29/06/2011 Newsnight


In-depth investigation and analysis of the stories behind the day's headlines with Jeremy Paxman.

Similar Content

Browse content similar to 29/06/2011. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



Sound and fury on the streets, but after more than a month of protest,


the Greek parliament votes for the austerity programme wanted by the


country's backers. Right behind me it's all happening, this is the


image of the European Union today. Talk about timing, guess who


demands a 5% increase in its budget, yes, it is the European Commission.


This man is on the Home Office banned list, how come the Border


Agency let him in and then let him slip again.


On the banks of the Clyde, they are about to pass judgment on the


Labour Party. Even if Ed Miliband's party does


scrape home here tomorrow, it doesn't mean an end to Labour's


serious problems here in Scotland, following the trouncing by the SNP


in the Holyrood elections last month.


You what?! You don't agree with that?


Is the home advantage in sport really just testimony to the power


Greece's politicians have to vote again tomorrow for the terms of the


loans they have taken to be satisfied. And then that's only the


start of the austerity programme demanded. But the first hurdle has


been cleared, and the likelihood that Greece will simply trouser the


bailout it has already had, and leap out of the euro has receded a


bit. To judge from the scenes on the streets today, there is a very


long way yet to go. First, let's hear Paul Mason's


report from Athens. They knew it would be a day to


remember. The end of an economic era, the moment when street protest


meets the cold reality of parliamentary votes. The communist-


led trade union came on in the same old way, but into a world where the


old certainties are vanishing. Rights which have been there in the


last 40 years will vanish overnight. In the private sector, collective


bargaining agreements will be wiped out, the taxation is already at an


incredible level. It will be serial destitution, basically.


Soon, there were thousands in the square that fronts the parliament,


waiting for the crucial vote. As the vote came, tension rose. And


then this. What had been a peaceful protest would not turn violent. And


thousands of people fled. We make no money, they always increase the


taxes, they selling the country to the bankers. In this building, the


Greek parliament, and they have the Greek police, paid by the Greek


people, to help them sell the country to the bankers.


In the square, thousands of people stayed, and fought, and the


fighting became intense. Inside the parliament, Prime


Minister Papandreou still fighting for a majority that has become


wafer thin, and issued this warning. TRANSLATION: The Greek people might


go through a hard time and they are experiencing a hard time, but the


Greek people don't want this Government or programme to fail, if


this happens, Greece will fail. But in the small streets outside


were tens of thousands of protestors had been coralled, amid


the tear ga, the mood was different. - tear gas, the mood was different.


Can Greece take the pain? As in practically, I mean, look around,


man, look around. Absolutely not. It is very deep down. I mean the


economy is deep down, it is demolished. It is a dictatorship


afterall, we have had dictatorships before. One. It is a democracy,


they have all been voted for, why a dictatorship, all these


politicians? Come on you are being so rhetoric. This is not a


democracy. We will not stop. don't stop. No, they must stop. The


Government must stop. How will you make them stop? With strikes and


demonstrations, everything. With the squares. We will come here,


we will not stop. What's happening? But the violence wasn't stopping


either. For many here the legitimacy of the whole political


system is now at stake. Are you a British station. OK, there is a


group of riot police coming down, they are spraying us with chemicals,


we are peaceful, if anything, we just want this Government, this


fascist Government to get out of the way.


As the fighting spread into the side streets, just yards away,


people gathered in the cafes, to watch the austerity vote go through.


Vote passed, 155 for, 138 against. But outside, there are millions


against. Not just the left, but the middle-classes, who are supposed to


be the backbone of Greek democracy. And so, 3.50pm, typical Greek cafe,


people watching the vote. On split screen, the riot. Just behind us


the riot is happening. This is the image of the European Union today.


