Power to the People: The Internet Clothing Label Revolution.

This article was recently published on suite101.com

Far from the cold and drizzly environs of the high-street there is a change brewing in the fashion world, and it is accessible from the comfort of your own home. The unabated rise of the Internet has blown the industry wide open, and not just in terms of new and more convenient purchasing methods.

Sites like Myspace have offered people a soapbox to convey whatever they want to the world, be it ideas, music or products. This unprecedented democratisation of the retail industry has led to a boom in the amount of independent clothing labels. Young designers now have a showcase like never before. The Internet has, it would seem, put the power back in the hands of the people.

Owning your own clothing brand, once the preserve of the fashionista elite, is now within the grasp of anyone with an ounce of entrepreneurial spirit and a burgeoning imagination. Labels like Adored and Big Deal found their feet on the Internet and are now usurping the major high-street fashion chains with their low-prices, high-quality and individual styles.

The punk ethos on display is hardly surprising, given that this fashion industry overhaul mirrors that of the music scene several years ago. Underground bands and artists built up a presence on Myspace and other sites, which, in many cases, led to record deals, tours and massive success. In fact Internet clothing labels sprung from that burst of independent creativity.

Underground punk and hardcore bands, impressed with the mouthpiece afforded to them by the Internet, began to set up their own clothing labels using the same sites. Members of bands like Bring Me the Horizon and You Me at Six set up clothing labels that grew so quickly they now stand fully independent of the bands that spawned them.

The Internet is rapidly becoming a one-stop shop for the ‘punk-kids’ on the cutting edge of fashion. Printing sites like Lucky Star Printing are helping to turn myspace into a modern day cottage industry with design, manufacture and distribution all under one virtual roof. There is of course, rampant competition at every level of the production process, which pushes prices way down and allows recession hit customers an opportunity to lay their hands on individual styles by unique designers at wallet friendly prices.

But is this really the future of fashion design and marketing? The decline in popularity suffered by Myspace over the past year has caused many designers to leave the social-network community. Internet traffic monitors, Hitwise have identified a 25% fall in Myspace generated traffic between 2006 and 2009; that is, people who clicked on a music or entertainment site as a result of seeing the link on Myspace. This decline in popularity may have driven the more established online labels to take the plunge and go it alone, but it could dissuade young designers from taking up the challenge at all.

The media that has taken Myspace’s place as the king-pin of social networking are less applicable in the capacity of direct sales, and the sites that are simply do not have the enormous reputation of Myspace in it’s heyday. This is likely to cause the movement to grind to halt.

However, what the independent label boom did show, was the power of the Internet to open doors for those wily enough to exploit them and that in this era of information a spark of creativity can create something amazing.

Just like punk, which burned brightly for a year or two and then was snuffed out, the independent clothing label revolution may prove to be short lived, but there is still time to support independent designers. Get online, grab a bargain and, more importantly, fight the power.

Unbroken's first ever UK show- ULU October 17th 2010

This review was recently published on punknews.org

Tickets for Unbroken’s long-awaited debut UK show sold out months ago and have been changing hands on internet forums for silly money ever since. It is seventeen years since the San Diego hardcore legends dropped their first full length album, Ritual, a record that reinvigorated the hardcore scene of the early nineties and inspired hundreds of like-minded individuals to get out there and start bands of their own. The list of bands that cite Unbroken as an influence is insane: The Hope Conspiracy, Planes Mistaken For Stars and Modern Life is War have all name-checked the so-cal crew as a catalyst for their musical endeavours- and for that reason alone tonight was always going to be a bit special.

Whilst half of the early-doors crowd were participating in a ‘mosh-warm-up’ by fighting their way through the merch queues the other half were being treated a strong set from German straight-edger’s Ritual, whose mix of anthemic chant-a-longs and impressive riffage went down a treat with the largely cosmopolitan crowd. It’s fitting that the bill should reflect the multi-national composition of the audience, who seemed to have converged on the ULU from every corner of Europe to see their heroes play.

