| Anyone want to present MotD tomorrow? on 09:15 - Mar 11 with 1720 views | JimmyRustler |
Lineker has been an odious turd for a long time.
Nobody gives a fvck what you think about the wider world mate, just do your job (albeit mediocrely) and present the bloody programme |  | |  |
| Anyone want to present MotD tomorrow? on 09:24 - Mar 11 with 1693 views | finberty |
We will be spared the input from the egotistical and unamusing Micah Richards too.
As the late Motty once said - this is getting better and better and better. |  | | |
| Anyone want to present MotD tomorrow? on 09:26 - Mar 11 with 1673 views | 442Dale |
| Anyone want to present MotD tomorrow? on 09:24 - Mar 11 by finberty |
We will be spared the input from the egotistical and unamusing Micah Richards too.
As the late Motty once said - this is getting better and better and better. |
Maybe Motson would have pulled out too. |  |
| |
| Anyone want to present MotD tomorrow? on 09:28 - Mar 11 with 1645 views | James1980 |
How impartial was it for Andrew Neil to be editor of The Spectator whilst being a political journalist for the BBC, or for Lord Sugar to tweet telling people to vote for Boris Johnson, whilst also being a presenter of a prime time TV show, or for Jeremy Clarkson to make comments like striking workers should be shot. They don't give a rats about impartiality. |  |
| |
| Anyone want to present MotD tomorrow? on 10:09 - Mar 11 with 1577 views | judd |
| Anyone want to present MotD tomorrow? on 20:33 - Mar 10 by Plattyswrinklynuts |
I volunteer. My interviewing/presenting technique would be in stark contrast to the bland, sycophantic puke spouted by Lineker & his overpaid cronies, ie “Graham Potter, were ANY of those January signings actually sanctioned by you?” Or discussing the merits of half time beheadings with Newcastles chairman?
Perhaps an entire show dedicated to league 2 pointedly ignoring every other division, much like they do with the Prem every week… What about Matt Allwright doorstepping a certain ex lifelong Dale CEO with some carefully prepared questions courtesy of posters on this forum… |
This is the sort of brilliant thinking that would never occur to the BBC.
An argument on Twitter last night justifying pundits was that they often show and comment on clips not actually shown during the highlights.
If that does not tell you editing and content management of the programme is wholly wrong and weighed in favour of inane verbosity, then nothing will.
Unfortunately there is no such thing as free speech, with the probable exception of parliamentary privilege.Express your views by all means, but beware the consequences, especially when entering into a lucrative contract of your own free will.
Lineker is paid £1.35m from public funds as a contractor, not an employee, and thus avoids standard PAYE taxation. Please tell me.what other, proper value-adding public sector funded occupations pays anywhere near this amount in such a manner? |  |
| |
| Anyone want to present MotD tomorrow? on 10:17 - Mar 11 with 1542 views | judd |
| Anyone want to present MotD tomorrow? on 09:28 - Mar 11 by James1980 |
How impartial was it for Andrew Neil to be editor of The Spectator whilst being a political journalist for the BBC, or for Lord Sugar to tweet telling people to vote for Boris Johnson, whilst also being a presenter of a prime time TV show, or for Jeremy Clarkson to make comments like striking workers should be shot. They don't give a rats about impartiality. |
You make a fair point, James.
As I understand it, Neil never made any controversial remarks, Sugar is a peer of the realm associated with the conservatives (I think) and Clarkson was ultimately removed.
Also the BBC DG has tried to reach agreement on future use of SM by Lineker but an agreement could not be reached.
Now we have a situation of the tail wagging the dog. | |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Anyone want to present MotD tomorrow? on 11:14 - Mar 11 with 1415 views | SuddenLad |
| Anyone want to present MotD tomorrow? on 10:17 - Mar 11 by judd |
You make a fair point, James.
As I understand it, Neil never made any controversial remarks, Sugar is a peer of the realm associated with the conservatives (I think) and Clarkson was ultimately removed.
Also the BBC DG has tried to reach agreement on future use of SM by Lineker but an agreement could not be reached.