Official reports say 47 people have been hospitalised, 29 arrested, 192


treated for breathing problems. The biggest casualty is consent. In no


European country is the gap between politicians and the people so


obvious, widespread, and bitter. Paul Mason joins us now live from


Athens. What is happening? Well, there is supported addic rioting


still going on. - sporadic rioting still going on. Not a single


politician of any note can leave their own secure accommodation to


come and join us. It is a little bit chaotic. The key thing is, the


austerity package has been passed by the parliament. It is no longer


a maybe, it is a fact. Tomorrow the parliament will pass the execution


law that will turn this into a series of actions, for individual


ministries, if you have lent Greece money, or if your pension fund has,


or your country, that is the good news. The bad news is, it has been


passed in the teeth of such viscerally felt anger. Come on,


Paul, it was hardly the entire population of Athens on the streets,


was it, and certainly not the entire population of Greece. But if


people are, as you say, in such numbers losing faith, where does


that lead? There are a lot of people out, the worry is, as you


saw in my report, if you are worrying about strategic issues, it


is losing the middle-class, it is losing the people who are the small


shop owner, in a lot of peripheral Europe the pain will be felt by the


public sector, and you know, pensioners. Here pain is being felt


by small business people, and they just don't feel that either their


voices are being heard, or that they can take it. I put this to one


of my contact, one of the key political commentators in this


country. Are we seeing n this loss of faith, some kind of a threat to


democracy? No, I don't think so that democracy


is threatened. Mob rule is a different thing. Until now in


Greece, it happens in a non-nasty way. If things turn nasty, if you


have mob rule, if you have people who are petty bourgwoi, or who are


barely - borgoise, or barely near the poverty line, and they get


furious, nobody has ever seen this play acted out, they have seen it


in Germany of the 20 and 30s. is your assessment, do you think


they will make the plan stick? There is two parts of the answer


there. The first question is, can the plan, as envisaged, actually be


implemented. Greece has all kinds of checks and balances, whether it


is the unions, talking about privatising the airport, or the


railways or the energy companies, the energy company is on strike.


Who will buy it, who will buy it with a work force like that. All


week I have been here, the words of the original boss of Fiat, in 1919


have been going round my head. He said, in the face of resistance


like this, you can't build anything with 25,000 enemies, speaking of


the Fiat work force. How are you going to build anything, how are


you going to do anything in a country where so many people are up


in arms against what you are doing. That's the first problem. The


second problem is does it dig Greece out of the mire to do it?


Many economists believe it doesn't. Has the euro, briefly, has the euro


been saved? For day, yes. For a week, probably. But the question


remains, Greece is 2.5% of the euro zone's GDP, how did a country so


small get the currency in such a big mess. The question has to go


back to the people who run the eurozone, you tell me who that is,


who we ask that question of. People here ask it. They just r just say,


look, the eurozone would not be in such trouble if we had decisive


leadership and some idea of what the plan is to dig Greece, nearly


bankrupt, at the best of times, out of this hole. We still don't really


have that. The pain in Greece is extreme


example of the discomfort being felt right across most of Europe,


there is one place they feel no pain at all, the European


Commission announced today that it badly needs, not to make economies,


but to be given much more money. Lots of it, 115 billion euros over


seven years, that is about another 5% or so after inflation. They also


announced a radical reshaping of the rebate system, including the


much fought over British rebate. The commission also set out plans


for the raising of so-called own resources, or EU taxes, levied on


things like financial transactions or an EU VAT. Speaking about the


rebate system today, the commission President, Jose Manuel Barroso,


stressed that the EU was founded on sal darity, which meant -


solidarity, which meant richer member states would accept paying


for more the good of those in the union who were less well off.


TRANSLATION: We will suggest a system that is far easier to


understand, fairer, more transparent, in the new system


there is no room for thinking about getting your fair share of your


money back. Solidarity implies that those relatively more wealthy and


prosperous, will contribute more in relative terms. We asked the


European Commission for an interview, they were much too


businessy. But we are lucky enough to be joined by the Conservative MP,


George Eustace, and another European MP. Is this some sort of


jock? No, it is a proposal on how we think we should have money until


2020, it is not a joke, it is a serious proposal. At a time when


every other Government in Europe is cutting expenditure? Yes, but let


me be very frank, at the same time this is a budget that is looking


for the future, we are looking at a 2020 target. Where do we want to be


as Europe as a whole. Do we want a strong Europe there, acting


together, or do we want to have special, all the different


countries, like the UK, the Netherland, whatever, and be on our


own in the world. That is the big question, and where do we want to


go until 2020, this is the proposal that is looking for the longer term.


We are not discussing tomorrow, we are discussing the day after


tomorrow. This is serious business. A nobble ambition? I think the


European Commission is just in complete denial about the whole


pickle that the EU and the eurozone in particular is in at the moment.


