NORMALLY, the shout from me is: “Vote, vote, vote” – and, most recently, I was calling for everyone to vote for Jane Ross, a Scottish footballer who is up for Sky Sportswoman of the month for November.
Jane is a hard-working, committed, dedicated individual, who is a great role model to all young girls, and you can register your vote here: skysports.com/more-sports/other-sports/news/29877/10085285/vote-for-your-8203sportswoman-of-the-month.
However, when it comes to the BBC Sports Personality of the Year and Tyson Fury, he doesn’t seem to have any of Jane’s characteristics and the shout is: “Don’t vote”. Let me repeat this: “Don’t vote.”
Just in case you are not aware, Tyson Fury, who recently became boxing’s new heavyweight world champion, has been quoted as saying: “I believe if a man should go to work all his life, a woman can go to work as well. If you’re not good enough, you won’t make it anyway. Who am I to say don’t you do that because you’re a girl? What I believe is a woman’s best place is in the kitchen and on her back. That’s my personal belief. Making me a good cup of tea, that’s what I believe.”
I believe that in a lot of cases continually quoting and discussing situations gives more airtime to the perpetrators who, through default, gain more publicity, so object achieved. There is also a saying that “there is no such thing as bad publicity”.
However, I make an exception in this case. How can you ignore these uneducated, bigoted and completely inappropriate comments. It’s impossible. I won’t name this individual again – and just for argument’s sake, I will call him “the bigot”.
The bigot is a nominee for BBC Sports Personality of the Year – not achiever of the year, not winner of the year, but personality of the year, and the decision on who wins this award is made by public vote – so again I say to you: “Don’t vote for ‘the bigot’.”
The bottom line here is: should he be on the list at all? I personally don’t think so. For me, I believe that it takes more than being at the top of your game to be the nation’s SPOTY; I think it is a combination of traits that include integrity, strength, compassion and a degree of humility that captures the spirit of the award and captures the imagination and votes of the general public.
What is the BBC’s response to all of this? Well, let me quote the party line. A BBC spokesperson said: “The Sports Personality shortlist is compiled by a panel of industry experts and is based on an individual’s sporting achievement – it is not an endorsement of an individual’s personal beliefs, either by the BBC or members of the panel.”
That to me sounds decidedly like a cop-out. Let’s play devil’s advocate here. Had the comments been of a racist nature, would the BBC still stand by their man? Again, I don’t think so.
Why is it, then, that sexism and homophobia in sport seems to be accepted whereas racism and racists would, quite rightly, be denounced and hounded out? The devastation and distress to those on the receiving end of these type of comments has the same effect.
Is the BBC a faceless corporation which doesn’t listen to the voice of the people? When you consider that tens of thousands of people have signed a petition calling for the BBC to withdraw the individual from the list of nominees, you wonder what their problem is in making a decision.
The public have called for action and their opinion counts – not the faceless corporation that is the BBC. If you want to add your name to the petition, go to change.org/p/the-bbc-should-remove-homophobic-tyson-fury-from-sports-personality-of-the-year-shortlist.
As for the British Boxing Board of Control, they met to discuss these comments and have decided to ask for a face-to-face meeting in early January to gather further information. This type of procrastination is open for you to draw your own conclusion.
This is 2015, isn’t it? Women have had the vote now for nearly 100 years. So while we continue our quest to make inroads into equality for women in sport, let’s ensure that comments from this short-sighted individual and any like-minded others do not put our cause back years.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here