Richard Keys and Andy Gray

[BR2]

I was at a work do last night and there were a couple of sports journos there who had some interesting insights into this whole affair.

The basic summary was Gray, Key and Jeff Shreves, are a bunch of arrogant c@nts...especially when all three of them were together. They have made a number of enemies over the years at Sky, and the senior guys at Sky had already considered a longer term plan to replace them.

One of the enemies they made was Barney Francis, who became MD of Sky Sports not long ago. He did a great job in cricket and as a result got the top job despite very limited football experience. Gray, Keys & Shreves were very dismissive of him, and apparently blatantly rude to him when he first got the job and wanted to learn more about football. People like that don't forget, so it''s not surprise that they've found support very hard to come by.

It also explains why there appears to have been a systematic release of these clips of Keys & Gray. People have kept these things on file for a long time, and have clearly been given the authority to release them now.

Apparently Francis was the one who brought in Ben Shepherd, so don't be surprised if you see him in Richard Keys chair soon. Also expect to see Gray & Keys pairing up on Talksport, that last bastion of the sexist male...

Easy targets now of course, but FWIW a couple of little bits - Sam Mattaface (?) ex Sky now TalkSport commentator, presumably with no particular axe to grind, said he always found Gray perfectly okay but that he became very aware that he was not particularly popular with his colleagues.

Keys used to live in my village and, although I never met the bloke, he was not well-liked. Up his own-arse would be a fair summary of the comments made about him.

Re-your last line.
Isn't that the case with most so-called celebrities?
We live in times where one of the biggest sins is envy and people tend to want to find something bad about people rather than good.
I suspect that not everybody at Sky envied Keys and Gray but sure enough some creep or creeps did and contributed to them losing their jobs.
I hope today they feel very proud of themselves for saving the rest of us from.........er,seeing them on TV and IIRC never having made a sexist comment live during the whole of the past 20 years.
My how grateful we should be to these informers as our lives will now be enriched because Gary Neville is being lined up.

[BR2]

Although I have no sympathy for these two (and this is probably more an AE question than General Football) at what point do your own thoughts and views become illegal as such.

I always thought that we basically had freedom of speach and thought as long as those views weren't used to prejudice another person opportunities or safety etc. As out dated and perhaps reprehensible their views are have Keys and Gray done anything illegal in moaning that a woman won't know the offside law (they obviously KNOW that she does so it isn't a serious comment even if they weren't rolling around in fits as they made the comments) or making embarssaing and suggestive comments about Redknapp and some random woman?

IMHO there is now no such thing as freedom of speech.
We now have a conditional and very limited version of freedom of speech.

[brendywendy]

The fcuking media.

I'm indifferent to Gray as an individual, but he has first lost his job of 20 years for some 'laddish' off-air comments, and now he faces losing another job, for the heinous crime of being a slightly mysoginistic 55 year old man.

Richard Keys, resigns from his job.

Then you have the case of Coulson (not pre-judging findings from the more recent evidence found) - not guilty of anything, but has been forced out of two jobs.

The media are in a big way responsible, it's disgusting.

except there are many industries, like the media, where youd lose your job for making those laddish comments in the work place, in hearing of management.
and more so the higher up you were i guess.

gray and keys are responsible.
to say other wise is well gay.

[cmonurz]

They are ultimately responsible for their actions, the media are responsible for their sacking.

[brendywendy]

What views are you on about your holiness?
My view is that people who work together very quickly establish a rapport and know the boundaries,it's called getting on with people- try to understand how people get on in relationships and you might get a more pragmatic sense of what goes on in the world rather than what should go on in the world,especially that modern world that you pontificate about.
You also do seem too easily shocked as demonstrated by overuse of the emoticom.

Stop acting like a buffoon.

What actually went on in the world last weekend was that 2 sexist idiots called into question a young lady's ability to do a job that is normally done by men. They got caught. Loyalty? Do me a favour. Their employers cannot afford to have their image tarnished by continuing to employ people with such views when they are known to the world at large. And nor should they. The fact they would have undoubtedly known of their views and attitudes previously and chosen not to do anything about it is shame on them of course.

As for workplace relationships - almost entirely irrelevant as we don't know how Jackie Chapman (?) viewed Andy Gray's pathetic little gag but it is quite likely she would have been disgusted by it. For a 55 year old bloke of pretty considerable power to pull that one on a 25 year old woman somewhere near the bottom of her profession is rank. Whether she truly thought nothing of it, can you not see that that, when added to his views on women officials in football paint a picture of an out of date, unacceptably ignorant bloke totally unsuited to being a figurehead of an organisation like SkySports?

No, I very much doubt you can, you old dinosaur.

Time for me to move on.

Obviously I take great offence by the ageist comment of "old".
Although technically correct (as could be the case of referring to a girl as being a bit of a looker)I really do not take offence and will not be demanding of Graham that you be removed from this board immediately.
I will also take note if anybody makes any ophthalmicist comments to me such as "open your eyes" as I have a condition where I am going blind in my left eye.
Fortunately I am not black,brown,ginger,bald,Roman Catholic,Jewish,Muslim,otherwise disabled or an obvious sex object so my other "ists" are rather limited.

work place/not in work place
public figure / not public figure
joking/not joking
know someone well/dont know someone well

[brendywendy]

Although I have no sympathy for these two (and this is probably more an AE question than General Football) at what point do your own thoughts and views become illegal as such.

