Wednesday 14 November 2018

ロン丼牛ドン / London Gyudon 09: Dozo Sushi

In all honesty, the well is running somewhat dry for this project and each new entry is requiring more and more effort to do. Paul found a place in Willesden (Sushi Masa, visited in a previous form: Sushi Say) but I didn't particularly feel like the journey so persuaded him to visit Dozo Sushi instead. We were going on a Monday and I'd never heard of it before the Sunday (the day before) when I walked past it. I often walk past Japanese restaurants and now I try to check the menu to see if I can add some water to the somewhat dry well.
Situated in Soho, on the outskirts of Chinatown, it had a good location and competition nearby in the form of Eat Tokyo (Holborn branch visited) and plenty of others further afield. This suggested it had to be good in order to keep competitive and there would be plenty of potential customers[1].

We met at quarter to seven on a Monday evening so I was surprised to see a fairly lengthy queue out of the door. This seemed a positive point to recommend it and the majority of those people had oriental[2] skin - this had to be good, surely. I checked inside about the queue and was told to wait outside which seemed obvious but is always worth checking in case people with bookings are queueing. This queue was constantly outside the door, even once we went in, so it was consistently popular throughout the evening. As Paul and I do understand, to varying degrees, Japanese, it took moments to confirm that the voices we heard in the queue were not Japanese and so, the chances were, that the people were not Japanese either. As I have mentioned quite a few times, this is not a factor that particularly bothers me but it is worth thinking about what you would think of a French restaurant that had groups of German people in the queue. Or an Indian restaurant with mainly Bengali[3] patrons.

Once shown to our seats (which were sunk into the floor in a pleasing Japanese touch), we were told that we had a 90-minute time limit for our seats which made the popularity of the restaurant even clearer. Ninety minutes isn't too bad but the fact that they have to say at the beginning, almost a caveat emptor, it really drove home how popular it was.
Of course, we ordered two gyudon and the sides were some yakitori and some nasu dengaku (a sweetened aubergine dish) that seemed to be a decent size. We didn't wait too long to have cutlery and soup delivered to the table. I'm not sure "delivered" is the right verb here, it was placed on our table without eye contact or words spoken. There is a school of service where you are invisible to the customer, placing things there as they need them without bothering them. This requires an understanding of how you may be inserting yourself into the customers' evening which is fine - this was not like that. Here the items were delivered to us, placed in approximately the right place but not with a comment, just put there. Not particularly carefully, and not subtlely either - it was the worst of both schools of service. I am not usually bothered by this, it is a kind of service I often like - quick and direct. The soup was, however, not particularly hot and although I wasn't bothered enough to mention it, Paul did actually ask for it to be replaced. The yakitori, which was pleasant enough, was next but was just a skewer each, as we knew, and so was more of an appetiser than a side/starter.

Next was the gyudon itself, quite a bit later and served in large, stone(ish) bowls that gave the impression of a bibimbap and looked like neither a gyudon nor a bibimbap but was definitely beef with rice underneath it. Other than the beef, there was quite a lot more to go with it with veg and egg to go with the beef and the dish is described as "sliced fillet of beef with shitake mushrooms, carrot, onion & seasoned egg on rice". These extras are not things that I have seen before in Japan or outside Japan so it was an interesting idea. In the end, it reminded me of a chicken katsudon (which has a chicken cutlet and soft egg fried and sort of scrambled with it to give a sweet combination) but with beef and some other veg too. The other food was off-putting and the chunky meat was absolutely not what was expected. It felt like all of the different ingredients were working against each other and the bowl as a whole seemed to lack flavour while, at the same time, being full of flavours drowning each other out. I remember describing Peruvian food as full of flavours being piled on – as if they were bored and just said: "oh put this in too" but that is done with some aim to get to an end goal. Here, it felt careless and lazy and like a concoction of leftovers without something that binds them together. Some of the best food around is made of leftovers but it needs something to make them work. After having almost finished, the nasu dengaku was brought out and this ended up being more appropriate than we had imagined when ordering as the sauce was so sweet! I rather liked it in the small doses but Paul scraped the sauce off after the first mouthful. I am a bit of an aubergine fan so I did enjoy it subjectively but it wasn't a particularly good nasu dengaku objectively. It had the sweetness of a dessert[4] and I am not usually a fan of Asian desserts. We did get given the dessert menu afterwards too, which was a nicely presented set of wooden boards, that I felt was quietly impressive.

Dozo Sushi is a strange restaurant and although I was not expecting much, I was not expecting that. It is so popular and that is something that I did not really understand from what I saw. The menu was reasonable but not cheap like a number of other restaurants – and so not cheap enough to be a proper USP. In essence, this felt like Chinese food dressed up to have a Japanese look which was not what we were after. The decor was appropriate enough but it did, after eating the food, feel less like a Japanese restaurant and more like a Japanese chain restaurant in China. That does not mean it would not appeal to lots of people and I guess that explains the queues and general popularity of Dozo Sushi - I can only assume that it has been to the taste of a guidebook writer that has added it to their list.
After finishing up, we had been there for an hour but less than the 90 minutes we had been allotted and we wondered whether we should stay longer to use the time[5] we had been given even though we had nothing left to order. We didn't. Also, rather tellingly I did not utter the words "gochisousama" (see link for explanation ) upon leaving for two reasons – a) the food was merely OK; b) I just don't think anyone would have understood…

I am not sure that I would go back to Dozo Sushi at all. The gyudon we have had has been fairly mixed in quality but this was definitively the worst and furthest away from expectation. Unlike at other restaurants where the gyudon has not been great, there has been a certain je ne sais quoi that makes me think that the gyudon is not a fair way to judge the overall restaurant (most notably at Machiya) but here, the gyudon really feels like it pointed to the approach here and it felt like Japanese food cosplay to some degree. Not what I am particularly after and I would not recommend to anyone else, really.

Cost of gyudon: £9.80


Dozo Sushi
32 Old Compton St, Soho, W1D 4TP


1. In spite of this location, there was actually something about it that made me think it might not be that good, and had altered my expectations accordingly. It was probably the fact that I had not heard of it.
2. "Asian" for those schooled in the American ways.
3. This isn't a simplistic position, most of London's Indian restaurants seem to actually be Bengali - and they were the same country for much of the past.
4. This did not stop us from getting some actual dessert, in the form of ice cream, afterwards from Amorino.
5. This discussion reminded me of a piece of research that I had read about in Freakonomics (http://freakonomics.com/2013/10/23/what-makes-people-do-what-they-do/) where parents at a kindergarten would come later than they used to once fines were introduced to (ostensibly) discourage lateness. It was then seen as a price for lateness rather than unacceptable behaviour and treated, as large companies around the world do when they don't like laws, as an operating cost rather than a deterrent.



Thursday 11 October 2018

ロン丼牛ドン / London Gyudon 08: Kurumaya

Finding places that do gyudon is getting harder and harder to do now but there are still a few around. Google Maps seems to have recently started pushing me restaurant information through the android app which is actually quite useful. I think it has worked out which places would be of interest to me and put this restaurant in my feed a while back. Kurumaya is a mini-chain of two restaurants around the city area and we chose to go to the Barbican branch as it was said to be more intimate.

