Match of the day.. No more Lineker*

[Faded Jaded Semi Plastic SOB 1,042]

2 hours ago, Feedthewolf said:

Much as I despise this government and find the double standards galling, drawing parallels with N*zi Germany rarely ends well for anyone. It's not a good look.

Agree with what you say, that said when I heard the announcement from the Government and what it entails my first thought was exactly as Gary Lineker Tweeted.........

[CANARYKING 644]

If the BBC loses Attenborough they are in big trouble, his programmes are sold worldwide bringing in millions in revenue. 

[The Real Buh 3,486]

7 minutes ago, CANARYKING said:

If the BBC loses Attenborough they are in big trouble, his programmes are sold worldwide bringing in millions in revenue. 

I’ve always had a theory about Attenborough…

 

[chicken 2,656]

16 minutes ago, Faded Jaded Semi Plastic SOB said:

Agree with what you say, that said when I heard the announcement from the Government and what it entails my first thought was exactly as Gary Lineker Tweeted.........

I concur.

What Lineker said was that the "language being used sounded like that used by Germany in the 1930's".

We also have to remember the mess the very top of the BBC is in right now owing to the Conservative peer who denied that he arranged a loan to Boris by a friend and yet in the same sequence of questioning admitted he knew that Boris needed money and his friend might be in a position to loan him some.

Perfect smoke screen?

This could well break the BBC too, and again - this is something that the Conservatives want - to scrap the license fee. I know there is some support out there for that. In reality it would mean an international staple, something many nations that access BBC Worldwide rely upon would likely lose their service, in addition to that, the closest thing to an impartial/neutral broadcaster would be gone, not least one we have the ability to hold to the most account.

Not to mention, Andrew Neil was never particularly shy of airing his own views and they are quite the opposite to Lineker.

The BBC have dropped the ball on this and unless they do a sort of "investigated and nothing found" sort of turn about, this will only damage them further.

This is Lineker on his own social media account, everyone knows it isn't an official BBC stance. Weird too because it isn't the first time he has tweeted on this subject matter or in a similar vein. This is also a chap - no matter how much he has earned, or earns - who has taken refugees into his own home.

If people cannot say "I think that statement could be interpreted as being a bit/lot fascist" then we are already stuffed. We have already removed the ability to warn others when it's genuine. If it's an exaggeration people quickly get shot down. The fact that much of the world has united with him in his sentiments says everything you need to know. Even Peers Morgan has stepped up to support him... and he's a constant target of Lineker's. 

[chicken 2,656]

1 hour ago, cambridgeshire canary said:

"Now up next it's Palace V City.."

Scary thing about Oswald Mosley is that when he turned up in East London on Cable Street with his black shirts, not only were they pilloried, they were attacked, aggressively, by such huge numbers the police were virtually powerless to prevent it. They were sent packing, they were despised.

If it happened now, if you dared say they "sound a lot like Nazi's" you'd get sacked. Yet you could stand in the street and shout their slogans and probably be absolutely fine. In fact, they'd probably have people cheering them on. 

[cornish sam 966]

3 minutes ago, chicken said:

I concur.

What Lineker said was that the "language being used sounded like that used by Germany in the 1930's".

We also have to remember the mess the very top of the BBC is in right now owing to the Conservative peer who denied that he arranged a loan to Boris by a friend and yet in the same sequence of questioning admitted he knew that Boris needed money and his friend might be in a position to loan him some.

Perfect smoke screen?

This could well break the BBC too, and again - this is something that the Conservatives want - to scrap the license fee. I know there is some support out there for that. In reality it would mean an international staple, something many nations that access BBC Worldwide rely upon would likely lose their service, in addition to that, the closest thing to an impartial/neutral broadcaster would be gone, not least one we have the ability to hold to the most account.

Not to mention, Andrew Neil was never particularly shy of airing his own views and they are quite the opposite to Lineker.

The BBC have dropped the ball on this and unless they do a sort of "investigated and nothing found" sort of turn about, this will only damage them further.

