wasn’t, but it will certainly have changed the landscape of the competition going forward. Having only witnessed three years of House Singing, I may not be the authority on the subject, but I’m not sure any house has had a drum section, tribal dress and northern Ndebele singing.

With an extremely tough act to follow, someone we needed was Franklin’s house, who have won or placed for the last two years. They gave a really good performance, like every house, and were a fabulous way to end the competition. Although they did not have a triangle part or sing to us about trains leaving South Africa, one cannot say Franklin’s weren’t innovative. It was the first time I saw them not stand in a perfect square.

In the end though, it was time for the adjudication. Mr Allwood gave a comment on each house, including some very well received constructive criticism. As many people could have guessed from the sheer difference of the performance, School House ran away with the trophy. Unfortunately the adjudicator declined to call a second and third place, even when I went and privately asked after the competition.

Mr Allwood said that he ‘thinks it was clear from his comments’, in which case I’m sure you’d all agree Morgan’s came second.

10

THE MARTLET CHRISTMAS ISSUE 8

News

WORLD

Pleading The Second T

Ben Ffrench looks into the chilling factors behind America’s gun problem

his year, in the first nine months alone, 9,956 people have been killed as a result of gun violence in the USA. A further 20,000 have been injured, and there have been 45 shootings in schools, according to the gun violence archive. In addition to this, there have been 294 mass shootings this year, more than one per day. To a reader like you, these are just figures on a page from a far away country, but for Americans all over the world, these terrifying statistics are the frightening reality. There is something yet more chilling: President Barack Obama cannot do anything about it.

Why does America have such a problem with guns? It is unrivalled in its firearm fatality rates among first world countries, and is only beaten by violence hotspots such as Venezuela and Colombia. The frustration is summed up well by President Obama, who, after yet another shooting in Oregon, said the following: ‘Somehow this has become routine. The reporting is routine. My response at the

podium ends up being routine. It cannot be this easy for someone to get his or her hands on a gun.’ But it is. Obama is right: gun deaths have become routine; part of America’s daily life. He came close to the end of the speech with this: ‘I hope and pray I don’t have to come out (to offer condolences)... I can’t guarantee that.’

Nowhere is this more evident than in America’s gun lobby. The USA is a country controlled by vested interests and this is one of the most powerful. The NRA (National Rifle Association) is said to have around 4.5 million members, although this figure is disputed. This is just one of many gun lobby groups con-

How many more massacres will it take before America acts?

The message is clear. Obama has cited gun crime as his greatest frustration in office, and he is still fighting, coming out with this speech for example. Yet he knows he is powerless and will fail to change anything - as he said in his speech, the opposition is great.

trolling American politics. Every time there is a gun massacre, the NRA will rear its head and nothing will be done to tackle the gun problem. The group has great control over senators, influencing their actions when congress votes on gun control, meaning that even the most

moderate of reforms are given short shrift. Through carefully controlled intimidation, the NRA keeps close tabs on politicians. The group even ranks US lawmakers on their record relating to gun rights, with scores ranging from A to F. The vast majority in the house and the senate are ranked A, with politicians tightly controlled by their eagerness to gain good scores. More than 50% of the House have A as their rating, with a figure just shy of this in the senate. Senators sometimes prove their allegiance by donating lots of money to the cause, with some giving almost $10,000 in donations. With a system like this, it is at best improbable that any change could occur.

But the NRA may not really be as it seems. The organisation claims to be a voice for 4.5 million gun owners, but this appears not to be the case. According to papers such as The Guardian, the NRA is run by a small, tight-knit company of executives who decide who gets nominated for the key positions,

11

THE MARTLET CHRISTMAS ISSUE 8

and NRA high command is believed to be elected by just 10% of its members.

This is not as democratic as the NRA have suggested. There are believed to be many in the NRA who support gun control measures. Evidence suggests this. A Pew poll found 58% of Americans to be favourable to the NRA. A further 85% of Americans were found to be in favour of gun control and basic, moderate measures opposed by the NRA, such as background checks on gun licences, indicating a crossover of NRA members and gun control supporters. The NRA appears to be a fraud, calling its legitimacy and credibility into question.

As the title of this article would suggest, the Second Amendment plays a crucial role in holding back change. Gun lobbyists and congressmen will often be ‘pleading the second’ in order to cement pro-gun laws. The Second Amendment is an immovable bedrock in America, a proud constitutional feature that is almost immortal. It states that, ‘A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed’. It is crucial to defending the principle of gun ownership, and has often been cited in recent years for this purpose. However, according to John Paul Stevens, a former associate justice of the Supreme Court, this is misinterpreted. Although the regulation of the

US government on gun control is limited, the power of local authorities and states to deal with it is not, and the ownership of guns is only allowed in the military or as part of a people’s militia, according to the Second Amendment. Here again one of the main arguments against gun laws is called into question.

America’s action on gun control so far has been extremely poor; what they do now will decide the fate of millions. The odds are almost impossible but President Barack Obama should, and will, keep trying. How many more massacres will it take before America acts? The message will get through eventually, but America cannot allow more blood on its hands.

The main arguments and oppositions to gun control are null and void. These can and must be dealt with. Some politicians present the most flawed arguments on gun control. Donald Trump has claimed that there will always be dangerous young men who lose control, and there is nothing that can be done. This is obviously wrong. There is much more that can be done. Young men can’t kill people if they can’t access guns. The reputation and credibility of the NRA is not unassailable. With them taken down, senators will be obliged far less to follow the NRA high command’s wishes. With greater education, we can win greater control over gun laws and the death rate will go down. It is time to act.

12

THE MARTLET CHRISTMAS ISSUE 8

Features FILM

The Death of Originality

Dan Alcock asks whether the film industry is over saturated by sequels and reboots

E

very year seems to be better than the last when it comes to films. In 2015 alone, we’ve been treated to Avengers: Age of Ultron, Jurassic World, Spectre, just to name a few, and soon of course we will witness a huge movie event: Star Wars: The Force Awakens. However, there is a plague looming over the film industry: all of these movies are sequels, reboots, or already part of a well known franchise, and this seems to be the norm now.

Is the film market oversaturated with these types of films? What factors lead to a successful film? Is this the end of creativity in the movie market?

There are several reasons as to why these films are so successful. You may think it’s due to positive feedback and good reviews but, while these are very important factors, they don’t always apply. For example, each Transformers film has generally received mixed to poor reviews, but has made a huge amount of money. If you look at the amount they made in the box office, however, you start to see a pattern.

The first grossed $710 million in 2007, the second $836 million in 2009, and the third $1.123bn in 2011 which now makes it the 11th highest grossing film of all time worldwide. The first films did well due to a huge budget; this provided the film with amazing top-of-the-market special effects, and enough money for a big advertising campaign. People of all ages wanted to see the film: both adults and children had watched Transformers cartoons and played with the toys.

Everyone who had been fans want to see their favourite alien robots on the screen

again. The sequel made more, as people trusted the franchise and enjoyed the first, and the third installment excelled further since the movie franchise had a big reputation for producing fun-filled films.

Compare this against a big budget film that wasn’t based on a franchise: 47 Ronin. Heard of it? Chances are you probably haven’t, or if you have it’s unlikely you saw it. That’s because, to put it simply, no one saw it. With a budget of $225 million, and starring action hero Keanu Reeves, it only grossed a measly $151 million at the box office.

Why? Well, despite a big advertising campaign, no one cared. The film was a fictional story based on a non-fictional

how a film does. Word of mouth and general audience buzz can pull people into the cinemas. The horror genre is generally a troubled section of the movie industry, often lacking originality, and almost always resorting to cheap jump-scares. However, in 2007 a film came out that breathed fresh life into it.

Paranormal Activity introduced a sort of film that hadn’t been seen before, it mastered the ‘found footage’ style of film with CCTV-like images being the basis of of the movie.

It was the subtleties that made this film creepy and genuinely unsettling. It was exciting and new and like nothing else anyone had seen before. People began spreading the word and daring

It’s not necessarily the big budget that draws in the audience character, but apart from that it was completely original. However, there was no draw to it, nothing special about it.

Take that into account and the fact that it was universally panned by critics means there was just no reason for your average cinema-goer to pay £10 for a cinema ticket and see it. Ultimately, this explains that people want to see something they know: maybe due to nostalgia, or due to the trust they already have in the franchise. It’s not necessarily the big budget that draws in the audience.

Critical reception can make or break

each other to go and see this ‘horror masterpiece.’ Plus, it was backed up by generally positive reviews from critics.

With a laughably small budget of $15000, Paranormal Activity managed to gross almost $200million.

According to Box Office Mojo, the top ten highest grossing films worldwide in 2014 included at number one Transformers: Age of Extinction with a revenue of $1.1billion. The next nine were all films that were either based on a book or comic, a sequel, or a reboot.

Number 10 is Interstellar, which had

big name, Christopher Nolan, attached as director, and a big budget to draw people into the cinema. The Academy Award winner for best picture that year was Birdman, which opened to huge critical acclaim. But with a low budget, it was only the 65th highest grossing film that year at about $103million. Now that is still a lot of money, but with as much hype as it had behind it, it wasn’t even close to reaching the money made by the critically slammed Transformers film.

A film that’s based on a book or previous franchise, gets great reviews, and has a high budget may still fail. An example of this is 2010’s Scott Pilgrim vs The World. It’s based on a set of graphic novels, it had big names attached such as director, Edgar Wright, and stars such as Michael Cera, Chris Evans, and Anna Kendrick. It had a big budget of an estimate $90 million; it even received great reviews! But it failed to make this back; it only grossed $47.7million worldwide.

Why? Well it must just be because it went under people’s radars. There may have been bigger films out at the time, but it’s just one of those unexplainable events.

It just shows that even films based off a franchise, that fit all the criteria of a successful film, can still fail.

Ultimately, all of these examples show that the original film isn’t dead.

It is a worry just how well reboots and sequels are doing, but most of these films are genuinely good. Marvel produces fantastic films. They have made a near guarantee that when you see a film with their banner placed on it, it’ll be a premium film. So don’t worry, there’s still room for the Birdman and Whiplash films, but you can still enjoy thrilling sequels/reboots such as Mad Max: Fury Road. It makes sense that the recognised franchises will pull in bigger audiences.

13

THE MARTLET CHRISTMAS ISSUE 8

Features TECHNOLOGY

Back to the Future II: Things that came true Jonathan Lee compares Back to the Future II’s vision of 2015 to reality

B

ack to the Future II projected a vision of the future for 21st of October, 2015, back in 1989.

Now, we are finally past the point in time at which Marty McFly and Doc Brown have travelled to. But one thing which has captured the hearts of millions is the imagination which was present in the film - the fictional world dreamt up by Bob Gale and Robert Zemeckis seemed just too good to be true. But now we can finally compare.

Has technology let us down?

True:

Half true:

Wearable tech In Back to the Future II, Marty Mcfly’s future children wear headsets and goggles in a representation of 2015’s kitchen. They use it to receive calls and watch videos, which is really similar to the Google Glass and Oculus Rift, a wearable gaming headset. We even have tech like the Apple watch and the Moto 360 smartwatches.

One thing the movie didn’t predict is the success of the smartphone.

Hover boards Frustratingly, we still don’t have hover boards like the ones Marty Mcfly uses in the film. The best hover boards are the Lexus slide and the Hendo board, and they still aren’t as accessible as we hoped. While the Lexus slide runs on liquid nitrogen, the Hendo board has to operate on a copper surface.

Biometrics The movie correctly guessed that we would have biometrics. We saw Jennifer Parker using the fingerprint scanner to open her door, which is totally possible now.

