Latest news with #BonnieTyler
Daily Record
16-05-2025
- Entertainment
- Daily Record
Why Rangers play Simply the Best and the reason Celtic fans hijacked Tina Turner hit
The anthem has been a fixture at Ibrox for more than 30 years – so why have Celtic fans taken such a shine to it in recent weeks? If you've been to a Rangers home game in the last three decades, chances are you've heard it blaring over the tannoy. Tina Turner's 1989 hit 'The Best', a cover of a Bonnie Tyler song which better known by its chantable Simply the Best chorus, has been an anthem at Ibrox for the last 30 years. It was first adopted in the early days of their Nine in a Row dominance but over the years it's become synonymous with the club, and doesn't even need to be playing for Rangers fans to belt it out from their chest. It speaks to the pride the Ibrox faithful hold in their historic record that at one stage did have them standing out in front as the proven most successful team in the world, But this season has seen Celtic match them both for league titles (55) and overtake them on the overall trophy front. And that was what was on the mind of taunting Hoops fans when they gleefully sung the Ibrox terrace anthem from the away end during last month's 1-1 draw. A Priest in a Paisley parish even referenced the hilarious moment in a confirmation speech in the days after the game. But where did start in the first place, and how did Rangers come to be blaring an unlikely pop tune over the tannoy at every home game? Why do Rangers play Simply the Best? The prevailing theory for why Rangers played the tune to the point they became synonymous with it is simple. The story goes that, during the early 90s, when they were beginning to gather some steam on their way to Nine in a Row, the hit was played over a BBC TV montage of Walter Smith 's team running riot. It struck a chord with fans and the club then adopted it into their repertoire – and it's stuck there ever since. That's only one theory, however. Others more ambitiously suggest that it's down to the fact Turner herself had a fondness for the club who adopted the hit as an homage to her in her pomp. We'll never know for sure, unless any Rangers historians pipe up!
Telegraph
16-05-2025
- Entertainment
- Telegraph
The data that predicts this year's Eurovision winner. And why it's not looking good for the UK
It's time for the annual spectacle where glitter, glamour, and geopolitics collide, entertaining millions across Europe and beyond. For Brits, Sam Ryder 's almost -triumphant 2022 performance aside (coinciding as it did with the same year Russia invaded Ukraine), it's a day of national humiliation – an annual reminder of either our hated position on the continent or awful taste in music. The UK is entering its 28th year without topping the Eurovision leader board. Using our machine-learning model, we look at what truly is holding the UK back – music or politics – and what the country can learn from the rest of Europe, including our prediction for this year's winner. Choice of song Song-wise, the UK has played it safe over the years. With the vast majority of winning songs either pop or ballad, the UK has almost entirely followed this path, avoiding genres such as rock, which tend to score poorly, as we were made aware in 2013 when Bonnie Tyler's rock entry Believe In Me landed us in 19th place. However, this isn't always the case: notable first-place exceptions being the Italians' leather-clad, fiery entry Zitti e Buoni (Shut up and Behave) from Måneskin in 2021 and Loreen's EDM hit Euphoria in 2012. Language barrier The UK also stumbles into a second advantage: our language. In the past 20 years, 70 per cent of the winning songs have been sung in English, with the lingua franca aiding entrants to appeal to a broader audience, but this wasn't always the case. Historically, the contest had strict language rules forcing countries to perform in their native tongues. Whilst this made the contest a celebration of linguistic diversity, it limited the ability of entries to resonate with audiences unfamiliar with Slovene, Maltese or other smaller European languages. When the rule was lifted, the dominance of English began in earnest, giving an edge to countries like the UK, Ireland, and Sweden, whose entries defaulted to the international language. Once again, exceptions to these rules exist. A notable example is the Portuguese 2017 ballad Amar Pelos Dois by Salvador Sobral, and Ukraine's Stefania by Kalush Orchestra in 2022. Similarly, the UK's entries consistently hit the right beat. Our modelling finds that songs in a major key – that is happy, upbeat and brighter sounding – increase the song's odds of success. Whilst they tend to vary between the minor and major tone, the UK repertoire is heavily slanted towards happier songs, with 85 per cent of our entries in the last 15 years being in a major key. From Sam Ryder's Space Man (2022) to Katrina and the Waves' Love Shine a Light (1997) to Sandie Shaw 's