Our Comment: Thanks, Brian. I am sure that some balance can be achieved that will suit most people. However, you are right that it is simply not practical to run several separate comment pages. I have run the site for 11 years now and, from past experience, it causes a lot of extra effort and doesn't work. I even have trouble with the separate comments that arrive in connection with the Chat Columns. Often, I have to replicate messages in both places.

The simple fact is that whatever we discuss will not be of interest to all. A little while ago we had a complaint about the local railway discussion. Perhaps, the weather is the best option. All Brits love discussions about the weather. I have a feeling that the easiest web site to run is the one at the Met Office!!! People love it... particularly clouds, rain and depressions.  ;-)

Our Comment: Thanks, Howard. I will be more careful about the subjects that I introduce.

Our Comment: Whoops! I know I promised not to comment but I think it is best to avoid a protracted discussion before you get an answer, Tony. I think the London's Field explosion was probably a V2 rather than a V1. It is possible that it was only half primed with explosives but, even so, it blew all the windows out of my granddad's house in Railway Avenue and effects were felt as far away as Oxford Street Boys School. It was one of the town's bigger explosions.

The V2 strike is discussed on one of the pages of our "Whitstable at War" feature. Click here.

Our Comment:  Thanks, Michael. You are quite right. It might be worth seeing if the Visitors Book will function better without comments. From today, we'll try it for a week or two by ditching the "Our Comment" bits. I can then concentrate on other things.

Our Comment:  Thanks, John.

Our Comment:  Thanks, Vince.

I don't wholly agree with Guus Hiddink. As far as I am concerned, it is time for Sepp Blatter to go NOW irrespective of whether he embraces technology. Over the years, there have been far too many issues surrounding this little man.

It is also necessary to understand that the aims of FIFA are quite different from those of football purists. The latter want a World Cup to be a competition in which the best teams confront each other on equal terms. That means holding the tournament in the best locations, using the best equipment, ensuring that matches are  administered by the best officials, using new methods to get decisions right and holding a post match review of each incident in which a yellow or red card has been issued. 

By contrast, FIFA are more concerned with promoting football around the globe, raising funding and basking in the limelight of the festivities. This is why we use a daft football, take the tournament to daft locations and feel the need to employ inadequate referees from the World's footballing backwaters. It is also why the World Cup will almost certainly be heading back to the USA sooner than it should.

FIFA don't care if matches are played at ridiculous altitudes (eg Mexico) or in temperatures of 110c (eg Mexico) or in daft humidity (eg South Korea). They don't care if it is played in a country where there is no crowd atmosphere (eg the USA). Nor do they care if the official ball is like a Woolies beach ball... or that crucial decisions are made incorrectly.... or that the later stages of the competition could descend into farce with many top players suspended as a result of yellow and red cards being issued like confetti.  

England also have to face a lot of home truths. For too long, English people have lived under the misapprehension that the Premier League is the best league in the world. It isn't. It is simply the most entertaining because it attracts the best crowds and generates the most excitement. It is quite marked that the teams showing up best in this World Cup have few or even no players from the Premier League. 

For years, our clubs have been overpaying substandard imports from abroad as part of a "quick fix" approach to team building..... whilst confining our own youngsters to the reserves. Now it is about to get worse. In order to get around employment laws and promote young talent, clubs will need to produce a certain number of home produced players. It sounds good until you realise that the big clubs are now importing youngsters from abroad in order to stock up their youth teams and call them "home produced".

 We have also been fooling ourselves over the so-called "Golden Generation" of players by basing our assessment on the Premier League. With hindsight, we now realise that we had just two potentially World Class players - Rooney (definitely) and Gerrard (possibly). The rest have been vastly overrated.

As a nation we have also become paranoid over the World Cup and a lot of it is stirred up by the hysterical media. The lead in to the Germany match was totally and utterly ridiculous. We had the full story of the ecstasy of 1966 followed by the disappointments of 1970, 1984, 1990,1996, 2002 and 2002. We had stats on how often we had lost while wearing white kit and won while wearing red kit. We even had derogatory comments from Franz Beckenbauer.

For heaven's sake, none of this had any bearing whatsoever. If you want to demonstrate the point, look at a current picture of Beckenbauer. He is now simply an old man whose "day" came and went 40 years ago. Who cares what he thinks? 

Football shouldn't be neurotic agony for players and supporters. It should generate a few smiles and be enjoyed.

