Oh FFS..... Really ?!

Yes I am. Presumably you can’t explain it hence your comment.

TBF, when you're a poster who everyone thinks "I know exactly what their stance will be" as soon as they see the username on this kind of thread...

Then expect to be called out on stuff.

Is there any evidence beyond he said she said to support that statement. Or are you just assuming he is guilty. I have no idea if he is guilty or not. Nothing has been shared in public to substantiate either sides case hence investigations are being carried out.

QED. Thanks for making my point for me a second time.

Touché. You seem to be signed up to the guilty without any knowledge of the facts.  From what I’ve read the bbc have both been spoken to as journalists and complained at as if they are responsible. I have no idea as to who version, if anyone’s, is the truth. If he is found to have done something wrong I expect to see him in court accused. I’m struggling to see why Monica or Marcus would hang around and risk thier reputations if they thought there was something wrong that could tarnish their image.

All I’m suggesting is we wait to see what the outcome of the investigations are rather than sack him and decide who should replace him before we know the facts.

Ooh wait.

Tell Ainsley to hang fire.

What about Jack Monroe?

Now that would be magnifico. The 'proper blokes' on Twunter will go into meltdown. It'd be epic.

If he is found to have done something wrong I expect to see him in court accused.

You are unlikely to end up in court for being a a complete knob, he has not been accused of stuff that would end up in court.

Not trying to derail the conversation, but struck by the number of column inches dedicated to GW, versus the almost total non-mention of Conor Mcgregor's (civil) conviction for a very serious sexual assault.

You complain to the company that you contracted to appear in the programme with. You complain about other employees at that company. You don’t complain to a third party who neither you or the other participant have a contractual arrangement with.

@chrismac honestly, depending on where in the food chain you were then you probably would go to the channel not the production company. If we were talking about everyday production staff then maybe it'd be different. But anything senior or on-screen I'd probably say the channel isn't the wrong answer.

For starters the channels now have whistleblowing numbers for exactly this sort of shit. They're on the call sheets.

Secondly if you're runner/researcher/junior/assistant your complaint will have to pass up through so many pairs of hands who are paid weekly that I can see how it would eventually reach the desk of "well I'm not biting the hand that feeds". That's not a slight against people working in TV production, it's human nature proven time and time again.  Even if it reaches the production company executives they're then balancing a precarious job that could be canceled at any minute (not in a cancel culture sense, just not commissioned) that pays hundreds of peoples mortgages Vs someone who has probably already moved onto the next gig.

The channel on the other hand is writing the cheques and it's their name metaphorically above the door. No-one outside the industry knows who Banijay are.  The channel is the the one with the power to tell your boss' boss' boss to fire someone.

Yes I am. Presumably you can’t explain it hence your comment.

Well, if you are being genuine then you've begged the question. You've asked why people have "complained to the BBC" with no further detail that anyone has complained to the BBC. Who complained? When?

BBC News has done some digging after they got wind of it because, hey, remember when journalists undertook investigations? But that's a gulf from someone filing a formal complaint.

Is there any evidence beyond he said she said to support that statement. Or are you just assuming he is guilty. I have no idea if he is guilty or not.

After the story broke he took to the Internet boasting that there were "only" 13 complaints made about him. Now I'm happy to concede that someone might had gone down the "he said she said" route to make baseless claims in order to try and squeeze out a payoff. But, generously, 13 is 12 too many.

All I’m suggesting is we wait to see what the outcome of the investigations are rather than sack him

He hasn't been sacked. He has "stepped aside."

@chrismac - if a court is the right place to resolve this, then the police not the production company might have been a more appropriate point to complain to.  But most of the stuff I’ve heard suggested, nobody is suggesting illegality.  That doesn’t mean it is ok, and it’s irrelevant right now whether he did or didn’t do most of it - he’s essentially unemployable as a presenter on mainstream entertainment, especially after how he chose to response to the claims.

He'll turn up with Reet Smugg and Farridge on Gutteral Bollox Naturally

It’s hard to believe that, in 20 years of straying over the being an out of order prat line fairly regularly, no one ever said “Err, Gregg, that’s a bit too close to the knuckle old chap”

His reply would probably have been something like:

"That's what the wife said!!..."

That’s what the wife said

What one? He's had 4...

What one? He’s had 4…

To go though one divorce is unfortunate, to go through three is context?