Now we have a situation of the tail wagging the dog. |
Lord Sugar was a Labour Peer until about 10 years ago when he decided to sit on the Independent cross benches. |  |
| “It is easier to fool people, than to convince them that they have been fooled†|
| |
| Anyone want to present MotD tomorrow? on 11:25 - Mar 11 with 1397 views | judd |
| Anyone want to present MotD tomorrow? on 11:14 - Mar 11 by SuddenLad |
Lord Sugar was a Labour Peer until about 10 years ago when he decided to sit on the Independent cross benches. |
Cheers | |
| |
| Anyone want to present MotD tomorrow? on 11:36 - Mar 11 with 1377 views | James1980 |
Also where is the impartiality in Fiona Bruce's husband being a Tory Party donor. Or that whole £800 Million pound loan for Alexander Boris De Pfeffel Johnson, organised by someone who became BBC Chair? | |
| |
| Anyone want to present MotD tomorrow? on 11:38 - Mar 11 with 1378 views | D_Alien |
| Anyone want to present MotD tomorrow? on 11:14 - Mar 11 by SuddenLad |
Lord Sugar was a Labour Peer until about 10 years ago when he decided to sit on the Independent cross benches. |
Hasn't he been sat on a cross bench since birth? His face has hardly changed |  |
| |
| Anyone want to present MotD tomorrow? on 11:50 - Mar 11 with 1361 views | judd |
Question Time, like MOTD,needs a complete overhaul.
Fiona Bruce was way out of order with that disgraceful attempt at justification. | |
| |
| Anyone want to present MotD tomorrow? on 12:00 - Mar 11 with 1344 views | DorkingDale |
| Anyone want to present MotD tomorrow? on 09:15 - Mar 11 by JimmyRustler |
Lineker has been an odious turd for a long time.
Nobody gives a fvck what you think about the wider world mate, just do your job (albeit mediocrely) and present the bloody programme |
Thought I was on my own on this.....he & Shearer are the latter day Smashy & Nicey. All the in jokes were quite amusing once upon a time but it's become smug & repetitive. Too much up their own arses. | | | |
| Anyone want to present MotD tomorrow? on 12:10 - Mar 11 with 1325 views | EllGazzell |
| Anyone want to present MotD tomorrow? on 11:36 - Mar 11 by James1980 |
Also where is the impartiality in Fiona Bruce's husband being a Tory Party donor. Or that whole £800 Million pound loan for Alexander Boris De Pfeffel Johnson, organised by someone who became BBC Chair? |
James, you're talking to a very limited few with that kind of thinking; too many have been dog whistled by the increasingly far-right corrupt government and its far-right media facilitators.
Gary Lineker is the modern Stan Cullis:
On 14 May 1938, England’s football team were pressured by the FA, the British Foreign Office and British ambassador to Germany, Nevile Henderson, to give the Nazi salute in Berlin’s Olympic Stadium, to assist the policy of appeasement.
He refused and was dropped
The Conservatives have nothing to stand on in the next election, their 13-year governance record is disgraceful; their only hope now is to drive division and ignite a culture war and this is an opening salvo. It is gonna get a lot worse before it gets better I'm afraid.
If you wanna escape, get yourself subscribed to DW (Deutsche Welle) https://www.dw.com/en/top-stories/s-9097 [Post edited 11 Mar 2023 12:15]
|  |
| |
| Anyone want to present MotD tomorrow? on 12:11 - Mar 11 with 1325 views | DorkingDale |
| Anyone want to present MotD tomorrow? on 09:28 - Mar 11 by James1980 |
How impartial was it for Andrew Neil to be editor of The Spectator whilst being a political journalist for the BBC, or for Lord Sugar to tweet telling people to vote for Boris Johnson, whilst also being a presenter of a prime time TV show, or for Jeremy Clarkson to make comments like striking workers should be shot. They don't give a rats about impartiality. |
Interesting discussion on QT on Thursday with Kenneth Clarke saying that as Lineker is a purely a football pundit with no input into political programming he should be allowed to state his views.
My view is that he's been doing it (getting away with it?) for years, but he crossed the line this time. It's unacceptable for anyone in a senior position at the BBC to compare any UK Govt to the Nazis in the 1930s.