This is Lineker on his own social media account, everyone knows it isn't an official BBC stance. Weird too because it isn't the first time he has tweeted on this subject matter or in a similar vein. This is also a chap - no matter how much he has earned, or earns - who has taken refugees into his own home.

If people cannot say "I think that statement could be interpreted as being a bit/lot fascist" then we are already stuffed. We have already removed the ability to warn others when it's genuine. If it's an exaggeration people quickly get shot down. The fact that much of the world has united with him in his sentiments says everything you need to know. Even Peers Morgan has stepped up to support him... and he's a constant target of Lineker's. 

But he has broken the social media guidance and has been previously warned about it. I agree the guidance is wrong and I agree with his opinion, but, his employer has rules in place that he has broken. The outcome of this shouldn't be a whitewash investigation, it should be changing the policy. If you repeatedly broke a policy that you had agreed to abide by as terms of your employment would you expect to be punished?

[chicken 2,656]

38 minutes ago, Disco Dales Jockstrap said:

I admit that I think Lineker is a smug tw*t who has long since gone stale on MotD. I'm just glad he's not going to be on the box this weekend. Long may it continue! He can self-cancel till the cows come home!

You a Lineker fan then Chicken? Poster on the wall as a boy? Get funny feelings every time you gobble down a pack of Walkers? Each to their own I guess. Top player mind. Saw him play once or twice at Carrow Road. Think he scored. 

OTBC

You realise that it isn't self cancelling? That's just a term that you have invented because it suits you, but you can't admit to pushing "cancel culture" because that would mean you have to use a term you have likely used on others, to describe yourself.

Probably the same with snowflake, but we can all see you're making it about yourself... 

[Graham Paddons Beard 2,459]

3 hours ago, Feedthewolf said:

Much as I despise this government and find the double standards galling, drawing parallels with N*zi Germany rarely ends well for anyone. It's not a good look.

Agree. This isn’t remotely close to Germany in the 1930’s . Lineker’s comments aren’t being criticised because of being anti government other wise Have I Got News For You would never be aired. Comparing to a regime responsible for the murder of millions of Jews is reprehensible. 

[TeemuVanBasten 3,327]

1 hour ago, canarydan23 said:

Remember when people* used to go on about how the BBC was all left-wing?

Proof that it is a Tory mouthpiece.

*morons

Oh yeah, because the BBC have never sacked any right wingers for their behaviour have they, Jeremy Clarkson is David Cameron's best mate isn't he?

Jeremy Paxman managed to host Newsnight for 25 years without ever telling anybody his political views. He managed that despite being the BBCs flagship political presenter. 

When he left Newsnight and started making documentaries for Channel 4 he then made it very clear that he was a One Nation Conservative. He chose to leave the BBC, and then he was able to express his personal opinions more freely.

Gary Lineker for years has acted like he is above the BBCs strict impartiality laws, like he's too big to be sacked, despite numerous warnings. That's despite being a football presenter.

He could leave and work for any number of other broadcasters where he is then free to air his views and use his huge Twitter platform however he sees fit, just like Andrew Neil and Jeremy Paxman elected to do, but of course he knows he'd earn a lot less money on Talk TV or LBC or wherever it is that he'd end up, so he basically wants his cake and to eat it. 

Edited March 10, 2023 by TeemuVanBasten

[chicken 2,656]

1 minute ago, cornish sam said:

But he has broken the social media guidance and has been previously warned about it. I agree the guidance is wrong and I agree with his opinion, but, his employer has rules in place that he has broken. The outcome of this shouldn't be a whitewash investigation, it should be changing the policy. If you repeatedly broke a policy that you had agreed to abide by as terms of your employment would you expect to be punished?

Doesn't need an investigation on an individual to change policy.

Reality is, if he was involved in a protest on the street, he'd have been untouchable within reason. Hence presenters like Chris Packham, Michaela Strachan etc have attended protests and some may have even been arrested for it but this doesn't "breach" policy.

Equally, it appears to be fine if you criticise government policy on issues around climate - Attenborough, or even satirise it through comedy (even though the Conservatives have told the BBC to cut down on left wing comedy and get more right wing comedy in).

