[Other Sport] George Riley..suspended on allegations

[surlyseagull]

I could earn a fortune in compo going back decades ,I was verbally assaulted had the piss taken out of me for being a man and was sexually assaulted by having my trousers taken down and sugar put down my pants ......Oh the life of an apprentice, and that was by the women.

 

[portlock seagull]

He has always given me the impression of being a smarmy git, full of his own sense of self importance.... it doesn't surprise me at all. His exchanges with the 'gals' on 5live in the mornings are always a bit sparky and cringeworthy.

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk

Doesn’t that say more about how you choose to interpret?

 

[heathgate]

Doesn’t that say more about how you choose to interpret?

Nope.... it says how he presents himself.... so assuming there is no smoke ... I guess I interpreted quite well..... even before this story broke.....

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk

 

[Weststander]

He has always given me the impression of being a smarmy git, full of his own sense of self importance.... it doesn't surprise me at all. His exchanges with the 'gals' on 5live in the mornings are always a bit sparky and cringeworthy.

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk

Good post.

He forgets he's there to get on with the sports news in a tiny slot, but it's all about smarmy Riley.

 

[black & white seagull]

This all seems on the say-so of what is basically a gossip group at the bbc.

While I understand your desire to defend someone you know (most of us would do the same), to label these women as a 'gossip group' demeans them and undermines your argument. From what I understand, it's a group of very senior people who are more than capable of understanding the implications of what they are doing. I can't imagine they would make such accusations without proper preparation and investigation, and feeling they had real reason to.

Of course, in due course it may turn out I'm wrong, in which case I'd be happy to retract the above.

 

[Weststander]

While I understand your desire to defend someone you know (most of us would do the same) to label these women as a 'gossip group' demeans them and undermines your argument. From what I understand, it's a group of very senior people who are more than capable of understanding the implications of what they are doing. I can't imagine they would make such accusations without proper preparation and investigation, and feeling they had real reason to.

Of course, in due course it may turn out I'm wrong, in which case I'd be happy to retract the above.

The BBC wouldn't have acted unless there were multiple serious complaints.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Very sad too see this story yesterday.

Cards on the table, George is a longtime colleague at the snooker and also a friend.

The first thing to say is that after due process and investigation, if he is proven to have done what he is accused of then he deserves what is coming. And for a high profile BBC presenter I imagine that is career death.

Personally I would be very surprised if he has done what he is accused of as reported, but we'll soon know and I haven't spoken to him since it broke.

But there are some troubling aspects to the way he has been publicly shamed and dragged through the mud before due process has been carried out.

This is a work disciplinary, not a court case. Why has his name been released before a decision on his guilt or innocence?

This all seems on the say-so of what is basically a gossip group at the bbc.

Why is there another male presenter unnamed? Is he a bigger, more important name? Better lawyer?

A witch hunt is always the enemy of real truth and due process. Let it take place but I suspect the damage is done even if he were cleared.

I repeat, if he has done what is alleged then he's got what's coming but we are not at that point yet.

Having been accused of serious misconduct at work (I was not guilty) and having had all my colleagues informed, and then having been casually described as having 'broken college rules' at a staff meeting (which I hadn't) I can sympathize with the accused and agree with the tone and content of [MENTION=47]Tooting Gull[/MENTION]'s post.

The facetious comment I made last night, conflating two presenters with a shared surname, was as someone noted, unwise, and was deleted. I never said I'm immune from being a bit of a **** from time to time.

In general it is good that things are coming to light. It doesn't feel, overall, like a witch hunt, more a catharsis, but I would change my view were it to be the case that some find themselves acquited after they have sunk while others who float are immediately hanged.

 

[Weststander]

Having been accused of serious misconduct at work (I was not guilty) and having had all my colleagues informed, and then having been casually described as having 'broken college rules' at a staff meeting (which I hadn't) I can sympathize with the accused and agree with the tone and content of [MENTION=47]Tooting Gull[/MENTION]'s post.

The facetious comment I made last night, conflating two presenters with a shared surname, was as someone noted, unwise, and was deleted. I never said I'm immune from being a bit of a **** from time to time.

In general it is good that things are coming to light. It doesn't feel, overall, like a witch hunt, more a catharsis, but I would change my view were it to be the case that some find themselves acquited after they have sunk while others who float are immediately hanged.

IMO your comment last night was harmless.

 

[Tooting Gull]

Some very relevant views, clearly a high-profile case that is going to be of interest, even more so in the light of international and domestic Westminster events. You can only hope that the BBC make a better job of the internal investigation than the FA's failed efforts with Aluko. But it appears that the in-house BBC executive running it is ex Met Police and they are generally pretty thorough, we have a guy in snooker who does the betting/match-fixing investigations from a similar background.

I hope I expressed my views fairly. But like Lewis Dunk when he had his ordeal before being acquitted on everything (and that of course was a court case, and not a work disciplinary), you'd expect friends and family to at least want to see fair treatment and due process. As stated I don't know what happened for sure, neither does anyone else on this thread, and again if he is proven to have done what he is accused of then of course he deserves what is coming. You just want to see it done properly and fairly, and I'm not sure being linked to Weinstein and Saville before the investigation has begun is especially fair.

 

[Weststander]

Some very relevant views, clearly a high-profile case that is going to be of interest, even more so in the light of international and domestic Westminster events. You can only hope that the BBC make a better job of the internal investigation than the FA's failed efforts with Aluko. But it appears that the in-house BBC executive running it is ex Met Police and they are generally pretty thorough, we have a guy in snooker who does the betting/match-fixing investigations from a similar background.

I hope I expressed my views fairly. But like Lewis Dunk when he had his ordeal before being acquitted on everything (and that of course was a court case, and not a work disciplinary), you'd expect friends and family to at least want to see fair treatment and due process. As stated I don't know what happened for sure, neither does anyone else on this thread, and again if he is proven to have done what he is accused of then of course he deserves what is coming. You just want to see it done properly and fairly, and I'm not sure being linked to Weinstein and Saville before the investigation has begun is especially fair.

To be fair, we should then extend that to all the MP's being accused by the press daily. A lot of hacks and members of the public hyping that up far more than the Riley case which has probably passed most people by as they have no interest in 5live. Those MP's are on the defensive, having to release statements to counter the press/public lynchings, before due process.