Oops Chris

[2006_Eagles]

I understand what Gayle said is inappropriate but i still think there has been a massive overreaction and with these matters there is a massive double standards it isn't funny.

Where was this out cry when Sharapova asked a Journalist to repeat a question because she was just admiring his form, I guarantee if a guy said that there would be an uproar.

Or on those morning shows when they have male models on sometimes and the host go on about there body's and arms and stuff, But if its a female model and the guy tells her she has great legs and a great body how would that go down.

I guess it's the whole underlying "rapey" aspect to a guy commenting on some sweet, sweet legs etc.

 

[JackFlash]

The hypocritical Channel 10 exec David Barham beefing this up like you wouldn't believe and now they intend to penalise the fans by not talking to Gayle on the field! Why punish the fans? The media created Gayle as the West Indian playboy cricketer by posting pics of him with a cigar and two bikini clad girls poolside while his West Indies teammates were being humiliated during the Test Series. Gayle has only played his role given to him, sure his timing was wrong, slap him over the knuckles and get on with the game and that means talking to him on field about the game! Stupid move by Barham and a total over reaction.

 

[Godchin]

What Gayle did was not a crime.

I never said it was.

I just thought the analogy I was replying to was a bit off.

 

[2006_Eagles]

The hypocritical Channel 10 exec David Barham beefing this up like you wouldn't believe and now they intend to penalise the fans by not talking to Gayle on the field! Why punish the fans? The media created Gayle as the West Indian playboy cricketer by posting pics of him with a cigar and two bikini clad girls poolside while his West Indies teammates were being humiliated during the Test Series. Gayle has only played his role given to him, sure his timing was wrong, slap him over the knuckles and get on with the game and that means talking to him on field about the game! Stupid move by Barham and a total over reaction.

Serving too many masters etc

And it was three bikini clad girls, not two.

Believe me I studied it good

 

[Gray Day]

Our friends have gone quiet

ManWithNoName
nobbyiscool

Come back we miss you

 

[MisterMarcus]

Oh. My. God. Did anyone listen to SEN the past hour when they were discussing this?

Admittedly it was Schibeci, Rodney Hogg, and a confused-sounding Smokey Dawson, so I wasn't exactly expecting a meeting of Mensa. But they managed to be sexist, racist, and virtually every other "ist" you can imagine.

Among the humdingers they came up with were:

* Asking Mel to go out was just the same as if he'd asked a male journo to go for a beer after the game.
* T20 is "fun and games", so Mel has to "expect" that kind of behaviour.
* Mel is an attractive female, so her primary function is eye candy and to be hit on.
* Gayle has form with being sleazy to women, so if Mel was surprised or upset, then it's her fault for not doing her research.
* Female journos shouldn't interview West Indies players "unless they know what they're getting in for". Cause, you know, all black men are randy womanisers who can't keep it in their pants for 5 minutes.

There was also a nice Audio Blackface with one of them pretending to be Gayle doing an interview with a male journo, to show how "harmless" it was.

Yeah. Real Classy.

 

[blackcat]

So they should alter there coverage to excuse the fact that he's a pig, rather than him just not being a pig?

This doesn't make any sense.

Suggesting "they put the conditions together" is like blaming alcohol providers for assaults, rather than blaming the person who committed the assault.

cricket and professional sport are hyper-sexualised environments. Surely both sexes of sports journalists know this, and have mechanisms to navigate fraught territory. Dont see dont tell. Politely reject advances... then when professional territory is ambiguous because a player is not aware of this, the person who is aware of this must have the responsibility to deflect it. I think McLaughlin was professional in managing this interview. This is like a 1970s Kate Fitzpatrick in World Series Cricket or Test coverage before Kerry Packer had her fired, but KF also had a dalliance with Imran...

this situation is not black and white, but the coverage has been. And now the coverage has zero relevance to the two parties concerned, MM and CG. There would be no anonymous arbitration on this matter, it has blown up massive-scale when it never had to.

 

[Ron The Bear]

Where was this out cry when Sharapova asked a Journalist to repeat a question because she was just admiring his form, I guarantee if a guy said that there would be an uproar.

Sexism towards men doesn't exist, like racism towards whites.

 

[2006_Eagles]

Lol when he shut down that male reporter at the conference

 

[Donakebab]

that has been indulged by the thousands of women who went up to his hotel suite with him.

It is neither Gayles fault, the willing sexual partners fault, nor the journalists fault. But this "outrage echo chamber" does not accurately portray the situation. How "offensive" can it be, if someone says they wish to look into your eyes, if someone calls you "baby". Have you not engaged in a transference, or counter-transference in what Gayle is "really saying" on a different level. So, he has was really slipping his hotel keys in Mel's pocket, with no concern about her single-status. And he said this "on air". And he has form, and he is pretty loose with his sexual partners and appetite.

So how different is he from Warnie?

Or Buddy Franklin?

