[ink171]

Unless he's paid by the appearance

[wasa5livefan]

Originally Posted by Steve Williams

I know Gary Lineker has taken over from Jonathan Ross as the bogeyman but we're closer to getting our money's worth from him than anyone else on TV - he's on Saturday nights about forty weeks of the year, then on every day during the Euros, then every day during the Olympics. And six days after they've finished he's back on MOTD again.

Let's add this up:
40 days for MOTD
21 days for the Euros
15 days for the Olympics
Total 76 days a year.
So he works one and half days a week.

[Igloo_Man]

Originally Posted by wasa5livefan

Let's add this up:
40 days for MOTD
21 days for the Euros
15 days for the Olympics
Total 76 days a year.
So he works one and half days a week.

But he does some other work as well (albeit not for the BBC but for Al Jazeera).

And you can add the SPOTY... 1 day

[mikw]

Originally Posted by wasa5livefan

Let's add this up:
40 days for MOTD
21 days for the Euros
15 days for the Olympics
Total 76 days a year.
So he works one and half days a week.

So, now we have to find someone else who works for 76 days a year on screen and see how their pay packets compare.

[mlt11]

Originally Posted by wasa5livefan

Let's add this up:
40 days for MOTD
21 days for the Euros
15 days for the Olympics
Total 76 days a year.
So he works one and half days a week.

The Olympics is every 4 years.

He does a Euros or WC Finals every 2 years.

So Lineker's annual BBC average is actually approx:

MOTD - 40
Olympics - 4 (17/4)
Euros / WC Finals - 13 (26/2)
SPOTY - 1

Total - 58

Chamberlin actually beats that easily between Super Sunday and MNF - and on average is on air far, far longer per day as well - eg MNF is a 4 hour programme with 90 mins of football so there is massively more presenter time.

[looby383x]

Originally Posted by jlp95bwfc

I disagree, Gary linekar once again looking like a spare part. It was bad enough when he was in the studio but now we have inverdale in the athletics studio, linekar in the stadium as well, and some other woman in the main studio. Linekar's interview with the gymnasts was quite frankly embarrassing. He clearly hadn't watched any of the event and was asking Louis smith what it was like waiting for the final gymnast to go, even though smith was the final gymnast.

Totally agree with lots of you. I like Gary Lineker and enjoy him on MOTD, however being Olympic anchor is beyond his skill set and he looks out of his depth.

Claire Balding or John Inverdale have a much better knowledge and ( more important in my view) interest in the sports included in the olympics. I think BBC missed out by allocating Claire to the swimming - she was brilliant, but would have been better doing Lineker's job

[jlp95bwfc]

Originally Posted by looby383x

Totally agree with lots of you. I like Gary Lineker and enjoy him on MOTD, however being Olympic anchor is beyond his skill set and he looks out of his depth.

Claire Balding or John Inverdale have a much better knowledge and ( more important in my view) interest in the sports included in the olympics. I think BBC missed out by allocating Claire to the swimming - she was brilliant, but would have been better doing Lineker's job

I agree with you with regards to Clare balding. Although she didn't know much about swimming, she showed a genuine interest in the sport, and asked the sort of questions which the viewer would want to find out the answers to. She also listened to what was being said by the pundits and had a greater knowledge of the sport as the week went on. She also didn't try to hide the fact that she was no expert and left it to the pundits to explain things, rather than constantly coming out with rubbish which had to be corrected (unlike linekar with Ian Thorpe). She would have definitely done a good job as prime time presenter as well instead of linekar.

[Igloo_Man]

Mark Cavendish looked so uncomfortable at the start of the track cycling coverage earlier in the Games but he's really grown into the role and looks far more like he is enjoying the job now.

[mikw]

Originally Posted by mlt11

The Olympics is every 4 years.

He does a Euros or WC Finals every 2 years.

So Lineker's annual BBC average is actually approx:

MOTD - 40
Olympics - 4 (17/4)
Euros / WC Finals - 13 (26/2)
SPOTY - 1

Total - 58

Chamberlin actually beats that easily between Super Sunday and MNF - and on average is on air far, far longer per day as well - eg MNF is a 4 hour programme with 90 mins of football so there is massively more presenter time.

Of course, Linekar also does some Al Jazeera stuff that we need to include for fair comparison - i expect the Tabloids did that when they mentioned his salary....

