Danny Murphy - Brainless?

[Diogenes the Cynic]

Neigh lad, I'm not having that.

Reign it in?

 

[chrissyjack]

I can't see these awful horse puns going furlong

 

[Woolly Blue]

I can't see these awful horse puns going furlong

Every time I see Murphy on MOTD, his analysis is always the same, basically he's a one trick pony.

 

[chrissyjack]

Every time I see Murphy on MOTD, his analysis is always the same, basically he's a one trick pony.

He's absolute rubbish . Put him out to pasture . Like the vast majority of these so-called experts .

" Oh , he SHOULD have scored there "......i bloody know , softlad . I'm watching it

 

[Jonte]

Sorry to labour this but it suddenly occurred to me why the BBC reached their conclusion so quickly, and why, therefore, I believe they are not in a position to deal with this matter impartially:

A response from the BBC, submitted for your delectation as promised:


Dear Mr...............

Many thanks for getting in touch with us about our Match of the Day Live coverage of the Liverpool v Everton FA Cup match on 5th January.

We've received a range of feedback from viewers, so to allow us to reply promptly and to ensure we use our TV Licence fee resources as efficiently as possible, we’re sending this response to everyone. We’re sorry we can’t reply individually, but we hope this will address most of the points raised.

We were concerned to hear you were unhappy with pundit Danny Murphy's comment in the studio about an Everton fan who was seen in the crowd jumping and waving his crutches in the air when Sigurdsson scored an equaliser for Everton.

We'd explain that Danny's comment here was clearly a tongue-in-cheek response to the joyous celebrations of the Everton fans.

Danny was of course a Liverpool player for seven years and so fully understands what a goal in a hotly-contested Merseyside derby means to both sets of fans, and here there was absolutely no offence intended.

The man's crutches could be seen being waved around, but the camera angle used here was wide enough to ensure the fan in question could not be identified by the pictures shown.

Many thanks once again for taking the time to get in touch, and we hope our reply here helps to explain the context surrounding Danny's light-hearted reference to the fan. We're very grateful for your feedback, which has been formally logged and made available to staff across BBC Sport for their information which helps us shape future coverage.

Kind Regards

BBC Complaints Team
www.bbc.co.uk/complaints

NB This is sent from an outgoing account only which is not monitored. You cannot reply to this email address but if necessary please contact us via our webform quoting any case number we provided.


Read into that what you will.

Not only have they compromised themselves as a fit and proper authority to deal with this matter, impartially and with due diligence, but by scrutinising the incident in this way with ringed footage using BBC production equipment, they are complicit in the act about which I complained.

Subsequently, I don’t believe for a moment that ‘Danny’s’ faux pas was at the forefront of their concerns when they considered this, and by all accounts, others’ complaints of a similar nature.

I recall that the proforma advice displayed when pressing ‘submit’ stated that the matter would be considered in the first instance by the production team hence there could be a foreseen delay in responding due to exigencies etc.

I believe that when they realised that the incident was in fact ‘a joint effort’, it became an exercise in damage limitation, hence the ‘matey, we’re all lads together’ type response with which I was furnished.

No doubt, they’ve made a feeble attempt - and in the process drawn attention to their own culpability - to cover their backs, by including the paragraph I’ve highlighted in bold.

It’s pretty obvious that the producers and managers responsible for MOTD will submit this in mitigation when approached by the Ombudsman who is know the only rightful and fitting body sit in judgement here.

Meanwhile, as far as the Beeb are concerned, ‘Danny’ will be out on a limb.

 

[Ron Swanson]

It's such an old boys club at the BBC. Murphy was never a good footballer and is an excruciatingly bad pundit, but likely got in off the back of having played for the RS. Michael Owen is another. He's devoid of any kind of personality but the BBC old boys club elevated him into becoming one of the better-paid pundits because he played for Liverpool.

They should really move away from the ex-footballers and start introducing some journos to balance it out - people that can string sentences together.

 

[Bigjoe]

He's absolute rubbish . Put him out to pasture . Like the vast majority of these so-called experts .

" Oh , he SHOULD have scored there "......i bloody know , softlad . I'm watching it

The only two pundits I tend to agree with are Gary Lineker and Alan Shearer.

 

[Arthur Putey]

Sorry to labour this but it suddenly occurred to me why the BBC reached their conclusion so quickly, and why, therefore, I believe they are not in a position to deal with this matter impartially:



Not only have they compromised themselves as a fit and proper authority to deal with this matter, impartially and with due diligence, but by scrutinising the incident in this way with ringed footage using BBC production equipment, they are complicit in the act about which I complained.

Subsequently, I don’t believe for a moment that ‘Danny’s’ faux pas was at the forefront of their concerns when they considered this, and by all accounts, others’ complaints of a similar nature.

I recall that the proforma advice displayed when pressing ‘submit’ stated that the matter would be considered in the first instance by the production team hence there could be a foreseen delay in responding due to exigencies etc.

I believe that when they realised that the incident was in fact ‘a joint effort’, it became an exercise in damage limitation, hence the ‘matey, we’re all lads together’ type response with which I was furnished.

No doubt, they’ve made a feeble attempt - and in the process drawn attention to their own culpability - to cover their backs, by including the paragraph I’ve highlighted in bold.

It’s pretty obvious that the producers and managers responsible for MOTD will submit this in mitigation when approached by the Ombudsman who is know the only rightful and fitting body sit in judgement here.

