Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
Lineker and Attenborough
Comments
-
First class observational comedy.IdleHans said:Looks as if Football Focus has been replaced by Bargain Hunt. Steve Gallen and Martin Sandgaard trawl the lower leagues looking for cheap footballers that they can move on quickly for a few quid profit. Sadly most of them end up in The Repair Shop instead.0 -
Would love to see the BBC front them all up and sack them.
Alex Scott not commentating on football? Ha ha.
My life is over.
Today just gets better.
Just need Welling to turn over Concord at PVR.
£10 if you pay in advance. Bring the family.1 -
RaplhMilne said:If he is in breach of his contract with the BBC then he is in the wrong. He willingly signed the contract to be one of the highest paid people at the BBC.Let’s be honest, are the whole lot of them going to up and walk away from Match of the day, and other football related BBC programming.Their arrogance in believing they are irreplaceable is beyond belief. I bet a queue of ex premier players is around the block looking for a job.
If it was a repudiatory breach of his contract then why haven't the BBC terminated that contract?
8 -
If he was in breach of contract, they’d have sacked him.RaplhMilne said:If he is in breach of his contract with the BBC then he is in the wrong. He willingly signed the contract to be one of the highest paid people at the BBC.5 -
I don’t see why he should compromise at all. He doesn’t need the money, he will get a job with another broadcaster easily. It is now the BBC’s problem not his.SporadicAddick said:
He can’t compromise on his stance, he has already made it. He needs to compromise on his use of twitter in the short term to get everyone around the table.ME14addick said:
I disagree that Gary Lineker should comprise on his stance.SporadicAddick said:
So do you disagree with the point I made?ME14addick said:
There should be no compromise on free speech that highlights the use of language designed to encourage hate and division.SporadicAddick said:whatever your views (and I sense a majority position on this forum at least), the BBC and Lineker quickly need to de-escalate this, and that will involve short term compromises from both and a robust and public review of policy. Entrenched positions from both sides are not helpful.
Gary Lineker did not air his views on MOTD, he did it on a completely separate platform i.e. Twitter.4 -
Braverman furious that MOTD is going ahead at all today. She's not a big fan of all the economic migrants being televised.14
-
5 Live putting out another podcast instead of 5 Live Sport.1
-
The BBC have got themselves in trouble here. The way they have dealt with this is just stupid and it will keep rolling along with them digging themselves a deeper hole.
If they are suposed to be impartial why get involved with a comment made by someone who isnt a political commentator. Maybe the Chairman who may or not be involved with the Conservatives has stuck his oar in.
3 -
Of course he doesn’t have to. It’s my opinion that for the good of sport on the BBC he should, particularly seeing how this is escalating. If he doesn’t want to then he should resign.Gary Poole said:
I don’t see why he should compromise at all. He doesn’t need the money, he will get a job with another broadcaster easily. It is now the BBC’s problem not his.SporadicAddick said:
He can’t compromise on his stance, he has already made it. He needs to compromise on his use of twitter in the short term to get everyone around the table.ME14addick said:
I disagree that Gary Lineker should comprise on his stance.SporadicAddick said:
So do you disagree with the point I made?ME14addick said:
There should be no compromise on free speech that highlights the use of language designed to encourage hate and division.SporadicAddick said:whatever your views (and I sense a majority position on this forum at least), the BBC and Lineker quickly need to de-escalate this, and that will involve short term compromises from both and a robust and public review of policy. Entrenched positions from both sides are not helpful.
Gary Lineker did not air his views on MOTD, he did it on a completely separate platform i.e. Twitter.0 -
Sponsored links:
-
SporadicAddick said:
He can’t compromise on his stance, he has already made it. He needs to compromise on his use of twitter in the short term to get everyone around the table.ME14addick said:
I disagree that Gary Lineker should comprise on his stance.SporadicAddick said:
So do you disagree with the point I made?ME14addick said:
There should be no compromise on free speech that highlights the use of language designed to encourage hate and division.SporadicAddick said:whatever your views (and I sense a majority position on this forum at least), the BBC and Lineker quickly need to de-escalate this, and that will involve short term compromises from both and a robust and public review of policy. Entrenched positions from both sides are not helpful.