I just don't think this will happen, Britain does have a veto on this, I


would be absolutely amazed if we were to accept a long-term budget


like this, at such an increase. France and Germany are saying that


this is also unacceptable. We are at the point now where really


things have moved beyond where the commission think it has, nation


states are increasingly restless about the problems we see in the


eurozone and and the things that go on. Will the proposal that the EU


will be able to levy its own taxes get anywhere? That particular


proposal, thanks to the legislation that this Government has brought in


would trigger a referendum in Britain. Unless the British people


vote for a referendum to vote for Brussels to set taxs in the UK,


that won't get through either. I don't think the UK Government would


accept that. I think the tide was turned for those who want deeper


integration. You explain that this is an ambition over a noble period.


But the EU will have 13 years of continuous, real terms, budget


increases. You can't really believe the people of Europe are going to


put up with that? It depends where you pay the money for. Let me start


by saying that the budget for the EU, the increase over the last few


years by 30%, for the other member states it is an average of 60%.


That is puting it into perspective. Where do we spend the money? If you


ask all the member states, Europe has to do more on energy, as far as


I remember this Conservative Government is claiming that they


are the greenest Government ever. Well, excuse me, you need a lot of


infrastructure if you want to have your renewables. Who will pay for


the infrastructure where you can connect all the different member


states of the EU, it has to be by European money. That is one.


Secondly, we need for moreen policy, look at what is going on in Libya -


for moreen policy, look at what is going on in Benghazi, we are


opening an office in Libya. Looking at the bank crisis, the crisis in


Europe, the crisis in Greece, it started with an economic crisis in


the banking system. So now, we want to have a better supervision. Who


will pay this supervision, because if European supervise, they have to


be paid from a European budget. They are all topics where everyone


is claiming more money. Excuse me t has to come from somewhere. Perhaps


I can explain, the answer to this question is the European Union


should not be spending that money. All the issues that he has just


outlined are issues where nation states should be taking the lead,


whether it is dealing with the banking industry or promoting green


energy. These are all areas where increasingly we need national


Governments to take the lead. Yes to co-operate and co-ordinate.


the national Governments: The EU is failing institutions, it has been


failing for far too long. It may have a future in the 2 1st century


t needs to be streamlined? Come on? I always hear from the


Conservatives that the EU has failed. But at the same time they


are asking for more renewables, how do they transport, that how do we


want to get it from Norway or the Netherlands or the North Sea wind


energy of course the EU has failed, why on banking systems. You can


have 27 member states controlling their own banks, they have been


doing that for years, what has failed is the banking control


system. Now we want to do that at a European level. You want a


financial transactions tax as well in the EU? I think all the people


want that banks are starting to pay for all the rubbish that they have


been spreading around so far. pay the EU? And there again. Let me


be very clear, all the banks are operating all over Europe, UK banks


are in Greece, vested a long time ago. If you look at all the -


invested a long time ago. If you look at all the banks, they are


across the borders and European wide. Let's let you defend British


banks? For years what has gone on is the European Union has used its


own failure as a reason for having further, deeper integration and for


the EU to have even more powers. What people increasingly are


realising and national parliaments across the EU are realising, that


the answer is not to take more power but to take the powers away


from it, and to streamline it. To have it do fewer things and let it


do those better. And let nation states take responsibilities, there


is no need for the EU to be in certain areas skpwr. Do you think


it is necessary to have an 8 - you think it is right to have an


85% increase in the entertainment budget for the European Parliament?


This is a proposal by the commission. I want to talk about


big number, if, as with the Conservatives, we have a deal,


there is another increase in research going into nuclear fusion,


it is in total 2.7 billion, OK, as a green politician, I'm very much


against that, can I negotiate with the Conservatives to have a cut


over there? There is also increased spending on space policies, because,


the member states are asking the EU to invest in space policy, I am


ready to negotiate a cut over there. I'm not saying I'm defending


everything. I want to discuss cuts, let me be frank, if we are


discussing what we are paying for the European Parliament and the


exact numbers there, it is all tiny numbers if you compare it to


nuclear fusion, to space relations. There I want to discuss the cuts.


The way to cut the spending is for the EU not to be involved in these


areas and let nation states take their own lead.