[Martin Phillp]

Jake Humphrey from the velodrome "If you're getting in from work or school."

Unless I'm mistaken, it's still the school summer holidays, even in Scotland where they go back in a week or so.

[polantic]

I criticised Hugh Porter heavily after the road races and time trials but he was really pin sharp in the velodrome.

It's clear he's much more knowledgeable about the track and he and Chris Boardman did a fine job throughout.

[Ginger Daddy]

News overrunning by 40 minutes, cue the complaints.....

[Ginger Daddy]

Originally Posted by polantic

I criticised Hugh Porter heavily after the road races and time trials but he was really pin sharp in the velodrome.

It's clear he's much more knowledgeable about the track and he and Chris Boardman did a fine job throughout.

The Belgians certainly did a better job filming the velodrome than the Dutch did of the cycling outside

[tellyadict]

Originally Posted by Ginger Daddy

News overrunning by 40 minutes, cue the complaints.....

It was shunted to BBC2 at 6pm. Local news cut by 10 mins though.

[Ginger Daddy]

Originally Posted by tellyadict

It was shunted to BBC2 at 6pm. Local news cut by 10 mins though.

Yeah I just realised

Says 1905 on the Sky EPG so looks like just a five minute cut.

[D.M.N.]

Originally Posted by Martin Phillp

Jake Humphrey from the velodrome "If you're getting in from work or school."

Unless I'm mistaken, it's still the school summer holidays, even in Scotland where they go back in a week or so.

Jake Humphrey ‏@mrjakehumphrey
Like I know when kids are on school holidays... !!??? I don't have them!!!
5:49 PM - 7 Aug 12

[gush]

Having followed the Womens Pole Vault Final yesterday evening, I was looking forward to seeing the medal ceremony. Well I could hear it happening 15 minutes ago on BBC Olympic Channels 1 and 4 BUT what did I see - just crowd shots and scenes of the high jump athletes waiting their turn !!!

[ink171]

Originally Posted by D.M.N.

Jake Humphrey ‏@mrjakehumphrey
Like I know when kids are on school holidays... !!??? I don't have them!!!
5:49 PM - 7 Aug 12

Well he's not far off being one

[Steve Williams]

Originally Posted by mlt11

Chamberlin actually beats that easily between Super Sunday and MNF - and on average is on air far, far longer per day as well - eg MNF is a 4 hour programme with 90 mins of football so there is massively more presenter time.

Well, if you were to use that as the only criteria then you could say that the Sky Sports News presenters should be paid most because they're on every day for hours and on screen constantly during their shift, but they're clearly not.

And the thing is, when was the last time Ed Chamberlin was last on television? I'm not slagging him off but I haven't seen him do anything on Sky since the last day of the season, so for all he's done during the season he's had three months off, it would appear. And similarly you can't just count up the number of shows Chamberlin and Lineker have done and say Chamberlin has done more because Lineker's fifteen Olympic appearances have been on consecutive days, which is clearly far more inconvenient and challenging than doing one or two programmes a week for fifteen weeks. He works all year round.

As mentioned Lineker also has his Al Jazeera work, I know the Beeb don't pay him for that but it illustrates he's not just sitting on his arse between programmes counting his money but going off and doing other work, same with his Sport Relief duties (both presenting the show and doing all the promotional work).

That's why I compared him not to other sports presenters but to other high-earning presentrs on TV, someone like Graham Norton for example might do two thirteen-part series a year. Brucie is on for thirteen weeks a year and if you were to add up how much he's on screen on Strictly I'm sure it would be a far lower percentage than Lineker on Match of the Day.

And also as well, the fact is he is Gary Lineker and he is famous and he's clearly going to get the wages that his huge profile would deserve, he's known by everyone in the country more or less so you get the kudos among the general audience because more people are willing to listen to him. Ed Chamberlin is a perfectly good presenter but the average viewer probably doesn't even know his name. I'm not saying Lineker doesn't have a cushy job but you can't argue with the fact he does put the hours in and people know and like him.

[tellyadict]

Originally Posted by gush

Having followed the Womens Pole Vault Final yesterday evening, I was looking forward to seeing the medal ceremony. Well I could hear it happening 15 minutes ago on BBC Olympic Channels 1 and 4 BUT what did I see - just crowd shots and scenes of the high jump athletes waiting their turn !!!

I thought that was very strange as you could here the national anthem but they were clearly not showing it.

