Why oh why can't we speak our minds using purposefully unoffensive wording, without others taking offence? Why, after reading facts, such as credible gathered data, used for reference/promotion/buisness opportunities etc, be questioned by those who simply think that those people are disrespecting them... Football Focus - Me: I dislike the show now. My views are not racist or discriminative, My veiws are now thankfully echoed a bit, due to the following facts given to me by a black female proffesional UK News Correspondent. The viewing figures can't have improved since Dan Walker left the show and Alex Scott took over, surely??? My good female friend helped me - She will be known on here as - LH (her family nic-name) LH was born in the UK in 1970. she and her family moved to the UK in the late 1960's fleeing civil unrest in Bangladesh. I know her well because her older brother was part of our class of 87, studying Sports Psychology. She has studied Jounalism for many years. She is freelance Chief News Correspondent and Author, who now works all over the world. She and her family love the UK people with a passion. She (LH) is an advocate for UK white people. She despises those ethnic minorities who, in her words, wrap themselves in a 'Black Lives Matter'/'Discrimination' Banner for the purpose to be heard. She has recently posted me some stats, which I found very interesting after I'd sent her my opinions on my own views of the demise of Football Focus since a woman has taken over the iconic Saturday, British build-up to a weekend of predominantly men's football. Me: Football is played by men/womaen and children. Women's football I championed from the late 80' when I started coaching. Today women's football is thriving. Women's football now has it's own shows on mainstreem TV - Live matches are now frequent, and after MOTD there is the Woman's Football Show too. And this makes me happy. I wrote to LH, begging her not to take offence.... My questions and her response was very interesting indeed. I wrote this - Why are the BBC recieving hundreds of weekly complaints from both men and women, asking why women are taking over men's footblall programs? Why is it that when a women's football program is dominated with women presenters and pundits, do they also have to have an equal female/male representation in the men's football programs? OKAY -.......and her response was given from her own collated stats that prove me and thousands of others right - LH replied and sent me this - please log in to view this image Alex Scott presents the BBC's Football Focus. Visionhaus/Getty Images Two of the UK’s leading presenters have engaged in a public spat over the fading fortunes of one of the country’s most established sports shows. The BBC’s Football Focus – a studio show inviting football pundits to analyse the day’s games following the final whistle on Saturday afternoons – has been running for 49 years, but was revealed this week to have lost more than a third of its viewing audience in the space of four years. That dip coincided with the departure of presenter Dan Walker, who left the show in 2021 after 11 years as host, whereupon he was replaced by former women’s England team player Alex Scott. He wrote on social media platform X on Saturday: “It’s hard to see Football Focus struggling. I loved it growing up and it was an honour to present it and I still miss it. We poured everything into that show every week and worked hard to keep it relevant. I hope it stays part of the TV landscape.” Scott responded to the message with a GIF, which said simply “Interesting.” Walker replied: “I’m not saying you haven’t Alex. It’s a saturated market and it’s hard work every week. I hope you have a good show today.” Scott subsequently added: “We have big interviews with Ange Postecoglou and Arsenal captain Martin Odegarard coming up on the ‘Award’ winning Football Focus tomorrow. “Make that a headline.” The Daily Mail reports that weekly average viewing figures for August fell from 849,000 in 2019 to just 564,000 in 2023. While there is understood to be no immediate threat to the show’s existence, commentators have raised concern about the future of a show in a landscape where football fans can quickly catch up with all the results and analysis via a realm of platforms, club websites and other personalised viewing choices. Comments Pamela keenan on September 23, 2023 7:55 am Desperately needs new presenter Anonymous on September 23, 2023 7:32 am Clearly the correct move is to replace the host that saw your audience drop by a 3rd. Yet they will not because of politics. So the show will keep dwindling until it is unceremoniously cancelled. Des Blakeston on September 23, 2023 6:57 am I can’t watch such a what has recently become a very boring program, perhaps a more experienced presenter, Claire Baldwin!, Ian Wright, I’m not impressed with Alex, she is a good pundit on the side of the pitch, Dan was head and shoulders above the current team. Barry Hayward on September 23, 2023 5:50 am get Roy Keane Micha Richards and Gary Neville on the show it would then be worth watching. LH - Scott is a black woman, and an ex footballer. She has her fingers in so many pies because she is black, and because she is a lesbian. This is not a shock to my fellow workers. We all say the same thing - "Today, is the best time on earth for a black to live in the UK and to gain employment on TV" Scott also hits many more tick-boxes - She is black, she is a woman, and she is gay. Despisite the fact that she can't talk correctly, she is still headhunted to represent other blacks on TV. We are all aware now that eveything white,is complained about by those many campaigners groups and protesters, who are battering down the doors of power at the BBC and Parliament. What's next after 60 years of Dr Who? ..........surely not a black gay man. Ha ha ha ha FFS!........if this was written by a white News Correspondent ??
