Month: September 2013

Family Guy: Which Griffin will meet their maker?

In a bizarre plot twist, not usually seen in animated comedies, a main cast member of Family Guy is set to be killed off. Prior to the premiere of the show’s twelfth season last Sunday on Fox, showrunners confirmed the demise of one of the Griffins in the new season in an episode guest starring Ashton Kutcher, in a spoof of CBS’ Two and a Half Men. I imagine this stunt is to generate interest in an increasingly repetitive cartoon stifled by the Simpsons monopolising storylines – it’s worked, this will be the first and likely last thing I write about the show. So, as I impatiently wait for my 100,000th view, we’ll run down the candidates for animated demise because while I’m obsessed with view counting, I can’t write anything requiring any real thought.

Nagging Nympho… Lois isn’t likely to get the chop

Lois Griffin

We’ll start with nasal housewife, Lois. She wouldn’t be that tragic a loss for the show. Sure, she’s needed to be a counteractive force to Peter’s silliness but she’s easily replaced. The voice actor, Alex Borstein also plays several other characters so it wouldn’t require a massive cast change should Lois be the one to bite the dust. It would even make sense to make Stewie her killer given his disdain for her that has subsided in recent years. That being said, there really is no reason for Lois to die and wouldn’t really provide the shake-up the producers are alluding to.
VERDICT: SAFE

 

Safe… It would make no sense to kill the ‘Family Guy’.

Peter Griffin

Then there’s the possibility of protagonist Peter being the one to die. In contrast to his flame-haired wife, it would certainly provide the shake-up the producers want but let’s be honest, the show would also die – in fact, the very concept of it would no longer make any sense. The only way Peter will end up dead is if he is resurrected without explanation in the very next episode, which is definitely a possibility.
VERDICT: SAFE

 

What the deuce?… Stewie will be fine

Stewie Griffin

Arguably, the show’s second most popular character. To put it plainly, there is no chance that Stewie will be killed off. I’ll actually go on the record and say that he is the least likely to bite the dust. His camp evilness is used time and time again to give viewers a break from Peter’s sometimes tiresome nonsense. Again, in the off chance that the producers do kill Stewie, he’ll be back almost imminently.
VERDICT: SAFE

Every dog has its day… and Brian’s might be about to end.

Brian Griffin

What about Brian, Stewie’s partner in crime? He’s certainly not the funniest character in the show, in fact he’s a bit of a douche at times. There’s actually a decent case to argue that Brian will have his coup de grace in season twelve. For example, he’s a blooming dog, dogs do not live this long.  He certainly wouldn’t be that missed and I’m sure Seth MacFarlane wouldn’t mind voicing just two of the six main characters instead of three. Brian the dog may have had his day.
VERDICT: IN DANGER

 

Shut up Meg.

Meg Griffin

Then there’s black sheep, Meg, voiced by the beautiful and frankly fucking cool, Mila Kunis. I honestly don’t think killing Meg off is a good idea from a creative perspective, sure she’s not necessarily popular (well I really like her), but the fact that she is such a reject within her own family has provided joke after joke over the last eleven seasons. The reason why she might be bumped off is the increasingly high demand of Kunis herself, who has outgrown the show in recent years, and with Ashton Kutcher (her current boyfriend) set to guest star, the signs don’t like great for Meg.
VERDICT: IN DANGER

 

Chris Griffin 

Without a Paddle… Seth Green’s is in deep water.

Lastly, is my least favourite Griffin, Chris. I don’t favour the others because he embarrasses my name but simply because I think he’s the most disposable. His usage has decreased in recent years and doesn’t hold a strong tie to any of the other family members. Peter has Lois, Stewie has Brian and Meg is Meg. It’s also worth noting that Seth Green, Chris’ portrayer, has just landed a starring role on a new sitcom, Dads. He’s also the only character to not have a previewed storyline for the anticipated Simpsons crossover. It’s not looking good for Peter and Lois’ eldest son and if I had to commit to just one name, I’d say Chris’ time is up.
VERDICT: IN DANGER

Boycott Blatter’s Bulls**t?

No one is happy about this. This being FIFA’s decision to hold the 2022 edition of the World Cup, football’s grandest international tournament in Qatar. And, it’s not football snobbery that’s the plaguing the internet forums. The most contentious issue without doubt with the decision is moving the beloved tournament to an untraditional winter commencement.

Simpleton… Blatter prays for an escape from this giant mess.

