Today's Sun Front Page

by , 2 May 2012

The front page of the Sun Newspaper today

"Woy gets England job - Bwing on the Euwos!

(We'll see you in Ukwaine against Fwance)."

By all means criticise Roy Hodgson for his football, or his lack of success as a top class manager, but to poke fun at a minor speech impediment, is just disgraceful.

How will the Sun report on the Paralympics - call it a freak show no doubt

I hope that every footballer and every football manager refuses to talk to any Sun reporter until they publish a prominent front page apology

Responses

add your response here

I hve just heard that the Mirror, not to be out done ran a headline - 'The Woy Done Good'

Both newspapers editors should be ashamed of themselves

by steve_ben2004, 2 May 2012

Totally and utterly unacceptable, steve.

But what we have come to expect from the tabloid press.

Apparently, apart from having a record of success in both club and international management, he speaks several languages and probably has a higher IQ than the whole population of tabloid 'journalists' put together.

by Feline123, 2 May 2012

Precisely! Roy Hodgson has a record of success going back some way and should have been given the England job about 15-20 years ago, instead of the English FA's round-the-world quest for any non-English coach they could bribe heavily enough to take on the England job.

by thetruth, 2 May 2012

That wouldn't be difficult would it Feline? (the collective IQ of red-top hacks)!!

by Bonz1957, 4 May 2012

Not difficult at all, Bonz!

by Feline123, 4 May 2012
add a comment

I think the Daily Mirror had a similar ploy!

Thankfully such trivial fun will be short lived and let's hope Roy Hodgson's back is broad enough to ignore this and get on with the very important job in hand. I agree, it is petty and can only be viewed with contempt. It does seem to me that the press enjoy creating derision at all England football managers and that's probably as a result that we have yet to find a winner in every respect .... or should I be talking about the team there!

They do say in today's press that Hodgson is an academic and a thinker above all else. Let's hope that pays dividends in the Euros. And they also say that anything above getting through the quarter-finals will be success. I always thought this was about bringing the cup home?

Perhaps if Hodgson can get his team playing like a top Premiership side at all times, we may actually have something to smile about this year. Is it worth getting the Red and White flags out yet?

by Snoopy48, 2 May 2012

It's long been a problem with the England 'team' that they don't play enough as a team, being first and foremost vastly overpaid club players, this vast wage scale being used as leverage by the clubs against the FA to keep national duties as light as possible.
Hodgson's first job must be to get more club cooperation via the FA. His second job must be to make the players appreciate the honour of representing their country. I wish him the best of luck, but the dead hand of the English FA may do for him as it did for his predecessors.

by thetruth, 2 May 2012
add a comment

That's just plain mean isn't it to exploit a personal idiosyncrasy like that.

Good luck to Roy, I hope he has the last laugh and does well with the team.

Personally I have never picked up a copy of that particular rag and never will.
Also if that's the way they carry on then I too fear for their Paralympics coverage.

by LILLIE, 2 May 2012

Why are journalists so rude and unkind. Words like that must have made him feel very embarrassed and taken away a lot of the glory of being chosen for a top job. Shame on the Sun for printing articles of this nature.

by Sabre, 2 May 2012

Basically Sabre because that's the type of people they are. Mean, petty, horrid little people with no sense of decency. Remember the old adage "Those than can, do. Those that can't, write about it"!!

by Bonz1957, 4 May 2012

Reminds me of another adage along similar lines: 'Those that can't do, teach; Those that can't teach, teach teachers.'

by thetruth, 5 May 2012
add a comment

Haven't read a newspaper today or any day except Sundays. Catch all news on BBC on-line. Have had no time to read that either but from what you all say it is pathetic. Is the media so desperate for news that they have to turn to such embarrassing trivia.

by save24, 2 May 2012

Snap, save, I only read a Sunday paper and read BBC news online the rest of the week.

by fruitcake, 3 May 2012

Radio 4 for me, and occasionally the TV news if the telly is on by default after watching something before I go to bed.

But I love the analysis programmes like 'Newsnight', and I'm a total addict of 'Today'.

John Humphrys is my hero, along with the lovely James Naughtie after his fabulous Spoonerism when discussing the 'Hulture Secretary'!!!!

by Feline123, 4 May 2012

Oh Feline! It took me a moment to extend that Spoonerism - naughty indeed! I assume that Mr Naughtie didn't extend it?
It's Radio 4 for me too - with occasional Breakfast TV news - but Newsnight is a bit hardcore for me! It's always presented with an agenda and Paxman sounds like one of my old bosses with the way he needles at people.

by thetruth, 4 May 2012

He pretended to be having a coughing fit, thetruth, but it was so bloody funny.

