“I would like to pay tribute to the referee in today’s game. He has a really difficult job and has to make snap decisions without the benefit of a television replay.

It is only human to make the occasional mistake. After all, look at my strikers - they made numerous mistakes, missing a hatful of chances. They earn £200,000 a week and for that sort of salary you expect a better return on our massive investment. The poor old referee is paid a fraction and I really sympathise with the difficulties they face. I also made a diabolical mistake sending on Antonio when I should have chosen Alfredo.

Those defensive blunders by Geronimo almost certainly cost us the match. The goalkeeper made a few mistakes too and that upset the confidence of the back four.

The ref saw the Bloggatelli incident differently from me, and I would not have sent him off, but I fully respect his decision. I also accept that I know less about the game than the referee. He has been on lots of courses and reached the present pinnacle in the Premiership because he has been a consistently good performer. Which is more than you can say for most of my overpaid teenagers.

The referee’s decision today is part of the human condition. We can all be wise after the event and not for one moment will I criticise the ref. I have been watching the Rugby World Cup in New Zealand and seen the general respect given to the referees. I would like to see the same in football. They are also sensibly equipped with appropriate technology while we in football are like dinosaurs, refusing to do anything that might help the referee give the best deeisions. Good luck to them, I say. They have my support every time.”

And that is a post-match comment you will never hear from a football club manager. You don’t hear it much from managers in workplaces either. They may not blame the ref for a mistake, but substitute the word staff for ref and you have a similar scenario. What a shame that for many employers, blame is still too often the name of the game.

Three cheers for the Treasury select committee!

It’s not often we can applaud politicians but they have got it spot on for censuring the discredited UK Payments Council over its appalling handling of the cheques issue.

This lackey of the banking industry raised real fears among businesses, charities and individuals that this vital payment method was to go within a decade.

It’s no good the council spin doctor saying it was only a consultation exercise. It was not. The council actively wanted to scrap cheques under the cloak of declining use. The real reason is that this cabal of bankers wanted rid of a scheme that was inconvenient and expensive for them, no matter what customers thought.

The only consultation was to be about what would replace the cheque. Abolition was presented as a fait-accompli.

Charities depend on cheques for 80 per cent of their donations. Many businesses still use cheques, and much of the population - not just those of a certain age - believe cheques are a vital way of paying for things.

Of course there are alternative electronic methods - and no one uses cheques at supermarkets any more - but how would the likes of schools, Brownies and sports clubs afford the cost of installing them.

Thankfully, the council backed down under sustained pressure from all quarters, but, true to its spinning traditions, under the pretext of claiming there was no viable alternative. Well surprise surprise! The cheque is a tried a trusted method and as a paper transaction cannot be bettered. It now also needs the return of the guarantee card.

Unfortunately, the handful of so-called independent colleagues on the council failed to put a brake on this disreputable plan - how on earth could they not see the looming furore? -  and stand guilty alongside their banking band of brothers.

They should have spent more energy on speeding up the tortoise-slow cheque payment system rather than raising the blood pressure of millions.

A lot of decent quangoes have been scrapped and the UK Payments Council should go the same way. It should be replaced by a body far more representative of the consumer, not the vested interests of bankers.

The council failed the public and the Government should kill it off - just what the council wanted to do to the still cherished cheque.

Well, it is a new year and numerous political possibilities for 2011; due to the deficit reduction plan starting within months we know this year is going to be tough. Both economic and political. The coalition will face difficult local elections across the United Kingdom, especially in Kent where the Tories and Liberals dominate the political scene.

As a typical pastime for a new year, some predictions;

1. Due to the student population in Canterbury, Liberal Democrats to have a difficult time in Canterbury.

2. Dover to return to no over all control – Labour to do extremely well.

3. Overall, the picture will be mixed in Kent. No dramatic massacre across the board for the coalition.

4. Alternative Vote will become the new voting system after a successful victory in the referendum.

5. The Oldham East and Saddleworth by-election will be won by the Liberal Democrats

6. No major strikes.

7. First Green councillor will be elected in Canterbury.

8. Kent's pilot of community budgets will be seen as a success by the Council, but prove to be extremely unpopular with residents.

