Gary Lineker

[Barbe bleu 826]

Overblown and bad all around for all of the parties involved.

Lineker won't have liked all this one bit.  He probably knows he went too far on the analogy and on the politics and won't have been comfortable with this highlighting his tax case.

BBC got itself caught in a storm and the government might find this was a bridge too far.

It'll be forgotten about tomorrow and Lineker will tow the line, at least for a bit, but it was a bit of fun while it lasted!

[littleyellowbirdie 2,549]

15 minutes ago, Barbe bleu said:

Overblown and bad all around for all of the parties involved.

Lineker won't have liked all this one bit.  He probably knows he went too far on the analogy and on the politics and won't have been comfortable with this highlighting his tax case.

BBC got itself caught in a storm and the government might find this was a bridge too far.

It'll be forgotten about tomorrow and Lineker will tow the line, at least for a bit, but it was a bit of fun while it lasted!

The problem is that the BBC has now become a fully-fledged political football. The fact that Alistair Campbell has been leading the charge attacking the BBC, of all people to do so, has really made my blood boil. Funnily enough, Lineker's production company produces his podcast.

I'm sad to say I think it probably is reaching the end of the road as a public service broadcaster; Labour's record on most things is to game thing in its favour rather than try and make things fair.

Edited March 14, 2023 by littleyellowbirdie

[TheGunnShow 5,940]

When Blair made Greg D-yke (who at least had something of a TV/journalism background - not to mention, actually resigned) the DG, was there much talk about the BBC's licence fee being scrapped, or indeed Channel 4 being privatised compared to Sharp (whose background is more financial) becoming the chairman?

Edited March 14, 2023 by TheGunnShow
OK, so a surname gets the auto-censor. Off to watch Chitty Chitty Bang Bangd with Penis van Lesbian then.

[Herman 9,764]

Blather. 

[TeemuVanBasten 3,327]

1 hour ago, Barbe bleu said:

Overblown and bad all around for all of the parties involved.

Lineker won't have liked all this one bit.  He probably knows he went too far on the analogy and on the politics and won't have been comfortable with this highlighting his tax case.

Which one?

There's also....

 

Awks...

[TheGunnShow 5,940]

Ah yes, let this craven, unelected set of shysters try to denigrate the justified critic when stuff like this gets swept aside. Attack being the best form of defence, eh?

Suella Braverman 'may have broken ministerial code' with attack on 'activist civil servants' (civilserviceworld.com)

Braverman’s statement “clear breach of Ministerial Code”, says FDA | The FDA Trade Union

Not that she hasn't got form for this in the past - and indeed resigned over this one, right? (article from late 2022)

Suella Braverman committed 'multiple breaches of the ministerial code,' says former Tory chairman (telegraph.co.uk)

She wasn't fit for purpose in the first place. She's admitted the current proposal might not pass muster with the European Court of Human Rights. She couldn't even explain how asylum seekers could safely put their applications in under interview (so she basically admitted her proposal was gash), she's been guilty of breaches of the ministerial code and resigned over it so how the heck she's been allowed back in is beyond any sense of logic.

She's gotta go.

Edited March 14, 2023 by TheGunnShow

[TeemuVanBasten 3,327]

14 minutes ago, TheGunnShow said:

Ah yes, let this craven, unelected set of shysters try to denigrate the justified critic when stuff like this gets swept aside. Attack being the best form of defence, eh?

Suella Braverman 'may have broken ministerial code' with attack on 'activist civil servants' (civilserviceworld.com)

Braverman’s statement “clear breach of Ministerial Code”, says FDA | The FDA Trade Union

Not that she hasn't got form for this in the past - and indeed resigned over this one, right? (article from late 2022)

Suella Braverman committed 'multiple breaches of the ministerial code,' says former Tory chairman (telegraph.co.uk)

She wasn't fit for purpose in the first place. She's admitted the current proposal might not pass muster with the European Court of Human Rights. She couldn't even explain how asylum seekers could safely put their applications in under interview (so she basically admitted her proposal was gash), she's been guilty of breaches of the ministerial code and resigned over it so how the heck she's been allowed back in is beyond any sense of logic.

She's gotta go.

The Conservatives need 10 years out of power. As Joe Lycett said, they are down to the dregs.

However lets not forget that part of the reason they've had 13 years in power, almost 15 by the time they are out, is because for two elections we were being asked by the official opposition to vote for Dianne Abbott to be the home secretary, and to be frank I wouldn't trust her to watch my kids for 10 minutes. 

