It's just a sign of the times (and not a very good sign) that this can be headline news, get close on a million people signing a petition and morons hounding the producer.
Eh? So anyone who doesn't like Clarkson has an agenda, apart from Kap, who doesn't like Clarkson either, but doesn't have an agenda. What kind of half-arsed logic is that?
Anyway, no ones getting het up about Clarkson. If he's done anything sackable, then fingers crossed he'll get what he deserves. If not, no big deal, he'll be back on your screen and you can enjoy your weekly dose of casual racism, lazy stereotypes and lame dad humour once again.
I did a search on myself... I've made 17 posts (not including this one or any that are to follow) about him in total in the entire time I've posted on this forum... I guess that's enough to make an agenda in Maw's book. Hey ho.
I could not care less about him nor the programme.
However I care about the BBCs recently instituted policy of zero tolerance from managers and stars who abuse their colleagues , including verbal abuse, I'm waiting to see how they get round that and what reasons they come up with . Is that an agenda ?
I did a search on myself... I've made 17 posts (not including this one or any that are to follow) about him in total in the entire time I've posted on this forum... I guess that's enough to make an agenda in Maw's book. Hey ho.
In some people's eyes, unless you declare an oath of allegiance to Clarkson, you have an agenda against him.
Not saying that's necessarily true of MAW, but it definitely is the case for many.
In some people's eyes, unless you declare an oath of allegiance to Clarkson, you have an agenda against him.
Not saying that's necessarily true of MAW, but it definitely is the case for many.
Ahhh Blue... what can we do... we've been outed as dishonest detractors The crime of commenting on a topical story is a dreadful one indeed. If it's not pro-Clarkson or by the Kappmeister that is
Fortunately for me Clarkson amuses me and I'm able to take his act with a pinch of salt.
It's also amusing to see those who don't like him or find him funny incandescent with modern moral outrage at his misdemeanours.
I think the effect social media had on Ross and Brand has fired up a new phenomenon of getting people sacked for things that previously would have gone by hardly noticed.
Every action has an equal and opposite reaction so the support shown via the petition is perhaps a sign that some are a bit bored with it all now which of course only serves to make others seethe in frustration (judging by the sentiments expressed in this thread).
Surely if you enjoy something, the fact it could drastically change or cease must make you give a little bit of a toss surely?
Why do people say weird contradictory things?
I don't find that contradictory - it is possible to like a programme and not be overly bothered if the presenters change. It depends what parts of the show you enjoy and whether you think they would be spoiled if a different person presented them... I personally think TG would be very different without Clarkson but I don't see why it couldn't still be a good programme.
Fortunately for me Clarkson amuses me and I'm able to take his act with a pinch of salt.
It's also amusing to see those who don't like him or find him funny incandescent with modern moral outrage at his misdemeanours.
I think the effect social media had on Ross and Brand has fired up a new phenomenon of getting people sacked for things that previously would have gone by hardly noticed.
Every action has an equal and opposite reaction so the support shown via the petition is perhaps a sign that some are a bit bored with it all now which of course only serves to make others seethe in frustration (judging by the sentiments expressed in this thread).
To be fair, if he did punch someone in the way that has been described in the story linked just above that wouldn't be a misdemeanour - I can't think of a company I have worked for that wouldn't sack someone who did that (I am not saying he did by the way).
There is a limit to what is acceptable and no-one should be given a free pass just because they are popular amongst the viewing public (or make lots of money for their company for that matter). Bullying and harassing people because you are in a more senior position (whether a manager or a famous TV presenter) is something small people do and they don't deserve anything but contempt and certainly not support.
IF this is true he is toast. But sadly it should never ever come to this where so called stars treat junior staff like s***. He has been allowed so much leeway for so long his ego is huge, he has gotten away with all sorts of crap because everyone was afraid to lose the golden goose. Hell mend the BBC , if all of the allegations are true.
Strikes me as a bit odd that someone can allegedly do what he's accused of doing and then act in the manner that he's acted since the incident, all blase and 'supremely relaxed' without any guilt, with the allegations stated in that article being true. He's obviously a bigger c*** than I thought, if that's true.
But him and TG is still my favourite thing on the box
IF this is true he is toast. But sadly it should never ever come to this where so called stars treat junior staff like s***. He has been allowed so much leeway for so long his ego is huge, he has gotten away with all sorts of crap because everyone was afraid to lose the golden goose. Hell mend the BBC , if all of the allegations are true.
Indeed. A sad example of how money talks. The BBC has made a rod for its own back by tolerating the repulsive man for so long.
Fortunately for me Clarkson amuses me and I'm able to take his act with a pinch of salt.