9. Government's “localism drive” met with scepticism and local protests over the future of services. NHS to suffer. Postal service will face an uncertain future after privatisation of the Royal Mail.

10. After successful constitutional reforms and reducing authoritarian anti-terrorism laws, Nick Clegg's unpopularity will reach a bottom. Improvement in the polls within the second half of the year. Struggling to gain the narrative and media attention, Ed Miliband will have a difficult year and will be unable to capitalise the fallout from spending cuts due to rhetoric from union leaders and Labour left. Cameron popularity will remain moderate due to a weak Labour opposition, but will take a knock after the local elections and possible new EU treaty.

9% swing to Labour is pretty impressive. Extremely positive assessment for the new leadership and the party locally. Dover is, politically, quite capricious and volatile – the Parliament seat tends to routinely switch between Labour and the Conservatives.

After the electoral holocaust for Labour in Kent, majority of the political mandarins will be delighted as a reverse in the decline. We can forgive them for being rather optimistic about future elections in Kent.

However, nationally, the picture is much different. Six comparable local election results, from this week, project (on a national scale) the Conservatives having at least a near 5% lead over Labour. This feeds into my narrative of Labour's current opinion poll position being mostly protest against the coalition. Not a definitive level of support. After all, Ed Miliband personal leadership rating is worse than Nick Clegg and no where near close to David Cameron.

Labour are probably between 28 – 35% in genuine support. Tories seem to be reasonably near the 40% level. Liberal Democrats between 12 - 15%

It was Trafalgar Day yesterday, the 205^th anniversary of how the small English navy destroyed the French, but lost their Admiral, Lord Horatio Nelson, in the process.

Last night, out of the jaws of victory, the Conservatives successfully snatched defeat at the latest River Ward by-election.

The Labour candidate, John Jones got his message across the streets of River ward, and into the letterboxes around Chatham.

He did it to such an extent that thoughts of weariness over the third election since May were completely rejected by the local residents.

They turned out in greater numbers than anyone expected (including this pundit) after the mess that occurred after the Conservatives won the seat for 13 days in August.

That may have had something to do with having an election on Budget Day.

It could have had something to do with Ed Miliband pounding the streets with Cllr Jones in the summer.

It could be that the vitriolic attacks on the Chief Constable after the last winner, David Craggs, stood down to continue as a Special Constable in Gravesend, had something to do with it.

Small wonder the Labour group was delighted to win back a seat that once was theirs.

Two leadership issues are now worth considering.

One is the lack of wild enthusiasm that is evident elsewhere in the photo issued from Labour's wake for the Conservatives displayed by the oft-times taciturn Paul Godwin.

The other is the challenge to the Leader of the Council and Tory group leader, Cllr Rodney Chambers, that is quietly mounting on the Hoo peninsula.

The Rochester and Strood Conservatives (who now include River Ward among their ranks) are hoping to see Craig Mackinlay successfully carry out his second challenge for the leadership of the Tory group.

Whoever wins that race next May will become Leader of the Council.

On this showing Mr Mackinlay must first cling on to his seat to have any chance of bidding to be group leader.

There are those in the council wearing red, yellow, white - and blue - who would be delighted if the second River seat returned to Labour next year.

Never go out to lunch - it should be tattoo'd on the eyelids of every reporter. That's the hour when stories have a nasty habit of breaking.

Yesterday your scribe broke with tradition, and went to lunch only to learn on his return that Medway's newest councillor had resigned less than two weeks after being elected in a costly, sometimes acrimonious, by-election.

It could be he went too soon.

David Craggs - private school headmaster, special constable, Army Cadet officer and (for the briefest of periods) a politician and elected member for the River ward in Chatham - was told by Kent Police he couldn't be a councillor and a special constable. He chose the uniformed role he had held for 17 years.

That has sparked a major crisis in the council, and a row that could find the controlling Conservative party's biggest constituency taking their close friends, the police, to the High Court amid accusations of bullying.

