Andy Gray Sacked by Sky; Richard Keys resigns - join TalkSport

[Heron]

Nixon was useless running the line today (not that I'd like to do it like) but I think he still performed better than someone like, lets say Biggs, who is clearly a woman and furthermore a Lesbian.

Wrong thread 

 

Right thread.

I have been told im a good shag we should meet lover boy 

 

[GM]

Andy Gray and Richard Keys have finally met their Waterloo. I'm glad

It's hard to have any sympathy for the Sky Sports Two, victims of their own breathtaking arrogance

David Mitchell

The Observer, Sunday 30 January 2011

Source

 

"The game's gone mad," says Richard Keys.

 

"I know. Women just don't understand the offside rule."

 

"Course they don't, Andy."

 

"Napoleon."

 

"Napoleon, sorry."

 

"It's to do with wombs, probably."

 

"The offside rule?"

 

"No, not understanding it."

 

"Thank God for that."

 

"A female linesman – it's lunacy. But nobody seems to realise, Rich- I mean, Napoleon."

 

"Apart from us, mon empereur. It's madness."

 

"OK, we're on air in 30 seconds. Are you going to take the hat off?"

 

"The general's hat? Don't see why."

 

"I won't either then. Why should I? It's PC gone mad. Twenty seconds."

 

"Have you ever met one who understood it?"

 

"No, they just wave the flag at random, like a cheerleader. Ten seconds."

 

"I think I will take the hat off, actually."

 

"Me too."

 

Let's leave aside the avalanche of subsequent revelations and go back to the initial leaked recording, because nothing more clearly reveals the bizarre mental world that football commentators Andy Gray and Richard Keys have been inhabiting. They're Napoleon and the rest of us are too insane to realise. They knew they had to keep this knowledge a secret or the lunatics would turn on them and so it has proved.

 

A few apologists defended their first remarks as merely humorous. Former England women's cricket captain Rachael Heyhoe Flint said: "These were tongue-in-cheek comments and we are blowing something enormously out of proportion here." But when you listen to that recording, it's not tongue in cheek at all. Their criticisms of female assistant referee Sian Massey are marked, as Gabby Logan wrote in the Times, with a "total lack of laughter".

 

I find that fascinating. These men weren't making sexist jokes or taking the piss. They seem genuinely to believe that women can't understand the offside rule. Not just women who don't like football or only watch the occasional match; not just scatter-brained sculptresses or isolated Pacific island tribeswomen; not just Katie Price or the Queen; but women who have worked their entire careers to get a job in football, been fully trained as referees and officiated in hundreds of matches. They think even those women can't understand the offside rule.

 

It seems reasonable to conclude that these broadcasters are implying that women are, at the very least, slightly less intelligent than men. But possibly only slightly: maybe they reckon that the offside rule is the most complex and difficult concept known to, well, man. They may think women can do anything else men can do – right up to rocket science, brain surgery and transubstantiation – but that female intelligence cuts off just before that most elusive and nuanced of human ideas, the offside rule. If that's the case, Keys and Gray are a bit sexist, but their main mental health problem is believing a slightly tricky rule from an incredibly straightforward game – a notion on the level of buying hotels in Monopoly – is like existentialism, string theory, the double helix, long division and backing-up-Nokia-phone-contacts-on-an-Apple-computer all rolled into one.

 

But it may be that they've got a better sense of proportion about the trickiness of offside, yet still consider it to be beyond any woman's intellectual grasp. If that's the case, they must spend most of their lives looking around in horrified bewilderment. They think women are imbeciles and yet there women are, walking around, wearing clothes, holding down jobs, being allowed to vote – driving around in cars, for God's sake! Gray and Keys must be terrified.

 

Could chimps be taught the offside rule? Or dolphins? That octopus seemed to know a lot about football. How basic an organism do Andy and Richard consider the female of their species to be? And why has Andy had sex with so many of them? Sarah Palin must be even more horrifying to them than she is to the rest of us: they're not worried that, if she became president, she'd destroy the world out of evil, inflexible rightwing rage, but just because the red button looked like a Smartie.

 

Is that why they've forged careers in football, the last bastion of male dominance? The moron women – the shaggable zombies, the lipstick-wearing Borg – hadn't yet broken into that citadel. It was safe. But now, with the sight of a woman on the touchline, randomly waving a flag or not waving a flag (and occasionally doing it at the right time by pure luck, the jammy bitch), they know that the Matrix's machines have entered Zion.