This is more than just about Lineker.

In addition - with regard to Allan Sugar - the policy should also apply to him. Whilst he is not on the payroll of the BBC, he is essentially part of a contract. I more than suspect that it'd be on there as well, the reality is though that as it is a bought in program, they wouldn't be able to do what they are doing now, through fear of losing the program to a rival channel having built up a following that will go with them. They have made mistakes like that before, though not for the same reasons (British Bake off, the Voice etc). 

 

[cornish sam 966]

1 minute ago, chicken said:

Doesn't need an investigation on an individual to change policy.

Reality is, if he was involved in a protest on the street, he'd have been untouchable within reason. Hence presenters like Chris Packham, Michaela Strachan etc have attended protests and some may have even been arrested for it but this doesn't "breach" policy.

Equally, it appears to be fine if you criticise government policy on issues around climate - Attenborough, or even satirise it through comedy (even though the Conservatives have told the BBC to cut down on left wing comedy and get more right wing comedy in).

This is more than just about Lineker.

In addition - with regard to Allan Sugar - the policy should also apply to him. Whilst he is not on the payroll of the BBC, he is essentially part of a contract. I more than suspect that it'd be on there as well, the reality is though that as it is a bought in program, they wouldn't be able to do what they are doing now, through fear of losing the program to a rival channel having built up a following that will go with them. They have made mistakes like that before, though not for the same reasons (British Bake off, the Voice etc). 

 

This would breach policy and they very well were likely reprimanded about it internally, the difference being people didn't care as much about that as it wasn't a political thing for people to start screaming bias and how the BBC has become a mouthpiece of the t*ries

[TeemuVanBasten 3,327]

12 minutes ago, chicken said:

Scary thing about Oswald Mosley is that when he turned up in East London on Cable Street with his black shirts, not only were they pilloried, they were attacked, aggressively, by such huge numbers the police were virtually powerless to prevent it. They were sent packing, they were despised.

If it happened now, if you dared say they "sound a lot like Nazi's" you'd get sacked. Yet you could stand in the street and shout their slogans and probably be absolutely fine. In fact, they'd probably have people cheering them on. 

Why did Britain First never manage to gather more than about 300 people then, and why did hardly any of them have any front teeth.

[Christoph Stiepermann 1,155]

As a sort of pre 2012 liberal who cares most about improving the lives of the working class and most vulnerable in society but who doesn't necessarily care so much about how much one extraordinarily wealthy female CEO is earning compared to a male CEO in a different field or what gender or race is best represented in media I feel completely politically ostracized by the BBC and it's reporting. It seems to skew Tory with a mix of modern SJW bull**** but even if I agreed with the message it's trying to convey I think it should be completely impartial and politically neutral. Anyone with half a brain can skim down the news headlines on BBC home and understand that it isn't impartial and is trying to influence it's readers to a certain way of thinking. 

It's now just like every other news outlet, it reports the news and produces content but all skewed around it's own agenda. Linker getting in trouble here is no different than if someone working for The Sun posted a tweet about how economic migration is actually good for the economy or if someone from The Guardian posted that in all everyday lower and middle income jobs people of all backgrounds earned the same wage on a per hour basis. They would be attacked by their employers and forced to change their narrative or would lose their job. 

Even if I completely disagreed with with Lineker was saying I'm glad he's stood by what he's said and is challenging the BBC on their standards here. Just because he's an employee doesn't mean he has to toe the line and do what he's told. The world is gradually tilting authoritarian not just politically but also in private business and people should be allowed to express their views without being punished so long as they aren't hateful or extremist. 

[chicken 2,656]

1 minute ago, TeemuVanBasten said:

Jeremy Paxman managed to host Newsnight for 25 years without ever telling anybody his political views. He managed that despite being the BBCs flagship political presenter. 

When he left Newsnight and started making documentaries for Channel 4 he then made it very clear that he was a One Nation Conservative. He chose to leave the BBC, and then he was able to express his personal opinions more freely.

Gary Lineker for years has acted like he is above the BBCs strict impartiality laws, like he's too big to be sacked, despite numerous warnings. That's despite being a football presenter.

