Rio Ferdinand in warm jizz

[Dr Lobster*]

Football star Rio Ferdinand has lost a legal bid to stop a TV sex video which featured the England defender.

The big Man United centre back went to the High Court to stop Sex, Footballers and Videotape from being broadcast but lost his bid.


Premiership stars Frank Lampard and Kieron Dyer and a third man were also in the programme.

The programme used one minute's footage of three men involved in a "roasting sex session".

But a lawyer for Ferdinand strongly denied the footballer had taken part in any group sex.

Explicit scenes showed England stars Dyer and Lampard and a third man giggling as they lived out sexual fantasies with female fans.

A female voice on the Channel 4 programme says, "No filming," but a male voice replies: "Suck my d*** and I won't film."

Men's voices were also heard making lewd suggestions to women apparently happy to take part.

A lawyer for Chelsea midfielder Lampard warned: "We'll sue, we'll sue."

You'll sue? for what you big ape.

what i find incredible is the great lengths these people will go to try and stop these things getting out.

they shouldn't do it in the first place if they don't want their activities in the public domain

[cat]

they shouldn't do it in the first place if they don't want their activities in the public domain

Do WHAT exactly?!

Sorry, but what have these guys done wrong?

When did having an orgy suddenly become grounds for a documentary to be made out of it, shaming those involved?

They didn't rape the women, the sex was entirely consensual, and the women clearly didn't mind being filmed that much otherwise they would have stopped.

It is so pathetic to see Channel 4 producing a documentary which says ultimately "young, good looking men like to have lots of sex".

Well, gee, what a shocker.

[Gavin Scott]

I agree. I've done allsorts with consenting men, but for someone to blackmail or make money out of such occassions is just grubby and plain wrong.

[Dr Lobster*]

gavin and cat, the differerence between rio ferdinand and yourselves is that he is in the public eye, and as such, should alter his behaviour accordingly.

we've already seen several football players falsely accused of rape over such antics, and whilst ferdinand did nothing wrong legally, i think he has a duty to ensure is image is not tarnished in any way.

[cat]

gavin and cat, the differerence between rio ferdinand and yourselves is that he is in the public eye, and as such, should alter his behaviour accordingly.

we've already seen several football players falsely accused of rape over such antics, and whilst ferdinand did nothing wrong legally, i think he has a duty to ensure is image is not tarnished in any way.

Oh, I see, so as soon as someone gains 'celebrity' status, that gives us all an entitlement to see them having sex.

Alter his behaviour? So he's not allowed to have sex IN PRIVATE because he's well known?

Piss off.

What ANYONE does behind closed doors, legally, is entirely their business and nobody elses.

The only thing I learnt from the programme was that Rio Ferdinand has a really nice arse, and isn't gay (there were lots of rumours a while back). Hardly a vital insight into the lives of footballers.

What is shameful about group sex? I'd always put Channel 4 slightly above the level of the Daily Mail, but it seems to have really let itself down.

[Dr Lobster*]

Oh, I see, so as soon as someone gains 'celebrity' status, that gives us all an entitlement to see them having sex.

Alter his behaviour? So he's not allowed to have sex IN PRIVATE because he's well known?

Piss off.

where did i say he shouldn't have sex?

the point i want to make is that somebody who is in the public eye, who has a reputation to protect should be as descrete as possible about their activities (sex/drugs or whatever) that are likely to be either sold to newspapers or used in such a way to tarnish their image.

take for instance john leslie, whose career has been completely destroyed for something not all that different from this.

whilst ferdinand committed no such act himself, i feel, given his status, he should conduct his private affairs and sexual exploits in such a way that is unlikely come back and bite him.

[Pete]

Well even if he's naive that's no reason for C4 to go and broadcast it all for no apparent reason but titillation of the saddo demographic.

[cat]

Oh, I see, so as soon as someone gains 'celebrity' status, that gives us all an entitlement to see them having sex.

Alter his behaviour? So he's not allowed to have sex IN PRIVATE because he's well known?

Piss off.

where did i say he shouldn't have sex?

the point i want to make is that somebody who is in the public eye, who has a reputation to protect should be as descrete as possible about their activities (sex/drugs or whatever) that are likely to be either sold to newspapers or used in such a way to tarnish their image.

take for instance john leslie, whose career has been completely destroyed for something not all that different from this.

whilst ferdinand committed no such act himself, i feel, given his status, he should conduct his private affairs and sexual exploits in such a way that is unlikely come back and bite him.