Puppet on a String (1967), happy pays off for the Brits – and Eurovision contestants as a whole. Across these three main areas, the UK hits all the right notes, statistically guaranteeing a high ranking spot rather than our average 18th place since 2010. If the song is right, perhaps it is the performance which brings us down. Performance matters The artist's performance on the night can make or break a country's entry. Eurovision is not short of iconic, over-the-top, eye-catching spectacles, from Finland's gothic Lordi to butter-churning Polish milkmaids. Male performers have a noticeable edge, earning higher points on average than their female counterparts, a trend that the UK has made use of with 50 per cent of our participants in the last 20 years being male artists, as opposed to female artists or mixed groups. Meanwhile, the UK appears to have carved out a distinctive approach to staging. Compared to other countries, the UK consistently opts for fewer backing dancers, with a lower-than-average number of dancers and minimal variation year-to-year on this choice. This restraint does not stand us in good stead however, with each back-up dancer adding on an average of 10 points to a country's entry in recent times. Lastly, running order seems to play a pivotal role; acts that perform later in the final or semi-finals often rake in more points, a phenomenon known as recency bias. This plays to our advantage as we have coincidentally averaged quite a late running order position of 15 in the last 25 years, compared to the show's midpoint of 13. Whilst the UK is often light on spectacle, bar perhaps Buck Fizz 's 1981 famous skirt-ripping routine, our performances, much like our songs, stand us in good stead. The final piece in the Eurovision puzzle is reputation. Politics at play It can often feel like Eurovision is a microcosm of broader European politics, with clusters of like-minded and historically linked countries scheming together. This is probably why the UK has long felt isolated on the Eurovision stage: short on allies in a game of bloc voting. Since 2008, our Northern Europe voting bloc (UK, Ireland, Finland, Denmark…) has contributed the biggest point share out of all the European blocs for only a third of our entries, meaning for the other two-third entries we've received more support from distant countries than we have our closest neighbours. This is a stark contrast to countries like Ireland and Sweden, our fellow northern European countries, who have received the highest percentage of their points from our group on all occasions in the past 20 years. Tight-knit blocs, particularly in Northern and Eastern Europe, significantly improve winning chances, either through mutual support or by rallying behind standout entries. Since the year 2000, Sweden has given 9 per cent of their total votes to Norway, and Norway has similarly sent 13 per cent, making them the strongest pair of point exchangers along with Cyprus and Greece, which have both given each other around 14 per cent. The UK, meanwhile, often stands apart, both literally and figuratively, on the voting stage. While our shared cultural history and proximity suggest we should benefit from Northern Europe's solidarity, our relationship with the bloc has been tepid at best, and recent geopolitical shifts have only deepened the divide. The closest ally we have is Ireland, which has been our biggest points donor since 2000, contributing almost 10 per cent of our total received points. Reputation also plays a role. Countries with a strong Eurovision legacy often enjoy a halo effect, perceived as reliable sources of quality. Our five historic wins should theoretically hold us in good stead, but with the last victory stretching back almost three decades, the newer generation of viewers will certainly not have the UK pegged as a strong producer of talent. Predictions With that in mind, bar a once-in-a-generation performance, the UK is going to struggle to win. This year, our machine-learning model predicts a Swedish victory. The jaunty, folk-inspired song by KAJ leverages the pop genre with male performers and a decent number of backing dancers, all data-backed strategies, and further bolstered by Sweden's reputation as a Eurovision powerhouse. Most importantly, Sweden can count on its voting bloc for support, and its powerful Scandinavian alliances mark them as the act to beat. The UK's entry, a pop anthem by Remember Monday, ticks many boxes for success, but will restrained staging (by Eurovision standards) and unfavourable voting patterns undermine these efforts once more? In the end, the UK's struggles at Eurovision are less about our music and more about our place on the European stage. Time and again, our entries align with winning trends, yet we are outpaced by countries with tighter bloc support and stronger reputational momentum. Until the UK can mend its fractured ties with Europe, even the brightest melodies may struggle to find their echo across the continent.
