|
|
Post by gmdf on Nov 27, 2021 18:11:42 GMT
All this tells me is that Vaughan should have been sacked years ago (assuming he actually wrote what you say above). Maybe he should be forced to repay all the years of salary he was paid since coming out as a racist? You think someone wearing a black hat is racist, what the hell do you know. What a strange comment. Are you on drugs? You wrote: If Vaughan (or anyone else) said this they would be making racist comments. Perhaps it's the sort of thing you say? đ¤ In which case...đ |
|
|
|
Post by mrsdoyle on Nov 27, 2021 20:47:32 GMT
Vaughan was being interviewed by his erstwhile employer, he said what he said in the way he said it in the hope his cancellation might be cancelled one day. I doubt he is hard up but he has lost his livelihood and has a family to support, he probably enjoyed his job too and would like to do it again. Yeah I know. Wouldn't we all. He hasn't lost his livelihood he just can't work for the horrendously anti British BBC anymore. No bad thing, he can work for proper outlets where you're allowed to be a white British male. My point is, he's all over the place and he should have stood firm. You can't say I didn't but sorry anyway. I don't know what that Moeen question thing is about, how it came about, the context, or why anyone would say yes to it, or even ask it. Pretty bizarre. Actually sounds like a joke, but it's in his interview. Unless I miss understand it? Apparently BT sport are telling Fox that unless they drop Vaughan as a commentator they wonât use their commentary, which would presumably mean loss of income for Fox. Sponsors are also dropping him. His main crime is not minding Trump apparently, that makes him literally Hitler in the eyes of the left. |
|
|
|
Post by mrsdoyle on Nov 27, 2021 20:54:55 GMT
You think someone wearing a black hat is racist, what the hell do you know. What a strange comment. Are you on drugs? You wrote: If Vaughan (or anyone else) said this they would be making racist comments. Perhaps it's the sort of thing you say? đ¤ In which case...đ It was an unwise comment, though probably intended as a light hearted aside, and exaggerated, but London is one of the most ethnically diverse cities in the world, where over 300 languages are spoken according to Wikipedia, and in 2011 white British represented less than 50%, that number must surely be less now. |
|
|
|
Post by gmdf on Nov 28, 2021 7:50:55 GMT
Yeah I know. Wouldn't we all. He hasn't lost his livelihood he just can't work for the horrendously anti British BBC anymore. No bad thing, he can work for proper outlets where you're allowed to be a white British male. My point is, he's all over the place and he should have stood firm. You can't say I didn't but sorry anyway. I don't know what that Moeen question thing is about, how it came about, the context, or why anyone would say yes to it, or even ask it. Pretty bizarre. Actually sounds like a joke, but it's in his interview. Unless I miss understand it? Apparently BT sport are telling Fox that unless they drop Vaughan as a commentator they wonât use their commentary, which would presumably mean loss of income for Fox. Sponsors are also dropping him. His main crime is not minding Trump apparently, that makes him literally Hitler in the eyes of the left. So as well as making racist comments to Asian players (and then denying it), and apparently Tweeting racist comments, you are now telling us he supports Trump? A man with a long history of racist (and misogynist) comments and acts? I'm guessing you are actually out to damn Vaughan, not support him! |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 28, 2021 9:50:09 GMT
Apparently BT sport are telling Fox that unless they drop Vaughan as a commentator they wonât use their commentary, which would presumably mean loss of income for Fox. Sponsors are also dropping him. His main crime is not minding Trump apparently, that makes him literally Hitler in the eyes of the left. No the reason he isn't welcome to commentate in Australia because he made racist comments to a group of Asian players at Yorkshire with 3 people including a current England international all hearing it, do try and keep up. If he's just stuck to admiring Trump and making cringey efforts at humour on Twitter he would have been just fine. |
|
|
|
Post by liquidskin on Nov 28, 2021 11:05:07 GMT
Poor old Vaughan, guilty until proven innocent. And condemned at a huge cost it seems. Rafiq on the other hand can admit making racist comments, which Vaughan hasn't, and nobody from the movement bats an eyelid. In fact, they give him money.
I think Randall is likely right on that front Mrs Doyle. Although he needed the obligatory second attempt to nail it as usual.
|
|
|
|
Post by gmdf on Nov 28, 2021 11:37:59 GMT
[Edited by moderator]Poor old Vaughan, guilty until proven innocent. And condemned at a huge cost it seems. Rafiq on the other hand can admit making racist comments, which Vaughan hasn't, and nobody from the movement bats an eyelid. In fact, they give him money. I think Randall is likely right on that front Mrs Doyle. Although he needed the obligatory second attempt to nail it as usual. I'm not a racist, nor an apologist for racists. [Edited by moderator]:  |
|
|
|
Post by longstop on Nov 28, 2021 13:15:13 GMT
Iâm trying to keep this thread open but if it descends into insults, it will regretfully be closed. Please make your points, replying to anyone elseâs comments if you wish but without hurling insults.