Upon entering, the restaurant was surprisingly empty and felt like the kind of place that was going to shut for the day in half an hour. In fact, it felt odd enough for me to check that it was indeed open. That is usually a terrible sign for an eatery but I am a little more aware of the economics of dining in the area - it may be more of a lunch spot and so could still be very good and popular[1] yet still empty. I think we were the only people in the seating area of about 20 - at least the service would be good. As mentioned in the Tokyo Diner comments (link), non-Japanese staff (or at least those that look non-japanese) can put people off and the staff here were not apparently Japanese - two things now that would put off the wary. Again, I don't subscribe to that view but worth mentioning.

Obviously, we ordered a gyudon each but the sides were open to change and we went for a salmon and avocado "california roll" and a spinach salad as the supplementary parts. The sides came first so we had them before the mains partly because they were so good, we did not want to wait. The rolls were quite well balanced and delicate while the spinach was simple but with the magic of sesame dressing - what more could you want? More dressing, I guess. The gyudon itself, that was quite a dark colour and not what I would expect from a gyudon. A lot of the taste can be seen from the photograph in all honesty. It is glossy and thicker than I would like with a bit too much sweetness. The beef was thick and "good" and accompanied with a salad that seemed quite out of place. As now seems to be more common at this part of the project, the bowl of food was acceptable but it was not like the gyudon I expected. The rice was also flavoured by the meat but also the salad and other bits that went with it. This wasn't something that I particularly cared for but it tasted quite nice - although not quite the kind of thing I would return for.

I have to say, I am not sure that I would recommend the restaurant from what I saw. The gyudon was not great and although the sides were nice, probably not enough to come back for when there are other, similar places that are easier to get to. I think it would be good for lunch based on a hunch more than anything else. I might try that hunch out.

Cost of gyudon: £12.50


Kurumaya
74-75 Long Ln,EC1A 9ET



1. This is a more common thing in the city, or "business districts" in general. I've often wondered what it must be like to come to London on the weekend and go to the city without knowing too much about it. London would be quire dead and you'd wonder what the fuss was about.

Friday 7 September 2018

ロン丼牛ドン / London Gyudon 07: Tokyo Diner

The West End welcomed us again as we headed to Tokyo Diner via an aborted visit to Japan Centre [1] I had been to Tokyo Diner before and was a fan of the simplicity of the food and menu - I am not sure it has ever changed. The restaurant has been going for a while and, strangely for Japanese restaurants in London, was not staffed by Japanese people but a mixture of nationalities although they did still use smatterings of Japanese in speech with the ritualised greetings and goodbyes. I think this is the kind of thing that makes some people doubt the quality and "authenticity" of the food without trying it which does annoy [2] me a little. Although it is difficult of things that don't annoy me a little.

Of course, we both ordered gyudon and the sides, this time, were tofu and broccoli. As we had both eaten here before, we were kind of aware of how the sides would be which meant fairly basic but solid. I enjoyed them both with their subtle, simple flavours.
The gyudon tasted quite different from each of those we had already eaten and it wasn't clear straight away as to whether it was good or not. Visually, it looked right as it wasn't too dark and the beef looked suitably stringy. It was, however, not quite right and the meat itself was a little flaky like tuna which made the whole dish feel a bit weird.
I like Tokyo Diner and the service and selection is very good overall. It is located really conveniently near Leicester Square on the edge of Chinatown so is a good place to meet. The gyudon wasn't what we wanted and the flakiness of the meat was just not the right texture for us but the restaurant as a whole is definitely a recommended "starter" Japanese place. It is odd because the sides were also not great (although they were good) so it is odd to recommend but this is based on much of the rest of the menu which is quite decent and is very easy to eat. The restaurant is very welcoming and the staff are helpful and friendly with an ambience that lets you linger.The menu is written in a charming way and there is a clear sign that tips[3] are not expected nor accepted and if for nothing else, that is reason enough to support the restaurant.


Cost of gyudon: £9.30


2 Newport Pl, London WC2H 7JP




1. The initial plan was to have gyudon from Japan Centre but a misunderstanding of what was in the menu meant a reallocation and a walk over to Tokyo Diner.
2. As does this idea that restaurants on holiday must be good if they have lots of “locals” in there. So does Burger King, why does that rationale not work for Burger King?
3. The dishes are arguably a little more expensive than they would otherwise be so the total amount paid is similar but is much more transparent. In Japan, it is not often that you pay service charges - the food itself includes that price.



Monday 6 August 2018

Free Computers

There is always a lot of talk in the media about waste and trying to be ecologically friendly when it comes to the reusing of, say, coffee cups, but how much designed obsolescence stops us using things for longer?
I, relatively recently, came into contact with the Restart Project (https://therestartproject.org/) which is designed to help people use, re-use or continue to use electronics products that we have that have fallen into disuse. The project is an interesting one that taps into the feeling of waste that many of us feel when electronic items stop working quite as well as we would like – often still working but not performing quite as well as we want. These devices become "obsolete" but the nature of that obsolescence is not always benign with a huge amount of wasted energy needed to make new devices to enable us to do the same things that we could before.

I am inclined to agree with the paper (here) that there are three major types of obsolescence:
1. obsolescence of function, whereby a product is superseded by a better functioning model
2. obsolescence of quality, where a product is engineered to break after a short period of time
3. obsolescence of desirability, whereby a product continues to work perfectly well but in our minds it has become worn because of external factors such as fashion
The first is necessary for progress, but the other two are manipulative and dishonest.
On that basis, I thought of all the computers that many of us have at home and we could be using instead of buying new computers that don't allow us to do anything different, they just feel newer (until they stop being new) and how to rescue them. Computers are vastly overpowered for most people – and even "complex" software like Excel used to work on computers 10 years ago – so they would work on old computers now. Home computers are now largely used as windows into the Internet and most people would be very well served by a decent browser and not much more (as evidenced by the use of "Chromebooks") – in many ways they are quite close to the "dumb terminals" of the past.

If that is the situation that you find yourself in, you can, for free, look into installing a variant of
  • ChromeOS (for a simple, secure and automatically updating browser-based OS using Chrome and Chrome apps – recreating the Chromebook experience). For personal use, you can download from https://www.neverware.com/freedownload a version of ChromeOS.
  • Linux (for a fully featured computer with access to lots of software but more maintenance than ChromeOS). I would recommend https://www.linuxmint.com/ for this.
In order to do this, all you usually need is a USB drive (4GB for Linux, 8GB for Chrome) and the ability to download the operating system file. You can usually have the operating system in addition to the one already on there (usually Windows) to have what is called a "dual boot system".
These kinds of systems are absolutely ideal for so many people and re-use is a great way to give access to the digitally disenfranchised at low, or even zero, cost. That's a digital revolution.