Every time Mr Hunt is mentioned nowadays Mr F and I have a giggle!

by Feline123, 4 May 2012

I think everyone has a giggle at the mention of Mr Hunt now, Feline. I heard a little item a day or two ago on Radio 4's lunchtime news, referring to Mr Hunt. The female newsreader stuttered over his name and title...I'm sure that was because no one can say those two things on air without getting nervous! She managed it, just, but I bet the others in the studio were in fits of laughter at her attempt!

by fruitcake, 4 May 2012

Sounds as though Radio 4 is allergic to Mr Hunt.

by thetruth, 5 May 2012

I've noticed that, fruits. Ever since JN made his hilarious gaffe you can almost hear the presenters psyching themselves up to saying the name without stumbling.

by Feline123, 5 May 2012

I shall have to listen to all the news bulletins now - a new sport!

by thetruth, 5 May 2012

Lol!

by fruitcake, 5 May 2012

I didn't hear it Feline what did he say - first and last letter please or we shall be in trouble. hee hee x

by Sabre, 5 May 2012

OK, Sis, transpose a couple of letters in the phrase, 'Jeremy Hunt, the Culture Secretary'. ;-)

by Feline123, 5 May 2012

Ah with you now Feline - how awful but funny. :-) I wouldn't have been able to have stopped laughing.

by Sabre, 5 May 2012

Well I certainly couldn't, Sis, and I still dissiolve into giggles every time I hear him mentioned!

by Feline123, 5 May 2012

Me too...how childish we are, Sis! ;-)

by fruitcake, 6 May 2012

Yep! And long may it continue, Sis!

by Feline123, 6 May 2012

It's good to laugh sisters there's nothing else that's free. I'm sure they'd tax us on breathing if they could.

by Sabre, 6 May 2012

Lol, Sabre!

by fruitcake, 6 May 2012

Don't speak too soon, Sabre! I remember thinking to myself 25 years ago (in the midst of all the privatisations) that they couldn't possibly privatise the weather (ie the rain that falls out of the sky...), but I was wrong - they privatised the water supply.
Also - remember that the government taxes cars based upon their CO2 output, so why not tax the people on the same basis? We could be taxed based upon a medical evaluation of how much air we use to perform respiration, which could be based upon how much food we eat and how much weight we put on relative to food consumption (from which could be calculated how much food we actually burn up, hence how much CO2 we emit).
Then - just as car manufacturers have invested in reducing new car CO2 emissions - personal fitness might become more popular as people try to find ways of making their bodies more efficient. Then of course, businesses based upon this expanding (or contracting, as the case may be) craze would be liable for VAT, while any fall in consumption of non-VAT'd food would have less of an adverse effect upon tax revenues, so the government would be quids-in.
If I can think of this, be sure that some civil servant in the Treasury has already suggested it!

by thetruth, 7 May 2012

Wow thetruth what a brainy person you are !!!! I dread to think what we'll be taxed on next.

by Sabre, 7 May 2012

Just imagine if I were employed by HM Treasury.... Sadly, they wouldn't have me. They missed a trick.

by thetruth, 7 May 2012

Would you give us a good increase in our pension then thetruth? and lower our tax a lot more so we don't pay any? Sounds a great idea to me.

by Sabre, 7 May 2012

I think you 'misappreciated' my comment, Sabre - the Treasury's job is to find ways of generating more revenue (and reduce expenditure), not give it away. On the other hand, I would happily advocate tax reductions as long as they are paired with welfare reductions - you can't have both lower taxes and more welfare, even though previous governments tried (and we are suffering austerity for it now).

by thetruth, 7 May 2012

Oh I thought you were the Pensioner's friend thetruth but you won't give us a nice rise. I shall have to think carefully whether I would want you to have the Treasury's job or not. Will contemplate this very deeply and let you have my answer in the forthcoming weeks, months or years.

by Sabre, 7 May 2012

Not to worry - the difference between me and a Treasury civil servant is that I have a face.
Also, governments are too weak to consider unwinding the last 64 years of welfare, so today's pensioners can relax in the knowledge that today's workers will continue to shoulder the ever-heavier burden. It's tomorrow's pensioners who need to worry - those retiring beyond 2030 - because the system will have collapsed under its own weight by then.

by thetruth, 7 May 2012

We have paid into the system all our working lives thetruth and whilst I am appreciative of what I receive I have paid for it and it's not a living wage at all. I have never been on benefits or been out of work when I was working and I started work at 13 with a Saturday job so I've never been idle.

by Sabre, 7 May 2012

There's a lot of truth in what you say, thetruth, but at least those who will retire beyond 2030 have around 20 years to prepare for it, as well as they can given the current circumstances. There are others, like myself, who fall between the two 'camps' and who have had the retirement goal posts moved as they near the end of the game. We worked all our lives on one set of circumstances and paid into the system only to find that the system now expects us to conjure up the means of providing the shortfall with no notice!

by fruitcake, 7 May 2012

Which just goes to show how shaky was the original premise of the welfare state. Government actuaries failed to consider the effect of people living longer and the effect of any fall in the birth rate, so National Insurance rates were set far too low. For decades governments have dodged this issue, but the longer it goes on, the worse it gets.
Sabre, in principle you have every right to expect what you expect, but (through the fault of government actuaries and policy-makers - and no fault of normal taxpayers) the fact remains that the pension system is underfunded, as is the NHS.
Fruity, you're right on the faultline of shifting goalposts, but inevitably somebody has to be. These goalpost shifts will continue for another 20-25 years.
Today's younger generations can expect much-lower-value state pensions (if any at all) and will have to spend their entire working lives paying twice over to cover the welfare costs of the post-retirement population as well as making separate provisions for their own retirement. After about 2035, the current welfare burden will finally be unwound and subsequent generations of workers should only need to pay once over again.

by thetruth, 7 May 2012

I've told both my grown up children to assume that they will get no State pension.