It couldn't have happened at a worse moment.

The Chief Executive and Returning Officer, Neil Davies, was on holiday.

So, too, was the council's legal chief and monitoring officer, Deborah Upton.

It left the Children's director, Rose Collinson, in charge, and without much backup to advise her.

Half an hour after Cllr Craggs resigned, the council was announcing another by-election could be (though not necessarily will be) called within 35 days.

But was it bullying?

As in all walks of life, there are people with political interests in police, newspapers, the courts, sport .... everywhere.

Kent Police seem to have a rule that says you can't do both. As a member of the constabulary you chose - and it doesn't matter whether you are a backroom boy or a multi-pipped senior officer.

The irony is that the Conservative Party has announced they want local police chiefs to be elected - just as they are in the Good Ol' Yew Ess of Aye. It will make them more accountable. It will also make them political - whether or not chief constables and personnel chiefs are happy with it or not.

***

The cost of the debacle that has once again left River Ward without a councillor is likely to top £10,000.

There were printing costs, election announcements, hiring polling stations, the election count team, the council's staffing costs....

Then there was the outlay incurred by the politicians. They published newsletters, banged on doors, bought rosettes, wore out shoes.... and, don't forget, there were six parties involved.

There were election fees for each of the candidates - most of whom failed to get into treble figures.

Now it all has to happen again if two River ward residents say they are unhappy only being served by one councillors, the erstwhile UKIP founder and leadership contender, Craig Mackinlay.

It is conceivable Medway's Blue Boys could end up sueing Kent's Boys in Blue, while they, in turn, are pursued by Lib, Lab, and assorted others wanting their wasted outlay refunded.

Chris Buckwell, Membership Secretary for the local Tory association, ex council Cabinet member and now an immigration judge, was spitting blood, and calling down the heavens on the heads of the cops' personnel team. Among his more restrained observations was an accusation of bullying.

Certainly, they have successfully managed to convince a democratically elected councillor to chose between the voters and plodding the beat.

The question is: should the police interfere with democratic rights and decisions?

It will need a judge to sort that out.

***

Thank heavens for the planning committee.

They saw the sense of a planning application to provide a play area in one of Medway's more under-provided wards.

The advantages (apart from keeping the kids off the street) were that it was well away from any neighbours, it met the needs of the community, and it had the backing of police and council.

The trouble was councillors were advised to refuse it. Because it was too far away from any neighbours, and the council and the police were against it.

That's right - while the local bobbies and the youth team had found an ideal place for a kick around - and the money, the planners and the Maidstone plods had a different viewpoint.

As one councillor said last night: if the local kids were going to be anti-social there are plenty of other places to do it.

So it went through.

The neighbourhood will get a play area - because councillors used common sense. Unlike some..

Holiday over for another year...

***

Those CCTV mobile spy vans may be Smart cars, but you have to question whether any of it has rubbed off on those responsible for them.

I have kept away from the rows about the cars because I think they are a necessary evil in Medway. Far too many people think a few seconds on the double yellow lines to drop off a letter, pick up a pupil from school, ask directions or greet a friend is perfectly all right. It isn't.

Equally as many believe the only reason for the CCTV cars is to provide the council with a ready-made source of additional cash.

It might be - but it wouldn't be the million pound earner that it is if there was not so much flaunting of the law by drivers.

Having said that, there is a clear lack of customer training for staff and a failure to crack down on the numerous abuses which they inflict.

I know one woman booked by the cars. A reasonable lady, she shrugged, accepted the penalty and got on with her life. Yet she apparently got a lot of abuse when there was a problem passing the CCTV car in the street.

The warden who recently accused a local resident armed with his own CCTV camera of harassment when they dared to turn it on him didn't know one vital bit of law: anyone can take photographs or film in the street, despite what some individual police officers may think in the wake of the anti-terrorism rules. Kent Police recently issued some simple guidelines to its own officers. One says: "The media do not need a permit to photograph or film in public places."

It also says: "In normal circumstances we have no legal power or moral responsibility to prevent or restrict what they record....Once images are recorded we have no power to delete or confiscate them without a court order, even if we think they contain damaging or useful evidence."

