Unfortunately we are being conditioned to having the characters and good presenters taken away from us in favour of the endless desire to satisfy the inclusion quotas.
I think it’s an argument that’s been done to death and there some merits to it as well but the bottom line is the best person (Jules) should get the job but the high chances are he won’t and instead and a black , gender fluid person , disabled with ginger hair will get the gig
Inclusivity and having good quality presenters aren’t mutually exclusive concepts. Straight white males don’t have a monopoly on being good football pundits.
Unfortunately we are being conditioned to having the characters and good presenters taken away from us in favour of the endless desire to satisfy the inclusion quotas.
I think it’s an argument that’s been done to death and there some merits to it as well but the bottom line is the best person (Jules) should get the job but the high chances are he won’t and instead and a black , gender fluid person , disabled with ginger hair will get the gig
Inclusivity and having good quality presenters aren’t mutually exclusive concepts. Straight white males don’t have a monopoly on being good football pundits.
No and if you read my second paragraph, I say it should be given to the best person for job, which could be anyone , however increasingly it isn’t
Unfortunately we are being conditioned to having the characters and good presenters taken away from us in favour of the endless desire to satisfy the inclusion quotas.
I think it’s an argument that’s been done to death and there some merits to it as well but the bottom line is the best person (Jules) should get the job but the high chances are he won’t and instead and a black , gender fluid person , disabled with ginger hair will get the gig
Inclusivity and having good quality presenters aren’t mutually exclusive concepts. Straight white males don’t have a monopoly on being good football pundits.
Paul Merson is proof of that!
Although I guess he probably ticks other boxes now.
Unfortunately we are being conditioned to having the characters and good presenters taken away from us in favour of the endless desire to satisfy the inclusion quotas.
I think it’s an argument that’s been done to death and there some merits to it as well but the bottom line is the best person (Jules) should get the job but the high chances are he won’t and instead and a black , gender fluid person , disabled with ginger hair will get the gig
Inclusivity and having good quality presenters aren’t mutually exclusive concepts. Straight white males don’t have a monopoly on being good football pundits.
Paul Merson is proof of that!
Although I guess he probably ticks other boxes now.
I still watch if I'm at home. Midweek is good as they show all the goals. Good way to follow the scores and Stelling's obscure references are brilliant.
The way people go on about Le Tiss, Nicholas, Thompson you'd think they always been on but there were plenty before them. George Best, Frank McClintock, Rodney Marsh for three.
Things change, people retire or are let go, Valarie Singleton doesn't present Blue Peter anymore and Sylvester McCoy isn't, thankfully, Dr Who.
Hope I die before I get old.
The difference is that the people you have named weren’t binned in order to tick a few boxes and be replaced by inadequate people.
Stelling remarked afterwards that he wasn’t happy with what happened.
And Best, Frank & Marsh we’re binned for Le Tiss, Champagne Charlie & Thompson. As Henners says, you got to move with the times.
I watch it, whilst my Bruv, Stubbers & Browny are in one ear. Out of all of them, the one I will happily hope to never see again is Alan McAnally (don’t know if I’ve spelt it right, don’t care). He is a complete knob.
I’m pretty sure they weren’t binned en masse. Marsh was sacked for inappropriate remarks and Best became ill. Their replacements, unlike the current lot, could string a sentence together as well as having a bit of banter. As could others in the past - Walsh, Mullery for example.
If moving with the times mean sacking a group of people for no reason when they’re doing a good job and replacing them with dross, it doesn’t make it a good move.
Were they doing a good job though? Le Tiss was starting to lose the plot (his Twitter is testament to that) & Thompson was just another moaning old man. I only found Champagne Charlie to be actually interesting but they end of it.
Sky Sports have signed up to the inclusivity thing. They appear to be fully on board it. I have zero problem with that tbh.
I wouldn’t mind Michelle Owen getting the gig, or taking over Jules gig so Jules can step into Jeff's shoes. Probably be better for her as she has a young family.
Unfortunately we are being conditioned to having the characters and good presenters taken away from us in favour of the endless desire to satisfy the inclusion quotas.
I think it’s an argument that’s been done to death and there some merits to it as well but the bottom line is the best person (Jules) should get the job but the high chances are he won’t and instead and a black , gender fluid person , disabled with ginger hair will get the gig
Inclusivity and having good quality presenters aren’t mutually exclusive concepts. Straight white males don’t have a monopoly on being good football pundits.
No and if you read my second paragraph, I say it should be given to the best person for job, which could be anyone , however increasingly it isn’t
What if the best person for the job is black, gender fluid, disabled with ginger hair?
Unfortunately we are being conditioned to having the characters and good presenters taken away from us in favour of the endless desire to satisfy the inclusion quotas.
