When he could do the job properly there were people who liked him and people who didn't. The same will be the case of whoever takes over from him. You can't please all viewers, but this is more than a case if whether you like Bruce or not.
The point is that you wouldn't expect a surgeon to continue operating if he could no longer do the job, and although Bruce's job isn't as important or life-threatening as that, he can no longer do the job properly - and we're paying him for not doing it properly. Any employer can refuse to renew the contract of an employee who is no longer capable of carrying out their duties to an acceptable standard and this is the stage Bruce is at - and it will only get worse.
Besides which, whether you like him or not, I don't think anyone one wants him to be any more of an embarrassment than he was last season for his own sake.
I have no problem. I answered the opening post with my opinion and you gave your opinion to my post. Every time I have said something you have countered it for which I have had to explain, expand or elaborate.
I doubt if the many people who think that Bruce can't do his job properly would see a decision to not renew his contract as being 'hounded out of his job'.
Some might, which is why the BBC give the impression they want him to stay. The BBC can't cough these days unless someone complains.
Behind the scenes, as I've said, things might be very different.
When he could do the job properly there were people who liked him and people who didn't. The same will be the case of whoever takes over from him. You can't please all viewers, but this is more than a case if whether you like Bruce or not.
The point is that you wouldn't expect a surgeon to continue operating if he could no longer do the job, and although Bruce's job isn't as important or life-threatening as that, he can no longer do the job properly - and we're paying him for not doing it properly. Any employer can refuse to renew the contract of an employee who is no longer capable of carrying out their duties to an acceptable standard and this is the stage Bruce is at - and it will only get worse.
Besides which, whether you like him or not, I don't think anyone one wants him to be any more of an embarrassment than he was last season for his own sake.
Agreed especially with the BIB - I think I and others did try and hint that for his own good and the sake of his health that he should retire but others seem determined to bang on about 'ageism' as a reason for the BBC not to let him go. Even if there was a threat of the BBC being accused of 'ageism' - I don't think it's a good enough reason to hold on to Bruce.
Interestingly John McCririck has tried to kick up a media fuss because channel 4 let him go from their racing show - he's a controversial personality that divides opinion but from what I read their decision wasn't based on whether he could do his job or not but because they felt he was out of tune with the majority of the audience so they made the brave decision to axe him - from what I can see his cries of ageism have mostly been met with derision in the media! I don't know what will become of his legal case but I think a lot of people consider it a joke!
Bearing in mind the whole thing can be handled a lot better by Bruce and the BBC if a decision was made to retire him from the show without ageism being the issue. However, firstly someone at the BBC has to be brave enough to tell him he's no longer up to the job!
When he could do the job properly there were people who liked him and people who didn't. The same will be the case of whoever takes over from him. You can't please all viewers, but this is more than a case if whether you like Bruce or not.
The point is that you wouldn't expect a surgeon to continue operating if he could no longer do the job, and although Bruce's job isn't as important or life-threatening as that, he can no longer do the job properly - and we're paying him for not doing it properly. Any employer can refuse to renew the contract of an employee who is no longer capable of carrying out their duties to an acceptable standard and this is the stage Bruce is at - and it will only get worse.
Besides which, whether you like him or not, I don't think anyone one wants him to be any more of an embarrassment than he was last season for his own sake.
Hi Topaz and Janet43,
Keep plugging away with your sensible opinions - which I support 100% and suspect many lurkers also do - but it'll be a long conversation.
More and more people are going to throw the Pope's resignation at the BBC's head to support their demands that Strictly should be cleaned up of all dodgy elements such as geriatric presentation in a show that is viewed internationally (yes, internationally live on expensive cable TV channels).
Come this Autumn, let's hope that Tess will be finally let off the hook of PC propaganda and allowed to front the show on her own. Bring in Zoe Ball on the mezzanine if you must, but frankly, as far as presenting is concerned, "Less is More".
Just to clarify. I am a bit fed up of Bruce and sometimes he does slow down proceedings with his jokes, whether he told them well or not. It's his smugness and 'I'm important' attitude rather than him being doddery. However I know that this year or next will probably be his last so I am prepared to sit it out.
However I dread the idea of the BBC choosing someone who will stick around for years and years. An Anton or a Chris Evans/Chris Hollings would make me not watch possibly. There is always a worse option.
Hopefully it will be Graham Norton, who used to do the Andrew Lloyd Webber shows well enough. He'd fit in great. Or Paul O'Grady who would add a bit of comedy - especially banter towards Craig.
Keep plugging away with your sensible opinions - which I support 100% and suspect many lurkers also do - but it'll be a long conversation.