Gary Lineker did not air his views on MOTD, he did it on a completely separate platform i.e. Twitter.
I disagree, he shouldn't compromise on his use of Twitter.2 -
Well quite. But we don’t necessarily know what policy / specifics his own contract is caught under I don’t believe.bobmunro said:valleynick66 said:All depends on what his contract / the BBC governing policies allow him to say surely.Didn’t Andrew Marr when he heft relatively recently cite concerns over what he has been previously allowed to say / not say?
Id suggest many employers these days have social media policies for workers and I know for example it’s best to be very cautious on anything which might reflect adversely on my employer.
Whether we like it or not the BBC is unique and slightly different from other broadcasters.Yes they do - I do. The two main points in our policy are:1. Do not make comments that may bring the Company into disrepute.2. You must make it clear that any opinions you express are your personal views and you do not claim them to represent the Company's opinions.If GL worked for my mob he would not be in breach of my SM policy.
I’ve understood that to be the reason he was taken off air ie. The BBC have chosen an interpretation of their policy that puts him in breach.I imagine the ultimate compromise will eventually be some re wording / enhanced guidance on what can / cannot be said. And he and others will be given a little more latitude in future.0 -
Why can’t the media follow it’s present zeitgeist and have ‘I’m a celebrity pundit and big cheese commentator’?
You could have Pru Leith discussing the catenaccio defence with Michael McIntyre, after Leeds v Brighton and Hove Albion commentated on by Robert Peston, plus expert analysis by Mary Beard.0 -
I presume that is an option but not the only sanction / outcome available.InspectorSands said:
If he was in breach of contract, they’d have sacked him.RaplhMilne said:If he is in breach of his contract with the BBC then he is in the wrong. He willingly signed the contract to be one of the highest paid people at the BBC.They’ve said I think they still value him as a presenter and for now at least would rather he worked for them.Not sure this will end amicably for him regardless.More interesting now is how long his fellow pundits remain loyal to him. They won’t as they are shooting themselves in the foot. More likely GL will say thanks for the support but please carry on working for the BBC to give them an out.0 -
That’s a fair question, and my view is yes. The BBC will take the opportunity to demonstrate its editorial independence and the Government will be forced to take a step back (and be more accommodating in the Charter discussions).PragueAddick said:
If I may butt in here @SporadicAddick, I agree in principle with your point myself, but there is one huge practical flaw. You called forSporadicAddick said:
So do you disagree with the point I made?ME14addick said:
There should be no compromise on free speech that highlights the use of language designed to encourage hate and division.SporadicAddick said:whatever your views (and I sense a majority position on this forum at least), the BBC and Lineker quickly need to de-escalate this, and that will involve short term compromises from both and a robust and public review of policy. Entrenched positions from both sides are not helpful.
Gary Lineker did not air his views on MOTD, he did it on a completely separate platform i.e. Twitter.
"a robust and public review of policy."
Absolutely. 100%. But really, do you believe that can be conducted, freely and fairly, under this government and with that line up at the top of the BBC?
I should add, for transparency, that I think the BBC is a bloated self serving edifice that needs stripping back to its core essentials - in a democratic society a State broadcaster has a role to play in delivering impartial and balanced content - the alternative is Fox / CNBC polarisation - but in its current form it’s stretching itself too far.
