Chris

Well, after lighting the touchpaper and retiring a safe distance, I think it's time for me to return to the smoking ruin of this thread. Sorry I've not been around much.

My 2p ... We have only Mr Chav's word for it that he has been wearing his trainers unchallenged since April. The school admits no-one has challenged him before now, but surely it's not beyond the realms of possibility that the boy is lying through is back teeth? And, even if he has been getting away with it since April, since when does 'getting away with it' for a period of time confer someone the right to ignore rules permanently? He must have known what would happen come the day he did get caught. Boys at my school were made to go about barefoot, or with no socks (if they were caught wearing white ones), but we all knew that is what would happen if caught, so most of us weren't stupid enough to try it.

Secondly, we only have Mr Chav's word for it that he didn't have time to get back to school for the exam. As Coggy has said, had he been sufficiently motivated I'm damn sure he'd have been there. I would have sat the paper barefoot rather than risk missing it. What we have here is someone who didn't care very much, who I doubt will re-sit the paper (I am quite sure that he only said he would in answer to a leading question from the journo that interviewed him; I know exactly how these 'hard luck' stories are written ), and who will add this incident to his long list of reasons why his circumstances are all someone else's fault. And thus the circle of chav life continues.
__________________

Well, I hope your attitude to the school doesn't rub off on your kids. What kind of example are you setting? Do you really want your children to grow up to be boorish louts who think they can always get their own way by challenging someone to a fight? I can see why you don't like the school's points-based approach to discipline. If your kids have already learned their behaviour from you I expect they will be topping the league table. Sad, sad, sad.