 

These men have so completely misapprehended the nature of humanity that they should be pitied. Poor, stupid Richard Keys – he probably doesn't even understand how funny it is that he said: "Did you hear charming Karren Brady this morning complaining about sexism? Yeah, do me a favour, love." But it's hard to pity people who have built massively successful careers in spite of mirthless arrogance, a towering sense of entitlement and disdain for a world they're convinced has got everything wrong. So I don't.

 

And these guys aren't alone. Football is full of Napoleons. Croatian FA president Vlatko Markovic is a good example. Last year, he said: "While I'm a president of the Croatian Football Federation, there will be no homosexuals playing in the national team", adding: "Luckily, only normal people play football." Yeah, normal people like Paul Gascoigne, Wayne Rooney, Gordon Ramsay, George Best and Craig Bellamy. What normal people.

 

It's certainly true that very few professional footballers admit to the "abnormality" of being gay. Maybe it's fancying men that messes with the brain's offside-understanding lobe? But surely that would make lesbian refs OK?

 

The worst thing about the footballing Napoleon complex is that it's so possessive of a game that shouldn't, and ultimately can't, be possessed. The human urge to kick a ball around and attempt to get it into a goal, and the urge to watch other people doing that, are innocent and harmless pleasures. How come they're so often marred by tedious bastards – from Andy Gray to Roman Abramovich to Sepp Blatter – trying to own the fun? They want to be able to take their balls away if we don't play with them in the way they like. When they can't, they start whining.

 

So, yes, Andy and Richard, the game's gone mad. Enjoy St Helena. I hope it's St Helena, not Elba.

[2sheds]

Did the Dark Forces get a female linsewoman sorted for the weekend? Did Steve the camerman get Sian Massey warming up, then told Burton she was a looker, then Burton did the rest. There was stuff released about Keys who is not suing NOTW.

 

I think it's incredibly naive to act like there's no agenda here, completely and utterly naive.  Sure Gray ultimately has to take responsibility for his own downfall in that he, and he only, made the comments.  However, clips like these don't just get leaked on a whim, or in the 'public interest'.  This wasn't a Ron Atkinson slip, where he was actually still on air in some countries (I believe it was still being broadcast in the middle east). 

 

What's happened here is essentially a secret recording that has then been used against them in public to not only smear them but to paint the picture that Sky had 'no choice'.  If it was a criminal case, you wouldn't even be able to use it (recording) in court unless in extreme circumstances (ie. murder etc) which this isn't even close to being.  They are in fact right when they say this is akin to the phone hacking scandal, it's practically identical in terms of end-product.  It was the same when they did it with Gordon Brown, another one 'they' wanted out.  I think it's good that more and more people are coming out in support of them, if not their views, then their right to have the private conversations kept private.

 

Like I've said, I've no particular care for either of them, the whole things has been hilarious, at times baffling (the genuine sound of disgust in original clip) and entirely hypocritical from the masses.  I've no doubt a lot on here don't share their views, and I know I don't, but I also know there will be a few nodding their heads in agreement with some that was said, with perhaps the exception of the Massey nonsense. 

 

Sadly, though, I think it's tragic that these media companies continue to pull the wool over the eyes of the public and they're only going to keep getting away with it because we all love a good distraction.  Sorry, scandal.  It's been pretty pathetic, the whole thing.  At the end of the day, nothing that was said was that f***ing bad.  Anyone acting like it were, like they're genuinely morally outraged really need to get a f***ing hold of themselves and be quite serious when they think "have I ever talked about women that way?"  Cause I've seen plenty of it on here down the years.  Like Indi said yesterday, where the f*** did all this moral superiority come from?  Who the f*** are we kidding?

 

Personally, I hope Gray gets every single penny he can from them.  Like him or not, they're the scum, not him.  He's just a tit, a tit that holds views no worse than the majority of peoples fathers on here.

Exellent post.

 

I totally agree an excellent post.

 

[BlufPurdi]

Bluf - I don't understand how you can defend someone for making a lewd suggestion to a colleague to "Tuck the mic in" and holding his belt buckle to point to his male area. At work, to a colleague, in front of other colleagues.  And you think that's acceptable behaviour?

 

Where did I defend his comments exactly?

[Lewando]

http://img196.imageshack.us/img196/8720/phototxh.jpg

[Exiled in Texas]

Bluf - I don't understand how you can defend someone for making a lewd suggestion to a colleague to "Tuck the mic in" and holding his belt buckle to point to his male area. At work, to a colleague, in front of other colleagues.  And you think that's acceptable behaviour?

 

 

Where did I defend his comments exactly?

 

 

 

Probably in the bits of your post (copied just above) where you reckon that the comments made at work, on company time, while at work are private an no concern of the employer.

 

The bit where you said that "nothing that was said was that f***ing bad".  Sounds like you're supporting comments like they said.

