sky sports presenters row - n/g | Page 3 | Vital Football

sky sports presenters row - n/g

Rubbish mate.

If 90% of your workforce is white, then clearly mainly white people will be sacked if you're getting rid. The candidate pool is far more diverse now too, so i expect many more BAME and even some females might get a chance at last.
I disagree. As Baghdad Rob said earlier, like-for- like replacements for Thompson, Nicholas and Le Tissier would be successful, household name, British internationals, aged 45+. The pool for that group is still primarily white.
 
I disagree. As Baghdad Rob said earlier, like-for- like replacements for Thompson, Nicholas and Le Tissier would be successful, household name, British internationals, aged 45+. The pool for that group is still primarily white.

To clarify I don't care if they are British internationals, over the age of 45 or most of those things mentioned. What I care about is any replacements being selected on the merit of being knowledgable and having a bit of charisma and not on factors such as skin colour or gender.
 
Gosh, us middle/old aged white men are having such a hard time of it nowadays. We've actually got some competion that is being allowed through. How dreadful. Moan moan moan.......

I don't think white men have an issue with the competition side of things. The issue is when people say that white men are over represented, black people are under represented and therefore people have a moral responsibility to discriminate on behalf of black people.

It is a bit like when Labour introduced Women Only shortlists and then people like you commented that men were scared of the competition. If you have been disqualified from the competition as a result of being born the wrong gender then you aren't actually competing.
 
Rubbish mate.

If 90% of your workforce is white, then clearly mainly white people will be sacked if you're getting rid. The candidate pool is far more diverse now too, so i expect many more BAME and even some females might get a chance at last.

Sure. But it all depends if they are being get rid because of their performances or because the powers that be wish to replace them with a more diverse looking group of people for social politics.

We shall see in due course if any of the newcomers are younger white males or if entirely made up of minorities like women or BAME.
 
Perhaps we can't have high quality research because there are so few women we can't get a decent sample.
:-)

Very good, and absolutely correct point.

But small sample size isn’t an acceptable reason for passing off spurious analysis as empirical evidence. And to hide the important information in small font in the notes section is disingenuous at best, more accurately dishonest.

They could have extended the sample by looking beyond UK business.
 
I don't think white men have an issue with the competition side of things. The issue is when people say that white men are over represented, black people are under represented and therefore people have a moral responsibility to discriminate on behalf of black people.

It is a bit like when Labour introduced Women Only shortlists and then people like you commented that men were scared of the competition. If you have been disqualified from the competition as a result of being born the wrong gender then you aren't actually competing.
Delighted with the women only panels at the time as the imbalance was chronic. Such a strong measure probably not needed now.
 
Last edited:
Radio 4 does a good job of providing refuge for the older listener, who doesn't get along with the modern world. Gentle programmes with comfortable briefs (sic) and ageing presenters and panellists. All good fun and a few may wish to take in The Archers, Midsomer Murders and other such too.

Perhaps it's time we had a football equivalent on television, probably on BBC 3, unless it proved exceptionally popular. There wouldn't be quotas, god forbid, but it would just happen to be populated by middle aged and older ex internationals of a blokey, jokey caste. Quite inoffensive minority viewing.
 
Last edited:
I’d rather see Alex Scott presenting motd than Gary Lineker.
She has a very natural talent and is a bit of a looker as well.
 
I’d rather see Alex Scott presenting motd than Gary Lineker.
She has a very natural talent and is a bit of a looker as well.

Just wait till she'd got her feet under the table. There would be a table full of opinionated women no longer afraid to tread on old mens' toes.
 
How True who knows,
Jeff Stelling could WALK OUT on Soccer Saturday after Sky Sports sacked long-serving pundits Matt Le Tissier, Phil Thompson and Charlie Nicholas... with the host disillusioned by the shock decision

  • Jeff Stelling is considering quitting as presenter of Sky Sports Soccer Saturday
  • Matt Le Tissier, Phil Thompson and Charlie Nicholas were all axed from the show
  • Stelling has called the trio's dismissal as one of the saddest days of his career
 
Just wait till she'd got her feet under the table. There would be a table full of opinionated women no longer afraid to tread on old mens' toes.
I’d doubt it jogills 😁
At the end of the day, all they do is read an autocue.
All that varies is how naturally they do it.
Stelling meanwhile fronts a very long live show and needs to constantly ad lib.
He would be very much sought after if he leaves Sky.
The BBC have created a massive problem for themselves with Lineker’s ridiculously high salary.
Just say hypothetically Alex Scott did replace him but...... on a much more realistic wage.
The headline..... Young black female is worth less than white middle aged man.
 
