Don't forget they're going to need more than 2 replacements.
No one will be 'replaced'. A completely new format will be launched with its first set of presenters, just as Clarkson, Hammond and Dawe were the first presenters of current Top Gear. I'm sure the 2016 format and its line-up will be tweaked and change over time, and longer term it will evolve. The Top Gear we have now isn't really the same as the 2002 series, and has been a different show in the middle too, when it was launching cars into space and sailing them to France.
Yes, you got things mixed up - the breaking news story is that Jeremy Clarkson got himself 'sacked' today after putting someone in hospital whilst on a final written warning issued following a series of controversial incidents over several years.
No, no, no. Clarkson is completely innocent of doing anything wrong at all. It's all a big conspiracy, dontcha know.
A motley collective of commie pinko liberal, Guardian reading greybeard tree huggers have ganged up on poor, put upon Jeremy who never did nuffin' guv. Honest.
Wot, our Jezza clock some jumped up wallah who gives himself a smarmy, poncy title like 'producer'? It's a PCBBC smear campaign, that's what it is.
So if top gear is dependent on 3 presenters, makes one wonder why they had so many producers thinking up ideas for the programme or planning what situations to put the presenters into, all that money spent on racing planes etc. Then there was the money lavished on the specials, when all they needed were the three presenters not the exotic locations or producers ideas. the sound & cameramen and the snazzy editing was a waste of time.
All that was needed were 3 presenters sitting in deckchairs talking about cars.
Wow! Look over there, think someone's just missed the point spectacularly!
The 3 presenters worked very well together, had very different styles but were all connected by their love of cars, their history of working with cars & their ability to either riff with each off the cuff or reproduce comedic material as if live (just like good comedy stage performers did such as Ade Edmonson & Rik Mayall)
Just inserting 3 new presenters in to the exact same cars & locations will not get the same results.
It's like saying lets replace all of the Real Madrid team with players from Acrington Stanley. The'd be playing at the same ground, in the same strip, have the same coaches and managers, with the same football & in front of the same crowd against the same teams, but you know damn well it just will not be the same!
Clarkson continues to show breathtaking arrogance. Perhaps the first hour with his lawyer will be spent with him being told the BBC are not obligated to renew his contract. His sense of entitlement is staggering.
I don't think any sane and reasonably minded person can argue with the decision. You can't assault and verbally harass someone in the workplace and get away with it. I couldn't. You couldn't. Clarkson couldn't. Nevermind the fact that in the years prior to it you have been accused of being a xenophobe and a racist, namely because of making xenophobic and racist comments.
The fact the BBC got over ten years out of Clarkson and Top Gear should be seen as a great success for the corporation. He was always a ticking time-bomb and always liable to do or say something that they couldn't sweep under the rug.
HOWEVER, having said all that, I think those who claim the brand will be just as successful without Clarkson are equally as deluded. It seems clear that May and Hammond will both leave as well, and therefore highly likely that a rival broadcaster will produce a rival motorshow with the former Top Gear team. It may not have the amazing production values and name value of Top Gear, but it will have the three amigos, and at first anyway, that will be enough. Top Gear without Clarkson will become increasingly sanitised, because he truly is a one of a kind TV personality.
A 54-year-old joining a twenty-something boy-band, with Clarkson's way of going against the establishment and thinking outside the box it might just work... and he'll bring his loyal audience with him! win-win!!!!
Not sure the other two will be happy as just backing dancers though, still, never know till you try!
but it's not going to be successful is it, we fans go where they go and hope it's soon.
Define success? That's to be seen and for the BBC to define not Clarkson fundamentalists, especially if it's a cheaper show not aimed at an international audience and not trying to capture the testosterone-fuelled spirit of James Bond.
The irony of what you're saying is that it's the exact opposite complaints were made by the original Top Gear audience when Clarkson changed it into a light entertainment show that entertained people with flash £300,000 cars tearing around an airfield instead of informing an educating viewers about real cars and their MPGs. The fate and success of the new format remains to be seen - over the coming years.