[Brekkie]

Originally Posted by looby383x

Totally agree with lots of you. I like Gary Lineker and enjoy him on MOTD, however being Olympic anchor is beyond his skill set and he looks out of his depth.

Claire Balding or John Inverdale have a much better knowledge and ( more important in my view) interest in the sports included in the olympics. I think BBC missed out by allocating Claire to the swimming - she was brilliant, but would have been better doing Lineker's job

I think the mistake they made with Lineker is not using him in Beijing if it was always on the cards he'd be the lead anchor for London.

I said beforehand considering he has had no involvement with the Olympics (or Olympic sport) since 1996 he shouldn't be the lead presenter, but he is a competent host, but I'd have rather seen Sue share the sofa with him as they work rather well together.

I say it every games though and I'll say it again - Hazel Irvine is by far the best Olympic presenter the BBC have. Claire Balding has had the respect too she deserves for what could be her Olympic swansong should she join Channel 4 Racing next year and glad C4 signed her up to lead their Paralympic coverage.

[LOSG]

BBC certainly getting their money out of Jake Humphrey during this fortnight.

[mlt11]

Originally Posted by Steve Williams

Well, if you were to use that as the only criteria then you could say that the Sky Sports News presenters should be paid most because they're on every day for hours and on screen constantly during their shift, but they're clearly not.

And the thing is, when was the last time Ed Chamberlin was last on television? I'm not slagging him off but I haven't seen him do anything on Sky since the last day of the season, so for all he's done during the season he's had three months off, it would appear. And similarly you can't just count up the number of shows Chamberlin and Lineker have done and say Chamberlin has done more because Lineker's fifteen Olympic appearances have been on consecutive days, which is clearly far more inconvenient and challenging than doing one or two programmes a week for fifteen weeks. He works all year round.

As mentioned Lineker also has his Al Jazeera work, I know the Beeb don't pay him for that but it illustrates he's not just sitting on his arse between programmes counting his money but going off and doing other work, same with his Sport Relief duties (both presenting the show and doing all the promotional work).

That's why I compared him not to other sports presenters but to other high-earning presentrs on TV, someone like Graham Norton for example might do two thirteen-part series a year. Brucie is on for thirteen weeks a year and if you were to add up how much he's on screen on Strictly I'm sure it would be a far lower percentage than Lineker on Match of the Day.

And also as well, the fact is he is Gary Lineker and he is famous and he's clearly going to get the wages that his huge profile would deserve, he's known by everyone in the country more or less so you get the kudos among the general audience because more people are willing to listen to him. Ed Chamberlin is a perfectly good presenter but the average viewer probably doesn't even know his name. I'm not saying Lineker doesn't have a cushy job but you can't argue with the fact he does put the hours in and people know and like him.

I know all that and wouldn't disagree with any of it - it's all blindingly obvious.

All I did was correct a calculation of Lineker's annual BBC hours and the statement that he had a higher workload than Chamberlin (which I assumed was referring to his BBC workload).

I didn't mention his salary, profile, what he's worth or indeed anything else!!!!!!!

[pakokelso93]

Originally Posted by Brekkie

Claire Balding has had the respect too she deserves for what could be her Olympic swansong should she join Channel 4 Racing next year and glad C4 signed her up to lead their Paralympic coverage.

Even if Balding does Channel 4 racing, she will still be freelance (as she is now she has done Ch4 Athletics and Crufts). I imagine she will continue on the likes of the rugby league on the BBC. Looking forward to the Balding lead paralympics on Ch4.

[mlt11]

Originally Posted by Brekkie

I think the mistake they made with Lineker is not using him in Beijing if it was always on the cards he'd be the lead anchor for London.

I said beforehand considering he has had no involvement with the Olympics (or Olympic sport) since 1996 he shouldn't be the lead presenter, but he is a competent host, but I'd have rather seen Sue share the sofa with him as they work rather well together.

But would Lineker have done a noticeably better job at London 2012 if he had done Beijing?

I doubt it would have made any difference - he does a perfectly good job without having any detailed knowledge of athletics etc. But then he doesn't really need that detailed knowledge to do the role he is performing.

It'll be interesting to see if he does Rio (assuming he is still at the BBC). I suspect it's probably more likely that he won't but it's obviously perfectly possible that he could do it - possibly influenced by the huge success of London 2012.