- Geoff Bycott Knighthood deserved or not ?
Within the current system I’d say he does. There has to be a limit on how long something can be held against you. In this case a contested conviction that resulted in a non custodial sentance. I’d say 25 years is plenty long enough.
P.sPosted 2 months ago
I wouldn’t have a probkem with the whole honours system being chucked in the bin.scuttlerMember
Not. But the whole farrago has served as wonderful cover for the other awful picks (May’s handpicked advisers who led her into an abysmal election, sundry other Tories etc) in her honours list. Which is… convenient
No shit! I just had a look and the obvious anomalies are the ones who’ve done stuff outside of No. 10 (like wife beating).
At least that Darroch ambassador chap who got thrown under the bus for doing his job confirming that Trump was a **** got some recognition.Posted 2 months agoP-JayMember
1) he’s a dick of the highest order.
2) As far as I know he’s never done anything that wasn’t for money or his own entertainment.
Even if it wasn’t for the above, say he was a decent sort who’d actually done something positive with his profile, influence etc then that fact that he’s been convicted (and failed to appeal against) a violent crime that he has zero remorse about (his recent opinion that the EU was at fault for his conviction and not the fact he actually committed a crime) should be an automatic ban from an honour.
Even if all that didn’t happen and he was a decent sort who had done some good and hadn’t punched his GF in the face 20 times and then blamed her for hurting herself as she was so upset he wouldn’t marry her then the fact he publicly claimed he’d have to ‘black up’ to get one should mean he shouldn’t.
But those days are over, we’re in a post-shame society now. It wasn’t long ago that if a ‘celebrity’ had committed a terrible crime they’d be very quiet about it and understand that for that reason some doors were closed to them, not anymore. So you can be a terrible person with zero moral compass but as long as enough people like the sound of your voice the government will give you one of our nations highest honours if they think your fans might vote for them.
SlagsPosted 2 months agobatfinkSubscriber
What a fitting end to her time as PM….. nothing summarizes the low-aspiration, low performance, low energy, mentality of her premiership like this list of people she feels represent the best of great Britain.
Geoffrey Boycot? FFS – how is he even remotely deserving, or even relevant?
Get in the bin Theresa, good riddance.Posted 2 months agoKryton57Subscriber
1. He’s a boorish, racist self-serving abuser, and;
2. Knighthoods are an idea that has outlived any relevance it’s had. Rarely about merit and most often about cronyism. Scummy
All of this but if you want to feel aggrieved have a look at the rest of the honours list. She’s basically reward everyone who helped her not get us through Brexit and ultimately put us in the position we are in. So essentially a bunch of self serving arguing tosspots have been rewarded for their failure to the British people and committed into the establishment.Posted 2 months agoP-JayMember
There has to be a limit on how long something can be held against you.
Perhaps if you’re repentant about the matter but when you’re an unrepentant, lying (French judicial system allegations) bore, maybe that time has not been reached
Agreed, he’s a typical Bully. It wasn’t his fault, it was the French for convicting him that caused all the fuss he could have done without with.Posted 2 months agobikebouySubscriber
I’ve listened to him on TMS for yonks now, and I’m still questioning why each time Agers is commentating he doesn’t hand over to Boycott.. it’s left for someone else to announce him.
Thats telling of his personality.
I had vague memories of his past, but didn’t know about the appeal or the outfall of it. I just thought he’d been convicted and that was pretty much it. You live and learn off STW thats for sure.
Is he deserving? I’d say No. BITD I do remember him refusing to open his local village cricket fete by announcing “speak to my agent, my fee is £5k” or something very very similar.. that says enough for me to say he’s not really represented his sport or influenced or indeed brought forward and promoted his sport.. more that he charges for his punditry on a fee x appearance basis. I see Knighthoods as value to society, someone whose pretty much plugged away at increasing and promoting the particular topic or sport or art.
I’m not sure he’s done any of my criteria, so a No from me.
I think the whole Knighthood system is far outdated, there should be a recognition for achievement in that persons chosen subject but that the award should reflect social and societal benefits.. not just to the person whose nominated.
Anyway, it does smack of Maybot cronyism… but then the personalities are similar and no doubt the outlook too.
IMOPosted 2 months agospawnofyorkshireSubscriber
And, even if he wasn’t, was he actually that good? Genuine Q, I’m no cricket expert.
He was a good batsmen for his era, but incredibly boring, didn’t get out much, one pace of scoring. He’d have made Jonathan Trott look like Tendulkar if they’d batted together.
Anyhoo he’s a wife-beating, misogynistic, ex-pat misanthrope who’s not lived in Yorkshire for more years than he did.Posted 2 months ago
His justification for championing brexit was because he was convicted of a crime he committed in France, whilst he lived in France by the french judicial system. So he’s also an idiotgobuchulMember
The whole of the Honours system is archaic bullshit.
The vast majority are for time served Civil Servants and is seen as a perk of the job.
Is it the case that an outgoing PM gets to dish a load of honours out as a farewell present? Is that correct?