It is so obvious that they are ticking "politically correct" boxes now. I don't care if the presenter is black,white, Asian or Chinese.I don't care if they are male or female. All I care about is if they are good at their job. Alex Scott isn't so I am one of the 250k who have stopped watching Football Focus
Yep 100% If you're good enough, then you're old enough right? I'm exactly in the same frame of mind... I've watched the likes of Claire Balding, Gabby Logan, Hazel Irvine and Jill Douglas presenting all mixed gender soprts with aplomb. And it's because they simply ask the right questions of the other professional pundits on the same show, rather than trying to give a view when they are not on the same page as current, and ex males pro's experiences on the pitch. I cringe when I hear the terminology of some female puntids. And I feel so guilty about my feelings towards their embarrasing wording.....like - She scored that goal with, 'outside whip' I do feel sorry for Scott because she is trying her best....but why is she replying to brilliant Dan Walker with - "Hmmm, Interesting" rather than being a bit more respective of a propper Proffessional Sports Presenter trying to simply express his feeling towards a show he loves? ....I sometimes shake my head..in disbelief.
The DEI apocalypse is upon us and the backlash is going to be horrendous because of the sheer spite with which activists have pursued their various agendas. We're seeing it in entertainment and we're about to see it explode in real life.
Ain't that the truth. I don't care if you are black, white, blue or green. I don't care what culture, or faith you represent. I just want harmony amongst us all. And in life we are all wrongly or rightly judged.... it's part of life. But it's wrong if an ethnic minority person black or white, no matter what country you visit, is discriminated against violently. But then some of those same people demand to not recieve the exact same critism that we all do as part of our own life's learning curve....right? We all read spats amongst us all on this forum yeah?.....but we don't call, discrimination do we?....instead we simply agree or disagree, and move on. We are walking on eggshells in the media....big time.
Yeah I understood the context. Like I said, welcome to hell. Bernard Manning is playing the Tartarus stage at 5 and later on the first Klansmen are going to drape themselves in confederate flags and tap dance to Old Dixie.
That's the thing that bugs me. We're peached to via the media that we should have an inclusive and diverse culture yet, instead of saying this man/woman/person has done this, colour, sexuality or whatever is tagged on to describe them - like "She is the the first black woman to....." I listen to Greatest Hits radio station now and again and they had a programme fronted by Holly Johnson how gay people affected the music scene in the 80s. In those days I didn't a toss what colour or sexuality you were - all I cared about is whether I liked the music or not. Racism was seriously active in those days but I may be naive here and yes racism is wrong but life seemed so much simpler in those days compared to now. There seems to be so many boxes that need to be ticked and rules to follow now
Well explained... Even politicians, who have think-tanks and advisors to guide them, still are walking on the same eggshells, trying to avoid losing their jobs because of voicing their own current affairs concerns etc..
I guess I can speak a little on behalf of the gay community and why they make reference to their sexuality. As you'll no doubt know, homosexuality was illegal until 1967. So you are a gay man, and you go to prison for being gay if caught. Between 1967 and 2014 it was legal to be gay, but you weren't allowed to get married. That was only for "normal" people. Gay people had to have a civil partnership that robbed them of basic rights such as spousal benefit - no life insurance if your partner dies, no widows benefit, no automatic inheritance, no living spousal benefits - so, for example if you are a Railwway worker, you get free travel. That benefit is also extended to your partner and children. Until the 2000s same sex relationships were denied this right. Even when you put aside the financial aspects, the sheer insult of not being recognised by society as a married couple. During the 70s and 80s especially, the gay community took ownership of the words used to taunt them - gay, queer, pervert etc etc became ways to describe themselves and neutralise the hatred. The result of all of this is instead of hiding in the shadows and denying their existence, the gay community reversed it by being openly gay, openly camp and not pretending to be something they weren't. My cousin got married to his partner about 9 years ago and the speeches were all very pro-homosexuality and the older members of the family were shifting in their seats and rolling their eyes, but to understand what it's like to live in the 21st century in the UK and be told you can't marry the person you love just because they are the same sex of you is just unbelievable. Anyway, that's my soapbox put away for today
There’s interesting data showing Gen Z are simultaneously the most likely to identify with LGBTQ and be the most intolerant of it, similar data is being shown with Racism, Identity and the split is huge between males and females. The truth is, as tolerance for these different groups has grown, some have also sought to wield this new found power against those who might still be sceptical, creating an interesting dynamic, Gen Z coming through school are the tip of the spear.
Wouldn't disagree, there's something about Gen Z that worries me and I say that as a father to 2 Gen z kids. Having said that I'm sure my parents generation has similar fears about mine.
Embrace it, the world is in flux and change is coming, tolerance of LGBTQ is a luxury afforded by a liberal world without conflict and strife, look around and see that time is passing.
Very well explained mate and I can understand the viewpoint, there always seems to be a fight from sections of humanity to be recognized for who they are. From my personal perspective, I'm not bothered on a person's colour or sexuality, I'm more bothered about the person themselves. If they act like a total idiot, I'll treat them like one. I think I may have taken this thread off track and to get it back on, the reason Football Focus could be losing ratings is that Sky and BT/TNT screen more matches now on the same time as the programme. However saying that, I feel that journalists or presenters should headline a programme rather than a footballer be it male or female
