Cricket-Match-Special ... A forum for discussion

I smell *modded*, if he did do it why wasn't it known last year.
it is quite a serious offence so it surprises me it took this long for the news to come out.

It is like all the escort saying I had an affair with famous people and selling the story to papers.
a lot of the time what really happened is exaggerated to make good money for the person selling the story.

Aidan11 wrote:If it becomes sexist for a man to ask out a women the human race is going to die out pretty swiftly.

That's not the problem though. If Gayle wanted to ask her out, he was free to do so in a more private setting. Instead, he embarrassed her on national TV whilst she was trying to do her job.

At a superficial level, I'd say it was inappropriate rather than sexist. Though as GarlicJam points out, there's a few underlying issues to do with womens historical place in society and also in a sports industry where it has been very difficult for female journalists and reporters to be taken seriously.

I do agree though that it's been blown out of proportion. Though some of that overblowing is by people complaining about "PC gone mad". And with the new old stories, there is the question of why they didn't come out earlier.

Toby F wrote:

Alviro Patterson wrote: the WICB and ICC could have dealt with it there and then.

Not a comment on the Gayle issue, but I am sure this sentence belongs in an alternative reality.

bhaveshgor wrote:I smell *modded*, if he did do it why wasn't it known last year.
it is quite a serious offence so it surprises me it took this long for the news to come out.

It is like all the escort saying I had an affair with famous people and selling the story to papers.
a lot of the time what really happened is exaggerated to make good money for the person selling the story.

I disagree.

In the scheme of things, it isn't such a serious offence - not like it was repeated, intimidating (possibly), physical or violent. From all reports, female journos are hit on, harrassed, subject to off-colour remarks on an ongoing basis. Serious enough to warrant the journo doing something about it, sure - if she wanted to.

Which then brings us to the question of timing. I think it is absolutely nothing like your escort analogy, bhaves, if anything, should this journo's name come out (and I am sure it will, sometime), it is likely to be damaging to her career. I see it more like a Bill Cosby situation. Why has it taken, in some cases, 25 or more years for allegations against Cosby to surface?

I would say it's down to a number of things: 1. awareness that "it didn't just happen to me"; 2. strength in numbers - after all, she is disbelieved immediately by many, even now; and 3. "enough is enough!"



Although, apparently the incident was relayed to manager Richie Richardson at the time - not naming the player - and he circulated an email telling the players to be more respectful to women.


It is not "PC gone mad" - Gayle needed to be pulled in line for this, after all he is a serial offender here - but of course the public reaction has gone completely over the top. But this sort of thing happens all the time these days - we have media commenting on media as a standard. And then when something along these lines happens, we get media commenting on the media's comments on the media, and on it goes. And then, of course, there is the social media -which the mainstream media need to comment on......



Luckily there is still CMS to make sense of it all. Mainstream Media's saviour.

If someone flashes their genitals you would expect the news to come out far earlier especially if the team manager knew about it.

Does really sound like someone making money out of this story.

Seeing that it has been stated that Richardson was told someone in the team did this, and circulated an email in response, I would expect an denial from Richie if it wasn't the case. A lack of one is a surrogate confirmation that it DID take place. Of course, there is still plenty of time for this denial to come out. Not surprised that the team/team manager didn't publicise the incident (assuming that it did happen), not overly surprised that the journo didn't - see above.

Besides the media (and possibly lawyers in the future), who stands to make money out of this? Certainly not the journo who made the allegation. imo

Just to be clear it is not the journalist that makes the money, was actually saying it was the girl or women.
Ie like the escort analogy a lot of the time the girls get paid loads for the story.
My memory might be playing tricks on me but Remember woods had loads of stories like that soon as he got caught cheating same with giggs.
It is quite convenient for this story to come out fews days after what he said.

Anyway not defending Gaye, but don't believe the 2nd story if it did happen I would expect it to be sorted sooner than now.
Sounds like gossiping and other things or the papers got facts wrong etc.
Wouldn't surprise me if gayle made another stupid comment, doubt he flashed his genital though.
If he did that no way would this story take 12 months to come out.

I think that this episode has proven the we still live in a misogynistic society.

Or perhaps it has proven that we are now too politically correct.

Or perhaps it has proven that feminists hold the key to all in society.

Robert Fisk would say: "to quote my mate Dave it is all Much Ado About Nothing."

Actually he wouldn't probably say that.

Alas it is a story which doesn't end well for all parties involved.

braveneutral wrote:I think that this episode has proven the we still live in a misogynistic society.

Or perhaps it has proven that we are now too politically correct.

These two, I definitely agree with.

Maybe patriarchal rather than mysoginistic - after all, doesn't that mean women-hating? I think that it is morphing into something approaching patriarchal these days.

GarlicJam wrote:

braveneutral wrote:I think that this episode has proven the we still live in a misogynistic society.

Or perhaps it has proven that we are now too politically correct.

These two, I definitely agree with.

Maybe patriarchal rather than mysoginistic - after all, doesn't that mean women-hating? I think that it is morphing into something approaching patriarchal these days.

Yep. There was some hate for the journo I think.

Patriarchal is a better fit.

Just think this story doesn't really help anyone.

Perhaps if she had asked the same question the response would have been different?

No, I think it will help - in the long term. Just another small step in the path of teaching us blokes that it is in our best interests to generally treat women as people.

Also, there is the chance - a slim one, imo - that Chris Gayle will start to think that he is not the super-lad that he (and many, many others) obviously thinks he is.


If McLaughlin had given a derisive laugh and said "in your dreams", then asked the question again, we'd have about 20 less posts on this forum.


Possibly McLaughlin would have got flak for being arrogant....

Yeah think Gayle will learn to treat women better after this episode, if you look at his twitter, instagram or his interview you can tell he had a history of thinking he was a player.

Just watched the interview for the first time. Mel looked uncomfortable but handled it well.

bhaveshgor wrote:Just to be clear it is not the journalist that makes the money, was actually saying it was the girl or women.
Ie like the escort analogy a lot of the time the girls get paid loads for the story.
My memory might be playing tricks on me but Remember woods had loads of stories like that soon as he got caught cheating same with giggs.
It is quite convenient for this story to come out fews days after what he said.

Anyway not defending Gaye, but don't believe the 2nd story if it did happen I would expect it to be sorted sooner than now.
Sounds like gossiping and other things or the papers got facts wrong etc.
Wouldn't surprise me if gayle made another stupid comment, doubt he flashed his genital though.
If he did that no way would this story take 12 months to come out.

We're not sure the second story happened...we only have the newspaper's word for it. And Gayle denies it....

http://www.espncricinfo.com/big-bash-le ... 59051.html

'Gayle's management have retained the services of a "leading Australian media lawyer" with the intention of "immediately" launching defamation action against Fairfax Media over allegations that he indecently exposed himself to a woman in Sydney during the World Cup last year.'

A court of law will decide if there's any truth in this story....

mikesiva wrote:A court of law will decide if there's any truth in this story....

I am well short of being a lawyer - I struggle to win an argument with my kids - but it sounds to me that Gayle and his team have no hope of winning this one. SMH have reported "a woman" alleged that Gayle exposed himself to her.

Unless SMH invented "a woman" and her allegation, surely SMH have done little wrong? Will the court/Gayle's legal team have any power to summons this woman, will SMH be forced to reveal her identity?


All this, and more, will be answered in a future episode of The Media Circus is Great for Lawyers, or As Gayle's World Turns