| Michael Vaughan 23:00 - Mar 31 with 6653 views | BlackCrowe |
Cleared of racism charges. BBC dropped him like a stone as soon as allegations were made and it's unlikely he'll return. He's broken. Seems like one of the good guys and an excellent pundit and authority on the game. Sad state of affairs. [Post edited 1 Apr 2023 8:21]
|  |
| |  |
| Michael Vaughan on 23:23 - Mar 31 with 4691 views | Hayesender |
I think this is one of those thread titles that could give Clive an ulcer.
But yes, a disgrace what Michael Vaughan has been put through |  |
| |
| Michael Vaughan on 00:20 - Apr 1 with 4594 views | MrSheen |
Ten years older and he’d have been mainstream. Ten years younger and he’d have known how to modulate his speech. Great cricketer, saved the game in this country whatever you think of him as a broadcaster. [Post edited 1 Apr 2023 0:21]
|  | | |
| Michael Vaughan on 00:27 - Apr 1 with 4557 views | Boston |
Stinks, you win the court case, but where do you go to win back your reputation?
Edit. Haven't a fcking clue who Michael Vaughan is. [Post edited 1 Apr 2023 0:28]
|  |
| |
| Michael Vaughan on 07:36 - Apr 1 with 4358 views | Hunterhoop |
Putting this case to one side, I really don’t think Vaughan is one of the good guys.
Phenomenally arrogant. Quite obnoxious. Not particularly popular amongst ex-pros. He is part owner in a sports agency and has spent all of his punditry career shamefully promoting the players on his books as deserving of an England call up or big T20/Hundred deal. The fact he gets a cut of said deals…Huge supporter of the Hundred for no other reason than he’s make a load of dosh from it.
All the “good guys” from around that era and just before end up on Sky. The one sport their coverage is excellent at. |  | | |
| Michael Vaughan on 08:23 - Apr 1 with 4257 views | Lblock |
Does this mean he isn’t a witch?
Burnt anyway |  |
| Cherish and enjoy life.... this ain't no dress rehearsal |
| |
| Michael Vaughan on 08:29 - Apr 1 with 4253 views | Loyalitat |
| Michael Vaughan on 07:36 - Apr 1 by Hunterhoop |
Putting this case to one side, I really don’t think Vaughan is one of the good guys.
Phenomenally arrogant. Quite obnoxious. Not particularly popular amongst ex-pros. He is part owner in a sports agency and has spent all of his punditry career shamefully promoting the players on his books as deserving of an England call up or big T20/Hundred deal. The fact he gets a cut of said deals…Huge supporter of the Hundred for no other reason than he’s make a load of dosh from it.
All the “good guys” from around that era and just before end up on Sky. The one sport their coverage is excellent at. |
This. He isn't holier than thou.
But going back to the case, he was cleared on the balance of probabilities, whilst all of the other charges against others were found in Rafiq's favour. Further, some of Vaughan's comments very close to this alleged incident, were clearly aimed at people with specific protected characteristics akin to Rafiq, and are illustrative on their own: His twitter remark about London and its population composition being a case in point.
Worse still for me was when he had the temerity to suggest that English-born, Moeen Ali, shouldn't just concentrate on playing test cricket, but in the intervening periods he should go out and arbitrarily ask strangers, of course with similar characteristics , whether they are of evil intent. When challenged, "broken" Vaughan was adamant that there was nothing offensive in his original tweet. This instance arose just 6 years ago.
The benchmark for good guys are most certainly those who have worked, and are still working on Sky, not "me.me, me, Vaughan". [Post edited 1 Apr 2023 8:44]
| | | |
| Michael Vaughan on 08:30 - Apr 1 with 4251 views | loftupper |
| Michael Vaughan on 08:23 - Apr 1 by Lblock |
Does this mean he isn’t a witch?
Burnt anyway |
Not a witch by the balance of probability...
Crack on though | | | |
| Michael Vaughan on 08:42 - Apr 1 with 4218 views | GaryBannister86 |
| Michael Vaughan on 08:29 - Apr 1 by Loyalitat |
This. He isn't holier than thou.
But going back to the case, he was cleared on the balance of probabilities, whilst all of the other charges against others were found in Rafiq's favour. Further, some of Vaughan's comments very close to this alleged incident, were clearly aimed at people with specific protected characteristics akin to Rafiq, and are illustrative on their own: His twitter remark about London and its population composition being a case in point.