I’d doubt it jogills 😁
At the end of the day, all they do is read an autocue.
All that varies is how naturally they do it.
Stelling meanwhile fronts a very long live show and needs to constantly ad lib.
He would be very much sought after if he leaves Sky.
The BBC have created a massive problem for themselves with Lineker’s ridiculously high salary.
Just say hypothetically Alex Scott did replace him but...... on a much more realistic wage.
The headline..... Young black female is worth less than white middle aged man.
Why is Lineker's salary "ridiculous" given that BT pay him more for doing less apparently? A company in the private sector that is supposedly efficient compared to the BBC according to those that are anti BBC.

BTW, I do think presenters on BBC and the private sector have ridiculously high remuneration in general. The BBC has to compete with them, unfortunately. Hence Lineker's pay. Obviously, the private sector think he is worth more!
 
Why is Lineker's salary "ridiculous" given that BT pay him more for doing less apparently? A company in the private sector that is supposedly efficient compared to the BBC according to those that are anti BBC.

BTW, I do think presenters on BBC and the private sector have ridiculously high remuneration in general. The BBC has to compete with them, unfortunately. Hence Lineker's pay. Obviously, the private sector think he is worth more!
Oh okay.
I wasn’t even aware that Lineker worked for BT.
So we’ll all agree that a publicly subsidised broadcaster is spending our tax money well by paying a football presenter £1.4 million
Let’s hope that his successor is paid even more eh?

I would like to see a salary cap. If Lineker gets more, Shearer gets less 👍
 
Why is Lineker's salary "ridiculous" given that BT pay him more for doing less apparently? A company in the private sector that is supposedly efficient compared to the BBC according to those that are anti BBC.

BTW, I do think presenters on BBC and the private sector have ridiculously high remuneration in general. The BBC has to compete with them, unfortunately. Hence Lineker's pay. Obviously, the private sector think he is worth more!
Smugness pays.
 
Sneaking outside the TV employee debate for a second, it seems to me that, in general, one of the main reasons for employers "relieving employees of their employ" has nothing to do with equalising ethnicity and gender, but everything to do with either re-employing them at a cheaper cost or getting in someone else to do the job at cheaper cost. Basically, cost-cutting, because they can !
 
Sneaking outside the TV employee debate for a second, it seems to me that, in general, one of the main reasons for employers "relieving employees of their employ" has nothing to do with equalising ethnicity and gender, but everything to do with either re-employing them at a cheaper cost or getting in someone else to do the job at cheaper cost. Basically, cost-cutting, because they can !

I understand why agents push for absurd salaries from such as Sky, they make huge amounts of cash. It's crazy though and affects what other broadcasters must pay. A lot of ordinary men and women will effectively be working for less, or not at all in the coming months. I will lose no sleep is newly employed presenters get less, which they surely will.

In fact the absurd salaries arrive over time as an agent persduades the broadcaster that their client has become indispensable. Angus Deyton was unlucky to be sacked from HIGNFY in my opinion but his sacking proved how repeatedly replaceable he was. I suspect the same applies more widely were broadcasters bold enough.
 
I understand why agents push for absurd salaries from such as Sky, they make huge amounts of cash. It's crazy though and affects what other broadcasters must pay. A lot of ordinary men and women will effectively be working for less, or not at all in the coming months. I will lose no sleep is newly employed presenters get less, which they surely will.

In fact the absurd salaries arrive over time as an agent persduades the broadcaster that their client has become indispensable. Angus Deyton was unlucky to be sacked from HIGNFY in my opinion but his sacking proved how repeatedly replaceable he was. I suspect the same applies more widely were broadcasters bold enough.
Absolutely.
That’s why I’m often confused by some on the left who absolutely condemn high salaries in commerce while simultaneously supporting the likes of Lineker and his bloated salary.
It makes no sense to me.