No-one is bigger than the BBC. If...if...he did what is alleged, he should be sacked...popular or otherwise. I couldn't careless whether a million people sign a petition. It holds no weight. The law is the law.
I wish people would stop trotting this old cliche out - truth he is bigger than the BBC; he's it's biggest star, a massive draw in the UK and worldwide, and is instantly more recognisable than any BBC manager. And 'the law is the law' - no. A sensible approach is to find a resolution that suits all parties, and stops short of pulling the plug on TG.
Two blokes had a fight that may or may not have involved a punch or maybe a slap. The punishment appears to be that TG is cancelled for the foreseeable future, and maybe permanently, depriving its fans of any new episodes. How is that a just punishment for the multi-millionaire protagonist and the victim?
A quick straw poll here shows almost unanimous support for Clarkson. My view is that blokes sometimes get involved in fights, and in most cases forget about it soon afterwards or hold a bit of a grudge. We don't get people sacked or the environment closed down, esp if doing that affects a few million people and potentially cancels a few worldwide shows that people are looking forward to.
No-one is bigger than the BBC. If...if...he did what is alleged, he should be sacked...popular or otherwise. I couldn't careless whether a million people sign a petition. It holds no weight. The law is the law.
The PC brigade make me laugh, they really do. The most pathetic bunch of do-gooders around. Thank God they weren't around in the 60's or 70's, they'd have all had heart attacks.
Sure times change, and I would never call someone names based on their colour or religion, but I don't care if someone calls me fat (I am) I don't care if someone calls me a long haired hippy (I am) I just don't care. Some people need to get a grip with reality.
There are people getting killed all over the world, but someone shoves someone else cos they were tired, hungry and irritable (we've all been there) and all hell breaks loose.
JC, take a TG style show to Sky or wherever and let the BBC struggle to fill another hole in its budget
I am pleased to hear you dissing the 60s and 70s because they were unacceptable times. A lot of progress has been made (more to do clearly) since then, we certainly don't want to go backwards.
So a show criticizing cars... going to a commercial channel...er...carrying ads promoting cars. Conflict of interest possibly? Never going to happen. The ratings would dive too because of the switch of channels and the ads.
I am pleased to hear you dissing the 60s and 70s because they were unacceptable times. A lot of progress has been made (more to do clearly) since then, we certainly don't want to go backwards.
So a show criticizing cars... going to a commercial channel...er...carrying ads promoting cars. Conflict of interest possibly? Never going to happen. The ratings would dive too because of the switch of channels and the ads.
odd how it gets sold to loads of commercial channels overseas, then
it seems that the BBC may lose in more ways than one, if they cancel TG....
It seems the Clarkson controversy could have further consequences for the BBC. It is reported the corporation could face a multimillion-pound bill over its decision to suspend the presenter from its moneyspinning Top Gear show because foreign broadcasters may be eligible for compensation.
BBC Worldwide broadcasts Top Gear to an incredible 214 countries and it attracts a record global audience of 350 million viewers. So, if the service fails to deliver the final episodes of the series on time, it could face penalty payments.
I wish people would stop trotting this old cliche out - truth he is bigger than the BBC; he's it's biggest star, a massive draw in the UK and worldwide, and is instantly more recognisable than any BBC manager. And 'the law is the law' - no. A sensible approach is to find a resolution that suits all parties, and stops short of pulling the plug on TG.
No. That really is the wrong attitude.
The show is so big, we will forgive him anything? Completely wrong. The punishment should be identical, whether you are Clarkson, or the office junior.
If he were not on a final warning already, there might have been room for negotiation- but he has already used up all his lives.
'I don't want my favourite programme to come to an end' should make no difference at all.
The show is so big, we will forgive him anything? Completely wrong. The punishment should be identical, whether you are Clarkson, or the office junior.
If he were not on a final warning already, there might have been room for negotiation- but he has already used up all his lives.
'I don't want my favourite programme to come to an end' should make no difference at all.
Cobblers. We won't forgive him anything, but I'd forgive him a bit of argy-bargy sorry fracas in a pub after a long day's filming.
It'd take some fantastic mental gymnastics to interpret an offhand comment from a known professional wind up merchant to be a realistic threat.
Sounds like something the faux outrage brigade would do though.
Especially when you compare with some of the really offensive things that have been said by some of the people on the Left but it seems to be considered acceptable when it comes from them.