More and more people are going to throw the Pope's resignation at the BBC's head to support their demands that Strictly should be cleaned up of all dodgy elements such as geriatric presentation in a show that is viewed internationally (yes, internationally live on expensive cable TV channels).
Come this Autumn, let's hope that Tess will be finally let off the hook of PC propaganda and allowed to front the show on her own. Bring in Zoe Ball on the mezzanine if you must, but frankly, as far as presenting is concerned, "Less is More".
That in a nutshell is your problem - your rudeness! No worries though - it's more a reflection on you which is why I don't take your opinions seriously, so it's best to end it here with a civil agree to disagree
That in a nutshell is your problem - your rudeness! No worries though - it's more a reflection on you which is why I don't take your opinions seriously, so it's best to end it here with a civil agree to disagree
I'm not intentionally rude but when you are eternally challenging my own personal opinion, either by misinterpreting what I've said or changing the subject, I can only conclude you have a problem with me. I call that borderline baiting and there are rules against that.
My only issue in this thread has been the OP's suggestion that people should go to the BBC studio to chant "Get Bruce out" which in my opinion is ridiculous.
I'm not intentionally rude but when you are eternally challenging my own personal opinion, either by misinterpreting what I've said or changing the subject, I can only conclude you have a problem with me. I call that borderline baiting and there are rules against that.
My only issue in this thread has been the OP's suggestion that people should go to the BBC studio to chant "Get Bruce out" which in my opinion is ridiculous.
I'd say putting 'yawn' in your post and now creating groundless excuses for your rudeness is being intentionally rude and since you're quoting rules I'm sure you know there's rules against that too!
I've merely disagreed with some of your posts which you seem to object to and I don't feel I've misinterpreted what you've said or changed the subject! I've not set out to 'bait' or have an 'issue' with you.
You keep saying you have an issue with what the OP said in his post, that's fine - I don't!
I can only repeat the suggestion that I made earlier because it's now going around in circles & going off topic to agree to disagree civilly.
I'd say putting 'yawn' in your post and now creating groundless excuses for your rudeness is being intentionally rude and since you're quoting rules I'm sure you know there's rules against that too!
I've merely disagreed with some of your posts which you seem to object to and I don't feel I've misinterpreted what you've said or changed the subject! I've not set out to 'bait' or have an 'issue' with you.
You keep saying you have an issue with what the OP said in his post, that's fine - I don't!
I can only repeat the suggestion that I made earlier because it's now going around in circles & going off topic to agree to disagree civilly.
Hi Topaz, I don't often post around these parts due to people like the poster you quoted. I also like to have a bit of fun and discussion, but sometimes it seems threads get highjacked by "do-gooders" intent on ruining peoples enjoyment. Tall Paul has explained his situation many times and sometimes it feels like people mock him.
I was stunned by "the legend that is Bruce" being so horrid to the McFly boys last year (it may have been a bit mad but the guys are the best of friends), and found the forgetting and messing up of names this year quite rude. However nothing will ever be as rude as the whole "back off, back OFF!" debacle. It stole Louis and Flavia's moment, and really quite ruined it for me. I can't think of a suitable replacement though which I'm sure I'll be criticised for!
.............And if anyone is any doubt about the BBC's position regarding Sir Bruce:
BBC One controller Danny Cohen said: “Bruce is a living legend and an integral part of Strictly. He and only he will decide when it’s time to leave the ballroom.”
About as ringing an endorsement as possible I would have said. Makes your heart sing doesnt it!
No it makes mine sink - I think if you stick around long enough people get conned into thinking you're 'a living legend'. There's a cowardice here - the fear of being thought ageist, the fear that people will hate his successor more 'if it ain't don't fix it attitude' - the false belief that someone he is a part of a viewer appeal - I don't think most people who watch SCD actually care that much who's presenting it.
I've never had much love for the guy but every year he gets worse - he shoehorns his own 'act' into it so much these days that sometimes we don't get time to hear all of the judges comments on a dance and that's wrong - it's not HIS show and everyone including him needs to realise it.
S.C.D. is still a good idea as an entertainment-based show but is a tired format and It needs revamping. Only sweeping changes can freshen it up. I would have a new presenter - just the one, someone capable and alert and quick-witted should things go wrong on a live programme. I'd do away with the 'Tesspit' altogether; it wasn't needed on the Tour and neither was a male co-presenter. If all the current faces were to be replaced together, Bruce and his admirers wouldn't feel that this was unacceptable. My only other change would be to have total honesty in the new judges' marking and comments - i.e. they be hired to judge dancing/footwork with integrity and with no manipulation of the scoring, gushing over poor dancers, finding fault with excellent ones, trying to ensure that average ones stay in the competition for ulterior reasons, etc.
