SKY SPORTS appear to have claimed the moral high ground... [Derived headline]

SKY SPORTS appear to have claimed the moral high ground indismissing football pundit Andy Gray from his pound(s)1.7m-a-yearjob yesterday. But have they? It is worth examining the background,and the questions posed by the cynical drip-feed of informationleaked from the satellite TV giant.

Strange, is it not, that an incident which occured more than amonth ago - surely common knowledge at the station - was first citedonly yesterday, sprung out of left-field when the Scot's contractwas terminated?

The major sport talking point was the much-publicised episodelast weekend in which he and fellow commentator Richard Keysquestioned the ability of a female official to understand theoffside law. That was neanderthal behaviour from Gray and Keys,inevitably leading to them being branded dinosaaurs, yet they werejust about the best in their business. Distasteful and sexist it mayhave been, but was it a sacking offence?

One has to question the leaking of three items of Sky footage.This will provide fertile soil for conspiracy theorists.

Sky management said Gray was dismissed "in response to newevidence of unacceptable and offensive behaviour in an off-airincident that took place in December 2010".

This related to inappropriate comments by Gray to fellowcommentator Charlotte Jackson during Christmas rehearsals. Liftinghis belt, he invited her to tuck a microphone pack "down here forme", into his trousers.

It surfaced in video widely available on the internet onlyyesterday. Depending on the level of familiarity between Gray andJackson, it could have been interpreted as ranging from the grosslyimproper to innocent banter between friends. If it was the former,Gray would and should have been sacked on those grounds alone, longbefore he and Keys became the subject of disciplinary action fortheir comments about Sian Massey on Saturday. So why did the Jacksonincident take so long to become public? Many will smell a witchhunt,and Gray will doubtless be taking legal advice on the circumstances.

Gray and Keys had been suspended from Chelsea and Bolton duty theprevious evening following uproar around comments made off-air andnot transmitted before and during Saturday's match between Liverpooland Wolves.

The pair stereotyped male perceptions with the tired old chestnutthat women do not understand offside, and then had a pop atcomplaints made by West Ham vice-chair Karren Brady about sexism infootball.

These comments were not transmitted, so were they apparentlyleaked by fellow Sky employees from the news side of the business,inspired by jealousy in a classic episode of media turf wars?

The writing was on the wall for Gray when earlier Sky footagefrom before Saturday's match was aired by Sky News yesterday. In it,line official Ms Massey was reported to be "a bit of a looker".Gray, having appeared to take a look at her, said: "Nah, Iwouldn't", before again questioning what women know about theoffside rule.

Ms Massey had the last laugh in spectacularly calling it rightover a difficult borderline offside decision in the run-up to theopening goal.

Had Gray applauded this he might have mitigated his offence, butchose not to.

However, in seeking to demonise the commentators, and establish amysoginist bias, critics had to go back to 1998 to trawl up footagein which they giggled their way through highlights of the women's FACup final between Arsenal and Croydon. Two episodes critical ofwomen more than 12 years apart hardly constitutes a campaign offemale vilification.

And so, at last, the Jackson tape was played late yesterday, andthe axe fell. Football fan forums were soon awash with conspiracytheories. Gray is suing News Corp over phone tapping allegations.News Corp, that pillar of the defence of women's rights which hasmade a fortune through exploiting women on page three, is owned byRupert Murdoch, who in turn owns a major slice of Sky. I cannot seeGray's offence - at least prior to revelation of the Jackson episode- as remotely comparable to that of another football pundit, RonAtkinson, whose reference to Marcel Desailly as: "a f****** lazy,thick ******" cost him two jobs.

Women are capable of their own politically incorrect jests -about men's lack of domestic skills or inadequacies in multi-tasking. Only the thinnest-skinned male interprets that as bigotryby the female of the species.

Sport reflects what is deemed acceptable in society, and can be apotent tool in stamping out the unacceptable. When we have a royalfamily which crosses perceived lines: the Prince of Wales referringto a fellow polo club member as 'Sooty', and Prince Harry labellinga Sandhurst colleague 'Paki', or Carol Thatcher comparing Frenchtennis player Jo-Wilfried Tsonga to "a golliwog", lines becomeblurred.

Sport plays a part in shaping society, but political correctnessrun mad helps nobody. Andy Gray should not be sacrificed on thealtar of PC or to some News Corp agenda.