This is a wonderful chat show moment. Behind the daft exterior of his Game for a Laugh days, Kelly's an intelligent man. So's Skinner. Kelly makes his very reasonable points very calmly and very well. Skinner stands his ground and defends his right to make light of anything. Neither feels the need to win or lose. That the discussion is happening is enough. And Kelly is clever enough not to lapse into gallery-playing righteous indignation. A meeting of equals. It's not either/or.
I remember watching that on TV when it first aired, Frank looked uncomfortable but well done to both of them for making their points and keeping it civil. Not heard anything of Matthew in years, I hope he's well as he always came across as a genuinely nice bloke.
Whilst uncomfortable to watch, and I remember watching it back in the day, this was a powerful and important moment in television. I respect that both Kelly and Skinner have a calm, reasoned and intelligent discussion about it. Nothing gets nasty, nothing gets personal, it's just two men with two polemics defending their own positions. Afterwards, I actually respected both a little more; I think they both came out of it well
He didn't label him as anything. He made a joke out of Kelly's predicament purely for the sake of humour; it wasn't personal. Now, that's not a philosphy I subscribe to, but it is Skinner's philosophy and he is entitled to his as much as I am to mine, and you are to yours
Interesting watching this in the Post Saville, # me too outrage junkie internet environment. It's a reasoned discussion between two adults on an emotive personal subject. Both come out of it with credit.
Objectively, it was a funny joke. He could have said Rolf Harris or Gary Glitter but If you're benefitting from being in the public eye and an issue comes up, you're a target for a joke. It's only a joke. The more the 'victim' goes on about it, the more people will start to wonder. That's part of the price of fame, for better or worse.
Without intending to take sides, in all fairness to Frank Skinner he had full editorial control over that show and chose to show the conversation without any significant editing favouring himself. Kelly actually brought the subject up between takes, and it was Skinner's insistence that he would be happy to let Kelly challenge him about the jokes on the show. Also, the first joke that Skinner quotes wasn't even his. It was David Baddiel's Skinner refers to that fact, but ends up taking the flack.
@@stuarthossack5351he lost everything, over a bs rumour. He was angry, hurt. And when he got cleared all the shows that had been mocking him and fueling the allegations invited him back on with smiles on their faces. Can't blame him
+SoundArtist Well Frank had the option of taking the easy way out, but he decided not to do it. He decided to own up to what he said. And Kelly was certainly aware of what he was doing, and the fact that Skinner didn't just hide behind a cheap lie must have earned his grudging respect.
You know, considering how badly this could have gone, Skinner did a good job justifying why he said those jokes that while back. And he's pretty upfront about it, not even taking the easy way out when Kelly offers him one at 2:26 .
The worst thing about this video is, I turned up the volume all the way to try and catch what was being said but then forgot to adjust the volume before watching the next video...
This is an amazing example of a situation where the “wrong” could be debated so many ways, with different approaches 😂 Exposes how we joke, when it’s wrong, how we should be able to take it, and why we shouldn’t have to take it. Brilliant moment 😂😂
Yep, though I felt Frank's insistence that there was "no malice," and "it was just a joke" felt a bit desperate, like a childhood bully who suddenly gets confronted about his behaviour by his victim after they've grown up. Matthew had every right to be angry with him. I'm just glad we seem to be moving away from that dickish period in comedy.
I'm so glad you posted this, I remember it at the time, funny how different Mathew Kelly looked without the silly mop of curly hair and beard. He was right to confront Skinner in this way though.
Yes, he should have invested in a new video player and some expensive audio restoration software, just so you didn't have any reason to make any ignorant and smart-arsed remarks.
@@wanderer1955 I restore audio from tapes. Have many formats, interfaces and software. Thanks for all your pro-tips. Who knew that all you have to do, is correct the volume before uploading the video? Fascinating stuff!
@@DaveyMulholland Get some software called "AUDACITY" it's a free download, there isn't much you can't do with it. Gee who'd a thought you can get software to correct "volume". Well I never!!
Tricky one this is. I’m all for comedians being able to make jokes about everything, but as a man, I can’t think of anything worse to be labelled as than a pedophile. Making jokes on it keeps the rumours alive and I don’t know how I’d react to that if I was on the receiving end.
My thoughts exactly, Jon. I think comedy must always be an open forum, because to be anything else is a concerning thing. But by the same token, Matthew Kelly must have gone through something very few of us have, and in the most awful way, and he is very much entitled to ask for accountability. It keeps us all honest. Freedom of speech yes, but not freedom of consequence; you don't just get to say what you like about anyone without recourse, and certainly not when it comes to something like this. And I think he handled it very well; i.e. with mock indignance because, frankly, if I was subject to that and then someone joked about it in the pub, I can't promise I would have the same restraint.
@@jevonscholes8159 oh yeah I totally get that, of course I do. I just mean the jokes will amplify it, and they also keep the "mud sticks" narrative as well. I guess my point was, as much as comedy should be an open church, Matthew Kelly has every right to respond as well. You can't expect to make jokes under free expression principles and then not be prepared to answer for them. I'm a big Frank Skinner fan, but I can see both sides here.
@@highwireman2012 for sure Mathew Kelly was well within his right, its just a difficult when it comes to comedy, especially as you never know what it might be that oversteps the line for different people. If the wrongful arrests have no consequence (altho I do think in this case it did open a debate) its very difficult to expect a higher standard of an average person or especially a comedian whereby their fame and career should imply it's not to be taken seriously. I think there is also a nice parallel to the John Lydon censorship, whereby not be able to make suggestions or jokes could be covering such horrendous acts. In general I personally think its for the best that the discussion should be open even though its certainly not perfect
Jokes about merely accused offenders are not that funny, even when well crafted. Jokes about convicted offenders, for example, Gary Glitter, work, because they're truly dark. Nothing dark about an innocent man, apart from said innocent man being tried my the media and comedians etc.
Mathew Kelly character has been tarnished even though he has been found innocent, a lot of TV work dried up after the court case. Anonymity for the accused and the accuser should be the way forward if a person is found guilty then there should be no anonymity protection, this seems like common sense to me. I just can not understand why dont the courts conduct themselves in this way.
I get that MK was pissed with Skinner, but I admire the way that Skinner refused to roll over and, in his words, get off the hook with an easy apology.
Matthew Kelly was clearly internally raging, which i feel put Frank Skinner slightly on the back foot, but big up Frank for having him on the show and big up Matthew Kelly for going on the show to confront him about the jokes he made that he did not see the funny side of. It just goes to show how these situations do not need to be over the top and Jeremy Kyle’d in order to make engaging quality viewing
B Rabbit Frank's logic was confused there because Matthew Kelly was mainly questioning the morality of the joke, not telling Frank how to be funny etc.
