Controversies

Despite being a bit of fun, due to the sometimes ambiguous nature of the categories there have been numerous controversies through the shows run.

## Donald Duck / Prison - Set 1, Game 10

This saw KEY being eliminated after his play of Donald Duck was challenged by HORNE. The category was "No more people who have definitely been imprisoned", and HORNE finds what looks to be fairly solid proof (a GIF of Donald, in a prison outfit, pulling on bars - see image, right).

WATSON, in an attempt to defend KEY, suggests that this might have been taken from a dream sequence. The players don't follow up on it, but this is in fact the case - the clip in question comes from Donald's Crime, and is part of a sequence where he imagines that he's being chased and will end up in prison (because he stole $1.25 from his nephews' piggy bank). In fact, he is never imprisoned, and instead earns the money back by washing dishes.

Whether or not there are legitimate example of Donald being imprisoned, KEY should not have been out on this evidence alone.

## Dominic Solanke / One letter away from a country - Set 2, Game 10

HORNE introduces a category which appears on screen as:

> No more **name** + **letter** = **country**
>
>

His original name is David Cameron (Cameroon), and while clarifying the rule his name another is Nige (Niger). KEY then names Dominic Solanke the very next turn, which gets challenged by WATSON on the basis that Dominica is a country. KEY asks at this point whether or not the category was just surnames, to which HORNE points out that his "name another" was a first name. He offers to go back and check (saying he genuinely doesn't remember it being surname), at which point KEY says "Nah, no point - I reckon I'm out."

This caused controversy BTL, because during the initial clarification of the rule HORNE does at one point mention surname. However, in the context of the full transcript, it's possible that he said this referencing his own example and/or KEY's deliberately absurd one (Mo Mowlam, changing the surname to Chad):

```
HORNE: David Cameron. No more people who, when you think about it, they're only one letter away from a country. In his case, Cameroon. You've got to chuck one in there.
KEY: Does it have to be an African country?
HORNE: It can be anywhere. Any country, but you've got to ADD one letter.
KEY: Can I ask a question? Can you get rid of all of the letters and put new ones in? So it's Mo Mowlam, and you put in... you can't do it? Chad? You can't do that?
HORNE: No, you just add a letter to their existing surname. Don't change the order or anything.
WATSON: Can we name another?
HORNE: Well, I'll just have that bloke Nige. There's a Liverpudlian comedian called Nige, and just add an R on the end and you get Niger.

```

In response to the uproar BTL, the official No More Jockeys account responded with:

> Horne mentioned “surname” when referring to Cameron (not the category), and his subsequent Name Another was accepted by all players. The NMJ Ethics Committee consider the matter closed.
>
>

Ultimately, it seems likely that HORNE's intention was not for the category to be restricted to surnames. However, in other situations where there is doubt (especially so early in the game), players have been granted a reprieve, which may have been the fairest way to resolve this case. Ultimately, though, KEY did accept the decision and refused HORNE's offer to "go back and check".

## Hulk Hogan / All Black - Set 3, Game 5

In this game, HORNE refuses to walk on a category of "No more people wearing all black" after naming Hulk Hogan. WATSON arbitrates the dispute (having done the work - see image, right), with KEY enraged that HORNE isn't walking. HORNE's main arguments in his defense were:

* In the picture, you can't see his socks or shoes - which might not be black.
* He's wearing a watch, necklace and belt buckle which are silver.

When the category is first declared it's phrased as "all black", and it *is* established that a suit with a white shirt wouldn't count. However, it is *not* established whether photos have to be full length, or what the rules are for shoes. The belt buckle point arguably falls down, since the category was introduced with Darth Vader (whose "all black" outfits will almost certainly contain small silver accessories too).

During the debate, HORNE worsens matters by luring KEY into a second challenge on Hulk Hogan being fictional ("One of the main reasons I'm not going is because there's a category you could just say"). Once this challenge is made, though, he then claims that he "doesn't really understand the challenge" and states that a persona is different to a fictional character - still refusing to walk.

Two turns later (before HORNE's next go), KEY challenges WATSON on the all black category again - this time for Kathy Burke. The best image HORNE can find shows her clearly wearing white shoes and a coloured scarf (see image, left). WATSON admits that he probably would have walked before HORNE's display, but won't now due to the precedent that's been established.

HORNE has a crisis of confidence at this point, because he realises that this would be KEY's third "incorrect" challenge, eliminating him from the game. He starts to insist that he should walk retrospectively, which KEY is oddly against ("you missed the chance to fall on your sword"). KEY also misremembers events, claiming it was WATSON who originally challenged Hulk Hogan on black (when it definitely wasn't).

Ultimately, KEY's third challenge fails but he is not eliminated. HORNE chooses to "self-sacrifice" on his next turn by deliberately naming someone invalid, removing himself from the game. He later justifies his behaviour by his failed Sooty challenge for wearing all black, where he felt KEY didn't do the work effectively. He apologises and says he has "learnt his lesson".

HORNE: "Did I ruin the game?"