Edited March 14, 2023 by TeemuVanBasten

[TheGunnShow 5,940]

3 minutes ago, TeemuVanBasten said:

The Conservatives need 10 years out of power. As Joe Lycett said, they are down to the dregs.

However lets not forget that part of the reason they've had 13 years in power, almost 15 by the time they are out, is because for two elections we were being asked by the official opposition to vote for Dianne Abbott to be the home secretary, and to be frank I wouldn't trust her to watch my kids for 10 minutes. 

Still far better than Braverman. Although totally agree with you that they're down to the dregs. 

[littleyellowbirdie 2,549]

2 hours ago, TheGunnShow said:

When Blair made Greg D-yke (who at least had something of a TV/journalism background - not to mention, actually resigned) the DG, was there much talk about the BBC's licence fee being scrapped, or indeed Channel 4 being privatised compared to Sharp (whose background is more financial) becoming the chairman?

The threats of scrapping don't seem directly related to the question of non-partisan appointments of chairmen to me. It's an additional external threat to the BBC, but it doesn't relate to the question of whether the Chairman and DG perform their jobs in good faith either then or now.

You're right that Dyké resigned, but he resigned as a result of the government gunning for the BBC, which does underline that he was doing his job in good faith in spite of the questions of links to the Labour party, which makes the case for giving Sharp and Davie the benefit of the doubt in the absence of credible evidence that they're partisan; most accounts, including that of Lineker himself, supports a presumption that Davie is running the BBC in good faith according to the principles he's supposed to be following.

As an aside, my dad (he was a BBC radio engineer) is a massive critic of the fact the DG increasingly came from a journalism background, which is only supposed to be a part of what the BBC does; arguably, the excessive focus on the news side over its other activities is a large part of why it's always under attack.

Edited March 14, 2023 by littleyellowbirdie
forgot to explain why dad's opinion was relevant.

[Herman 9,764]

39 minutes ago, TeemuVanBasten said:

Which one?

There's also....

 

Awks...

It saddens me at how many apologists and supporters there are of this most malignant, venal and corrupted government. For shame. 

[TeemuVanBasten 3,327]

13 minutes ago, Herman said:

It saddens me at how many apologists and supporters there are of this most malignant, venal and corrupted government. For shame. 

How on earth have you deduced that my post was support for the government, it was pointing out that Lineker is in a whole world of sh*t. 

So I have to suck off a serial tax avoider to show that I wouldn't mind a change in government? No thanks, but you rim who you want to.

I'll happily vote tactically for the Lib Dems in my constituency (Labour have got no chance here, I live amongst the monied), I don't see where getting teabagged by a tax avoiding multi-millionaire Royalist named Gary with a creepy brother has to come into it, if somebody has told you that this is necessary then I'm afraid you may have been misled.

Edited March 14, 2023 by TeemuVanBasten

[TheGunnShow 5,940]

Always kick up instead of down. When a government is reduced to trying to discredit who justifiably criticises it, we know they have absolutely nothing worthwhile to offer.

Braverman should go. End of story. 

And I will certainly be discharging my all-too-meagre democratic duties to this end at the next possible opportunity, as much as our poor models don't give me much in the way of feasible choices. Which perfectly represents the problems we face. At the same time, electoral reform is only scratching the surface.

Tactical voting and protest voting are, by definition, failure in a model to reflect nuances in public opinion accurately.  

[Herman 9,764]

1 hour ago, TeemuVanBasten said:

How on earth have you deduced that my post was support for the government, it was pointing out that Lineker is in a whole world of sh*t. 

So I have to suck off a serial tax avoider to show that I wouldn't mind a change in government? No thanks, but you rim who you want to.

I'll happily vote tactically for the Lib Dems in my constituency (Labour have got no chance here, I live amongst the monied), I don't see where getting teabagged by a tax avoiding multi-millionaire Royalist named Gary with a creepy brother has to come into it, if somebody has told you that this is necessary then I'm afraid you may have been misled.

You've spent the last few days desperately trashing the reputation of a government critic. It's quite obvious what you are doing and are. 

[littleyellowbirdie 2,549]

3 hours ago, Herman said:

You've spent the last few days desperately trashing the reputation of a government critic. It's quite obvious what you are doing and are. 

Lineker had plenty of critics before the last few days for reasons unrelated to politics.