Thursday 12 July 2018

ロン丼牛ドン / London Gyudon recap

Six down, an unknown number to go. That feels like a good time to do a quick recap of where w have been and the rankings of that. So here we go:

Friday 6 July 2018

ロン丼牛ドン / London Gyudon 06: eat Tokyo

Eat Tokyo, although it does have a genuinely terrible name, is a mini-chain of Japanese restaurants around London and so must be fairly successful. Having been before, I can totally understand why and have seen how popular it is with queues out of the door on a regular basis. The reason? Good value Japanese food (although not Misato level value) with a really broad menu makes this a very accessible place to try Japanese food. This also meant, buried in there somewhere, there was gyudon on the menu so it popped on to our list.
I'd not been to the Holborn branch and thought it'd be a good pick as it was in a slightly different area than other restaurants we'd been to - you have to find bits of variety in something like this. Meeting relatively early in an area not renowned for nightlife, I wasn't expecting to wait but it was already full at 6:45 so we waited, briefly, to be seated and given the menu. Taken upstairs, the space was quite nice but it was also fairly loud and with a plethora of languages too so I can't help but feel that it may have found itself into a guidebook (there was also quite a few suitcases downstairs being stored, suggesting similar) or two. We were seated next to some girls from China (I think from their speech patterns) who happened to be fairly raucous and it was very much that kind of place - we struggled to hear each other.
The menu was vast, illustrated and covered in plastic (which I think I have only seen at Japanese restaurants). Most of it seemed to be taken up by sushi and that also seemed the most popular choice looking around - which of course was irrelevant as we would be having a gyudon each. The sides we went for to go with it were spinach gyōza and pumpkin korokke - both items that I had not seen before.

The food came quickly and first, surprisingly, was the gyudon in large bowls and liberally sprinkled with spring onion to go with the small amount of pickled ginger. Accompanying the gyudon was miso soup which was unexpected as it had not been mentioned but it was a pleasant addition. The bowls were large but, also quite full which is often not the case so it was a good value dish but with quality vs quantity a constant balancing act, I was not holding out much hope. With the first mouthful, I was impressed with the rice and meat which was chunky and properly covered the rice. Was it gyudon or just beef on rice? I wasn't sure but I liked it. The second mouthful confused me though - it tasted different but I wasn't sure why. The beef was fatty and wasn't marinated fully, I thought… But then the third mouthful changed again and I liked it again, it was an odd experience but I could not quite comprehend. The gyōza arrived with the korokke providing a change of flavour and texture. Both of the sides were excellent with the spinach gyōza being like nothing I'd tried before. Bright green, I wasn't sure what to expect but they had the right texture and were paired with a nice chilli sauce too to give a kick. The pumpkin korokke was pretty sweet but had the right texture to go with the chewy gyudon. Oh, the gyudon? Well, the portion was massive so actually, the sides were almost like a respite. The meat was enjoyably cheap and fatty making it closer to the gyudon I remembered but it was probably a bit too chewy. Especially for the portion size which made it quite an effort for us both which is quite a surprise for 2 mains and 2 sides between two. It was very good value and the gyudon was good. One thing that I felt let it down was the rice - or more accurately the way the rice had been flavoured. Normally, with the beef at the top, the sauce seeps into the rice making it take on the flavour but to varying degrees as you go through the meal. In this case however, and almost certainly not prepared like that, it was as if the rice itself was marinated and the beef put on top so you did not get the changing of the rice. I think that contributed to the feeling of the gyudon being massive as it was, effectively, the same dish throughout rather than being altered by ratio. That is nitpicking a little though.

I was very pleasantly surprised by the gyudon and soup combination as it was great value and reminiscent enough of gyudons past to hit the spot. The restaurant itself was better than I remember but it is not a place to linger due to the noise and pace of it - it is great for groups with such an extensive menu. I would recommend the gyudon but, ideally, it would be better shared in some way in order to break up that wall of taste. Had we had half a bowl of gyudon each (and half a bowl of something else), that would be more satisfying for me. I'd had thought a more mixed meal would also be enjoyable - I think I'll return with a larger group some time. You should probably give it a go too.

Cost of gyudon (w/ soup): £9.00

Eat Tokyo (Holborn branch)
50 Red Lion Street, London, WC1R 4PF



World Cup 2018, Last 16

Well, that was a pretty interesting set of games…

France vs Argentina
We started with, arguably the pick of the games on paper - and maybe the best selection of players on the pitch at the world cup so far… As long as you consider their club form. Argentina had been woeful and scraped through to the knockout phases after an astonishing goal by Messi and a great one by Rojo. It is worth remembering that they had also been woeful in qualifying and scraped through after Messi did his thing again. France had also been pretty poor in the groups but were comfortably through as their opposition was weak. It was to be a battle of the Titans. Wheezing and unsure titans though they were.
Argentina started so nervily with incredibly poor control through the team, bouncing off feet as they went to control the ball, it meant that attacking momentum kept being lost. France looked to play on the counter and it became so easy to do so as, without much effort, Mbappe could run straight into the heart of the Argentina defence and then he looks very sharp against the oil tankers he was up against. It was a bit embarrassing. Angel Di Maria, in particular, was poor with and without the ball - not running on, not passing. Mascherano was playing well biting and breaking down, although commentary saying otherwise. Griezmann stayed deep, Pogba was strong but also deep and disciplined. It then changed, Di Maria scored an extraordinary goal and briefly became a different player, changing to become be direct and dangerous. But that, in itself suddenly opened up chances for France with holes in midfield that left the space for Mbappe to drive into.
Aregntina's defending was exposed and with Mbappe just given space to run in to, they had no ability to contain the midfield. Mbappe changed the game and this game could be very important in his development. Aregntina came back a little to give some respectability to the score but were just too ragged to match to France. France were ready to take advantage. Sometimes, that is all you need to do.

Uruguay vs Portugal
After the shambolic excitement of the previous game, I didn't expect a great deal from these two tight teams. But I was wrong, an early goal changed the nature of the game and meant an unexpected ebb and flow with both teams trying to whip through midfield to get to their danger men. The first Cavani goal was one of brutal beauty as he swished out a pass to Suarez who returned the favour with an absolutely brutal cross - the type you say you "just need to get something on that". And Cavani did, his face which was enough. It looked wonderful - almost a massive one-two. Portugal continued to believe and although they were not creating chances, and nor were Uruguay and this was a tense, tense match. It was one for the purists and it was wonderful to watch with high-level play and very little of the (exciting shambles of the previous game. Uruguay were deserved winners playing hard and clever by denying space and exploiting in the counter with great displays by Suarez and Cavani to hold up and create.

Spain vs Russia
The red army marches on, somehow. There's a part of me that thinks Spain got found out. Pique giving a penalty away doesn't surprise me, he would not give that away for his club and I felt the same thing as Ramos was caught fouling in the attack. These are players that are used to getting decisions. The Ramos decision ("pulled down" in the box) is almost always given and it was striking how quickly the commentary team gave him the foul but came round to the VAR decision quickly. Ramos always generates fouls, so I wonder if this type of defending is about to see its demise. Spain were all over Russia but created so few attempts actual attempts at goal and they ended up needing goals rather than the ball. They had plenty of the second but not much of the first. I'm not sure what to make of Russia, they still don't look very good but their heavy running does close down space quite competently. Even after that, they still had the energy after an (insipid) attack vs defence game to take the penalties without as much pressure.