'Your' Top Gear is over, now something else will replace it aimed at other viewers, not you. You and those like you may well desert the show, but there are 60,000,000 other people in the UK who do not watch Clarkson on BBC2, and some of them may actually like the new format without him - for different reasons that made you like the old one.
It's no different to all the nay-sayers predicting the end of Radio 2 when Evans replaced Wogan or the end of the One Show when the BBC golden couple defected to ITV (although I seem to recall there was also a contrast that wasn't renewed there too, albeit due to being money grabbing rather than what appears in the light of day to be a criminal assault).
At the end of the day (literally), there's a crisis in Jeremy Clarkson's career, not the BBC's future.
It will be interesting to see how he hopes to take on the BBC when he himself, in his own column in the Sun last may admitted he was on his final warning from the BBC. He can't exactly deny he didn't know he was on thin ice.
You know as well as I do that Channel 5 gets know where near the audience that BBC2 gets. If C, M & H go to 5, they will lose at least half their audience.
And you know as well as I do that people will follow the show, especially if they know the previous presenters are involved. TG gets great ratings for BBC TWO - around 6 million these days - if only a quarter of the viewers follow the show to Channel 5, that's still a big rating success for them. They already have the show name (which is quite similar to Top Gear) and they can inject the 3 hosts and set things up as legally possible to TG without copyright infringement and then they have a winner. Let's face it, if only the 1 million people who signed the petition were the only ones to tune in, 1 million is still great for Channel 5, they don't have many million+ guaranteed shows.
No, because deep down they'd know the BBC show would get more viewers after things settled down. Just like when ITV decided to move the News at Ten back to 10pm and bring back Trevor McDonald, assuming the definitive "face of 10pm news" back where he belonged would trounce the BBC incumbent with its new acid house theme tune. It was as much a disaster as poaching Chiles & Bleakely or Suzanne Reid.
And it would be sad to see Clarkson and (perhaps especially) the other two who walked out of Top Gear on principle, selling out to ITV by constantly slipping in sly plugs for all the other ITV shows, just like any other show on that channel. The guests would invariably be people from other ITV shows, be it Coronation Street actors, Keith Lemon, Philip Schofield or Coleen Nolan.
Mind you, I wonder if ITV will try to get Clarkson as a guest on the next series of Jonathan Ross? I'm sure they'd like the idea of the both of them talking about being sack- err, I mean not having their contracts renewed after scandals, internet petitions and victims to blame.
Do you think this bit has any relevance to the outcome?
Benito Mussolini made the trains run on time. I can judge the man no other way than that.
Do you ever get a nosebleed up there on the high moral ground...?
Define success? That's to be seen and for the BBC to define not Clarkson fundamentalists, especially if it's a cheaper show not aimed at an international audience and not trying to capture the testosterone-fuelled spirit of James Bond.
The irony of what you're saying is that it's the exact opposite complaints were made by the original Top Gear audience when Clarkson changed it into a light entertainment show that entertained people with flash £300,000 cars tearing around an airfield instead of informing an educating viewers about real cars and their MPGs. The fate and success of the new format remains to be seen - over the coming years.
'Your' Top Gear is over, now something else will replace it aimed at other viewers, not you. You and those like you may well desert the show, but there are 60,000,000 other people in the UK who do not watch Clarkson on BBC2, and some of them may actually like the new format without him - for different reasons that made you like the old one.
It's no different to all the nay-sayers predicting the end of Radio 2 when Evans replaced Wogan or the end of the One Show when the BBC golden couple defected to ITV (although I seem to recall there was also a contrast that wasn't renewed there too, albeit due to being money grabbing rather than what appears in the light of day to be a criminal assault).
At the end of the day (literally), there's a crisis in Jeremy Clarkson's career, not the BBC's future.