I wish people would stop trotting this old cliche out - truth he is bigger than the BBC; he's it's biggest star, a massive draw in the UK and worldwide, and is instantly more recognisable than any BBC manager. And 'the law is the law' - no. A sensible approach is to find a resolution that suits all parties, and stops short of pulling the plug on TG.
Two blokes had a fight that may or may not have involved a punch or maybe a slap. The punishment appears to be that TG is cancelled for the foreseeable future, and maybe permanently, depriving its fans of any new episodes. How is that a just punishment for the multi-millionaire protagonist and the victim?
A quick straw poll here shows almost unanimous support for Clarkson. My view is that blokes sometimes get involved in fights, and in most cases forget about it soon afterwards or hold a bit of a grudge. We don't get people sacked or the environment closed down, esp if doing that affects a few million people and potentially cancels a few worldwide shows that people are looking forward to.
He really isn't bigger than the BBC. Let's have some perspective. What ratings does the show get? 5 million? Plenty of BBC shows have changed presenter line-ups and in some cases, have been improved as a result. The removal of Clarkson could in fact attract a new audience who currently don't watch because of him.
No...the law is the law. No-one is above it...politicians...sportsmen...actors...bankers...tv presenters...lorry drivers. The law is for all of us and should be applied fairly to all of us. What mustn't happen is 'punishment' determined by someone's popularity or otherwise. Not on. What example would that set to wider society?
He really isn't bigger than the BBC. Let's have some perspective. What ratings does the show get? 5 million? Plenty of BBC shows have changed presenter line-ups and in some cases, have been improved as a result. The removal of Clarkson could in fact attract a new audience who currently don't watch because of him.
No...the law is the law. No-one is above it...politicians...sportsmen...actors...bankers...tv presenters...lorry drivers. The law is for all of us and should be applied fairly to all of us. What mustn't happen is 'punishment' determined by someone's popularity or otherwise. Not on. What example would that set to wider society?
I asked before, but again, what law are you referring to?
Cobblers. We won't forgive him anything, but I'd forgive him a bit of argy-bargy sorry fracas in a pub after a long day's filming.
It was a fight, not murder. Get some perspective.
Let's all have a fight with a work colleague then.
After Savile (and before you say it- yes that was something far worse) I don't think the BBC is in any mood to be seen to have different rules for different people.
He really isn't bigger than the BBC. Let's have some perspective. What ratings does the show get? 5 million? Plenty of BBC shows have changed presenter line-ups and in some cases, have been improved as a result. The removal of Clarkson could in fact attract a new audience who currently don't watch because of him.
No...the law is the law. No-one is above it...politicians...sportsmen...actors...bankers...tv presenters...lorry drivers. The law is for all of us and should be applied fairly to all of us. What mustn't happen is 'punishment' determined by someone's popularity or otherwise. Not on. What example would that set to wider society?
He really isn't bigger than the BBC. Let's have some perspective. What ratings does the show get? 5 million? Plenty of BBC shows have changed presenter line-ups and in some cases, have been improved as a result. The removal of Clarkson could in fact attract a new audience who currently don't watch because of him.
No...the law is the law. No-one is above it...politicians...sportsmen...actors...bankers...tv presenters...lorry drivers. The law is for all of us and should be applied fairly to all of us. What mustn't happen is 'punishment' determined by someone's popularity or otherwise. Not on. What example would that set to wider society?
You're determined to apply maximum punishment to a petty action. Punch - or maybe swung a punch? So what? No big deal in the end. Nobody dies, nobody suffered much and certainly not for any duration other than hurt pride. Blokes have been punching each other forever. It happens; live with it, don't go all 'aaaaaaaaaaaaaagggggggggggghhh call the police'. It's a squabble.
I was quite neutral on this till I started to read all of the anti-JC & anti-TG carp being spouted on here & elsewhere. Fair enough, if you don't like him that's your lookout not my loss. Sadly your sense of injustice at JC being on telly means the rest of us will probably lose out, because the law is the law, just like the 4 year old on her bike on the pavement was told the law is the law.
Gawd what's this country come to? A bit of a disagreement in a pub = close everything down.