Everything from smartphones to border control machines now has this popular security feature, kicking off from Apple’s iPhone 5S.

Compost fuel We still don’t have the ability to create fuel out of pure trash, certainly not like Mr Fusion. One of the things we’ve managed to create is a microfueler. It processes water, sugar, and yeast into ethanol, which can be used to run cars. It’s really pricey and big though, with one unit costing around £6600.

Flying cars Flying cars may have been the boldest prediction the movie has made, but that day has yet to arrive. Right now we have prototypes of cars with folding wings, like the Terrafugia and the AeroMobil, but we don’t really see these as becoming everyday transportation in the near future.

Video calls In 2015 Marty Mcfly does a video call with his co-worker, Needles. This may have seemed like an impossible dream in 1985, but with FaceTime and Skype, video calls are now the norm.

Self-tying shoes Nike has decided to release limited edition pairs of the iconic self-tying shoes which Marty wore in the film. This technology was patented by Nike a few years ago, but was released on Back to the Future day (21 October 2015).

Weather control While we can’t predict and control weather like in Doc Brown’s 2015, we can still control the rain at times. Cloud seeding allows us to change the amount of precipitation we get in an area by dispersing substances that serve as ice nuclei.

14

THE MARTLET CHRISTMAS ISSUE 8

Features

CULTURE

Abandonning the Bard

A

Blake Jones reviews whether play adaption and modernisation is going too far

recent Onion article bore the headline ‘Unconventional Director Sets Shakespeare Play in Time and Place Shakespeare Intended’. Whilst this may seem pedantic, it raises the question of whether directors are too wrapped up in trying to put their own spin on a play that performing them the original way becomes rare. Modernising plays has become part of our culture, but should we by trying to hold back this change, or does it represent the evolving nature of art?

Whilst many playwrights have had their work altered over time with each performance of their plays, I shall be focussing on Shakespeare’s work and the interpretations of it. His work is some of the oldest in the popular repertoire and it is open to adaption. By contrast, Arthur Miller’s Death of a Salesman has

remained almost untouched. The more recent nature of it and the way the stage directions make him sound as though he is nervously trying to protect his nest are the likely cause of this.

One of the underlying reasons for adapting plays to different eras is a financial one encouraged by producers.

Going back to the Onion article, the avant-garde director is quoted as saying, “I know when most people hear The Merchant Of Venice, they think 1960s Las Vegas, a high-powered Manhattan stock brokerage or an 18th-century Georgia slave plantation, but I think it’s high time to shake things up a bit.” To a modern audience, most of Shakespeare’s plays look the same. The costume and scenery are of a similar nature, with only a few differences in the mood between tragedy, comedy and history.

If a play is set in a casino it will look

exciting. There may be messy language asking for ‘3,000 dollars’ or awkward moments when the dialogue is very different to anything an American gambler would say. However, you can have feather boas and huge roulette tables and that gives a modern audience the visual excitement that it wants when it comes to a play.

This formula will not always work though. In Michael Almereyda’s Hamlet, the modern setting means that Claudius is in charge of ‘Denmark Corp’.

There are other times when the small details which make it impossible to truly adapt a play will really frustrate an audience. Nevertheless, it will be the small number of Shakespeare buffs who notice the lack of ducats and they will probably still want to be watching a tra-

ditional version of the play. Instead, the larger audience who want to watch a play or film they have never seen before are going to find the new version more appealing. Therefore it is understandable to alter a play to please the popular audience, however one must be fine with hurting a few fans.

Another common element in the adaption of plays is the reworking of the order of scenes. Sometimes it is a small detail such as combining two scenes already in the same setting, to get through that plot point quickly. There are many parts of Shakespeare which people are not too precious about which can be taken away. However some decisions can be made which are borderline offensive.

I recently watched a production of

The main themes include prophecies, curses and witchcraft - these things have no place in the 20th Century

15

THE MARTLET CHRISTMAS ISSUE 8

Hamlet with Benedict Cumberbatch in the lead role. In this production, many in the audience would be followers of Shakespeare who want to see a high production value version. Yet there were also many Cumberbumblers (or whatever they are called) who were fans of the actor and wanted to see him more than the play. To keep those who see the original script as less sacred interested, for the first few weeks of the run the infamous ‘to be or not to be’ speech was put at the beginning of the play.

In addition, the watchmen seeing Hamlet’s ghost was cut and the play began in a simple way which would draw in even the most novice theatre goer.

Fortunately the speech had been moved back to the middle by the time I watched it, but there were still many alterations.

Again, having the speech begin could help to engage audience members from the beginning. Yet, in return, there are fans who feel that the emotional outburst of Hamlet can only arise from his struggles throughout the play and come from nowhere if at the beginning.

Added to this, there are certain themes which cannot be included when a play is modernised. My favourite play is possibly Richard III. I watched a film version with Ian McKellen some time ago and found it very disappointing.

The play which was originally set in the 1400’s was put in 1930’s England, por-

traying a character of a similar nature to Hitler coming to power. The problem was that the main theme which attracted me to the play originally was the use of prophecies, curses and witchcraft. These things have no place in the 20th Century.

If someone were to curse someone, now or 80 years ago, it would have little power over them as they would struggle to care. Therefore to make a realistic adaption, the director had to put as little focus on that side of the play as possible.

This meant that the fear of the characters could not be portrayed as clearly.

Going further, the greatest tragedy was that the ghost visitation scene from Act V was cut completely. As interesting as it can be to compare England’s supposedly tyrannical King to Hitler, Shakespeare’s brilliant work should not be sacrificed to do this.

However, in response to this, no matter how far and brutal the adaptations may be, there is something truly exciting about the possibilities in re-setting the plays. The racism which made Shakespeare in the 1500’s feel uncomfortable can be reapplied to our modern society to create a plot which is perfectly feasible for racism towards other minorities.

This highlights how truly unchanging humans and society can be and having it portrayed in a play makes that even more remarkable.

Stephen Sondheim’s Company in

Some decisions can be made which are borderline offensive

1970 was groundbreaking for the way that it took upper middle class people’s problems and thrust them in the faces of upper middle class people at the theatre.

With Shakespeare the same thing is being done, only he wrote about the areas of tension hundreds of years before we realised how important they were to us.

Whether it be the desire to take revenge but being too cowardly to do so, the family divides that mean two people loving each other who cannot be together or being bolder than you are because of the pressure from your wife. Some ideas will always resonate with humans and show us where we always go wrong.

If someone were to make a speech titled ‘have not a Muslim eyes?’ there would be many people it would hit deeply as they realised the mistakes they’ve made. Therefore sometimes it is

not only good to adapt a play, but it can make it much more meaningful to an audience for very contemporary reasons.

For these reasons, we should not be dismissive of modernisation of plays.

There can be something very valuable which a play can offer if given a new setting. However there is too much in the original plays which matters too much to be discarded for the sake of an adaption. Therefore a director must work out their priorities and act accordingly.

Each play is a balance of loyalty to the original, commercial power and innovation for something hundreds of years old. However, if I were directing a play, I would remember that as important as my own creative expression is, the supplemented themes should never allow the qualities of the original work to be sacrificed.

16

THE MARTLET CHRISTMAS ISSUE 8

Features TRIDENT RENEWAL

Does Britain really need trident?

With a Tory majority, Trident renewal is inevitable. Douglas Wilson asks why that won’t stop it being a major point of political debate

T

he subject of Britain’s nuclear weapons has been a constant and controversial part of British politics since their creation, despite widespread and overwhelming public support. Britain’s nuclear defence is the 5th largest out of the eight publically nuclear states (Israel hasn’t officially confirmed they have nuclear weapons yet) with 225 total nuclear warheads (and 160 active) behind America, Russia, France and China. Whilst Britain’s nuclear weapon stockpile may not have the ability to wipe out all human life many times over like the American and Russian equivalents could, every bomb has eight times the power of the two dropped on Japan and would obviously be able to kill billions of people, alongside irrevocably damaging the environment. Ever since acquiring these weapons, Britain has insisted that they are to be used as a deterrent only; to make sure that no country would ever attack mainland Britain for fear of nuclear war, which isn’t beneficial to anyone. The current stock of weapons is currently due to end its 30 year lifespan in 2024, with a final vote in parliament on the matter set for the next few years.

But despite never being used, there has always been a strong anti-nuclear weapon movement in Britain, far stronger than in any other nuclear state. In the last election, both Conservative and Labour manifestos included a commitment to a full renewal of Trident with the Liberals demanding a smaller, cheaper nuclear stockpile and the SNP advocating full disarmament.

The election result saw the Conservatives winning a majority and the SNP made a powerless minority in the House of Commons rather than the kingmakers they had hoped. However, the election led to unilat-

The Trident submarine at sea the decision for Britain to build a bomb was first committed to by the Labour government in 1946. Since then, it has highlighted the strong differences between the left and right of the party that have continued to do harm to the party ever since.

With the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament forming in 1957, it quickly gained more and more influence in the Labour party, with the party adopting a unilateralist policy in 1960, only to then abandon it in 1961. The Labour party adopted a policy of disarmament between 1982-1989, only to produce two spectacular landslide defeats, as public opposition to Trident has always

there’s a rise against centrist politicians and the alternatives happen to be against Trident. However, the renewal of Trident should be questioned, as it doesn’t add to Britain’s security due to changing threats and the NATO alliance.

Trident is designed to prevent an attack on Britain, but this nation does not face any existential threats.

Thanks to the EU, war from the continent is simply not going to happen. Whilst Russia may be getting more aggressive in its foreign policy, any suggestion that it would attack Britain is absurd. Russia has attacked countries like Ukraine and Geor-

Britain should not have nuclear weapons because they are morally indefensible eralist Jeremy Corbyn being made Labour leader and Scottish Labour’s desperately needing attention. As a result, Trident is back on the agenda.

The issue of nuclear weapons has always been a divisive one for the Labour party, despite Labour governments being essential to the building of Britain’s nuclear defence. Whilst Britain’s first bomb was tested in 1952 under Winston Churchill,

ranged between 20-30% rather than a commanding majority. It was assumed that unilateralism would never be a heavily debated topic in Westminster simply due to the popularity of Trident and the support of the two mainstream parties.

Does the surge of support for the SNP and the election of Jeremy Corbyn show public demand for an end to Britain nuclear weapons system? Not really, it’s just that

gia, former Soviet states that Russia considers being under its sphere of influence (like the US considers the Americas) and has bombed terrorist groups weakening its ally in Assad. To think this translates to a threat to Britain is comical.

China is not a communist enemy but now a trading partner. North Korea’s nuclear weapons are weak, and don’t have the capability to reach the UK. The only poten-

tial national threat would be Argentina, but their military is much worse than ours and as the last war showed, is easily defeated with nuclear weapons. Our greatest security risk comes from terrorist groups, which cannot be bombed, and have shown not to care about nuclear weapons when they attack American citizens. So, at this point, Britain does not need nuclear weapons for defence.

But even if there were serious existential threats to the UK, a nuclear deterrent would ultimately be irrelevant due to NATO. Because we are part of NATO, any attack on Britain would also be legally considered an attack by the other 27 countries involved, including the USA and France, both of which have nuclear weapons.

So, Britain’s nuclear weapons are simply pointless, as we can rely on both France and America to provide them. This would, of course, offend many patriotic Britons who insist are defence must be not dependent on others, but that ignores the reality that our defences have relied on other countries’ since the creation of NATO in 1949. If anything, the billions spent on Trident can be used to help build other aspects of the army we might actually use.