Kelly was arrested as part of Operation Arundel, in which Tam Paton (manager of the Bay City Rollers) was also arrested at the same time. Paton is known to have had an appetite for teenaged boys, including trying it on with lead singer Les McKeown, and at the time of the arrest the police found cocaine at Kelly's home. In the end he was not prosecuted, due to lack of evidence, which is entirely different to being acquitted as it leaves the question unanswered, and if you ooh at the general picture (drugs, association with paedophiles, and the allegations themselves) it is not a compelling picture of innocence. Kelly may have elected to do be Skinner's quest on the show as attack is often the best form of defence when someone has something to hide.
'Do you think that's fair' means different things to the two. Matthew Kelly is asking 'do you think that's fair that I was going thru that and then you made fun of me unjustly'. Frank is answering 'yes I think it's fair that I as a comedian should be able to make a topical joke about something in the news, meant as a joke, because it would be impossible to regulate comedy against this approach and nothing personal was intended'. Both right.
+Ed Surname Lets image an ex work colleague way back in your past pops up out the blue and accuse you of inappropriate sexual behavior because even if you are found totally innocent of any wrong doing, a nasty stain will be will be with you for the rest of your life then all of a sudden you become the but end of jokes in the area where you live, i think you may have a little more sympathy for Matthew Kelly's situation.
I remember this really well. Frank looks uncharacteristically awkward but also seems honest which makes the interview even more squirmish for the viewer but fair play to both sides. I don't think this would happen these days because it's too real. Compelling TV anyways.
I'm not sure if Frank was 100% honest. He's a smart guy so I reckon he must've recognised the difference between a joke about a convicted sex offender like Gary Glitter and a guy who'd just been accused like Matthew Kelly. And his line of defence, "It was a joke, that's my job," doesn't wash but Frank knows there's jokes he wouldn't tell.
@@cliffhanley2120 Baddiel and Skinners whole schtick was 2 friends sitting on a sofa saying stuff and making jokes like the rest of us do (only they're supposed to be funnier, obviously). He can't really say that here, although he does try to differentiate between that style of entertainment and Stars in their Eyes, because then he'd get battered by people saying they wouldn't say such things at home. It's enough for me that Skinner invited Kelly on his show and appeared to be willing to discuss it tbh.
Both handled it well and as we saw later with all the Jimmy saville stuff we’re some celebrities were falsely accused and had their names run through the mud….Kelly was right to call it out cause wherever mud is thrown it sticks
@@kenthomson9562 The quote has been around since the end of the nineteenth century, attributed to a number of different celebrities and authors of that era.
@@ljdmanxfella5793so if anyone is accused, that’s it. They’re bang to rights. How about I accuse you of being a nonce. Does that mean you’re one too? Is that how it works?
I love these type of moments, Matthew from his perspective has every right to feel pissed off, while Frank feels he was just a topic to joke about that week, the confrontation is brill', both handled it well in my opinion.
It was quite brave to dig frank skinner live for that, skinner wudnt have expected that but goes to show clearly mathew kelly forgave but did not forget
+Peter Byrd - "Armchair Thriller" scared the shit out of me. The episode where the faceless 'Black Nun' appears in a rocking chair in an attic scarred me for life. Then there was the pet pooch nailed to some old dear's front door. Complete with blood stains. Then there was the flash of an evil face whizzing by in a dark train tunnel right next to some woman about to doze off with her head right next to the window, terrifying her. These images stayed with me. 'Armchair Thriller' was often repeated in the afternoon when I was (for some reason) often home from school. I saw 'em all. To this day even the theme music makes me go cold.
+aerialkate Here! Iv never heard of this prog!, and I'm an old TV fan, I will now go and look, { Im at the point in this video where I don't know If Frank apologised or not, I hope he didn't repeat it here I hope!!! ohhhh too late,
2 yrs late but fuk me i was the same afternoon showings and home alone i can still remember that shadow over the chair all alone i went out into the street because it fuked with me so much
This didn't go down as I think Mathew planned. I think he thought Frank would get embarrassed and buckle, and he would come out looking the bigger person. How wrong he was. He neglected to realized how 'sharp' Frank is. And I think he just made himself look even worse. Also anyone who missed the original gags got chance to hear them again !!
I don't really look at it in that way and quite a few people don't. It seemed as if Mathew held back quite a lot. It was more he wanted to bring it up just as a way to say "People like you need to realise that you're talking about real people here..Real innocent people". Which was true in his case and quite a few others over the years. Frank just seemed to sit there, squirm and come out with a few semi funny commenst to try and defuse the situation. A few years later Frank said this was the hardest interview to do because he had no way to defend himself.
I'm afraid it's clear to see that Matthew Kelly is actually very, very angry. Yes, he plays along and even covers it at times with laughter but if you look at 2.19 you can see how serious he is about it. This is a very tense piece of television and I don't think it's about who won and didn't win.
I'll tell you something about Matthew Kelly, take it as truth if you wish, but all i know of Matthew Kelly is what i know from my Nana, years ago, in the 1970's, Matthew Kelly lived around my area, Cheshire, i'm not sure exactly where but i think it was somewhere around Northwich/Winsford, that general area, now this happened before he became well known, and as far as i can tell, it is only a rumour, but anyway, the story goes that he was married, and got up to no good with a teenage boy, a police report was filed at the time, but Matthew Kelly buggered off to London, became quite successful and nothing ever came of it. He was then investigated in 2003 on what i believe to be a different child abuse scandal, but there was insufficient evidence, now, i'm not for one second saying take this as fact, this is from my 78 year old Nana and her memory is a bit dodgy at the best of times, but having said that, i wouldn't let him near my kids haha.
There is never smoke without fire, he's dodgy, end off, you wanna leave him in a room with your kids? Of course you don't. Jimmy savile was just rumours once you know...
+Daniel Thompson So because Jimmy Savile was a paedophile it follows that Matthew Kelly is one too. "No smoke without fire" is a slogan for lazy-minded numbskulls.
Stephen Ogley You knew someone who worked for him who called him a monster? Well that's conclusive then. I despair when I read brain-dead comments like yours.
Yeah I think you’re right but there’s a level of responsibility - own what you say. And if you’re attacking a marginalised group and promoting a trope that gay men are likely to be paedos then FS needs to hear that. Anyway do agree, it’s a good conversation
This is truly grisly but well done Matthew Kelly. Trial by tabloid is a disgrace - just because someone is accused of something or even under investigation doesn't mean they don't matter and deserve to be treated with contempt. Inoocent until proven guilty.
Was a joke at the time but no smoke without fire Pete Townsend got off as a police whistleblower informed the newspapers and that gave him and everybody else time to destroy their computers etc so when he was raided they only had the evidence of a credit card which was used to view child porn ?
I disagree totally. If you've ever Ben on the receiving end of a continual, passive aggressive joke about you then I think you would think it bullying. We all have seen the school bully making fun of the weaker person, all the time, every day,. To what end other than to diminish them and use them as an oblect for ridicule. That's bullying to me and it doesn't need to make someone do something they don't want to either. Humour is sometimes cruel yes, Nd sometimes it's also bullying. I'm not necessarily claiming Frank Skinner was doing this but it', I think he is unaware of the effects on others and claiming the usual get out clause of its only humour.
