Ipswich Manager Paul Jewell Caught Up In ‘Mild Criticism Of Lineswoman’ Sexism Shocker!

Chris Wright

12th, January 2012


By Chris Wright

“Here love, put down the ironing for a minute, my car bonnet needs a good waxing…”

Ipswich lost again last night; 2-1 to Birmingham, Nikola Zigic nabbing the winner in stoppage time, their 11th defeat in 14 matches.

Manager Paul Jewell was also left fuming over an incident in which Ipswich winger Lee Martin was fouled in the box by Brum’s Stephen Caldwell and no penalty was given on the insistence of the referee’s assistant – a lady human with a vulva and everything by the name of Amy Fearn.

Said Jewell:

“Unfortunately, everyone to a man could see it was a penalty, but not a woman.

“Although the referee didn’t have a good sight of the incident, the lineswoman had a great view of it. It was a stonewall penalty and a sending off.

“You need to ask him [referee Robert Lewis] and her [Fearn] why they didn’t give it. I asked both of them about it at the end but all I got was the wall of silence.”

Yep, that’s it. That’s the batch of quotes that have led the Daily Mail (amongst others, it has to be said) to proclaim a ‘SEXISM STORM’ this morning. Now excuse me, but does anything Jewell said actually constitute sexism? No, no it doesn’t. If he’s adjudged to be discriminating by referring to Fearn as a ‘woman’ or ‘her’, then I’ve had it. I’m handing in my badge and going to live with the animals.

He may be an resolutely unsavoury character, but need I remind you that Jewel has a lot of time for the women of the world, and I have a few minutes of grainy video footage that proves it…

You’ll find sick bags under your seats.

Posted in Championship, FAIL, Media

Share this article: Email


  1. nicko says:

    arggghhh my eyes, I managed to forget that image! Someone pass they eye bleach.

  2. Mr. Chopper says:

    I think it’s the line “everyone to a man could see it was a penalty, but not a woman” inferring that women are somehow inferior to men when it comes to making referring decisions, no?

  3. Jon says:

    What Mr Chopper said

  4. Anonymous says:

    Spot on Mr. Chopper.

  5. Nuno says:

    Yeah, agree with Mr. Chopper, that IS a bit sexist…

    @nicko here it is:
    P.S.: GIF not recomended if you just ate. Or have a weak stomach. (it will make the above picture look like nothing)

    • Chris says:

      Nuno: Firstly, disgusting! Secondly, Jewell only said ‘to every man, but not a woman’- he wasn’t inferring that she got the call wrong ‘because’ she was a woman, just that she actually was one.

  6. Chimpo says:

    but he seemed like such a modern man

  7. Nuno says:

    Sorry Chris (and anyone who saw the GIF), can you edit my comment and remove the link? (or just erase the comment). Saw that the other day and is still unfortunatelly too fresh on my mind…
    Ok, but that’s not how it sounded to me, it looked like he said any male referee would get that decision right, a woman wasn’t able to make the right decision.(sounded “any male referee could see it was a penalty, but unfortunately the referee was a woman”).

    • Chris says:

      @Nuno: I’m cool with the link but I’ll happily delete if you so desire – I’ve seen worse things on the internet. Much worse.

  8. Mr. Chopper says:

    As Nuno says, if you change it slightly to “Every man on earth would have got that right, unfortunately our assistant referee was a woman.” you can see why it’s dodge. He doesn’t even have to bring her gender into it. Without doing that, he’d essentially be saying “Everybody could see it was a penalty but the assistant for whatever reason hasn’t given it.”

    As Aleksandr says, “Eeeeeeets simple!” (LOLJK)

    Thing is, he was wound up and furious at a decision. It’s something or nothing he’s said and the awful snotrags are jumping on it for column space. The papers essentially have fuck all left to do apart from whip up controversy and run wild opinion pieces, as people tend to get their news online now. So let’s all agree that the Daily Mail should be burned down and go for a pint.

  9. Mr. T says:

    How is that not sexist? If he had said “everyone to a man could see it was a penalty, but not THE woman” rather than “everyone to a man could see it was a penalty, but not A woman” you could have perhaps defended him. But by saying what he did, he basically said that every man would have gotten the decision right, but no woman could. It may be a difference in semantics and perhaps he just used a wrong word that he did not intend to be sexist.

    The question again is not whether he is sexist, but whether he used a sexist term. And by calling into question her gender, and distinguishing her capability to make the right call based on that, I think that should clearly be termed sexism.

    Just my opinion though.

  10. C says:

    I wonder how the media will spin this so that it’s Liverpools fault…

  11. Ian says:

    I’ll tell you how it’s not sexist. The reporter prompted him with “Every man could see it was a penalty”, Hence the response, “Every man, yes, but not a woman…”. If anyone was being sexist it was the gimp from the media who should have asked “Every person could see it was a penalty?”, no? Wasn’t it he that should be raked over the coals for suggesting that female observers can’t tell what a penalty is???
    Get a life you cringing manginas.

  12. Mr. T says:

    @C – lol. Here is a try.

    “The tribalism prevalent in Liverpool has led to another unavoidable and completely foreseeable regrettable event. Drawing strength from the Liverpool handling of the Downing and Suarez misdemeanors, Jewell took the lead when he exhibited violent and unwanted tribal fervour by putting a dividing line between men and women. It is time that Kenny Dalglish realized the far reaching effects of his completely diabolical attitude over the Suarez affair and step down from the Liverpool managerial position. His inclusion of Downing in the squad after Downing was arrested over allegations of assault also no doubt contributed to the feeling that if no where else, Jewell would find refuge at Liverpool if he is prosecuted for his violent outburst.”

    Here is another:
    “The DM can today make the sensational and exclusive report that the person who delivered the remarks was in fact Dalglish and Suarez combined wearing a clever disguise. More to follow.”

    Though at this point they might as well give up and tell everyone that there is nothing to report, and so they are gonna talk at length about a footballer’s inappropriate and probably satanic handling of his hairstyle.

Leave a Reply