Let’s start with the good points about this arrangement. This shouldn’t take too long. FIFA claims that holding such a renowned event in a country less interested in football will spread word of football and help develop Qatar’s and the surrounding nations’ footballing abilities. And to be fair, that is a good point. In fact, if that was the only, genuine reason and there weren’t so many faults with the decision, I’d probably back Blatter and co.’s decision.

Unfortunately, the bid was also full of holes such as the ignorance of Qatar’s scorching hot summers that would make playing football in almost impossible. As a result, Blatter proposed a Winter World Cup which has angered football fans across the globe. Not only is his idea a breach of decades of tradition, it would also be a monumental disruption to the major domestic leagues around the world, something many a football fan tend to value more. There are too, no stadia fit for the World Cup currently in Qatar, meaning up to eight venues would have to be constructed within the next 9 years. On top of the logistical issues, there are huge social issues too. Male homosexuality is illegal in Qatar meaning any gay man making the trip would be at risk of imprisonment and five years in prison. When Sepp Blatter was rightly criticised for allowing the event to be held there he simply told LGBT fans to keep a low profile. Not only is the decision to hold the tournament in Qatar, a painful inconvenience it is also dangerous to one cross-section of football fans. Maybe we shouldn’t be inviting an intolerant nation to embrace the ‘beautiful game’.

Money talks… Other nations offered better conditions.

It really does beg the question; what were the voters thinking? How on earth, given all of this information could this scorching, homophobic nation be a better choice than say the United States or Australia? Two countries that don’t endanger certain members of society through human rights violations. Two countries who could hold a competition in the northern hemisphere’s summer months without people evaporating. Two countries with expanding domestic leagues that would be hugely benefited by the promotion the World Cup brings.

It simply makes no sense to isolate the vast majority of football fans and domestic leagues to appease one tiny country not even remotely interested in football. Well, it doesn’t until you remember what a corrupt, selfish, money-grabbing scheme Sepp Blatter currently employs at FIFA HQ. Rumours spread that Russia had effectively bought their bid’s victory for the 2018 FIFA World Cup and given how feeble Qatar’s claim to the tournament is, you can safely assume money played a part here.

We continue to await the inevitable confirmation of the tournament’s move to Winter and eagerly we hope that the main footballing bodies elsewhere will stand up to Fifa and tell them where to shove it. Will they? I wouldn’t count on it.

The Inner Twerkings of Miley’s Madness

This post is pure speculation,  I have no real proof to suggest anything I’m going to ramble on about here is true but it may be something worth thinking about. At any given time, there is usually one celebrity making all the headlines, the one you can’t go anywhere without having a conversation about them, I’m talking Lady Gaga after she wore her meat dress, Kanye interrupting Taylor Swift at the VMAs but who would have thought innocent-faced, Miley Cyrus would ever reach the required height of relevance to make such a huge impact? Well, she has and while most are labelling her a ‘whore’ among other things, there is a just a chance that she may really be a marketing genius.

Scantily clad… Miley has become quite attached to skimpy clothes and sexual grinding.

In case you live under a rock, country darling Miley Cyrus has recently transformed in to a mega slut, think Draco Malfoy in a strip club. It all started with her single “We Can’t Stop”, exploring the sinister themes of a drug party rather than the cute on-goings of Tennessee hoedowns like her previous singles. The video was the most controversial with Miley writhing around barely clothed, making out with dolls, licking men’s torsos and twerking like she’d been tasered. That was stir enough but Cyrus managed to exceed her antics when she then twerked right in the lap of Robin Thicke at the MTV Video Music Awards. She also showed the world that she had a rare disease called ‘restless tongue syndrome’. Anyhow, interest continued to generate and she once again kept her momentum of craziness going by appearing in her latest music video for follow-up single, ‘Wrecking Ball’ entirely naked on an actual wrecking ball and by practically fornicating with a sledgehammer. She claims that this is purely artistic but you would have to be a moron to have seen that video and think she’s not trying to promote her sexuality.  You’re probably wondering where I’m getting with this but if you think about it; sex sells.

Hammer time… Miley claims this is artistic.