The truth is that, on Sunday, England faced a well-organised but average German team. That was all there was to it. It was all about "now".... and not "then". Even with our limited resources, we could easily have matched them if we had ditched the paranoia and got the system and tactics right. Even the technicalities weren't difficult to work out. It was simply a matter of playing people in the positions that they play for their clubs. At international level, you simply don't have time to get people playing differently. Failure to realise this should now lead to Capello's repatriation to Italy.

In the longer term, problems have to be sorted at grassroots level. We must ensure that we have a wide base of young players and give them an opportunity to get involved from an early age. We must get competitive sport back into schools - from Junior school upward. I know some people will groan but I am afraid competition and sport are an important part of learning for many youngsters. You never know... it might even cut the absentee rates for kids who are fed up with failing at academic subjects.

True coaching should start at the level of school district representative teams and the coaches should be proper ones - not people who have acquired coaching badge from a part time course at the local College of Further Education.

The Premier League must also decide what it is about. If it insists on ploughing the same furrow as the last 15 years, then some way must be found for youngsters to be developed. That might mean greater use of loan arrangements or even links between top clubs and lesser clubs -  with smaller clubs acting as nurseries for the big ones.

Most of all, England must decide its priorities. Is the national team more important than the Premier League? A few years ago, many English football fans would have said "NO". However, the World Cup is now growing into a massive event and, as we have seen, it is the only "ultimate" test of players. In that respect, the 2010 tournament has done us a favour because it has shown that Man Utd, Man City, Arsenal, Spurs, Chelsea and Liverpool are not as good as they think they are. 

And, if anyone wants to argue the point, they should consider that, since 1984, English clubs have won the European Cup on just three occasions. Those successes came in.... 1999 (when Man Utd squeezed an undeserved 2-1 win over Bayern Munich after being outplayed for most of the match)..... 2005 (when Liverpool beat AC Milan on penalties after being lucky to come back from a 0-3 deficit)... and 2008 (when Man Utd beat Chelsea on penalties). It's hardly a record to boost the ego of the Premier League.

Supporters might like to consider all this when they get the bill for their 2010/2011 season ticket!!!!  If nothing else, the World Cup has shown that they are being charged the earth for a sub-standard product.  

So, will things change for the better? Probably not. England may be the best supported national team in the world and those fans may scare the pants off the FA. However, the FA may be powerless to improve things. The gradual takeover of our top clubs by consortiums from the Middle East, Far East, Russia and the US means that the Premier League will soon be controlled from abroad. Will those foreign interests (with their foreign managers and foreign players) actually care what happens to the England team? Will they change to help the national side? I doubt it. After all, what would be in it for them... provided that English mugs are still prepared to place their bums on the foreign seats of Old Trafford, Stamford Bridge and The Emirates? 

Our Comment: Thanks, Terry. I have had a re-think. Looking at the state of things, I might actually get a game for England. So, why hang up my boots so early. ;-)

I have been trying to find ways of making the World Cup interesting now that all my Red Crosses of St George have found their way into the wheelie bin. I have decided to support Chile. I have no Andean connection but the Chile players have two endearing qualities. Firstly, they are wonderfully gifted. Secondly, they are completely and utterly "off their chump". They could easily end up scoring a hat trick of own goals and having half their team sent off in the match against Brazil tonight.

I have also started following the career of referee Marco Rodriguez from Mexico. He resembles Christopher Lee and he seems to have the incredible knack of turning football matches into Hammer Houses of Horror by handing out yellow and red cards. He has fast become a Mexican Weapon of Mass Destruction and I can't wait for him to send everyone off including the linesmen. I suppose it would be very unsporting for me to wish him on Germany in the next round. Yes... okay... I thought so! 

Incidentally, just minutes before your message arrived, I received some good football news. My nephew (Neil Taylor) has just completed a transfer from Wrexham (Conference League) to Swansea (Coca-Cola Championship). Neil has played for Wales U21s and, a few weeks ago, made an appearance for the full Welsh team as a substitute in their away match against Croatia. That full cap cropped up at a time when the Welsh squad was decimated by injuries but it was a remarkable achievement for a youngster playing in the Conference.

Neil is the son of John Taylor who played alongside some or our regular readers in the Whitstable Old Boys team of the 1960s. Of course, I have been trying to persuade Neil to sign for Whitstable Town but I suppose Swansea will have to do. ;-)

PS I have just visited the FIFA official web site and this is the way they decribe Lampard's goal that wasn't....