 

Also where you reckon that Sky are the scum not Gray/Keys, and that the comments are acceptable because other people might have similar thoughts. Sorry, I just don't think that makes it right or acceptable.

 

So yeah, it still looks like you defend his comments as acceptable behaviour.

[Gash]

Bluf - I don't understand how you can defend someone for making a lewd suggestion to a colleague to "Tuck the mic in" and holding his belt buckle to point to his male area. At work, to a colleague, in front of other colleagues.  And you think that's acceptable behaviour?

 

Where did I defend his comments exactly?

fwiw i think it's fine, it's a joke i told a woman at work today that i was going to put rohypnol in her drink and she wouldn't be going home tonight. It's a joke.

[BlufPurdi]

Bluf - I don't understand how you can defend someone for making a lewd suggestion to a colleague to "Tuck the mic in" and holding his belt buckle to point to his male area. At work, to a colleague, in front of other colleagues.  And you think that's acceptable behaviour?

 

 

Where did I defend his comments exactly?

 

 

 

Probably in the bits of your post (copied just above) where you reckon that the comments made at work, on company time, while at work are private an no concern of the employer.

 

The bit where you said that "nothing that was said was that f***ing bad".  Sounds like you're supporting comments like they said.

 

Also where you reckon that Sky are the scum not Gray/Keys, and that the comments are acceptable because other people might have similar thoughts. Sorry, I just don't think that makes it right or acceptable.

 

So yeah, it still looks like you defend his comments as acceptable behaviour.

 

I've quite clearly stated the initial comments are bizarre, I've also posted previously that the comments to Jackson are pretty crass in nature.  What I've gone on to highlight is this shit happens every single day around the country.  Sure some women may well not accept it and rightfully complain to their respective HR departments, but some couldn't give a flying fuck, because some DO see it as office/workplace banter.  I could go into countless examples of it happening in my own workplace.  My own boss has said some ridiculous things to girls 15-20 years his junior. 

 

And I'm sorry, nothing that was said was that fucking bad.  If Jackson had been complaining to HR then it would be an entirely different context, but she hadn't so the context is completely different.  It's a clip that's been leaked to further manipulate events.  If you're fine with that particular company doing this, as some seem to be, looking past the actual content and quotes, then we really do deserve everything we get from out new media overlords. 

 

To those comparing it racism, seriously man, get away.  Okay, the principles can be seen as the same, and definitely, the comments were ridiculous, but we all fucking know that we know people that make these jokes all the time.  Hell, discrimination laws are lunacy.  You can report things to HR that you've heard said about someone else when they're in the fucking pub.  I'm all for such laws to be in place, but let's not pretend they all attach themselves to common sense.  Let's also stop over-reacting and whipping up hysteria about every extreme view we hear. 

 

As I've gone over, people make these jokes all the time, rightly or wrongly, my point in raising that is, why all of a sudden are we deciding (pretty much as a nation) that these views are outdated.  You only have to look in the Lush Lasses thread on here to see the way some people talk about women.  Yes, I know these women "put themselves in that place", but through those comments I think it's fair to assume that many, if they are working with a hot lass, would in turn say crass comments like "I'd smash that" or words to that effect.

 

Personally, I'd never say any of these things, and I reckon those on here that have met me (sober) would back that up.  Far too polite and reserved, but I'm still not going to get on my high horse and pretend these people are ageing dinosaurs when I could name a list as long as my arm of people on here and in my work life that are exactly the same.  It's like the xenophobia that exists in this country, only a few will come out and be honest about it, but there's an overwhelming amount that agree but would never dare say so.

 

Probably waffled on a bit, but you clearly missed my point of my post, and tried to sum it up as me defending their comments when it's patently not the case.

[Incognito]

Bluf - I don't understand how you can defend someone for making a lewd suggestion to a colleague to "Tuck the mic in" and holding his belt buckle to point to his male area. At work, to a colleague, in front of other colleagues.  And you think that's acceptable behaviour?

 

Where did I defend his comments exactly?

fwiw i think it's fine, it's a joke i told a woman at work today that i was going to put rohypnol in her drink and she wouldn't be going home tonight. It's a joke.

 

Yes but she knows that you're gay.

[Dave]

I've met Bluf sober (and monged as it happens). He's fucking dinosaur.

[BlufPurdi]

I've met Bluf sober (and monged as it happens). He's fucking dinosaur.

 

I was dreading this post, I thought you were going to put me down.

[Exiled in Texas]

Bluf - understand where you're coming from. The Massey comments were unprofessional, but the Jackson comments were an HR nightmare (sexual bullying it was reported as).   I think we're just opposite sides of the line of what's acceptable.

