[Football] Joe Lycett to shred £10k if Becks continues his World Cup promotion...

[GoingUp]

Maybe he could give that £10k to families struggling to buy food, pay for their heating and electricity etc instead of...... you know...... shredding it.

Hopefully it's fake money used for symbolic purposes.

Yes it's shite that the World Cup is Qatar but all these celebrities and Football Associations from around the world should had done something YEARS ago instead of waiting two weeks before it kicks off. Oh wait, they wouldn't had got enough attention and press back then.

 

[Springal]

Yes it's shite that the World Cup is Qatar but all these celebrities and Football Associations from around the world should had done something YEARS ago instead of waiting two weeks before it kicks off. Oh wait, they wouldn't had got enough attention and press back then.

It’s funny how everyone forgets England played a stupid friendly against Brazil in Qatar in 2009 in an attempt to get their vote for us to host the 2018 World Cup ! We were complicit in this whole thing

 

[mejonaNO12 aka riskit]

Listening to the latest episode of Richard Herring's podcast which has Mr Lycett on it.

As he says in that, It's got people talking, whatever your view

Sure, some WEIRD people will be talking more about the £10k but it also has people rightly talking about Beckham and the truly mad decision he has made. All he actually wants is for Beckham to acknowledge the issues. Reading between the lines, that would probably see him not shred the £10k.

Again, it's a bit weird that some people seem more upset about £10k being threatened to be shred compared to the other issues but there you go.

 

[nicko31]

Look like he went ahead with the shred...

 

[Triggaaar]

Must admit until the recent Laura K interview on BBC I'd never heard of him. Seems to know how to get publicity though.

I love Laura Kenny, but why on earth has she become a political commentator?

 

[dejavuatbtn]

I’d imagine that there are a lot of people who could have done with just a little bit of that £10k. It’s a sad way to make a point. I don’t think Beckham would have given a shit.

 

[Triggaaar]

I’d imagine that there are a lot of people who could have done with just a little bit of that £10k. It’s a sad way to make a point. I don’t think Beckham would have given a shit.

Charity being the obvious answer. He's now going to have to defend himself against the obvious questions: if you've got £10k to burn (yeah I know), why not give it to charity? What sort of pompous twit destroys money like that, instead of giving it to those that it could benefit from it? If you want people to talk about some injustice, why not chain yourself to a railing like everyone else?

The story here isn't about what Beckham is doing (which we already knew was disgusting), but about Joe being an idiot.

 

[Husty]

Its Joe Lycett's money to do with as he see's fit. I'm sure Joe would have loved to give it to charity instead... obviously Beckham hasn't allowed him to do that is the point a lot of the thicker commentators here are missing.

 

[Motogull]

Lycett giving the money to charity would not have been newsworthy. The stunt has gained a much wider audience.

 

[pb21]

Could be a ruse, think he has form for this sort of thing?

 

[brightn'ove]

£10,000 is a relatively cheap advertising campaign. The awareness he has raised will raise far more money for many different charities than if he quietly donated that cash. people can’t see past what an individual could do with that money.

 

[BadFish]

£10,000 is a relatively cheap advertising campaign. The awareness he has raised will raise far more money for many different charities than if he quietly donated that cash. people can’t see past what an individual could do with that money.

You are spot on here. That 10,000 is probably well spent.

 

[Swansman]

Its Joe Lycett's money to do with as he see's fit. I'm sure Joe would have loved to give it to charity instead... obviously Beckham hasn't allowed him to do that is the point a lot of the thicker commentators here are missing.

I understand how you think but it doesn't make you any less stupid.

Sure, he can burn his money if he wants but David Beckham is probably not physically controlling this man, forcing him to burn 10k in some kind of pointless honorable ceremony to support the three gay people who felt Qatar seems like a great place to live in... it just feels a bit wasteful.

 

[Cheeky Monkey]

I understand how you think but it doesn't make you any less stupid.

Sure, he can burn his money if he wants but David Beckham is probably not physically controlling this man, forcing him to burn 10k in some kind of pointless honorable ceremony to support the three gay people who felt Qatar seems like a great place to live in... it just feels a bit wasteful.

What?

 

[clapham_gull]

Good on him, really like the way he is turning into a subversive campaigning comedian like Mark Thomas.

Money very well "spent" to highlight the hypocrisy.

Saying the money could have gone to charity is an odd point. He could have spent 10 times more with a PR company with little effect and that wouldn't have gone to a charity either.

Incidentally, he's also raised more for charity with other stunts that most of those criticising him would give in a lifetime.

The real story should be about Beckham and how we should be long tired about his dubious associations with whatever for personal promotion.

 

[beorhthelm]

£10,000 is a relatively cheap advertising campaign. The awareness he has raised will raise far more money for many different charities than if he quietly donated that cash. people can’t see past what an individual could do with that money.

awareness of what? the issue is in the press, widely discussed already, doesnt need this daft stunt. the only thing this promoted awareness of is Joe Lycett.

 

[Sarisbury Seagull]

Good on him, really like the way he is turning into a subversive campaigning comedian like Mark Thomas.

Money very well "spent" to highlight the hypocrisy.

Saying the money could have gone to charity is an odd point. He could have spent 10 times more with a PR company with little effect and that wouldn't have gone to a charity either.

Incidentally, he's also raised more for charity with other stunts that most of those criticising him would give in a lifetime.

The real story should be about Beckham and how we should be long tired about his dubious associations with whatever for personal promotion.

Yep, well said.

And the fact that Nadine Dorries has come out to criticise Lycett confirms that he is on the right side of things.

 

[Triggaaar]

Its Joe Lycett's money to do with as he see's fit. I'm sure Joe would have loved to give it to charity instead... obviously Beckham hasn't allowed him to do that

Ah, so Beckham has had some sort of injunction against Joe to prevent him donating to charity. Wow, the plot thickens, along with the audience.

 

[Triggaaar]

Lycett giving the money to charity would not have been newsworthy. The stunt has gained a much wider audience.

Like I said, there are other news worthy things he could have done, like chain himself to some railings or something.

 

[Triggaaar]

Saying the money could have gone to charity is an odd point. He could have spent 10 times more with a PR company with little effect and that wouldn't have gone to a charity either.

What comedian is going to spend £100k on a PR campaign against something another celebrity is doing? Why are you comparing what he's done with throwing money away in a different manner? There are other ways for a celebrity to draw attention to an issue, and they don't require money being destroyed.

I imagine at some point he'll be saying he didn't really shred £10k

The real story should be about Beckham and how we should be long tired about his dubious associations with whatever for personal promotion.

Indeed, but it isn't, because this is the wrong way to draw attention to something.