He's free to explain himself. Just thought you would like the opportunity seeing you waded angrily in here slagging off my post but now you have quite clearly shown you have nothing to back up what you think is wrong with it. Another Clarkson fan who angrily tried to defend the indefensible and fails miserably.

He sold all the gold at knock-down prices, instigated a cycle of govt borrowing that went completely against his Golden Rule for investment, and was without doubt the most unwanted PM for a long while when he manoeuvred himself into power. He fits my idea of an idiot.

HTH.

Huh? I stated my opinion, that Clarkson isn't what some of you want to portray him as. Nothing to do with what other people wrote, I was defending Clarkson against unwarranted and unfounded slurs, that if you sit in a pub with him he'll attack you and racially abuse you.


Have a grab at this ....



...



...


straw.

You are angry Mr Boo. Relax.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UUH0w7ib8aI Not exactly bullying! The whole thing was a ill judged moment that without drawing blood would have simply been funny, by drawing blood it actually made it more entertaining because it was done on accident and not intended to hurt anyone.
Much like the almost horrific scene where one panellist had a sugar-glass wine glass that he "broke" by singing at it. On finding out it was sugar glass someone else threw theirs at the opposite side, before Fry shouted "No!! yours is real!" If that had impacted it would have been awful but not intended to hurt.

Not the professional media....professional reviewers have said it's a work in progress, with some comments about how rubbish the 2002 revamp was when it started....

There's been a mixed reaction from the professional reviewers, with most negative comments referring to the lack of change....that it's exactly the same as the JC version.

There may be someone somewhere being paid to call it a complete disaster....but that's not the overriding view from the professionals.

Top Gear is not a traditional car show any more....so serious car reviews will not be coming back, because as Jeremy Clarkson proved....they are boring....even he can't make them interesting...which is why larking around in cars was introduced....and that is going to stay.

The BBC aren't stupid...they know there is an anti BBC campaign, fuelled by the right wing press to undermine the BBC and Chris Evans, and Top Gear....and they know that something like this needs at least one full season to get to grips with.....So it will be given time....and as for the rest of the world... they don't really care about JC. They watched Top Gear because it was funny and stupid.

So thats still a no to explaining why it isn't silly to compare Clarkson punching someone to a soap opera character, the point I was making.

Show me a PM that hasn't made decisions we can all disagree with. What it doesn't do is make them an "idiot". At best it makes some of their decisions wrong in retrospect.

You don't get to be Prime Minister or Chancellor these days without having your wits about you.

James May says he is a fan of Flop Gear, well he has his tastes.

(edit)
Nvm it turns out he said nada,

The big difference here is that in 2002 the show was created by Clarkson and Wilman because the previous version had been cancelled. The started with a blank slate and had to create the format that became the success that it was.
The BBC has this blueprint for a show, it is theirs since Clarkson & Co sold it to them. There either was reinventing to be done, in which case someone could create a whole new show, or they could take the existing format and just find new characters to take up the helm. Simply put, the show itself shouldn't be a work in progress given the amount of it they have chosen to keep as near to the previous version as possible. But what has happened is that they have chosen to tweak the bits they have kept (that we know were popular and successful) just enough to make them worse and less entertaining.
Added on to this is the choice of main host &/or the way that host is presenting the show.

Yes, it's still a no. You're not getting a response from me to defend what someone else may have thought and may have written. At face value though and without going all the way back to find who said what & when, I can't see that that does stand up as an argument so award yourself a point for winning that argument. Well played sir.

What I was talking about was refuting the idea that spending time with Clarkson in a pub will result in physical and racial abuse.

I see now that the overwhelming view of the ordinary viewers who have en masse gone against the new version, counts for nothing against the professionals who review it differently. Fancy that. We're all wrong guys, only proper writers know the truth and can have an opinion.

It's light entertainment. We don't need a degree or 12 years journalistic experience to watch it and think jeez no thanks.

Well, at least Chris might get a titwank out of it:

http://www.mirror.co.uk/tv/tv-news/k...-gears-8087576

With friends like that....

The whole "If you didn't like this reboot then you must support Clarkson and his juvenile behaviour" is almost an argument as baffling as "If you don't like the Ghostbusters reboot then you're a misogynistic pig!".