It could have all been resolved if he'd agreed to revoke that part of the tweet but he obviously has an agenda & believes that he's more important than the BBC. | | | |
| Anyone want to present MotD tomorrow? on 12:16 - Mar 11 with 1301 views | DorkingDale |
| Anyone want to present MotD tomorrow? on 10:17 - Mar 11 by judd |
You make a fair point, James.
As I understand it, Neil never made any controversial remarks, Sugar is a peer of the realm associated with the conservatives (I think) and Clarkson was ultimately removed.
Also the BBC DG has tried to reach agreement on future use of SM by Lineker but an agreement could not be reached.
Now we have a situation of the tail wagging the dog. |
Agree Judd. As I just messaged above, it could have been resolved by him agreeing to revoke the comment comparing the Govt to the Nazi Govt of the 30s.
That statement is just not acceptable concerning any UK Govt from a senior BBC presenter.
He obviously thinks that he is above "normal" restrictions..... | | | |
| Anyone want to present MotD tomorrow? on 12:20 - Mar 11 with 1291 views | sxdale |
So now we have no punditry on MOTD. Football focus, final score and fighting talk have all been cancelled now personally I don't give a flying f*** as don't watch them and like others have said skip through the waffle on MOTD.
However all of this is distracting from the issue which is the government policy (I use the word loosely) on the migrant issue.
An even bigger concern is that the BBC is replacing said programmes with more f****** episodes of bargain f****** hunt and the f****** repair shop. Faced with that bring back Lineker  | | | |
| Anyone want to present MotD tomorrow? on 12:24 - Mar 11 with 1281 views | rich_dale |
| Anyone want to present MotD tomorrow? on 12:10 - Mar 11 by EllGazzell |
James, you're talking to a very limited few with that kind of thinking; too many have been dog whistled by the increasingly far-right corrupt government and its far-right media facilitators.
Gary Lineker is the modern Stan Cullis:
On 14 May 1938, England’s football team were pressured by the FA, the British Foreign Office and British ambassador to Germany, Nevile Henderson, to give the Nazi salute in Berlin’s Olympic Stadium, to assist the policy of appeasement.
He refused and was dropped
The Conservatives have nothing to stand on in the next election, their 13-year governance record is disgraceful; their only hope now is to drive division and ignite a culture war and this is an opening salvo. It is gonna get a lot worse before it gets better I'm afraid.
If you wanna escape, get yourself subscribed to DW (Deutsche Welle) https://www.dw.com/en/top-stories/s-9097 [Post edited 11 Mar 2023 12:15]
|
Bruce's husband works for a PR agency paid £3m a year to advertise Govt policy. And she is someone that works on a political programme, actually chairing it nonetheless. If the BBC are serious about impartiality they first need to address this, and the issues in their boardroom. Having a chair that has donated hundreds of thousands of pounds to the Tories is a serious conflict of interest and a big red flag. A sports presenter sending a tweet is not. The video posted earlier in the thread by EG sums it up perfectly.
But yes, it will be a full on culture war now by the Tories leading up the next election as it's all they have. They generally will point the finger elsewhere anyway to suggest that people's problems are caused by minorities or outsiders - they won last time by making enemies of the EU and this time they will go all out on immigration. At the end of the day they're the party of the mega rich and need to find ways to encourage ordinary working people to vote for them. | | | |
| Anyone want to present MotD tomorrow? on 12:33 - Mar 11 with 1250 views | 442Dale |
| Anyone want to present MotD tomorrow? on 12:16 - Mar 11 by DorkingDale |
Agree Judd. As I just messaged above, it could have been resolved by him agreeing to revoke the comment comparing the Govt to the Nazi Govt of the 30s.
That statement is just not acceptable concerning any UK Govt from a senior BBC presenter.
He obviously thinks that he is above "normal" restrictions..... |
Wasn’t his tweet comparing the similarities in the language used?
It’s all about perception of opinion. Both Lineker and others have tweeted opinions I’ve thought are probably a bit much considering their roles, not something we might do ourselves, but those went without censure or furore.
For example recently, Lineker has made sarcastic comments about Sunak, Starmer/Sue Gray, Brexit, posted support of an American senator being made to look stupid for his views on guns, supported Ukraine… all in the last month.