Yet the people you say complained about the new Top Gear obviously didn't care enough, in enough numbers to watch what was essentially a copy called 5th Gear. If they did 5th Gear would have been a huge "Success" rather than reasonably good for C5.
A "success" for the BBC now would be to have the same level of worldwide sales and exposure for the BBC brand with a newer Top Gear. If the show drops significant numbers in terms of viewers worldwide and domestically, whilst also failing to make money rather than cost money to make then it will not be a "success"
I presume he will write something about this once his contract period ends or give an interview somewhere.
His best policy would be to keep a low profile for a year or so, concentrate on writing or researching documentary TV programmes as well as getting some counselling. He might then be able to patch things up with the BBC eventually.
The big question would be whether he would give his blessing to the other two working with someone else or a series with other presenters. Setting up in competition with a BBC programme would just damage both versions.
Do you ever get a nosebleed up there on the high moral ground...?
What moral high ground is involved in pointing out that most ITV shows these days are constant plugs for other ITV shows, and that the Top Gear trio moving to ITV would inevitably become part of that incestuous environment?
Or is what you're really trying to say between the lines, "I'm a Jeremy Clarkson fundamentalist and I'm MAD AS HELL today!"?
Wow! Look over there, think someone's just missed the point spectacularly!
The 3 presenters worked very well together, had very different styles but were all connected by their love of cars, their history of working with cars & their ability to either riff with each off the cuff or reproduce comedic material as if live (just like good comedy stage performers did such as Ade Edmonson & Rik Mayall)
Just inserting 3 new presenters in to the exact same cars & locations will not get the same results.
It's like saying lets replace all of the Real Madrid team with players from Acrington Stanley. The'd be playing at the same ground, in the same strip, have the same coaches and managers, with the same football & in front of the same crowd against the same teams, but you know damn well it just will not be the same!
It flew over your head...the production team who made the programme had the creative ideas and put them on the screen....3 presenters on their own are like an actors without a script & good production values...are nothing.
I'm not at all sure about earlier comments wondering whether Mays or Hammond will sign up to continue with the show without clarkson.
He has, to all intents and purposes not only got himself sacked but put the bbc in such a position that they cannot possibly offer new contracts to Mays and Hammond because top gear will have to be completely overhauled in the future. That will inevitably mean a whole new set of presenters (assuming it will be more than one).
Mays and Hammond can't possibly be awarded new contracts to appear on top gear - he's put them out of work on this show too. It's not Mays and hammonds decision, clarkson's made that decision for them - they're out too.
It flew over your head...the production team who made the programme had the creative ideas and put them on the screen....3 presenters on their own are like an actors without a script & good production values...are nothing.
And you know as well as I do that people will follow the show, especially if they know the previous presenters are involved. TG gets great ratings for BBC TWO - around 6 million these days - if only a quarter of the viewers follow the show to Channel 5, that's still a big rating success for them. They already have the show name (which is quite similar to Top Gear) and they can inject the 3 hosts and set things up as legally possible to TG without copyright infringement and then they have a winner. Let's face it, if only the 1 million people who signed the petition were the only ones to tune in, 1 million is still great for Channel 5, they don't have many million+ guaranteed shows.
Channel Five don't make programmes - They buy everything in from independent producers so one of them would have to stump up the vast amount TG costs. They could pre-sell it to Five if they get all their ducks in a row but Five aren't going to be directly funding a Top Gear knock-off with Clarkson.
I presume he will write something about this once his contract period ends or give an interview somewhere.
His best policy would be to keep a low profile for a year or so, concentrate on writing or researching documentary TV programmes as well as getting some counselling. He might then be able to patch things up with the BBC eventually.
The big question would be whether he would give his blessing to the other two working with someone else or a series with other presenters. Setting up in competition with a BBC programme would just damage both versions.
Can you imagine him keeping his trap shut? This a public schoolboy, where stigs & bedders are the name of the game. I think it is annoying he will automatically be given a platform to air his version of events without questioning.