New York Times
16-04-2025
- Entertainment
- New York Times
‘Ruben Amorim, he'll bring the glory days again' – Man Utd fans explain their song of defiance
Although an impressive and in-form Newcastle United led 4-1 on Sunday against Manchester United, making most of the noise were the Manchester United contingent high on the top tier of the Leazes End. Plenty of the 3,000-strong travelling fans left St James' Park before the end of the game to begin another disappointing journey home, but the majority stayed and sang a terrace hit that has become popular among fans in recent months. Advertisement Sung to the tune of It's a Heartache by the Welsh singer Bonnie Tyler, the United version goes: 'Ruben Amorim, he'll bring the glory days again. We'll back him from the Stretford End, he'll turn the Reds around.' The original lyrics share the pain of falling in love with someone who won't love you back. Hence, the heartache being a fool's game. United fans hope that won't be the case with the Portuguese, who has led his team to only six league wins in 21 games. Released in 1977, It's a Heartache was a global hit. Bonnie Tyler isn't a United fan — though she has had lunch with Sir Alex Ferguson several times — but Matt, who has played guitar in Tyler's band for the past 27 years, is a proud Red. So they're happy about the song sounding out from the terraces, but the question is: why were fans singing so loudly and proudly when their team were trailing 4-1 during their 14th Premier League defeat of the season? At other clubs, the managers would be getting criticised rather than sung about, but not at Manchester United, where there's a strong trait among match-going fans to sing for their managers. Every United boss in the post-Ferguson era has appreciated this greatly, but Sunday's singing provoked debate online among those who question whether the support is deserved when the team is so bad. Amorim is firmly backed at matches. Part defiance amid the disappointment, part an expectation that supporters should do just that, support, because if you can't do that in the bad times, then you're not much of a supporter. 'I go to games to support the team, whatever the result,' said Harry, 24, who travelled from Manchester and was in the away end as Newcastle did their first league double over Manchester United since 1930-31. 'That might not mean singing about players while we're 4-1 down, but you support your club for two reasons. Advertisement 'One, because the players need it. The pressure of playing for United is big enough without having your own fans on your back. If we want to celebrate their future successes, we should back them through the troughs and give them a reason to give everything for this club. Yes, they should do that anyway, but anyone who's played sport knows that support can give you a bit extra you didn't know you had. 'It's also about representing United. Some people aren't arsed and embrace the hatred for United, but I also want everyone to leave any interaction with United or us as fans thinking, 'They're the best in the world'. So you want to show resilience, you want to show that you back the club through anything.' But why for Amorim when you're 4-1 down? 'Normally in these scenarios you get a long rendition of the United Calypso (a terrace classic first released on record in 1957), to show support for the team rather than specific players. But in this case, it was the manager. That's because fans have seen the last decade. 'We know good managers have come here and failed. We see the rest of the world trying to get them down, see journalists smarming that they've helped get them sacked, and there's one group of people who should back them through thick and thin, and that's supporters. Supporters, not customers, is the key.' 'I was proud to sing for the gaffer,' added Neil Mullen, who travelled by coach from north Manchester to Newcastle. 'I've always been a big believer in that you back the manager until the very end. I feel that United fans are good with the managers in general, maybe partly because the stick Fergie got in the early days is a reminder of how it can turn. 'Beyond that, Amorim is a very impressive man, very likeable and clearly a good young coach. There's also no appetite from anyone for yet another new manager. I also think you can never judge a manager until he has at least five of his own players in his squad. Advertisement 'There are definite signs of things getting better under Amorim and I believe that if you prove your loyalty in the dark times, then you deserve to enjoy the good times more. The manager will appreciate it and that'll probably make him even more determined to succeed.' The theme is consistent. 'We went all the way to Newcastle to support our beloved Manchester United and I'd always rather stay and sing than walk out early,' says Nathan Thomas, from Irlam, Salford. 'Because for me, being side by side with other fans who've devoted their life to United through both the good times and the bad times is one of the things that makes it special. 'I also think we're building something with Amorim and in these early days, he needs our support. I like him and a lot of what he says, so singing his name when the players on the pitch haven't done so well feels quite right.' James Mawdsley, a 21-year-old season-ticket holder who has only missed the away games at Crystal Palace and Viktoria Plzen this season, was another who stayed until the end, giving the song his all. 'My coach home wasn't going to leave until well after the final whistle, so there was no point leaving early, but the players and manager need the support from fans more than ever right now,' he said. 'I don't like the divide in the fans and think we should all back the manager, but I also really like the new Amorim song. 'It's original and when it gets properly going, like at Leicester away, it sounds really good. We have to hope that we'll be singing it in the streets of Bilbao in May, otherwise this season will be remembered for nothing but misery and disappointment.' It's Bilbao or bust for Manchester United this season, heartache or happiness this month or next. But the fans will have done their bit.