The main room had filled out by time Ceremony took to the stage armed with a set of tunes design to excite and disturb in equal measure. Currently touring Europe on the back of the excellent Rohnert Park L.P, Ceremony are a band at the height of their creative powers and a breath of the fresh air of originality in what can be a claustrophobic and restrictive genre. Live, Ceremony are a force to behold; frontman Ross Ferrer stalks the stage like a feral, and less muscled-out, Rollins barking out lyrics here and there, addressing the front row and then those up on the balcony in seemingly the same breath. He performs like a vessel of pure music, convulsing and contorting in front of the audience while ideas overflow from him, impervious to the stage-divers charging around him. The site of him standing with hunched shoulders, microphone pulled in close, in the middle of the empty horse-shoe of the mosh-pit like a lost child, while enraptured punters look on in bemusement is a bizarre one indeed. Talk about breaking the forth wall- Ceremony are awesome tonight.

So last but not definitely not least: Unbroken. Leading in with a play-list of brit-pop and UK indie, Unbroken pile into their criminally short, but ecstatically sweet, set like men possessed, wielding their instruments like there is no tomorrow. The crowd respond in kind and politely go “f**king nuts” in the presence of their heroes. Unbroken’s set is hardcore perfection and refreshingly free of bullshit, Dave Claibourne’s clarion call during the set opener sets the tone for the remainder of the show; “We came into this together, lets leave here together… no bullshit”. From then on the band pile-drive their way through 40 minutes of their awesome back-catalogue, which is lapped up by the fantastically receptive crowd. “This will be our last song I think,” says an awestruck Rob Moran towards the end of the evening, “We don’t really do encores”. As if the mere fact that tonight’s show is being played at all wasn’t enough.

Is tough-tackling ruining the game?

This article was recently published on suite101.com

The issue of tackling is becoming one of the most hotly debated in the modern game. A few high profile, and sickeningly graphic, injuries in recent years have led to uneasy discussions about protecting our quicker, more skilful players and retaining the contact element that makes football such an engaging contest.

Tackling is undoubtedly one of the reasons we love football. Think of a perfectly-timed, goal-saving tackle, like Bobby Moore’s inch-perfect challenge on Jairzinho that still lives on in legend 40 years later- it is a thing of beauty, and a criminally under-celebrated element of the game.

Obviously when these challenges go wrong they do so in style and over the years football authorities have introduced tighter controls to reduce the risk of this. Challenges from behind, two-footed challenges, studs-up challenges and challenges with a raised leg all run the risk of earning the perpetrator a straight red- which, lets be honest, is preferable to what the receiver of such a challenge might get.

With these measures in mind it would be madness to say that tackling is tougher in the modern game than it was- say- thirty years ago. Don Revie’s Leeds United would almost certainly not have achieved nine-consecutive top-four finishes if such tackling had been outlawed in the early seventies- but that’s getting into a whole new area of controversy.

Horrible challenges have been around since the dawn of time- ever since man first kicked a football there has been a slightly bigger man ready to wrap six studs round his knee and shout; “got the ball ref!”. The difference today is that we live in the age of information and the internet; now when someone breaks their leg at a football match it’s not just the couple of hundred people in the terrace nearest the incident that see it in all it’s gory realism, it’s whoever watches Match of the Day that night as well, and whoever clicks on the link on the Sun’s website etc etc.

This issue has leapt back to the forefront of debate following a tackle by “everyone’s-favourite-dutchman” Nigel De Jong on Hatem Ben Arfa that broke the young Newcastle midfielders leg in two places.

While it was clumsy challenge, and I wish Hatem Ben Arfa the speediest of recoveries, I do feel that reaction to it was made worse by De Jong’s preceding reputation as a ‘thuggish player’. De Jong has repeatedly shown himself to be a strong and enthusiastic player but also one who needs to rein in his clumsiness. His sickening challenge on Stuart Holden in a friendly (!) between Holland and the USA earlier this year was evidence of a player who challenges first, thinks later.