Hi Topaz, I don't often post around these parts due to people like the poster you quoted. I also like to have a bit of fun and discussion, but sometimes it seems threads get highjacked by "do-gooders" intent on ruining peoples enjoyment. Tall Paul has explained his situation many times and sometimes it feels like people mock him.
I was stunned by "the legend that is Bruce" being so horrid to the McFly boys last year (it may have been a bit mad but the guys are the best of friends), and found the forgetting and messing up of names this year quite rude. However nothing will ever be as rude as the whole "back off, back OFF!" debacle. It stole Louis and Flavia's moment, and really quite ruined it for me. I can't think of a suitable replacement though which I'm sure I'll be criticised for!
Hello danishdancer
Thanks for your support - it's nice to 'meet' another friendly poster I know what happens on forums sometimes can put people off posting so I'm glad you decided to post despite it.
Tall Paul is indeed harmless so imo there's no need to worry about his posts or comments and anyway the mods are here to deal with anything that crosses the line. He has his own style - which maybe melodramatic, I don't always agree with him but he can be funny and he does make some very valid points. I only found out recently about his situation from another thread, I wasn't sure whether to bring it up here - but he's stated it on his public profile anyway - and that maybe partly why he expresses himself the way he does. I really don't think he meant any harm by his OP and anyway it's got many of us commenting and generated some interesting posts which is what the forum is for.
Yes I'd say it was last series and particularly in the final that was the last straw for me too, I gave Bruce the benefit of the doubt the year before for having a go at the McFly boys running on to the floor because it was unexpected but I agree he spoilt the winning moment for Louis and Flavia and celebs/dancers who'd wanted to congratulate them. Along with all the other faults that you and other posters have mentioned it just ruins what is a really good show.
No it makes mine sink - I think if you stick around long enough people get conned into thinking you're 'a living legend'. There's a cowardice here - the fear of being thought ageist, the fear that people will hate his successor more 'if it ain't don't fix it attitude' - the false belief that someone he is a part of a viewer appeal - I don't think most people who watch SCD actually care that much who's presenting it.
I've never had much love for the guy but every year he gets worse - he shoehorns his own 'act' into it so much these days that sometimes we don't get time to hear all of the judges comments on a dance and that's wrong - it's not HIS show and everyone including him needs to realise it.
Yes your post sums up how I feel about the situation katmobile. Although I like Bruce - I've never bought into the 'tv legend', 'national institution' hype around him - and the BBC statement is just wrong imo especially in the light of his abysmal performance last series..
When the time comes for Bruce to step down, I’m not that bothered who presents Strictly either – as long as it's someone different to him and they can present, they have a pleasant personality and not an overbearing one and they have a love for the show then that’s all that matters to me - because to me the show is about the dancers and celebs not the presenters!
Comments
The point is that you wouldn't expect a surgeon to continue operating if he could no longer do the job, and although Bruce's job isn't as important or life-threatening as that, he can no longer do the job properly - and we're paying him for not doing it properly. Any employer can refuse to renew the contract of an employee who is no longer capable of carrying out their duties to an acceptable standard and this is the stage Bruce is at - and it will only get worse.
Besides which, whether you like him or not, I don't think anyone one wants him to be any more of an embarrassment than he was last season for his own sake.
I have no problem. I answered the opening post with my opinion and you gave your opinion to my post. Every time I have said something you have countered it for which I have had to explain, expand or elaborate.
Some might, which is why the BBC give the impression they want him to stay. The BBC can't cough these days unless someone complains.
Behind the scenes, as I've said, things might be very different.
Your turn, I suppose. (yawn).
Agreed especially with the BIB - I think I and others did try and hint that for his own good and the sake of his health that he should retire but others seem determined to bang on about 'ageism' as a reason for the BBC not to let him go. Even if there was a threat of the BBC being accused of 'ageism' - I don't think it's a good enough reason to hold on to Bruce.
Interestingly John McCririck has tried to kick up a media fuss because channel 4 let him go from their racing show - he's a controversial personality that divides opinion but from what I read their decision wasn't based on whether he could do his job or not but because they felt he was out of tune with the majority of the audience so they made the brave decision to axe him - from what I can see his cries of ageism have mostly been met with derision in the media! I don't know what will become of his legal case but I think a lot of people consider it a joke!
Bearing in mind the whole thing can be handled a lot better by Bruce and the BBC if a decision was made to retire him from the show without ageism being the issue. However, firstly someone at the BBC has to be brave enough to tell him he's no longer up to the job!
