Jump to content

BRFCS

BY THE FANS, FOR THE FANS
SINCE 1996
Proudly partnered with TheTerraceStore.com

[Archived] Had Enough


Recommended Posts

I've been reading up on the Andrew Sachs incident, disgusting the way they treated a 78 year old bloke in the name of 'comedy'.

I used to like Ross's show on a friday night, but not anymore. Would he have found it as funny if it had been about one of his daughters ? and Brand needs a bath, smelly (PLEASE DONT USE THAT WORD AGAIN)

As ridiculous as the BBC's wage structure is, Woss has probably earned another grand in the time it took me to type this.

"Want" over

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 120
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Brand should be sacked as he is a talentless, monkey faced junkie (PLEASE DONT USE THAT WORD AGAIN) who parades around showing the world he is a 5th rate Kenny Everett with added opiates. He is a crappy fashionista who morons who read Heat magazine and believe he is a comedy God because he whirls his arms around and sticks his todger in young women with no brain in their head and no taste.

Ross' contract should be re-negotiated. I like some of his stuff, but he's not worth the £18m.

This incident has been blown up, but it was a horrible thing to do, and if Brand ends up suffering, then that's good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agreed, I find Brand very funny. Ross on the other hand is, as the Yanks say, a douchebag. And an overpaid, unamusing one at that. This whole episode is rather unpleasant however and is indicative of Ross's inability to go five minutes without reverting to tired innuendo. His hysterical desire to ingratiate himself with his guests by roping them in to his smutty gags, whether they're willing or not, is pretty embarrassing to be honest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They should have both been sacked by now. In my opinion they are both foul mouthed, talentless morons and I do not want another penny of my licence money to go into their pockets.

From now on any programme in which either of them appears will be immediately switched off. (Not that I have ever really watched them anyway.)

When you think of the mild remark that forced Jim Bowen to resign from Radio Lancashire, allowing those two to continue to broadcast is just ridiculous.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But that's just it isn't it Al ? Getting paid literally millions to hurl obscenities and disgusting innuendo, at an old guy who isn't available to defend himself and 'we'll look into it'.

One whiff of racism and we're sweating like a brazilian on a tube train.

Bin 'em both save a fortune and be spared comments like the ones Woss made to Gwyneth Paltrow.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do wish people will chill out more, on the whole.

It's not like Woss and Brand have just acted completely out of character here is it?

Must admit, not read the whole transcript so will reserve judgement, but the clips I heard didn't seem that bad IMO. Sach's agent certainly got a few opportunistic plugs in on the strength of it. Also think Brand hit the nail on the head with the comments about the Daily Mail.

It was a cheap shot though, but again - it's not like Brand hasn't got form on this one. Ross has made a career of slip-ups and sailing close to the wind. The real culpability here though is with the BBC for over-estimating the public's capacity for incidents like this to 'keep it real' and 'down with the kids'. This should not have made it to the airwaves - not because it's offensive, but because more people would take umbrage it than think it amusing.

On a similar topic, it's like this Alan Stanford/wags incident. Listen to the radio and it's caused great offence to the players apparently. Look at the pics and AS and the three women all seem to be enjoying it and having good laughs, so what exactly is the problem?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agreed, I find Brand very funny. Ross on the other hand is, as the Yanks say, a douchebag. And an overpaid, unamusing one at that. This whole episode is rather unpleasant however and is indicative of Ross's inability to go five minutes without reverting to tired innuendo. His hysterical desire to ingratiate himself with his guests by roping them in to his smutty gags, whether they're willing or not, is pretty embarrassing to be honest.

I have to agree with you there. I used to like Ross but he's become very very tired on TV. Brand, on the other hand, displays many characteristics that I know I should dislike but I just find him funny. His football column in The Guardian is usually a good read too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He made comments about having sex with his granddaughter. On her website her group (called Satanic Sl*ts Extreme!) gives the following message "Keep a look out if you are hungry for some blood, guts, gore, sexy striptease and sl*tty activity.'"

