Who else hates this guy (Gregg Wallace)?

Cold Fusion said:
Im abit confused about the Torode side of this. He says he has no recollection of it, but then the BBC say he acknowledged that it happened?

I then interpret the article to say the 'victim' recalls the slur being said and then he apologized immediately. It should be a non-story really.
Click to expand...
Yeah, this very much seems like they were looking for any excuse to end Torode's contract after Wallace's demise, knowing that the show was most likely over and done with.
 
Current gossip is that (the god awful) Andi Oliver and (passable) James Martin are a couple in the frame. Although if I were James, I wouldn't go near it with someone elses barge pole.
 
GravyMonster said:
Yeah, this very much seems like they were looking for any excuse to end Torode's contract after Wallace's demise, knowing that the show was most likely over and done with.
Click to expand...

There's plenty of stories around about Torode being a piece of ****. Although he doesn't seem to have the same sex pest reputation.
 
Cold Fusion said:
Im abit confused about the Torode side of this. He says he has no recollection of it, but then the BBC say he acknowledged that it happened?

I then interpret the article to say the 'victim' recalls the slur being said and then he apologized immediately. It should be a non-story really.

Then again the BBC love stories about themselves when maybe it would be netter to report and let it go.
Click to expand...
He outed himself as being the person the report referred to (it didn’t cite his name agains the allegation but it would have been obvious it could have only been him or one/two others).

He denied the alleged event happening.

As the the BBC, damned if they sack him, damned if they don’t. Sack him they’ll get accused as being OTT because I expect most people can identify with letting some kind of slur out at least once in their lifetime. Don’t sack him and they’ll get accused of harbouring a racist.

What ever happens, it’s good for ratings on the news channel.

As for airing the already filmed series, again, damned if they do, damned if they don’t. The compromise would be stick it on iPlayer with no promo and a disclaimer, if people really want to watch it, it’s there. If they don’t, they don’t have to.
 
Last edited:
What we need is a bit of slapstick with the pancake mix. Ade Edmondson and Dawn French anybody.
 
"As the the BBC, damned if they sack him, damned if they don’t."

They can't do either. He was on contract to Endermol, he's not renewing his contract.

As for the sensational story of Mr Gurn, all the allegations upheld, bar one, are 'hurty words' not 'sex pest'.
 
Mint8 said:
Pity he felt the need to play the autism card - presumably as it may bolster any legal action he takes against the BBC/producers etc
Click to expand...

Standard these days to try and milk a mental health angle, Huw Edwards did it too, and a load of posters on here immediately lapped it up after already being willing to put forth rather ridiculous arguments in his defence.
 
b0rn2sk8 said:
Yeh that only happened in your head.
Click to expand...

People were literally trying to argue the toss over him DMing teens on Instagram - it's all there in the thread, one guy (Hotwired IIRC) trying to claim there was no indication of age, etc., as if a teenager on Instagram could just as easily be mistaken for a middle-aged man. There's literally no excuse for that - whether it's criminal or whether the person had just turned 18, it was still incredibly suspicious and worthy of criticism and questions - but some were very keen to try and argue the toss I suspect simply because of their football shirt politics - the Sun or other tabloids had run with the story and it's about a good guy/establishment figure ergo it must be opposed.

Then Huw put out the mental health angle and people absolutely lapped that up too - some were even angry the thread existed in the first place as "no crime has been committed".

The point was that the mental health angle is clearly within the PR playbook now, and that's because it will work on many people. MH is serious; it shouldn't be abused as an excuse to spin some sympathy when faced with bad publicity.
 
Last edited:
dowie said:
MH is serious; it shouldn't be abused as an excuse to spin some sympathy when faced with bad publicity.
Click to expand...
It's primarily being abused within the PIP domain and the government now seems to have said tax payer can't arbitrate on peoples personal truth.
 
dowie said:
People were literally trying to argue the toss over him DMing teens on Instagram - it's all there in the thread, one guy (Hotwired IIRC) trying to claim there was no indication of age, etc., as if a teenager on Instagram could just as easily be mistaken for a middle-aged man. There's literally no excuse for that - whether it's criminal or whether the person had just turned 18, it was still incredibly suspicious and worthy of criticism and questions - but some were very keen to try and argue the toss I suspect simply because of their football shirt politics - the Sun or other tabloids had run with the story and it's about a good guy/establishment figure ergo it must be opposed.

Then Huw put out the mental health angle and people absolutely lapped that up too - some were even angry the thread existed in the first place as "no crime has been committed".

The point was that the mental health angle is clearly within the PR playbook now, and that's because it will work on many people. MH is serious; it shouldn't be abused as an excuse to spin some sympathy when faced with bad publicity.
Click to expand...

Hmm?

What's this **** shovelling you're up to.
 
Fubsy said:
Popcorn guys! He's got a bite.
Click to expand...

Nah, not worth diverting this thread too far - there's some overlap with the mental health card/PR angle, which was the main point, but anyone can go and read the posts in the Huw thread and see the mental gymnastics used to downplay or defend his actions for themselves.

Back to the broader topic, people do seem to give some celebs a lot of leeway - Gregg Wallace, perhaps, wasn't as popular and gave off different vibes than, say, previous lovable BBC & ITV icons who've been cancelled previously for both illegal and legal but morally dubious sexual conduct.
 
Last edited:
dowie said:
Nah, not worth diverting this thread too far - there's some overlap with the mental health card/PR angle, which was the main point, but anyone can go and read the posts in the Huw thread and see the mental gymnastics used to downplay or defend his actions for themselves.

Back to the broader topic, people do seem to give some celebs a lot of leeway - Gregg Wallace, perhaps, wasn't as popular and gave off different vibes than, say, previous lovable BBC & ITV icons who've been cancelled previously for both illegal and legal but morally dubious sexual conduct.
Click to expand...

Oh no, you talked ****, well off topic and dropped my name. Out of fairness I have a turn with the shovel don't I.

It's quite the cheek for you to ressurect a bitter moment of your past in hopes of rewriting how it went.

How many mental issue threads got nuked out of existence because so many forum members were assigning such issues to you. On such quality grounds as it being obvious, just look around. They even have nicknames for your forum behaviour.

That's exactly the grade of evidence and gymnastics you were pulling to assign guilt and I can't be having with unwashed opinion no matter who or how many people are in it or how upset you were that I didn't share your feelings. Apparently it burned enough for you to remember years later that I considered your feeling based opinion to be garbage.

But you know what, you get the same category as ol Huw Edwards had at that time. Trash grade claims deserve no respect. None of them stuck in the end did they, the unwillingly labeled "victim" said **** off and lawyered up. The much later porn charge that stuck was a completely different matter.

Anyway the difference is I won't lift a finger to argue in your favour because you're too unpleasant, so I've always just left them to it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom