fact is real; maybe it reflects a sheer disregard for proportion or accuracy; or maybe it arises from a subconscious need for universality in a confusing age of spiralling subjectivities and relativistic hopscotch, longing to pin down objective truths in even the most fantastical of scenarios ... Nope, in Jamie Redknapp's case it's just plain ole pig ignorance. When you're brought up by an (admitted in court this week) illiterate father to do nothing but play football and get by on your looks what do you expect ? Nobody in football ever corrects someone else's mistakes. Just like reading The Guardian in the dressing room, displaying any iota of education marks you out as 'gay' as Graeme Le Saux found to his cost. Note the ignorant widespread use of the American idiom 'stonewall' (meaning to delay - eg. park the bus) to describe stone-cold certain penalties, the ignorant use of 'coloured' to describe black players and the ignorant overuse of 'fantastic' to describe everybody and everything in Premiership football. And that's just the BBC, maintaining standards for the nation by paying Alan Hansen 40,000 per week to drag us all down into the cesspit, sub-educational world of British football. Why do people misuse 'literally' and many other words and expressions? It's because they are too insecure to let the English language do its job, which it does admirably. There's no need to bolster the language, as it is powerful in its own right. 'Safe haven', 'still continuing', 'raising up', 'dropping