«13

Comments

  • It's not just this indecent, it's the whole history of incidents that have made Sky decide it's time for them and Gray to part company.

    Read the news
  • most certainly when you also take into consideration everything else the idiot stated
  • Of course, the fact that he's suing the Murdoch-owned News of the World is purely coincidental.

    Not that I have any sympathy for what he did, but...
  • My he is so funny " tuck this in hey tuck this in"  what a laugh Yawnimage

    The words respect lack of come to mind.

  • WilkieWilkie ✭✭✭

    He's an arsehole. 

    His actions have brought Sky some very negative publicity. 

    No wonder they want rid of him.

  • let's stir this up

    what we are seeing in that tube is one incident in isolation. what we don't know is what sort of long term relationship he has with that female. many people who know someone well will "have a laugh" or "take the piss" knowing that it's very likely that the other person will join in the banter. that's what we don't see or has been reported (afaik)

    it might have been an off the cuff, "humorous" thing between 2 parties that has happened many times before - this time it just happened to have got onto You Tube and based on his comments about the female ref, has prompted the sacking.

    and before anyone jumps at me - I don't condone what he said about the ref - it was bang out of order. but to be sacked now having had that tube brought to the attention of Sky does question their judgement in their action - have they really done a full investigation of the circumstances or is it a knee jerk reaction?

    people seem to be "convicting" Gray without full evidence - no wonder he is seeking legal advice on Sky's action.
  • WilkieWilkie ✭✭✭

    I agree, FB, that it's sometimes the case that both parties are happy with the banter, and it's hard to know how the other party in this case may feel about it (although she doesn't appear to be joining in).

    I've been in situations where there is banter between people who've worked together for a long time, then the new man  tries to join in and it doesn't feel right to the women.

    But how can you tell the new boy "you can't talk to the women like that" when others do? Tell him he's got to earn the right? 

    Similarly, if a new woman joins she might find the comments offensive whereas the women who've been there a while don't.  She'll be judged as a spoilsport, or stuck up, or a lesbian (believe me on that last one!)

    It's safest (although dullest) if people just don't have those kinds of conversations at work.

  • I agree  with your sentiment FB but the body language of the woman suggests to me that she's not overly impressed.  She manages to flash a quick smile before turning her body away and conducting her own conversation.  She doesn't really engage with the banter.  Richard Keys laughs along with him for longer.

    I think such behaviour is very much out of date and I'm a bit surprised.  

  • The stuff they said about the lineswoman off camera was silly, I don't agree with it, but not worth more than a warning imo.    

    Asking to tuck a microphone pack down the front of your trousers - well it's like FB says - depends on the relationship you have with the woman you are asking.    If you both generally joke about like that then it's nothing - if it's one sided sexism but a fairly isolated incident then no  maybe not a sacking but not something that should be ignored.    If it's part of his general behaviour towards female staff yes he should be sacked but if it is part of a pattern of behaviour he should have been picked up on it and warned first so I have got a bit of sympathy for him.

    The timing of it though looks more like Sky are concerned with the bad publicity than protecting their staff.  

  • RunningInPleasePass wrote (see)
    It's not just this indecent, it's the whole history of incidents that have made Sky decide it's time for them and Gray to part company. Read the news
    Yes,I have read the news & also the statement made by Sky.

    http://www.skysports.com/story/0,19528,12040_6701186,00.html

    I have read the news & statement above from sky which is is quite clear.

  • Yesterdays news announcement from Sky stated that this disciplinary action and ultimate dismissal of Gray, was down to his previous employment behaviour and warnings not being heeded.

    He was in breech of his previous disciplinary warnings and/or final warnings.

    I think they have been removed as I can't track them due to this pending appeal.

  • WilkieWilkie ✭✭✭

    Who knows - maybe there have been complaints from other staff before, he has been warned, and this is the final straw?

    If it ends up in court or employment tribunal we'll find out, I guess.  But I doubt it will - there'll be settlement of some kind.

  • sure Mouse - her body language doesn't look good - but she may have been concentrating on something else so isn't reacting as she would as usual. we don't know the facts or relationships.

    too many conclusions being drawn without evidence or knowledge.
  • News reports put him as being on 1.7m a year.  Thats a lot of sky subscriptions just to pay him.
  • PhilPubPhilPub ✭✭✭

    Obviously we don't know the full facts but from the way news has broke, including the 'leak' of this clip on youtube, it does appear that Sky are looking after their own interests in the face of bad PR, rather than simply sacking someone who didn't heed existing warnings. 