Worse still for me was when he had the temerity to suggest that English-born, Moeen Ali, shouldn't just concentrate on playing test cricket, but in the intervening periods he should go out and arbitrarily ask strangers, of course with similar characteristics , whether they are of evil intent. When challenged, "broken" Vaughan was adamant that there was nothing offensive in his original tweet. This instance arose just 6 years ago.
The benchmark for good guys are most certainly those who have worked, and are still working on Sky, not "me.me, me, Vaughan". [Post edited 1 Apr 2023 8:44]
|
Exactly. His tweets from around that period reflect his real views.
As a cricket lover, it is incredibly disappointing how players I used to worship ended up being revealed by social media as complete....whatevers.....ie Vaughan, Botham, etc.etc.
I had unfollowed Vaughan because of his repulsive social media output at that time. | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Michael Vaughan on 10:19 - Apr 1 with 4023 views | Wegerles_Stairs |
| Michael Vaughan on 08:42 - Apr 1 by GaryBannister86 |
Exactly. His tweets from around that period reflect his real views.
As a cricket lover, it is incredibly disappointing how players I used to worship ended up being revealed by social media as complete....whatevers.....ie Vaughan, Botham, etc.etc.
I had unfollowed Vaughan because of his repulsive social media output at that time. |
Is Botham really so reprehrensible simply because he's pro-Brexit? He's raised millions of pounds for charity, which is extremely meritorious.
As for Vaughan, he's a bit of a cocky tw*t but England wouldn't have won the Ashes if he hadn't been. The 'evidence' against him was weak and Rafiq's certainly no angel either, as shown by his proven antisemitism. [Post edited 1 Apr 2023 10:21]
| | | |
| Michael Vaughan on 10:43 - Apr 1 with 3953 views | GaryBannister86 |
| Michael Vaughan on 10:19 - Apr 1 by Wegerles_Stairs |
Is Botham really so reprehrensible simply because he's pro-Brexit? He's raised millions of pounds for charity, which is extremely meritorious.
As for Vaughan, he's a bit of a cocky tw*t but England wouldn't have won the Ashes if he hadn't been. The 'evidence' against him was weak and Rafiq's certainly no angel either, as shown by his proven antisemitism. [Post edited 1 Apr 2023 10:21]
|
Botham's the best, most inspirational player I've seen live. Vaughan was a great captain at the right time and a superb bat. But, I think both are Little England gammon bores and yes the "you lot" evidence was paper thin but his tweets about Moeen, London, call centres were stone-cold racism.
Jimmy Savile raised more than Botham for charity. Doesn't make someone a good person.
Anyway, my point was more that it is weird "getting to know" people you have admired on the sports field through social media. I was the biggest fan of Gallen (first time round) but had to unfollow his complete bilge on social media. | | | |
| Michael Vaughan on 10:52 - Apr 1 with 3903 views | paulparker |
| Michael Vaughan on 08:23 - Apr 1 by Lblock |
Does this mean he isn’t a witch?
Burnt anyway |
Burnt by social media , Vaughans name was dragged through the mud and was suspended on his media duties , whilst the other blokes Twitter was using Antisemitic slurs
You couldn’t make it up |  |
| And Bowles is onside, Swinburne has come rushing out of his goal , what can Bowles do here , onto the left foot no, on to the right foot
That’s there that’s two, and that’s Bowles
Brian Moore
|
| |
| Michael Vaughan on 12:19 - Apr 1 with 3778 views | Hunterhoop |
| Michael Vaughan on 10:52 - Apr 1 by paulparker |
Burnt by social media , Vaughans name was dragged through the mud and was suspended on his media duties , whilst the other blokes Twitter was using Antisemitic slurs
You couldn’t make it up |
Baloney, PP.
Have you actually read about the case against Vaughan?
He got off because they could not prove beyond doubt exactly the phrase he said (and therefore the context and implied meaning). There were several conflicting accounts of what he supposedly said.
These are the versions produced by the ECB as the conflicting versions, which the ECB decided were so different the entire case became dogged with uncertainty.