You're right that somebody inevitably has to be on the faultline, but why did it have to be me...?! :-(

by fruitcake, 7 May 2012
add a comment

funny how they never mentioned anything about murdoch not being a fit & proper person etc anywhere in the paper, evidently

by steve_ben2004, 2 May 2012

The Sun did mention The House of Commons Culture Media and Sport report findings on page 4 or 6 but were happier to highlight the split along party lines as weakening the criticism of Murdoch and his fitness to run a major media company.

Their reporting is basically scoffing in the face of the MP's who voted for the inclusion of the anti-Murdoch sentiment.

It should be stressed that the MP's were only divided on the inclusion of that 'fit' phrase, in all other respects the MP's were united in their condemnation of News Corp and the willfull blindness of its senior management to address the phone hacking scandal and in lying to Parliament.

As for their humourless front page on Roy Hodgson and for their poor judgement in running it, for me, it just highlights The Sun's need to distract attention from the bashing the media owners got in the Commons yesterday.

Therein lies the problem, it would be nice to see the media being impartial and reporting facts no matter how uncomfortable they are, rather than them defending the indefensible and that is why it is important that Murdoch's control over broadcast media has to be challenged and where possible reduced.

by Parchester, 2 May 2012

The Sun and its red-top ilk have long adhered to the "phwoar, gotcha, Shazza, Bazza, Gazza,..." lexicon for their headlines. Mocking Roy Hodgson's pronunciation is simply the latest application of that methodology. Remember Graham Taylor being portrayed as a turnip?

As for weakening Murdoch's hold on media power, you can't argue with money and he's got a lot of it. I'm surprised that he hasn't retired yet - he seems a very shrunken man now at 80-ish - but the fact that he's still in the saddle must mean that he still believes he has a business mission. Those who criticise Murdoch are at heart people who find the whole idea of commercial business distasteful and would much rather that everybody behaved in a crystallised mythical genteel Victorian manner - mythical because the Victorians were far more scurrilous in their practices than the business leaders of today.

by thetruth, 2 May 2012

I've not seen today's paper and will not be buying that now! Shocking!

by serena1, 2 May 2012

I've never heard of Roy Hodgson, nor do I ever read the Sun newspaper, but this is disgraceful by anyone's standards.

by fruitcake, 3 May 2012

It was so rude fruity must have made him feel terrible. I see some think it was done as a joke - what weird minds they have.

by Sabre, 4 May 2012

Making fun of someone's disability is never funny, is it, Sabre, weird minds is right, sick minds even.

by fruitcake, 4 May 2012

Apparently, Jonothan Ross, who suffers from a similar speech impediment, was interviewed and said he just thought it was The Sun's quirky sense of humour.

Another thing for me to disagree with the talentless git about!

by Feline123, 5 May 2012

Jonathan Ross - the 'Tony Blair of television', as I used to think of him (as in - inexplicably popular, faux cool, finely image-honed and intensely irritating). I'm sure I've heard TV 'insiders' mention that Ross purposefully adopted that w/r mispronunciation (and mockney accent) as part of his trendy image in the '80s and that outside of broadcasting he sounds just like the well-brought-up middle-class chap that lurks somewhere beneath his dashing quiff and zoot suits.

by thetruth, 5 May 2012

Totally agree with you feline I can't bear to watch him on the television.

by Sabre, 5 May 2012

Thanks, Sis!

by Feline123, 5 May 2012

I used to like Jonathan Ross when he first started out, he was different and funny then, but I went right off him a few years back when he started making really tasteless and sexist comments to female guests on his talk show. You could see how offended many of them were, and the American ones were too polite to answer him back!

by fruitcake, 6 May 2012

I've never liked Ross - always thought he was a fake. As for his obsession with pushing the boundaries of conversation, far be it from me to ascribe any term of affliction to it (eg Tourette's, or Obsessive Compulsive Disorder), because that would be unfair to actual sufferers of such afflictions.. Even his speech impediment is played-up for effect. He strikes me as the exemplar of the difference between London and the rest of the UK - Londoners love him because he's such an uber-trendy, avant-garde Mockney - but outside of London he just looks and sounds like a caricature.

by thetruth, 7 May 2012
add a comment
add your response here

Posts within the money.co.uk community represent the views, experiences and opinions of members and experts only. They should not be taken as financial advice and should not be followed without further research.

Get our free money saving newsletter
Join over 450,000 other subscribers who grab our expert money tips, unmissable money guides & hottest bargains each week in our special email...

More Discussions on Sport Events