Beyond that, Britain should not have nuclear weapons because they are morally indefensible. Rather than attack enemy soldiers, nuclear weapons cannot distinguish between soldiers and civilians. Nuclear weapons also have a devastating impact on the world and its environment for years to come. Britain should not be allowed to use those weapons under any circumstance based solely on principle.

17

THE MARTLET CHRISTMAS ISSUE 8

Features

Out of the 1,537 Boeing 747s to have ever flown, only 638 of them are still in service

AVIATION

Jumbo Jets: The Last Roar

Jumbo jets are unwittingly flying into the history books, and our aviation expert, Pawin Sermsuk, is here to explain why.

F

or almost half a century, jumbo jets have been soaring through the skies around the world. Since the launch of the first jumbo, they have carried 80% of the human race. It’s usual for us to see them cruising by, but little do we know that they are slowly flying into the history books. Sadly, we are unwittingly reaching the end of the jumbo era.

The jumbo story began on a fishing trip in Alaska in the summer of 1965.

Juan T. Trippe, the owner of Pan Am, told Bill Allen, the CEO of Boeing, his vision of future aviation. He wanted a new airplane 2.5 times larger than anything ever built. At the end of the trip, Trippe said to Allen, ‘If you build it, I’ll buy it.’

Boeing took the challenge, and in 1968, the 747 project was born. Pan Am signed for 25 jumbos, worth $3.7 billion in today’s money and Boeing promised they could have it in just 28 months. But despite the size of the challenge, the company’s top priority wasn’t the 747, but was instead the supersonic project. They didn’t think they would sell more than 50 747s, most of which will be the freighter version, but boy were they wrong. Since then, the 747 have been developed into nine different variants, totalling in 1,515 deliveries. It can carry up to as many as 370 passengers in a typical configuration, and eventually became known as the undisputed ‘Queen of the Skies’.

By the 90s, the number of people travelling by air had tripled. Many airports around the world were running at almost full capacity. Airlines were desperate for an even larger passenger jet, capable of carrying more passengers in the limited time slots they have. Then in 1994, French aircraft manufacturer Airbus responded with the proposal of the largest passenger jet ever built, designated “Airbus A3XX”. It promised full double decks seating around 550 people and capable of

flying over a third around the world. Its launch customer, Singapore Airlines, was eager to have the jet in their fleet. But unlike Boeing, the delays in design and manufacturing meant that Airbus took 11 years until the plane, officially named the Airbus A380 Superjumbo, finally took off on its maiden flight on 25 October 2005.

It took them a further two years to deliver Singapore Airlines their first A380 in 2007. Today, 173 superjumbos have

Competition is high and premium airlines are struggling to fill up the jumbos.

A lot of the time airlines can’t even fill up the plane enough to make the flight profitable. With rising fuel prices and more concerns about the environment, jumbos are becoming more dirty to fly. Boeing responded in 2011 with the Boeing 747-8, a redesigned 747 with 30% higher fuel efficiency, more aerodynamic and much quieter than the previous 747-400. But de-

The real threat, however, comes from a whole new generation of aircraft been delivered to 13 operators around the world, with Airbus’ dearest customer Emirates operating over a third of it.

Despite the sheer size of the plane, experts say the A380 came a bit too late and is ‘too big’ for modern aviation world.

Low cost airlines have started to emerge and are quickly dominating the industry.

spite all their efforts, the order books are pretty near empty. The 747-8 Intercontinental only has 51 orders, 14 of which are unfilled. The A380, on the other hand has 317 orders, with 144 unfilled. In the recent Dubai Airshow in November 2015, neither of the planes received any order. The remaining unfulfilled orders are expected

to be completed by 2019, which will mark the end of the production of jumbo jets.

The real threat, however, comes from a whole new generation of aircraft. Aviation authorities around the world are charging carriers for their carbon emissions and airlines have been looking elsewhere to replace their ageing fleet of jumbos. Aircrafts like Boeing’s own 777 and 787, or Airbus’ brand new A350.

These single-deck twin-engine aircrafts can carry slightly less passengers than the jumbos, but some can even fly further and are much greener than the jumbos.

The smaller size also meant that they don’t need big international hubs, but instead can fly directly to your international destinations. Less hassle and cheaper all round. To date, these twin-engine planes have totalled a number of 3,792 firm orders and 1,696 deliveries.

Whatever happens, it is likely that we will be flying jumbos for many years to come. Meanwhile, it is estimated that at any single moment, around 150,000 of us are seated high in the sky in a jumbo.

Analysts estimate that these jumbos may go out of service around 30 years from now, but no one knows for sure. When the time comes for them to stop flying, I think we’ll all miss them very greatly.

Designed to be a hub-to-hub people carrier, this A380 was captured touching down in Paris CDG on its daily flight from Bangkok

18

THE MARTLET CHRISTMAS ISSUE 8

Features HISTORY

The Zulus: A Brief History

Toby Jupp delves into the enticing but rarely talked-about period of the African tribe.

The memorial in Stanger, South Africa dedicated to Shaka, to whom a national holiday has also been dedicated (Heritage Day 24 September)

T

he Zulu people are a large ethnic group of Southern Africa, dating back to circa 1709.

Mainly located in the African nations of South Africa, Lesotho, Zimbabwe, Swaziland and Malawi, the group has a modern-day population of around 12,000,000, of which by far the most substantial proportion is the 10,500,000 in South Africa.

I am personally of Zulu heritage (my paternal grandmother was the descendent of a Zulu chief ) and there are several famous people, both modern and past, from the tribe, most notably the current Prime Minister of the Republic of South Africa, Jacob Zuma, along with Siphiwe Tshabalala, scorer of the opening goal of the 2010 FIFA World Cup, and the founder of the Zulu nation, King Shaka kaSenzangakhona, who I shall talk about later on. The main language and religion are Zulu itself, though many speak English, Afrikaans and Portuguese, and Christianity is a common religion, while the current King is named Goodwill Zwelithini kaBhekuzulu and has been incumbent since 1967.

The Zulu Kingdom and people have a rich history, but it is probably most well-known for the Anglo-Zulu War

which took place in 1879, and despite an initial victory for the African tribe, the British Empire ultimately defeated them and annexed the independent kingdom formed in 1816 by the aforementioned Shaka. In the aftermath of the war the British divided the Empire into 13 kinglets (small territorial regions).

So, as touched upon earlier, the Zulu tribe was founded c. 1709, just over a century before the establishment of the Zulu nation. The man credited with this is Zulu kaMalendela. The mythology surrounding the tribe’s foundation was that when his father, Malendela, died, the chief of the Ngunis, a power struggle between his two

The first invasion in January 1878 was an unmitigated catastrophe for the British As a result of Cetshwayo’s death in 1884 (the chief at the time of the war), the Kingdom gradually demised and after 1897, by which it was simply known as ‘Protectorate of the United Kingdom’, the Zulu Kingdom as it was ceased to exist. Most members of the tribe currently live in the Easterly region of KwaZulu Natal in South Africa.

sons was initiated, and younger brother Zulu lost out to his elder brother Qwabe.

Zulu and his followers were exiled to modern-day Mozambique and there received aid from the Portuguese which is a probable reason why many Zulus today still speak the language.

In Zulu, Nguni, and many other tribal languages in Southern Africa, the

word ‘zulu’ is translated as ‘heaven’.

It was 1818 when Zulus started to form a powerful state, led by Shaka Zulu or Shaka kaSenzangakhona, the first King of the Zulu clan (up to this point the leaders had been considered ‘chieftains’). Under the leadership of Shaka, the Zulu Kingdom experienced large reform to help turn it into the powerful state Britain would later invade. The most important of these reforms were military, and Shaka designed many new innovative weapons to go with his tactical ideas and adopted a system very similar to that of ‘meritocracy’ (started by the French in the Revolutionary Wars of 1792-1815) which allowed men to rise through the ranks based on skill rather than circumstances of birth.

The system reaped immediate dividends, succeeding in breaking up the Ndwandwe alliance in battles against Zwide at Gqokli Hill (1818) and Mhlatuze River (1820). By 1825, the Zulu Empire was significant and flourishing further due to Shaka’s successful policy of integrating members of conquered tribes on full equality into the Zulu tribe, allowing the Kingdom to continue to expand.

In 1828, however, Shaka was mur-

19

THE MARTLET CHRISTMAS ISSUE 8

dered in a conspiracy involving two of his half-brothers Dingane and Mbopa in the Zulu capital of Bulwayo. Dingane proceeded to murder many of Shaka’s followers and arguably the Kingdom declined until Dingane was forced to flee in 1838, following defeat at the Battle of Blood River. Dingane was assassinated by another half-brother, Mpande, in 1840 near the Swazi border.

Mpande’s reign until 1872 was fairly uneventful after the initial purge of any perceived enemies within the Zulus, except for a failed conquest of Swaziland in 1852, which was almost over before it started due to international pressure to withdraw. It was in the reign of his son Cetshwayo when the Zulus became the centre of the world’s attention…

It was 1818 when Zulus started to form a powerful state, led by Shaka The Anglo-Zulu War of 1879 came about when, in 1878, Britain sent an ultimatum to chiefs representing Cetshwayo that they disband their army and accept British control; when Cetswhayo refused, war followed. This came as a consequence of Britain successfully expanding its imperial influence to Canada, and in 1874 Sir Henry Bartle Frere was sent to South Africa in 1874 to bring plans to take over the African Kingdoms and Boer Republics into fruition.

The first invasion in January 1878 was an unmitigated catastrophe for the Brit-

ish Empire. Despite being armed with basic weaponry at best, 35,000 Zulus successfully fended off a strong British force of around 16,000 who had brought 17 cannons and a Gatling machine gun.

One particularly bruising battle was Isandlwana (22 January 1879) where more than half of the British army of around 2,000 were wiped out, including 55 senior officials. The British secured some consolation the following day at Rorke’s Drift where they narrowly managed to defend a mission station from a concentrated attack by 3,000 or so Zulu warriors, which was called an ‘impi’.

It was clear that the British had severely underestimated the bravery, ferocity and indeed skill of the Zulus. Unfortunately for Cetshwayo’s men, they would not make the same mistake twice.

An almost doubled force of 25,000 made up the second invasion and they swiftly started to repair the damage of the initial crushing defeats with victories at Kambula, Gingindlovu and Eshowe.

It was the Battle of Ulundi that proved the killing blow for the Zulus. Cetshwayo had anticipated the reinforced efforts of the British and had attempted to negotiate a peace treaty but the British commander Lord Chelmsford was reluctant to negotiate, instead preferring to reinforce his reputation that was shattered by the earlier defeats. The British forces were simply too formidable this time and Cetshwayo’s men were decisively defeated, forcing the Zulu king to become a fugitive.

Cetshwayo was captured on 28 August and brought to Cape Town. Upon this announcement to the Zulu people, the new commander Wolsely discarded Bartle Frere’s initial plans and drew up the idea of the 13 ‘chiefdoms’. In 1883 Cetswhayo was reinstated as King and assumed the territory of Zululand (this was partly an attempt to stop the uprisings of the disgruntled Zulus) but died some time in 1884 when his tribe clashed with

King Cetshwayo who led the Zulus against the British some Boer mercenaries. Although the Zulu nation existed until 1897, it was here when the Kingdom had lost all meaning.

Nowadays the province, as I have already said, no longer functions as the great kingdom it once was, and the monarchy is merely symbolic rather than holding any great power. The Zulus are the largest proportion of what is commonly referred to as the ‘Bantu-ethnic groups’ which includes the Nguni and the Swazi. The associated political party, the IFP (Inkatha Freedom Party), is the fourth largest in the South African national assembly with 10/400 seats and is probably the closest to the Conservatives of the UK political parties, in terms of policy.