The clear and obvious difference was he did it on national television while she was doing her job as a professional. If you want to chat someone up, do it in private where they have the opportunity to tell you what they really think, rather than backing them into a corner where they can't tell you to **** off for being a dirty sleaze because it could cost them their job.

 

[krisholio14]

So if a sexist pig is playing all females should be banned ?
What if it's a male reporter and the player he's interviewing is gay and tries hitting onthe reporter ? Ban all male reporters as well

Take a couple of Bex and have a lie down FFS.

Like I said, attractive female journo + known pants man cricketer = recipe for an 'incident'.

You think your continued outrage is going to force Chris Gayle to change his MO? Even if he says '**** those Australian idiots, I ain't going back there', that might make you happy, but he's still not going to change. Apart from being a pants man, he's shown he has no ****s to give what anyone else thinks, so why put Mel or any other female reporter in a potentially compromising situation?

There are plenty of other cricketers (like, all of them bar Chris Gayle and maybe Dwayne Bravo) out there Mel can interview without the slightest chance of this happening.

 

[blackcat]

Oh. My. God. Did anyone listen to SEN the past hour when they were discussing this?

Admittedly it was Schibeci, Rodney Hogg, and a confused-sounding Smokey Dawson, so I wasn't exactly expecting a meeting of Mensa. But they managed to be sexist, racist, and virtually every other "ist" you can imagine.

Among the humdingers they came up with were:

* Asking Mel to go out was just the same as if he'd asked a male journo to go for a beer after the game.
* T20 is "fun and games", so Mel has to "expect" that kind of behaviour.
* Mel is an attractive female, so her primary function is eye candy and to be hit on.
* Gayle has form with being sleazy to women, so if Mel was surprised or upset, then it's her fault for not doing her research.
* Female journos shouldn't interview West Indies players "unless they know what they're getting in for". Cause, you know, all black men are randy womanisers who can't keep it in their pants for 5 minutes.

There was also a nice Audio Blackface with one of them pretending to be Gayle doing an interview with a male journo, to show how "harmless" it was.

Yeah. Real Classy.

exactly, it has zero relevance to the contrive contretemps of this in the first instance.

Lets say it was Mitch Johnson without tattoos but with a university degree in architecture, and he used different words, but just as the interview concludes, he said lets catch up for a glass of wine at this classy restaurant after the game, or see MONA at 10am tomorrow before I get the plane at 1.30pm, or I will take a later plane back so I can spend a few extra hours at MONA.

Is he saying anything different to CG, his time frame may be "I will shag you senseless next week" instead of tonight... but would he not be saying the same thing. Just a different strategy.

 

[2006_Eagles]

Take a couple of Bex and have a lie down FFS.

Like I said, attractive female journo + known pants man cricketer = recipe for an 'incident'.

You think your continued outrage is going to force Chris Gayle to change his MO? Even if he says '**** those Australian idiots, I ain't going back there', that might make you happy, but he's still not going to change. Apart from being a pants man, he's shown he has no ****s to give what anyone else thinks, so why put Mel or any other female reporter in a potentially compromising situation?

There are plenty of other cricketers (like, all of them bar Chris Gayle and maybe Dwayne Bravo) out there Mel can interview without the slightest chance of this happening.

It's almost like Channel 10 wanted it to happen...

 

[JackFlash]

Serving too many masters etc

And it was three bikini clad girls, not two.

Believe me I studied it good

Three?...lucky man. So he created the image and the media went with it, as soon as he has a crack at Mel McLaughlin the media attack him from all fronts. Of course Gayle was wrong to say anything, but this was not a Dusty Martin case, no chopsticks involved. Give him a talking too, but ignoring him on the field only punishes the fans. Barham at Channel 10 has stuffed this up. Get on with the game and Gayle is an important part of this game and when he hits one of those almighty huge sixes, the audience want to hear from him.

 

[nobbyiscool]

Oh please. As I said, if you're going to put a female reporter in front of a guy who has a track record of having a crack, what do you think is going to happen eventually?

Just because you would like to idealize that things should be a certain way, facts are they aren't. You'd like to think Mel could interview a player and not be come on to? Fair enough, and the vast majority of the time you wouldn't have anything to worry about.
But in this instance?

I ain't victim blaming anyway. It wasn't Mel's fault Gayle tried it on. But whoever put her in front of a known womanizer and someone who is also known to try it on with female journos has to know there is a strong possibility of something like this happening.

I dunno, maybe he could say, not be a pig, like every other player she's interviewed this season?

 

[2006_Eagles]

exactly, it has zero relevance to the contrive contretemps of this in the first instance.

Lets say it was Mitch Johnson without tattoos but with a university degree in architecture, and he used different words, but just as the interview concludes, he said lets catch up for a glass of wine at this classy restaurant after the game, or see MONA at 10am tomorrow before I get the plane at 1.30pm, or I will take a later plane back so I can spend a few extra hours at MONA.