Miley acting promiscuously in her weird videos generates interests, which generates more views which generates more publicity and before you know it, Sly little Miley or Sliley as I’m now dubbing her, has her first UK number-one single. Pretty clever right? She follows her madness up quickly with her stint at the VMAs, everyone’s left talking about Miley and we’re waiting for what she’ll do next. She releases ‘Wrecking Ball’ accompanied by another equally controversial video and subsequently she breaks the record for most views on Vevo within 24 hours. And you can bet that ‘Wrecking Ball’ will be another top 5 hit globally. Why has she done this? Probably because it’s worked. Crazy behaviour gets noticed. Just think about how irrelevant Amanda Bynes was 12 months ago and now she’s arguably been the most talked about celebrity of 2013. But what I’d bet is that this is an ingenious plan by Miley to simply distance herself from her Hannah Montana days. She tried and failed to do that with “Can’t Be Tamed” but this time has thrown out all the stops to ensure she will no longer be seen as a kid. Here’s the checklist; 1) she’s singing about drugs, 2) she’s provocatively licking and flirting with literally any object she can find, 3) she’s changer her image so people know she is different now and 4) she’s declared ownership of a slutty dance move that is easy to replicate and already popular. In fact, that last point is her biggest triumph. Twerking is all the rage in clubs, on Twitter, on Vine and when ever anyone hears that word they think; Miley Cyrus – which is probably why she’s been trending on Twitter in some medium for the last two weeks.

If what I’m suggesting is correct, you really have to give Miley credit, she’s done a remarkable job of making herself relevant when in reality she’s not the best singer nor the most distinguishable popstar of this generation but if she can make some money and herself a success from these eccentric escapades than more power to her; Twerk, Miley. Twerk, twerk! On the other hand, if she has just gone a little bit insane and actually thinks her behaviour is normal and appropriate, maybe we should get her some help and perhaps get Billy Ray on the Jeremy Kyle show.

Other Celebrity publicity stunts that have worked out

  • Mariah Carey scored a platinum-selling single with the only slightly above average, ‘Obsessed’ by targeting Eminem in her video.
  • Lady Gaga cemented her reputation as ‘quirky’ and ‘off the wall’ by wearing a dress made of meat – it didn’t harm her album sales either.
  • Swapping spit seemed to bolster sales for both Britney Spears and Madonna.
  • Any number of female celebrities have increased their sex appeal by coming out as ‘bisexual’.
  • Kim Kardashian masterfully handled the fallout of her sex tape to become one of the world’s most famous names (well her mother did).

Richard III: Greedy York Eye Fortune

The body of the last king of England to die in battle, Richard III was discovered under a council car park in the Grey Friars area of the Leicester. The discovery was made in 2012 and proven to be him in early 2013 but now some several months after the excavation, the citizens of York have pound sterling signs wedged between their eye lids.

The citizens of the northern city claim that York is his ‘spiritual’ home and it would be ‘morally correct’ to bury him at York Minster. The petition to remove his remains from the East Midlands has drawn plenty of support in online petitions with even Dame Judi Dench joining the crusade. My question is, do they really have a claim to his remains? No. Richard III was not born in York, he was born in Fotheringhay, Northamptonshire. He did not even live in York, nor did he grow up there. He was the Duke of Gloucester and his wife was buried in London, if anything these are the places that should be contesting Leicester not York.

Resting place… Richard III was discovered in Leicester.

While, his links to the town are obvious through the war of the roses you must too question the timing of the people of York who are now adamant his remains should be moved. Nobody cared when the excavation was taking place and nobody cared when he was found. It was only when the mainstream media latched on to his discovery and tourists flocked to see him that York-dwellers paid any attention whatsoever. Now, you won’t find a more passionate hive of Richard III sympathisers.

The ludicrous nature of the campaign reaches new heights when you realise that the University of Leicester and Leicester City Council have spared no expense in their historic search. They’re the ones who put their hands in the pockets to find him and put in the time and effort to uncover his body in the first place and now York want to reap the rewards and pass it off as a compassionate act of humanitarianism? The Richard III society remain neutral on the subject, realising we have no concrete knowledge on where Richard wanted to be buried and there’s a huge chance, Leicester nor York were his preferred choice.

Greedy… York Minster initially backed Leicester’s burial plans.

In fact, the only people claiming to know of his wishes are a group of people claiming to be his family. The same ones who didn’t know they were his descendants until they were tracked down and are now acting as if they had a deep emotional bond. It’s even more ridiculous when you realise that Richard III’s number of descendants has been estimated as somewhere between one and fifteen million. The fact remains is that nobody alive has ever met Richard III – not even close. There is not one person who knew him well enough to make this decision or who know him well enough to even care. I’m talking about a social version of the Statute of Limitations. So how they have the audacity to proclaim his burial wishes is beyond me.