This was just a summary of the rich

An artist’s impression of the British defence against the Zulu assault (centre-right) at Rorke’s Drift

history of the Zulus in the 19th century, a whole different chapter exists in the apartheid era of South Africa, but this is unfortunately too much to fit into one article! In my opinion, the Zulus were clearly a very fierce and brave force, and produced one of the most stunning victories of an era at Isandlwana. Led by such successful kings as Cetshwayo and Shaka, they became a force to be reckoned with and only a lack of advanced weaponry proved their downfall. The British clearly felt the need to extend their influence to the region and the fact that they set about taking the Zulu territory first is testament to that strength.

I hope you enjoyed reading about what I believe is an interesting yet lesser-known part of modern history.

20

THE MARTLET CHRISTMAS ISSUE 8

Features TECHNOLOGY

What has made Apple so successful?

Tom Buckle looks at the most important factors that have led to huge success of Apple’s most successful product, the iPhone.

R

ecently we all turned to our iPhones, iPads and iMacs to read that Apple, who produce all our favourite electronics, is now twice as big as the world’s second biggest company, ExxonMobil. For many of us, this is no surprise as in March earlier this year Apple announced that they had sold their 700 millionth product in phones alone and this year they also celebrate the 8th year since the release of their first iPhone back in 2007.

So what has caused the huge success of Apple’s most successful product? Well to find out we must travel back through Apple’s history to 2007 and to the release of Apple’s first iPhone. The product itself was released by Steve Jobs at the Macworld Conference and Expo in San Francisco on 27th June. This unveiling was undoubtedly special, as nobody had ever seen anything like it, although nowadays we would look back at the product as if it was in fact quite the opposite of special. The phone itself had very limited functionality: for example, it could not connect to the internet without WiFi connection and so it was often looked upon as simply a computer that could make phone calls.

But the main reason for the success of the first iPhone was the new concepts.

The major change introduced by Apple was that you could now use the internet on a hand-held device, which had never been seen before. At the time, people usually relied on computers in order to browse online and so this new concept caught the eye of many who were prepared to pay the £350 price tag for such a device.

Upon the release of the iPhone to the public in June 2007, long queues began to form outside Apple stores by those eager to get their hands on the innovative product.

The excitement turned into a cultural event and at once people were desperate to be a part of the action - never before had a product received attention on such a large scale.

The hand-held device became incredibly successful after its release. An

Apple logo

Apple survey conducted in January 2008 (6 months later) showed that 3.7 million iPhones had been sold worldwide. This stunned Apple creators, as this meant they had generated £1.3 billion in half a year. And Apple knew they had an idea that would change the world. Even Steve Jobs described the first iPhone as ‘revolutionary’ and ‘five years ahead of any other mobile phone’. In fact, he was almost correct: the iPhone had the potential to be revolutionary, but there were still flaws in the design.

Apple took on board the grumbles made about slow mobile browsing speeds and difficulties typing on the touchscreen virtual keyboard. Then on June 9th 2008 Apple released their second product, the Apple iPhone 3G that, when paired up with mobile contract company O2, allowed for the user to access the internet without WiFi for the first time. The new iPhone was extremely successful as it sold out online before it even hit stores.

A month after the release of the new iPhone, Apple announced its plans to introduce an iPhone software development kit for third-party companies to produce applications that could be sold to the public. And so the App Store was added to the iTunes Store on July 9th

iPhone 1 and iPhone 3G huge success of the iPhone’s early days.

This idea continued as Apple released more and more iPhones. The iPhone 4 was not released until two years later in June 2010 and saw the new idea of front-facing camera, a high resolution screen and a new shape be added to the

Apple sold 700 million iPhones in 8 years 2008, which later proved to a huge turning point moment for mobile phones.

As a result of these new introductions, Apple had sold a total of 50 million iPhones

by April 2010. It is obvious then that the creation of new and never before seen features on a phone was ultimately one of the most important factors that resulted in the

products. People continued to go crazy for the phones, which gave Apple a new idea. They figured out that if they continued to release a new phone every year, they could increase the number of iPhones bought so long as they continued to add new features.

And that’s exactly what they did. The release of the iPhone 4 was swiftly followed by the iPhone 4S on October 4th 2011 - the day before Steve Jobs died.

This edition was, in my opinion, a big step-up in Apple iPhones as it saw the addition of iOS 5. New features in this phone included iCloud, iMessage and Apple’s personal assistant, Siri.

Continuing on with the pattern was the iPhone 5, released in September 2012.

As well as a panorama feature and the new aluminum design, this smartphone allowed for 4G, the super-fast mobile broadband launched late in 2012. Added to the iPhone 5 was the colourful 5C and the high-powered 5S. When combined with iOS 6 and the new EarPods (designed after digitally scanning hundreds of ears), Apple had sold

421 million phones by November 2013.

And then before the release of the iPhone 6 a lot of speculation about the design of the new product was created, producing a lot of excitement. Apple used this to their advantage and released invitations to ‘a special event’ on September 9 2014 using the slogan ‘Wish we could say more’. This move just showed how Apple had the ability to grip their users and as a result fans began queuing outside Apple stores a full 20 days before the iPhone 6’s retail date.

Then 6 months after the iPhone 6’s releasement Apple announced they had sold a total of 700 million iPhones in 8 years - an unimaginable number. As well as this is the fact that earlier this year we learnt Apple is now twice the size of ExxonMobil. So what are the real reasons for the success?

As I mentioned earlier, the introduction of new features at an early stage was vital, because it took years for other phone companies to learn how to implement these features into their products.

Because of this Apple had made their users hooked on their products and so by releasing a new iPhone every year their overall sales continued and will continue to keep rising. Apple dominates the phone market and is much more popular than other companies such as Android and Windows. But for me, the most important reason for success is the ability to create huge speculation for each iPhone as shown by the queues and predictions of designs. Apple are able to boast about a 98% satisfaction percentage from their users, and so this shows how hundreds of millions are guaranteed to buy the next phone. Apple will only grow in sales and productions of iPhones. For them, the sky’s the limit, which Siri tells me is about 1,280km.

21

THE MARTLET CHRISTMAS ISSUE 8

Features TECHNOLOGY

Cyber Crime Crysis

Saul Rea and Alex Thulin investigate whether our computers are at risk in this modern age.

Hackers are able to expose your private information

I

n the 21st century, almost everyone will have some form of technology like a smartphone or a desktop PC. This has worked wonders for our world given the way it has modernised the way we work.

However, this has also caused major issues with crime. With the development of advanced security, you would think that major companies would be able to

scribed as a ‘significant and sustained cyber-attack’. Launched on the 21st of October, it has put the company’s four million users at risk. The attack shut down TalkTalk’s website before, it is assumed, many users details, including credit-card and bank details, were stolen. The extent of the attack is still not known but TalkTalk have said all of their customers could be effected. The attackers used one of the

How are we supposed to feel safe in a world where all of our details can be stolen in seconds? keep any private information safe. This has not proved to be the case.

Recently two teenagers, aged 15 and 16, were arrested for hacking into broadband giant, TalkTalk. This resulted in a 10% drop in shares. It is not just teenagers committing these crimes; North Korea hacked into technology powerhouse, Sony, and exposed masses of private data resulting in huge losses for the company.

However, it is not just the big companies who have to worry about this. Every one of us could be at risk of having our details stolen by someone on the other side of the world. How are we supposed to feel safe in a world where all of our details can be stolen in seconds?

The attack on TalkTalk has been de-

simplest tricks known to them: a DDoS (Distributed Denial of Service), a simple attack that floods websites with fake visits until the website simply can’t handle it.

The DDoS attack can be performed by almost anyone with a small knowledge of where to look, and there is even an app for it. This wasn’t the only component to the attack however, TalkTalk have revealed that all of the company’s users’ details could have been compromised, leaving the company’s security under scrutiny. Perhaps the most shocking part about this attack is that the hacker is reported to be a teenager. A company with control over millions of people’s bank and security details relies on a security system that can be hacked by a teenag-

er. The details were not even encrypted, meaning anyone who can get into the database has access to four million bank accounts. This is not adequate security for a company of this calibre.

The most expensive court-case in British history was the phone hacking scandal that was exposed in 2014 which managed to shut down News of the World. The entire cost of the trial went to £95 million. The scandal began back in 2002 when the first attacks were carried out by independent hackers illegally. These were attacks seeking private information from various people. Carole Caplin, who was the fitness advisor to Tony Blair, was hacked at great length as they were hacking into the phones of many diseased people; one of the earliest recorded cases of phone hacking.

However, the scandal garnered so much attention because News of the World hacked the phones of the deceased. In 2011 The Guardian revealed that the phone of schoolgirl Milly Dowler was hacked after she went missing in 2002. She was found six months later.

The Guardian claimed that private investigators did this to delete voicemails to give false hope to the family of Milly Dowler. This could have been destruction of evidence about Milly’s kidnapper, as he could have left voicemails for her himself.

In July 2011, Milly’s family was preparing to claim for damages. This is just one of the horrific attacks that the News of the World carried out. Other examples include the phone-hacking of fallen soldiers relatives and the London 7/7 bombing victims. The hacking scandal resulted in the closure of News of the World and the head of the company was imprisoned along with ten private detectives.

Major hacking incidents make the news because of the size and prestige of the targeted companies. This gives us a false sense that it can’t happen to us at home. This is not true, as anyone is at risk from cyber attack. Some figures say that up to half of all Americans were hacked in 2013. This is a serious issue since almost everyone has a smartphone nowadays. As a result, people have a vast amount of personal information with them at all times. This means that each and every one of us is at risk from being hacked. Without basic security most of our information is at risk of being taken.

It could be bank account information, emails or passwords. It is all in jeopardy.

Even though massive banks can encrypt files to keep our information safe and we can buy expensive security programmes for our computers, it does not mean we are safe. As computers continue to advance, so will hacking technologies.

A lot of security programmes will only be able to slow down hackers and alert you before they can get at your private data. We might trust banks and corporations to keep our information private but hackers can and will find a way to get to access our data.

Smartphones mean that you have lots of data with you at all times

22

THE MARTLET CHRISTMAS ISSUE 8

Features

The Marvel Monopoly ENTERTAINMENT

W

e’ve all seen the Marvel franchise rise and rise in the box office and TV ratings in recent years, from the first Iron Man film in 2008 to the second star-studded Avengers film this recent summer. But just how has the Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU) risen to become such a global phenomenon in world entertainment? There’s obviously no simple answer to such an incredible success story but it’s more of a collection of smaller successes and their idea of a combined universe.

The Marvel Cinematic Universe was a groundbreaking idea that was untested before on such a large scale, the basis of the universe being that all the Marvel movies and TV shows are based in the same universe. This allows the interaction of characters and plotlines between TV shows and between films, which has been so integral to the success of the MCU. Each round of movies in the MCU is called a phase and features standalone films for the main characters culminating with a team up film at the end of the phase. This idea of combining the best characters from their own films is great for fans who get to see their favourite characters interact and the conflicts and friendships that they will have.

These films spawn their own plotlines and conflicts: for example, the TV show Marvel’s Agents of SHIELD is based on an organisation and the characters in this organisation are trying to cope with the fallout from the latest film at the time: The Avengers. This constant linking and connecting between the films and TV means that, as a watcher of the MCU, you will watch all of the films and TV as a con-

Marvel logo

Calum Egan looks at Marvel’s incredible success story.

tinuous story, so instead of flicking off if a film doesn’t interest you, you will watch all of the media as a series of sequels.

