Scandal Lyon and Brownless

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
Talk about an overreaction i must have missed the part where he killed someone, So 2 single adults having sex and for that you think most people will not want to see Lyon on TV screens ever again.

Happy to see Lyon on tv screen again. He is one of the better footy brains that on the screen when we normally dealing with the melons like Luke Darcy and the like that call every second player "an absolute star of the game"
Yeah, Gary has stuffed up big time with a long time mate and the mate's ex-wife. That has nothing to do with his actual football knowledge and ideas of our great game. That is about personal relationships what he , Billy and their two extended families are dealing with. He is an absolute fool for what he done and the consequences in the closest relationships of his life are now in a lot of pain. In time he will deal with the shit he has brought into his life. Whether Billy can ever forgive him truly, I seriously doubt it. Even if they talk again it will never be the friendship it once was. However in covering the game of football, no reason he cannot come back. He is human, made a terrible mistake and will live with the consequences. Hopefully he deals with it like a man but as he does start to get his shit together hopefully he feels comfortable enough to return to covering the game he loves in the media. I'm not expecting it any time soon though.
 
I sat there last night while he was blubbering away and it was all about his hurt feeings and how the 'bro code' was broken. The more I thought about it, it seemed Brownless' focus was on his feeings and Lyon's behaviour. Not one mention of what she wanted. In these things I don't there there is ever going to be 100% acceptability of Lyon's behaviour from the aggrieved party, no matter how Lyon approached it. Brownless seems to be putting the 'male' aspect above anything else.

Perhaps he is trying to not **** shame his wife and the mother of his children.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

I'm not a huge fan of Robbo. However, his piece on the Brownless/ Lyon matter in today's Hun is well worth a read.

The final three paras resonated with me. They were:

Lyon must have thought last night that he has hurt beyond comprehension the one bloke who worshipped him every day.

How does he come back?

Billy, to his eternal courage and dignity, gave him an opening. And that's what you call a mate.
 
'You' as in anyone calling her a ****. Why would anyone call her a ****?

Not one mention of what she wanted.[/QUOTE
Brownless seems to be putting the 'male' aspe

Please read what you wrote previously. You made the point that there was no mention of what the wife wanted and that billy seems to be putting the male aspect. Billy could easily have said that she was as bad as Garry and that would have been **** shaming, which is a verb and not a noun. I did not say she was a ****.
He did not bad mouth her and that is to his credit.

The behavior of these two was without consideration of the feelings of people who loved them and was pure hedonism. Use whatever label you choose but I did not call her a ****.
 
Which means what?

My comments were about Brownless being upset because his bro code has been violated. I haven't inferred or read any inference that she is a ****. I'm saying she should be allowed to determine her own choices and once separated, he gets to have minimal input into her choices.
 
Did Bill give a continental about his wife and the mother of his children while he was being a good ol Aussie Bloke and rootin' around on her for the last 20 odd years?
Maybe his wife was OK with it as long as it wasn't her best friend?
 
Jesus Christ.

We aren't cavemen who own our women. She wasn't Bill's property to be stolen.

Garry was single
She was single
They hooked up as two single consenting adults.

Billy's ego is bruised and his friendship with Garry is obviously over, but can we not talk about women as if they are akin to nothing more than trophies?
I don't care how new-age sensitive you are. I bet you couldn't handle it any better.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Which means what?

My comments were about Brownless being upset because his bro code has been violated. I haven't inferred or read any inference that she is a ****. I'm saying she should be allowed to determine her own choices and once separated, he gets to have minimal input into her choices.
When she chooses one of his close mates....
 
Maybe his wife was OK with it as long as it wasn't her best friend?

Maybe, probaby, almost certainly, his wife wasn't OK with it. And had no "moral" guilt about rootin around on the big sook in return.

Whatever happened between them, only one of them is sooking it up in public for cheap sympathy.
 
Which means what?

My comments were about Brownless being upset because his bro code has been violated. I haven't inferred or read any inference that she is a ****. I'm saying she should be allowed to determine her own choices and once separated, he gets to have minimal input into her choices.
You are determined to misconstrue what I wrote.
You said that billy concentrated on the male aspect and not his wife.

I implied that this was in deference to her reputation. He could have lashed out against her but he did not.
You inferred that I meant she was a ****. I did not and you could not reasonably infer that from my comment.
You should check the meaning of infer and imply before you use these words.
 
This forum is about something that has been admitted to be true by those involved. Allegations of past indiscretions by Garry or billy are just that, allegations until there is some admission or photos.
 
The suggestion that he's letting his ex-wife off the hook because he isn't publicly shaming her is absurd. She's irrelevant to the public interest. They're only interested because of his relationship with Garry which is at the core of these matters. If it was instead his best mate "Greg Smith", the story wouldn't get any traction outside of Women's Weekly.
 
The suggestion that he's letting his ex-wife off the hook because he isn't publicly shaming her is absurd. She's irrelevant to the public interest. They're only interested because of his relationship with Garry which is at the core of these matters. If it was instead his best mate "Greg Smith", the story wouldn't get any attraction outside of Women's Weekly.
Correct! It's a story because two of them are well known public identities. Also, betrayal and lies are always grist for the tabloid mill and social media.
 
Oh
The suggestion that he's letting his ex-wife off the hook because he isn't publicly shaming her is absurd. She's irrelevant to the public interest. They're only interested because of his relationship with Garry which is at the core of these matters. If it was instead his best mate "Greg Smith", the story wouldn't get any traction outside of Women's Weekly.
come on, the only reason we are all here arguing with strangers is because they are public figures. By extension so are their wives. They get to have Louis Vuitton hand bags and mansions and when they misbehave We take salacious pleasure in the details
 
Oh

come on, the only reason we are all here arguing with strangers is because they are public figures. By extension so are their wives. They get to have Louis Vuitton hand bags and mansions and when they misbehave We take salacious pleasure in the details
What! The wives are bit players in the public context.

It's about one public identity betraying and lying to a very good friend who also happens to be a public identity.
 
Did Bill give a continental about his wife and the mother of his children while he was being a good ol Aussie Bloke and rootin' around on her for the last 20 odd years?
it's all speculation.
When she chooses one of his close mates....
It's not an ideal situation, but sometimes these things happen for a number of factors we aren't privy to.

And have all your choices in life been to the positive of everyone in your life?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top