Those in the pro-York burial clan have certainly had no qualms in bashing the city of Leicester for its conduct in the matter by trying to pass organisers off as money-driven buffoons. Those same people quietly ignore the fact of Leicester’s great expenditure and effort in unearthing the fallen king not to mention the historical significance of Richard with the city. They also don’t seem to care that Leicester Cathedral has commemorated many of the major anniversaries of the Battle of Bosworth; York Minster has not.

Exhibition… The city of Leicester has already spent money honouring the king.

Keeping the King in Leicester is even within keeping of archaeological and religious practice. York Minster even backed plans for Richard III to be re-interred in Leicester cathedral in March of this year. Unsurprisingly, as soon as Leicester began the construction of their tourist attraction, including alterations to their historic cathedral, and the citizens of York saw the potential income involved they decided to play the role of moral guardians.  Leicester is even in the middle of the country and a bigger city in general, far more recognisable on the international stage and a much better place for people to pay their respects and visit the King. The worst thing of all is that the citizens of York have managed to convince much of the general public that their cause is an honourable one and not a factually invalid ploy to make money for their city. Please don’t be taken for a fool and allow this injustice to occur. Although, not initially, Leicester has honoured Richard III for decades. York only became involved when the money did. As Leicester’s mayor, Sir Peter Soulsby so plainly put it; “the case for Leicester is overwhelming.”

Please sign this petition and keep Richard III in Leicester. Thank you in advance; http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/39708

The Damning Consequence of Accusation

Today, Coronation Street actor, Michael Le Vell was cleared of sexual assault and raping a minor. Although, today may seem like a victory for the actor; the power of a simple accusation will plague his career for years to come.

Innocent… Michael Le Vell was cleared of all charges

The official approach of all courtroom proceedings in the UK and indeed, most other places is ‘innocent until proven guilty‘. But, if we were to gage the general public’s response to Le Vell during his trial last week, a more accurate description would be ‘guilty until proven innocent and probably still guilty after that’. A quick search of ‘Le Vell paedo’ on Twitter returns several tweets condemning an acquitted man as irrefutably guilty.

https://twitter.com/_JadeFulton/status/377498568250376192

Damaged… The acquittal of Michael Jackson didn’t stop abuse.

Unfortunately, labels stick, as we’ve seen time and time again with other accused celebrities. Michael Jackson was famously tried in court on two separate occasions for child molestation charges. The singer came to a private settlement with the accusers the first time around but was acquited in 2005. Both Jordie Chandler and Gavin Arviso have admitted lying about Jackson’s abuse but still, he is widely considered to be a predator. You probably didn’t know that because the media doesn’t want you to. These celebrities are stuck with this tag for lifetime and the liars that tarnish their livelihood usually get off scot free.

In fairness, many believed that Michael Le Vell was the victim of a Salem witch trial type scenario, basically meaning he was accused, knowing that the accusations alone were enough to ruin him – which they will. Michael Jackson was never the same after his court cases and like him, Michael Le Vell will always be the target of ‘paedophile’ jibes. Even though, the accuser didn’t get the defendant a conviction, he will still pay the price for this episode.

The question is what can be done? Why do people assume the worst? Well, in honesty, people resent success. It’s human nature to enjoy the fall of a person high up in the world because it makes civilians feel and look better.  But the real culprits promoting this cause are the sensationalist tabloids who only sell papers if they convict without evidence. The Sun isn’t going to sell more copies of a paper that labels a loved Corrie star as ‘accused by probably innocent’ than they would labelling him as a ‘sick pervert’. The celebrities accused in these instances, and in fact, the general public should be given a greater chance at anonymity. Ultimately, although cleared of all charges, Michael Le Vell will be considered a sex offender for the rest of his days, whereas the mother and daughter who put him through this atrocity can carry on as normal because no one knows who they are. If you want to talk about perversion; how about perversion of the course of justice?

The Dying Derby With Derby

The perception among many neutrals and every member of the Sky Sports fixture selection team is that Derby County vs. Leicester City is a passionate, hearty and eagerly anticipated derby match and while that may have once been the case, it’s importance has been dwindling for years.

Hyped... A souvenir sold in Tenerife.

Hyped… A souvenir sold in Tenerife.