By doing this, Marvel can add in other franchises within their universe that you might not watch otherwise but, because it is all part of the overarching story, you feel more inclined to watch them all.

TV show Daredevil is a brutal and boody take on a superhero story

Marvel is also doing a great job of varying the tones and personalities of their universe and characters. The latest TV show Daredevil is a brutal and bloody take on a superhero story that contrasts so well with a lot of the rest of the MCU and their quips and one-liners. But despite how different it was it still was critically acclaimed as one of the best TV shows of recent years, receiving an 8.9 on IMDb. Now due to the success of this darker take on an origin story, Marvel have lined up three more series to star on Netflix in the next two years, setting up another section of the MCU that will overlap and mingle with each other.

Their character line-up also ranges from a tree to a blind, lawyer vigilante to an eccentric billionaire to a god from Norse mythology. This variation means that it’s far harder to get bored of one dimensional characters and identical origin stories. Furthermore, Marvel are now bringing in more and more obscure characters into the MCU, like, for instance who had heard of the Guardians of the Galaxy before they smashed the box office in 2014? And by smashing the box office, I mean they made nearly 800 million dollars from a film that featured: Chris Pratt, a very green woman, an angry raccoon and a talking tree.

Now to think of these characters by their appearance would be deceiving as each character has a fleshed out backstory, all with the right amount of tragedy so that it doesn’t overwhelm their personalities but enables you to feel sympathy for them and overall meaning that you will root for them. This is one of the most important things for any film because otherwise the audience won’t feel sad if they die or happy if they succeed. So the fact that the filmmakers were able to do this with a tree whose vocabulary doesn’t extend beyond three words, speaks volumes for their ability as if it can be done with these characters, it can be done with any characters in the MCU. In stark contrast to Marvel, their main competitor hasn’t been doing so well in recent times. After the success of The Dark Knight trilogy helped to reboot superhero films in recent years, DC comics have fallen rather flat. What was supposed to be the start of a new series of Superman films: Man of Steel was decidedly meh and just plain aver-

age, the dark tone not quite fitting with the film or the character resulting not in a bad film, just one that didn’t stand out or rival what Marvel are producing.

Now if I were to tell you that there had been a new DC hero to the cinematic stage: Green Lantern, you’re either very confused or just plain horrified because that film was supposed to be DC’s answer to Iron Man but they just simply got it wrong. The film was confusing, odd and just plain ludicrous at times with weird fish-people featuring all too much for my liking, and that was the general consensus as the film went under the radar to most and was criticised by those who had the unfortunate experience of watching it.

It is, however, a completely different story with the DC TV shows as The Flash and Arrow have been very popular on the small screen along with limited success for Gotham and newcomer

An angry raccoon and a talking tree

Supergirl. This platform is where DC has the edge over Marvel as the main MCU TV show Agents of SHIELD was a very slow starter for a lot of fans who tuned out and haven’t tuned back in despite the show picking up some real momentum. But how is it that DC have done so well on the small screen?

Well, they have adopted the shared universe format that Marvel has been using but can dictate their own tones and plotlines as there are no interconnected DC films. This was one of the main criticisms of Marvel’s TV show that has been addressed with Daredevil which isn’t completely isolated from the rest of the MCU but does well to stand on its own legs as an independent show.

The future does seem bright for the MCU with their main TV shows hitting full throttle and the eagerly anticipated Batman vs Superman along with Will Smith in Suicide Squad. However Marvel seem far from finished, having announced their film schedule until 2020 and if they can keep making films like Ant Man, yes Ant Man, one of the top films of the year, then I don’t see them stopping for a while.

23

THE MARTLET CHRISTMAS ISSUE 8

Sport

Ones to watch at Euro 2016 FOOTBALL

Johnny Allison looks at the players with potential to shine in France next summer.

Robert Lewandowski After Robert Lewandowski’s blistering start to the season to the 2015/2016 season it is clear that he is one of the players to watch in this tournament.

Scoring 5 goals in 9 minutes against Wolfsburg from the bench is quite an achievement. It will be a task for him to lead Poland to Euro success, but it is a task that you can’t put past him.

Mesut Ozil After a great start to his third season at Arsenal, Mesut Ozil will be looking to add to his recent winners medal from the World Cup at this year’s Euros. Ozil had an insignificant season last season, however he has been leading the line alongside Alexis Sanchez and Theo Walcott this year at Arsenal. Many people overlook the German playmaker’s impact on the game as in the last five seasons he has made 93 assists, only 5 behind Lionel Messi and 11 ahead of anybody else.

Kevin De Bruyne His recent move to Manchester City for £54.5m made many question his price tag, however the 24 year old has put all questions to bed by making an immediate impact at City. He has already left a mark on the qualification by scoring many crucial late goals for Belgium. Belgium are the dark horses in the competition and if Belgium have a chance at lifting the trophy, De Bruyne will have to be firing.

Gylfi Sigurdsson Gylfi Sigurdsson has been at the heart of the attack for Swansea this season. Whether it be scoring goals or assisting, Sigurdsson provides both. Iceland were complete write-offs for qual-

ifying for the Euros yet Sigurdsson has fired Iceland into their first major tournament in their history. Iceland aren’t likely to progress through their group yet with the playmaker from Swansea is on form, who knows what could happen.

Graziano Pelle Graziano Pelle has had a mixed time with Southampton but his hold up play and technique is close to perfect. He earned an Italy call up in his first season with the Saints after a string of goals. Since then he hasn’t looked back and he has helped Italy to qualify with ease. He will need to be on form for Italy because he is the man who will be up front seeking to provide the goals.

Jamie Vardy Who would have expected Jamie Vardy to perform as well as he has done this season. Having set the record for goals scored in consecutive games by an Englishmen with 9 in November, he will be looking to push on. Vardy has helped Leicester to an astonishing start to the season, at the time of writing placed in 3rd. For a team who is only in their second season back in the top tier of English football this is very impressive.

Bernardo Silva Bernardo Silva, who is blessed with a brilliant left foot, has been earning some rave reviews since joining Monaco from Benfica in August last year.

He scored nine goals and provided three assists in 31 league appearances for Monaco last season and he has helped Portugal to qualify and is being talked about as Deco’s heir. He has a long road ahead of him as he is only 21.

Paco Alcacer The striker from Valencia has helped Spain recover following a very disappointing world cup campaign.

After a lack of firepower before the world cup many thought Diego Costa would provide the spark up front Spain needed. However, they couldn’t have been more wrong. Paco Alcacer has stepped into the role as striker in the Spain 1st XI and he has done with some style. Alcacer is also only 22 so he too has a long career ahead of him.

last few years with Borussia Monchengladbach. He is a very strong presence in the heart of the midfield and when he gets his chance I’m sure he will deliver.

Kyle Lafferty Nobody would have expected Northern Ireland to qualify for the Euro’s but even more of a surprise was the performance of Kyle Lafferty. He scored 7 goals in 9 appearances and orchestrated a Northern Ireland shock top of the group finish. He hasn’t shone for club, however.

Mateo Kovacic

Ashley Williams

The Croatian’s move to Real Madrid came out of nowhere and many were unsure if he could prove his worth on the big stage. Mateo Kovacic hasn’t found a way into the Real Madrid starting lineup but with midfielders like Toni Kroos, James Rodriguez and his fellow Croatian Luka Modric, it was never going to be an easy task. Nevertheless, Kovacic will be one to watch during the euros and let’s hope he comes up big for Croatia.

Wales qualifying for the Euros wasn’t their only achievement this year. They broke into the top 10 rankings in World football. They can thank many for this but making sure they kept clean sheets was essential and Ashley Williams achieved this. He was a solid rock in the heart of defence and he made sure Gareth Bale and the rest’s hard work wasn’t short lived and kept solid at the back.

Divock Origi

Let’s be honest, you can’t write a players to watch without including this guy. Cristiano Ronaldo is arguably the best player in the world, his only challenger being Lionel Messi. Although he has achieved lots for club, Ronaldo doesn’t have many achievements with Portugal. Could this be the year were CR7 helps Portugal to a surprising Euro 2016 win? Who knows, we can only hope that he shows some magic and gets the crowd on their feet.

The Belgian had a world cup he will never forget over the summer of 2014 and it bought him a move to Liverpool. However, after being sidelined for a season by Brendan Rodgers, new Liverpool manager Jurgen Klopp has brought him back. Divock Origi has proved to be a bright spark for Belgium over the qualifiers and he will be looking to leave a mark on Euro 2016.

Christoph Kramer We may all know him as the poor guy who got a concussion just minutes into the world cup final but Christoph Kramer has proved his worth over the

Cristiano Ronaldo

I think we can all agree that the Euros in 2016 will be a highlight of the year, and it will be an event to put in your diary.

With players like Ronaldo, Ozil and Co. this competition won’t fail to impress.

24

THE MARTLET CHRISTMAS ISSUE 8

Sport CHRISTMAS

Sport to watch this Christmas!

Dan Brown drives into sport avaliable this Christmas.

Last year’s Champ, Michael van Gerwen

DARTS: Christmas wouldn’t be Christmas without the darts. Well that’s what is believed by the many avid darts fans at least. Admittedly Christmas time is the highlight of the darts calendar with the eventful World Championship taking place. It pretty much covers the whole Christmas time span, kicking off at the start of December and ending on New Year’s day. Personally, I find this event stupendous viewing. The atmosphere does it for me, the crowd simply do not stop all night. This is thanks to the ever increasing quality of players taking part in this professional darts competition.

Year on end the standards get better making the whole event even better. This year should certainly not disappoint. The current World Champion Scotsman Gary Anderson is an obvious shout for the title once again due to his class shown last year at the very same competition. However as always my money is on the world number one Michael Van Gerwen who in fact narrowly lost out to Gary in the final last year. Michael is also in the much better form winning much more summer tournaments, but this is just my opinion.

However how could one leave out the highest decorated darting player in history, Phil Taylor. The sixteen time cham-

pion of the world is still going strong in the world of darts and could easily make it seventeen, showing the novices in comparison how it’s done.

FOOTBALL: Right so it’s Boxing Day and everyone is slightly upset that Christmas is basically over. But no, we have the annual event

Sky Sports. The day kicks off with Manchester United travelling to Stoke City at lunchtime live on Sky. To be honest, this game doesn’t exactly prove to be a Christmas cracker. United aren’t exactly playing attacking football and are relying on their strength at the back to grind out results, hence many of their results ending in 0-0 or 1-0. Furthermore, Stoke do not pose a huge threat when going for-

Arsenal at points this season have been miraculous to watch of the football fixtures on Boxing Day keeping us in the festive spirit. These matches occur in all the leagues but I’m going to focus on some of the main ones in the Premier League. In fact, the games I think that are most relevant are those being televised. This year we are lucky enough to be able to view three games on the day, two on BT Sport and one on

ward, even with their big new signing Xherdan Shaqiri. I would predict a narrow victory for United mainly due to the fact that their quality simply outshines that of Stoke. Next we have our first BT game between Newcastle United and Everton. Newcastle have so far definitely had a rocky season leaving them just above the relegation zone at the time of

writing. This has been disappointing for such a large club but have shown some example of their ability with a 6-2 victory against Norwich. Their opponents Everton are having a mediocre season so far and will be feeling as though they can do better as the season progresses. This is certainly achievable for Everton as they have the potential to score goals with a clinical striker in Romelu Lukaku and also promising young talent such as Gerard Deulofeu. Taking all points into account my prediction would be a comfortable victory for Everton. Finally the later kick off of 19:45 proves to be the highlight of the day when Arsenal travel to St Mary’s to take on Southampton. Arsenal at points this season have been miraculous to watch and are certainly living up to their name of the English equivalent of Barcelona, in playing style. One example of this is when they took apart the Manchester United defence and went 3-0 up by halftime. However Southampton will not lie down to Arsenal. Southampton are having a solid season, currently standing at 7th in the league at the time of writing, it is not the blistering start they showed last season but you would be a fool to doubt the quality they have. I would still expect an Arsenal victory due to the fact that, if they play to their full quality, they are quite simply impossible to stop.

