Anyone else feel that Avram Grant is the victim of a gross invasion of his privacy with Fleet Street's finest spending thousands to reveal that he enjoyed a "rub 'n tug" at a massage parlour?
The way I see it, Avram Grant is one of the lowest profile people in football, all he does is go out and coach his team, do the post-match media and that's it - you never hear or see him outside of that.
He doesn't do ads, voice-overs, puff pieces in the press - nothing - he is just a middle of the road bloke who happens to be a football coach rather than, say, a bank manager or an insurance firm boss.
How on earth can it be in the public interest for this story to be published? Is Avran Grant really a public figure because he coaches a football team? I don't think so.
The only way that you could justify printing a story about his private life would be if it was in conflict with his footballing responsibilities (as in the John Terry case) and there is no way that that applies here.
No, I think this is way, way out of line, people are entitled for their private lives to be respected if they lead the sort of 'public' life that Avram Grant or, say, Paul Scholes or Stuart Pearce do in that they have a public job but do not seek to trade on their name and reputation off the pitch - a la Beckham and Tiger Woods.
0
Comments
Grant's not set himself up to be a family man and generally keeps himself to himself, so this does feel a little OTT. However, if he has visited a brothel, it's against the law (brothels remain illegal under the Sexual Offences Act 2003) and if the women in there are there against their will, then that's a far bigger black mark. If the place was raided and Grant was caught, and hauled up in court, it'd be exposed anyway.
In addition, Terry and his advisers are extremely aggressive in hawking his "brand" to the corporate world as a "brand ambassador" and portraying him as a "family man".
Indeed, only last month Terry was giving paid interviews in Hello telling everyone about his wonderful home life!!!
All Avram ever does is take training, explain away the latest loss at the weekend to the press and then he leaves the word alone - big, big difference.
The thought occurs that Terry's hangers on tipped the press off to try and deflect attention from their man.
Speculation on my part obviously.
True, Inspector, they are illegal, but then again so is cannabis and under-18's drinking in boozers and they are both rampant!!!
For the record, I have never visited such an establishment, but if that's the worst thing a bloke ever does in his life then he won't have led too bad of a life.
Of course, some brothels do employ women in terrible conditions and under dubious circumstances - and they should be shut down, but its the oldest business in the world and ain't ever going to go away.
Massage parlour which has a good chance of being exactly what it says on the door
Totally and utterly different to Terry
Nonsense journalism at its scummiest.
If Grant had visited somewhere where only a single woman worked, he wouldn't have broken the law. I imagine he wouldn't have been running into a Sun hack, either.
"AVRAM Grant's wife last night vowed to stand by her husband despite his visit to a vice den - saying: "He deserves a massage."
Eccentric Israeli actress Tzofit Grant, who once drank her own urine on live TV, said she encouraged him to have rub-downs to relieve stress.
She added: "He works so hard, I think he deserves a massage once a day, and from two women, not one."
Mum-of-two Tzofit, 46, who has been wed to Grant for 16 years, claimed the place where he was snapped was not a brothel. Speaking from her home in a plush district of Tel Aviv yesterday, she said: "It's not a brothel but a massage parlour.
"Considering the pressure that Avram is under at Portsmouth, I'm angry with him for not going every day for a massage. Avram loves a massage.
"He enjoys an Australian massage, a Japanese massage and a Thai massage. I'm looking forward to coming to England to visit and having a massage there with him".
She added: "So far as I am concerned he can go and have a massage whenever he wants. It's his business what he does with his body, and he certainly has not damaged our marriage.He doesn't have to tell me everything. He doesn't tell me he went to the store to buy milk. I told Avram immediately after he told me about it that you don't have to account to anybody about what you do with your body.
"Who goes to a brothel in the middle of the day wearing Portsmouth kit when he knows he is a recognisable personality?
"We are talking about a massage parlour where they give massages." Tzofit added that she could not understand "what all the fuss is about in Britain" because her husband is not a publicly elected figure.
She added: "I don't know why what he did is being compared to what John Terry did. "There is no comparison, although John Terry's private life is also not the business of the media. "We should also make a distinction between a famous person and an elected person."He doesn't owe anybody explanations about what he does. "A man goes in the middle of the day for a massage and suddenly they make it into a brothel. It makes me laugh."
Avram Grant got a massage in a Massage Parlour - that is not illegal, its only illegal if you ask for and receive extras - and there is no suggestion that he did.
If you can't see the oceanic scales of difference between John Terry and Avram Grant then you are seeing things from a unique perspective.
Only the press are calling it a vice den
the tabloids and idiots like max clifford really need to grow up.
So why didn't you make more of the alleged altercation between Moutouakil and Arter?
Or Darren Ambrose?
you missed an opportunity there - you could be writing for the Daily Star if you'd had a spot more foresight :-)
Because a training ground sliding tackle from behind by one Championship reserve on another doesn't capture the interest as much as a Premiership manager sliding his tackle the behind of a ho. (ho).
And the Dambrose "stuff" probably doesn't get reported because it's not true.
:-)
I'd imagine so, and it's probably accompanied by vile pissy lager.
The legal definition of "public interest" does not refer to that which the public may be interested but rather to an issue whose publication would benefit the public at large.
Otherwise God knows what they'd be printing!
Given that definition I'd have to question whether most content in most publications is of any benefit.
Exactly
But forgotten tomorrow.
Have they got photos of a sex act being performed ?
Who really cares if an old, ugly man whos probably bored and lonely in a strange town pays to get his rocks off.
It would appear not.