Thank you very much.? The UK Border Agency better have a good story to


tell, some how they managed to let into this country man who was


banned. He didn't sneak in, he arrived under his own name, and his


visit announced in advance. He sauntered through immigration


control, and went on to address public meetings, before, eventually,


the police caught up with him and sent him to the detention centre


where he's tonight. The stable door has finally been bolted. We have


been on the trail of cleric Sheikh Raed Salah, he entered the UK with


consumate ease, despite the Home Office having banned him. Opponents


claim Sheikh Raed Salah is a supporter of Hamas, holds anti-


semetic views, he denies this. He's a leader of the Islamic movement in


Israel. He is said to have This is man with a proven track


record, he's widely reported in the Israeli and international press for


making a series of anti-semetic statements. Last month he did five


months in prison for assaulting a police officer. Obviously he has


not taken up Gandhi's methods of non-violent resistance.


There is a cross-party agency that advises the UK Border Agency about


foreign nationals coming to Britain. Last week the Home Secretary was


advised to ban him. Three days later the Home Secretary signed the


banning order, two days after that Salah arrived at Heathrow. Once the


Home Secretary had decided to exclude Salah, the UK Border Agency


should have passed on information to immigration officers here at


Heathrow, and to consulate staff in Israel. Apparently this didn't


happen in time. So on Saturday Salah simply turned up at Heathrow


and walked through immigration control.


He had meetings lined up with three parliamentarians and a public


engagement, talking about the Arab Spring, at this venue in the


capital. Sheikh Raed Salah finally arrived here at the Conwy Hall on


Monday for a prearranged talk. Unknown to him, these premises were


watch bid the met police. Iran sponsored TV was there covering the


event. In all likelihood police surveillance officers were in the


audience, there were no arrests. There are conflicting reports about


why not. There were discussions about legality because the Home


Secretary's order had not been served, but Government sources say


it is a police mistake. There are all strange stories about what


happened on the night. It was clear he was quite open, and the


organisers were open about having him here, and were proud to show he


was here. That concerned us, that actually on an operational level


there are issues that need to be tightened up. He was free to go on


to the next stage of his journey. This time heading north from London


to Leicester for a prearranged meeting. Last night addressed an


audience of 1,000 in Leicester. Finally at 11.00pm he was arrested


and taken to Paddington Green station. His legal advisers today


said to deport such an important Palestinian protestor was against


the principles of democracy. A lot of this was unnecessary, if Sheikh


Raed Salah was on an exclusion list, this should have been made known to


him some time ago, it would have given him the opportunity tole cha


eng it, and find out why he was on the - challenge it, and find out


why he was on the list, no reason has been given to him about why


he's on the banned list, of people deemed not conducive to the public


benefit. This is not the first time someone of this type has slipped


through the immigration net. We were told of this desperate-


sounding e-mail from a Government It is a specific concern when


someone turns up at Heathrow, the major treent point of the UK, and


the UK Border Agency seem unable to stop someone the Home Office says


is unwelcome. We need to wait a while to find out exactly what went


wrong, it is of grave concern that the Government agency, tasked by


the Government, and the Home Secretary specifically, to turn


around undesirables is unable to do this. The UK BA are going on strike


tomorrow F it is the case that you can have radical preachers like


this, entering the country, after the Home Office has made very clear


they shouldn't be entering the country. It does beg the question


as to who else has been let into the country. The Home Office has


laufplged an internal inquiry into - launched an internal inquiry into


the Salah case. It was thought the message about Sheikh Raed Salah's


status was passed through the communecation lines in good time. -


communecation lines in good time. We asked the UK Border Agency to


talk to us but they had other plans. What happens when these people turn


up and the Border Agency say enjoy your stay? I would say this was a


scene from the Pink Panther, if I was being uncharitable. Once the


Home Secretary reach as banning order, those papers should be


served on the person. Because we are very clear the Government


believes in secure borders this man should never have entered the UK.