Hardly sailing close to the wind to say you had sex with somebody described as a sl*t

I am glad to see the politicians jumping on a bandwagon while the economy is collapsing around our ears. There were only 2 complaints after the initial show.

I am also willing to bet his next audience figures will show a massive increase.

Has nobody ever made a prank call before? Have you not seen The Simpsons? Graham Norton has made a living out of it for 10 years, also fonejacker.

Get a grip people. It's sad

Just found out that they already gave written apologies to Andrew Sachs a few days ago.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, the Daily Mail, defender of all that is free, decent and good, once again defends our morals. Rather ironic consider it's the organ of a pornographer (no pun intended).

What's the worst offence here? That someone broadcast the 'f word' again (seems to be Woss's forte)? That Brand made another crank call? That it's poor old Manuel? That some seemingly fame-hungry floozy has revealed Sachs lineage to Brand? That there's been such a breach of discretion?

I'm trying hard to see where the 'obscene' element comes into this TBH.

Apparently, a 'record' amount of complaints against the BBC have been received - even more than the fake Queen advert.

The only likely losers in this will be the production/editorial staff - and that's fully justified given their obvious lack of judgement in airing this. No doubt Woss & Brand will have some minor admonishment, but it's not going to affect them in the scheme of things, least of all the things they crave the most - fame, controversy, publicity and money.

People, media, Manuel - get over yourselves. This really isn't the worst thing happening the world right now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, the Daily Mail, defender of all that is free, decent and good, once again defends our morals. Rather ironic consider it's the organ of a pornographer (no pun intended).

As much as I agree with your sentiments and despise The The Daily Mail, you've confused it with the Daily Express, owned by pornographer Richard Desmond.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, the Daily Mail, defender of all that is free, decent and good, once again defends our morals. Rather ironic consider it's the organ of a pornographer (no pun intended).

You're thinking of the Daily Getsworse (aka Daily Express), which is owned by the pornography tycoon Richard Desmond. The Daily Mail is the organ of the loony right, aka the Conservative party.

I like Ross's Saturday radio show and find him rather funny but despise his television show and his sycophantic attitude towards his guests.

Both he and Brand will in all likelihood escape with a rap over the knuckles unlike the poor production editor who allowed the comments to be aired. He's probably already left Broadcasting House clutching his P45.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're thinking of the Daily Getsworse (aka Daily Express), which is owned by the pornography tycoon Richard Desmond. The Daily Mail is the organ of the loony right, aka the Conservative party.

....

Just checking you was all taking note at the back! Well spotted, thanks for pointing that out. :wub:

Still, more t*ts read the mail it seems than are on show in the Sport!.

So, back to this topic, like the lawyers say - cui bono? .....

Brand, who has a new TV show starting this week, as well as the paperback edition of his book still in the charts?

Sachs, who happens to have a new book out? (possibly the reason for the original slot on the show, which he failed to keep with). Interesting to note as part of the apology/complaint by his agent, the BBC were keen to add 'actor, Andrew Sachs, who played Manuel in Fawlty Towers' rather than just 'Andrew Sachs'.

Jonathan Ross, who just happens to have a book out?

The vampire chick, who gets some publicity for her website/troupe/whatever they are?

The BBC - as suggested previously, the audience figures will probably increase.

Good publicity all round I'd suggest?

So, back to the two people that originally complained. On behalf of all concerned, I'd like to to say sorry.................. that you've not got anything better to do with your lives or focus your energies on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seems pretty pathetic that a mere prank call as been made such a big fuss over. That's the Daily Mail for you I guess.

Don't think it requires both Brown and Cameron to come and comment about a radio prank call. Shouldn't they be sorting out the economy or something.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Brand really is the unfunniest "look at me, if I twirl my arms about and shout loud enough does that make it funny" twonk who ever walked the face of the earth.

He should be sacked for that if nothing else, regardless of this incident, which although hardly World War 3, was frankly pathetic. Woss should have known better.

Can't believe people are queueing up on here to defend them. :wacko:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.