@@saudade369 I didn’t say that disparaging jokes are fun, but unless you are being overpowered it’s not bullying. If someone makes passive aggressive jokes about you, fight back. You don’t get to call everything you don’t like in life “bullying” just because you don’t like it.
@@ifanmorgan8070 Your definition of bullying doesn't cover all areas though. There's the psychological side of bullying which merely (but damagingly) gets inside the head of the victim, particularly the younger ones who are vulnerable, over-sensitive and easy prey for the bully. In those legions of cases, it's not to do with being overpowering or forcing someone to do something (which is of course one form of bullying). It's to do with undermining, belittling....mental abuse, in other words. And yes, Frank...while not being a bully here)....is nevertheless using that cold, defiant, rational way of exempting himself from blame that a bully would if they were taken up on it. "It's only a joke".....while the consequences are being ignored, not appreciated.
jokes are bullying?, what about criticism? is that bullying too, lets just be fascists shall we and stop people from saying anything offensive, someones going to walk out in front of a car on purpose because they think they are car proof but you're not allowed to tell them that's a STUPID idea because that would be bullying, you see where it leads ? lol there's actually several comedy sketches based on this subject and a red dwarf episode lol where there's a ship driving directly into a star but no ones allowed to tell the crew it's a bad idea becase criticism of any kind including jokes are illegal and is classed as bullying lol infact we actually had to amend the section 5 public order act a couple of years ago with thanks to comedians like rowan atkinson to remove the words offence from it just so that comedians could do their jobs without fear of being arrested for telling jokes.
Well done Frank for standing your ground. Although Kelly was never charged with child abuse, dating back 30 yrs, he certainly wasn’t cleared. Many of his alleged victims were unwilling to give evidence and others recollections very too hazy. When his holiday home in Colombo, Sri Lanka a notorious paedophile hot spot, which his wife nor two grown up children had ever visited, was raided by police it was full of kiddies soft toys and children’s games, which the local police were only too happy to show waiting press. You can be like Frank Skinner and draw your own conclusions.
@@davidcollins9258 I know. There were some terrible stories coming out of Colombo at the time. Many families living in abject poverty would let their kids ‘play’ with the wealthy foreigners. Through shame and embarrassment, the people and government brushed it under the carpet. Even now people don’t want to talk about it, so you can see why the paedophiles flocked there. Why Kelly would want a holiday home there is suspicious at best.🤷♂️
Hopefully you can be tracked down so Kelly can take legal action against this slanderous nonsense. I’m sure you’ve seen what celebs can do against social media keyboard warriors these days.
Watching it again - the truth of the matter is Mathew Kelly comes across as creepy. He makes me feel uncomfortable and is cringe inducing. He is not very likeable or endearing. I think that's why the truth of the joke is irrelevant ( not to him I'm sure) but it works because , rightly or wrongly, people find him creepy, insincere and uncomfortable
I think the problem, rightly or wrongly, is that there is something a bit creepy about Mathew Kelly. I , personally, don't think he handled this very well. I know what he was trying to do , and he had some balls to bring it up, but he made himself look more silly- in my opinion...Mathew being all self righteous and expecting a positive audience response - 2:31 - the most awkward few moments on telly ever??
Skinner dealt with Kelly very well. Kelly almost seemed menacing at the start. But Skinner knew how to play it. I'm sure hes had others want apologies for things he has said, but hes a comedian and seeing the funny side of life. He is satirical and that's what he does well.
He's right about Kelly being part of the mood at the time and I'd defend his right to joke about whatever he likes. And the comment below is right, it's good to see a good, adult debate about this. I'd argue Frank's jibe at Sophie Ellis Bextor at the Brits was actually harder to defend.
It is strange watching this - like many others, I've waited for it to be uploaded for a long time. I say strange because I have told so many people about it over the years and recounted what happened. I have to admit that I haven't been portraying it accurately...I've made out that Skinner was put right on the back foot and squirmed throughout. He actually put up a good case for himself and what he'd done. My "party piece" will need to be rejigged, I think.
Cliff, he wasn't wrong. A sense of humour can't be wrong, it can only be different. There shouldn't be any rules for comedy. If there was then life of Brian wouldn't exist, everything offends someone. It's the people who think their being offended actually gives them any rights who are the problem.
Ok, so my sound is clearly working as every RUclips video is playing sound, but this one isn't! Where is the sound? Nobody is complaining about no sound in the comments section of this video. What is happening?
I think you must have been listening to another interview, Allison. And what is valid, or humourous, about publicly dragging an innocent man's life and career through the mud? I would have been very happy if Matthew had punched his lights out. I wonder if you would have the same response if someone gossiped unfairly about you to the whole world?
It’s interesting - I’m seeing the opposite and I like Skinner but think it’s a weak dodge. It also says a lot about how primitive our attitudes to homosexuality were in the 1990s/2000s.
I find it so creepy how Matthew Kelly looks so smug and laughs at his own passive aggressive comments. Why do so many older people do that? Do they think it makes them look clever?
He was being accused of the worst crime imaginable and was put through hell and back and Frank Skinner used it to make a joke at his expense. Had Matthew killed himself over it would it of still been funny? I think he had the right to be smug since he was cleared of all charges actually.
It’s not an easy black and white issue this as I can see both sides of the cases made. However I’d like to say I wish I could believe that Kelly wasn’t bothered a bit about the jokes Skinner and Baddiel cracked that night on “Unplanned”. His use of the word horrible to describe the jokes is pretty emotive and not one used by someone not phased by them. And just listen to the tone of his voice, it’s like that of a parent/teacher calmly chiding a child. Frankly I believe in my humble opinion that Kelly chose the wrong way to handle the situation. Given that Skinner didn’t attempt to take the easy way out and respectfully defended himself and disagreed with the actor/television host, I think he’d have been willing to listen to his objections in private. The former “Stars in the their Eyes” presenter could have asked his agent to get in touch with the two comedians respective agents/agent and agreed to meet. Being cynical you might be able to accuse Kelly of attempting to provoke sympathy and make Skinner look bad. However due to his resilience under pressure although he did look uncomfortable the Brummie comic managed to turn the tables a bit. Kelly comes up looking that bit worse although to be fair he does shake his interviewers hand and leave things as they are. I know there are people who will say that it was up to him how he chose to handle the situation. An adult doesn’t air their issues with someone out in public, no one need have ever known there were any. How many people in the audience after that episode of “Unplanned” would have remembered the jokes in the long term if not the short? While I think very few people’s opinions regarding Kelly’s innocence or guilt would have altered anyone’s opinion of the whole affair, I can still appreciate how from his perspective it may have hurt him. There can’t be anything worse when it seems someone is making light of a unthinkable situation at your expense. So as I stated already I’m not without sympathy for him. I just think he could have handled things differently.
Why did you write it with things such as "the actor/television presenter" and "the former Stars In Their Eyes Host"? It comes off extremely pretentious and irritating n
I'm struggling to see your point Roy, assuming you have one? Unless you really are gullible or naïve enough to believe that _"Baddiel and Skinner Unplanned"_ *must* have been unplanned, simply because they used the word _"Unplanned"_ in the shows title?