“There’s too many of you lot, we need to have a word about that”
“Too many of you lot, we need to do something about it”
“There’s too many of you lot, we need to do something about it”
“There’s too many of you lot. We need to have a word about that”
Now, tell me this isn’t a cover up. It’s what a good lawyer can do for you, but it’s pretty bloody clear what he meant by any of these versions!! Vaughan is a wrong ‘un. Great cricketer and captain. Tosspot of a bloke. | | | |
| Michael Vaughan on 12:49 - Apr 1 with 3708 views | Lblock |
| Michael Vaughan on 12:19 - Apr 1 by Hunterhoop |
Baloney, PP.
Have you actually read about the case against Vaughan?
He got off because they could not prove beyond doubt exactly the phrase he said (and therefore the context and implied meaning). There were several conflicting accounts of what he supposedly said.
These are the versions produced by the ECB as the conflicting versions, which the ECB decided were so different the entire case became dogged with uncertainty.
“There’s too many of you lot, we need to have a word about that”
“Too many of you lot, we need to do something about it”
“There’s too many of you lot, we need to do something about it”
“There’s too many of you lot. We need to have a word about that”
Now, tell me this isn’t a cover up. It’s what a good lawyer can do for you, but it’s pretty bloody clear what he meant by any of these versions!! Vaughan is a wrong ‘un. Great cricketer and captain. Tosspot of a bloke. |
Christ…. I know nothing about this case but it all hinges on that does it?!
Thank God those up in arms weren’t sitting around the table when I was out with friends on Thursday night. Some of the things being said about the Indian community would’ve got people shot!! | |
| Cherish and enjoy life.... this ain't no dress rehearsal |
| |
| Michael Vaughan on 13:42 - Apr 1 with 3537 views | paulparker |
| Michael Vaughan on 12:19 - Apr 1 by Hunterhoop |
Baloney, PP.
Have you actually read about the case against Vaughan?
He got off because they could not prove beyond doubt exactly the phrase he said (and therefore the context and implied meaning). There were several conflicting accounts of what he supposedly said.
These are the versions produced by the ECB as the conflicting versions, which the ECB decided were so different the entire case became dogged with uncertainty.
“There’s too many of you lot, we need to have a word about that”
“Too many of you lot, we need to do something about it”
“There’s too many of you lot, we need to do something about it”
“There’s too many of you lot. We need to have a word about that”
Now, tell me this isn’t a cover up. It’s what a good lawyer can do for you, but it’s pretty bloody clear what he meant by any of these versions!! Vaughan is a wrong ‘un. Great cricketer and captain. Tosspot of a bloke. |
So it’s he said , she said , hardly cast iron
Whilst the other fella was on Twitter agreeing with antisemitic tweets
Who is the wrong un ? | |
| And Bowles is onside, Swinburne has come rushing out of his goal , what can Bowles do here , onto the left foot no, on to the right foot
That’s there that’s two, and that’s Bowles
Brian Moore
|
| |
| Michael Vaughan on 13:58 - Apr 1 with 3494 views | stevec |
It’s interesting how it’s always the angels on LFW who seem to be the ones that love seeing people hung drawn and quartered.
Come to see the guillotining Sir, would you like a front row seat Sir? |  | | |
| Michael Vaughan on 14:01 - Apr 1 with 3471 views | Hunterhoop |
I’m amazed. You think nothing is wrong with those 4 versions of statements? Just to be clear, there was no doubt in the conclusion that he said something along those lines just enough doubt over the exact sentence.
If you think all of those are fine for someone to say to a group of young lads then let’s just agree to disagree here. | | | |
| Michael Vaughan on 14:30 - Apr 1 with 3379 views | traininvain |
| Michael Vaughan on 14:01 - Apr 1 by Hunterhoop |
I’m amazed. You think nothing is wrong with those 4 versions of statements? Just to be clear, there was no doubt in the conclusion that he said something along those lines just enough doubt over the exact sentence.
If you think all of those are fine for someone to say to a group of young lads then let’s just agree to disagree here. |
Not dissimilar to the Terry/Ferdinand incident. [Post edited 1 Apr 2023 14:30]
|  | | |
| Michael Vaughan on 14:36 - Apr 1 with 3331 views | Clive_Anderson |
| Michael Vaughan on 14:01 - Apr 1 by Hunterhoop |
I’m amazed. You think nothing is wrong with those 4 versions of statements? Just to be clear, there was no doubt in the conclusion that he said something along those lines just enough doubt over the exact sentence.
