SIGN UP

Is It Now A Sacking Offence To Voice A Legitimate Question??

Avatar Image
anotheoldgit | 09:40 Sun 07th Apr 2019 | News
88 Answers
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/sportsnews/article-6894517/Gordon-Strachan-faces-axe-Sky-fury-grows-sex-offender-comments.html

Referring to convicted sex offender Adam Johnson possible return to top class football, Sky Sport's Gordon Strachan, asked this.

/// 'If he goes on to the pitch and people start calling him names, have we got to do the same as it is to the racist situation? Is it all right to call him names now after doing his three years - have we got to allow that to happen?' ///

Answers

41 to 60 of 88rss feed

First Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next Last

Avatar Image
I may be proven wrong but the chances of AJ making a comeback to 'top class' football are extremely small. Nothing to stop it being a topic for discussion on SKY but broaching the subject at all was inviting trouble and embarrassment all round. Strachan is a victim of circumstances.He gave a valid view which revolves around abuse in general towards a player(s)...
12:23 Sun 07th Apr 2019
If they shout PAEDOPHILEthat’s down to their own ignorance but they could shout sex offender
A remarkably thoughtless comment about something which is highly unlikely ever to happen - what football team will sign Johnson now, especially in the UK?

And Strachan is not the only football pundit whose career was cut short in a similar way - Rodney Marsh, Andy Gray, Richard Keys et al.
JimF,whether it is unlikely or not that AJ will ever play again at the highest level,this was the subject under discussion in the Sky studios.

Gordon Strachan was undoubtedly posing the question as to how,if AJ received abuse,should the situation be dealt with.

The abuse is the issue here and the example he has used, is the most topical,that of racist abuse to black footballers.

Should we put up with abuse conditionally?

Noooooo! It’s not what he asked. Your interpretation might be what he meant to ask. But what he actually asked was the ridiculous question of whether we should let it (allow) happen. We don’t allow racial abuse, so we shouldn’t allow any other kind.
We shouldn't allow any kind of abuse... but to correlate being called names as a sex offender or being called names for being black... is crass and dense, to say the least.
Zacs,he added this:-

//Is it all right to call him names now after doing his three years - have we got to allow that to happen?'//

I think it is perfectly clear what he was alluding to.
Private is hardly the point Jim. The issue is still a call to sack someone stating a fact. Much worse, surely, than facing the sack for asking a question or stating an opinion.
It’s still a dumb, unnecessary, deliberately and unnecessarily provocative question, ag.
I looked it up, out of interest, and didn't know this...
//Pedophilia is not a legal term, and having a sexual attraction to children is not illegal. In law enforcement circles, the term pedophile is sometimes used informally to refer to any person who commits one or more sexually-based crimes that relate to legally underage victims.//
So I guess he could actually be called that.
Pixie,whatever he may be classed as is irrelevant if it constitutes abuse.

I've seen many times on AB that someone 'has served their time'.

If AJ did play at the highest level (or any level),does it give fans the right to abuse?
I know, ag, I have already said that abuse is not acceptable. The comparison with black people is odious though. And I also believed "paedophilia" only concerned prepubescent children... but was obviously wrong. I was responding to some other posts too.
‘does it give fans the right to abuse?’

Do we really have to ask that question! Seriously!
“The comparison with black people is odious though”

Amen to that.

Anyone trying to compare to two...
It's revolting, sp. To answer the question... it's entertainment and anything which loses them money will get people sacked. The great thing about social media is that people can be far more famous and get better pay for it because they are so much more well-known.
The flipside, is that if you act like a pillock, people find that out too....
Pixie,I understand.

I'm surprised Sky Producers debated the subject.It always had the potential to travel into choppy waters.

Whether we agree with Strachan's analogy or not,Sky should have known better.

As has been mentioned,numerous pundits have been axed and many more will follow.Some of these problems are of Sky's own making.
Strachan gets sack for asking a valid question, yet Jamie Carragher is caught on film spitting at a young fan and is allowed to stay, is this double standards by SKY?
It was not a valid question because of the way he worded it. Maybe some people are just better off not being in the public eye.
//Maybe some people are just better off not being in the public eye.//

I saw Gordon Strachan score from a corner in 1981 for Aberdeen in the League Cup at Berwick.Virtually all the fans stood up to applaud his skill!

Oh well, that’s ok then.

41 to 60 of 88rss feed

First Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next Last

Do you know the answer?

Is It Now A Sacking Offence To Voice A Legitimate Question??

Answer Question >>

Related Questions

Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.