@@ljdmanxfella5793 My point which I believe was clear, was - most of the comments were made by Baddiel and not skinner - unplanned or otherwise - it was the name of the program. What exactly is your point? It was a joke. This was well over 10 years ago when the world could make jokes.. .remember that time?
Well said. J'd go further and say that Frank gave Mathew a chance to get on telly again after his horrific ordeal. He fell on his own sword to help him out. To expunge a few things openly for both. Well done Frank and Mathew. Great telly.
@@daikayll1897 Are you joking? Frank Skinner made cheap jibes at Kelly's expense. He clearly was not expecting to get called out on this. Kelly's career was ruined despite him having done nothing wrong and that slime Frank Skinner is hardly whiter than white. I don't think FS deserves any credit here.
In 2022, Skinner is effectively admitting he made reckless allegations against Matthew Kelly... for comedic content, and acknowledging that likely destroyed his life and career.
This is a wonderful chat show moment. Behind the daft exterior of his Game for a Laugh days, Kelly's an intelligent man. So's Skinner. Kelly makes his very reasonable points very calmly and very well. Skinner stands his ground and defends his right to make light of anything. Neither feels the need to win or lose. That the discussion is happening is enough. And Kelly is clever enough not to lapse into gallery-playing righteous indignation. A meeting of equals. It's not either/or.
I remember watching that on TV when it first aired, Frank looked uncomfortable but well done to both of them for making their points and keeping it civil.
Not heard anything of Matthew in years, I hope he's well as he always came across as a genuinely nice bloke.
Fair play to both of them for saying their piece and being gentlemen about it.
Whilst uncomfortable to watch, and I remember watching it back in the day, this was a powerful and important moment in television. I respect that both Kelly and Skinner have a calm, reasoned and intelligent discussion about it. Nothing gets nasty, nothing gets personal, it's just two men with two polemics defending their own positions. Afterwards, I actually respected both a little more; I think they both came out of it well
He didn't label him as anything. He made a joke out of Kelly's predicament purely for the sake of humour; it wasn't personal. Now, that's not a philosphy I subscribe to, but it is Skinner's philosophy and he is entitled to his as much as I am to mine, and you are to yours
Interesting watching this in the Post Saville, # me too outrage junkie internet environment. It's a reasoned discussion between two adults on an emotive personal subject. Both come out of it with credit.
@@FoobsTon well said
Agreed
Objectively, it was a funny joke. He could have said Rolf Harris or Gary Glitter but If you're benefitting from being in the public eye and an issue comes up, you're a target for a joke. It's only a joke.
The more the 'victim' goes on about it, the more people will start to wonder. That's part of the price of fame, for better or worse.
Without intending to take sides, in all fairness to Frank Skinner he had full editorial control over that show and chose to show the conversation without any significant editing favouring himself.
Kelly actually brought the subject up between takes, and it was Skinner's insistence that he would be happy to let Kelly challenge him about the jokes on the show.
Also, the first joke that Skinner quotes wasn't even his. It was David Baddiel's Skinner refers to that fact, but ends up taking the flack.
I actually have a lot of respect for both after re-watching this. It is really something when you are dignified.
Snap
I met Matthew Kelly and he is a very nice man.
Matthew Kelly is laughing on the outside but not on the inside.
Creepy isn't it? Oops.
@@stuarthossack5351 He's a good man who has caught a coward out
@@stuarthossack5351he lost everything, over a bs rumour. He was angry, hurt. And when he got cleared all the shows that had been mocking him and fueling the allegations invited him back on with smiles on their faces. Can't blame him
@Sugarcupx I know I'm only kidding. It's that classic guy who always smiles, keeps smiling when he's annoyed or angry. Which is a little creepy tbf.
we could all sense that...
kelly wanted to thump skinner, but knew he could'nt
I thought Frank handled that very well. It would of been much easier to apologise and move on.
***** Very fair opinion.
+SoundArtist Well Frank had the option of taking the easy way out, but he decided not to do it. He decided to own up to what he said. And Kelly was certainly aware of what he was doing, and the fact that Skinner didn't just hide behind a cheap lie must have earned his grudging respect.
+Jack Williams TRUTH WELL SAID SIR
What's all this "Would Of" nonsense lately? It's "Would Have", ffs Would OF makes no sense.
Nigel Farage lol
You know, considering how badly this could have gone, Skinner did a good job justifying why he said those jokes that while back. And he's pretty upfront about it, not even taking the easy way out when Kelly offers him one at 2:26 .
Well done for Matthew confronting him live.
The worst thing about this video is, I turned up the volume all the way to try and catch what was being said but then forgot to adjust the volume before watching the next video...
me too😂
I was saved by the advert which slowly built up to a loud volume but I realised before it got too loud.
You warned me, I forgot and it happened
Lol, yes, I've had sleepless nights since that occurrence too.
I came straight to the comments so you’ve saved me that pain lol
This is an amazing example of a situation where the “wrong” could be debated so many ways, with different approaches 😂
Exposes how we joke, when it’s wrong, how we should be able to take it, and why we shouldn’t have to take it. Brilliant moment 😂😂
Yep, though I felt Frank's insistence that there was "no malice," and "it was just a joke" felt a bit desperate, like a childhood bully who suddenly gets confronted about his behaviour by his victim after they've grown up.
Matthew had every right to be angry with him. I'm just glad we seem to be moving away from that dickish period in comedy.
A joke isn't a joke if it hurts someone's feelings it is just a way to humiliate you😢!!!
BRILLIANT SOUND QUALITY
pardon?
@@pabrennan6877I said BRILLIANT SOUND QUALITY!!!
What's that again?@@Bjarku
@@pabrennan6877 hang on let me get my megaphone. I said B R I L L I A N T. S O U N D. Q U A L I T Y!
Is that the audience hissing?
I actually respect Frank a lot for this. At least he stood by what he sais and not offered some fake cowardly apology. Took a alot of guts methinks.
H4NDCRAFTED I'm guessing they already knew that, seeing as that's what they wrote it that way in the first sentence.
It was probably just a typo.
Kelly's career was ruined. He was never found guilty. Unfair.
@@Superfantastictop10 neither was Jimmy Saville. So was he innocent?
@@TheRobertino2001 good point
@@TheRobertino2001 Saville died before a case could be built against him.
And now David Badiel is writing books and making documentaries, lecturing people on what they’re allowed to say.
After a decade of racially abusing footballer Jason Lee on TV to writing a book about him being a victim.
Grifter. A very unfunny one at that
I'm so glad you posted this, I remember it at the time, funny how different Mathew Kelly looked without the silly mop of curly hair and beard. He was right to confront Skinner in this way though.
Rubbish.
Fair play to Kelly for bringing it up and fair play to fun time for the way he dealt with it.
You should have switched the volume off completely, I could still almost hear it!!
Yes, he should have invested in a new video player and some expensive audio restoration software, just so you didn't have any reason to make any ignorant and smart-arsed remarks.