Croatia vs Denmark
Croatia here were the clear quality in this game and had to go at Denmark to press that home. But Denmark scored first and early - within a minute. Croatia picked it up and scored within 4 mins. This game was going to be amazing. Yet, it never caught fire again, really with the tight and tense game that you get in tournament football. Croatia didn't play very well and so kind of got away with it by escaping with victory although they did get a last-gasp penalty in extra time too after breaking free. A last-gasp professional foul stopped a certain goal to be swapped for a penalty [1] which was badly missed by Modric - how would that play for the shootout? It was of no consequence, Croatia prevailed in the shootout and would face the hosts.

Brazil vs Mexico
Brazil were Brazil, as ever. Not the Brazil of breathless commentary, as ever. Mexico are a proper last 16 kind of team but always get found out at this stage and it is a bit of a shame that they can play so well for patches but not convert it. Mexico started brightly, finding gaps and going at Brazil to make the game exciting. But as time wore on, Mexico were also seemingly worn down and Brazil eventually made their quality tell. Each player for Brazil lived up to their own caricature with, most notably, Neymar frolicking and falling as he saw fit. Coutinho looks like the class of this Brazil side but he always plays second fiddle to Neymar as he made it all about him with a wonderful bit of Rivaldo-esque gamesmanship trying to get an opponent sent off. Even so, Brazil were good enough to despatch the Mexicans who lived up to their billing as a Last 16 team, did present a struggle of sorts but over 90mins did not offer enough. Brazil are clearly intimidating for a lot of opponents, and it is probably only when Brazil are seen as a normal team that they will get beaten.


Belgium vs Japan
The kinds of games dreams are made of. This had the look of the most lopsided game with a deeply unimpressive Japan side up against the highly fancied, and highly talented Belgium that had swatted aside their previous opponents. I've a soft spot for Japan but this was maybe the weakest I'd seen them in twenty years or so with only a couple of players that I considered "good". Well, teams are made with teamwork as well as individuals and Japan probed and prodded very effectively early on. Belgium were pushed deep, unable to sit, consider and create with Japan forceful and clever on the ball. The first half ended up even on score and on points with a bit of pressure from Belgium at the end. Come the second half though, and Japan scored early and deservedly and then, shockingly, scored decisively a few minutes later. The second involved great control and lay off by Kagawa (neat and excellent throughout) to Inui who smashed it true and proper into the bottom corner from range. The ball that doesn't spin is the ball that stays hit. Japan were in dreamland but they didn't lose focus and continued to control proceedings as Belgium became more and more hurried in their approach until they realised that, actually, apart from an advantage in football skill, they also had a physical advantage. And desperate times call for Robert Huth (or Gérard Pique) to be put up the top and to launch balls. Belgium didn't have Robert Huth but Marouane Fellaini would be a good substitute and he came on with his awkward elbowy style and changed the game. Japan couldn't cope with the simple ball into the box and with that Belgium turned the game to make it 2-2. This was going to extra time and the plucky Japanese would surely be beaten then. We didn't have to wait. From their own corner, Japan gave the ball away and Belgium launched forward at the end with an exhilarating counter attack. De Bruyne finally seeing gaps in front of him drove into the middle at pace with a quick transition through the phases into attack and from there, it was training ground stuff to slip in Chadli for the winner. Japan will remember this as a learning experience but will also wonder what could have been. Belgium will probably do the same. I doubt that they will be as complacent again.



Sweden vs Switzerland
Switzerland, the UEFA Mexico, found their level again as the knockout stages began. This was a pretty dull game with both teams being a fairly equal level but not really going for it. Sweden are resilient and have played a major part in the absence of the Dutch, Italians and Germans at this stage without necessarily playing in a remarkable way post-Zlatan. I think the world cup will miss Shaqiri as his driving runs and inventive passes are always interesting to watch even if they don't always come off. But other than that, there was little of note, to be honest. Sweden are very team-focused and have won by denying others the ability to play - it might be enough and they have to be proud to get to the last 8 when they are normally not ones to escape the group.

Colombia vs England
Oh, the tension. This is the first time England have prevailed in a shootout in the World Cup so it may have a bigger effect on their mentality than anything else but for anyone without skin in the game, this was a poor game of similar quality to the Swedish one - so that quarter final does not hold much hope for the neutrals. I am not, quite, a neutral but am less "invested" in England these days. Colombia were weakened by the loss of James and seemed out of the game for the first hour or so, seemingly more concerned with slowing the game down and creating tension with niggly hacks and complaints. It was a bit "dark arts" but not entirely unexpected. England got yet another set-piece goal via a Harry Kane penalty fairly early and looked to "game manage" the match out with almost no attacking verve at all. There was precious little, from either team, guile or invention with England in particular happy to pass the ball in deep positions and not threaten. It is a quandary as Alli and Sterling in particular are well known to be fleet of foot and mind so to attack without really offering them options was odd. For that reason, I thought it was a bit funny that Colombia scored a late equaliser to take us to extra time and penalties. England would eventually prevail, but there seemed little urgency to press home their advantage which may have been fashionable 8 years with the Spanish model but we've seen where Spain have ended up after playing as if goals were beneath them. A scare, definitely, but will it be a spur?

UEFA vs CONMEBOL
UEFA teams have done well here, with 6 of the 8 coming from Europe (2 from CONMEBOL). Which might not be that surprising but when that does not include 3 of the 4 semi-finalists of Euro 2016, it suggests quite some depth. This is also after the exits of Germany, Spain, Portugal from the World Cup and the non-qualifications of Netherlands, Wales and Italy. I'm not absolutely sure, but I feel like the expansion of the Euros to 24 teams, to give UEFA teams more experience may be a factor here and even some of the terrible performances at Euro 2016 by England have probably helped them here.

VAR
VAR is performing very well throughout the tournament and FIFA should be happy with this extra support team for the referee being used quite effectively. The television symbol is already becoming increasingly common from players but I do feel that the tournament has been quite clean in relative terms in spite of the low number of red cards.

-----

1. Penalty kicks have an xG of 0.8 suggesting they are missed 20% of the time - so this is a fairly simple swap/sacrifice for that 20%. It ended up with Croatia going through anyway, but I cannot see how this would have the same level of disgust as when Luis Suarez did the same thing in 2010.

Friday 29 June 2018

World Cup 2018, matchday 3

Refereeing
I've been really struck by how few yellow cards there have been. Compared to the club games I have been watching, it seems as if yellow cards are given less liberally which just seems a bit weird and almost old-fashioned. I think it has worked quite well but clear, deliberate professional fouls being left unpunished isn't ideal, for me. On the other hand, I have not seen it get particularly out of hand and seems to be people fairly even so it has helped the games flow VAR was always going to be a talking point but I really feel that the implementation has been excellent (so far) although I have not agreed with all decisions. The speed of review is good and I think the effect on the players already feels clear. Neymar failing to neymar a penalty out of the Costa Ricans after going to review is one of the great moments of VAR and should, hopefully, change some habits. Video assistance is all it is though, and now bemoaning VAR for not getting everything right is the next stage for those kinds of people in the punditry game. The time taken has not been onerous, in my opinion, and has really helped get some decisions spot on - South Korea's opener was incorrectly flagged offside and then overturned on review after noticing the ball had come off a German player. I wonder if VAR will level the playing field a little to prevent the big teams always getting the big decisions. FIFA have been quite brave to go with VAR in the World Cup and UEFA have been clear about not supporting it. Conceptually, I have never had an issue with getting the right decision but the time has been a problem but FIFA seem to have the implementation right here and hopefully it will be understood that the ref is in charge - and can still make howlers on handball, for example. It isn't often I get to praise FIFA so I'll take the opportunity - bravo.