Thank you.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 28, 2021 14:09:56 GMT
Poor old Vaughan, guilty until proven innocent. And condemned at a huge cost it seems. Rafiq on the other hand can admit making racist comments, which Vaughan hasn't, and nobody from the movement bats an eyelid. In fact, they give him money. I think Randall is likely right on that front Mrs Doyle. Although he needed the obligatory second attempt to nail it as usual. You do realise that people are editing their comments on purpose now since you can't help falling for it every time? Anyway, how would you like it to play out? You already cast doubts because Adil Rashid didn't corroborate while midway through the World Cup, now that the tournament is over and he has that's not good enough either? Two people who weren't part of the original investigation have corroborated it, perhaps 12 senile old farts in egg & bacon ties need to back it up too since these brown men can't be trusted? |
|
|
|
Post by liquidskin on Nov 28, 2021 15:12:54 GMT
That's the first time you've edited on purpose, and you know it.
Show me where I've cast doubt on Rashid not corroborating, at any time?
|
|
|
|
Post by mrsdoyle on Nov 28, 2021 22:40:11 GMT
Apparently BT sport are telling Fox that unless they drop Vaughan as a commentator they wonât use their commentary, which would presumably mean loss of income for Fox. Sponsors are also dropping him. His main crime is not minding Trump apparently, that makes him literally Hitler in the eyes of the left. So as well as making racist comments to Asian players (and then denying it), and apparently Tweeting racist comments, you are now telling us he supports Trump? A man with a long history of racist (and misogynist) comments and acts? I'm guessing you are actually out to damn Vaughan, not support him! hopefully I have managed to post a link to the paper of choice of this boards members which might surprise you. |
|
|
|
Post by gmdf on Nov 29, 2021 7:57:57 GMT
So as well as making racist comments to Asian players (and then denying it), and apparently Tweeting racist comments, you are now telling us he supports Trump? A man with a long history of racist (and misogynist) comments and acts? I'm guessing you are actually out to damn Vaughan, not support him! hopefully I have managed to post a link to the paper of choice of this boards members which might surprise you. Thanks you for posting an article that is rally quite out of date, and has nothing to do with cricket. |
|
|
|
Post by Wicked Cricket on Nov 29, 2021 10:13:29 GMT
The witch-hunt of Michael Vaughan is extraordinary to watch. Sucked in by the Yorkshire CCC racist whirlwind, he is now fighting for his punditry life. He doesnât do well at the start of the interview. He attempts to show sympathy, distress and honesty all at the same time. Yet, turning your head to one side and lowering the eyes when asked a pertinent yes or no question is not helpful. Whispers of Prince Andrew come to mind.  Under PressureHearsay and the unveiling of historical tweets is the basis of this latest racist inquisition as LS suggests. Given emails and texting came before Twitter, do we presume others in the public eye may be beaten with the witch-hunt stick for comments written even further back than 2007? Like McCarthyism in the 1950s, there appears to be no set rules. Perhaps, a deemed racist comment from a 1991 text or email, holds the same excuse for the media to brandish the cattle prod as 2021? Yet, we return to Azeem Rafiq, the man who started this recent persecution, who has not only written anti-semitic tweets, but sent âcreepy, lewd and vulgarâ texts to a 16 year-old girl in 2015. Amazing to watch the BBC suppress the latter information. Breathtaking to see the blatant hypocrisy at play, offering yet more evidence of how the left-wing media are now in full propaganda mode, deciding which truths to erase and what lies to propagate, where evidence and facts are meaningless, if they donât fit in to their political agenda. I have nothing but sympathy for Vaughan. He is in the wrong place at the wrong time, where his past success on and off the cricket field has given the mainstream media an opportunity to abuse and use him as a scapegoat. To see the BBC turn on one of their highest profile cricket pundits and execute this public shaming is beyond belief, so stop paying the licence fee, for goodness sake, to this treacherous and deceitful media machine. If Vaughan ends up on the punditry scrapheap, woe betide anyone else. www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/59432187 |
|
|
|
Post by mrsdoyle on Nov 29, 2021 10:45:34 GMT