@@DaveyMulholland Hey numbnuts. Correcting the volume BEFORE uploading is far easier.😁👍
@@wanderer1955 I restore audio from tapes. Have many formats, interfaces and software. Thanks for all your pro-tips. Who knew that all you have to do, is correct the volume before uploading the video? Fascinating stuff!
@@DaveyMulholland Get some software called "AUDACITY" it's a free download, there isn't much you can't do with it. Gee who'd a thought you can get software to correct "volume". Well I never!!
@@wanderer1955 woweeee!
Tricky one this is. I’m all for comedians being able to make jokes about everything, but as a man, I can’t think of anything worse to be labelled as than a pedophile. Making jokes on it keeps the rumours alive and I don’t know how I’d react to that if I was on the receiving end.
My thoughts exactly, Jon. I think comedy must always be an open forum, because to be anything else is a concerning thing. But by the same token, Matthew Kelly must have gone through something very few of us have, and in the most awful way, and he is very much entitled to ask for accountability. It keeps us all honest. Freedom of speech yes, but not freedom of consequence; you don't just get to say what you like about anyone without recourse, and certainly not when it comes to something like this. And I think he handled it very well; i.e. with mock indignance because, frankly, if I was subject to that and then someone joked about it in the pub, I can't promise I would have the same restraint.
@@highwireman2012 the arrest was probably something harder to deal with than the jokes though
@@jevonscholes8159 oh yeah I totally get that, of course I do. I just mean the jokes will amplify it, and they also keep the "mud sticks" narrative as well. I guess my point was, as much as comedy should be an open church, Matthew Kelly has every right to respond as well. You can't expect to make jokes under free expression principles and then not be prepared to answer for them. I'm a big Frank Skinner fan, but I can see both sides here.
@@highwireman2012 for sure Mathew Kelly was well within his right, its just a difficult when it comes to comedy, especially as you never know what it might be that oversteps the line for different people. If the wrongful arrests have no consequence (altho I do think in this case it did open a debate) its very difficult to expect a higher standard of an average person or especially a comedian whereby their fame and career should imply it's not to be taken seriously. I think there is also a nice parallel to the John Lydon censorship, whereby not be able to make suggestions or jokes could be covering such horrendous acts. In general I personally think its for the best that the discussion should be open even though its certainly not perfect
Jokes about merely accused offenders are not that funny, even when well crafted. Jokes about convicted offenders, for example, Gary Glitter, work, because they're truly dark. Nothing dark about an innocent man, apart from said innocent man being tried my the media and comedians etc.
this is the most epic talk show moment of the past 15 years, please bring back the Frank Skinner show
Brian Fantana Without Frank Skinner. Please.
Mathew Kelly character has been tarnished even though he has been found innocent, a lot of TV work dried up after the court case. Anonymity for the accused and the accuser should be the way forward if a person is found guilty then there should be no anonymity protection, this seems like common sense to me. I just can not understand why dont the courts conduct themselves in this way.
I get that MK was pissed with Skinner, but I admire the way that Skinner refused to roll over and, in his words, get off the hook with an easy apology.
I think Frank was cowardly here.
@@cliffhanley2120 Please explain how facing up to his accuser and answering his questions as honestly as possible is cowardly?
@@cliffhanley2120 How?
cant hear shit. Ill try agin and this time not breathe
Thats what Kelly said to Skinner afterwards!
😂😂
Matthew Kelly was clearly internally raging, which i feel put Frank Skinner slightly on the back foot, but big up Frank for having him on the show and big up Matthew Kelly for going on the show to confront him about the jokes he made that he did not see the funny side of. It just goes to show how these situations do not need to be over the top and Jeremy Kyle’d in order to make engaging quality viewing
Frank “ I can’t have Matthew Kelly coming on and telling me about jokes , that can’t be right “
The volume was so low I'm surprised you could hear anything at all.
Yep.....and that was a put-down in itself.
B Rabbit Frank's logic was confused there because Matthew Kelly was mainly questioning the morality of the joke, not telling Frank how to be funny etc.
Kelly was arrested as part of Operation Arundel, in which Tam Paton (manager of the Bay City Rollers) was also arrested at the same time. Paton is known to have had an appetite for teenaged boys, including trying it on with lead singer Les McKeown, and at the time of the arrest the police found cocaine at Kelly's home. In the end he was not prosecuted, due to lack of evidence, which is entirely different to being acquitted as it leaves the question unanswered, and if you ooh at the general picture (drugs, association with paedophiles, and the allegations themselves) it is not a compelling picture of innocence. Kelly may have elected to do be Skinner's quest on the show as attack is often the best form of defence when someone has something to hide.
+DAVID EMBACHER the police like to say lack of evidence sometimes because they dont want to admit they are wrong
+DAVID EMBACHER All I'll say is, look at his career since this moment. People have stayed well clear.
Was Kelly 'associating' with Tam Paton, or other paedophiles?
'Do you think that's fair' means different things to the two. Matthew Kelly is asking 'do you think that's fair that I was going thru that and then you made fun of me unjustly'. Frank is answering 'yes I think it's fair that I as a comedian should be able to make a topical joke about something in the news, meant as a joke, because it would be impossible to regulate comedy against this approach and nothing personal was intended'. Both right.
+Ed Surname Lets image an ex work colleague way back in your past pops up out the blue and accuse you of inappropriate sexual behavior because even if you are found totally innocent of any wrong doing, a nasty stain will be will be with you for the rest of your life then all of a sudden you become the but end of jokes in the area where you live, i think you may have a little more sympathy for Matthew Kelly's situation.
@@yell50 Nope
I remember this really well. Frank looks uncharacteristically awkward but also seems honest which makes the interview even more squirmish for the viewer but fair play to both sides. I don't think this would happen these days because it's too real. Compelling TV anyways.
I'm not sure if Frank was 100% honest. He's a smart guy so I reckon he must've recognised the difference between a joke about a convicted sex offender like Gary Glitter and a guy who'd just been accused like Matthew Kelly. And his line of defence, "It was a joke, that's my job," doesn't wash but Frank knows there's jokes he wouldn't tell.
@@cliffhanley2120 Baddiel and Skinners whole schtick was 2 friends sitting on a sofa saying stuff and making jokes like the rest of us do (only they're supposed to be funnier, obviously). He can't really say that here, although he does try to differentiate between that style of entertainment and Stars in their Eyes, because then he'd get battered by people saying they wouldn't say such things at home.
It's enough for me that Skinner invited Kelly on his show and appeared to be willing to discuss it tbh.
Both handled it well and as we saw later with all the Jimmy saville stuff we’re some celebrities were falsely accused and had their names run through the mud….Kelly was right to call it out cause wherever mud is thrown it sticks
Jimmy Carr: Dissecting a joke is like dissecting a frog. No-one laughs and the frog dies
I think it's nobody learns anything and the frog dies anyway.
And it was Ronnie Corbett.
If he said that then it’s the most intelligent thing he’s ever said.
