The form French fly-half this season is Camille Lopez. He’s shed a few pounds over the summer and looks sharper, quicker and more confident as a result. The fact he’s playing outside Morgan Parra and inside Fofana would therefore make him the logical choice for the autumn Tests, but bizarrely the 27-year-old wasn’t in the elite squad of 30 players that met at the end of September for a three-day training camp. That omission will surely be rectified in time for the three autumn Tests and also expect to see a return for Jean-Marcellin Buttin, the Bordeaux full-back playing the best rugby of his career four years after winning two caps as a precocious 20-year-old.Central switch: Would Stade’s Jules Plisson be more effective at 12? Photo: Getty ImagesThe fly-halves Noves selected in September were Trinh-Duc and Jules Plisson, the Stade Francais star whose temperament and tactical kicking are as brittle as the Toulon No 10’s. Interestingly, Stade coach Gonzalo Quesada – who knows a thing or two about what’s required to be a top-class fly-half – selected Plisson at inside-centre for their Challenge Cup match against Timisoara Saracens last week with Morne Steyn at ten. Plisson played well, showing his pace to scoot through for an early try, and demonstrating that there are few French threequarters who can pass as crisply and accurately as he. Moving from 10 to 12 would relieve Plisson of the pressure of running the back-line while improving its creativity, particularly if Fofana – whose distribution can sometimes let him down – plays at 13.But whoever Noves picks at fly-half, the responsibility will be enormous. The last time France beat the All Blacks was a 27-22 win in Dunedin in the summer of 2009 and since then there have been nine consecutive defeats, culminating in the 62-13 humiliation in last year’s World Cup quarter-final. Spare a thought for Guy Noves. The France coach has to select a side to face the All Blacks in a month and one wonders where he’ll start when it comes to his back-line. On the credit side Wesley Fofana is on top of his game this season, and Morgan Parra and Maxime Machenaud are both looking good at scrum-half. They’ve options at full-back and on the wings but it’s France’s perennial problem position that must be giving Noves sleepless nights.Which fly-half could possibly give France the direction and authority required to beat the All Blacks in Paris next month (not forgetting Samoa and Australia in the two preceding weeks)? The last man to give it a go was Francois Trinh-Duc, who wore the No 10 jersey in the 27-0 victory over the Pumas in Tucuman. He did okay in that game, managing the wet conditions better than his opposite number Nicolas Sanchez, but the Pumas that day were appalling, a shadow of the side that reached the World Cup semi-final nine months earlier.Watching brief: Guy Noves oversees a France get-together last month. Photo: Getty ImagesTrinh-Duc was in between clubs in the summer, having left Montpellier for Toulon at the end of last season, but his move up the Mediterranean coast isn’t going well. Not that he’s to blame. The conflict among the coaching staff – which appears to be over following the news of Monday that Diego Domiguez has been replaced by Mike Ford – has unsettled the club and Trinh-Duc, a confidence player who needs stability and support from his coaches, is suffering more than most.However, the brutal truth is that the 29-year-old has never had it where it counts most – the top two inches – and in a career that’s now spanned nine seasons and 55 caps he’s never found the consistency to mark him out as a top-class fly-half.That Trinh-Duc continues to be considered the solution by many in France to their fly-half problem is down to what this correspondent calls ‘Chabal Syndrome’ – turning an average player into a great one on the back of their media profile and not their on-field performance. If Sebastien Chabal achieved legendary status by growing a beard and growling, Trinh-Duc’s greatest gift is being a good bloke.On the front foot: Camille Lopez has been in superb form for Clermont. Photo: Getty ImagesSo what are the alternatives? Noves must have despaired when he sat down to watch the weekend’s European competition. Of the 14 French clubs in action only five fielded a French fly-half: Toulon, Clermont (Camille Lopez), Bayonne (Lucas Meret), Brive (Thomas Laranjeira) and Grenoble (Gilles Bosch). Contrast that with the English clubs over the weekend, where seven of the 12 teams had home-grown fly-halves with an eighth, Leicester’s Freddie Burns, coming off the bench to steer his side to victory against Racing 92. Man at No 10: Francois Trinh-Duc in action against Argentina in June. Photo: Getty Images LATEST RUGBY WORLD MAGAZINE SUBSCRIPTION DEALS Who will Guy Noves pick to wear the France No 10 shirt against New Zealand? Playing at fly-half in that 2009 victory was a fresh-faced 22-year-old by the name of Trinh-Duc. He had the world at his feet that day but the Frenchman’s failure to kick-on lies in his head.For the latest Rugby World subscription offers, click here.