25

THE MARTLET CHRISTMAS ISSUE 8

due to the fact that my favourite cricket competition, the Big Bash, is back. This blistering league of cricket takes place throughout the Christmas period giving all cricket fans a proper festive treat. The competition starts on the 17th of December with an opening game between the two Sydney teams, Sydney 6ers and Sydney Thunder. This city derby proves to be a glistening opener with much famous talent on display such as the likes of Brad Haddin, Mitchell Starc and Nathan Lyon all representing the 6ers and Shane Watson and Jacques Kallis representing the Thunder. Matches such as this will carry on throughout the Christmas period and into the New Year. Having already written an article on the Big Bash I know for a fact that this league is outrageously entertaining and can be second to none in viewing.

This is down to the fact that each and every game is fought intensely to the very end due to the quality of players, some of which I have already mentioned play for the two Sydney franchises. So therefore the unlikely summer sport of cricket will still be providing us with sporting entertainment this Christmas.

Britain’s Ellen Whitaker at Olympia

HORSE RIDING: Christmas time brings one of the highlights of the horseriding calendar to Olympia. The event takes place from the 15th of December to the 21st providing a wide range of equestrian activities from international standard dressage to entertaining competitions. An example of one of these competitions is The Shetland Pony Grand National which holds all the excitement of the horse race on a mini scale. Shetland Ponies and their riders race round the arena at a fast and furious pace making it one of the highlights of Olympia. Another piece of

one with the winning time. However, putting all of these entertaining competitions aside, there are some high class events taking place. Living up to its reputation as one of Europe’s premier indoor equestrian events, Olympia 2015 will once again host the Reem Acra FEI World Cup Dressage leg taking place on 15th and 16th December. Six time Olympian Kyra Kyrklund will be performing on Tuesday 15th December, with Laura Tomlinson’s demonstration on Wednesday 16th December. The main representative for Britain will be Laura Tomlinson, who retired her Olympic team gold medal winning partner, Mistral Højris at

CRICKET: Christmas cricket may not be a commonly talked about in the UK but in Australia it is the complete opposite. This is

This blistering league of cricket takes place throughout the Christmas period entertainment on offer is the Kennel Club Dog Agility competitions. These take place at each of the performances with different types of classes for each one. For instance you may see the ABC Class (that’s Anything But a Collie) or you may see the small dogs pairs relays. But whatever you see, you are in for a great deal of fun, as these wonderful animals race around, over and through the obstacles, wearing their owners out and going hell for leather to be the

Olympia in 2013, returns to the famous arena to treat the audience to a uniquely crafted demonstration. Taking the audience through their paces, Tomlinson’s masterclass will provide the perfect insight into her training techniques, focusing in particular on how to deal with a difficult competition environment. So therefore Olympia is a great treat for us all over Christmas as it generally has something for everyone.

The logo of the KFC T20 Big Bash League

To summarise hopefully there is something sporting for everyone to watch this Christmas. The selection is very broad to say the least with the quota going from darts to horse riding. Personally I’ll be spoilt for choice and spend way too much time in front of the television this Christmas.

26

THE MARTLET CHRISTMAS ISSUE 8

Sport SPORT PSYCHOLOGY

From Chimps to Champs: Does Steve Peters’ magical theory work?

Francesco Cipriani outlines and investigates Steve Peters’ revolutionary Chimp Management theory and whether it truly works.

H

e is hailed as the ‘sporting saviour’ and has managed to resurrect many famous athletes and clubs. Cyclist Victoria Pendleton states: ‘without his (Steve Peters) help I would never have been able to achieve my career triumphs’. Chris Hoy calls him ‘the voice of reason’ and both Craig Bellamy and Ronnie O’Sullivan praise him for saving them from retirement and mental torture. Moreover, he also brought Liverpool to within inches away of grasping their first Premier League title in 24 years.

Even though Peters’ modesty and humility have kept him away from the spotlight, the question on everyone’s minds is still: how does he accomplish this?

Steve Peters published his book The Chimp Paradox in 2012 explaining this.

Peters believes that there are three parts of our brain which he calls the ‘chimp, human and computer’. The ‘chimp’ runs on emotions and gut instincts, making snap decisions that go against the more rational side of our brain (‘the human’). The paradox is that ‘chimp’ is essential for our living but we need to control and program it, otherwise if we just let it take control over us and let it run our lives, the results could be catastrophic. Both the ‘chimp’ and the ‘human’ can put information in the ‘computer’ (the part of our brain which acts as an area to store behaviours and thoughts).

If too many ‘chimp thoughts’ are put in the ‘computer’ then the ‘chimp’ will take over. So the key is storing useful information in the ‘computer’.

If the ‘chimp’ does eventually take over, one will start having unhelpful feel-

ings of anxiety or catastrophic thinking.

Whenever ones has these feelings, it means that the ‘chimp’ is hijacking the system. The ‘human’ could try taking the control back by force, but the ‘chimp’ is too strong and fast so the operation would most probably fail. For example: if you suffer a panic attack in an elevator because of claustrophobia, your ‘human’ side will logically know that the situation is not actually dangerous and still you will not be able to control your reaction.

What is important in these occasions is to understand that it is not you that is

ferent ways: it can go in flight, freeze or fight mode, depending on what it thinks it is more appropriate. After having completed this step, one can come up with a plan to manage the “chimp” and stop it from taking over.

ONE WAY TO MANAGE ANXIETY ● Recognise that the ‘chimp’ is acting. ● Slow down your thinking in order to get the ‘human’ involved. ● Get a perspective. ● Have a plan.

if we just let it take control over us and let it run our lives, the results could be catastrophic.

reacting but the ‘chimp’. This is the first step to manage anxiety and it also stops you from criticising yourself.

So whenever stress hits, the first reaction you will get is a ‘chimp’ one. This is completely normal and in some instances can save your life. However, in other cases, it is not useful. As I have already said, it is of paramount importance to recognise that it is your ‘chimp’ acting and not yourself; to achieve this one needs to understand how one’s ‘inner chimp’ reacts under stress, as everybody’s react in dif-

However, Peters says that a great part of his treatment is setting achievable targets.

For example, one cannot completely rid themselves of the ‘chimp’, it is impossible.

So one cannot ever stop being anxious, because their brain is set like that; and if one addresses the problem with that approach (ie of eliminating the ‘chimp’ completely) then the problem will never be solved, as the target is simply unachievable.

Having described Peters’ Model, the next step is to see whether it actually works universally. As I have already said,

Peters has worked with many famous sportsmen and women, and all of them say that he is extremely charismatic. So the question is: does the model actually work or is it Steve Peters’ charisma and passion that makes it so effective? Seeing the immediate success that the Chimp Paradox had, a few studies are being lead to see whether this therapy is as successful as it seems. Surprisingly, though, this is not as easy as it sounds, because there are many ways to test the Model, but all have side effects. The easiest and less complicated way is to probably just make other psychiatrists try out the Chimp Paradox on their patients. This is not perfect as the experiment would have to be repeated several times, and a lot of patients would have to get involved, but it is by far the best way.

So, what will happen once the results of these tests comes out? Well, if the results are positive then Peters can be officially called a psychological genius. However, if they are not positive, then the model will unfortunately slowly fade away after Peters’ retirement. In fact, Peters is aware of this possibility and he says that the ‘Chimp Paradox’ is not the perfect way to control anxiety, as everybody’s mind works differently so if it doesn’t work for you change change to a model that relates to you. However, one thing is certain, whatever the outcome of the experiment: this man has made a mark in the world of not only psychology and psychiatry, but also of sport and everyday life, revolutionising the lives of thousands of people, and so inevitably writing his name in medical history.

27

THE MARTLET CHRISTMAS ISSUE 8

Sport

I

ce hockey is one of the biggest sports in America and falls into the category of one of the ‘big four’ in the US. This group contains American football, basketball and baseball and to be mentioned in this group surely goes to show how exciting this sport is to, not just watch, but to play. But why isn’t it so popular in the UK? For those who don’t follow ice hockey it is one of the most exciting sports in the world, and yet it is underrated. With fastpaced action and the constant threat of a large tackle, it always leaves the fans and the players on edge with excitement. It relies on speed, skill, discipline and teamwork, not to mention quick thinking.

The aim of the game is similar to most sports and it’s to score a goal in your opposing teams net. However, ice hockey uses a puck (flat cylinder shape) instead of a ball which enables it to slide across the ice with relative ease. In addition to this the players must wear a large amount of protection, from imminent challenges and possible fights, and carry a stick which allows them to move and hit the puck.

Every NHL team is allowed up to 23 players in their roster (team) and a minimum of 18 with two goal tenders. Each team has six players on the ice at any one time and a team is allowed rolling substitutes. The NHL has 30 teams competing over four separate divisions (Pacific, Atlantic, Metropolitan and Central) and every team plays each other, resulting in a team playing 82 games in the regular season. After this the top three teams of each division and the best four losers are all put forward into the Stanley Cup Championships. This is the title that all the teams want to win.

ICE HOCKEY

Is Ice Hockey an Underrated Sport?

James Morrell investigates why Ice Hockey is an underrated sport in the United Kingdom The best 16 teams of the regular season compete in a win or be knocked out tournament, with a best of seven round against another team, until it comes down to the final two teams. These compete over seven games (i.e. best of seven) until the Stanley Cup Champion is decided.

The National Hockey League (NHL) is one of the most viewed sports in the US and Canada with on average 350,000 views per game however this tally can expand to well into the millions especially during the Stanley Cup Finals. Every game consists of at least 15,000 fans travelling to the stadium to watch the game, and since NHL games are played every day of the week across all the teams, then having thousands of fans during the week is very impressive. However this isn’t as popular in many other countries, especially the United Kingdom.

So why is ice hockey rejected here?

Ultimately it isn’t really viewed here because of the fanbase around football, which dwarfs that of hockey. Football has

been the biggest sport in the UK for years, ranked number one in the ‘most popular sports in the UK’ poll, and even if it wasn’t, there are eight other sports such as rugby, cricket and tennis that are ranked above ice hockey. In addition, nearly every NHL game is played after midnight GMT and even if it were at a reasonable time here, one must buy an American TV licence in order to watch it. Recently, Germany has revealed that ice hockey is hugely up and coming in their country with already an extremely large fan base and major league which is a good alternative to the NHL and defeats the problem of games being played too late.

So which countries play ice hockey?

For a long time and especially since the 1950’s ice hockey has been predominantly the ‘Big Six’ countries. These consist of Canada, USA, Czech Republic, Sweden, Finland and Russia with North America and Russia holding the most success.

Despite this, having mentioned earlier,

Germany is an up and coming country in the world of ice hockey with many large teams across the country. You may be surprised to know that the United Kingdom is ranked as low as 24th in the world rankings which is below France, Japan and even South Korea which goes to show how behind the trend we really are.

Since ice hockey is so small in this country, I would like to open the eyes of the people of the United Kingdom and even around the world to how exciting and fun the sport actually is to not only watch but to play. Therefore I would strongly suggest to watching highlights or even classic moments from any league around the world to try and peak your interest in the sport. Plus, ice hockey is played fairly regularly, by long-term skaters who do not want to see the sport die out, at every nearby ice rink, including the closest in Oxford where Oxford City Stars are currently playing. This is a good place to watch ice hockey, get involved and maybe even become a future star.