If you think all of those are fine for someone to say to a group of young lads then let’s just agree to disagree here. |
I think there's some doubt about whether he said anything at all, but let's say he did say something along those lines, how would you like to see him punished for saying something a bit racist over a decade ago?
Reputation ruined and professional life over? Prison sentence?
I wonder what exactly you'd like to see happen to him for this terrible crime that would leave you satisfied. | | | |
| Michael Vaughan on 14:38 - Apr 1 with 3345 views | terryb |
| Michael Vaughan on 14:30 - Apr 1 by traininvain |
Not dissimilar to the Terry/Ferdinand incident. [Post edited 1 Apr 2023 14:30]
|
That crossed my mind as well. | | | |
| Michael Vaughan on 14:45 - Apr 1 with 3305 views | Boston |
So this Rafiq bloke...does he hate the Jews or not?
Asking for Northern, who hasn't had an eye rolling thread since Thursday. | |
| |
| Michael Vaughan on 16:44 - Apr 1 with 3189 views | thame_hoops |
His lawyer absolutely run rings around the ECB, from what I was reading at the time in The Telegraph during the hearing.
What I do agree with, Vaughn did say that, why would he say something detrimental to a player when he wanted them to perform at their absolute best. Bearing in mind, this was alleged to have been said during the huddle before they went on to Field?
I am not privy to what other posters have said about his various tweets in the past, but I believe on this occasion, he was very hardly done by. Compare how the BBC treated him, to how they have backed Lineker. |  | | |
| Michael Vaughan on 18:14 - Apr 1 with 3085 views | Hunterhoop |
| Michael Vaughan on 14:36 - Apr 1 by Clive_Anderson |
I think there's some doubt about whether he said anything at all, but let's say he did say something along those lines, how would you like to see him punished for saying something a bit racist over a decade ago?
Reputation ruined and professional life over? Prison sentence?
I wonder what exactly you'd like to see happen to him for this terrible crime that would leave you satisfied. |
Not be given a public platform again. Simple as that. He may not be because most of the media know what happened anyway and what he’s like. | | | |
| Michael Vaughan on 20:11 - Apr 1 with 2975 views | Clive_Anderson |
| Michael Vaughan on 18:14 - Apr 1 by Hunterhoop |
Not be given a public platform again. Simple as that. He may not be because most of the media know what happened anyway and what he’s like. |
So his career/life ruined and being banned from speaking publicly ever again for saying a bad comment years ago. Seems massively over the top to me.
What do you think should happen to Azeem Rafiq who is on public record of saying much worse stuff online? Should he be denied any public platform to speak about what happened to him? | | | |
| Michael Vaughan on 21:07 - Apr 1 with 2914 views | Hunterhoop |
| Michael Vaughan on 20:11 - Apr 1 by Clive_Anderson |
So his career/life ruined and being banned from speaking publicly ever again for saying a bad comment years ago. Seems massively over the top to me.
What do you think should happen to Azeem Rafiq who is on public record of saying much worse stuff online? Should he be denied any public platform to speak about what happened to him? |
That’s not what I said. Not be given a public platform, I.e. be paid as a pundit, isn’t the same as his life being ruined or banned from speaking publicly. Rafiq has made mistakes too. He hasn’t been paid to be a pundit nor is, as far as I’m aware.
Look, I think Vaughan is a tosser. I’ve explained why in two posts. If you don’t, whatever. Good for you. | | | |
| Michael Vaughan on 08:09 - Apr 2 with 2731 views | essextaxiboy |
| Michael Vaughan on 10:43 - Apr 1 by GaryBannister86 |
Botham's the best, most inspirational player I've seen live. Vaughan was a great captain at the right time and a superb bat. But, I think both are Little England gammon bores and yes the "you lot" evidence was paper thin but his tweets about Moeen, London, call centres were stone-cold racism.
Jimmy Savile raised more than Botham for charity. Doesn't make someone a good person.
Anyway, my point was more that it is weird "getting to know" people you have admired on the sports field through social media. I was the biggest fan of Gallen (first time round) but had to unfollow his complete bilge on social media. |
If you unfollow everyone who disagrees with your opinions how do your views get challenged and not entrenched |  | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