Howard Lake | 10 January 2012 | News FRSB invites charities and agencies to send in annual complaint return form Tagged with: Fundraising Standards Board Law / policy AddThis Sharing ButtonsShare to TwitterTwitterShare to FacebookFacebookShare to LinkedInLinkedInShare to EmailEmailShare to WhatsAppWhatsAppShare to MessengerMessengerShare to MoreAddThis 26 total views, 2 views today AddThis Sharing ButtonsShare to TwitterTwitterShare to FacebookFacebookShare to LinkedInLinkedInShare to EmailEmailShare to WhatsAppWhatsAppShare to MessengerMessengerShare to MoreAddThis About Howard Lake Howard Lake is a digital fundraising entrepreneur. Publisher of UK Fundraising, the world’s first web resource for professional fundraisers, since 1994. Trainer and consultant in digital fundraising. Founder of Fundraising Camp and co-founder of GoodJobs.org.uk. Researching massive growth in giving. The Fundraising Standards Board (FRSB) is asking its member charities and fundraising agencies to complete and send in their annual complaint return form. This document summarises all their fundraising activity and any complaints received during 2011, and its submission is a core obligation of membership.Alistair McLean, Chief Executive of the FRSB, said: “Although we currently have a very high submission rate for complaint returns at 80%, we are determined to see that return level rise still further, enabling us to monitor both fundraising volumes and complaint levels as accurately as possible.”As part of this process, for the first time, from June 2012 the FRSB’s website www.givewithconfidence.org.uk will clearly show whether each member has filed its return.Photo: Alistair McLean, CEO of the FRSB by FRSB on flickr.comMcLean explained the move, saying:“By publicly acknowledging those members that have completed their returns we believe that we are giving others an extra spur to action ensuring greater transparency to the public.”He added that the form has been redesigned to be even easier to complete and that FRSB staff were on hand to help members complete their returns.The FRSB now has over 1,370 members signed up to self-regulation, so it is expecting to report both greater fundraising volumes and complaints than in previous years.Three core fundraising areas will be explored in detail by the FRSB; telephone fundraising, direct mail and data protection.As in 2011, fundraising academic Professor Adrian Sargeant will provide an analysis of complaint trends which will be published within the FRSB’s Annual Report in June 2012.The deadline for members to submit the annual return is 16 March 2012.The 2011 FRSB Annual report revealed that 18,442 complaints had been received by charities during 2010, with direct mail (addressed and unaddressed) accounting for 53% of all complaints, and with street fundraising attracting the highest proportion of complaints against volume of activity at 0.17%.www.frsb.org.uk
As a Muslim woman born in a rural village in Gujarat, India, I experienced Gandhi as a figure whom you were not to criticize because he was a saint who gained independence for India. Now that I live in the U.S., it has been important for me to relearn about the Indian independence movement and Gandhi’s history from a perspective that takes into account colonialism. This is what I have learned.The Indian Independence Movement The modern invasion of India, a large empire with multiple rulers and a vast amount of resources, occurred from 1735 to 1833, as various Western countries and companies, including the East India Company, targeted its resources.The rulers and people of India did not take that sitting down and did fight back. There were constant rebellions. In 1857, Muslims, Hindus and Sikhs rebelled against the East India Company after they were being fed pork and being paid low wages. The rebellion of 1857 led to direct British governmental rule of India. During World War I, the people in India continued rebelling, especially in Bengal and Punjab, because most of the working class was frustrated by the continued taxing of Indians by the British and by changing the nation’s currency from being based on the gold standard. The working class relied on hard-won gold coins as backup for an official currency they understood was part of a financial system rigged against them. The rebellions, the Independence Movement and the partition of Bengal (modern day Bangladesh) in 1905 inspired many different organizations in India throughout the years, from socialist and communist parties to the bourgeois Congress Party and the All League of Muslims. Communists led the Telangana Peasant Uprising of 1948 against feudal landlords in an India still under colonial rule by the British.Gandhi’s role in the Independence MovementGandhi grew up in a poor region in Gujarat and was in the merchant caste, or Vaishyas. His education was funded by a rich priest, and he was called by a rich family to work as a lawyer for them in South Africa. There he was part of the Natal Indian Congress — a struggle against discrimination against Indian traders in South Africa. While living there, he perfected the concept of satyagraha (truth-force), also known as nonviolent direct action, in political struggle. Both the Congress Party of India and the British noticed, approved of and encouraged Gandhi’s political direction because they did not like the rise of resistance in India, including armed resistance by the revolutionary left. The Congress Party of India, founded in 1884, was filled with rich people who wanted to work with the British and have a cooperative, profitable relationship with them.Similarly, Gandhi was always about having a cooperative relationship with the British on the path toward national independence. He was invited back to India by the Congress Party in 1915 to work toward that goal. The British and the Congress Party used Gandhi as “the best shield of the Congress against left-wing groups and organizations.” (“India and the Raj, 1919-1947” by Suniti Kumar Ghosh)When Gandhi came back to India, he sparked a civil disobedience movement for which he was arrested. While he was in prison, the Congress Party continued advocating Gandhi’s message of civil disobedience to raise Indian consciousness. At the same time, the Congress Party refused to listen to Muslim and Dalit concerns