He could leave and work for any number of other broadcasters where he is then free to air his views and use his huge Twitter platform however he sees fit, just like Andrew Neil and Jeremy Paxman elected to do, but of course he knows he'd earn a lot less money on Talk TV or LBC or wherever it is that he'd end up, so he basically wants his cake and to eat it. 

Andrew Neil made his views very clear whilst he was still working for the BBC. It was absolutely no surprise where he went to work after the BBC. That he may or may not have used a social media platform is more on point.

I think if anyone was unsure about his political allegiances whilst he was still at the BBC it was probably more to do with their own ability to read situations etc than it was about his lack of putting it out there. Though I guess some people do need it spelt out...

... which brings us back to Lineker. This isn't the right hill to talk about arrogance - which he clearly isn't. Is it not impartial to say that something sounds not unlike something you'd expect to hear from 1930's Germany? How do you express that impartially?

"Gosh, that language was rather, hefty." - meaningless. Impartiality doesn't mean meaningless gobbledygook. It means commenting on a situation as you see it relying upon the evidence and research to back it up more than one's personal view or opinion.

You could legitimately report on a far right rally with Tommy ten names but not actually Robinson by stating "Tommy Robinson is here and preaching the far right extremist propaganda that he has become well known for. It's like a modern day enactment of Oswald Mosely and his blackshirts who mimicked and idolised the Nazi's in Germany." That could actually be presented as fair and impartial.

In fact, the BBC itself, often puts out articles that are not far from that.

Equally, even if they are being impartial, it is their job as "press" or media, to challenge politicians for their rhetoric. Sadly, that aspect of the BBC is incredibly lacking. Just like it would appear is happening with every other facet of public services right now, it's is being politically weaponised. 

[TeemuVanBasten 3,327]

1 hour ago, Well b back said:

Just interested, those that approve of Gary Lineker not presenting do you also approve of the BBC pulling the last episode of the David Attenborough series as it criticises the government ? 

The BBC have stated that it is untrue, that it was also going to be 5 episode long serious, then an additional feature length / film from a different production company licensed for iPlayer.

Anybody will be able to watch it on iPlayer. 

"This is totally inaccurate, there is no ‘6th episode’. Wild Isles is – and always was - a five-part series"

"We acquired a separate film for iPlayer from the RSPB, WWF and Silverback Films about people working to preserve and restore the biodiversity of the British Isles."

[chicken 2,656]

5 minutes ago, TeemuVanBasten said:

Why did Britain First never manage to gather more than about 300 people then, and why did hardly any of them have any front teeth.

The point isn't how many, it's the distinct lack of opposition.

The only real exception actually being here in Norwich, when the EDL tried to get something going, to only find 100 people who turned up, most from other counties. When they did finally assemble, they were met with a "this is Norwich" counter protest of over a thousand.

In some ways, you are starting to see that backlash on social media. The BBC won't win this one now. They are facing a decision more about themselves than they are about Lineker. Match of the Day, whether you like the presenters or not, has very much nearly always been about the personalities that present it. Especially in the modern era, since the birth of social media.

Sky has highlights out incredibly quickly and there are youtube channels of fans analysis etc you can watch if you prefer. As much as people may dislike him, Shearer, Murphy, Wright, etc, but it works and is immensely popular. It is absolutely no surprise the amount of support he is getting.

Another one to throw into the hat is Jeremy Clarkson - massive climate change denier for a long time, heavily critical of all things remotely alternative to him, both in person, on social media and in columns he has written etc (predates the Meghan stuff by a looooong way). That's before you bring up him punching staff for not delivering the buffet he wanted or something, and the use of racist language. He rode a lot of that sort of thing out for a very long time. 

[chicken 2,656]

6 minutes ago, TeemuVanBasten said:

The BBC have stated that it is untrue, that it was also going to be 5 episode long serious, then an additional feature length / film from a different production company licensed for iPlayer.

Anybody will be able to watch it on iPlayer. 