Just 24 miles separates the cities of Derby and Leicester and with heavily populated towns lying on the borders of Derbyshire and Leicestershire, there would be no real surprise if there was a huge rivalry between the two clubs. In truth, the rivalry has ebbed and flowed for many decades. The Rams first met the Foxes in February 1894, making it the oldest of Leicester’s rivalries. It is also the most contested of the three East Midlands derbies with 104 meetings in the last 119 years. There have been several controversial matches between the two with most, admittedly coming in the last 20 or so years. Leicester defeated Derby in the 1994 Division One play-off final in a game that would become known as the ‘Silence of the Rams’. The two clubs then battled during the late nineties and early noughties in the top flight as both’s preferred rivals, Nottingham Forest were nowhere to be seen. Leicester, in fact hold an impressive record over Derby in recent times with six wins in the last seven meetings. Although, Derby hold the greater record overall with 46 wins to Leicester’s 31.

History… Leicester once scored four headed goals at Derby in the opening 15 minutes.

Ironically, Derby fans bemoan the lack of history involved in this rivalry citing Nottingham Forest and Leeds United as rivalries for them with greater historical importance due to the switching sides of Brian Clough and his rivalry with Leeds’ Don Revie back in the 1970s. As I’m sure most fans are aware, Derby like to emulate their Red rivals in dismissing Leicester with claims that they “don’t care” about them. Funnily enough, their fans haven’t seemed to have grasped the irony of that statement given their unrequited dislike of Leeds. Leicester see Forest as bigger rivals too due to greater connections in historical and geographical senses. In recent times, City have too begun to see West Midlands, Coventry as rivals. In my rivalry survey from the 2012–13 season, Derby listed Leicester as their third biggest rivals behind Forest and Leeds and Leicester listed Derby as their second biggest rivals, only just beating Coventry. In comparison to Leicester placing as Derby’s second biggest rivals in a similar survey ten years earlier, we can see the decreasing feeling of disdain between the two.

In all honesty, a casual reader of The Sun’s ‘Super Goals’ could be forgiven for not noticing the apparent rivalry between the two clubs, as attendances barely increase when they meet. However, this could be due to Sky Sports influence who have screened 4 of the last 5 meetings between the two, not to mention the rising costs of tickets.

Recent home attendances

Home side / Season 2010/11 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14
Derby 26,142 28,205 23,123 23,437
Leicester 25,930 22,496 20,806   –

Recent away attendances

Away side / Season 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14
Derby 1,324 883   –
Leicester 1,848 1,901 2,794

It’ll probably tell you all you need to know that when the two clubs were drawn to face each other last week in the third round of the Capital One Cup, a third of fans were excited, a third were indifferent and a third were legitimately disappointed at playing just a divisional rival.

How the Foxes see it

Uninspired… Poor attendances have the Foxes disinterested.

“In my opinion, it isn’t as big as it was – as with many derby games. The intensity of the “derby” has reduced in many years, with the emphasis by clubs on “family friendly atmospheres”, but they are still guilty of trying to talk up a dying act. With Derby, I believe many Leicester fans focus mainly on Forest & Coventry, leaving Derby in the rough – forgotten about in a way.

Of course, those that live in areas like Donington, Coalville, and even Loughborough to some extent, will beg to differ, as there’s a wide mix of both Leicester & Derby fans, sparking local rivalries, but nothing on a wide scale. With Derby running down the order, not really challenging for the title, like Leicester and Forest, the competition for “we’re higher than you” hasn’t really been much of a talking point – Such as the dramatic and tight ending of last season, we can all predict who will be up there and who won’t.

As for atmosphere, I can’t really comment about Pride Park, as I haven’t been able to visit in a few years. But at the King Power, it’s a little like a normal fixture, with the cringe-worthy bigging-up by either club, trying to spark a rivalry with ticket promotions and e-newsletters for “The East Midlands Derby”.” – @SamJohnson23

