Nice of sky to allow the ridicule of one of thier pundits.

[Theoracle]

To which I'd reply - that is not for any judge in the land to decide either, particularly one who was educated in a west of Scotland apartheid school.

No judge is going to tell me "Hun scum", "Hun school" or the "Hun walk" is not offensive or sectarian. Absolutely none.

Again, that's not for him to decide. It really isn't.


I'm going to guess "the decision" was based on a particular case and the context in which the term was used, otherwise it's just absurd for any judge to make that call.

The decision to find it offensive is up to whoever finds it offensive.

All a sheriff or law lord would do in future cases is refer to what is now a stated case and if that decision was not appealed and overturned. Then that is that.

 

[Shengus Malengus]

All a sheriff or law lord would do in future cases is refer to what is now a stated case and if that decision was not appealed and overturned. Then that is that.

I may be wrong but I don’t think it was a defined ruling and it referred to one particular prosecution and the terms of use and context in that case.

It doesn’t give filth free rein to use terminology like “hun scum”.

Normally you’d still get convicted for that.
I say “normally” because we know this shitehole churns out biased judgements.

 

[scooter70]

I couldn't really care to be honest. It's never going to be Rangers TV. They will probably have a preference but I highly doubt its a question on the application form when applying for the job. There's Neil McCann on a lot too, Super also before he moved to BT. There's no favouritism by the TV company imo, it's just pure and utter paranoia, of course they will sing the praises of the team winning the league and winning most derbies also.

Total nonsense

If you don’t see it then that’s up to you I suppose

“Application form”: you think Sutton who is an absolute troll, had to fill that out for the job last summer? Do you think Sky got him for his cutting insight or his known Rangers hating tendencies?

 

[paphosranger]

Total nonsense

If you don’t see it then that’s up to you I suppose

“Application form”: you think Sutton who is an absolute troll, had to fill that out for the job last summer? Do you think Sky got him for his cutting insight or his known Rangers hating tendencies?

Do you think Boyd is less of a troll than Sutton? They are both the same level. Because they have won the league some cannae handle it, where as if it was Boyd everyone would be loving it.

 

[GovanFrontLoyal]

If Boyd pulled that off he would never be allowed on Sky again. I get folk watch other football and want Sky, for those that only watch us, Rangers TV and a wee trip out the country is your answer.

 

[scooter70]

Do you think Boyd is less of a troll than Sutton? They are both the same level. Because they have won the league some cannae handle it, where as if it was Boyd everyone would be loving it.

Again if you watched you’d see Boyd being reigned in very often by the anchor of the show whilst Sutton gets away with much more

Fwiw both are pantomime acts but the Sky coverage undoubtedly favour them over us, not sure it’s even up for debate

You mention Neil McCann, can you remind me last time he was on there? They replaced Petrov, who seemed to fair minded for them, with Neil Lennon and Charlie Mulgrew, both bitter pricks, they seem to have replaced McCann with Kenny Miller

 

[DBallZ]

One byproduct of a dominant Rangers team would be Sutton crawling back under a rock somewhere rather than polluting the media.

 

[paphosranger]

Again if you watched you’d see Boyd being reigned in very often by the anchor of the show whilst Sutton gets away with much more

Fwiw both are pantomime acts but the Sky coverage undoubtedly favour them over us, not sure it’s even up for debate

You mention Neil McCann, can you remind me last time he was on there? They replaced Petrov, who seemed to fair minded for them, with Neil Lennon and Charlie Mulgrew, both bitter pricks, they seem to have replaced McCann with Kenny Miller

Fair enough, I do get your point and can appreciate that also. McCann is paid more by the BBC these days and is doing a lot of Rangers TV when I watch.

Ask yourself, why would Sky favour them over us? For what given reason? And in what way has Boydy been reigned in, in a way Sutton doesn't? You genuinely believe also Petrov was too fair minded to be a pundit on there and that's the reason he's no longer on as much?

 

[jigster]

Exactly, it'd a bit of a red neck people on here getting offended on his behalf. He was probably laughing along with them

i'm not offended for Boyd , i'm just glad its not me who's made out to be the clown/ village idiot by my employers

but he's supposed to represent the team i follow so anything that may reflect badly on Boyd etc etc .......

 

[jigster]

If Boyd pulled that off he would never be allowed on Sky again. I get folk watch other football and want Sky, for those that only watch us, Rangers TV and a wee trip out the country is your answer.

its far easier for Rangers/Boyd to be laughed at than other teams , can't imagine any other team/pundit being treated as such

 

[scooter70]

Fair enough, I do get your point and can appreciate that also. McCann is paid more by the BBC these days and is doing a lot of Rangers TV when I watch.

Ask yourself, why would Sky favour them over us? For what given reason? And in what way has Boydy been reigned in, in a way Sutton doesn't? You genuinely believe also Petrov was too fair minded to be a pundit on there and that's the reason he's no longer on as much?

Boyd gets reigned in a constantly, often told “you’ve made your point” by Barbour whilst she giggles away at daft comments from Sutton. As I say I find them both a bit tedious with their contrived nonsense

Why would they favour them? Production teams etc I suppose, do I believe they prefer a Lennon or Mulgrew over Petrov? Yes I do, think the proof is there

To be honest don’t think we’ll agree but how any Rangers fan can believe they are even handed is beyond me, from our fans singing songs and being played over by crowd noise whilst theirs rattle off about the IRA etc to the unbalance in any panel it’s a fairly obvious bias imo

 

[aye me]

All Boyd has to do on air to shut them up is bring up the subject of trophies to be stripped from Celtic after they have admitted sexual abuse of youngsters at their boys club and this is a subject that should be brought up because if positions were reversed they would be crying from the roofs wanting us demoted and stripped of trophies and championships .

 

[Theoracle]

I may be wrong but I don’t think it was a defined ruling and it referred to one particular prosecution and the terms of use and context in that case.

It doesn’t give filth free rein to use terminology like “hun scum”.

Normally you’d still get convicted for that.
I say “normally” because we know this shitehole churns out bias judgements.

Sorry bud but that was an appeal by the miscreants lawyers in front of Law Lords and is now a stated case which can be used for deciding future cases if a fiscal is brave enough to try one again
Only a sherif court decision can be appealed in sheriffs chambers but once it gets in front of the big wigs it’s over.