Football
And so the Russians got found out. Russia played fairly well with their strong running in the first two games but looked out of their depth against a fairly workmanlike Uruguay. It was a lovely free kick by Suarez after the wall clearance but quite a ragged midfield all told. Russia have some quality but I cannot see the hosts doing too much more against Spain unless Spain are as unfortunate as they were to meet the famously dubious South Koreans in 2002. I don't think the tournament will be missing this Egypt or Saudi Arabia teams though it was nice to see Salah score in that way that he does – lofting the ball over the keeper. Uruguay may be workmanlike but they are proper workmen with two centre back and two forwards of genuine quality and that may be enough against Portugal. Though it will probably be pretty dull…


Bordering nations, Spain and Portugal, progressed as expected from day 1 but neither were particularly convincing. In 2014, Spain were excellent in patches before being destroyed by the Dutch and the Portugal and Morocco games exposed that soft jaw again. Portugal are an attritional side (as are Spain too, in a very different way) with little in the way of beauty, just workmanlike servicing of what Ronaldo might be able to do. That was enough to be winners of Euro 2016 and they probably should not be entirely written off. Iran were hopeful but miss the end product that so many improving teams lack. I won't miss them but I did massively enjoy them being a bit Spanish in their time-wasting and rolling around versus the Spaniards. Morocco can count themselves a bit unlucky and were quite impressive in patches through the three games but not enough for anything.


Classic third match dead rubber between the French and Danes gave us both the first goalless draw of the tournament and also a human rights abuse on anyone that watched. Denmark look fairly neat but the French were just so disappointing. They will always cause a threat but watching them, it is almost just by accident that they attack - there seems to be precious little construction. They remind me of a high-level videogame football team but controlled by someone not very good mashing square every so often and hoping it'll work. Peru brought a lot of noise, fervour and excitement and Australia didn't. I'm not sure either will be particularly missed into the last 16 but they will have enjoyed themselves.


Do not write Messi off, that has to be the thing to learn. And so we end up with what we thought - the two better-known teams progressing. Argentina finally looked vaguely competent and were more comfortable in the game than the scoreline suggests. The Messi goal to open the game up was a goal that is so very difficult to do but he has really made look easy. The left leg control to take the ball into space is astonishing - there is nothing you can do about that. Croatia have arguably been the team of the round with a competence and quality that has shone through. Nigeria and Iceland will both be missed to be honest and both have done themselves proud both on and off the pitch - the Iceland thunderclap will surely be one of legend. Nigeria had a young side with some eye-catching players - and not just due to the ludicrous kit.


Everybody's second team won with grace and quality is what was decided by the commentary team before the game had even kicked off but the game itself wasn't like that. Brazil will be there or thereabouts I expect but not through a particular quality of attack. They do, however, have one of the brightest passers in world football in Philippe Coutinho who has been neat, tidy and the expansive when he needs to be. He sees passes that I don't see even from the television viewpoint. Serbia will be kicking themselves for a lapse in concentration against Switzerland to let them back in and for Shaqiri, especially, to take advantage. Switzerland look dangerous whenever Shaqiri has a little bit of space and can cause a lot of grief for their opponents.


F. F. That was quite the shock. Germany out after three terrible performances has to be the story of the round. Mexico almost threw it away with a big loss to Sweden but still got through. This wasn't a strong group and South Korea looked awful so for Germany to be unable to break them down until the end was truly shocking. In the parochial commentary, Germany missed the pace and incision of Leroy Sane but as he was not seen as reliable, he would not have played. His replacement in the squad, Brandt, looked very good whenever he came on with pace and quality so I really don't think Sane would have made a difference. What would have made a difference, and German performances still defined the group here, was a set of German players that looked like they knew how to construct attacks. South Korea were no more than competent in winning but it was a pleasure to see VAR making an offside goal onside and Son running free for the second. What a set of games Germany were involved in!


Goals aplenty in previous games left this last matchday as a bit of a dead rubber. England and Belgium were far superior to their opponents and so went into the last game with good goal difference and maximum points - split on disciplinary points. And both managers decided to rest much of their first teams and blood some of the subs. As a result, there wasn't much to be gleaned, Belgium deservedly continued their run of wins but neither team was left with egg on their faces and we were not quite treated to the spectacle of the France vs Denmark match. England lacked a cutting edge and were found wanting defensively quite a few times straight down the middle. I'm a huge fan of Trent Alexander-Arnold and it was great to see him start and give a very good account of himself - one to keep an eye on. The game started with talk of where the draw was already heading and this game decided which half would host which team - and many in England would be pleased to be on the "easier" half. But these are the same people oblivious to the fact that England have a woeful record in knockout games - beating only Ecuador and Denmark in the current millennium. Why they need reminding again, I don't know, but pride so often comes before a fall.


How do you solve a problem like matching records? Goal difference, followed by goals scored followed by head to head followed by discipline. Discipline? Yep, so Japan progress instead of Senegal by virtue of having picked up fewer bookings in the three games. It is the first time I have heard if this method but it is better than the coin toss of 1990, I am happy with that. This always looked a tight squeeze with a balanced group due to the imbalances in each team but it is a shame to lose Senegal after their pace and (attempted) attacking verve was pegged back by a Japan that was under the cosh. I've generally got a soft spot for Japan but this was not an impressive display and they are pretty fortunate to have caught Colombia out. Colombia will be without James, probably, and so will not have the guile in the middle that he possesses but the more basic threat of Falcao and Cuadrado can definitely unsettle. One to watch.

Monday 25 June 2018

World Cup 2018, matchdays 1 and 2

The Joys of the World Cup
I do love festivals of football underpinned by corrupted bidding practices and very dubious host nations so I have been really looking forward to the World Cup. FIFA are very good at ticking all those boxes these days so I am confident that I will be well served for many years.
I had wanted to do a little blog post after each round of matches but the football has been relentless, absolutely relentless. I am watching every game, as I always [1] do and on weekdays, I am still working a fairly standard work day so I get home at about 6:30 pm and then watch three games of football yet none of them live. This does necessitate the basic exit from much of the normal communications during the day – so no checking of the news/Internet. People I work with mainly don't think that I like football so that is a fairly simple conversation to avoid, which helps. Anyway, that takes its toll and I have felt that a fair bit more than I remember doing before.
So, looking at the games after match days 1 and 2, what have I learned?