"This is totally inaccurate, there is no ‘6th episode’. Wild Isles is – and always was - a five-part series"

"We acquired a separate film for iPlayer from the RSPB, WWF and Silverback Films about people working to preserve and restore the biodiversity of the British Isles."

Point is though, he is on the BBC payroll isn't he? Therefore by their own rules he isn't remaining impartial so can't work for them again.

In reality though, Attenborough has criticised governments before. He's been a climate activist for decades, he's not even close to impartial. Neither are most of the Springwatch etc, I mean, heck, the vast majority of comedy isn't and they broadcast it! 

[canarydan23 4,062]

22 minutes ago, TeemuVanBasten said:

Oh yeah, because the BBC have never sacked any right wingers for their behaviour have they, Jeremy Clarkson is David Cameron's best mate isn't he?

Jeremy Paxman managed to host Newsnight for 25 years without ever telling anybody his political views. He managed that despite being the BBCs flagship political presenter. 

When he left Newsnight and started making documentaries for Channel 4 he then made it very clear that he was a One Nation Conservative. He chose to leave the BBC, and then he was able to express his personal opinions more freely.

Gary Lineker for years has acted like he is above the BBCs strict impartiality laws, like he's too big to be sacked, despite numerous warnings. That's despite being a football presenter.

He could leave and work for any number of other broadcasters where he is then free to air his views and use his huge Twitter platform however he sees fit, just like Andrew Neil and Jeremy Paxman elected to do, but of course he knows he'd earn a lot less money on Talk TV or LBC or wherever it is that he'd end up, so he basically wants his cake and to eat it. 

Are you trying to convince me of something, or yourself?

[TeemuVanBasten 3,327]

6 minutes ago, chicken said:

The point isn't how many, it's the distinct lack of opposition.

The only real exception actually being here in Norwich, when the EDL tried to get something going, to only find 100 people who turned up, most from other counties. When they did finally assemble, they were met with a "this is Norwich" counter protest of over a thousand.

In some ways, you are starting to see that backlash on social media. The BBC won't win this one now. They are facing a decision more about themselves than they are about Lineker. Match of the Day, whether you like the presenters or not, has very much nearly always been about the personalities that present it. Especially in the modern era, since the birth of social media.

Sky has highlights out incredibly quickly and there are youtube channels of fans analysis etc you can watch if you prefer. As much as people may dislike him, Shearer, Murphy, Wright, etc, but it works and is immensely popular. It is absolutely no surprise the amount of support he is getting.

Another one to throw into the hat is Jeremy Clarkson - massive climate change denier for a long time, heavily critical of all things remotely alternative to him, both in person, on social media and in columns he has written etc (predates the Meghan stuff by a looooong way). That's before you bring up him punching staff for not delivering the buffet he wanted or something, and the use of racist language. He rode a lot of that sort of thing out for a very long time. 

I'm pretty sure the EDL saw counter protests pretty much wherever they went.

Britain First less so, because they never really built any momentum offline, they were clearly just a merch machine anyway, Golding and Fransen were full time t-shirt and hoodie sellers really.

[Pyro Pete 1,927]

No presenters or pundits will feature on Saturday's Match of the Day programme, a BBC spokesperson says.

Saturday's Match of the Day programme will "focus on match action without studio presentation or punditry", they say.

[The Real Buh 3,486]

3 minutes ago, Pyro Pete said:

No presenters or pundits will feature on Saturday's Match of the Day programme, a BBC spokesperson says.

Saturday's Match of the Day programme will "focus on match action without studio presentation or punditry", they say.

So as it actually should be then

Or how you can and have been able to see it on YouTube for quite some time

several hours before Match of the day is broadcast

[Disco Dales Jockstrap 1,899]

6 minutes ago, Pyro Pete said:

No presenters or pundits will feature on Saturday's Match of the Day programme, a BBC spokesperson says.

Saturday's Match of the Day programme will "focus on match action without studio presentation or punditry", they say.

RESULT! I might actually watch it. They should start MotD by panning into Lineker's chair to find he has been replaced with a packet of cheese and onion.

