What are suitcarriers for?

When I embarked, several years ago, on worsening my carbon footprint under the guise of ‘business travel’, I noticed that many of my travel companions in this category had large, square flat bags, called ‘suit carriers’. I naturally assumed that the boffs in Samsonite’s R&D department had spotted a niche opportunity, thought things out carefully, and crafted a product designed to keep one’s suits and shirts in pristine, ‘ready-to-wear-as-soon-as-you-got-off-the-plane’ condition.

Not a bit of it. Do not be fooled. The suitcarrier mangles your clothes as effectively as if you had handed them to a captive princess in a tower of your choice (the princess I mean. Not the tower) and asked her to assemble a rope ladder by tying them end to end for the benefit of any passing in-bred aristocrat. In other words they are RUBBISH. With mine, everything needs ironing afterwards. Even my socks.

It does, however, have one important feature. It is bullet proof, the salesman assured me, made from the same material that is used to make body armour. So that’ll come in handy if anyone decides to take pot shots at the carefully concealed dodgy linen suit I own.

And while I’m on the subject of travel, I have just come through Lima airport, and what a depressing experience it was. You can spot the tourists by the fact that are invariably in possession of some Peruvian woven artesan type garish ‘Inca’ bag. These did in fact used to be mostly genuine, made by handlooms by indigenes (and weren’t so garish). Now they look like they have been mass produced in some sweat-shop in downtown Lima. And the other thing is, most of these tourists are over 60. What on earth do they think they are doing?? When I first travelled in Peru at the age of 27, this was ground-breaking stuff (or so I pretended to myself - just so long as you could ignore the brigades of de-mobbed Israeli reservists).

Now every Tom, Dick and Harold seems to be schlepping up to Cuzco - and at the forefront seems to be the grey pound. In the past these sextagenarians were quite content to sit at home sipping sherry, bit of gardening, bingo, Corrie. But now? They are zooming round the planet like modern day Christopher Colombii (the plural of ‘Columbus’?) on speed, thus devaluing the whole travel experience by making it look easy, the swines.

People used to be impressed if you had done the Inca Trail – now it’s almost a ‘must-do, and if you stand still for two seconds, you are likely to get trampled underfoot by the hordes, about 25% of whom are doing it for ‘charidee’ – and what a scam that is – get everyone else to pay for something you want to do anyway.

I’ll tell you what – there is a good reason Jeeves carefully packed all Bertie Wooster’s elegant togs in trunks and leather suitcases, and it was because they were fit for purpose. Old Jeeves wouldn’t have been seen near a suit carrier - and if he was, I’m confident he would have raised an eyebrow at it.

Ashley Cole - and being an England fan

There's been a lot written and said about the boo-ing of Ashley Cole after his schoolboy error on Saturday against Kazakhstan. I was there - it was a disgrace. I mean let's face it - does anyone believe that boo-ing will IMPROVE someone's performance, in any sport /way of life?
The debate has widened out into talking about the England fan culture. Two principal reasons have been espoused for why such boo-ing occurs. The first is the old club versus country issue - which English fans support their club before their country, and which do the opposite.
I have always been country before club. It's noticeable in fact, that those who do the opposite, are generally fans of the top 4 clubs ( as they stand today). Maybe, given the years of disappointment from watching England creates such a position amongst some fans, who want some success once in a while - hence they feel closer to their clubs. I am an old enough goon to have seen England win a World Cup - and maybe that's the difference - once you have seen that, it's always going to be country before club.

The second reason mooted for the boo-ing of AC is the fact that premiership footballers' millionaire lifestyles mean they are so divorced from the everyday realities the rest of us poor wage slaves have to face, that when they play badly (or make one mistake, as in this case) they are a legitimate target for boo-ing.

Well I find both viewpoints unjustifiable really. I contrast England's lukewarm support with the utter, and fierce passion with which the Argentines support their national team. The supporters of River Plate, and Boca Juniors are arguably more passionate than ANY English supporters - but once the light blue and white stripes are donned, everyone supports the national team, regardless of which club the players originate from.
And then this second argument. Surely if ANYONE has a right to bitch about the millionaire lifestyles of their international players, it's the supporters of Brazil and Argentina. Just about every one of these players have left their home country clubs to go and ply their trade on the other side of the Atlantic, never to be seen gracing the pitches of Buenos Aires and Sao Paulo again. Surely that would be a very good reason to boo the players, if you were so inclined - they with their multi-million pound villas in Italy, whilst you scrape a living in a Buenos Aires shanty suburb?
Not a bit of it - the Argentine supports every player - and loudly too. Contrast this with supporters I saw on Saturday who didn't chant for England ONCE. I'm not exaggerrating - there were a lot of them. Give me the Argentine or Brasilian football supporter any day. They deserve success. Not like England's pathetic excuse for supporters.