"Meetings between these two sides often provide talking points and this one's came 60 seconds later when Lampard's shot from the edge of the box struck the underside of the crossbar and bounced down, with the referee ruling the ball had not crossed the goalline".

Bounced down? It wasn't just IN the goal.... it was half way to Poland! Talking point???? I put my foot through the telly, ex-communicated Uruguay from the UN and invaded Germany to hold a debate of the video evidence. Just how long can FIFA hide behind referee's rulings, balls that are not FIFA balls or German balls but Adidas balls.... and Sepp Blatter's b&££$*!%. It now seems that Sepp may even be censoring his own FIFA web site.

Our Comment: Thanks, Brian. I take your point about the World Cup. However, it would be nice to get a certain Italian manager to admit that he planned anything wrong!!!!

I wonder who will want to manage England now. Most of the current team are heading into their 30s and there is nothing following on behind. Last night, I tried to name a team of younger players to take us through to 2014. This it how it panned out

• Just one certainty.... Wayne Rooney. 

• Four vague possibilities from the current squad provided that they can improve massively (Glen Johnson, Lennon, Milner and Hart).

• Three possible names from the Premier League - Micah Richards, Adam Johnson, Wilshire, Walcott. 

That's it... and it amounts to about half a team with no backups!!!! The FA reckons that it might be possible to "fast track" players from the successful Under 19 and Under 17 teams but that is just "pie in the sky". How on earth will they get Premier League and European Cup experience when most of the big clubs simply sign players from abroad? 

We are in deep do-dos.

Our Comment: Thanks, John. It is an interesting thought. Seaching old documents can be quite difficult as they are not always clear and there is the added problem that many of our ancestors couldn't spell. Thus, there are quite a few spelling variations for place names.

In his article "The Origins of Whitstable - Name and Place" (click here), Brian Smith explains that the name Graystone came from an as yet unidentified landing place known as "Le Craston".

Our Comment: Thanks, Robbie. I can promise you there won't be much on football from now on. English football died in Bloemfontein around 5 pm yesterday.

A lot of people think I am totally anti-art... but it is not true. I do love many art works including contemporary ones that show skill and innovation in order to fascinate and provoke thought. Furthermore, artists are free to produce what they like - good, bad or indifferent. And, yes, the labels "good", "bad" or "indifferent" are to some extent subjective judgments. 

I say to "some extent" because judgment is often clouded by reputation. Once an artist achieves fame just how clinical are  judgments of their work? In these circumstances, to what extent is art really judged by its artistic value rather than the name attached to it?

Public funding of weird and unpopular items is always going to raise difficult questions - particularly during a recession. Why should the public fund items that are very widely regarded as "tat" even though that widely held opinion is subjective. If our Visitor Information Centre and Council Offices are closed to save money on the grounds that few people want them, is it right to fund art that few people want? I really don't have an answer.

I think people also have to be careful about flooding a small town like Whitstable with art and culture intiatives because it can change the character and nature of the place and make residents feel that they are strangers in their own home. I have seen web sites that first and foremost describe Whitstable as "a place with a lively art scene". Is that all we have become... a large art gallery or musuem? I hope not. I think not!!! 

Our Comment: I can't help a lot, Pat... but I hope some of our readers can throw some light on the subject.

I must admit that I have never heard of a Grays Inn Road in Whitstable but quite a few old roads have either disappeared or been renamed.

The only Chorlton that I know of is in Cheshire. There are many "Charltons" around the UK. The closest is just outside Kent - in South East London. This, of course, is the home of the famous Charlton Athletic football club and it is some 45 miles from Whitstable. 

Back in 1850, road links between Whitstable and Charlton would have been pretty poor but there would have been another more convenient connection. Charlton is close to the River Thames and barges would have plied their trade between there and seaports in the Thames estuary like Whitstable. If any of your ancestors were mariners, it might explain how some members of the family arrived in Whitstable.

Our Comment: Ahhhh.... but your and Fabio's misery is my good fortune, Stephen. No-one will want the England manager's job now and, so..... I'M GOING TO HAVE IT. I will negotiate a £6m pa deal, arrange a series of friendlies in the Bahamas, Seychelles and Caribbean and get Ambre Solaire to sponsor me. 