At the beginning wasn't this presented as petty, as merely a bit of pushing and shoving, no punch landed or was thrown. I wonder in whose interest it would be to present such a scenario.
Yes, you got things mixed up - the breaking news story is that Jeremy Clarkson got himself 'sacked' today after putting someone in hospital..
No wonder the NHS is in crisis. A split lip is 'putting someone in hospital?'. Leave a perfectly good bar with an ice maker to drive to the nearest A&E.. But nice to see the beeboids have a sense of drama.
It flew over your head...the production team who made the programme had the creative ideas and put them on the screen....3 presenters on their own are like an actors without a script & good production values...are nothing.
Get it now?
If you really think that the 3 presenters did nothing more than read a script you really have no need to post anymore!
The show was bought and revamped by Clarkson & his friend (the Executive producer of Top Gear) Andy Williams. The creativity of these two people created the new Top Gear. Yes, other people are brought in to do all the other essential jobs and some of those will have creative input in to the show, or suggest ways to film a particular shot but there is no doubt that the 3 presenters on this show are far and away more than just presenters.
Having watched the show being recorded, there is no doubt in my mind that chemistry between the presenters was a huge part of the show & that is unlikely to replicated in either terms of success or believability in the near future.
Yet the people you say complained about the new Top Gear obviously didn't care enough, in enough numbers to watch what was essentially a copy called 5th Gear.
Exactly. Proving that people who moan about chance are rarely right.
"success" for the BBC now would be to have the same level of worldwide sales and exposure for the BBC brand with a newer Top Gear.
Completely wrong. Success on the BBC is more than ratings and money, especially when the changes are foeced upon them rather than a new broom simply fixing things that aren't broken. Jeremy Clarkson broke Top Gear.
You assume the BBC will try to maintain Top Gear as an international brand. But if they don't, they're not going to be aiming for the same success as before. An all-new format will have its own goals to achieve.
They may not be as ambitious as Clarkson's Top Gear but that doesn't mean its not a success, any more than the live revelation of Lucy Beale's killer in Eastenders watched by 10M viewers wasn't a success just because 22M watched previously Ricky and Bianca get married and 30M watched Den serve Ange divorce papers.
I gather Doctor Who is globally a bigger success now that Matt Smith has left, despite the emotional and irrational fangirl outpourings when Peter Capaldi took over. And its live ratings in the UK have collapsed.
Leave working out what happens to Top Gear next to the people who actually work in TV.
Why did Jeremy Clarkson have to do this? Why couldn't he just keep his temper and leave us to continue enjoying the show?
I presume he will write something about this once his contract period ends or give an interview somewhere.
Oh, I think he's more ambitious than that! Expect an updated biography (not autobiography, so that the BBC can be slagged off royally but he can deny he ever said anything himself) and some DVDs, probably featuring the three of them
No wonder the NHS is in crisis. A split lip is 'putting someone in hospital?'.
Oh, so you finally admit it happened then? And what about your other insinuation that no police involvement was more proof that it didn't really happen?
No wonder the NHS is in crisis. A split lip is 'putting someone in hospital?'. Leave a perfectly good bar with an ice maker to drive to the nearest A&E.. But nice to see the beeboids have a sense of drama.
I know today hasn't gone as you would have hoped- but you don't know how bad it was.
Might have needed stitches- maybe not, but bad enough to go to A & E.
Comments
Clarkson has more than two hips?!?!?
No, no, no. Clarkson is completely innocent of doing anything wrong at all. It's all a big conspiracy, dontcha know.
A motley collective of commie pinko liberal, Guardian reading greybeard tree huggers have ganged up on poor, put upon Jeremy who never did nuffin' guv. Honest.
Wot, our Jezza clock some jumped up wallah who gives himself a smarmy, poncy title like 'producer'? It's a PCBBC smear campaign, that's what it is.