I think it’s an argument that’s been done to death and there some merits to it as well but the bottom line is the best person (Jules) should get the job but the high chances are he won’t and instead and a black , gender fluid person , disabled with ginger hair will get the gig
Inclusivity and having good quality presenters aren’t mutually exclusive concepts. Straight white males don’t have a monopoly on being good football pundits.
No and if you read my second paragraph, I say it should be given to the best person for job, which could be anyone , however increasingly it isn’t
What if the best person for the job is black, gender fluid, disabled with ginger hair?
Then fine , however I was using that example to emphasise my point. I get it’s seen as a bit of a bigoted view but I really do think with all of this we creating a society where people are being forced into accepting cultural changes instead of letting things evolve naturally which in my humble opinion will be more harmful in the long run
Unfortunately we are being conditioned to having the characters and good presenters taken away from us in favour of the endless desire to satisfy the inclusion quotas.
I think it’s an argument that’s been done to death and there some merits to it as well but the bottom line is the best person (Jules) should get the job but the high chances are he won’t and instead and a black , gender fluid person , disabled with ginger hair will get the gig
Inclusivity and having good quality presenters aren’t mutually exclusive concepts. Straight white males don’t have a monopoly on being good football pundits.
No and if you read my second paragraph, I say it should be given to the best person for job, which could be anyone , however increasingly it isn’t
What if the best person for the job is black, gender fluid, disabled with ginger hair?
Then fine , however I was using that example to emphasise my point. I get it’s seen as a bit of a bigoted view but I really do think with all of this we creating a society where people are being forced into accepting cultural changes instead of letting things evolve naturally which in my humble opinion will be more harmful in the long run
I’m willing to take that chance rather than allow inclusivity to “evolve naturally”.
Unfortunately we are being conditioned to having the characters and good presenters taken away from us in favour of the endless desire to satisfy the inclusion quotas.
I think it’s an argument that’s been done to death and there some merits to it as well but the bottom line is the best person (Jules) should get the job but the high chances are he won’t and instead and a black , gender fluid person , disabled with ginger hair will get the gig
Inclusivity and having good quality presenters aren’t mutually exclusive concepts. Straight white males don’t have a monopoly on being good football pundits.
No and if you read my second paragraph, I say it should be given to the best person for job, which could be anyone , however increasingly it isn’t
What if the best person for the job is black, gender fluid, disabled with ginger hair?
Then fine , however I was using that example to emphasise my point. I get it’s seen as a bit of a bigoted view but I really do think with all of this we creating a society where people are being forced into accepting cultural changes instead of letting things evolve naturally which in my humble opinion will be more harmful in the long run
But things DON'T evolve naturally, that's the problem. Segregation in America, Apartheid in South Africa - extreme examples yes but these things only ended because people made it happen.
Speaking as someone with a health condition (Autistic Spectrum Disorder) I can tell you that people wouldn't ever "naturally evolve" to stop using insulting terms and looking down on people - a lot of hard work has made it improve but there is a lot more hard work and a lot more improvement to come. And that applies equally to other matters of gender, race, sexuality etc too.
Unfortunately we are being conditioned to having the characters and good presenters taken away from us in favour of the endless desire to satisfy the inclusion quotas.
I think it’s an argument that’s been done to death and there some merits to it as well but the bottom line is the best person (Jules) should get the job but the high chances are he won’t and instead and a black , gender fluid person , disabled with ginger hair will get the gig
Bottom line speaks loudest.
Sky, and whoever else you wanna throw in there, are not part of some conspiracy to rid of all white geezas presenting, nor are they on a moral crusade (they might pretend they are).
This is them adapting to changing market demands, hence my opening sentence. So whether you like it or not, there is a market for BAME/women presenters, otherwise they wouldn’t do it, this is basic business studies. They won’t damage their own investors monetary demands to look progressive or “right on”.
I still watch if I'm at home. Midweek is good as they show all the goals. Good way to follow the scores and Stelling's obscure references are brilliant.
The way people go on about Le Tiss, Nicholas, Thompson you'd think they always been on but there were plenty before them. George Best, Frank McClintock, Rodney Marsh for three.
Things change, people retire or are let go, Valarie Singleton doesn't present Blue Peter anymore and Sylvester McCoy isn't, thankfully, Dr Who.
Hope I die before I get old.
The difference is that the people you have named weren’t binned in order to tick a few boxes and be replaced by inadequate people.
Stelling remarked afterwards that he wasn’t happy with what happened.
And Best, Frank & Marsh we’re binned for Le Tiss, Champagne Charlie & Thompson. As Henners says, you got to move with the times.
I watch it, whilst my Bruv, Stubbers & Browny are in one ear. Out of all of them, the one I will happily hope to never see again is Alan McAnally (don’t know if I’ve spelt it right, don’t care). He is a complete knob.