By my reckoning, it will be twelve months before England supporters realise that I don't know what I am doing..... 2 years before the England players realise that I don't know what I am doing... 3 years before Trevor Brooking starts to suspect that I might not know what I am doing.... and 10 years before the Football Association realises that, on reflection and in the fullness of time, it was perhaps possible that I didn't know what I was doing if all things are taken into account. By then, I will have banked £24m and can claim my £6m pay off. ;-)

Our Comment: I didn't mean any disrespect to Rosie's culinary skills, Chris. My experience of school mash potato came from Simon Langton. My reference to the "ladling" stems from the "dinner system" used there. As you know, tables were occupied by 8 people - one of whom was supposed to be a supervising sixth former. Immediately after "grace", each table would send one of its members to the kitchen hatch to collect the tin serving trays. This process was like a Wild West "gold rush".

When the dinner arrived, the sixth former would nominate servers who would dish it onto plates from the trays. It wasn't done with any great care -  often, large lumps of mashed potato would be thwacked onto a plate from a considerable height. It wasn't done with any great  fairness either - the good things (such as Gypsy Tart) were cut into very unequal portions with the least popular member of the table being given a small corner piece.   

By Year 3, we had managed to dispose of our sixth former - probably buried in mash or swept away in one of those dreadful but frequent summer salads (comprising a few sprigs of lettuce and masses of carrot).

Mind you, they did do wonderful "roast beef and roast pots", brilliant liver and the best sausages I have ever tasted. 

PS Does anyone know the history of diet? I wonder who was the first human to look at a cow and say.... "I'm gonna eat that". I mean... it's not a very obvious thing to do....  is it? Why not eat a log or a rock or the wife. Then, there is the problem of food preparation. Who felt that meat should be cooked? Who on earth was daft enough to make pasta into different shapes in a failed attempt to make it an acceptable food? Who would look at their very first corn field and think.... "Cor... look at all those loaves of bread?

I can only think that, having decided to eat a cow or cornfield, cavemen spent the entire Neolithic period working out how to do it. They must have been very clever because all the innovation appears to have happened in the early days of mankind. In the last century, modern man has only managed create Baked Beans and the Big Mac.

PPS Please don't write. I've worked out why a caveman wouldn't eat the wife. There would be no-one to bake the cornfield. ;-) 

Our Comment: Thanks, Howard. I had better ensure that I haven't misled anyone. There is no suggestion that the art work has been purchased for the event. In fact, that would seem very unlikely. It is more likely that it is simply being exhibited on loan. The reference to "£40,000" comes from rumours of the estimated value of the work. The high value explains why it has been given a dedicated "24 hours per day" security guard. 

Canterbury City Council does indeed have a reasonable reputation in local government circles. Overall, it is pretty efficient compared to some other authorities and maintains tight control of the purse strings . I don't agree with some of its overall strategies and priorities... but I accept that opinions on these things are subjective. My main criticism is that too many of our councillors have become marginalised by the system and that we hear far too much from unelected officials. In my view, this has led me to think that Whitstable is not being properly represented.

Our Comment: Thanks, Neil. I agree with you about the planning processes. They go a long way to undermining local democracy.

I think there is a real opportunity for the town to be enhanced by art and culture initiatives if such projects are handled with care, moderation, real  understanding of the past and sensitivity towards the people. However, local authorities and art organisations often fail to take the time to investigate these things - particularly when they have dashed in from elsewhere in the last few years and want to make Whitstable fit their economic or recreational requirements. The end result is that local art and culture appears to be created in a cement mixer before being ladled out like the indigestible mashed potato from a school canteen of the 1960s - "Splodge... gerra load of this culture stuff, luvvies. That'll learn ya". 

On the subject of weird art forms in general, one of the big problems is that no-one can define "art". In fact, it is not a good idea to do so anyway because firm boundaries would act as a barrier to innovation. Sadly, some inadequate elements of the art world exploit this necessary fuzziness in order to justify and tout talentless tripe. There are also other elements that have become so detached from the real world that they appear to me to almost cross the fine divide between sanity and insanity.

One of the funny things is that when "odd" bits of art are discussed with "ordinary" people, they will say something like... "Well, I think it is rubbish... but then I don't know anything about art". I wish they had the confidence to leave out the "BUT". What does anyone need to know about art? The artist either has an impact on you or she/he doesn't. If they don't, they have failed in your case and you are entitled to say so without apologising. For too long, art has hidden behind a protective wall of snobbery whilst coming cap in hand for public handouts.

Our Comment: Thanks, Howard. Many years ago, the old Whitstable Urban District Council had a few independent councillors. Sadly, that has all gone under the Canterbury City Council set up. The electoral system requires two or three councillors to be elected at each election and this makes it very unlikely that an independent can become a councillor.... and, even if one did, the "cabinet" system would almost certainly keep her/him well away from the major policy decisions. It's a shame. 