Yes and a lot more.
True Isambard Brunel, but it's not going to be successful is it, we fans go where they go and hope it's soon.
Wow! Look over there, think someone's just missed the point spectacularly!
The 3 presenters worked very well together, had very different styles but were all connected by their love of cars, their history of working with cars & their ability to either riff with each off the cuff or reproduce comedic material as if live (just like good comedy stage performers did such as Ade Edmonson & Rik Mayall)
Just inserting 3 new presenters in to the exact same cars & locations will not get the same results.
It's like saying lets replace all of the Real Madrid team with players from Acrington Stanley. The'd be playing at the same ground, in the same strip, have the same coaches and managers, with the same football & in front of the same crowd against the same teams, but you know damn well it just will not be the same!
Clarkson continues to show breathtaking arrogance. Perhaps the first hour with his lawyer will be spent with him being told the BBC are not obligated to renew his contract. His sense of entitlement is staggering.
The fact the BBC got over ten years out of Clarkson and Top Gear should be seen as a great success for the corporation. He was always a ticking time-bomb and always liable to do or say something that they couldn't sweep under the rug.
HOWEVER, having said all that, I think those who claim the brand will be just as successful without Clarkson are equally as deluded. It seems clear that May and Hammond will both leave as well, and therefore highly likely that a rival broadcaster will produce a rival motorshow with the former Top Gear team. It may not have the amazing production values and name value of Top Gear, but it will have the three amigos, and at first anyway, that will be enough. Top Gear without Clarkson will become increasingly sanitised, because he truly is a one of a kind TV personality.
Not sure the other two will be happy as just backing dancers though, still, never know till you try!
And on that bombshell...
Define success? That's to be seen and for the BBC to define not Clarkson fundamentalists, especially if it's a cheaper show not aimed at an international audience and not trying to capture the testosterone-fuelled spirit of James Bond.
The irony of what you're saying is that it's the exact opposite complaints were made by the original Top Gear audience when Clarkson changed it into a light entertainment show that entertained people with flash £300,000 cars tearing around an airfield instead of informing an educating viewers about real cars and their MPGs. The fate and success of the new format remains to be seen - over the coming years.
'Your' Top Gear is over, now something else will replace it aimed at other viewers, not you. You and those like you may well desert the show, but there are 60,000,000 other people in the UK who do not watch Clarkson on BBC2, and some of them may actually like the new format without him - for different reasons that made you like the old one.
It's no different to all the nay-sayers predicting the end of Radio 2 when Evans replaced Wogan or the end of the One Show when the BBC golden couple defected to ITV (although I seem to recall there was also a contrast that wasn't renewed there too, albeit due to being money grabbing rather than what appears in the light of day to be a criminal assault).
At the end of the day (literally), there's a crisis in Jeremy Clarkson's career, not the BBC's future.
Don't forget the Stig as the 'Bez' of the band.
It will be interesting to see how he hopes to take on the BBC when he himself, in his own column in the Sun last may admitted he was on his final warning from the BBC. He can't exactly deny he didn't know he was on thin ice.
http://www.theguardian.com/media/2014/may/03/jeremy-clarkson-given-final-warning-by-the-bbc
Do you ever get a nosebleed up there on the high moral ground...?
Yet the people you say complained about the new Top Gear obviously didn't care enough, in enough numbers to watch what was essentially a copy called 5th Gear. If they did 5th Gear would have been a huge "Success" rather than reasonably good for C5.
A "success" for the BBC now would be to have the same level of worldwide sales and exposure for the BBC brand with a newer Top Gear. If the show drops significant numbers in terms of viewers worldwide and domestically, whilst also failing to make money rather than cost money to make then it will not be a "success"
His best policy would be to keep a low profile for a year or so, concentrate on writing or researching documentary TV programmes as well as getting some counselling. He might then be able to patch things up with the BBC eventually.