This sort of mentality is not going to produce elegant, fantastically timed challenges- just clunky, wince-inducing challenges in which one or both players end up hurt. Then there’s the acrobatics from the world cup final in which the bottom of De Jong’s foot was unfairly fouled by Xabi Alonso’s rib-cage, but that’s a story for another day.

Another public scapegoat is Karl Henry, whose so-late-they-had-to-delay-Match-of-the-Day challenge on Wigan’s Jordi Gomez supplied the British public with some much needed Youtube entertainment but thankfully resulted in no injury.

Karl Henry is captain of a Wolves side whose physicality has come under much criticism this season, not least from a bewildered Newcastle boss Chris Hughton who watched an admirably composed Joey Barton get flattened repeatedly by some wayward challenging from the boys in orange.

Henry is another strong and enthusiastic tackler, but he is also a brilliant one whose well-timed challenges undoubtedly contributed to Wolves’ continued status as a Premiership side. However the challenge on Jordi Gomez was rash; Henry committed far to early against an extremely quick player- the red card he then received was produced so quickly that Henry was off the field while Gomez was still airborne.

Teams that are promoted to the Premiership with realistic designs on staying up frequently employ bully-boy tactics against quicker, more skilful teams to ensure they do so, but it is deeply unfair to say that these teams go out with the sole intention of injuring, and possible ending the career of, a fellow professional.

What is true, however, is that the game now is played at a much quicker pace than it used to be. Players in 2010 are such finely tuned athletes that inch-precision in all areas of the game is now vital. This has led to previously excusable mistakes, for example a heavy touch when receiving a pass, resulting in bone-crunching 50-50s as two players scramble for the resulting loose ball.

As a result an innocent but inexpertly timed challenge becomes potentially catastrophic. Two cases in point being Martin Taylor’s challenge on Eduardo and Ryan Shawcross’ tackle on Aaron Ramsey, both of which resulted in horrific injuries to the tackled player. Shawcross’ reaction to the challenge suggested he hadn’t even expected to catch Ramsey never mind inflict such a horrible injury on the young Welshman. These were two challenges totally lacking in malice.

So now the FA is faced with a balancing act; football is in equal parts a game of deft skill and courageous physicality, this must be maintained. Skilful players must be protected but it is up to the tough-tackling defenders and holding-midfielders to take responsibility for their actions and ensure they promote intelligent and precise challenging, or risk losing the contact side of the sport completely.

Valencia v Manchester United: Living in the shadow of debt

This article was recently published on suite101.com

Manchester United's clash with Valencia in the Champions League last week looked on paper to be one of the games of the round. In the event it was a fairly tawdry affair with the visitors from the north of England picking up the three points thanks to a well taken late goal from Mexican wunderkind Javier Hernandez.

The game itself may not have lived up to the hype, but what this contest between two giants of the European stage provided was a fascinating look at two huge clubs coping with equally huge debts.

Valencia’s trophy haul of 6 La Liga titles and 7 triumphs the Copa del Rey has cemented their status as Spain’s third most successful club, behind the near mythical duo of Real Madrid and Barcelona, and earned them the reputation of one of the most formidable teams in Europe.

Ten years on from their sensational run in the Champions League that saw them reach the final in two consecutive seasons, Valencia retain their place amongst Europe’s glamour teams and continue to be extremely stubborn opponents. Chelsea’s victory in 2007 was the first for an English side at the Mestalla in 40 years.
With such a distinguished history it is little wonder that the club’s owners wanted to build a more fitting home for Los Ches. Designed to hold 73,000 fans, the Nou Mestalla, situated in the north west of the city was set to rival the great stadiums of their European rivals, until February 2009 when a sheepish looking board of owners announced that the plans were to be scrapped and production halted, citing the clubs mounting debts as the reason for the project being shelved. Now the stadium lies empty and only semi-complete, serving as a macabre monument to the ambition of a club and to the boom and bust nature of the modern game.