Speculation - Here's what I think happened. There was no catering booked on the shoot to ironically, after all this, save money, though there had been catering on the previous day when Hammond and May were there. Clarkson wanted some food. Assistant Producer told him he could eat back at the hotel. Clarkson got irate with the producers response and shuck him. Ends up being reported as a "fracas"
Cobblers. We won't forgive him anything, but I'd forgive him a bit of argy-bargy sorry fracas in a pub after a long day's filming.
It was a fight, not murder. Get some perspective.
...but it is more than just him though isn't it. He works for the BBC...our public service broadcaster...that means the highest standards are expected all the time whether he is at work or otherwise...the same of course applying to all other public service workers. His behaviour (and I would argue his general attitude too) is incompatible with what I expect from our public servants.
Let's all have a fight with a work colleague then.
Fair enough. I have once, he just came at me, we ended up rolling around the car-park. Run to the boss shouting 'gggggrrrrrrrruuuuuuuuuuuu Andy hit me. Sack him"? Bolx. We hated each other, before & after. Still managed to work under the same roof though for another 3 years.
Comments
Two blokes had a fight that may or may not have involved a punch or maybe a slap. The punishment appears to be that TG is cancelled for the foreseeable future, and maybe permanently, depriving its fans of any new episodes. How is that a just punishment for the multi-millionaire protagonist and the victim?
A quick straw poll here shows almost unanimous support for Clarkson. My view is that blokes sometimes get involved in fights, and in most cases forget about it soon afterwards or hold a bit of a grudge. We don't get people sacked or the environment closed down, esp if doing that affects a few million people and potentially cancels a few worldwide shows that people are looking forward to.
What law applies here?
It's because filming wasn't finished - the star in a car, and the audience segments
I am pleased to hear you dissing the 60s and 70s because they were unacceptable times. A lot of progress has been made (more to do clearly) since then, we certainly don't want to go backwards.
So a show criticizing cars... going to a commercial channel...er...carrying ads promoting cars. Conflict of interest possibly? Never going to happen. The ratings would dive too because of the switch of channels and the ads.
If BBC management went and read this thread just now, They would pull that tonight and replace it with something else.
odd how it gets sold to loads of commercial channels overseas, then
No. That really is the wrong attitude.
The show is so big, we will forgive him anything? Completely wrong. The punishment should be identical, whether you are Clarkson, or the office junior.
If he were not on a final warning already, there might have been room for negotiation- but he has already used up all his lives.
'I don't want my favourite programme to come to an end' should make no difference at all.
The BBC would be foolish to try and continue without the three presenters.
Cobblers. We won't forgive him anything, but I'd forgive him a bit of argy-bargy sorry fracas in a pub after a long day's filming.
It was a fight, not murder. Get some perspective.
Especially when you compare with some of the really offensive things that have been said by some of the people on the Left but it seems to be considered acceptable when it comes from them.
He really isn't bigger than the BBC. Let's have some perspective. What ratings does the show get? 5 million? Plenty of BBC shows have changed presenter line-ups and in some cases, have been improved as a result. The removal of Clarkson could in fact attract a new audience who currently don't watch because of him.
No...the law is the law. No-one is above it...politicians...sportsmen...actors...bankers...tv presenters...lorry drivers. The law is for all of us and should be applied fairly to all of us. What mustn't happen is 'punishment' determined by someone's popularity or otherwise. Not on. What example would that set to wider society?
I asked before, but again, what law are you referring to?
Let's all have a fight with a work colleague then.
After Savile (and before you say it- yes that was something far worse) I don't think the BBC is in any mood to be seen to have different rules for different people.
worldwide - 350 million.
It's one of the biggest shows...
Pause
In the world
I was quite neutral on this till I started to read all of the anti-JC & anti-TG carp being spouted on here & elsewhere. Fair enough, if you don't like him that's your lookout not my loss. Sadly your sense of injustice at JC being on telly means the rest of us will probably lose out, because the law is the law, just like the 4 year old on her bike on the pavement was told the law is the law.
Gawd what's this country come to? A bit of a disagreement in a pub = close everything down.
...but it is more than just him though isn't it. He works for the BBC...our public service broadcaster...that means the highest standards are expected all the time whether he is at work or otherwise...the same of course applying to all other public service workers. His behaviour (and I would argue his general attitude too) is incompatible with what I expect from our public servants.
No-one is above the law...including Clarkson.
More likely they will have to pro rate the agreed fee based on the number of episodes they did deliver.
We've gone soft I tell ya.