@@kenthomson9562 The quote has been around since the end of the nineteenth century, attributed to a number of different celebrities and authors of that era.
@@stevebailey5591 Yes that makes more sense.
Well done Frank standing up to be counted. And i do feel for Matthew, being accused of that filth. Especially the worse thing when your innocent.
What, you mean like how Michael Jackson was found innocent of the same filth too? Yeah, right Simon!🤣
@@ljdmanxfella5793 The difference being that Matthew Kelly has never paid anyone off. That speaks volumes to me.
@@ljdmanxfella5793so if anyone is accused, that’s it. They’re bang to rights. How about I accuse you of being a nonce. Does that mean you’re one too? Is that how it works?
I love these type of moments, Matthew from his perspective has every right to feel pissed off, while Frank feels he was just a topic to joke about that week, the confrontation is brill', both handled it well in my opinion.
I can't believe this is the only copy of this on youtube, it's an epic moment of tv history
It was quite brave to dig frank skinner live for that, skinner wudnt have expected that but goes to show clearly mathew kelly forgave but did not forget
When you search for stuff now a lot of stuff won't show
The worst thing about this video is you taped over the 70's Classic Armchair Thriller for this.
+Peter Byrd - "Armchair Thriller" scared the shit out of me. The episode where the faceless 'Black Nun' appears in a rocking chair in an attic scarred me for life. Then there was the pet pooch nailed to some old dear's front door. Complete with blood stains. Then there was the flash of an evil face whizzing by in a dark train tunnel right next to some woman about to doze off with her head right next to the window, terrifying her. These images stayed with me. 'Armchair Thriller' was often repeated in the afternoon when I was (for some reason) often home from school. I saw 'em all. To this day even the theme music makes me go cold.
+Peter Byrd I love that creepy shadow intro lol
+aerialkate Here! Iv never heard of this prog!, and I'm an old TV fan, I will now go and look, { Im at the point in this video where I don't know If Frank apologised or not, I hope he didn't repeat it here I hope!!! ohhhh too late,
that show shit me to death as a child and dont get me started on hammer house of horror and the original evil dead
2 yrs late but fuk me i was the same afternoon showings and home alone i can still remember that shadow over the chair all alone i went out into the street because it fuked with me so much
Kelly looks like Kane from WWF
This is spot on
I used to do a bit of weight training at a gym co-owned by Wolf from Gladiators. His main topic of conversation was the weekly shop at Sainsburys.
This didn't go down as I think Mathew planned. I think he thought Frank would get embarrassed and buckle, and he would come out looking the bigger person. How wrong he was. He neglected to realized how 'sharp' Frank is. And I think he just made himself look even worse. Also anyone who missed the original gags got chance to hear them again !!
"sharp"........well maybe...but that is such a shame.....Skinner is a total pratt....
I don't really look at it in that way and quite a few people don't. It seemed as if Mathew held back quite a lot. It was more he wanted to bring it up just as a way to say "People like you need to realise that you're talking about real people here..Real innocent people". Which was true in his case and quite a few others over the years. Frank just seemed to sit there, squirm and come out with a few semi funny commenst to try and defuse the situation.
A few years later Frank said this was the hardest interview to do because he had no way to defend himself.
Aye, don't try to outcringe Skinner...playing right into his hands.
I'm afraid it's clear to see that Matthew Kelly is actually very, very angry. Yes, he plays along and even covers it at times with laughter but if you look at 2.19 you can see how serious he is about it.
This is a very tense piece of television and I don't think it's about who won and didn't win.
I'll tell you something about Matthew Kelly, take it as truth if you wish, but all i know of Matthew Kelly is what i know from my Nana, years ago, in the 1970's, Matthew Kelly lived around my area, Cheshire, i'm not sure exactly where but i think it was somewhere around Northwich/Winsford, that general area, now this happened before he became well known, and as far as i can tell, it is only a rumour, but anyway, the story goes that he was married, and got up to no good with a teenage boy, a police report was filed at the time, but Matthew Kelly buggered off to London, became quite successful and nothing ever came of it.
He was then investigated in 2003 on what i believe to be a different child abuse scandal, but there was insufficient evidence, now, i'm not for one second saying take this as fact, this is from my 78 year old Nana and her memory is a bit dodgy at the best of times, but having said that, i wouldn't let him near my kids haha.
There is never smoke without fire, he's dodgy, end off, you wanna leave him in a room with your kids? Of course you don't.
Jimmy savile was just rumours once you know...
+Daniel Thompson So because Jimmy Savile was a paedophile it follows that Matthew Kelly is one too. "No smoke without fire" is a slogan for lazy-minded numbskulls.
+Daniel Thompson Well I agree with you, Daniel. I know somebody that worked with him for years, and they described him as a monster.
Stephen Ogley You knew someone who worked for him who called him a monster? Well that's conclusive then. I despair when I read brain-dead comments like yours.
He buggered off to London lol
Is there anything about which a joke can't be told? Frank Skinner is up front about it. People in the public eye always get jokes told about them.
yea but the jokes made about matthew were the worst kind.
Yeah I think you’re right but there’s a level of responsibility - own what you say. And if you’re attacking a marginalised group and promoting a trope that gay men are likely to be paedos then FS needs to hear that. Anyway do agree, it’s a good conversation
@@dombaker8790 Matthew Kelly isn't gay though so where does the gay men fit into that?
This is truly grisly but well done Matthew Kelly. Trial by tabloid is a disgrace - just because someone is accused of something or even under investigation doesn't mean they don't matter and deserve to be treated with contempt. Inoocent until proven guilty.
Mmmm Barrymore was innocent as well.
And MJ
..and of course jimmy saville. .. . .moral ..= everything on TV = bullshit.
Was a joke at the time but no smoke without fire Pete Townsend got off as a police whistleblower informed the newspapers and that gave him and everybody else time to destroy their computers etc so when he was raided they only had the evidence of a credit card which was used to view child porn ?
Top notch audio recording of tv
I've heard so many bullies claim they were only joking.
Bullying is when one person overpowers another and forces them to do something against their will. Disparaging jokes is not bullying.
I disagree totally. If you've ever Ben on the receiving end of a continual, passive aggressive joke about you then I think you would think it bullying. We all have seen the school bully making fun of the weaker person, all the time, every day,. To what end other than to diminish them and use them as an oblect for ridicule. That's bullying to me and it doesn't need to make someone do something they don't want to either. Humour is sometimes cruel yes, Nd sometimes it's also bullying. I'm not necessarily claiming Frank Skinner was doing this but it', I think he is unaware of the effects on others and claiming the usual get out clause of its only humour.
@@saudade369 I didn’t say that disparaging jokes are fun, but unless you are being overpowered it’s not bullying. If someone makes passive aggressive jokes about you, fight back. You don’t get to call everything you don’t like in life “bullying” just because you don’t like it.
