THE aftermath of Lord Hutton's report is not unlike listening to football managers arguing over the performance of a referee.

As far as the Government is concerned of course, Lord Hutton did a splendidly thorough job.

But for opponents of the Government and supporters of the BBC, it is a clear case of "We wuz robbed" with whitewash stains everywhere.

In their eyes, an establishment figure like Lord Hutton is no more likely to condemn the Government than a referee is inclined to give a penalty against Manchester United at Old Trafford.

Gavyn Davies resigned as BBC chairman on Wednesday with the words: "I have been brought up to believe that you cannot choose your own referee, and that referee's decision is final."

The BBC's Director General Greg Dyke was left with no real option but to follow Mr Davies yesterday. Honourable men doing the honourable thing, though neither could resist questioning the referee's decision as they went.

The BBC had inaccurately accused the Government of the vilest of crimes and senior managers failed in their duty to make sure that such a momentous story was true. That is as serious as it gets.

Lessons have been learned, new procedures put in place, and the BBC has far too much talent and professionalism within its ranks for public confidence to be damaged for long.

But what of the individual correspondent whose alarming arrogance and incompetence led to a stand-off between the Government and the BBC, cost taxpayers a fortune, and sent heads rolling down the corridors of Television Centre?

The BBC, which was so quick to suspend Robert Kilroy-Silk when it judged him to have brought the corporation into disrepute, has yet to make an announcement on the future of Andrew Gilligan.

Surely he should have been shown the red card by now? Indeed, he should have walked without waiting for it.