Hi Topaz and Janet43,
Keep plugging away with your sensible opinions - which I support 100% and suspect many lurkers also do - but it'll be a long conversation.
More and more people are going to throw the Pope's resignation at the BBC's head to support their demands that Strictly should be cleaned up of all dodgy elements such as geriatric presentation in a show that is viewed internationally (yes, internationally live on expensive cable TV channels).
Come this Autumn, let's hope that Tess will be finally let off the hook of PC propaganda and allowed to front the show on her own. Bring in Zoe Ball on the mezzanine if you must, but frankly, as far as presenting is concerned, "Less is More".
However I dread the idea of the BBC choosing someone who will stick around for years and years. An Anton or a Chris Evans/Chris Hollings would make me not watch possibly. There is always a worse option.
Hopefully it will be Graham Norton, who used to do the Andrew Lloyd Webber shows well enough. He'd fit in great. Or Paul O'Grady who would add a bit of comedy - especially banter towards Craig.
Hi komeintaightor
Nice to see some civil posters around here
That in a nutshell is your problem - your rudeness! No worries though - it's more a reflection on you which is why I don't take your opinions seriously, so it's best to end it here with a civil agree to disagree
I'm not intentionally rude but when you are eternally challenging my own personal opinion, either by misinterpreting what I've said or changing the subject, I can only conclude you have a problem with me. I call that borderline baiting and there are rules against that.
My only issue in this thread has been the OP's suggestion that people should go to the BBC studio to chant "Get Bruce out" which in my opinion is ridiculous.
I've merely disagreed with some of your posts which you seem to object to and I don't feel I've misinterpreted what you've said or changed the subject! I've not set out to 'bait' or have an 'issue' with you.
You keep saying you have an issue with what the OP said in his post, that's fine - I don't!
I can only repeat the suggestion that I made earlier because it's now going around in circles & going off topic to agree to disagree civilly.
Hi Topaz, I don't often post around these parts due to people like the poster you quoted. I also like to have a bit of fun and discussion, but sometimes it seems threads get highjacked by "do-gooders" intent on ruining peoples enjoyment. Tall Paul has explained his situation many times and sometimes it feels like people mock him.
I was stunned by "the legend that is Bruce" being so horrid to the McFly boys last year (it may have been a bit mad but the guys are the best of friends), and found the forgetting and messing up of names this year quite rude. However nothing will ever be as rude as the whole "back off, back OFF!" debacle. It stole Louis and Flavia's moment, and really quite ruined it for me. I can't think of a suitable replacement though which I'm sure I'll be criticised for!
No it makes mine sink - I think if you stick around long enough people get conned into thinking you're 'a living legend'. There's a cowardice here - the fear of being thought ageist, the fear that people will hate his successor more 'if it ain't don't fix it attitude' - the false belief that someone he is a part of a viewer appeal - I don't think most people who watch SCD actually care that much who's presenting it.
I've never had much love for the guy but every year he gets worse - he shoehorns his own 'act' into it so much these days that sometimes we don't get time to hear all of the judges comments on a dance and that's wrong - it's not HIS show and everyone including him needs to realise it.
I feel that there are better candidates.
Thanks for your support - it's nice to 'meet' another friendly poster
Tall Paul is indeed harmless so imo there's no need to worry about his posts or comments and anyway the mods are here to deal with anything that crosses the line. He has his own style - which maybe melodramatic, I don't always agree with him but he can be funny and he does make some very valid points. I only found out recently about his situation from another thread, I wasn't sure whether to bring it up here - but he's stated it on his public profile anyway - and that maybe partly why he expresses himself the way he does. I really don't think he meant any harm by his OP and anyway it's got many of us commenting and generated some interesting posts which is what the forum is for.
Yes I'd say it was last series and particularly in the final that was the last straw for me too, I gave Bruce the benefit of the doubt the year before for having a go at the McFly boys running on to the floor because it was unexpected but I agree he spoilt the winning moment for Louis and Flavia and celebs/dancers who'd wanted to congratulate them. Along with all the other faults that you and other posters have mentioned it just ruins what is a really good show.
Yes your post sums up how I feel about the situation katmobile. Although I like Bruce - I've never bought into the 'tv legend', 'national institution' hype around him - and the BBC statement is just wrong imo especially in the light of his abysmal performance last series..
When the time comes for Bruce to step down, I’m not that bothered who presents Strictly either – as long as it's someone different to him and they can present, they have a pleasant personality and not an overbearing one and they have a love for the show then that’s all that matters to me - because to me the show is about the dancers and celebs not the presenters!