We might all have different stances on all those - some may feel far more strongly about the right to have a gun than they do about immigration or his choice to make comparisons in language used, so should he not have been told to “stand back” then as well?
There’s either a right to express an opinion on subjects in a reasonable way or they’re told not to tweet etc at all. Rather than all this, wouldn’t it have been better to challenge him to explain where he sees the comparisons in the language used and attempt to prove it to be wrong? | |
| |
| Anyone want to present MotD tomorrow? on 12:38 - Mar 11 with 1232 views | 442Dale |
Also, Bristol Rovers have made a statement saying their staff/players won’t be speaking to the BBC today.
I hope we do the same.
And blame Bolton. | |
| |
| Anyone want to present MotD tomorrow? on 12:42 - Mar 11 with 1210 views | D_Alien |
| Anyone want to present MotD tomorrow? on 12:33 - Mar 11 by 442Dale |
Wasn’t his tweet comparing the similarities in the language used?
It’s all about perception of opinion. Both Lineker and others have tweeted opinions I’ve thought are probably a bit much considering their roles, not something we might do ourselves, but those went without censure or furore.
For example recently, Lineker has made sarcastic comments about Sunak, Starmer/Sue Gray, Brexit, posted support of an American senator being made to look stupid for his views on guns, supported Ukraine… all in the last month.
We might all have different stances on all those - some may feel far more strongly about the right to have a gun than they do about immigration or his choice to make comparisons in language used, so should he not have been told to “stand back” then as well?
There’s either a right to express an opinion on subjects in a reasonable way or they’re told not to tweet etc at all. Rather than all this, wouldn’t it have been better to challenge him to explain where he sees the comparisons in the language used and attempt to prove it to be wrong? |
That's a fair point... except it'd then be giving his view - or the language he used (oh, the irony) the same credence as if it were put forward by a politician, i.e. someone required to stand for election
One could argue that he's now close to achieving sainthood in some quarters, and yet in others (such as DorkingDale thinking he was alone in his opinion of Lineker) are finding out they're far from being in a minority | |
| |
| Anyone want to present MotD tomorrow? on 12:45 - Mar 11 with 1200 views | rich_dale |
| Anyone want to present MotD tomorrow? on 12:33 - Mar 11 by 442Dale |
Wasn’t his tweet comparing the similarities in the language used?
It’s all about perception of opinion. Both Lineker and others have tweeted opinions I’ve thought are probably a bit much considering their roles, not something we might do ourselves, but those went without censure or furore.
For example recently, Lineker has made sarcastic comments about Sunak, Starmer/Sue Gray, Brexit, posted support of an American senator being made to look stupid for his views on guns, supported Ukraine… all in the last month.
We might all have different stances on all those - some may feel far more strongly about the right to have a gun than they do about immigration or his choice to make comparisons in language used, so should he not have been told to “stand back” then as well?
There’s either a right to express an opinion on subjects in a reasonable way or they’re told not to tweet etc at all. Rather than all this, wouldn’t it have been better to challenge him to explain where he sees the comparisons in the language used and attempt to prove it to be wrong? |
Yes the tweet was about the language used in 1930s Germany and it was not an incorrect comparison. The words the Government have been using are part of a calculated approach designed to get a particular reaction from people.
It's revealing though that it's touched a nerve somewhere. In a few months we might see a leaked WhatsApp chat showing pressure from Downing Street on the BBC board to shut Lineker down. | | | |
| Anyone want to present MotD tomorrow? on 12:48 - Mar 11 with 1186 views | 442Dale |
| Anyone want to present MotD tomorrow? on 12:42 - Mar 11 by D_Alien |
That's a fair point... except it'd then be giving his view - or the language he used (oh, the irony) the same credence as if it were put forward by a politician, i.e. someone required to stand for election
One could argue that he's now close to achieving sainthood in some quarters, and yet in others (such as DorkingDale thinking he was alone in his opinion of Lineker) are finding out they're far from being in a minority |
Always thought he was smug. The crisp adverts were the clue.
That’s why I think it’s more than being about Lineker or what his views on a particular subject are. | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