What I think has happened, and this is only anecdotal, is that the name


did not come up on the computer system, and what UK Border Agency


staff have said is they are actually given pieces of paper to


remember people's names as they walk through. Anyone who comes


through at Heathrow will know there are thousands upon thousands of


people coming through. If indeed the computer system does not flag


up the name, that is why he has entered into the country, and


goodness knows how many other people, who we are wanting to be


cautious about, who are on that list, the watch list, have entered


as well. The Home Secretary is quite right to have an inquiry, she


must be hopping mad about this. She would have expected her own agency


to have followed her intructions. What has happened, he has arrived


in this country, he has been to Birmingham, he has come to London,


they publicised the fact he was going to be in the House of Commons


today. Invite bid three of your colleagues? Indeed, he was invited


by three colleagues. Three Labour Party colleagues? Nars for them, I


have not invited them - that is a matter for them, I have not invited


them. Was that wise? You will have to ask them. Your own parliamentary


colleagues, invite manning banned from this country to come into


Westminster, to a- a man banned from this country to come into


Westminster and address them? didn't know he was being banned,


coming into the country. If it was publicised he was banned, I would


understand why they had invited him. Nobody knew he was banned. He


didn't know, the Israeli authorities didn't know, Heathrow


Airport Airport didn't know, the Home Secretary must have known she


signs the pieces of paper. I don't think you could hold the three


Labour Party MPs responsible for a complete shambles. They are


responsible for issuing the invitation, of course, the fact


that the Home Secretary can remember the pieces of paper she


signed but doesn't tell people what she has signed. Is that what


happened, or is it some sort of computer malfunction. It is a bit


of a shambles, I'm glad there will be an appearing before the select


committee, and I will had an opportunity to probe hero bustly


about the situation. The case has - her robustly about the situation.


The case shows there are flaws in the system. We need to make sure


the borders are secure, and when she signs an order it is


implemented, and someone isn't allowed to travel to Birmingham, go


to Leicester and travel to the House of Commons without being


arrested. They are voting on the banks of the


Clyde tomorrow, the constituency was once in the heart of Labour


Scotland, the sort of place you could have stuck a red rosette on a


wrought iron lampost and see it dug up and triumphantly carried to


Westminster. After the Scots nationalists managed to win an


overall majority in the Edinburgh parliament, nobody is so sure any


more. By-elections are the time when politicians of all parties


catch side of a stocky man with stockings and sandals and say, they


are sure that is Michael Crick, REPORTER: Mr Prescott? Oh blimey,


what has brought you up here. I thought we were having a nice day.


Five smiling expectant face, all hoping tomorrow sees their


political breakthrough. They hope to add to their success in May.


Sunbathing outside their HQ, they may have looked a touch relaxed.


Working hard. You don't look like you have been working hard, you


look like you are being very complacent? I'm sun burnt because I


have been walking around. You are more sun burnt that his T-shirt. In


the Clyde, on the firth of Clyde, is on the sunny day in the right


spot, one of Labour's more attractive seats. The strong wind


challenged the docking crew to the utmost, they succeeded with no more


damage to the ship than a scrape of paint. It has a proud past in


shipbuilding. Greenoch was where Cunard ships were refitted. Jobs


are scarce now. This was one of 13 seats Labour managed to defend in


May's Scottish elections. Their man, Ian MacKenzie, admits his party


must change here, and stop taking people for granted. We didn't work


as hard for their vote as we are doing now. Is it about how hard you


work for the vote or is it about the policies? It is a mixture of


both. You have to work hard for the vote and have the policies, and


meet the people on the street. big challenger, in what's normally


a solid Labour seat is Anne McLaughlin? We are getting a


fantastic response, people think it is time for a change, and I think


they are right. Are you saying you could nick this one? I don't know,


definitely optimistic about it. Last night she was joined by Sheikh


Raed Salah, making his fifth visit in a contest where independence


doesn't feature in SNP literature. You don't mention independent


anywhere in the leaflets? Everybody in the SNP knows we are the party


of independence. Why not mention it in the leaflet, are you hoping


Labour voters will forget you are for that? Labour voters do believe


in independence, one the great tasks to persuade them to vote for


the SNP. Why not mention it in the literature, this is a chance to win


the referendum? The referendum will be in the campaign.