The big question would be whether he would give his blessing to the other two working with someone else or a series with other presenters. Setting up in competition with a BBC programme would just damage both versions.
What moral high ground is involved in pointing out that most ITV shows these days are constant plugs for other ITV shows, and that the Top Gear trio moving to ITV would inevitably become part of that incestuous environment?
Or is what you're really trying to say between the lines, "I'm a Jeremy Clarkson fundamentalist and I'm MAD AS HELL today!"?
It flew over your head...the production team who made the programme had the creative ideas and put them on the screen....3 presenters on their own are like an actors without a script & good production values...are nothing.
Get it now?
He has, to all intents and purposes not only got himself sacked but put the bbc in such a position that they cannot possibly offer new contracts to Mays and Hammond because top gear will have to be completely overhauled in the future. That will inevitably mean a whole new set of presenters (assuming it will be more than one).
Mays and Hammond can't possibly be awarded new contracts to appear on top gear - he's put them out of work on this show too. It's not Mays and hammonds decision, clarkson's made that decision for them - they're out too.
I don't think you get it to be honest.
Channel Five don't make programmes - They buy everything in from independent producers so one of them would have to stump up the vast amount TG costs. They could pre-sell it to Five if they get all their ducks in a row but Five aren't going to be directly funding a Top Gear knock-off with Clarkson.
Can you imagine him keeping his trap shut? This a public schoolboy, where stigs & bedders are the name of the game. I think it is annoying he will automatically be given a platform to air his version of events without questioning.
At the beginning wasn't this presented as petty, as merely a bit of pushing and shoving, no punch landed or was thrown. I wonder in whose interest it would be to present such a scenario.
No wonder the NHS is in crisis. A split lip is 'putting someone in hospital?'. Leave a perfectly good bar with an ice maker to drive to the nearest A&E.. But nice to see the beeboids have a sense of drama.
If you really think that the 3 presenters did nothing more than read a script you really have no need to post anymore!
The show was bought and revamped by Clarkson & his friend (the Executive producer of Top Gear) Andy Williams. The creativity of these two people created the new Top Gear. Yes, other people are brought in to do all the other essential jobs and some of those will have creative input in to the show, or suggest ways to film a particular shot but there is no doubt that the 3 presenters on this show are far and away more than just presenters.
Having watched the show being recorded, there is no doubt in my mind that chemistry between the presenters was a huge part of the show & that is unlikely to replicated in either terms of success or believability in the near future.
Completely wrong. Success on the BBC is more than ratings and money, especially when the changes are foeced upon them rather than a new broom simply fixing things that aren't broken. Jeremy Clarkson broke Top Gear.
You assume the BBC will try to maintain Top Gear as an international brand. But if they don't, they're not going to be aiming for the same success as before. An all-new format will have its own goals to achieve.
They may not be as ambitious as Clarkson's Top Gear but that doesn't mean its not a success, any more than the live revelation of Lucy Beale's killer in Eastenders watched by 10M viewers wasn't a success just because 22M watched previously Ricky and Bianca get married and 30M watched Den serve Ange divorce papers.
I gather Doctor Who is globally a bigger success now that Matt Smith has left, despite the emotional and irrational fangirl outpourings when Peter Capaldi took over. And its live ratings in the UK have collapsed.
Leave working out what happens to Top Gear next to the people who actually work in TV.
Why did Jeremy Clarkson have to do this? Why couldn't he just keep his temper and leave us to continue enjoying the show?
Oh, I think he's more ambitious than that! Expect an updated biography (not autobiography, so that the BBC can be slagged off royally but he can deny he ever said anything himself) and some DVDs, probably featuring the three of them
Oh, so you finally admit it happened then? And what about your other insinuation that no police involvement was more proof that it didn't really happen?
I know today hasn't gone as you would have hoped- but you don't know how bad it was.
Might have needed stitches- maybe not, but bad enough to go to A & E.
North Yorkie police are now taking an interest.