Aesthetics
There are a lot of teams with a lot of nice kits and quite a few which are pretty rubbish and that seems to be at random. I did not particularly like the Adidas templates in the photos but they largely look nice on TV. A lot of them seem to be referencing older kits with clear links to 1990 and 1994 with some of the shapes. The Danish one has got the chevrons so all's right with the world. I am still annoyed with some of the colour choices – especially around the shorts – but the look of the games is generally pretty good. I think all the stadiums look fairly similar at pitch level but some of those pitches have been terrible and that does affect the games and the players trying to pass it.
The TV presentation has been largely the same as it usually is with a few graphical flourishes provided by the host broadcaster. The way the scores are shown and the typefaces used are not great and a little gimmicky - the branding of the world cup as a whole is not particularly memorable. It won't stick in the mind like the dots of Italia 90, that is for sure.

Coverage
In the UK, there are two broadcasters for this tournament – ITV and BBC. It is the battle of our age, and every age. And in every age, the outcome seems to be the same with the BBC outclassing ITV at every turn. I have to be honest, I am not watching as much of the ancillary stuff so I'm not so aware of it all but of the bits I have seen, the BBC is a clear winner. A possible exception is the rather magnetic Slaven Bilic [2] on ITV coverage. As I am watching "as live", I do skip a lot of the nonsense but I do try and catch a little analysis too although I became a fan of the "no, kick off isn't at 7:45, it is at 8pm" at Euro 2008. One interesting aspect has been the use by both BBC and ITV of female pundits which has caused uproar with all the usual suspects but for me has done a little bit of a Gary Neville [3] for me on punditry. I didn't think Gary Neville was a great pundit but he just highlighted how poor most of it was before – all he did was take the job seriously and decide to do some research and understanding of things before he spoke about them. Both BBC (Alex Scott) and ITV (Eni Aluko) have accepted that they should not be token and they are entirely integrated into the normal punditry model. The BBC has also had female presenters (I do think Gabby Logan is an excellent presenter) and a female commentator too which should not be a point of interest but still is. The first England match was also, at the time, the most watched TV event of the year which is quite impressive in a Royal Wedding year.
That is the TV coverage but both channels have their streaming output (again, better on the BBC with their excellent iPlayer infrastructure) and the BBC also have a VR "app" which I have tried on the PSVR [4] , although it is available through other platforms too. This is only available live and so I have not had so many opportunities to try it. I did try it for Germany vs Mexico and rather enjoyed it. There were three viewpoints which you could select at will – behind each goal and one in the stands on about the halfway line (I guess near the media boxes). I think I have tried similar before for other matches but there was a major difference in quality. The picture here was very good (PSVR is a lower resolution picture than the actual PS4 output) but still not ideal. You could see the whole pitch and the shape of the teams making it feel like a great seat. I have been fortunate enough to have those kinds of seats at a few games I have been to at Anfield and it makes tactical understanding much sharper. The game changer here, the one that makes it a genuinely good experience, is that there is also a fake jumbotron floating above the pitch giving you the TV feed. For me, this is the best of both worlds – tactical view from VR and the replays and close-ups from the TV feed. It was actually a very watchable experience but wearing a headset is not as comfortable as not wearing one and this was not an evening game. I think I will try it again if the stars align.

Football
You see how this is fairly low down the groupings? That isn't a coincidence. I was excited about the start but I knew that the first game was between two poor football teams and it was one of [5] the worst 5-0 matches I have seen. The next few games were no better but after Spain vs Portugal, the quality picked up and matchday 1 was actually pretty good. Matchday 2 has also been pretty mixed in terms of quality overall but has created some interesting matchups. Maybe the best way of assessing is to consider which match of the third Matchday to watch in each group.

A. Uruguay vs Russia
The first game between Russia and Saudi left me concerned - these looked like to two terrible football teams. Egypt were a little toothless without Mo Salah and played as if they had him when setting up but just didn't have the quality. Uruguay were lucky to win with their off day against Egypt and then were fairly comfortable to beat Saudi to face the tireless Russians that seem to have taken an injection of pure enthusiasm after a set of abject displays in the previous decade. I'm not sure it will be a great game but it is always sort of fun watching Suarez and Cavani.

B. Spain vs Morocco
Maybe Spain vs Portugal was the best match of the tournament so far with a strange ebb and flow to the game as a vastly superior Spain were caught out and complacent a few too many times. Being the obvious favourites for the group, it actually made the group quite a simple one and so we have got to the last match with both expected to win to seal their places.
Morocco and Iran have been interesting opponents with both being tricky for the big boys and I especially liked Iran using a lot of the Spanish tricks against them. Iran can actually still make it against Portugal but I just don't really fancy watching them. The other story has, of course, been Ronaldo scoring four including, finally, a direct free kick after 45 World Cup attempts. Portugal are set up to serve Ronaldo and the team seem happy to do so which is at odds to the Argentinian setup. I don't find them particularly fun to watch though, as a result, but I can admire them.

C. Denmark vs France
France have been quite poor but have six points. They look pretty disjointed and ill-prepared but have such a set of players that they may not need to be coherent for the 90 mins if one player can do something in one moment. In many ways, this is a little like how Manchester United have played for a few seasons now and France look similar. It was disappointing to see the Peruvians beaten as they have been a very enjoyable team to watch on and off the pitch but they have ultimately been not quite good enough. Denmark have looked a neat side with Eriksen able to pull the strings and Poulsen providing pace and industry so it could be a good match.

D. Nigeria vs Argentina
Well… The story of the tournament, for many people, is the shockingly poor displays by Argentina and, by extension, Lionel Messi. Argentina look disjointed and disloyal - like a Chelsea team looking to get their manager sacked as they seem to do every few years. Watching Messi in this team is so strange as it feels like he is expected to play as the 10 but people don't offer themselves. It is a very odd situation where the player that can choose options quicker and better than anyone is given none. We watch with the chance it will happen or that there will be an outrageous fall from grace. Right now, either will do. Nigeria will offer a test but they may be easier to play for Argentina rather than an excellent Croatia side or the hugely disciplined Iceland. Iceland have been Iceland - in your face and unintimidated by their opposition. That crowd, and the thunderclap is one for the world, and the World Cup, to really savour. Iceland are happy to be there but we should also be glad to have teams like this there. Croatia were excellent in taking advantage of the sloppy Argentinians and were comfortable in taking Nigeria down with arguably the most accomplished performances of the group stages. Nigeria look ridiculous in their kits and although not as dazzling as the kits, the team were quite good at beating Iceland and will be a stern test.

E. Serbia vs Brazil
A group with Brazil in it is always defined by Brazil. There is something incredibly annoying for me about Brazil, they feel like a huge marketing campaign rather than a football team and have not been a particularly interesting football team to watch throughout my football watching life. A pragmatism allied with usually some genuinely brilliant players is what they have been since winning in 1994. Thus, watching them getting hammered in the last world cup ranks as one of my happiest moments in the world cup - they were lucky to lose by so few. Anyway, another year, another reeling off of Neymar's stats and how great he is not quite matching what I see on the pitch. Brazil do have one of the most interesting passers around in Philippe Coutinho so they are not always an elaborate show pony. In their matches so far, weaknesses have been shown against both teams and the annoyances around diving have come to the fore. Switzerland have looked a dangerous side at times with Shaqiri wandering around the forward line with a true snarling, scampering menace which could break out at any time. Serbia comfortably dealt with Costa Rica and looked comfortable against Switzerland until the second half and so go into the match needing a win. A set of good, technical players allied to the heft of Mitrovic makes them a little erratic but usually fun. The permutations make this interesting and a Swiss win or draw would take them through but Serbia need to beat Brazil with Brazil through with a draw. There will be a bit riding on this game and I feel it might show.

