Chelsea-Man U 'a great advert for atheism'

SUPPORTERS of every other team in the country say the 3-3 match at Stamford Bridge yesterday was definitive proof of a godless universe.

While smaller clubs across the country had to turn away vital revenue due to frozen pitches over the weekend, Chelsea and Manchester United earned some more millions of pounds to give to their squad of human-shaped players in a manner no deity would allow.

The coverage of the game also furthered the secular argument by featuring a 10 minute encomium to how much Martin Tyler would like to have sex with Manchester United and because of the very existence of Sky Sports in the first place.

Theological Footballologist Wayne Hayes said: “The traditional concept of a creator is an all-powerful, all-knowing and all-loving being that made everything from the mightiest pot belly of a shirtless, racist Chelsea fan to the tiniest patch of hair on Wayne Rooney’s eyebrow.  

“But if god were truly omnipotent he would not allow United to claw back a three goal deficit giving every prick in the home counties the chance to talk about ‘their’ fighting spirit as if they were somehow responsible for Howard Webb.

“Similarly, if he were truly benevolent he’d either let Torres get a goal so he can stop staggering around the pitch like Bambi after his mother was shot or lightning bolt him out of his misery.

“And any all-knowing deity worth a wank would have worked out that a ‘great game for the neutral’ would have involved more players being eaten by crocodiles.”

Religious supporters have argued that the resurrection of Paul Scholes and the miracle of Jonny Evans’ career point to a higher power.

But Hayes insisted: “Every single player on that pitch is richer than you will ever be and is probably having sex right now with a woman so beautiful it would make your penis cry.

“God is dead and Jeff Stelling killed him.”


Sign up now to get
The Daily Mash
free Headlines email – every weekday

Snow continues to be the same

THIS year’s snow is the same as last year’s, it has been confirmed.

But scientists say they do not know if the latest snow is the same as the snow from 2010 because no-one can remember.

Professor Henry Brubaker, from the Institute for Studies, said: “This is what makes it so difficult to cope and plan ahead. Because the records only go back 12 months we can never be entirely sure what properties snow will have.

“Like last time, this snow is very, very cold – almost as if it’s frozen – and incredibly white.

“We also know from last year that snow is difficult to drive on. We think this is because of its whiteness. We did some tests and driving on talcum powder is also quite tricky, especially if you mix it with olive oil.”

He added: “But to really understand it, we need to know more about historic snow, so we’re desperately trying to find someone who can remember what snow was like in 2010. One man from Derbyshire phoned-in to say that he thinks it was blue and tasted like meat.”

The department of transport has already given up on this year’s snow but is hoping that, like last year’s, it will eventually disappear.

A spokesman said: “If only we knew why it disappeared then we might be able to work out why it arrives in the first place.”

The department will begin planning for next year’s snow as soon as it has decided what properties it is likely to have.

The spokesman added: “We’ve been bombarded with ideas so we’re just going to pick one out of a tombola. I’ve suggested it will be invisible but will smell like a freshly waxed saddle.”