I’m pretty sure they weren’t binned en masse. Marsh was sacked for inappropriate remarks and Best became ill. Their replacements, unlike the current lot, could string a sentence together as well as having a bit of banter. As could others in the past - Walsh, Mullery for example.
If moving with the times mean sacking a group of people for no reason when they’re doing a good job and replacing them with dross, it doesn’t make it a good move.
Were they doing a good job though? Le Tiss was starting to lose the plot (his Twitter is testament to that) & Thompson was just another moaning old man. I only found Champagne Charlie to be actually interesting but they end of it.
Sky Sports have signed up to the inclusivity thing. They appear to be fully on board it. I have zero problem with that tbh.
I wouldn’t mind Michelle Owen getting the gig, or taking over Jules gig so Jules can step into Jeff's shoes. Probably be better for her as she has a young family.
This shows how far we still have to come. When did anyone ever mentioned about a man's family/young children to look after?
Unfortunately we are being conditioned to having the characters and good presenters taken away from us in favour of the endless desire to satisfy the inclusion quotas.
I think it’s an argument that’s been done to death and there some merits to it as well but the bottom line is the best person (Jules) should get the job but the high chances are he won’t and instead and a black , gender fluid person , disabled with ginger hair will get the gig
Inclusivity and having good quality presenters aren’t mutually exclusive concepts. Straight white males don’t have a monopoly on being good football pundits.
No and if you read my second paragraph, I say it should be given to the best person for job, which could be anyone , however increasingly it isn’t
What if the best person for the job is black, gender fluid, disabled with ginger hair?
Then fine , however I was using that example to emphasise my point. I get it’s seen as a bit of a bigoted view but I really do think with all of this we creating a society where people are being forced into accepting cultural changes instead of letting things evolve naturally which in my humble opinion will be more harmful in the long run
Granted Clinton Morrison isn’t the best of pundits but this pretending not to understand his accent is all a bit snowflakey to me, I find Carraghers tougher to understand if anything.
Granted Clinton Morrison isn’t the best of pundits but this pretending not to understand his accent is all a bit snowflakey to me, I find Carraghers tougher to understand if anything.
Yeah I can understand what Clinton Morrison is saying perfectly well. Unfortunately.
Him and Dawson are stand out awful and the rest not much better. Not sure who can possibly replace Jeff Stelling. The midweek guy is functional but always found him pretty dull
I still watch if I'm at home. Midweek is good as they show all the goals. Good way to follow the scores and Stelling's obscure references are brilliant.
The way people go on about Le Tiss, Nicholas, Thompson you'd think they always been on but there were plenty before them. George Best, Frank McClintock, Rodney Marsh for three.
Things change, people retire or are let go, Valarie Singleton doesn't present Blue Peter anymore and Sylvester McCoy isn't, thankfully, Dr Who.
Hope I die before I get old.
The difference is that the people you have named weren’t binned in order to tick a few boxes and be replaced by inadequate people.
Stelling remarked afterwards that he wasn’t happy with what happened.
Were they binned to "tick a few boxes" or is that another victim myth?
"oh dear, us poor oppressed white men don't have single every job so anyone who isn't us only gets the job because of do-gooders/PC/Woke/cultural marxism/whatever the word is this week"
Presenters change all the time, people retire or move jobs all the time. It isn't always a conspiracy, it's just business.
Not saying that at all. But if you think Clinton Morrison improves the show and got the gig on merit...
Comments
No and if you read my second paragraph, I say it should be given to the best person for job, which could be anyone , however increasingly it isn’t
Although I guess he probably ticks other boxes now.
Le Tiss was starting to lose the plot (his Twitter is testament to that) & Thompson was just another moaning old man. I only found Champagne Charlie to be actually interesting but they end of it.
Sky Sports have signed up to the inclusivity thing. They appear to be fully on board it.
I have zero problem with that tbh.
I wouldn’t mind Michelle Owen getting the gig, or taking over Jules gig so Jules can step into Jeff's shoes. Probably be better for her as she has a young family.
She was Ace
It's threads like this, that remind me, that it's white older straight men, who are the biggest snowflakes of them all
Speaking as someone with a health condition (Autistic Spectrum Disorder) I can tell you that people wouldn't ever "naturally evolve" to stop using insulting terms and looking down on people - a lot of hard work has made it improve but there is a lot more hard work and a lot more improvement to come. And that applies equally to other matters of gender, race, sexuality etc too.
Sky, and whoever else you wanna throw in there, are not part of some conspiracy to rid of all white geezas presenting, nor are they on a moral crusade (they might pretend they are).
Him and Dawson are stand out awful and the rest not much better. Not sure who can possibly replace Jeff Stelling. The midweek guy is functional but always found him pretty dull
It was a change nobody asked for.
Do feel like she's on absolutely everything at the moment. Not a complaint btw, she's a sort.
Look like the bloody wurzels!
It does nobody any good. Shame on you.