Is he saying anything different to CG, his time frame may be "I will shag you senseless next week" instead of tonight... but would he not be saying the same thing. Just a different strategy.

As my best mate quite succinctly says, "Is there any difference between the guy paying for a hooker and the guy taing a girl out on a date, buying her dinner and paying for everything that night and then sleeping with her? Essentially they're both paying for sex. Just that one is socially acceptable."

Amen

 

[Carbine Chaos]

Oh please. As I said, if you're going to put a female reporter in front of a guy who has a track record of having a crack, what do you think is going to happen eventually?

Just because you would like to idealize that things should be a certain way, facts are they aren't. You'd like to think Mel could interview a player and not be come on to? Fair enough, and the vast majority of the time you wouldn't have anything to worry about.
But in this instance?

I ain't victim blaming anyway. It wasn't Mel's fault Gayle tried it on. But whoever put her in front of a known womanizer and someone who is also known to try it on with female journos has to know there is a strong possibility of something like this happening.

That's stupid. Just because you take a fat guy to Hungry Jacks doesn't mean he has to buy a burger.

 

[blackcat]

The clear and obvious difference was he did it on national television while she was doing her job as a professional. If you want to chat someone up, do it in private where they have the opportunity to tell you what they really think, rather than backing them into a corner where they can't tell you to **** off for being a dirty sleaze because it could cost them their job.

this
is
Chris
Gayle


as I said in a post 30m before. the camera is normalised for him. there is no filter. there is no off-switch.

Boris Becker conceived a child with a waitress in the cloak room at Robert Deniro's Japanese restaurant in London Noma it is called.

Brereton rode his harley in to the Metro and within 30 seconds was in a cloakroom at the Metro top of Bourke st.

Carey had a dalliance the same with someone he glanced at at the airport.



This is not regular behaviour for us Joe Schmoes. It aint. I have never insinuated as much. But the behaviour IS normalised within this milieu

 

[Bomberboyokay]

Sexism towards men doesn't exist, like racism towards whites.

Same old shit from you.

 

[nobbyiscool]

Similar to the woman "Tracey" in the dusty incident. Why should we take them seriously if they wont put their name to it

This is so dumb in the extreme.

Take the example last week of Jamie Briggs last week. He's in a position of power. Should the woman that he harassed have to make public statements to give herself "validity", risking her career in the face of very powerful people?

Of course she shouldn't. And thinking that she should have to speak publicly, rather than raise it through the appropriate channels (ie. her boss, which she did), ignores the immense power imbalance between a wealthy, well known, powerful star player, and a woman trying to make a career in a male dominated industry.

I think that's what this comes down to. Not enough people want to try and understand it from McLaughlin's perspective - she's a woman in a male dominated industry, which creates obvious power imbalances. And it's not for her to accept poor behaviour to "fit in". It's for the industry to change so it's accessible to everyone.


Anyway, I think I'm probably done. There's not much point trying to educate sexist idiots online. If you were prepared to be educated, you wouldn't be sexist idiots in the first place.

 

[2006_Eagles]

I dunno, maybe he could say, not be a pig, like every other player she's interviewed this season?

We've established that this is normalised behaviour for Gayle.

Doesn't it make it right, but there are ways to mitigate the damage.

 

[Ron The Bear]

Same old shit from you.

Same as what?

 

[CarnDaTigg's]

This is so dumb in the extreme.

Take the example last week of Jamie Briggs last week. He's in a position of power. Should the woman that he harassed have to make public statements to give herself "validity", risking her career in the face of very powerful people?

Of course she shouldn't. And thinking that she should have to speak publicly, rather than raise it through the appropriate channels (ie. her boss, which she did), ignores the immense power imbalance between a wealthy, well known, powerful star player, and a woman trying to make a career in a male dominated industry.

I think that's what this comes down to. Not enough people want to try and understand it from McLaughlin's perspective - she's a woman in a male dominated industry, which creates obvious power imbalances. And it's not for her to accept poor behaviour to "fit in". It's for the industry to change so it's accessible to everyone.


Anyway, I think I'm probably done. There's not much point trying to educate sexist idiots online. If you were prepared to be educated, you wouldn't be sexist idiots in the first place.

Completely irrelevant and rambling example. Was the lady with Jamie Briggs part of a media organisation that directly benefits from the story / outrage of the SJW's?

 

[2006_Eagles]

That's stupid. Just because you take a fat guy to Hungry Jacks doesn't mean he has to buy a burger.

Tempting fate is never a good idea

 

[Bomberboyokay]

You think your continued outrage is going to force Chris Gayle to change his MO?

He'll change when probably later today he gets suspended from the next match with no pay.

Even if he says '**** those Australian idiots, I ain't going back there', that might make you happy, but he's still not going to change.

BBL is his second biggest pay every year. He isn't quitting.