Mel McLaughlin offers on air to buy fellow host a drink

[🏅Dooks]

Mel McLaughlin slammed on social media for 'double standards' for saying she'd buy Mark Waugh a drink 

Thoughts?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3404965/Chris-Gayle-smashes-four-sixes-row-match-record-fastest-half-century-Twenty20-history.html

[1965]

WGAF

 

[Diocletian]

Well now you know how everyone feels about your posts in the politics thread.


 

[Stalin]

Mark Waugh.... 

[WilliamPowell]

Mel McLaughlin slammed on social media for 'double standards' for saying she'd buy Mark Waugh a drink

Thoughts?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3404965/Chris-Gayle-smashes-four-sixes-row-match-record-fastest-half-century-Twenty20-history.html

I thought that's what she said but wasn't 100% sure

She was incredibly flustered after she called Mark Waugh; Damien Fleming.

So she then mumbled and fumbled her way through things apologising and then made the comment about buying him a drink but sort of stopped mid sentence and tappered off

Seemed to lose the plot completely at that point 

KP was great though got things back on track. MW tried too as well but he comes across as clueless too at times so he didn't really help 

Though IMHO she seems to have struggled since the Gayle thing, in that she seems to be trying too hard to make sure she doesn't say something that may cause a social media meltdown and in the process she is coming across as being out of her depth

Can understand the carry on because of what happened with Gayle, was always going to happen

But who really cares

[Stalin]

You care cause type heaps

[Andyy]

Total crap.

Both incidents are completely different.

Gayle hit on her and asked her out - some might say he even objectified her a little.

McLaughlin just offered Waugh a drink to make up for getting his name wrong.

Both incidents are also quite garbage and poorly handled.

And if she doesn't know who Mark Waugh is why is she commentating the cricket? We know why...

[(•))(©™]

Yet, in both situations, she exuded poor journalistic skills. Add to that the inability to
get out of the unprofessional circumstances she puts HERSELF in.
At the end of the day, she's a poohouse journo and it's awkward watching her, let alon having to deal with the fallout of what is largely due to her sub par qualifications.
How's the fake, deep, feigned authoritive voice she uses!

[Dougeytherichmondfan]

Yet, in both situations, she exuded poor journalistic skills. Add to that the inability to
get out of the unprofessional circumstances she puts HERSELF in.
At the end of the day, she's a poohouse journo and it's awkward watching her, let alon having to deal with the fallout of what is largely due to her sub par qualifications.
How's the fake, deep, feigned authoritive voice she uses!

I thought she was quite professional in the first instance, insofar as she was asking a question regarding the cricket and was given a response totally off topic (regardless of the overtly salacious responses) she was able to get the interview back on track.

2nd instance, well, wasn't great but every journo stuffs up from time to time.

The two instances are not at all comparable, people just looking for any reason to justify their dumb, antiquated points of view.

[🏅Dooks]

Yet, in both situations, she exuded poor journalistic skills. Add to that the inability to
get out of the unprofessional circumstances she puts HERSELF in.
At the end of the day, she's a poohouse journo and it's awkward watching her, let alon having to deal with the fallout of what is largely due to her sub par qualifications.
How's the fake, deep, feigned authoritive voice she uses!

The two instances are not at all comparable, people just looking for any reason to justify their dumb, antiquated points of view.

What do you mean?

[Stalin]

Total crap.

Both incidents are completely different.

Gayle hit on her and asked her out - some might say he even objectified her a little.

McLaughlin just offered Waugh a drink to make up for getting his name wrong.

Both incidents are also quite garbage and poorly handled.

And if she doesn't know who Mark Waugh is why is she commentating the cricket? We know why...

Sounds more similar than completely different

[Dougeytherichmondfan]

Yet, in both situations, she exuded poor journalistic skills. Add to that the inability to
get out of the unprofessional circumstances she puts HERSELF in.
At the end of the day, she's a poohouse journo and it's awkward watching her, let alon having to deal with the fallout of what is largely due to her sub par qualifications.
How's the fake, deep, feigned authoritive voice she uses!

The two instances are not at all comparable, people just looking for any reason to justify their dumb, antiquated points of view.

What do you mean?

You honestly don't see the difference between the two?

[(•))(©™]

Yet, in both situations, she exuded poor journalistic skills. Add to that the inability to
get out of the unprofessional circumstances she puts HERSELF in.
At the end of the day, she's a poohouse journo and it's awkward watching her, let alon having to deal with the fallout of what is largely due to her sub par qualifications.
How's the fake, deep, feigned authoritive voice she uses!

The two instances are not at all comparable, people just looking for any reason to justify their dumb, antiquated points of view.

What do you mean?

You honestly don't see the difference between the two?

It's ok.

We understand what you're trying to say.

It's just that you're wrong.

No need to project.

[🏅Dooks]

Yet, in both situations, she exuded poor journalistic skills. Add to that the inability to
get out of the unprofessional circumstances she puts HERSELF in.
At the end of the day, she's a poohouse journo and it's awkward watching her, let alon having to deal with the fallout of what is largely due to her sub par qualifications.
How's the fake, deep, feigned authoritive voice she uses!

The two instances are not at all comparable, people just looking for any reason to justify their dumb, antiquated points of view.

What do you mean?

You honestly don't see the difference between the two?

I just found your last sentence confusing in the context of the first few. But now I get what you are trying to say

[Dougeytherichmondfan]

Yet, in both situations, she exuded poor journalistic skills. Add to that the inability to
get out of the unprofessional circumstances she puts HERSELF in.
At the end of the day, she's a poohouse journo and it's awkward watching her, let alon having to deal with the fallout of what is largely due to her sub par qualifications.
How's the fake, deep, feigned authoritive voice she uses!

The two instances are not at all comparable, people just looking for any reason to justify their dumb, antiquated points of view.

What do you mean?

You honestly don't see the difference between the two?

I just found your last sentence confusing in the context of the first few. But now I get what you are trying to say