Meanwhile, as far as the Beeb are concerned, ‘Danny’ will be out on a limb.

Sorry to labour this but it suddenly occurred to me why the BBC reached their conclusion so quickly, and why, therefore, I believe they are not in a position to deal with this matter impartially:



Not only have they compromised themselves as a fit and proper authority to deal with this matter, impartially and with due diligence, but by scrutinising the incident in this way with ringed footage using BBC production equipment, they are complicit in the act about which I complained.

Subsequently, I don’t believe for a moment that ‘Danny’s’ faux pas was at the forefront of their concerns when they considered this, and by all accounts, others’ complaints of a similar nature.

I recall that the proforma advice displayed when pressing ‘submit’ stated that the matter would be considered in the first instance by the production team hence there could be a foreseen delay in responding due to exigencies etc.

I believe that when they realised that the incident was in fact ‘a joint effort’, it became an exercise in damage limitation, hence the ‘matey, we’re all lads together’ type response with which I was furnished.

No doubt, they’ve made a feeble attempt - and in the process drawn attention to their own culpability - to cover their backs, by including the paragraph I’ve highlighted in bold.

It’s pretty obvious that the producers and managers responsible for MOTD will submit this in mitigation when approached by the Ombudsman who is know the only rightful and fitting body sit in judgement here.

Meanwhile, as far as the Beeb are concerned, ‘Danny’ will be out on a limb.

I got the same reply. They have completely missed the point. Whether you can identify the guy is irrelevant. According to Murphy all disabled are on benefits. Bad stereotyping. Its like as if the camera panned a crowd picked out a black guy and they said at least he's not mugging someone.

 

[Jonte]

I got the same reply. They have completely missed the point. Whether you can identify the guy is irrelevant. According to Murphy all disabled are on benefits. Bad stereotyping. Its like as if the camera panned a crowd picked out a black guy and they said at least he's not mugging someone.

That’s how I see it too, Arthur.

Prejudice is prejudice, in all its forms.

Those in charge have realised this too and I’ve no doubt that behind the scenes, ar$es will be kicked.

Unfortunately, we won’t get to hear of it and those apologies won’t materialise as this would be considered an admission of guilt and therefore consequences.

Still, I believe there will be/ have been repercussions, and you can almost guarantee that any future transgression will be swiftly followed by a caveat of the form ‘we have to stress that so-and-so’s comment was of his own volition and in no way reflects the views of the BBC’ etc., either verbally by Linacre during the programme, or subtitled at the end, thereby absolving management of any blame.

Watch this space.

 

[GrandOldTeam]

@Arthur Putey @Jonte He has been identified, he's had journos hassling his family;

 

[peteblue]

It's such an old boys club at the BBC. Murphy was never a good footballer and is an excruciatingly bad pundit, but likely got in off the back of having played for the RS. Michael Owen is another. He's devoid of any kind of personality but the BBC old boys club elevated him into becoming one of the better-paid pundits because he played for Liverpool.

They should really move away from the ex-footballers and start introducing some journos to balance it out - people that can string sentences together.

All the journos are RS as well........

 

[Jonte]

@Arthur Putey @Jonte He has been identified, he's had journos hassling his family;

I see. Thanks GOT.

That’s disgraceful; and perhaps worrying for the Beeb who were instrumental in highlighting the event.

If this guy seeks legal advice, I doubt that excuse they gave about the use of a wide angled lens will hold any sway in court.

Oh, Mr. Murphy, what have you started.

 

[Woolly Blue]

I see. Thanks GOT.

That’s disgraceful; and perhaps worrying for the Beeb who were instrumental in highlighting the event.

If this guy seeks legal advice, I doubt that excuse they gave about the use of a wide angled lens will hold any sway in court.

Oh, Mr. Murphy, what have you started.

He tweeted this the same as the match mate



I don't know if it was before or after MOTD was run, but it does seem he pretty much identified himself.

Now, I have a fair amount of sympathy for him, because he was recovering from an operation, but it does highlight the problem with twitter and other social media in that, if you want to remain anonymous, then sticking your name up on the internet ( especially a not very common name ) , isn't a wise move.

That doesn't exonerate the press from pestering him, they're scum and should leave the bloke alone, but sometimes you have to help yourself a bit in life and exercise a bit of common.

edit : though the header says Jan 5th, the timestamp says it was the morning after the match

 

[Jonte]

He tweeted this the same as the match mate



I don't know if it was before or after MOTD was run, but it does seem he pretty much identified himself.

Now, I have a fair amount of sympathy for him, because he was recovering from an operation, but it does highlight the problem with twitter and other social media in that, if you want to remain anonymous, then sticking your name up on the internet ( especially a not very common name ) , isn't a wise move.

That doesn't exonerate the press from pestering him, they're scum and should leave the bloke alone, but sometimes you have to help yourself a bit in life and exercise a bit of common.

edit : though the header says Jan 5th, the timestamp says it was the morning after the match

So Murphy was obviously wrong, but I take your point.

Thanks for flagging that up, Wool.

 

[Trimm Trabb]

Murphy on Allardyce saying he left Gylfi and Rooney out of the Arsenal game due to fatigue:

“I don’t get the fatigue thing. It’s not like they’re in the Champions League or anything.”

Haven’t we played more games than any other team this season?