    Still doesn't change the fact that he's an arsehole.

  • Anything off-air should be judged by normal office standards. People of both genders are often subject to off-colour comments by the office wag. If it's offensive, it should be reported and subject to the two verbal, one written warning rule. It seems odd to add this to existing evidence if the sound engineer in question didn't report him.

    Edit: On the other hand I for one won't miss the idiotic bigot!

  • RunningInPleasePass wrote (see)
    Yesterdays news announcement from Sky stated that this disciplinary action and ultimate dismissal of Gray, was down to his previous employment behaviour and warnings not being heeded. He was in breech of his previous disciplinary warnings and/or final warnings. I think they have been removed as I can't track them due to this pending appeal.


    When the news broke yesterday afternoon it was being reported very clearly that it was for another incident..

    Personally I think the remarks made about the lino are far more offensive,than the incident with Charlotte Jackson which was obviously a bit of light hearted banter between two work colleagues.

    You wonder if Sky just wanted rid & needed an excuse??

  • SlugstaSlugsta ✭✭✭
    Cheerful Dave wrote (see)
    Of course, the fact that he's suing the Murdoch-owned News of the World is purely coincidental. Not that I have any sympathy for what he did, but...
    this
  • skottyskotty ✭✭✭
    BRT wrote (see)

    You wonder if Sky just wanted rid & needed an excuse??

    looks like it to me and I am sure it is all connected with him suing NOTW.

    as for his behaviour I doubt if it is a recent development, it has probably been his "banter" for 20 years with the company and they simply kept rewarding him with new contracts.

    but then he gets on the wrong side of Murdoch and suddenly it seems every off-air discussion is being recorded.

    i think it is a set-up and they were out to get him.  

  • Wilkie wrote (see)

    He's an arsehole. 

    His actions have brought Sky some very negative publicity. 

    No wonder they want rid of him.


    +1.

    He's an arsehole generally. A biased, boring, irritating to listen to arsehole. I don't care why they got rid of him. I'm just glad I don't have to listen to him any more.

  • JWrunJWrun ✭✭✭

    Agree with lots of comments, namely we don't know the relationship, we can't see the full incident in this clip, it is merely a snapshot and in light of what he's just said re the lineswoman, a lot of biased opinions out there.

    IMO even if my male friends said something like that to me i would not take offence but i would certainly fire some quick response back, i've grown up surrounded by sportsmen and am well aware of the banter that they have with each other and with women, sometimes its funny but sexist comments tend to grate, i'm not one for getting serious and flouncing out if someone were to say something like that to me, btu my mates know not to take the piss like that. Just because its common doesn't mean it should be excepted but everyone has their own limits.

    I had the discussion with my OH last night and he rightly pointed out that that kinda of view (re the lino) about her not knowing the offside rule, is one that many men think and say out loud but someone in the public eye should be more careful about where they are spouting their opinions. 

    Personally I think AG was exceptionally biased and a shite presenter so i'll not miss him!!

  • Since elements of the offside rule are now down to "interpretation" I don't know ANYONE who can claim to fully understand the offside rule - regardless of what they have between their legs.

    What is "interfering with play"? Who was it who said "were they on the pitch? Yes? Then they're interfering with play"!!image

  • If you ever attend one of their speaking occasions they sprout racist, homophobic, sectarian and sexiest crap (should I add allegedly after that to cover myself?).

  • WilkieWilkie ✭✭✭
    From another thread....

    popsider wrote (see)

    Gray and Keys only got the job in the first place because the Sky controller misunderstood when Murdoch told him nothing would  pull in the viewers like a pair of tits.  
    Jay Carter 2 wrote (see)

    If you ever attend one of their speaking occasions they sprout racist, homophobic, sectarian and sexiest crap (should I add allegedly after that to cover myself?).

    Sexiest crap?  Can crap be sexy??  image
  • Some people have very weird tastes Wilkie....image
  • not necessary JC2

    Ag is from an era that doesn't tolerate women in football. A small minded individual who thinks it's funny in this day and age to belittle women who are qualified to do a mans job in their sport.

    I honestly doubt he will be missed by anyone except those who can relate to his outdated prattle.
  • and next is this a sackable offense?


    Answers on a postcard to Sky sports.
  • WilkieWilkie ✭✭✭
    I couldn't actually hear what they were saying.
  • I thought that was just me! LOL!

Sign In or Register to comment.