 

Perhaps, it's the fact that I've been working in Corporate America for the last 20 years, that I just can't see how any of this can be defendable, especially when it's been released into the public domain, and the company is now being judged publically.

 

Compare this issue (exact details released into public domain through news outlets), with the Carrol/Taylor fight (details kept in house with only vague hearsay in the press). The companies were able to deal with the issues differently because they did not have the public media scrutiny.

 

Edit - And I'm not disputing that there might be a hidden agenda from Sky - but ffs if Gray didn't provide the rope, knot it and put his head in to loop for Sky.

[Thespence]

Edit - And I'm not disputing that there might be a hidden agenda from Sky - but ffs if Gray didn't provide the rope, knot it and put his head in to loop for Sky.

 

Its not if legal action happened last week though. If there was a agenda they would not have greased his palm with work in the Summer on fox.

[BlufPurdi]

Edit - And I'm not disputing that there might be a hidden agenda from Sky - but ffs if Gray didn't provide the rope, knot it and put his head in to loop for Sky.

 

Its not if legal action happened last week though. If there was a agenda they would not have greased his palm with work in the Summer on fox.

 

Will you stop banging on about this World Cup deal, it means absolutely dog shit.  If anything it could be argued they used him that one last time to make an impact for Fox Sport in the US.  Regardless of whether the likes of us liked him, in the industry, he was hailed as some sort of revolutionary. 

[Thespence]

Edit - And I'm not disputing that there might be a hidden agenda from Sky - but ffs if Gray didn't provide the rope, knot it and put his head in to loop for Sky.

 

Its not if legal action happened last week though. If there was a agenda they would not have greased his palm with work in the Summer on fox.

 

Will you stop banging on about this World Cup deal, it means absolutely dog s***.  If anything it could be argued they used him that one last time to make an impact for Fox Sport in the US.  Regardless of whether the likes of us liked him, in the industry, he was hailed as some sort of revolutionary.  

 

Will you stop banging on about agendas? The lawsuit meant dog s*** to him working at Sky & Fox.

[BlufPurdi]

Edit - And I'm not disputing that there might be a hidden agenda from Sky - but ffs if Gray didn't provide the rope, knot it and put his head in to loop for Sky.

 

Its not if legal action happened last week though. If there was a agenda they would not have greased his palm with work in the Summer on fox.

 

Will you stop banging on about this World Cup deal, it means absolutely dog s***.  If anything it could be argued they used him that one last time to make an impact for Fox Sport in the US.  Regardless of whether the likes of us liked him, in the industry, he was hailed as some sort of revolutionary. 

 

Will you stop banging on about agendas? The lawsuit meant dog s*** to him working at Sky & Fox.

 

At least I've got a suspicious sequence of events to back that theory up.

[Thespence]

Edit - And I'm not disputing that there might be a hidden agenda from Sky - but ffs if Gray didn't provide the rope, knot it and put his head in to loop for Sky.

 

Its not if legal action happened last week though. If there was a agenda they would not have greased his palm with work in the Summer on fox.

 

Will you stop banging on about this World Cup deal, it means absolutely dog s***.  If anything it could be argued they used him that one last time to make an impact for Fox Sport in the US.  Regardless of whether the likes of us liked him, in the industry, he was hailed as some sort of revolutionary. 

 

Will you stop banging on about agendas? The lawsuit meant dog s*** to him working at Sky & Fox.

 

At least I've got a suspicious sequence of events to back that theory up.

 

Have I not?

[BlufPurdi]

No.

[Thespence]

No.

 

I did say "The initial story about Massy 1st came about in the Daily Mail not the The Times or The Sun or NOWT. Before you say it,  The Sun is not afraid to run stories about Gray either as we see here from 2007 http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/article231900.ece . For me someone in the gallery listening to what was being said by Gray & Keys knew they had something good & sold the story. Later that day Sky News released the chat near the pitch with Gray, Burton & Steve.T.Camerman because they now that someone will sell this bit of footage as well so SKY/News International have to start setting the agenda rather than being on the backfoot, so they show the clips as a exclusive."

[BlufPurdi]

Case closed then.

[Thespence]

Case closed then.

 

Well not really hopefully Gray with his lawsuit will flush the truth out.

[Robster]

Friends of mine just text me to say they are starting on Talksport next week.

[jdckelly]

yup

http://www.talksport.co.uk/sports-news/football/premier-league/5123/6/keys-and-gray-sign-talksport

[Ketsbaia]

Might have a listen - even if it is TalkSport. I have a lot of time for Keys & Gray.

[ponsaelius]

That's more their level.