Can we no longer dislike things simply because they're frankly utter shite? Does there have to be some ulterior motive that makes us horrible people for disliking something? It's just bizarre

Anyway, yes, Chris Evans trying far too hard over on Twitter to convince people his Top Gear reboot is a success when it so clearly isn't, the man very clearly has self confidence issues. If Top Gear itself isn't over by the end of this season, Chris Evans most likely will be. Seriously I have not seen one person speak highly of Evans but I *have* seen people speak highly of both LeBlanc and Sabine, so they should host together, get rid of Evans, if you have to have a Chris Evans in there then for gods sake get Captain America in already.

It's a work in progress because everyone is working together for the first time. Personalities will not come to the fore until everyone gets used to each other. It's not the format that needs changing per se.....but the format needs to be moulded around the personalities so that the show evolves into what it wants to be.

Therefore a good starting point is to inherit what Clarkson handed over, and take it from there.

That's what Clarkson did in 2002.

He discovered that people preferred mucking around in cars to reviewing cars. They tried hard to make car reviewing work, but it failed....

Clarkson's show borrows a lot from shows like TFI Friday....the 2002 show was traditional car reviews of ordinary cars and had about 20 people in the audience....

Jeremy Clarksons second series looked more like TFI Friday than an episode of traditional Top Gear......with tradiitonal car reviews dumped in favour of mucking around in cars.

What they produced in episode 1 was as good as anything Clarkson had done in the last series.....which has its problems because the Clarksons show became too contrived....so they need to reel that back in a bit....but it was a good start....

If they combine Extra Gear with Top Gear....reel in the overly contrived nature of the road trips....then it has the potential to be better than Clarksons show...

Perhaps it simply reflects the feelings about the show. If there is widespread criticism then it is wrong to expect there to be a balance provided by an equal number of positive articles (or vice-versa).

There is no campaign. Just people saying they don't like Evans or the new show. It's not a conspiracy, it's just personal taste. We are still allowed to have that, I think, unless there's been a secret EU ruling.

Yet clearly he doesn't know how to present TG, and sees it as a vehicle (no pun intended) for his own stardom.

Or maybe he does know how to present TG, the trouble being that he presents it how he wants (or the only way that he can, judging by the similarity between his presentational styles in other programmes), rather than what would be beneficial for the programme and the intended audience.

Was there ever any actual official statement or proof of 'punching' the persion? I thought that was just in the hysterical accounts in the tabloids which made it sound as if the poor chap was in intensive care. I saw a reference to 'verbal assault' in the official BBC report. I am sure if he had punched the man then we would have seen photographs of the injuries by the now but there is a complete absence of any.

I am not a Clarkson 'fan', he can make good programmes but was wasted on Top Gear rather than the grown up documentaries that he has made.

I loved Top Gear with JC, JM & RH and was sad to see them leave. I was curious to see how the new show would work out with Evans & Le Blanc so tuned in on Sunday keen to see....I'm afraid it fell very flat.
Evans was too shouty and manic, Le Blanc was as wooden as a character in acorn antiques. There was no chemistry, which is understandable as it's the first show. But there was no humour and everything seemed so fake & forced. How many more "jokes" can they make out of Matt not knowing city's in UK?
Top Gear used to be essential viewing for me, but after what I saw on Sunday it will no longer be, it's missing something which I don't think they can replace.
BBC made as mistake trying to recreate the show exactly as it was before, they should have looked at changing it so that it couldn't be seen as nothing more than an inferior remake.

Pretty much spot on.
I think Chris Evans is doing for Top Gear what Richard Hammond done for natural history programmes. RH Single-handedly ruined Planet Earth Live when he presented it a few years ago. He was simply the wrong choice. It seems the BBC never learn.

If the BBC eventually replace the shouty and annoying Chris Evans, will the critics say how brilliant the show is without Chris Evans and everything will be alright with Top Gear again?

Therefore he doesn't know how to do the job properly, but only presents any show in the manner of his choosing.

I think the new Top Gear will be just fine once the nerves settle down .

Still think they missed a trick in not having Rachel Riley as a co - host .

only made it about 35mins in then I got bored and turned off.

Thought the stars in the car section was absolutely crap, literally asked them first and best cars and that was it? was so bad (imo)

only part I thought was ok was the American airfield section with the german woman.

I don't quite get this "nerves" thing - CE is a seasoned, professional broadcaster and presenter, and has had live presenting experience over many years, both on TV and on radio. He has pioneered a few shows too. So this should all be second nature to him.

MLB is an actor, so should be used to remembering/reciting lines to a camera and in front of an audience (as well as being able to convey all forms of emotion)