F. South Korea vs Germany
A tight group which is tightly poised at the death after German's travails. Germany are the big beasts here and losing the first game to Mexico, deservedly, after being repeatedly cut apart was an eye-opener. Mexico are quick to counter and open space really well as they did in their second game too. Sweden have played in a fairly Swedish manner with some solidity and something approaching flair but not quite getting there. German complacency almost allowed the Swedes to take a point, or even all three, but they weren't quite able to convert to points. Leaving them needing a victory which could take them through and it is plausible that Germany, Mexico and Sweden could end up on 6 points each as South Korea have been quite woeful. Germany have a lot of quality as has been clear but they have not really been creating great chances nor looking like the champions. Yet, they have probably done enough to win and were pretty good against Sweden so should have enough to defeat South Korea. That, could leave the positions decided by goal difference and maybe even fair play… The Boateng red card could prove more costly than initially thought.

G. England vs Belgium
This group always looked a bit 2 vs 2 and it seemed likely that this last game would be a decider. You might say it doesn't matter too much but it has repercussions for the draw so it will be played for. Belgium have been pretty solid and have an enviable selection of players to choose from with many neat, nippy players to provide the physical weapon that is Romelu Lukaku and +6 for goal difference is not to be sniffed at. England didn't look too good in the first game making it hard for themselves but had not been tested particularly either. Dismantling a weak Panama side gave them the an equal pole position for the group in terms of goal difference (excellently, they are topping the group due to fewer yellow cards than Belgium) but it is again worrying that goals have been conceded to weak sides. They look a little raw and naive - and that makes for an intriguing matchup as I think both teams will go into the match with expectations.

H. Senegal vs Colombia
I didn't feel there were many standout teams in this group and the Japanese victory against Colombia opened the group up. It means four fairly evenly matched teams with wildcards for each team that I rather rate (Kagawa, Lewandowski, Mane, James) giving it a nice balance. I feel like all of the teams would have been pleased to progress but would not necessarily aim for much more than that so it is a weird group. I have a soft spot for Japan and they have been their usual neat selves (with mental blockage) but the other game has more riding on it. Senegal and Colombia can both go through and with the even nature of the teams, I feel like any result could happen in both games so it is very open.

There is a lot to play for, and a lot still to watch. It is now that it starts getting truly serious.



1. I think I have watched every available game of World Cup football since 1998 (or actually the latter stages of 1994, more strictly) not including games which are played at the same time such as the third group games. In recent years, that has been largely "as live" by recording games.
2. Yes, he of some fine World Cup ignominy in 1998 with Laurent Blanc.
3. Gary is actually on ITV but without room to breathe, he does not do much more than the other pundits to be honest.
4. PlayStation VR is a nice little setup attaching to the PS4. I have been absolutely blown away by at least one thing ((Rez Infinite) which I blogged about in 2016. I said at the time that nothing would be the same again. It hasn't been.
5. I think England vs San Marino was probably worse.

Thursday 14 June 2018

ロン丼牛ドン / London Gyudon 05: Sushi Waka

This would be the third restaurant that we went to that appeared to specialise in a particular kind of Japanese food but none of them had been gyudon. Sushi Waka seemed to be a sushi place, so it was still not specialising in gyudon, and took us to North London or Camden to be more specific. This was pretty convenient for me as I didn't live too far away and I know the area quite well. As a result, I had been to Sushi Waka before but had been to some other Japanese restaurants more often. My favourite Japanese restaurant is in Camden and is called Asakusa close to Mornington Crescent station and I also rather like Seto Ramen which is also nearby. As far as I am aware, neither does gyudon and so Sushi Waka it would be.
Camden is a bit of a nightlife area and there is a fairly "old" feel to the establishments in the area with the atmosphere having been set a long time ago rather than as a result of more recent redevelopment but there is still plenty of new to go with the old. Nearby the multiple Camden markets bring plenty of tourist footfall to the general area but Parkway is not so close to the market and so I imagine the restaurant does rely on regulars rather than drop-ins.
The first thing to note is that there was no "gyu-don" on the menu, only in set form. The restaurant feels different to each of the ones we've been to so far with very little pretentiousness which comes with being a more local kind of place. Sushi Waka itself must be of a certain vintage as it has a sign that gives that away if you know the details[1]. This little fact, I love.
Camden has a few Japanese restaurants and parts of LB[2] Camden have long been home to Japanese people which lends itself to less touristy restaurants, I hope. It was a pleasant restaurant inside but was not particularly modern feeling, or even "refreshed" with old looking décor and rather odd dining chairs which looked like conference or meeting chairs. It did not feel upmarket or downmarket, it just felt a bit local and quite unimpressive as a location. There is also a Japanese (tatami) room upstairs but we did not see that.
We didn't pick so many dishes and supplanted the order of 2 gyudon sets with vegetable korokke and some house salad and decided we'd get more if necessary. The sets came with miso soup, pickles and fruit so we felt that had enough variety, initially at least. The food didn't all come together and was served, effectively, as courses with the korokke, soup and salad coming first, followed by gyudon.
The korokke was pretty creamy and tasty but nothing particularly noteworthy (it was just something I'd not had in a while) but it reminded me of supermarket food in Japan - in a good way. The salad was fairly plain and seemed to be more an accompanying dish rather than a course but we still finished it before gyudon was brought out. Interestingly, the table was clear as we sat down with no condiments, such as soy sauce and shichimi[3] at all so the restaurant was obviously confident in seasoning appropriately. I was less confident and so asked for some shichimi to put in the soup but only wanted to have it with the gyudon.
The gyudon was brought out in quite large, solid bowls that felt more like bibimbap bowls, such was their heft. This is relevant as it made it enjoyable to hold when eating [4] with chopsticks. The big bowl meant quite a decent portion of rice and meat – and the meat was quite dark with a little sprinkling of pickled ginger. That, however, is just the mechanics, how was the taste? In all honesty, I was not expecting much with the colour not looking quite right. And that taste was very good. Surprising, but very good. The meat was sweet – far sweeter than I expected or probably (thought that I) wanted but quite easy to eat. Coupled with the rice, it was a great combination as the rice soaked up a bit of that sweetness. As I mentioned before, there were no condiments on the table and so no extra pickled ginger either but the sprinkling that was in the bowl was also very good and wonderfully sharp providing an excellent counterpoint to the meat and rice. I was genuinely surprised about how good it was. I was also heartened by the quality of the miso soup which felt deep and flavoursome which again was improved by the addition of a little counterpoint which the shichimi provided. Being picky, as I devoured the bowl, it did feel a spot dry but Paul said it was a bit "wet" for him so it may just have been the way we ate it. There was no egg to top the dish but we were both in agreement about this one – it was not missed. We both left our bowls without even a single grain of rice remaining and that sweetness of the marinade goes so well with the rice by the end, having seeped through such that the balance is spot on. It is a bowl that improves through the meal which is quite an odd sensation. Eventually, after being asked about whether we wanted anything else, we were presented with small fruit plates as a sort of dessert (although there is an actual dessert section on the menu) which was at turns very Japanese but also quite uncommon – I think the first time we have had it. It was a very satisfying conclusion to the meal which cleansed the palate and also gave a fresh ending [5] .