The Tories have no hope at all, adding to their solitary Scottish


MP, David Wilson has to say otherwise. The two big issues I


have found is jobs and independence. As far as that people got a bit of


a fright in May with what happened with SNP getting control in


Holyrood, people are worried about that. I know people who voted SNP


now who have come back to the Conservatives. The Liberal


Democrats Sophie Bridger is 20, the youngest by-election candidate from


a major party since 1832. But they won't suffer another humiliation


like Barnsley, where they came sixth. Simply because there are


only five candidates here. We had a disappointing election, a few weeks


ago, that is why it is a great opportunity for us. I don't think


we managed to get the messages across in the election campaign,


previously, what we are really doing in Government in Westminster.


That is why this has been such a positive opportunity for to us show


that. Hope to be overtake the Liberal


Democrats, Mitch Sorbie, he looks like a nightclub owner. It is


probably between Labour and the SNP? You might find people with


sense voting UKIP. Let's forget that. Let's talk sense, shall we,


if it is between Labour and the SNP, surely, who of those two would you


say is the front runner here? have to look with 14,000 majority


last time, Labour are fairly safe. If I had my spaniel with a Labour


rosette, I think my spaniel might get in.


We local shipyard, today, the final day of campaigning, Labour rolled


out John Prescott. The party's answer to Sheikh Raed Salah.


Do you have a sneaking admiration for Sheikh Raed Salah, you and he


are like - the party's answer to Alex Salmond. Do you have a


sneaking admiration for Alex Salmond? Does Labour need its own


Alex Salmond? Labour needs all to fight all sorts of battles. They


have to persuasively put the case, I do it my way and they their way,


Labour is a combination of all those. People in the Labour and SNP


camp think tomorrow's result should be really close. It's likely to be


a lot closer than the 14,400 majority bequeathed by the late


Labour MP, David Cairns. Even if Ed Miliband's party does crepe home


here tomorrow, it doesn't mean an end to Labour's serious problems


here in Scotland. Following the trouncing by the SNP, in the


Holyrood elections, last month. You what? You don't agree with any


of that? I didn't hear it! Andy Murray went through to the


semifinals at Wimbledon to the delight of fans. They are providing


a rare treat of what counts as a home win. In team sports in


particular the advantage of playing at home is taken as read, in the


Premier League, for example there are said to be three home wins for


two away wins. What is the home advantage. The authors of


Scorecasting, a new American book about sports, believe they have


worked it out. It is no secret that steams are


more likely to win on home turf. Take Chelsea they didn't suffer a


single Premier League home defeat for over three years, under Jose


Mourinho, but loss ten away games in the same period. And it's true


for all team sport. Rugby, cricket, baseball, ice hockey, you name it,


there is a definite home advantage. But what is it? Is it the support


of the fans? Is it because the home team knows the ground? Is it


because they don't have to make the journey to a distant venue. The two


Americans say it is none of those things. They conclude that the home


advantage is down to one thing and one thing only, the referees, or


umpires, as they are known in most American sports. It is not so much


that teams play much better at home, as that, for whatever reason,


officials want to appease the home crowd. With us now is the sports


journalist, Jon Wertheim, one of the authors of Scorecasting, and


Prabal Rana, who rather - David Runciman, who rather doubts the


methodology. Explain why you think it is the referee? Athletes perform


better at home because they are being cheered, that is hard to bear


out, there is no evidence that they shoot baskets better. There is very


little evidence of performing better at home. What we did find is


with officials there is a huge discrepancy, home versus away calls,


the bigger the crowd the bigger the discrepancy. It is true in all


sports. The closer the game, the closer the discrepancy and the


closer the fans are to the action. It is a different data. The


official bias is driving the home advantage. You think what happens


when Manchester United plays at home, there is something in it?


tend to overlook the cases when the referees make a bad decision. They


favour the big teams. What is weird about home advantage it is true for


all teams, good, bad teams, big and small teams. John has shown


referees react to crowds getting on their back. Play in one of the


lower Scottish leison your team will do better at home. There is an


iron law, it is to do with team not individual sports. My feeling is it


is to do with the trust in the team. The referees have a small part to


play. Did you look at the possible explanations? We did, the distance


travelled, that doesn't turnt out to be the case at all. It is an


intriguing thesis, how can one quantify trust. That is pretty hard


to study. The issue in a team sport, if you know the official also give


you these calls, maybe that increases the trust. This is the


method question, because there is a temptation to explain the things,


because we can quantify them. There are some things about home


advantage that just aren't quantifyable. If you rule those


things out you overexplain some of the easier things. In individual


sports you can break them down into nuggets and baseball is another


example. Then you can get the explanations, football, for such a


simple game is mind bobling complex when you break it down. Nobody has


done that already. You have alluded toe the fact that this theory


asupplies in team sports, not in individual sports. Doesn't that


suggest to you there may be something about the idea of the


relationship between the team and the fan that is may be at work?