Ice hockey is underrated because of many reasons, these include the impossibility of playing for younger age groups when you want to start because there are no teams to join or people don’t want to join without a friend, and the fact that ice hockey is difficult to view at home. However the biggest problem is that other sports dwarf ice hockey, banishing it completely from most British papers. The Big Six have gained in money and representation which slows the growth of the sport in our country, so let’s challenge their authority of the biggest ice hockey-playing nations by putting our boots on and getting out there.

28

THE MARTLET CHRISTMAS ISSUE 8

Sport TENNIS

Murray’s Story of the Season Calum Egan reports on a decent season for Britain’s number one

F

or many people, Wimbledon is the epitome of Tennis: a World Cup or Six Nations that comes around every summer to peak interest in tennis before then fading again into obscurity. Obscurity, however, is a very subjective term for such a popular sport. For those who enjoy tennis, it’s an all year round sport with tournaments all over the world. Name a city and you’ll probably get a tennis tournament: Shanghai, Rome, Cincinnati and Toronto, just to name a few. For those who don’t know, the tennis calendar is split into 5 main sections containing a few Masters 1000 events, the next best thing to a Grand Slam, each with a major tournament at the end.

I’ll be recapping the season mainly through the eyes of Andy Murray as, let’s face it, he is the face of British Tennis. If I asked you to name a tennis player, the majority of you would go to Rafael Nadal, Roger Federer, Novak Djokovic or Andy Murray so, as much as people slate him and call him a failure, he only fails because he competes at the very highest level of tennis against some of the best players of all time.

Firstly you have the hard courts of Oceania, with small tournaments in Sydney, Brisbane and Auckland before the first big event of the year: the Australian Open. For Murray this is something of a bogey tournament, having got to the final 3 times previously but losing every time.

So he was aiming to stop that unwanted record when he, having got to a first grand slam final since his Wimbledon win in 2013, faced off against Djokovic in the final on the 1st of February. Unfortunately for the Scotsman, he was beaten 7-6 (7-5) 6-7 (4-7) 6-3 6-0 by the Serb in the heat of the Australian summer. However this performance showed many positive signs after a lacklustre 2014 for Murray due to a combination of injury and bad form. This improvement was marked by his return to the top 4 in the rankings for the first time in 12 months.

The end of the first hard court segment of the year was marked by the Miami open, another Masters event, and another event where Britain’s number 1 was beaten by Djokovic in the final, this time 7-6 (7-3) 4-6 6-0. Djokovic again showing his fitness and composure on the biggest of stages to ‘bagel’ (winning a set to 0) Murray in the final sets of successive finals. Miami did represent a huge milestone for Murray as he recorded his 500th professional win, becoming the first British player to do so in the Open Era. On to the clay courts: Murray’s least favourite surface, having never previously won a title on clay. This was to change

Wimbledon, an iconic court in Munich as he elected to play a tournament of lesser importance, an ATP 250 event, in order to get his confidence up for the so called ‘bigger events’, and it worked. Murray then backed up his title in Munich with another in Madrid, a Masters 1000 event, this time in far more impressive fashion as he beat the ‘King of Clay’ Nadal in the final 6-3 6-2. Nadal had been unbeatable on clay in previous years so this win was a major milestone for Murray despite Nadal’s decline in form.

Due to these titles, expectations were at a record high for the French Open in the French capital of Paris. Murray didn’t disappoint and reached the semi final where he met his old friend: Djokovic.

The match was rain-delayed on Friday after 2 sets of play with Novak taking both but Murray fought back on the Saturday to 2 sets all before he ran out of steam and was dispatched by the world number 1 in clinical fashion to ultimately lose 6-3 6-3 5-7 5-7 6-1. An unlikely man won the title however as Stan ‘the man’ Wawrinka produced a masterclass to beat the Serb in four sets. A similar story made the papers on Monday morning but improvements were being made and the Scotsman’s most successful spell on the clay gave plenty of positivity for Wimbledon next month.

Murray headed into the grass-court campaign with high hopes of winning his second Wimbledon after making vast improvements in his form and fitness over the first half of the season. This was in no way dented by his fourth win at Queen’s club, climaxed with a win over big-serving South African Kevin Ander-

A solid season for the Scot son, to join tennis legends Boris Becker and John McEnroe as a four time Queen’s club champion. With Murray peaking just in time for Wimbledon, expectations were high for the Scot. These expectations were shattered by a Federer performance that rolled back the years to the Swiss’ best ever performances, recording an incredible 75% first serve accuracy to thwart Murray 7-5 7-5 6-4. Although Federer was at his peak once again, so was Djokovic and their final was one for the history books as Novak won in a colossal four set match to take his Grand Slam total to 2 for the year.

Post Wimbledon and the players took to North America for the fourth part of the season. Another final and another meeting between old foes Murray and Djokovic although this time Murray turned the script on its head to win against his Serbian adversary for the first time for 2 years.

Dominating the baseline battle was key to Andy’s victory as he won 6-4 4-6 6-3 in the Masters 1000 event in Montreal, Canada.

As well as being his fourth title of the year, Murray overtook Federer in the ATP rankings to claim 2nd place ahead of the US open, the fourth Grand Slam of the year, ensuring a more favourable draw in theory. However a loss to Federer in Cincinnati allowed the Swiss legend to reclaim 2nd place.

Murray’s US open campaign nearly ended in tragedy as he had to overcome a 2 set deficit to beat French player Adrian Mannarino in a 5 set thriller in only the 2nd round. Despite his heroics previously, the British number 1 could not repeat his comeback heroics after falling down 2 sets against Kevin Anderson in the fourth round, losing 7-6 (7-5) 6-3 6-7 (2-7) 7-6 (70) in an epic four hours and 18 minutes contest. It was the first time Murray had lost before the quarter-finals of a Grand Slam since the US Open in 2010.

As the final stretch of the season approached, Murray suffered yet another defeat to Djokovic in a final of a Masters 1000 event however, Murray won’t be overly concerned with this one. Djokovic is in a league of his own right now - his win in Paris not only his 22nd in a row, his 10th title of the year in a record breaking year for himself.

With the finale of the calendar, the ATP World Tour finals, wrapped up, securing his place in the top 8 showdown in London well in advance, Murray has had a successful year. It has been a solid season for the Scot in that he has nailed his place in the top 3 in the world and bounced back from his disappointment of 2014.

29

THE MARTLET CHRISTMAS ISSUE 8

Sport

Steven Gerrard playing for LA Galaxy

AMERCIAN SPORT

Football’s Exchange Freddie Bermingham and Jonny Hurrell evaluate the successes of ‘soccer’ going to America and the NFL coming to the UK

W

ith the recent set of NFL regular season games finishing, the popularity of NFL in the UK has never been higher.

But how much further will it rise and will we eventually see London franchise?

NFL games have been played at Wembley every year since 2007, each game bar one with an attendance over 80,000. A few days after the Kansas City Chiefs beat the Detroit Lions 45-10 in front of 83,000 people, it was announced that three more games (in addition to the Wembley deal) would be held at Twickenham between 2016 and 2018. Further to this, Tottenham’s new stadium will host at least two games a year from 2018.

Overall, this means that there will be at least five games a season from 2018, being held at three different venues. The amount of money the NFL has pumped into trying to export the game was proven when, on the 24th October, they closed regent street and held a ‘block parade’.

It involved an estimated 600,000 participating in activities, being entertained by cheerleaders and meeting coaches and players.

In my opinion, these figures show

a remarkable interest in the sport even though many see it as a dramatised version of rugby. The lure of watching it on TV is far less enticing given the constant adverts and stop-start nature. On a typical game day in America, the most watched ‘match’ is redzone. It is essentially their equivalent of Match of the Day, only live.

They chop and change between games depending on which is at the most exciting point or when a team may be about to score. This kind of broadcasting highlights the fact that it is fairly dull to watch a single match through.

A UK audience are unlikely to be interested in 60 minutes of action to be drawn out over four hours. Even then, the 60 minutes only comprises of 10 minutes of play, the rest is the 35 seconds in between plays. In comparison, football has two 45 minute halves with usually insightful analysis during the break. Perhaps it is a culture barrier that will be too difficult to break. American’s are practically immune to the constant commercials. Even during the game they have stats ‘presented by’ and halftime shows ‘brought to you by’.

It’s just annoying.

There has long been talk of a potential

franchise to be based in London. Mark Waller, the Vice President of International NFL said that there will need to be six million ‘avid’ fans to warrant the need for a franchise; ‘avid’ is classed as extremely interested or favorite sport, in a survey taken each year. When the International Series started in 2007, there were 2.3 million fans, the most recent figures show that there are now four million: on track to reach six million by at least 2025.

The NFL’s governing body has however stated that there cannot be any new teams adding to the current 32. This would mean that the most likely team to transfer across the Atlantic would be the Jacksonville Jaguars, who have played at Wembley for the last for the last few years and will continue to do so in the foreseeable future. Their owner, who currently owns Fulham Football Club, is worth $5.6 billion. A study conducted by Deloitte has found that each year, the International Series games generate £26 million for the UK economy and a permanent franchise would be worth £100 million.

The potential move has been welcomed by Chancellor of the Exchequer George Osborne who said that he would do everything possible to facilitate a team, including offering tax breaks. Whilst there is still a certain degree of scepticism of the attraction of the sport, we are see very few negatives of having a franchise in the UK, something we are wholeheartedly behind.

On the opposite side of the spectrum, we look at how football would fare in the USA, and for those of you reading this who have been to the States yourselves you probably will have noticed that the Americans are big on their own sport. The NFL and college football dominate the sporting landscape, and then in the background tends to be baseball, basketball, to an extent ice hockey and, undoubtedly, the growing sport of football – or for the sake of saving confusion – ‘soccer’. And we think we could all agree we’re fairly similar here in England, with soccer, rugby and cricket; the only exception to that rule being the possibility of the NFL – and even though we know exactly zero people who actually play American Football, we do know some who like to watch and follow it.

The real problem for us with American sports is that they’re just quite boring.

And the reason for that is that they just take too long. For example, in 2013 the average NFL game went on for 3 hours

and 10 minutes, and in baseball the average game lasts 2 hours and 57 minutes, It amazes us the amount of support the population offer for the sports, especially given, may we note, the actual game time in the average NFL game in 2013 was about 11 minutes. Yes, 11 minutes.

That means only 17% of what you’re watching is actually being played as a game and of that how much is actually exciting stuff, the kind of highlights you see on YouTube and social media? Compare that 11 minutes to the 80 and 90 minutes of rugby and football respectively and you begin to question how the States can love their sports so much and not ours?

The next question is, what are you actually watching for the other 83% of the time?!

Well, in a typically American way, the reason the games are so long is, you guessed it, advertisements. The average NFL game is built around on average 20 advertisement breaks, featuring over 100 ads. Of course there are some other reasons to take into consideration such as referee reviews, watching players and referees loiter on the pitch readying themselves for the next play.

And it’s for this reason that we think British sports, and in particular soccer, won’t thrive in the US the way their sports do. It really is that one very simple reason.

It’s not that they’re not exciting or long enough for the people, otherwise the NFL wouldn’t be so massive, it’s not that the population are just stubborn and patriotic. It is, in my opinion, very basically put, the fact that American sports are built around commercials. They don’t force the broadcaster to creatively weave as much advertising as possible into the one short 15-minute break halfway through each game after 40-45 minutes of non-stop game time.