5 hours ago, TheGunnShow said:

Always kick up instead of down. When a government is reduced to trying to discredit who justifiably criticises it, we know they have absolutely nothing worthwhile to offer.

Braverman should go. End of story. 

And I will certainly be discharging my all-too-meagre democratic duties to this end at the next possible opportunity, as much as our poor models don't give me much in the way of feasible choices. Which perfectly represents the problems we face. At the same time, electoral reform is only scratching the surface.

Tactical voting and protest voting are, by definition, failure in a model to reflect nuances in public opinion accurately.  

Totally agree with the last statement.

Electoral reform may be only scratching the surface of the UK's problem, but it's the one problem that provides a path to properly addressing the other problems sensibly without perennial polarisation.

[Herman 9,764]

 

[littleyellowbirdie 2,549]

9 hours ago, Herman said:

It saddens me at how many apologists and supporters there are of this most malignant, venal and corrupted government. For shame. 

It's what happens when you have a political system that encourages hating the other party more than supporting your own voting choice.

3 hours ago, Herman said:

 

There should be much more being made of this; that's an unequivocal breach of the rules. The conditions are such that it's effectively a party political broadcast dressed up as journalism.

Edited March 14, 2023 by littleyellowbirdie

[Foxy2600 301]

Telegraph absolutely correct, it’s not about ‘Big Ears’ it’s about the Licence Fee.

Millenials like my two don’t bother paying….

Their view is that something they have to pay for should be informative - like the actual facts and as far as reasonable, without some kind of slant or opinion.

They laugh about the moniker of Investigative Journalists  - their view is that ‘Paid by the BBC’ to tout their opinions 

Factor in Lineaker - footie pundit £1.4m and the other troughers like Kuensberg and Mason…. Well, you ain’t getting the news - you’re just getting a Champagne Socialist’opinion’

[horsefly 4,300]

On 12/03/2023 at 09:07, yellowrider120 said:

Indeed. Might I suggest you do as you preach and open your own eyes to the fact that the Earth is some 4.5 Billion years old and there have been regular cycles of extensive cooling and warming.  I have not said (despite your inference) that climate change is not happening. What I object to is the fairy story that somehow mankind can 'control' the climate!! 

FFS! You don't need much scientific knowledge to grasp the basic FACT that increased levels of some chemicals (eg. CO2) in the atmosphere contribute to increased warming, and that reduction of those chemicals contribute to reducing that warming. I guess you also haven't heard that the ozone layer has largely been replenished because "mankind" acted to stop pumping PFCs into the atmosphere. So much for your absurd claim that mankind cannot control the climate.

[horsefly 4,300]

On 11/03/2023 at 13:52, Rock The Boat said:

Viewers are certainly leaving the BBC in droves. It's not a crap argument, it is a fact. Viewers no longer trust the mainstream media and refuse to watch propaganda masquerading as entertainment. It's good to see which sports commentators are refusing to work as it will make it easier to sack them. Hopefully the political commentators will join their sporting comrades in refusing to work so that we can sack them too.

Oh dear! That lasted well did it not! I know the idea of worker's rights appall you, but alas for the BBC it has very clearly stated policies that protect the right of freelance sports presenters to speak freely on any matter they like when they are not on air. So there can be no sackings. So sorry to burst more blood vessels in your pinky gammon face.

[horsefly 4,300]

On 12/03/2023 at 07:20, Herman said:

Maybe, just maybe, this whole debacle has been used to cover up the fact that the brexit government has just spent another half a billion pounds to fix something that brexit has exacerbated??

 

Indeed!

Post-Brexit cost of returning "boat people" to  French detention centre: £500,000,000

Pre-Brexit cost of returning "boat people" to the EU under the Dublin III regulation: £0

 

Edited March 15, 2023 by horsefly

[The Real Buh 3,432]

This is why they need to make me the moderator on here.

One little thing and all the off topic animals invade and before you know it you’ve got a pseudo-Intellectual D1ck parade with the terminally online.

If I were to be made operator I promise to you, the good people of the football forum, I would force these beasts into separate fighting pits where they can throw faeces at the glass that we are safely behind. It would be your choice to view the endless chat about Brexit and Donald Trump and, I don’t know, probably still banging on about the credit crunch or whatever.

The point is these morons need to be kept in their containment area, like the stupid kids having their own table in first school.