So if Boris loses the election in a few weeks and becomes probably the most unsuccessful PM of modern history, will be a given a load honours to dish out to his cronies?Posted 2 months agoconvertSubscriber
Genuine Q, I’m no cricket expert.
You could quite easily have classed him as the world’s best opening batsman of his generation. His style of play is rather outdated now (very defensive, more about staying in than maintained a run rate- though you could argue we could do a bit of that now tbh). Andrew Strauss also got a knighthood at the same time. He captained England for 50 odd test matches and won the ashes at least twice as I recall so head and shoulders above Boycs in that respect who only captained England 4 times I think when others were injured. But as a standout opener of their respective generations Boycott was the better player. Strauss the much nicer human being however!
I’ve never really liked him. I can respect him as a player now but at the time he was a bit of a turn off to watch as a young kid. I could probably credit his batting as an influence on my modest success as a youth cricketer – not because I learnt anything from watching him but because whenever he was in I turn off the telly and went outside to practise! As a person I’ve also never liked him. I suspect he would be diagnosed as on the aspergers spectrum if anyone could be bothered to spend that much time in a room with him alone. A very self orientated man with very little empathy for others. We lazily characterise him as ‘a typical Yorkshireman’ but I think that masks what he is and has given him a shield to deflect some significant character flaws (or certainly unpleasantness) his entire life. If I had my way I’d never hear him witter on with the same cliched lines on TMS ever again.
But……as much as anyone can know who was not in the room…..I’m not convinced about the conviction. Enough has been said and written about the woman who accused him that I just can’t hand on heart think it totally right. A different time and a different era but does someone who has a genuine complaint instruct their lawyer to ask for cash compensation to withdraw the complaint when beaten that badly? You would want him branded the abuser he was. She was being sued by other people at the time for money owed. Splitting up with Boycott was going to cut off her main income stream and seamingly she was in financial strife already. Boycott had numerous affairs and relationships and in the #metoo world of today I don’t think anyone else has come forward. Domestic abusers tend to also be serial abusers. He has of course be convicted and that should be the primary position of anyone looking at him from afar otherwise the whole system falls to pieces. So that is what I still think of him as. His personality and flaws as a human being I would say make him more vulnerable to a miscarriage of justice on this than most though rather than a shoe in cert. IMHO of course – and that is as someone who really can’t stand the man.Posted 2 months agoedhornbySubscriber
he was sacked in 2017 by the BBC for saying some pretty horrendous stuff about, ironically, not getting a knighthood
there was also a story recently about him being the one who was pushing for the South Africa tour right in the middle of apartheid
it’s a no from mePosted 2 months agomeftyMember
he was sacked in 2017 by the BBC for saying some pretty horrendous stuff about, ironically, not getting a knighthood
His numbers don’t lie, he averaged over 47 in Test Cricket, no modern England day player has surpassed his average other than Joe Root. He averaged 56 in First Class cricket which is the best average of any English player who scored more than 30,000 runs. He was an incredibly consistent batsman and I enjoyed watching him. His 100th 100 at his home ground in a Test Match was really something special. He had all the shots in his youth, his one day final record innings in the 60s was only broken recently by Alex Hales, but he realised too many of them were too risky so he reduced the number of scoring shots to the four with the highest reward to risk ratio. Graham Gooch credits him with helping to transform him into a major run scorer by adopting the same approach and he in turn passed the same methodology to Alistair Cook
He is certainly not a misogynist, he much prefers the company of women to men and, as an abstemious drinker didn’t fit into the heavy drinking culture of the England cricket team in his day, but there is no doubt that he is self centered and that didn’t improve his chances of fitting in. However that is hardly an uncommon trait among successful sportsmen (or women).
As a broadcaster, he has excelled, as Tim de Lisle observed, it was as if Botham and he exchanged personalities on entering the commentary box: the swashbuckling batsman became a boring blocker; and the boring blocker started hitting every ball out of the park with his vivid and trenchant views. He is revered as a broadcaster throughout the world, especially in India, which I suggest makes it unlikely that he is a racist – although ill judged and offensive remarks were made in 2017. Yes he is a bit cliched now, but at least they are his cliches, and he is still an astute judge of batsmen and their weaknesses.
Of course, he has plenty of flaws to go with all those runs, but frankly so does everyone, especially those who are driven to succeed.
I would agree with convert on the French case, but as a fan, I probably found it easier to reach that conclusion than he did.Posted 2 months agonastybobbyMember
Great cricketer, not a very nice human being by all accounts. I doubt if his politics were similar to Dennis Skinner [rather than often being accompanied with a pineapple ring] that he’d even have got close to a knighthood from the Maybot. Gives Yorks a bad name IMO, although there’s plenty of boorish dicks that come from these parts, unfortunately.Posted 2 months agoEwanMember
Within the current system I’d say he does. There has to be a limit on how long something can be held against you. In this case a contested conviction that resulted in a non custodial sentance.
Doesn’t the above just mean he’s a *lying* racist domestic abuser who punched someone 20 times in the face?
(and no he doesn’t deserve any kind of gong!)Posted 2 months ago
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.