Telegraph
03-04-2025
- Entertainment
- Telegraph
Support dogs in the dock confirm what babies we've all become
Anyone else out there too scared to turn on the telly come teatime? Make yourself known, friend. Have you swapped the Today programme for Smooth FM, because Bonnie Tyler belting out Total Eclipse of the Heart reminds you of getting a 3am cab to the airport rather than imminent armageddon? Welcome. Come, share a safe space. And if you, too, react to the News at Ten music as though it were the terrifying opening credits of Doctor Who circa 1975, all plucked string baseline and swoopy oscillating menace, rest assured, there are a great many of us back here. No, not there, here. Here! Look! COO-EEE! Hiding behind the cushions on this great big existential DFS (Devastating Finale Sanctuary) sofa. So. Across the pond, the Beverly Hillbillies have rolled into Doge City and are parking their very own brand of bipolar politics on the free world's lawns. The international markets are at the volatile mercy of Trump's fiscal whims. Barely a day goes by without some horrendous natural disaster or callous act of obscene warmongery. And what are we doing here in Great (stop with the eye-rolling, kids) Britain? I'll tell you what we are doing, we are apparently bringing so many emotional support animals into our courtrooms that our creaking justice system has called a halt to the menagerie. Wait, what? Am I saying that even our (alleged) criminal classes are such big babies they can't make it into the dock without clutching a living plushie? Yes, yes I am. So much so, folks, that judiciary officials have taken valuable time out from despairing about the crumbling estate, the soon-to-reach 100,000-long backlog of unheard trials in England and Wales, the justice delayed and the justice withheld, in order to deliver guidance on dealing with the issue of disruptive and incontinent animals. (Insert tasteless joke about messy jailbirds here, if you must.) It seems a surge in defendants and witnesses seeking to bring along pets to help them cope with stress has led to 'untrained' animals jumping at or even attacking witnesses – including people who are scared of dogs or have allergies. Or, presumably, just want their day in court without being mauled by a mastiff. Is that too much to ask? Clearly it is in Spineless UK PLC. It's hard to understand where this ridiculousness comes from (the US, obviously, but more of that shortly), but thanks be to Dog, its days are numbered. Last year, at Grimsby Crown Court, defendant Vincent Harvey brought his nine-week-old Staffordshire terrier with him when he was sentenced to eight months in prison for dangerous driving. Cute? Not when the creature both urinated and defecated on the floor of the court's foyer after Harvey was sentenced. In 2017, Aidan Wiltshire, a transgender pensioner, was allowed to bring his pet cat to his trial at Chelmsford Crown Court to 'help calm his nerves'. Wiltshire, who had been living as a woman and calling himself 'Anne' at the time, relentlessly stalked two women; a city lawyer and a church minister. As he imposed the 18-month supervision order, Judge David Turner QC condemned Wiltshire's oppressive behaviour towards the two women: 'It affected their lives practically and professionally. It intruded into their privacy, it left them feeling besieged, controlled, manipulated, overwhelmed, at risk, hounded and anxious.' It strikes me that criminal justice was also being controlled and manipulated when Wiltshire refused to appear without his cat. But he was only taking advantage of the unhinged precedent set in 2016 by Judge Lynn Roberts, a family judge for Essex and Suffolk, who permitted dogs into Chelmsford County Court in what was a UK first. Apparently, the judge said she would have 'loved' to also allow donkeys into court but stopped short because of their size. The scheme there came to an end in 2019 when a new judge ruled against it – but it's self-evidently caught on elsewhere. As ever, ignorance rules; unlike guide and assistance dogs, emotional support animals do not share the same legal status. Taxis and shops aren't obliged to give them access. Landlords can refuse them – but medical magazine Pulse recently carried an article revealing that so many patients now ask their GPs for 'supporting letters' to justify their 'need' for such animals, family doctors have now been advised to charge a fee – or just refuse to write them. Back in the Halls of Justice, I can grasp why a vulnerable witness might benefit from the comfort a much-loved pet would bring, but even then, it's a hard sell. Why can't they keep it in the waiting room? Tied to the railings outside? In a horse box? Rumour has it that furry AI robots are being programmed to offer the same service, without the unpredictable bowel movements, which sounds just the ticket. Speaking of tickets, the whole concept of emotional support animals has been imported from America. There's a chap on TikTok who credits his emotional support 'cuddly' alligator with relieving his depression. And when Demi Moore lost out on the Oscars, comfort came in the form of ' emotional support Pilaf ' which turned out to be chihuahua, not dinner. But the tide has started to turn. As of 2020, America's Department of Transportation decreed that US airlines would no longer be required to transport emotional support animals after passengers insisted on bringing on board horses, pigs, peacocks and turkeys for psychological reasons. Only dogs qualify as service animals, although I'm not sure how many of us would be happy with a 8st cane corso occupying the middle seat. Or watching a defendant play with his puppy as he's sent down for a criminal offence. We are living through tough times as the Trumpian Tariff Tumult