about being minorities in India and wanting separate elections. This created a big divide within the Independence Movement. The All Muslim League of India was created — an organization filled with elite Muslims — which started asking for a separate state for India, eventually leading to the partition of India after World War II. At the same time, there were various resistance movements that Gandhi tried to take over or use; the best example is what he did to the Dalits. These were the “Untouchables” — the lowest caste members looked down upon by all upper caste people in India. Gandhi was afraid of the Dalits having any power in Congress. He was also afraid that they might convert to Islam, which in turn would give Muslims more power in the country during elections. Like the Muslim population, the Dalits were also asking for separate elections and a voice in the government, and it seemed the British might relent and grant it. To stop this from happening, Gandhi went on a fast to put pressure on the Dalit leader, Dr. Bhimrao Ramji Ambedkar, to withdraw the demand of autonomy for the Dalits and their inclusion in the Indian Constitution. Gandhi’s fast put a lot of pressure on Ambedkar, who had to worry about Gandhi’s health or death, and also the possibility of mass retaliation against the Dalits from higher caste members. Ambedkar was forced to arrive at a settlement with Gandhi and eventually resigned from Congress.Gandhi also tried to appease the Dalits. With bourgeois supporters and mentors like G.D. Birla, Gandhi started the Harijan Sevak Sangh in 1932, an organization supposedly to eradicate untouchability in India, including opening Hindu temples to them. The word Harijan means “children of God” and is connected to Hindu caste rape culture where it is used to describe the children of women who are bound to Hindu temples to perform mandatory sex under the ritual system called Devadasi. According to Gandhi, opening the temples should have been a gift to the Dalits. However, what it did was kill the civil disobedience movement for the Dalits because it created a divide between the Congress Party and them. The Dalits understood that the temple movement wouldn’t seek the improvement of the Dalits’ political, economic and social standing like B.R. Ambedkar wanted. The British were able to use this campaign and Gandhi as a tool to direct attention away from the larger civil disobedience campaign for independence. This misdirection also pushed the independence movement to continue to tie India to England — which was, according to Ghosh, the very thing Gandhi was brought back to India to do. During World War II, the Quit India Movement was launched in response to the British trying to get Indians to fight for them in the war. Gandhi launched the campaign at an All India Congress meeting in August 1942 where an end to British rule was demanded. Gandhi and the Congress wanted immediate independence for India, while still keeping “cooperation” with England. Some other major parties like the All Muslim League, as well as the Indian ruling class that was profiting from the war, did not support the Quit Movement. All leaders of the Quit Movement were arrested by the British.World War II expedited the movement for Indian independence, as Britain, under siege by Germany’s Nazi war drive, couldn’t continue to dominate an India rising in resistance to colonization. The fact that the British needed to get out of India as fast as possible allowed for the partition to happen. World War II, not Gandhi, was the force that gained India its freedom. Propaganda about GandhiIn the West, and elsewhere, mass culture and ruling-class propaganda portray Gandhi as a hero, a nonviolent leader everyone should look up to. In fact, Gandhi was a tool of the rich in India and of the British because he was a charismatic leader whose policies were not geared toward the working class. Most of his policies stemmed from his belief in the caste system. Gandhi was a firm believer in the caste system in India, even though in the West people often think he was the one who brought attention to the plight of the Untouchables. He believed women were inferior and were a threat to male privilege, and a racist who thought that Black people were lower in status than the Untouchables in India. The colonialist propaganda about Gandhi started in South Africa when a white Christian clergyman, Rev. Joseph Doke, wrote a 1909 biography of Gandhi that made him seem like a Hindu saint similar to the Christian Jesus Christ. Then, as Hindu Nationalists and the Indian bourgeoisie saw Gandhi’s popularity rise, they started spreading literature with religious connections to elevate Gandhi in any shape or form. Gandhi also used his charisma and mixed his message with his religion to call out the Hindu masses.Myths about Gandhi spread worldwide − for instance the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. first took inspiration from Gandhi at a time when most of the information available was this propaganda. But the perspective that King took was more related to Gandhi’s stance on nonviolence. In fact, toward the end of his life, Dr. King held on to the belief in nonviolence, but his ideology transformed into that of Gandhi’s opponent, B.R. Ambedkar. The continued propaganda about Gandhi is harmful today because activists are told “not to resist” and to “follow Gandhi” in the path of nonviolence.In actuality toward the end of his life, Gandhi did not appeal to the Muslims, to youth inspired by socialism, to Dalits, or even to the Hindu nationalists. As Ghosh states, “Gandhi of the popular imagination was not who he really was. He becomes, in the imagination of the oppressed and exploited, [of] the masses, a symbol of anti-imperialism, anti-feudal struggle — the very opposite of what he was.” FacebookTwitterWhatsAppEmailPrintMoreShare thisFacebookTwitterWhatsAppEmailPrintMoreShare this
Would you like to read more?Register for free to finish this article.Sign up now for the following benefits:Four FREE articles of your choice per monthBreaking news, comment and analysis from industry experts as it happensChoose from our portfolio of email newsletters To access this article REGISTER NOWWould you like print copies, app and digital replica access too? SUBSCRIBE for as little as £5 per week.