@@ifanmorgan8070 Your definition of bullying doesn't cover all areas though. There's the psychological side of bullying which merely (but damagingly) gets inside the head of the victim, particularly the younger ones who are vulnerable, over-sensitive and easy prey for the bully. In those legions of cases, it's not to do with being overpowering or forcing someone to do something (which is of course one form of bullying). It's to do with undermining, belittling....mental abuse, in other words.
And yes, Frank...while not being a bully here)....is nevertheless using that cold, defiant, rational way of exempting himself from blame that a bully would if they were taken up on it. "It's only a joke".....while the consequences are being ignored, not appreciated.
jokes are bullying?, what about criticism? is that bullying too, lets just be fascists shall we and stop people from saying anything offensive, someones going to walk out in front of a car on purpose because they think they are car proof but you're not allowed to tell them that's a STUPID idea because that would be bullying, you see where it leads ? lol there's actually several comedy sketches based on this subject and a red dwarf episode lol where there's a ship driving directly into a star but no ones allowed to tell the crew it's a bad idea becase criticism of any kind including jokes are illegal and is classed as bullying lol infact we actually had to amend the section 5 public order act a couple of years ago with thanks to comedians like rowan atkinson to remove the words offence from it just so that comedians could do their jobs without fear of being arrested for telling jokes.
Well done Frank for standing your ground. Although Kelly was never charged with child abuse, dating back 30 yrs, he certainly wasn’t cleared. Many of his alleged victims were unwilling to give evidence and others recollections very too hazy. When his holiday home in Colombo, Sri Lanka a notorious paedophile hot spot, which his wife nor two grown up children had ever visited, was raided by police it was full of kiddies soft toys and children’s games, which the local police were only too happy to show waiting press. You can be like Frank Skinner and draw your own conclusions.
@@davidcollins9258 I know. There were some terrible stories coming out of Colombo at the time. Many families living in abject poverty would let their kids ‘play’ with the wealthy foreigners. Through shame and embarrassment, the people and government brushed it under the carpet. Even now people don’t want to talk about it, so you can see why the paedophiles flocked there. Why Kelly would want a holiday home there is suspicious at best.🤷♂️
Only one person made an allegation so you saying there were many is utter crap.
@@evilroyslade1099 agreed. Just the one allegation of one person and he was released with no further developments so he’s innocent .
@@TheRobertino2001the biggest load of crap I’ve ever read in my life
Hopefully you can be tracked down so Kelly can take legal action against this slanderous nonsense. I’m sure you’ve seen what celebs can do against social media keyboard warriors these days.
The line " I haven't seen it" says a lot about Kelly.
Mad how different the comments are from 12 years ago compared to now
Good on ya Matthew. An interesting encounter.
Apparently interview had finished and Matthew said something after and Frank said put the cameras back on.
Someone needs to upload the original!
@@undividedorchestra Sorry Mathew.
Watching it again - the truth of the matter is Mathew Kelly comes across as creepy. He makes me feel uncomfortable and is cringe inducing. He is not very likeable or endearing. I think that's why the truth of the joke is irrelevant ( not to him I'm sure) but it works because , rightly or wrongly, people find him creepy, insincere and uncomfortable
He hosted a show where people pretended to be someone else...
Kinda did ruin his career. He was accused, cleared but his career never recovered, despite being innocent.
Have a look at the evidence
@@daviddingvean8597 you mean the actual court evidence or what the papers say which isn't evidence?
He should of done more acting. Missed his way. He's very good.
@@TheStevenWhiting court evidence and pictures of the inside of where he was living
Yep ..oj Simpson was found not guilty too 👍👍
Matthew "I,d like to talk to you IN PRIVATE about something you said about me." Frank "save it for the show."
Did that happen?
@@brettpritchard265 Frank said so.
I think the problem, rightly or wrongly, is that there is something a bit creepy about Mathew Kelly. I , personally, don't think he handled this very well. I know what he was trying to do , and he had some balls to bring it up, but he made himself look more silly- in my opinion...Mathew being all self righteous and expecting a positive audience response - 2:31 - the most awkward few moments on telly ever??
Skinner dealt with Kelly very well. Kelly almost seemed menacing at the start. But Skinner knew how to play it. I'm sure hes had others want apologies for things he has said, but hes a comedian and seeing the funny side of life. He is satirical and that's what he does well.
amazing tv, i was at a party in uni and it was on in the backround, everyone stopped and watched in silence!
Must've been a shit party
He's right about Kelly being part of the mood at the time and I'd defend his right to joke about whatever he likes. And the comment below is right, it's good to see a good, adult debate about this. I'd argue Frank's jibe at Sophie Ellis Bextor at the Brits was actually harder to defend.
And now he was cleared of all
Charges and a national treasure.
It is strange watching this - like many others, I've waited for it to be uploaded for a long time.
I say strange because I have told so many people about it over the years and recounted what happened. I have to admit that I haven't been portraying it accurately...I've made out that Skinner was put right on the back foot and squirmed throughout. He actually put up a good case for himself and what he'd done. My "party piece" will need to be rejigged, I think.
THAT... is your party peice?!
Puts any of the One Shows intrviews in the shed !
Well done Frank stick to your guns,...
but mathew kelly was innocent mate? i think he had a right to be pissed off.
Frank doesn't like it when the boots on the other foot, remember when he tried to belittle Bernard manning on his show .
Doesn’t like it? He stood his ground.
Remember the Alan hansan one ....that was good. Or Britney spears that one was a fuckin car crash
@@barrychambers7854 Well, he wouldn't admit he was wrong. I think he knew he was though.
Cliff, he wasn't wrong. A sense of humour can't be wrong, it can only be different. There shouldn't be any rules for comedy. If there was then life of Brian wouldn't exist, everything offends someone. It's the people who think their being offended actually gives them any rights who are the problem.
Exactly ! so why did he invite Bernard on his show to belittle him about his humour. That's why I don't like the man.
Ok, so my sound is clearly working as every RUclips video is playing sound, but this one isn't! Where is the sound? Nobody is complaining about no sound in the comments section of this video. What is happening?
Anyone falsely accused of anything knows how he is Matthew is feeling.
Did u see the evidence
All men are seen as guilty.....
It definitely hurt his career too, even though he was found to be innocent.
The problem with the "jokes" is that they infer that he is guilty. And Frank Skinner has no right to assert that, until proven in a court of law.
You do know that a joke isn't an assertion right?
Got to admire Frank Skinner for standing by his jokes, and not being a hypocrite.
Not really, apologising would have meant losing face, that's all he was bothered about.
Not quite, in May Skinner apologised for his and Baddiel’s repeated racism towards Jason Lee.
They could have closed the window, all I can hear is all that rain outside!
Bloody hell. Why has this just popped up? It’s so old I forgot what the Matthew Kelly story was even about.
Been looking for this for ages. Thanks :D.
I actually thought Frank Skinner handled that pretty well. Fair play to him for sticking to his guns and defending what he does.
Matthew Kelly is trying to be intimidating but frank is getting the upper hand and making very valid points.
I think you must have been listening to another interview, Allison. And what is valid, or humourous, about publicly dragging an innocent man's life and career through the mud? I would have been very happy if Matthew had punched his lights out. I wonder if you would have the same response if someone gossiped unfairly about you to the whole world?