0 -
That tweet I posted up on the previous page from Mr Solekhol…. On this device it is now masked by Twitter with a label warning as showing “sensitive” content. WTAF? Is everybody seeing that?3
-
The BBC is - or at least is supposed to be - a public broadcaster. A state broadcaster is one under direct government control. You don't get many state broadcasters in democracies.SporadicAddick said:in a democratic society a State broadcaster has a role to play in delivering impartial and balanced content - the alternative is Fox / CNBC polarisation - but in its current form it’s stretching itself too far.3 -
Good semantics. A public service broadcaster is correct.InspectorSands said:
The BBC is - or at least is supposed to be - a public broadcaster. A state broadcaster is one under direct government control. You don't get many state broadcasters in democracies.SporadicAddick said:in a democratic society a State broadcaster has a role to play in delivering impartial and balanced content - the alternative is Fox / CNBC polarisation - but in its current form it’s stretching itself too far.0 -
At least something good will come out of it then ...bobmunro said:Match of the Day pundit Ian Wright has said he'll quit the BBC if it "gets rid" of Lineker.
"If they get rid of Gary Lineker, I'm out, I'm gone, I'm not staying there," he said on the latest edition of his podcast Wrighty's House.
"On his own platform, he should be able to say what he wants to say," the former Arsenal player said.
Wright also said he agreed with Lineker's tweet about the government's new asylum bill.
He said the row was "the prefect distraction for this government".
"They've got no empathy" and "the most vulnerable ones are always the ones that suffer," he added.
"He [Lineker] is so right with what's he's saying."
1 -
This society chooses a few versions of what it calls democracy, but there are other versions (like proportional representation throughout) that are also called democracies.
0 -
Sponsored links:
-
In my view what would be best for BBC sport and all its other output, is people taking a stand against it being turned into a state broadcaster. It’s quite funny that the tweet at the centre of the row was about language used in Germany in the 1930’s and now the high ups at the beeb are taking actions used in Germany in the 1930’s by trying to silence voices that question the government.SporadicAddick said:
Of course he doesn’t have to. It’s my opinion that for the good of sport on the BBC he should, particularly seeing how this is escalating. If he doesn’t want to then he should resign.Gary Poole said:
I don’t see why he should compromise at all. He doesn’t need the money, he will get a job with another broadcaster easily. It is now the BBC’s problem not his.SporadicAddick said:
He can’t compromise on his stance, he has already made it. He needs to compromise on his use of twitter in the short term to get everyone around the table.ME14addick said:
I disagree that Gary Lineker should comprise on his stance.SporadicAddick said:
So do you disagree with the point I made?ME14addick said:
There should be no compromise on free speech that highlights the use of language designed to encourage hate and division.SporadicAddick said:whatever your views (and I sense a majority position on this forum at least), the BBC and Lineker quickly need to de-escalate this, and that will involve short term compromises from both and a robust and public review of policy. Entrenched positions from both sides are not helpful.
Gary Lineker did not air his views on MOTD, he did it on a completely separate platform i.e. Twitter.19 -
Certainly with R5L it has (though that's it's sports stuff).CharltonMadrid said:Wonder if the BBC presenters walkout will extend from sports to other shows.0 -
R0TW said:Would love to see the BBC front them all up and sack them.
Alex Scott not commentating on football? Ha ha.
My life is over.
Today just gets better.
Just need Welling to turn over Concord at PVR.
£10 if you pay in advance. Bring the family.
You are entitled to your opinion but just to let you know Alex Scott isn't a commentator and many of us enjoy the analysis on MOTD, even though I tend to watch it on catch up and I pick the games I want to watch.
Pleased to hear you support lower league football; life blood of football and cheap.
1 -
Not getting in to the whole debate about the BBC, etc but MOTD without the punditry means more football, which is good.