As ever, it felt a bit bad to miss out on much of the breadth of the menu (in this case, sushi) due to the project but it was not such a disappointing turn of affairs as it was in Machiya. The "gyu-don set" is a good meal in its own right and the surroundings are pleasant enough but I was truly impressed by the gyudon. It was not particularly nostalgic for me, but at the same time, it kind of was. I don't think the gyudon I used to enjoy in Japan was quite as sweet and it did not set off any repressed memories (as for the Koya meal) about gyudon so it was different to what I was expecting but not a fundamental diversion so it did tick the boxes. I would definitely recommend a visit to most people as the gyudon was really nice and the restaurant presents an atmosphere of a Japanese restaurant that is not quite as prevalent as it used to be. That lingering feeling of the past and not quite modern interpretation of Japanese décor is one that I really appreciate and is not replicated too much anymore. The gyudon was great and I'd be intrigued to try some more from the menu.


Cost of gyudon (set): £12.50

Sushi Waka
75 Parkway, Camden Town, London NW1 7PP


1. The Sushi Waka sign has a phone number that does not work any longer and has not worked since 1999 as Inner London's area code for telephone numbers changed from 01, to 071 to 0171 to 020 within about a decade.
2. LB meaning London Borough. LB Camden is fairly dense and, although an inner London borough and so smaller than others, covers Covent Garden in the south to Highgate in the north. The Finchley Road area had traditionally had quite a few Japanese ex-pats. They weren't immigrants, they were ex-pats.
3. Shichi-mi tōgarashi also known as nana-iro tōgarashi or simply shichimi, is a common Japanese spice mixture containing seven ingredients.
4. I like to eat bowls of rice held in my left hand rather than from the table but I have to say that I rarely do it in restaurants in the UK. I don't think I have been doing that on the gyudon project either but it felt really nice here. It is all part of the process.
5. It was not a true ending though, of course – it was only 8pm. Not too far away on Kentish Town Road, we went to the "Dirty Ice Cream" emporium Mamason. This is a fairly new Filipino ice cream bar that I had been to before and thought it worth checking out again for a dessert and/or drink. With a selection of ice cream and sorbet flavours that are rarely seen in London, such as ube and lychee, we thought it worth a try. And it very much was as the ice cream was excellent.




Thursday 31 May 2018

The Lloyd's Building

Lloyd's (or Lloyd's of London) is an insurance market that could lay claim to being the prime mover in creating the concept of insurance as is widely understood[1] and is named after a coffee house that was run by Edward Lloyd. The original coffee shop became a meeting point for those involved in the maritime trade and they came to share information about shipping which was used for offering insurance. Insurance is just about managing risk by pooling those risks so that it benefits more people. By pooling that risk, catastrophe can be more effectively managed. If 5% of 20 ships will sink, that might not seem so bad but if it happens to be your ship - you will take 100% of the loss. So, the effect of that risk is different if you have one of twenty total ships or if you have twenty ships yourself. Pooling that risk means that everyone pays a little bit more but nobody loses out entirely and as it is pretty random who that 5% will afflict, it seems like a low cost. So the financial risk is, effectively identical, but the real risk to individual participants is reduced.

Insurance works, but pooling risks only happens if you actually have multiple risks to pool and for that you needed people to be pooled together to be able to meet and strike these agreements. That happened at Lloyd's Coffee House - it was a prime example of the benefits of mixing people together.
Fast forward a few years, or a few centuries, to 1986 and a new building was completed for the market in the City of London. A building that split opinion and also, 25 years hence, became the youngest Grade I listed structure[2] in the UK. Why did it split opinion? Because that is what modern architecture does and this structure was very modern. Like the Pompidou Centre in Paris, this building was "inside-out".

In many ways, we have to think about what the purpose of a building is and Le Corbusier, famously, described homes as machines for living. If we think about it in that way, then it allows us to reassess what the purpose of components that make up a building are. At the most basic level, you need walls and a roof but that does not quite scale up when you have larger buildings with the requirements of infrastructure. Traditional buildings have external walls that do two things - structurally hold the building up and provide shelter from the elements. Walls can be load bearing or simply partitions and that is the difference in looking at the purpose of the walls. What if we split that responsibility out a little, you could have something else that was better at holding a building up and a separate something else that was better for providing shelter. Once you separate that out, you can start having load-bearing structures that don't need to look good as they are hidden away and facades that are better for the inhabitants - this gave us the glass skyscrapers with central cores. Glass lets light in and makes a nicer environment for those inside the building. Many traditionalists in the world of newspaper columns don't seem to think buildings are for anything other than looking at from afar, however, and so changes in technology are not always seen positively. What a central core also allowed was for all the "services" (such as lift cores, utility supply etc)to be put into that central core and then allowing the space between the glass frontage and the central core to be pretty open - giving large open spaces. This centralised load-bearing structure soon became the new tradition of building skyscrapers.

What, however, could we do if we could also move that central core outside the building to leave an open, unbroken space? The benefits of an unbroken, easily adaptable space were clear for tenants of a building and that is what drew Lloyd's to the vision given by Richard Rogers as he persuaded the decision makers over to his way of thinking. Another benefit of an approach like this, a sort of exoskeleton for a building, is that the maintenance of these previously hidden things is made much quicker and easier as a result of being accessible. Maybe most famously for the Lloyd's building, the lifts are placed outside the building and that just happens to afford great views of the City of London - I assume that this is a positive unintended consequence. Does the building work for the inhabitants? Over thirty years on, that answer seems to be a clear "yes" but you have to think of stakeholders and the external view of something is important in such a central location in one of the best-known cities in the world. Well, unsurprisingly, this has been a success too - it will never be a universally loved building but it is one that fewer and fewer people are against now.

I'm not that interested in architecture - not enough to write about anyway which seems an odd thing to say after a few hundred words about a building. The point, however, is about the idea of thinking of design in a new way. Taking a step back to see the purpose of a building rather than what had gone before it seems like a sensible way of approaching problems and maybe we should all try to get back to first principles every so often to appraise what we do. I am also a big fan of making things easily accessible to make changes to when required. At work, I do a fair amount of calculation models and it is always important that we can see what is going into those - the inputs have to be clear[3] and externalised so that you can change them easily. So that others can maintain them rather than hiding away the working components. Eventually, people get used to the look and it becomes a house style. That's what I have learned from Richard Rogers' groundbreaking building.

1. Although this may not, semi-famously, be all that well understood by some high ranking people in US politics such as Paul Ryan (amongst many, many other Republicans).
2. Listing structures in the UK involves giving the architecture certain types of protection and many owners would not like this to happen as it necessitates conservation which may not always be what the owner wants to do.
3. The Pompidou Centre, which came before the Lloyd's building, by Rogers and Renzo also externalised the structures but went one step further by colour coding the infrastructure lines to give clear indications how things worked. In some ways, like a diagram rather than real life.