It's also amusing to see those who don't like him or find him funny incandescent with modern moral outrage at his misdemeanours.
I think the effect social media had on Ross and Brand has fired up a new phenomenon of getting people sacked for things that previously would have gone by hardly noticed.
Every action has an equal and opposite reaction so the support shown via the petition is perhaps a sign that some are a bit bored with it all now which of course only serves to make others seethe in frustration (judging by the sentiments expressed in this thread).
If what has been suggested - that he threw a punch at a fellow BBC employee - is true, then he deserves to be sacked for gross misconduct, as would any other member of staff in any other organisation you care to mention. You really can't go around lamping people at work because you're pissed off.
The fact that it was allegedly thrown by Clarkson, should really make no difference to the outcome, otherwise someone else at the BBC might subsequently do the same and argue that if Clarkson wasn't sacked, why should they be.
The most remarkable thing in that whole article for me is this bit:
After the row ended, Clarkson is believed to have been placated with a £21.95 steak cooked for him by the hotel’s general manager Robert Scott.
as opposed to the general manager calling in the police as you would think they normally would when one guest physically and verbally assaults another guest.....:o
Comments
All round pathetic really.
I did a search on myself... I've made 17 posts (not including this one or any that are to follow) about him in total in the entire time I've posted on this forum... I guess that's enough to make an agenda in Maw's book. Hey ho.
However I care about the BBCs recently instituted policy of zero tolerance from managers and stars who abuse their colleagues , including verbal abuse, I'm waiting to see how they get round that and what reasons they come up with . Is that an agenda ?
In some people's eyes, unless you declare an oath of allegiance to Clarkson, you have an agenda against him.
Not saying that's necessarily true of MAW, but it definitely is the case for many.
Ahhh Blue... what can we do... we've been outed as dishonest detractors
Couldn't give a toss if Clarkson stays or goes.
Surely if you enjoy something, the fact it could drastically change or cease must make you give a little bit of a toss surely?
Why do people say weird contradictory things?
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/entertainment/celebrity/jeremy-clarkson-called-top-gear-5330155
It's also amusing to see those who don't like him or find him funny incandescent with modern moral outrage at his misdemeanours.
I think the effect social media had on Ross and Brand has fired up a new phenomenon of getting people sacked for things that previously would have gone by hardly noticed.
Every action has an equal and opposite reaction so the support shown via the petition is perhaps a sign that some are a bit bored with it all now which of course only serves to make others seethe in frustration (judging by the sentiments expressed in this thread).
I don't find that contradictory - it is possible to like a programme and not be overly bothered if the presenters change. It depends what parts of the show you enjoy and whether you think they would be spoiled if a different person presented them... I personally think TG would be very different without Clarkson but I don't see why it couldn't still be a good programme.
To be fair, if he did punch someone in the way that has been described in the story linked just above that wouldn't be a misdemeanour - I can't think of a company I have worked for that wouldn't sack someone who did that (I am not saying he did by the way).
There is a limit to what is acceptable and no-one should be given a free pass just because they are popular amongst the viewing public (or make lots of money for their company for that matter). Bullying and harassing people because you are in a more senior position (whether a manager or a famous TV presenter) is something small people do and they don't deserve anything but contempt and certainly not support.
IF this is true he is toast. But sadly it should never ever come to this where so called stars treat junior staff like s***. He has been allowed so much leeway for so long his ego is huge, he has gotten away with all sorts of crap because everyone was afraid to lose the golden goose. Hell mend the BBC , if all of the allegations are true.
But him and TG is still my favourite thing on the box
Game, set and match.
Posted here. 1559 above.
As others have said, if the contents of the article are true then he's finished on the BBC!
Indeed. A sad example of how money talks. The BBC has made a rod for its own back by tolerating the repulsive man for so long.
So this is what it's about to you? Wow! Clarkson supporters .v. anti-Clarkson supporters? Just wow
The Stig too. Arsehole.
Most reports indicate they were with him earlier in the day, but not at the hotel.
May's interview was ambiguous , to say the least. He was he said to drunk at the time.
If what has been suggested - that he threw a punch at a fellow BBC employee - is true, then he deserves to be sacked for gross misconduct, as would any other member of staff in any other organisation you care to mention. You really can't go around lamping people at work because you're pissed off.
The fact that it was allegedly thrown by Clarkson, should really make no difference to the outcome, otherwise someone else at the BBC might subsequently do the same and argue that if Clarkson wasn't sacked, why should they be.
The most remarkable thing in that whole article for me is this bit:
as opposed to the general manager calling in the police as you would think they normally would when one guest physically and verbally assaults another guest.....:o
He's not exactly going to say anything to a doorstepper is he? I'd say the same "Too pissed, can't remember sorry"