What one? He’s had 4…

All his own?

Not trying to derail the conversation, but struck by the number of column inches dedicated to GW, versus the almost total non-mention of Conor Mcgregor’s (civil) conviction for a very serious sexual assault.

It's a fair question, and my interpretation is that we already knew CMG was a very nasty piece of work. The story did get reported and he didn't put out a video blaming the victim (happy to be corrected if he did). I've also yesterday read a thought piece about his "fall from grace". Oh, and he's from the RoI.

GW is a UK household name, was still admired by many (see the OP here) and has gone full Partridge in his response. A big part of the news is what's novel, and this is quite novel.

Idea for a TV show.

Put Wallace, and all of the other “celebrity” undesirables, on an island in the Antarctic and leave them there.

Call it Nonce Island.

Now Harry,don't be coy.

You were really thinking more Battle Royale 😉

Nope.

Show would be 4 minutes long. Celebrity Nonces stood on an ice covered volcanic beach with a box of MRE and bivi bags. Footage taken from a drone as it goes back to the ship. Credits, including a list of all of the people that they have abused. End.

Theme tune would be "Don't get mad, get even" by The Age of Chance.

Damn, so no weaponised combine harvesters..

Is dissapoint. 🙂

BBC News has done some digging after they got wind of it because, hey, remember when journalists undertook investigations? But that’s a gulf from someone filing a formal complaint.

I do remember when this happened and journalists were honourable people who investigated stories and allegations. They worked hard to seek out the evidence to support or refute those allegations. They would interview those making the allegations and those who were accused and publish well thought out news stories and programmes.  What we have now, and not just this story, is trial by social media and the press with none of this investigation and corroborating of facts that used to be the hallmark of good journalism. 

"Put Wallace, and all of the other “celebrity” undesirables, on an island in the Antarctic and leave them there.

Call it Nonce Island."

Not defending GW in any way, but nothing so far paints him as a "nonce".

Why don’t celebs who get caught out like this ever apologise??

I mean a genuine apology rather than one of those faux “sorry if you were offended” type ones.

Some do, Ant McPartlin ****ed up, apologised and booked himself into rehab.

I think it comes down to being a decent person rather than an obnoxious bell end though.

none of this investigation and corroborating of facts that used to be the hallmark of good journalism

Rose tinted glasses on there. Journalism failed so many people in the past. The bar was so high that even Saville’s crimes went on without public challenge.

t. The bar was so high that even Saville’s crimes went on without public challenge.

True. It he did have the support of prime ministers and the royal family which helped him bury the story.

Idea for a TV show.

Put Wallace, and all of the other “celebrity” undesirables, on an island in the Antarctic and leave them there.

Call it Nonce Island.

wait, what?

So GW makes some ill judged attempts at humour therefore; 

a) you think that makes him a nonce

b) you want to watch him be killed, live on tv, in the name of entertainment…?

Give your head a wobble

You think I was being 100% serious?

Oh, was what you said an ill judged attempt ah humour.

You best be off to nonce island then ?

Nonce Island.

Channel 5 already did that though:

scruff9252Full Member
Oh, was what you said an ill judged attempt ah humour.

You best be off to nonce island then ?

Wow!

And on that note I'm off.

What we have now, and not just this story, is trial by social media and the press with none of this investigation and corroborating of facts that used to be the hallmark of good journalism.

I don't think this is the case at all. We have credible people, like Kirsty Wark, raising complaint, many of whom said they followed the formal procedure and nothing was done. You then have Wallace slamming the self destruct button with his ridiculous middle class women of a certain age comment, which basically backed up the suggestion that he is classic 1880's man. Media have been quick to point out that there has not been any suggestion of illegality and, as of last night, he was still on the tele.

Given the publicly funded BBC's history of poor management of these types of issues amongst its 'talent' before, it is entirely understandable that there is pubic interest.

"it is entirely understandable that there is pubic interest."

Typo of the day!

I do remember when this happened and journalists were honourable people who investigated stories and allegations. They worked hard to seek out the evidence to support or refute those allegations. They would interview those making the allegations and those who were accused and publish well thought out news stories and programmes.  What we have now, and not just this story, is trial by social media and the press with none of this investigation and corroborating of facts that used to be the hallmark of good journalism.