—————————————————————————————————

“Is it a rivalry? Of course it is. Even though, as all of us Leicester fans know – “we’re all on our own”.
 Back in the early to mid 90s, when I first started following Leicester, the rivalry was a lot bigger especially if you compare it with today. That 3-3 draw at Filbert Street when Iwan Roberts scored that hat-trick. That was intense, local rivalry at its very best.
 Compare that to how the atmosphere and games between both clubs has been in the last few seasons and it doesn’t even come close for me. Even the teams hated each other back then. It just isn’t like that anymore.
Sadly, the new stadia has played a part in the demise of the rivalry. Higher ticket prices and the fans not being as close to each other at games due to segregation means the atmosphere in games is nowhere near what it used to be.
 Of course, we Leicester fans know that Forest and Derby hate each other more than they do us. Boo hoo. But for seperate sets of fans to say there is no rivalry is ludicrous. Maybe Derby say that because we seem to get a good return out of them each season and it’s an easy way out?
Certainly amongst Leicester fans, where you live, work or what era you were brought up in generally defines which club out of forest or derby we see as our main rivals. But certainly in my opinion there’s no denying that when Leicester play derby there’s always that extra bit of edgy nervousness compared to that of what we feel against a team like Burnley that we have no real ties to. ” – @BertLCFC
—————————————————————————————————
“I have never really seen Derby as a major rivalry. I do a bit more these days, but I’ve never seen them as even close to being as big rivals to us as Forest are, and at one stage, even Coventry too.Coventry is a bit of a mismatch and it’s good to have more than one big game – so I do view the Derby games as being a bit bigger due to their absence but I don’t feel a serious sense of hatred when we play Derby. I see them as being quite a similar club to Leicester, if I’m being totally honest.There hasn’t really been a derby-day feel when playing them either. Whether it’s the crowds (or lack of them) or the lack of competition, I don’t know, but I don’t tend to feel hatred towards Derby, although I do view them as a side I enjoy beating.” – @DanLCFC93

The Rams’ view

Priorities… Derby fans are distracted by other rivals.

“It’s not really dead, it is dying though. Mainly because of the connections between derby and forest fans, the connections of the clubs as a whole. We know each other, we work with each other, the clubs, particularly at the moment have ex staff at their rivals club.

Nobody knows a Leicester fan, we don’t share anything, there’s no real history, plus we wind you up by pretending you don’t matter which is having a negative effect on the rivalry.

Leicester will always be a rival to me” – BlackNWhites, Rams Talk

—————————————————————————————————

Leicester and Derby are both cities in the East Midlands with football clubs attracting similar levels of support. Leicester is a far larger city population wise, but does have competition from its Rugby team in attracting paying customers. Fans of both sides see Nottingham Forest as their main rivals. Only fifteen miles of ‘Brian Clough Way’ separates Derby and Nottingham, whereas its a much further distance to Leicester. It’s no secret that Derby and Forest both regard each other as their main rivals.
I have been a Derby supporter since 1969 and I think that nowadays there is so much more passion in local Derbies. It was there in the 70’s, but it’s taken far more serious nowadays. It sometimes boils over onto the pitch. Just look at the controversy on the pitch during Derby v Forest games and the lack of it when we play Leicester. Derby were successful in the 70’s. as a young lad I saw them champions twice and despite the lack of our red neighbours playing in the same division the Leicester game as I remember didn’t have the buzz about it. It was more atmospheric than now, but back then, unlike today, Leicester didn’t have the beating of us.
A rivalry can be stemmed by an incident or history much more than geographical location.  There has never been any real bitter feelings between Leicester and Derby. You get odd supporters spats, but search the social media and its not ongoing like with other clubs. When we lost to Leicester in the play off final at Wembley that could have been a spark to ignite the flame, however nothing much has changed. A disputed equaliser and the fact that a former Derby player played a role in the winning goal failed to ignite any real long term rivalry. If a play off final fails to do it then what can?
I am a little frustrated that our wins over the Foxes have been few and far between in recent years. I sincerely hope that we can put one over our ‘Friendly Rivals’ this time around.” – @BuckTaylor64
—————————————————————————————————
“I hate Leicester pal, don’t worry about it. Really wish most our our fans, and some of your’s, would be less apathetic about our fixtures. It doesn’t have to be as fierce as both our games v Forest but rivalry games make football and it would be a shame to lose the needle completely.” – Badlands, Rams Talk
—————————————————————————————————

Basically, Derby and Leicester aren’t the greatest of rivals. The sad state of affairs is that Leicester probably get more disdain from Peterborough and Derby probably get the same from Burton Albion these days. Okay, maybe that is a slight exaggeration but the point remains that the fierce rivalry I grew up with in the 1990s no longer exists. Maybe it’s because of Sky, maybe it’s because of ticket prices or maybe it’s because Derby fans like to dismiss Leicester as beneath them, in line with Forest’s superiority complex. Whatever the reason, the meetings of these two clubs will always stir up a bit of interest and excitement but to put it plainly this rivalry is at death’s door.