The witch-hunt of Michael Vaughan is extraordinary to watch. Sucked in by the Yorkshire CCC racist whirlwind, he is now fighting for his punditry life. He doesnât do well at the start of the interview. He attempts to show sympathy, distress and honesty all at the same time. Yet, turning your head to one side and lowering the eyes when asked a pertinent yes or no question is not helpful. Whispers of Prince Andrew come to mind. Under PressureHearsay and the unveiling of historical tweets is the basis of this latest racist inquisition as LS suggests. Given emails and texting came before Twitter, do we presume others in the public eye may be beaten with the witch-hunt stick for comments written even further back than 2007? Like McCarthyism in the 1950s, there appears to be no set rules. Perhaps, a deemed racist comment from a 1991 text or email, holds the same excuse for the media to brandish the cattle prod as 2021? Yet, we return to Azeem Rafiq, the man who started this recent persecution, who has not only written anti-semitic tweets, but sent âcreepy, lewd and vulgarâ texts to a 16 year-old girl in 2015. Amazing to watch the BBC suppress the latter information. Breathtaking to see the blatant hypocrisy at play, offering yet more evidence of how the left-wing media are now in full propaganda mode, deciding which truths to erase and what lies to propagate, where evidence and facts are meaningless, if they donât fit in to their political agenda. I have nothing but sympathy for Vaughan. He is in the wrong place at the wrong time, where his past success on and off the cricket field has given the mainstream media an opportunity to abuse and use him as a scapegoat. To see the BBC turn on one of their highest profile cricket pundits and execute this public shaming is beyond belief, so stop paying the licence fee, for goodness sake, to this treacherous and deceitful media machine. If Vaughan ends up on the punditry scrapheap, woe betide anyone else. www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/59432187This whole thing doesnât play well with me. Where is justice in all this? Vaughan has been hung out to dry on hearsay. He may or may not have said what he is accused of, I donât know, and neither does anyone else here, I only know he denies it and there is no proof either way. Rafiq has been backed up by two peers, and Vaughan backed up by a number of peers, but that doesnât constitute proof. For that matter there is no proof that Rafiq tried to get an underage girl (as regards consumption of alcohol) drunk for sexual reasons or sent those nasty texts. Iâm not saying the girl lied, just that as far as I am aware there is no proof, itâs her word against his. I worry that we will end up in a situation where any person of colour can destroy any white person just by making an accusation of racism. I just donât see how that is going to help race relations. |
|
|
|
Post by flashblade on Nov 29, 2021 11:57:00 GMT
The witch-hunt of Michael Vaughan is extraordinary to watch. Sucked in by the Yorkshire CCC racist whirlwind, he is now fighting for his punditry life. He doesnât do well at the start of the interview. He attempts to show sympathy, distress and honesty all at the same time. Yet, turning your head to one side and lowering the eyes when asked a pertinent yes or no question is not helpful. Whispers of Prince Andrew come to mind. Under PressureHearsay and the unveiling of historical tweets is the basis of this latest racist inquisition as LS suggests. Given emails and texting came before Twitter, do we presume others in the public eye may be beaten with the witch-hunt stick for comments written even further back than 2007? Like McCarthyism in the 1950s, there appears to be no set rules. Perhaps, a deemed racist comment from a 1991 text or email, holds the same excuse for the media to brandish the cattle prod as 2021? Yet, we return to Azeem Rafiq, the man who started this recent persecution, who has not only written anti-semitic tweets, but sent âcreepy, lewd and vulgarâ texts to a 16 year-old girl in 2015. Amazing to watch the BBC suppress the latter information. Breathtaking to see the blatant hypocrisy at play, offering yet more evidence of how the left-wing media are now in full propaganda mode, deciding which truths to erase and what lies to propagate, where evidence and facts are meaningless, if they donât fit in to their political agenda. I have nothing but sympathy for Vaughan. He is in the wrong place at the wrong time, where his past success on and off the cricket field has given the mainstream media an opportunity to abuse and use him as a scapegoat. To see the BBC turn on one of their highest profile cricket pundits and execute this public shaming is beyond belief, so stop paying the licence fee, for goodness sake, to this treacherous and deceitful media machine. If Vaughan ends up on the punditry scrapheap, woe betide anyone else. www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/59432187This whole thing doesnât play well with me. Where is justice in all this? Vaughan has been hung out to dry on hearsay. He may or may not have said what he is accused of, I donât know, and neither does anyone else here, I only know he denies it and there is no proof either way. Rafiq has been backed up by two peers, and Vaughan backed up by a number of peers, but that doesnât constitute proof. For that matter there is no proof that Rafiq tried to get an underage girl (as regards consumption of alcohol) drunk for sexual reasons or sent those nasty texts. Iâm not saying the girl lied, just that as far as I am aware there is no proof, itâs her word against his. I worry that we will end up in a situation where any person of colour can destroy any white person just by making an accusation of racism. I just donât see how that is going to help race relations. Not hearsay, but 3 non-conflicting witness statements. Which peers have backed him up? This is a difficult one - who can testify that MV did not make a certain statement? I'm not taking sides - just commenting on your interpretation of the 'testimonies' PS I wanted to edit this post, but decided not to. |
|