Until the summer of 2010 the debts that plagued the clubs owners had seemed to have little effect on the players’ performances on the pitch. A poor showing during the 07/08 La Liga season being the only major blip in recent years and even that lacklustre campaign was rewarded with the inclusion of a strong Valencia contingent in Spain’s victorious Euro ’08 team.

Then the transfer window opened and the opportunism began. The dawn of the new season finds Los Che’s with a considerably depleted squad. The golden duo of David Villa and David Silva have been sold, along with rangey striker Nicola Zigic and veteran defender Carlos Marchena, in a move that raised £74M for the ailing club. Despite these efforts reports suggest that Valencia’s debt remains in the region of £425M.

Club president Manolo Llorente defended the sales, saying “Our key objective is economic viability, and that means we are obliged to take responsible decisions. One of which is to sell our best players.”

Admirably, Valencia have rallied and at the beginning of October find themselves topping the Spanish league, and, along with Real Madrid, one of only two only undefeated sides in the division. It remains to be seen how long they can maintain this pressure on their title rivals but as it stands the Valencia side of ‘10/’11 have every right to call themselves contenders for the La Liga championship. The fans will keep on smiling as long as the goals and wins keep on coming, but this cannot hide the fact that Valencia is a club in crisis.

While the blue half of Manchester, who benefited from the fire-sale with the acquisition of silky winger David Silva, represent a club in the exact opposite financial situation to Valencia, their rivals in the red half may look upon the club’s predicament with a degree of anxiety.

As Manchester United prepared for their Champions league clash at the Estadio Mestalla last Wednesday, they would have harboured silent concerns that they were being offered a glimpse of their own future.

Manchester United’s debt problems are much more widely known. The storm of protests that met the takeover of the club by the Glazer brothers in 2005 have gathered pace again in 2010 with the “green and gold” movement. Green and gold being the colours of Newton Heath, the forerunners of Manchester United, and symbolic of a return to financial integrity and the purity of the that early side.

In January 2010 Manchester United’s debts had grown to £716M, a figure that continues to rise; the interest on this debt, previously fixed at 14.25% APR, grew to 16.25% in August 2010. It will take more than a yard-sale of big name players to dig themselves out of this hole.

Manchester United continue to keep their heads just above the water on the strength of their global brand; the Red Devils top the table for shirt sales every season between 1.2 and 1.5M shirts sold per season, only Real Madrid come close to matching this.

In addition to this, Manchester United have Old Trafford, a ground capable of holding 75,957 fans, compared to the 55,000 held by Estadio Mestalla. Even the Nou Mestalla’s projected capacity falls short of this mark by nearly three thousand seats. The fact that United play to a full house at most home game’s is a testament to the strength of this fan base.

Even with their huge global presence, Manchester United continues to struggle but the strength of the brand affords them a certain degree of breathing space and allows them to keep their head above the waterline. Valencia just cannot compete with this profile. Los Che’s do not have the level of income required to service a debt of this magnitude.

I do not intend to justify the position of Manchester United however, the practice of using a clubs income to service an ever increasing debt is not only unsustainable it is also grossly irresponsible, particularly when we have seen so many clubs without the luxury of global branding fold and disappear due to mismanagement and debt.

Clubs such as United have been walking a dangerous line with the international football federations for some time and should be wary of possible future sanctions. Uefa have been in talks for some time about barring hugely debt-ridden clubs from European competition.

This means fundemental changes must be made if United are to continue to keep their head above water and keep hold of their big names.

For now, both clubs live to fight another day in the Champions league and continue to challenge for domestic honours in their respective countries, but both clubs are surely aware that they must learn to operate sustainably if this success is to continue in coming years.

How Red is "Red Ed"?