No, sorry, that is TOTALLY different.

John Leslie was accused of raping a woman. There is absolutely no correlation - or should not be - between that and consensual adult sex, be it between 2 or 200 people.

You said he should alter his behaviour accordingly - how, exactly, should he do this when it comes to sex in a private situation?

As for being discreet about 'their activities' which you label broadly as 'sex/drugs' as if to suggest that is all celebrities do, I would suggest to you that use, purchase and supply of drugs brings with it the potential for a criminal conviction, and group sex absolutely does not.

Had he been supplying/buying/taking drugs, FINE. But he was not. He did not engage in anything remotely illegal.

And you do seem to be missing the rather fundamental, underlying point that just because he, in your own words, is 'in the public eye' does not mean that his sex life should be, and does not mean that he should be expected to act in a manner which upholds such an attitude.

[Gavin Scott]

whilst ferdinand committed no such act himself, i feel, given his status, he should conduct his private affairs and sexual exploits in such a way that is unlikely come back and bite him.

At the end of the day, there are now millions of pounds changing hands in our cash-for-scandal culture. There was another one in the tabloids this morning of a "Cold Feet" actor snorting charlie. The front page image looks like it came off a picture phone, which probably means that some opportunist geezer emailed it in to the news of the screws.

Celebrities don't have a responsibility to me not to have orgies or take weekend enhancers. At most they have a responsibility to themselves, their agent and mortgage lender to try not to get emobroiled in a tabloid cruicifiction.

The fact that people think they are 'entitled' to judge celebrities private lives is what fuels the newspaper frenzy to laden their papers with it.

I don't think I dare ever try to be famous. I could keep fleet street afloat.

[Dr Lobster*]

No, sorry, that is TOTALLY different.

not really.

John Leslie was accused of raping a woman. There is absolutely no correlation - or should not be - between that and consensual adult sex, be it between 2 or 200 people.

the correlation is stark.

both john leslie and rio ferdinand have engaged in promiscious sexual behaviours, fuelled by their celebrity status.

my point is, is that if one does participate in activities such as group sex etc etc, the definition of rape becomes blurred.

say for instance a female has consensual sex with one player with other men in the room, all parties involved may have consumed large amounts of alcohol and or drugs, and several other players have their 'turn' with her. she may note have wanted to have sex with them ,but because of her intoxicated state, does. where does this leave the players? consent was implied, but not given.

the similarity between this and john leslie was drawn from a simular case last year where a girl, who had consented to sex with one player, claimed to have been raped by two others (carlton cole and titas bramble).

i know this is not the case here, but nevertheless, given how this can so easily happen, ferdinand should have taken steps to avoid his exploits getting into the public domain, and not being stupid enough to allow them to be filmed.

You said he should alter his behaviour accordingly - how, exactly, should he do this when it comes to sex in a private situation?

whilst sex should always be a private event between consenting individules, the very fact that he is a celebrity, the very fact that he is in the public eye leaves him open to kiss and tell stories, false rape allegations and so on. obviously for this footage to get out in the first place mean't at best he was careless, and given his position should have ensured that this video could never have been filmed in the first place.

did the female participants consent to being filmed? probably not.

As for being discreet about 'their activities' which you label broadly as 'sex/drugs' as if to suggest that is all celebrities do, I would suggest to you that use, purchase and supply of drugs brings with it the potential for a criminal conviction, and group sex absolutely does not.

Had he been supplying/buying/taking drugs, FINE. But he was not. He did not engage in anything remotely illegal.

well quiet, and from what i've read about this footage, there are allegations of drug taking amoungst the players. i will dig around google for the source if you wish to debate this point.

And you do seem to be missing the rather fundamental, underlying point that just because he, in your own words, is 'in the public eye' does not mean that his sex life should be, and does not mean that he should be expected to act in a manner which upholds such an attitude.

yes, but like i've said, if he doesn't want his sex life to be in the public eye, why allow it to be filmed?

[Dr Lobster*]

There was another one in the tabloids this morning of a "Cold Feet" actor snorting charlie. The front page image looks like it came off a picture phone, which probably means that some opportunist geezer emailed it in to the news of the screws.

it's quite interesting how, depending on the person involved the public and employers seem to react.

i seem to remember angus deayton doing exactly the same thing as john thomson not so long ago, and he hasn't really had a high profile telly job since.