Eh, but thats exactly what happened here.  BBC News spent a number of months investigating, corroborating and then believed they had a credible story.  They presented their findings to Wallace for comment / rebuttal and he "stepped aside" then went on Social Media to defend himself and made the situation worse.  Following which, other claims emerge that seem to reinforce the original allegations.  If the claims are entirely fabricated and maleavolant he has the resources to sue for liabel.

They would interview those making the allegations and those who were accused and publish well thought out news stories and programmes.  What we have now, and not just this story, is trial by social media and the press with none of this investigation and corroborating of facts that used to be the hallmark of good journalism.

What more do you actually want? They've listed all the allegations with the who, what, where and when.  A sit down interview on Newsnight where they can cross-examine the female assistant who he allegedly grabbed her bum?

He'll do a Prince Andrew style car crash interview next....

Not trying to derail the conversation, but struck by the number of column inches dedicated to GW, versus the almost total non-mention of Conor Mcgregor’s (civil) conviction for a very serious sexual assault.

I was aware of Conor McGregor's case, and it did make headlines, however until that happened I'd never heard of him and wouldn't recognise him.   I suspect I'm not unusual - in contrast there won't be many people who don't recognise Gregg Wallace's mug from the telly.   The McGregor story also appeared to be finite - there was a certain amount of news about it, but it seemed like only one complainer, and her story was defined in the court room. In contrast once the Wallace story broke various "me too" stories broke along with people reawakening old stories.  Many of those people were (minor) celebs themselves which makes the stories more marketable.  Then of course McGregor presumably had legal advice saying "don't say anything, you will ruin any hope of an appeal" and Wallace had a little voice in his head saying, "your cheeky greengrocer personality can dig you out of this" and so he made it so much worse by going on Instagram to "defend" himself.

Not defending GW in any way, but nothing so far paints him as a “nonce”.

Careful, we've exploded the servers before arguing that definition!

He’ll do a Prince Andrew style car crash interview next….

i would bloody love that. The Andrew interview was one of my all time favourite tv moments. I’d love to see Kirsty Wark, Emily Matlis or Vic Derbyshire tearing him apart.

Wallace allegations 'truly upsetting' - John Torode

Very tricky for Torode - he must be right up there as someone who just stood by and watched Gregg do his stuff, and he's hardly in a junior role where worries over his career or of being believed could have been a factor.

Anyone else notice how Torode often seems to have a bit of a runny nose?

I’m convinced that Torode and Wallace film mostly separately and so I tend to spend half of an episode distracted looking for shots that they both feature in. So in my feeble mind it’s plausible that Torode didn’t see most of it and yeah when he was there he woulda been preoccupied with his runny nose.

Re the BBC, they are in the fault line now.  A letter from Nestle claiming about behaviour when filming Inside the Factory on thier premises has been surfaced although GW has not been named specifically.

Very tricky for Torode – he must be right up there as someone who just stood by and watched Gregg do his stuff, and he’s hardly in a junior role where worries over his career or of being believed could have been a factor.

You could say the same for Marcus, Monica and in the past Michel Roux when he did professionals. Either none of them saw anything or are part of the problem.

A letter from Nestle claiming about behaviour

****ing hell! If Nestle are complaining about you then you must be a right bastard.

Feels like this thread is running out of steam, which is probably a blessing, but contributors might like to read an old review of GW's culinary highpoints. Didn't go looking, it turned up on my bluesky feed.

https://metro.co.uk/2024/12/05/unearthed-review-gregg-wallaces-travesty-a-restaurant-22127231/

Daily Mash:

How to avoid allegations of inappropriate behaviour at your Christmas do, with Gregg Wallace

😆

I saw that Strictly clip for the first time yesterday, not an avid viewer, why wasn't he told to rein it in formally then?

You could see the professional was uncomfortable with his remarks,would have saved the BBC alot of angst.

Replacement announced.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cr56v10v6yro

Food critic Grace Dent is to host the next series of Celebrity MasterChef, after Gregg Wallace stepped back from presenting the show after allegations against him.

Author and podcaster Dent has appeared regularly as a guest on MasterChef, and last year was a contestant on MasterChef: Battle Of The Critics.

Good hire; perhaps they could also get Jay Rayner to replace John Torode?

Food critic Grace Dent is to host the next series of Celebrity MasterChef

[thumbs up emoji]

Better.