OTBC

Edited March 10, 2023 by Disco Dales Jockstrap

[alex_ncfc 666]

14 minutes ago, Pyro Pete said:

No presenters or pundits will feature on Saturday's Match of the Day programme, a BBC spokesperson says.

Saturday's Match of the Day programme will "focus on match action without studio presentation or punditry", they say.

Hopefully it'll stay this way.

What a shame that an episode without presenters who think they're funny and pundits who don't know any of our player's names coincides with us not being in the Prem.

[Pyro Pete 1,927]

But this is what it will be next week.

 

[Capt. Pants 4,298]

Hopefully the Premier League will deem the BBC not fit to air its product and will cancel the deal. 

ITV will be chortling about this.

Edited March 10, 2023 by Capt. Pants

[Thirsty Lizard 3,184]

1 hour ago, TeemuVanBasten said:

Oh yeah, because the BBC have never sacked any right wingers for their behaviour have they, Jeremy Clarkson is David Cameron's best mate isn't he?

Jeremy Paxman managed to host Newsnight for 25 years without ever telling anybody his political views. He managed that despite being the BBCs flagship political presenter. 

When he left Newsnight and started making documentaries for Channel 4 he then made it very clear that he was a One Nation Conservative. He chose to leave the BBC, and then he was able to express his personal opinions more freely.

Gary Lineker for years has acted like he is above the BBCs strict impartiality laws, like he's too big to be sacked, despite numerous warnings. That's despite being a football presenter.

He could leave and work for any number of other broadcasters where he is then free to air his views and use his huge Twitter platform however he sees fit, just like Andrew Neil and Jeremy Paxman elected to do, but of course he knows he'd earn a lot less money on Talk TV or LBC or wherever it is that he'd end up, so he basically wants his cake and to eat it. 

They didn't get rid of Clarkson for his political views did they? They got rid of him because he punched a colleague. 

[Disco Dales Jockstrap 1,899]

53 minutes ago, chicken said:

You realise that it isn't self cancelling? That's just a term that you have invented because it suits you, but you can't admit to pushing "cancel culture" because that would mean you have to use a term you have likely used on others, to describe yourself.

Probably the same with snowflake, but we can all see you're making it about yourself... 

Now don't be such a snowflake Chicken. I didn't invent the term 'self canceling' as you well know. The word I invented was 'spankalicious'.

You really are no fun at all these days; you've changed.

The old Chicken was vibrant. This one? Boring. Predictable. Unoriginal. Hmmmmmm...

Have you ever thought about becoming a presenter on MotD? I hear there's a vacancy!

"Free the jugg-eared one!"

OTBC

[Capt. Pants 4,298]

MOTD will be totally sh1t.

If there are any brilliant goals, shocking defending, controversial moments, VAR, sendings off there will be nothing to debate. 

It will just skip to the next game as though nothing ever happened.

 

[Pyro Pete 1,927]

Just wait until the MotD match commentators pull out.

[TeemuVanBasten 3,327]

18 minutes ago, Thirsty Lizard said:

They didn't get rid of Clarkson for his political views did they? They got rid of him because he punched a colleague. 

They got rid of Clarkson for a catalogue of behaviour problems, rule breaches and controversies which concluded with that incident, yes.

This is not Lineker's first reprimand for breaching impartiality rules, he has done it consistently on Twitter, he was already sailing close to the wind.

Its not complicated from where I'm sitting. The BBC have a very clear set of rules on impartiality. Lineker has breached those rules continuously, and therefore could be considered to be in breach of contract.

We all have rules set by our employers, if you work in Asda you are supposed to wear an Asda polo shirt, if you turn up to work in a Fred Perry polo shirt you can expect to get in trouble.

If you play football and you gamble on football games you are in breach of very clear guidelines and can expect to get into trouble.

There is nothing illegal or immoral about wearing Fred Perry polo shirts and or going into a bookies in a general sense, but when applied to specific jobs or industries then clearly they become a problem.

If Lineker doesn't agree with the BBC rules on impartiality then he shouldn't have signed his contract. You can't expect to work on a building site if you aren't prepared to wear a helmet. 

Edited March 10, 2023 by TeemuVanBasten