Vote for The Teal Buh as your moderator and I promise I’ll impart solitary confinement of people obsessed with politics because they didn’t lose their virginity until their early thirties. It’s the kind thing to do all around

[horsefly 4,300]

On 13/03/2023 at 18:08, littleyellowbirdie said:

Regardless, employees are a matter for the DG, not the board of governors of the BBC .

Indeed! So let's hope there is some kind of inquiry into why the DG made an absurd decision to suspend Lineker when BBC policy on the rights of freelance sports reporters to speak freely is clearly stated in their regulations. Either the DG is seriously incompetent, or he was leant on by those with influence to respond to comments that the government disliked.

[horsefly 4,300]

23 hours ago, Barbe bleu said:

Overblown and bad all around for all of the parties involved.

Lineker won't have liked all this one bit.  He probably knows he went too far on the analogy and on the politics and won't have been comfortable with this highlighting his tax case.

BBC got itself caught in a storm and the government might find this was a bridge too far.

It'll be forgotten about tomorrow and Lineker will tow the line, at least for a bit, but it was a bit of fun while it lasted!

I guess you didn't read Lineker's eloquent response to the ending of his suspension. Far from towing the line he effectively restated precisely the criticisms in his original quote. Bravo Lineker!

[Herman 9,764]

29 minutes ago, horsefly said:

I guess you didn't read Lineker's eloquent response to the ending of his suspension. Far from towing the line he effectively restated precisely the criticisms in his original quote. Bravo Lineker!

Have you seen his twitter profile picture? 😀

[Yellow Fever 3,783]

12 hours ago, Foxy2600 said:

Telegraph absolutely correct, it’s not about ‘Big Ears’ it’s about the Licence Fee.

Millenials like my two don’t bother paying….

Their view is that something they have to pay for should be informative - like the actual facts and as far as reasonable, without some kind of slant or opinion.

They laugh about the moniker of Investigative Journalists  - their view is that ‘Paid by the BBC’ to tout their opinions 

Factor in Lineaker - footie pundit £1.4m and the other troughers like Kuensberg and Mason…. Well, you ain’t getting the news - you’re just getting a Champagne Socialist’opinion’

I do wish some people before they explode with indignation could at least spell his name correctly. Just takes a little time and care.

It's not difficult - it's in the title. Reminds me of that picture a few pages back of another Cro-Magnon man with a poster again with incorrect spelling.

Lineker

[Foxy2600 301]

1 hour ago, Yellow Fever said:

I do wish some people before they explode with indignation could at least spell his name correctly. Just takes a little time and care.

It's not difficult - it's in the title. Reminds me of that picture a few pages back of another Cro-Magnon man with a poster again with incorrect spelling.

Lineker

Prefer the Mick Channon pronunciation - probably why I always spell the irrelevant idiots name wrong tbh....

Mick Channon, now there was a proper football pundit. 

Anyways, suitably chastised.

 

[KiwiScot 1,443]

On 14/03/2023 at 06:28, Herman said:

BBC = Big Black C....s (One for Jools there😉)

Edited that for you

 

[Barbe bleu 826]

5 hours ago, horsefly said:

I guess you didn't read Lineker's eloquent response to the ending of his suspension. Far from towing the line he effectively restated precisely the criticisms in his original quote. Bravo Lineker!

Welcome back and good to see you are all fired up! 

I did read linekers tweets. I think they were conciliatory really.   Said what he wanted to say about the struggles refugees have but no silly analogies, no direct comment on policy and kept out of party politics.

It won't last, he doubt he can bite his tongue that long, but it seemed quite grown up really.

I'm with but in this one really though.  He was  footballer from before I was born and hosts a highlights programme that a lot of people used to watch.   He seems an odd lightning rod for all of this, and I doubt he enjoyed being one either.

 

Edited March 15, 2023 by Barbe bleu

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

Viewers are certainly leaving the BBC in droves. It's not a crap argument, it is a fact. Viewers no longer trust the mainstream media and refuse to watch propaganda masquerading as entertainment. It's good to see which sports commentators are refusing to work as it will make it easier to sack them. Hopefully the political commentators will join their sporting comrades in refusing to work so that we can sack them too.

Don't tell me. They are migrating to GB News and TalkTV with its rounded, democratic, neutral presenters and news readers.

Is that how you balance it out? I accuse the BBC of being left wing so lets have news channels that are right wing and don't even report much from the rest unless its something they can deride.

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

Poor old Matt doesn't understand why Sky decided they wanted to replace a few boring old football pundits with some more boring pundits. I would have picketed Sky if they kept you Matt. It wasn't a job for life.