This article recently appeared on suite101.com

Since Ed Miliband's victory in the Labour party leadership election on September 25, 2010 there has been much speculation as to what this heralds for the party. Many have cited Miliband's policies, such as the establishment of a high-pay commission, as evidence of a shift back to the left, much to the delight of trade unionists and supporters of ‘old labour’. His detractors, on the other hand, have taken this apparent move to the left as a sign of weakness over critical issues, mainly reducing the deficit.

Consequentially, depending on where it comes from, the moniker “Red Ed” could be a rallying cry or just more mudslinging.

Miliband himself, it appears, is less than happy with the tag; the lengths he is willing to go to distance himself from these comments indicate a distinct discomfort with such pigeonholing. In an interview with the Guardian’s Decca Aitkenhead, Mr Miliband did not take kindly to the mention of rumours that he was a Bennite, suggesting an uneasy relationship with left-wing politics- or at least, an unease with the mention that he forms a part of that left-wing.

It’s almost as if being part of the moderate left, previously a byword for tolerance and benevolence, has become a slur, and socialism; a dirty word. Conservative party chairman Baroness Warsi pointedly commented that Miliband owed his leadership victory to the votes of trade unionists, who still make up a large proportion of the Labour party leadership ballot.

Such comments are not only needless but also dangerous- the implication that the unions are malicious bogeymen out to bring our country to a standstill, or that a politician with union backing is weak and easily manipulated, does not do justice to a legitimate and fundamentally vital component of the political machine.

Miliband has described the accusations as “tiresome” and “nonsense”, adding that his late father, the socialist academic Ralph Miliband, would not have agreed with the assertion that he was a “lefty”. Indeed, it is difficult to see where these accusations have stemmed from at all.

Writing for The First Post, Neil Clark noted that Miliband is in opposition to the re-nationalisation of the railways, placing him further to the right than the majority of Tory supporters. Clark puts forward the idea that, due to a clutch of centre-left policies, like increased taxation for higher incomes, voters have been drawn into a "Diane Abbot can't win and Ed's the best of the rest" scenario, garnering him a begrudged support from leftists and trade unionists.

Leftist paper The Socialist Worker has also hinted that this is the case, rubbishing claims that Ed Miliband’s election signalled a shift to the left for the labour party and pointing out that just seven MPs voted for the Diane Abbott. Abbott’s campaign unfortunately failed to ignite the left of the party who instead went for a safer option in Miliband.

In the same article The Socialist Worker went on to denounce the tag of “Red Ed” as ludicrous, stating that Miliband is Labour leader “thanks to the approval of the trade unions and because many workers don’t want any more of the toxic policies of New Labour.”

Whether or not these accusations are founded or not is to some extent immaterial; it is the fact that such accusations are being made at all that is saddening. It is true to say that describing Miliband as a socialist is indicative of how far to the right the British political system has moved in recent years, but it is also true to say that the slur implied by such a description is evidence of an increased intolerance towards leftward thinking in modern politics.

Neil Clark described Miliband's reaction to the rumour that he was a Bennite to be “as if Bennism were some appalling disease”- it appears that the predominately centre-right populace of the British political system seem to think it is.

While we are a long way off a Mcarthy-esque “reds under the bed” witch-hunt, it is still fairly sad that such prejudice exists. It is difficult to form a representative political landscape when mainstream politicians are becoming increasingly similar shades of grey. It is a shame as well, that the support of trade union leaders has become a way in which to make someone appear unelectable.

Even more sad, it could be argued, is Mlliband’s reaction to the murmurs of leftism that surround him; the blatant terror that he has shown at the mere mention of such rumours give the impression of a man who feels that harbouring left wing views in mainstream politics is a one way ticket to career suicide. Such terror is symptomatic of a political system were no one dares lose the middle ground.

However, If Mr Miliband harbours even loftier ambitions for himself and his party, who could blame him for being scared?