And this is why the men in charge, the advertisers, the broadcasters, and nearly everyone, will in a way discourage the sports – at least to the extent that they don’t over popularize and overtake the NFL. They don’t want NFL to be taken over by the MLS, (Major League Soccer – the Premier League equivalent) simply because they won’t make anywhere near as much money, and we don’t blame them. As much as we find American football a fairly boring and eventless sport, the people of the USA love it to the extent that they seem almost brainwashed. Why would they shorten the game and reduce profits to make way for soccer and rugby?

Most recent figures show that there are now four million NFL fans

30

THE MARTLET CHRISTMAS ISSUE 8

Sport

Jose Mourinho FOOTBALL

Has time run out for the “special one”?

C

Will Stewart discusses why Jose Mourinho’s time at Chelsea may soon be over

helsea’s recent lack of success has shocked the footballing nation. This has come as a total surprise to many, especially given that Chelsea are the current Barclays Premier League champions and have arguably one of the best managers in the world.

Jose Mourinho has had a managerial career spanning over fifteen years, and in these years he has had success with nearly all of his clubs. With Chelsea, where he has had two spells as manager, he has won eight trophies so far. He has also won the Champion’s League with Porto and Inter Milan.

In his time with the Portuguese giants, Porto, he won six titles, which is an outstanding achievement for a manager at the beginning of his coaching career.

Last season, his team were at, or very near, the top of the table from the start to the end of the season and didn’t lose a game until December. There is little wonder many people at the start of this season thought his team were favourites to regain their title. They don’t call him the ‘special one’ for nothing.

It’s not just one thing that makes him special. He can be a master tactician whilst also coming across in the media as someone who couldn’t really be bothered to be there. He can connect with his players and get the best out of them whilst public-

sea, dominated the headlines and Jose Mourinho came under fire for her mistreatment. His view was that Hazard didn’t need treatment and that he needed all eleven players at that time, but the doctor didn’t agree. Mourinho is now facing an individual legal claim from Eva Carneiro over her exit from the club. The following week they lost 3-0 to title rivals Man City and since then they have lost to Crystal Palace, Everton, Southampton, West Ham, Stoke (twice) and most of all, Liverpool at home. This is simply not good enough for any team, let alone the reigning champions.

After their loss to Liverpool, Mourinho held a post-match inquest with his coaching staff on the pitch and even though the Chelsea fans were chanting words of encouragement for him throughout the game and displaying banners of support for him, owner Roman Abramovich was not at the match. He cut a forlorn figure as Liverpool’s third goal was scored, which put the victory out of sight. The pressure on him is mounting every week and with each game he loses, his job looks in an even more perilous situation.

The title seems to have already slipped from their grasp since leaders Manchester City and Arsenal look increasingly stronger week by week. Their best player last year, Eden Hazard, has

This season has gone drastically wrong for Chelsea and Mourinho

ly criticising one of them every weekend.

However, his time may be running out.

Although I believe him to be a fantastic manager and great character to have in the news, results do not lie and recently they have not been going his way. A 2-2 draw at home with Swansea on the first day of the season did not seem too bad a start, but what followed made the headlines for the following days and weeks.

The incident with Eva Carneiro, the former Chelsea team doctor who treated Eden Hazard on the pitch in the final stages of the match against Swan-

not performed at all and major signings such as Radamel Falcao and Pedro have not lived up to expectations.

The responsibility for all this must rest with the man in charge, Jose Mourinho. The players are mainly the same players that won the title last year, with a few new additions, and they don’t become bad footballers overnight. There could well be something going wrong behind the scenes at Chelsea football club, whether it’s a mutiny amongst the players or just a bad team dynamic.

Mourinho isn’t helping himself as he

Time may be running out for Jose Mourinho is in the referees’ bad books on a regular basis and he often gets sent to the stands.

Mourinho was given a £50,000 fine after comments he made following Chelsea’s defeat to Southampton. He was given a one-match stadium ban and also fined £40,000 by the Football Association after his misconduct during his team’s defeat to West Ham in October. If he can’t keep himself under control then how can he expect his players to maintain a cool head during tough fixtures? It makes you wonder if the team are really behind his style of play and if they really do want to play for Chelsea with him in charge.

The media are constantly criticising him and there are all sorts of rumours of him pushing players and falling out with referees. He claims that there is some conspiracy against Chelsea, where referees are reluctant to award major decisions to them. Personally, I believe that all of his post-match antics are purely to distract the media away from his team’s bad run of form and this is a clever tactic often used by managers. It may be that his mind games have finally caught up with him.

Jose Mourinho has claimed his previous differences with Chelsea owner

Roman Abramovich are long behind him and they now enjoy a harmonious relationship. However, the Chelsea boss was sacked once before by Abramovich in 2007 despite winning two titles in his first three seasons at Stamford Bridge.

There have already been 3 managerial changes this year, including Brendan Rodgers’ sacking. Rodgers’ big name replacement at Liverpool, Jürgen Klopp, had a joke at Mourinho’s expense, calling himself the ‘normal one’ as opposed to the ‘special one’, but the two managers do seem on good terms with each other.

Chelsea would have to pay Jose Mourinho £30 million to get rid of him and the bookmakers have odds of 3/1 on him to be the next managerial casualty of the season. There is talk of Mourinho’s representatives already investigating a move to PSG or a return to Inter Milan if he loses his job at Chelsea.

However you look at it, this season has gone drastically wrong for Chelsea and Mourinho. A fall from champions last year to 15th place by October is inexcusable.

It may be that by the time you read this article Jose Mourinho will have already been sacked but at the moment, things are looking very ominous for the ‘special one’.

31

THE MARTLET CHRISTMAS ISSUE 8

Humour

Dudley’s Dilemmas ADVICE

The following was published after Dudley, the Head’s dog, was given many doggy treats by Henry Waterson and Blake Jones

Dear Dudley, I go to you with a great dilemma, but know that I can trust in your renowned confidentiality to when it comes to personal matters. I am in the Lower Sixth and this year have started having General Studies with St Helen’s girls. Whilst I find it thrilling to look through many examples of flawed logic and say that it sounds bad but is still an argument (or whatever else I have to look forward to in the GS course) I am finding something tricky.

To go to these exhilarating lessons I have to go into St. Helen’s school and share a classroom with girls. Now whilst I have nothing against them, these females are rather foreign to me. At my prep school we only had about three girls in each class and at Abingdon I have only had lessons with boys. Although one would think I have experience with talking to girls because of the female teachers at school, myself and many of members of the house, are actually struggling to distinguish between our house tutors on the basis of three of them all being women.

My lack of experience with gynic individuals means that when I see them I struggle to talk. My friends cover this up by saying I am so deeply engaged in learning that correlation is not causation. Whilst this should be fine, there is one girl in our class who I have found a particular fondness to. I feel very strongly about her, but am unable to say more than ‘this is an opinion not an argument’. Please give me advice on how to feel more comfortable in these lessons and, if you can, what I should do to advance my relationship with this girl.

Anonymous L6th

Dear Client, I admire your bravery in coming to me with the most tender of issues. Follow my advice, and you will realise you have made the right choice. You’d be surprised at how many pupils and members of staff have written to me seeking solutions to romantic predicaments, but since most of these exchanges are inappropriate for public reading (I offer absolute confidentiality), there is not much evidence to show for it. But, please, let me assure you that I am indeed an expert in this field of counselling, having advised on many secret liaisons during my career.

Before we kick off, I’m gratified to learn how much you’re enjoying the General Studies course, having designed a great deal of it myself. I often hear boys putting shoddy arguments to one another around the grounds, so I pulled a few strings and now you can all finally get better at it.

But I digress; let us seek out a solution for you. In my experience of the modern day learning environment, academic excellence is a quality highly sought after by members of the opposite sex. A study somewhere in America shows that students who excel in class by sitting at the front and providing the larger part of the class’s input are talked about for an average of three extra minutes per day behind their backs. If you like, you can come round to my office for a thorough discussion of the GS course. If you bring a bag of Roast Beef Bones I will even consider sharing the teacher’s notes.

I learned quite early on in my career that human courtship differs significantly from canine (it really does), but I would nevertheless extol the benefits of a moonlit walk through the park. I understand that Albert Park is not an ideal venue for a moonlit walk, but there are plenty of green spaces around Abingdon to choose from.

Furthermore, it is a powerful symbol of unity for my kind to wear matching collars. I see no reason why the concept cannot be transferable, so consider buying her a matching tie.

A common mistake made by suitors in your situation is to comb through social media searching for detailed information surrounding your soulmate. When it comes to it, this is seldom appreciated and more times than not results in police involvement. I have friends in the dog squad, and trust me, their bites are just as big as their bark.

In the complex world of courtship, every dog understands the importance of grooming.

Ensure you are clear of fleas, animal waste and residual food, and spend no fewer than 60 minutes grooming every morning.

However, none of these strategies will make you gain the slightest distance unless you can bring yourself to talk to her. The fact that you did not send me a name suggests you have not made great progress towards this goal. Poems, boxes of chocolate and flowers are all very well, but ultimately it’s your personality that’s going to win or lose the battle.

Regards, Dudley.

The

{Recap}

Quiz

See how much you can remember with this quiz by Henry Waterson

1. What does ‘ISIL’ stand for?

2. What is Toyota’s official plural of ‘Prius’?

3. A Russian airliner recently broke apart over which desert?

4. What is the name of Abingdon’s next head?

5. How many peers sit in the House of Lords?

6. Who played the leading female role in Spectre?

7. What is the maximum size of an an NHL hockey roster?

8. In what year was the first NFL regular season game played in the UK?

Abingdon or not?

9. Who was the first Abingdonian to fall in WW1?

10. What was School House’s song actually about?

11. Which Zulu king won the battle of Isandlwana?

12. Back to the Future Part II is set on which day in 2015?

13. Where is the Trident programme based?

14. What is the Asian equivalent of the EU? 15. Where is Jeremy Corbyn’s constituency?

Bonus: What does Andy Murray eat his strawberries with?

b

c

d

e

f

g

Work out whether the following pictures were taken from around the Abingdon area or from other locations in the UK.

1. Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant 2. Prii 3. Sinai, Egypt 4. Michael Windsor 5. 750 6. Léa Seydoux 7. 23 8. 2007 9. Paymaster Alan Murray Austin 10. A train travelling through South Africa 11. Cetshwayo 12. 21st October

a

PUBLISHER Emma Williamson

HEAD OF SPORT Dan Brown

EDITOR Toby Jupp

DESIGN EDITORS Blake Jones Pawin Sermsuk

DEPUTY EDITOR Henry Waterson FEATURES EDITOR Blake Jones HEAD OF NEWS Nick Harris

WEBSITE MANAGER George Jeffreys ILLUSTRATOR Michael Man

STAFF WRITERS Alex Thulin Ben Ffrench Blake Jones Calum Egan Dan Alcock Dan Brown Douglas Wilson Francesco Cipriani Freddie Bermingham Henry Waterson Jacob Lillie James Morrell Printed by the Newspaper Club

Johnny Allison Jonathan Lee Jonny Hurrell Nick Harris Patrick Cole Pea Sermsuk Piers Mucklejohn Sam Chambers Saul Rea Toby Jupp Tom Buckle Will Stewart

Contact us at martlet@abingdon.org.uk

Initial design by Asten Yeo and George Jeffreys

a. Not - Blandford Forum b. Not - Henley on Thames c. Abingdon - Army Base d. Abingdon - South West Abingdon e. Abingdon - Bridge into Abingdon f. Abingdon - The Lock g. Not - Pontypridd, Wales 13. Clyde Naval Base, Scotland 14. ASEAN 15. Islington North Bonus: His fingers