Our Comment: Thanks, Howard. However, at the moment, there is nothing to link the work of art directly with Canterbury City Council. It is possible that the council may have provided some general grant to the overall art festival and I suspect that they may have had to give permission for the neon light to be erected on the Slopes. With regard to the latter, I wonder if they checked the content because I suspect that some people are going to find it offensive. There  could be a few letters and emails winging their way to Military Road at this very moment.

Mind you, even if the council asks for the work to be removed, some people will consider that it has already served a "useful" function by generating sufficient controversy to advertise the Biennale. I don't know how true it is but I have heard rumours that TV cameras have been down there to report on the work. I suspect that for people to be mentioning values in the region of £40,000, the artist is going to be someone well known (I am sure we can all tinker with a possible name!!!) and the council are going to have to tread carefully.

Obviously, if it turns out that the council is directly financing the work, its use for the Biennale or its security arrangements, there could be some very unhappy residents.... bearing in mind the recent cuts in services, the loss of the council's office in Harbour Street... etc... etc. Yesterday, it was particularly noticeable that just a few yards along the Slopes the grass bank is now quite overgrown in an area that many people like to use in summer.

Speaking purely personally, I am not offended by the light even if I do think it's a bit of a nonsense. I also feel that it is valid for art to shock or generate controversy and discussion. However, the shock or controversy should revolve around the subject matter. When shock and controversy merely concern whether the work is art or whether it is worth £40,000, it all becomes an act of self indulgence on the part of the art world and serves little or no useful purpose. Shocking an audience for no other purpose than to shock an audience is to occupy space and waste it.

I am not against the art world doing a few things around Whitstable at times. However, in recent years, I have felt swamped by the emphasis that our council and others place on art and culture. Effectively, the town I once knew as home has been annexed by invaders and turned into something it never was. It is particularly irritating that it has all been done using the excuse that it is somehow preserving our heritage and identity. Do any of our Native readers really believe that the art and culture merchants are portraying Whitstable as we remember it?

The real problem is that, rather than being a natural product of Whitstable, so much local art and culture has been imported and superimposed over Whitstable for economic or even purely selfish reasons . So, can I challenge artists to portray the sense of loss and frustration that I (and probably others) feel... or is that beyond their comprehension or purpose? 

Our Comment: Honest, Diana! It's all true. I hope you are able to get to see it before it disappears.

Our Comment: Thanks for "the voice of reason", Neil, . I try to "live and let live" with regard to art as it can be a very personal thing.... but there are times when I go through the roof - possibly unfairly!!!! So, to provide balance, I think your suggestion of an "Is this art?" discussion is a great idea. Over to our readers.

I appreciate that the Biennale may be good for business but, on a serious note, I would like the authorities to explain the real impacts of such initiatives. So often, we hear that a scheme, project or initiative will "boost the local economy by £X million pounds".... with the "X" increasing exponentially as the escapade increases in size. It is one of the main justifications for anything that is a bit controversial..... BUT, what does it actually mean in the real world?

How is "X" calculated? Are we talking gross profit... net profit.. or profit after tax? If it is gross profit, how much of it leaks out of the locality in costs, taxes etc. Who benefits from what's left? How does it impact on an ordinary Joe or Joanna Soap? How much does it knock off our council tax? What general services does it finance? How many jobs does it create? What type of jobs are these? Are they full or part time? How does the pay in these jobs relate to local prices (including house prices)? How much does the council spend on the project - not just in terms of immediate grants but also on setting things up, clearing things up and maintaining an infrastructure capable of supporting it all

I just have this horrible feeling that things like the Biennale clog up our town centre roads for little or no real benefit to the average Mr or Mrs Soap. However, we won't know until someone actually publishes the figures.

PS I have been interested in the way that the Marlowe theatre rebuild has been described in different publications. Some time ago, I read that it would bring "£X million pounds into the economy of the Canterbury area". More recently, I have seen "the £X million pounds" described as "boosting the economy of East Kent". Are these reports written by the Vicar of Bray?

Do these things vary according to who the authorities are trying to get to support the scheme? I have this feeling that some people would claim that the Marlowe "X-factor" would boost the economy of Dubai if it meant that support could be screwed out of a Sheikh. Basically, authorities can make unsupported figures prove anything if they are as economical with with facts as they are with recycling sacks.