I will however say that if Mr Lineker knew anything about the rise of Hitler and his mob he wouldn't make the comparison. He owes an apology not to the government but to the memory of all those who suffered at the hands of the Third Reich.8 -
Its far from semantic. The practical difference can be seen today , not just in Russia, but in the EU member states Poland and Hungary. Fortunately not here in Czech but Czech TV is under similar pressure to the BBC all the time. CT models itself on the BBC and I can assure you the journos there are glued to this ( expecting to see it covered on the main news tonight as the tomatoes and turnips were on Tuesday) and watching with a sense of dread.SporadicAddick said:
Good semantics. A public service broadcaster is correct.InspectorSands said:
The BBC is - or at least is supposed to be - a public broadcaster. A state broadcaster is one under direct government control. You don't get many state broadcasters in democracies.SporadicAddick said:in a democratic society a State broadcaster has a role to play in delivering impartial and balanced content - the alternative is Fox / CNBC polarisation - but in its current form it’s stretching itself too far.
I think very few who don’t live abroad appreciate what a beacon of integrity and professionalism as well as freedom and democracy, the BBC is, around the world.16 -
I agree that the use of state versus public service in my post was wrong - hence “good” semantics…PragueAddick said:
Its far from semantic. The practical difference can be seen today , not just in Russia, but in the EU member states Poland and Hungary. Fortunately not here in Czech but Czech TV is under similar pressure to the BBC all the time. CT models itself on the BBC and I can assure you the journos there are glued to this ( expecting to see it covered on the main news tonight as the tomatoes and turnips were on Tuesday) and watching with a sense of dread.SporadicAddick said:
Good semantics. A public service broadcaster is correct.InspectorSands said:
The BBC is - or at least is supposed to be - a public broadcaster. A state broadcaster is one under direct government control. You don't get many state broadcasters in democracies.SporadicAddick said:in a democratic society a State broadcaster has a role to play in delivering impartial and balanced content - the alternative is Fox / CNBC polarisation - but in its current form it’s stretching itself too far.
I think very few who don’t live abroad appreciate what a beacon of integrity and professionalism as well as freedom and democracy, the BBC is, around the world.2 -
100% this.PragueAddick said:
Its far from semantic. The practical difference can be seen today , not just in Russia, but in the EU member states Poland and Hungary. Fortunately not here in Czech but Czech TV is under similar pressure to the BBC all the time. CT models itself on the BBC and I can assure you the journos there are glued to this ( expecting to see it covered on the main news tonight as the tomatoes and turnips were on Tuesday) and watching with a sense of dread.SporadicAddick said:
Good semantics. A public service broadcaster is correct.InspectorSands said:
The BBC is - or at least is supposed to be - a public broadcaster. A state broadcaster is one under direct government control. You don't get many state broadcasters in democracies.SporadicAddick said:in a democratic society a State broadcaster has a role to play in delivering impartial and balanced content - the alternative is Fox / CNBC polarisation - but in its current form it’s stretching itself too far.
I think very few who don’t live abroad appreciate what a beacon of integrity and professionalism as well as freedom and democracy, the BBC is, around the world.
Especially now as Sky only allows us to watch BBC NI 🙄0 -
The beeb gotta take a stand here. If lineker has breached impartiality rules then they have to take action. Likewise, with the presenters that have essentially gone on strike in support of him. Surely that’s breach of contract in anyone’s world. By downing tools, they’ve completely screwed up the beebs programming schedule for the indefinite future. As a licence payer, I’d be very annoyed if they let them get away with it.17
-
How much do you know about the rise of Hitler? He didn't start out with state power and control, he started out as one of many angry people attracted to mob politics at the end of the first world war. He built an organisation around him that was dedicated to taking state power and one of the key things they did was to dehumanise certain sections of German society. They did it through the use of language, describing people as aliens, saying they had too much influence and that a proper govt would get rid of them all. Can you not see parallels between that and Suella Braverman claiming there are up to a billion people wanting to "invade" our shores? (and yes she did say that 1 in 7 people in the entire world were lining up to come here).cfgs said:Not getting in to the whole debate about the BBC, etc but MOTD without the punditry means more football, which is good.
I will however say that if Mr Lineker knew anything about the rise of Hitler and his mob he wouldn't make the comparison. He owes an apology not to the government but to the memory of all those who suffered at the hands of the Third Reich.34
This discussion has been closed.