It’s interesting - I’m seeing the opposite and I like Skinner but think it’s a weak dodge. It also says a lot about how primitive our attitudes to homosexuality were in the 1990s/2000s.
@@dombaker8790 When you say 'our' attitudes you are taking things for granted. Not everyone shares your opinions.
@@dombaker8790 Why are you bringing homosexuality into it? Matthew Kelly's not gay.
Was this recorded with a potato?
yes
Neon Messiah Well he's honest...
Potatoes give off better audio quality than this.
Why? has it left a chip on ya shoulder ?
It's a case of:- fill in the missing sibilance!
You need to turn the volume down a bit, i could almost hear it...
Frank handles himself here like the true legend he is.
By legend, you mean 'turd'?
I saw Matthew Kelly in Educating Rita and he was great in it.
"Tonight Matthew I'm going to be ....murdered on the way home" fair play frank hahahaha that was Gold 😂😂😂😂
Let’s face it Matthew Kelly is a national treasure and his career has never recovered from this accusation
Have you seen the evidence
National treasure might be over selling it a little, but I agree he got caught up in the moral outrage campaign of the moment.
National treasure !!! Your having a laugh
My memory might be playing tricks but didn't they also find a load of class A drugs in his house?
@@doctor_gibbo1392 no
I find it so creepy how Matthew Kelly looks so smug and laughs at his own passive aggressive comments. Why do so many older people do that? Do they think it makes them look clever?
Really nasty
I think Matthew Kelly is a wimp and he was doing this creepy smug routine because he didn't have the balls to actually hit Frank.
He was being accused of the worst crime imaginable and was put through hell and back and Frank Skinner used it to make a joke at his expense. Had Matthew killed himself over it would it of still been funny? I think he had the right to be smug since he was cleared of all charges actually.
Frank Skinner is a likeable guy, and Matthew Kelly is a slimy creep who makes my flesh crawl. Even so, Kelly is right here and Skinner is wrong.
neonatalpenguin Neither come across as likeable guys.
Whose idea was it to stick that Armchair Thriller title at the beginning? That used to shit me up something rotten when I was a kid!
I can't believe you taped over Armchair Thriller!
I am listening to this on ear phones sounds like someone is doing morse code
You can't police what people say, let the comedians do comedy, Matthew - Frank was right to stand up for himself
Oh to be where we was but only 6 short years ago.
Any chance of any sound
I know Matthew personally, and I know the shit he went through, I thought he dealt with this in a very calm and considerate way...
Then you're blatantly either incredibly naïve or very unintelligent Mr Horse!
No you don't.
Kelly is doing very well his career is not over the man never stops working.
Wonder how many kids had a star in their eye?
Ha very good
It’s not an easy black and white issue this as I can see both sides of the cases made. However I’d like to say I wish I could believe that Kelly wasn’t bothered a bit about the jokes Skinner and Baddiel cracked that night on “Unplanned”. His use of the word horrible to describe the jokes is pretty emotive and not one used by someone not phased by them. And just listen to the tone of his voice, it’s like that of a parent/teacher calmly chiding a child.
Frankly I believe in my humble opinion that Kelly chose the wrong way to handle the situation. Given that Skinner didn’t attempt to take the easy way out and respectfully defended himself and disagreed with the actor/television host, I think he’d have been willing to listen to his objections in private. The former “Stars in the their Eyes” presenter could have asked his agent to get in touch with the two comedians respective agents/agent and agreed to meet. Being cynical you might be able to accuse Kelly of attempting to provoke sympathy and make Skinner look bad. However due to his resilience under pressure although he did look uncomfortable the Brummie comic managed to turn the tables a bit. Kelly comes up looking that bit worse although to be fair he does shake his interviewers hand and leave things as they are.
I know there are people who will say that it was up to him how he chose to handle the situation. An adult doesn’t air their issues with someone out in public, no one need have ever known there were any. How many people in the audience after that episode of “Unplanned” would have remembered the jokes in the long term if not the short? While I think very few people’s opinions regarding Kelly’s innocence or guilt would have altered anyone’s opinion of the whole affair, I can still appreciate how from his perspective it may have hurt him. There can’t be anything worse when it seems someone is making light of a unthinkable situation at your expense. So as I stated already I’m not without sympathy for him. I just think he could have handled things differently.
A* Robert! :)
Why did you write it with things such as "the actor/television presenter" and "the former Stars In Their Eyes Host"? It comes off extremely pretentious and irritating n
Why are you being nitpicky and irritating?!
Robert McElwaine Robert, he's just giving feedback on your essay. He's entitled to his own opinion.
And I gave feedback on his feedback. I'm entitled to my opinion as well!
Many of the comments were made by David Baddiel , not Frank. They were said on Baddiel and Skinner Unplanned.
I'm struggling to see your point Roy, assuming you have one? Unless you really are gullible or naïve enough to believe that _"Baddiel and Skinner Unplanned"_ *must* have been unplanned, simply because they used the word _"Unplanned"_ in the shows title?
@@ljdmanxfella5793 My point which I believe was clear, was - most of the comments were made by Baddiel and not skinner - unplanned or otherwise - it was the name of the program. What exactly is your point? It was a joke. This was well over 10 years ago when the world could make jokes.. .remember that time?
@@ljdmanxfella5793your response still reads as just rude
I think Matthew Kelly had been through a lot that year and was just a little upset but they both handled it very well.
Well said. J'd go further and say that Frank gave Mathew a chance to get on telly again after his horrific ordeal. He fell on his own sword to help him out. To expunge a few things openly for both. Well done Frank and Mathew. Great telly.
@@daikayll1897 Are you joking? Frank Skinner made cheap jibes at Kelly's expense. He clearly was not expecting to get called out on this. Kelly's career was ruined despite him having done nothing wrong and that slime Frank Skinner is hardly whiter than white. I don't think FS deserves any credit here.
@@TheJTD1982 Maybe not but we'll never really know. At least Kelly did get a moment that we have been witness to.
Kelly is such a repellant human being. He looks so pleased with himself even though he's slowly dying here.
loved armchair thriller
Have you seen Matthew Kelly recently? Wow, he looks rough. He's 70, but looks like he's had a tough time since this was done. Poor guy
Booze.
Frank genuinely looks scared there.
Wow this is so awkward, but Frank Skinner handled it very well.
In 2022, Skinner is effectively admitting he made reckless allegations against Matthew Kelly... for comedic content, and acknowledging that likely destroyed his life and career.
Get the headphones out for this one
He looks a very in nerving block does Kelly, not sure this did him any favours.
Elvis presley fucking rocks his legend will live in every ones hearts for ever more REST IN PEACE MR ELVIS PRESLEY!
Elvis was a 🛎end
Are you running a tap through a siv while recording this?
@funkymcmunky See the volume adjusted one in the video responses.
gotta give frank skinner credit for having him on the show must have taken some balls
What did he do
Can't hear it