I always thought that we basically had freedom of speach and thought as long as those views weren't used to prejudice another person opportunities or safety etc. As out dated and perhaps reprehensible their views are have Keys and Gray done anything illegal in moaning that a woman won't know the offside law (they obviously KNOW that she does so it isn't a serious comment even if they weren't rolling around in fits as they made the comments) or making embarssaing and suggestive comments about Redknapp and some random woman?

IMHO there is now no such thing as freedom of speech.
We now have a conditional and very limited version of freedom of speech.

try shouting fire in a cinema
or bomb on a plane
or N*gg*r in the bronx

and see where your freedom of speech would have got you, twenty years ago/ or today

and imo freedom of speech doesnt, and has never, given you the right to upset or offend other people without some consequences

[brendywendy]

They are ultimately responsible for their actions, the media are responsible for their sacking.

they were sacked for their actions. ergo......

[cmonurz]

They are ultimately responsible for their actions, the media are responsible for their sacking.

they were sacked for their actions. ergo......

They were sacked because of the impact of the media investigation into their behaviour. I've personally no doubt that had this stayed internal, they wouldn't even have been suspended for a game, never mind lost their jobs.

[Red]

IMHO there is now no such thing as freedom of speech.
We now have a conditional and very limited version of freedom of speech.

try shouting fire in a cinema
or bomb on a plane
or N*gg*r in the bronx

and see where your freedom of speech would have got you, twenty years ago/ or today

and imo freedom of speech doesnt, and has never, given you the right to upset or offend other people without some consequences

Spot on again brendy. With freedom comes responsibility.

Now where's my t-shirt?

[Schards#2]

They are ultimately responsible for their actions, the media are responsible for their sacking.

they were sacked for their actions. ergo......

They were sacked because of the impact of the media investigation into their behaviour. I've personally no doubt that had this stayed internal, they wouldn't even have been suspended for a game, never mind lost their jobs.

I can't believe that what Gray has done would consitute gross misconduct, therefore, to be fairly dismissed, he should have verbal warning, written warning and final warning as well as invitation to meetings to discuss his conduct etc, none of which has happened.

May end up being expensive for Sky.

[Red]

You've no more idea than I have what they've already got on him schards, or what has been said been closed doors.

So I'll file your post as wild speculation.

[cmonurz]

So I'll file your post as wild speculation.

[Hoop Blah]

Has anyone suggested their comments were illegal, or is it just an open question?

Have they suggested it? Not as such no, although I'd say some of the reactions from the media (and perhaps on here) would give that impression.

It was more an open question, but at the same time sacking someone for something that's perfectly legal seems a little harsh.

[brendywendy]

They are ultimately responsible for their actions, the media are responsible for their sacking.

they were sacked for their actions. ergo......

They were sacked because of the impact of the media investigation into their behaviour. I've personally no doubt that had this stayed internal, they wouldn't even have been suspended for a game, never mind lost their jobs.

your outrage does you credit young man.perhaps you should make a placard

[BR2]

Although I have no sympathy for these two (and this is probably more an AE question than General Football) at what point do your own thoughts and views become illegal as such.

I always thought that we basically had freedom of speach and thought as long as those views weren't used to prejudice another person opportunities or safety etc. As out dated and perhaps reprehensible their views are have Keys and Gray done anything illegal in moaning that a woman won't know the offside law (they obviously KNOW that she does so it isn't a serious comment even if they weren't rolling around in fits as they made the comments) or making embarssaing and suggestive comments about Redknapp and some random woman?

IMHO there is now no such thing as freedom of speech.
We now have a conditional and very limited version of freedom of speech.

try shouting fire in a cinema
or bomb on a plane
or N*gg*r in the bronx

and see where your freedom of speech would have got you, twenty years ago/ or today

and imo freedom of speech doesnt, and has never, given you the right to upset or offend other people without some consequences

There you go again spouting off in a holier than thou way without reading properly what has been written.
My point was that there is no absolute freedom of speech (in response to Hoop Blah).
So stop arguing with yourself-I doubt if anybody disagrees with you.
Incidentally you say "your freedom of speech"-does that mean that you don't believe in any freedom of speech?
If not then why do you live here rather than say in North Korea for example?

[Red]

Has anyone suggested their comments were illegal, or is it just an open question?

Have they suggested it? Not as such no, although I'd say some of the reactions from the media (and perhaps on here) would give that impression.

It was more an open question, but at the same time sacking someone for something that's perfectly legal seems a little harsh.

So to get sacked you have to break the law?

Calling my boss a pcunt isn't illegal but I doubt it'd do my career much good.

Don't think legality has anything to do with this.

[soggy biscuit]

Rights without responsibilities?

[Red]

If not then why do you live here rather than say in North Korea for example?

Have to admire your posts BR2 - there's never any shades of grey, no half way houses.

To answer the above though - I imagine trying to get a visa would be a nightmare

[Red]

Rights without responsibilities?

What do you mean?

[soggy biscuit]

Rights without responsibilities?

What do you mean?

If you are given freedom of speech then you also take on board the responsibility of using it in an appropriate manner