Their home games in individual sports, Andy Murray might play at


Wimbledon and cheer, it is not a home game like Manchester United


playing in their own stadium. another collective effort, where


another team game playing mopgs fans? It is hard to study all those


impacts. I agree with John, the fans isn't the explanation, it is


very hard to measure that. But it could be that it is the familiarity


thing, when you are at home, it is your territory, you feel


comfortable. Actually, the fact that it applies for teams that


don't have many fans as well as teams that have thousands of fans,


suggest it is something to do with your ground, not your fans.


looked at it as a percentage of capacity, not the number of fans.


In Italy there were riots, so the football team played in an empty


stadium, they wouldn't let the fans in, there was no crowd there, the


official bias went down. The passing and the goals stayed


constant. Home advantage disappeared when the crowds


disappeared. That could be Italy! Not everything is explainable by


statistical analysis. Then you won't write books! There is nearly


other variabilitys, but the data on this in every sport there is this


difference, there is a discrepancy in penalties and fouls in


basketball. That tells us there is something going on. It is true, the


referees are clearly biased, the question is that what decides what


wins the game, he hasn't shown that. This sort of analysis is increase


league common. For economics and a view of the world. That human


behaviour is down to statistical analysis. What is wrong with it?


You can go too far, what you can end up is looking for the


explanation that is fit the numbers, that means you leave out all sorts


of things, it doesn't mean we should trust our eyes but have a


broader view that could explain things than what is logistically


analysing. I will see it when I believe it. I think the other thing.


He's essentially saying there are things beyond science? Absolutely.


Beyond economics? I think in the last ten years between the Internet,


I think we have had this prove live racial of data, it is foolish not


to - proliferation of data, it is foolish not to look into it. It is


wrong to assume it explains everything, it explains a lot more


than we thought, not everything. What are the other things that we


ought to be fact torg in. Things like trust and team spirit, home


advantage is an iron law, it is an amazing thing, home advantage,


whoever they are, it applies. Something about being in a team is


hard to explain it unless you are in one. In the US, the ultimate


team sport is football. All these military analogies. American


football. Sorry, American football, NFL, it doesn't have a high winning


statistic, where as basketball can have a much more advantage? It is


about a team sport, passing continuing sequences of play,


sports like American football break down the sequences and the trust is


dissipated. It is football, basketball, where the game flows.


It is the game that is flow have team advantage. While you are both


here, you are here specifically to go to Wimbledon, will Andy Murray


take the home title? He's the home player.


We will see what happens, he has two tough matches left. Thank you


Apology for the loss of subtitles for 42 seconds


both very much. Now tomorrow That's enough for now. Since we


have been on air, Richard Burton has been in touch, he wanted to


make clear he was due to speak rat a meeting in Westminster with


Sheikh Raed Salah, - speaking at a meeting with Sheikh Raed Salah, but


he wasn't involved with him. Tomorrow we have the most famous


person to come out of Dumfries, Pretty whily outside tonight with


largely clear skies. Another day where the sun will shine in most


places. There will also be a fair few showers to chase around.


Particularly by the afternoon, across parts of north-east England.


Intense downpours, east and South Yorkshire as well as Lincolnshire,


with the risk of a flash of lightning and a rumble of thunder.


The showers will be lighter and scattered across the south-east.


The south west of England will see showers mostly in the morning, by


the afternoon, many places here fine and bright with spells of


sunshine. The same goes across Wales. Some showers in the morning,


most places having a fine end to the day. Scattering of thours will


come and go through Northern Ireland. Temperatures still likely


to reach the high teens. Showers in Scotland, dying out in the Glasgow


area. For eastern Scotland heavy showers for the afternoon. There is


still a chance for showers on Friday, a dry and fine day.


Temperature as degree or so higher. Still some cloud bubbling up


through the day, still the small chance of a shower or two across


Download Subtitles