The public has exactly the same rights and powers as the press. No more. No less. Given the rapidly improving quality of mobile phone cameras, we will all have to get used to being filmed.

After all, the CCTV car wardens and the 500 CCTV cameras in Medway and Swale monitored by their colleagues in Strood are operating under exactly the same rights and powers. It's just that members of the public are more visible than people sitting in a bunker in Strood, or behind a Smart car windscreen.

(In case anyone thinks I might have a personal axe to grind, I don't. On the other hand, I was booked by one of the ground patrols yesterday while interviewing delighted students who have just completed their education in Medway...)

***

The election of David Craggs as Medway's 34th Conservative councillor must be causing some angst in the ranks of the Labour party as they lose another seat.

Meanwhile the four independent councillors who formed their own group (sans the ultra-right wing former chairman of Audit) are whispered to be planning to put up candidates of their own next May.

That could cause fears in the ranks of the Liberal Democrats. They saw their competent deputy leader suddenly move into the ranks of the indies only weeks after standing as their candidate in the Gillingham and Rainham constituency where he polled 8484 votes.

There have been investigations taking place into what happened to cause his sudden departure. Andy Stamp himself has to date refused to explain his reasons for crossing the Chamber.

***

The achievements of Medway's sixth formers have been remarkable this year.

School after school reported their best-ever results - or pretty close to it.

Probably the most satisfied will be the staff.

None more so than at the Hundred of Hoo school.

Headteacher Kevin Mahon has been under great pressure. His school has been in special measures.

So for the 94 students to get record levels of passes is a tribute to all the work that has been put in - by the pupils and by their teachers.

***

This week's regeneration committee contemplated four major reports. This most important of these - and one that could influence whether millions of pounds of government cash reach the community - is the 15-year Local Transport Plan.

Bus travel is always a political football and never more so than in Medway where public transport is anathema to some councillors.

Yet there are major plans for the buses - providing they don't interfere with the beloved car.

They include several park and ride schemes (something has to be done to divert the traffic away from Medway's once and future city centre).

Sainsbury's are expected to fund one next to the tunnel entrance at the Medway City Estate.

The council has eyes on a plot of land at Wigmore for a second one.

There is no talk of one near Blue Bell Hill. Maidstone council has proposed a joint park and ride serving both Medway and Maidstone. It would pick up traffic arriving in the Towns from the M2. The trouble is Medway wants to snaffle some of the trade going to the county town, but isn't prepared to sacrifice any of the trade currently attracted to Chatham's fine shopping experience that is the High Street.

As though Maidstone could do such a thing.

***

Car clamping on private land is to be banned by the government in the next few months. About time we ended the regime of the high fining, non-answerable clampers.

The problem, however, will not go away for property owners who suddenly discover someone using their land to visit the shop, the pub, or simply to leave their car for a weekend.

***

The first of a string of councillors investigated by Medway's Standards Committee for actions (real or perceived) gets hauled over the coals next week.

The likelihood is that the councillor (who resigned after being convicted of benefits frauds by claiming cash aid while receiving a councillor's pay) will not turn up.

Nothing has been heard from Dennis Macfarlane since his world collapsed.

Meanwhile, it will be interesting to find out who wins the battle between the Honorable Member for Rochester and Strood and three chief officers of Medway Council.

The Hon Member, Cllr Mark Reckless, has certainly got himself into hot water several times since he first gained public support as a Conservative councillor for Rochester West three years ago.

Apart from his clash with the council's chief officers he got elected to Parliament despite objections to his selection from Central Office.

Within days of election he was earning the displeasure of the whips, then missed the three-line whip to vote on the Finance Bill.

He was reported to the board by the Chief Executive, the Director for Children's Services and the council's Monitoring Officer following a public row in the Council Chamber.

His hearing is among the string waiting to be settled.

Meanwhile, there are whispers that the boot is on the other foot with allegations of bullying being made against senior staff. If that's true it will be interesting to see who investigates - and what the outome is.