Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Even Piers Morgan is backing Garry Lineker – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 11,002
edited March 2023 in General
Even Piers Morgan is backing Garry Lineker – politicalbetting.com

Bad news @GaryLineker – I’m your defence. ?? https://t.co/1XEniEhFyO

Read the full story here

«13456

Comments

  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 20,695
    edited March 2023
    First (unlike Leftie Lineker)
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,164
    Defund the BBC now!
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,080
    Hardly to his credit
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,517
    Is Piers Morgan defending Lineker meant to make Lineker's case stronger or weaker? ;)
  • murali_smurali_s Posts: 3,037
    Who isn’t with Lineker?

    Just the BBC, Cruella and the rest of the Tory filth who stands against Lineker.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,392
    At least Piers is self aware, to a degree, per his tweet.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 25,045
    @kamski Jimmy Savile was a Liberal supporter, he did a PPP with Jeremy Thorpe. He was not a committed Tory.
  • pingping Posts: 3,724
    FPT
    kle4 said:

    Whilst BBC management must be hating all this the BBC news team must be having a good time - nothing they love more than reporting about the BBC, on the BBC.

    One thing we can all agree on:

    It is the weirdest of weird organisations.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,517
    Labour: “The BBC’s cowardly decision to take Gary Lineker off air is an assault on free speech in the face of political pressure. Tory politicians lobbying to get people sacked for disagreeing with Government policies should be laughed at, not pandered to. BBC should rethink.”

    https://twitter.com/Peston/status/1634251332717776896

    Hmmm. Peston might remember the whole Kelly farrago, and Campbell's dirty little hands in it:
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/3459141.stm
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,770

    @kamski Jimmy Savile was a Liberal supporter, he did a PPP with Jeremy Thorpe. He was not a committed Tory.

    A PPB that can be watched in full here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t1RN0BQsBsE&ab_channel=futureisgosub

    To be fair, if you wanted to hang around with people with... how to put this... sexual baggage, then the 1970s Liberal Party Parliamentary Party was the place to be.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,709
    edited March 2023
    Has OGH also disclosed he was a former LD parliamentary candidate and LD county and district councillor? Not that much of a surprise he and former Daily Mirror editor Piers Morgan back Lineker in his tweets hostile to a relatively unpopular Tory government
  • pingping Posts: 3,724
    I wonder what Nilüfer Demir makes of it all?

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nilüfer_Demir

    The power of photojournalism.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 27,835
    So. Who's gonna be on MOTD?
    Will it even happen?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 116,709
    edited March 2023

    @kamski Jimmy Savile was a Liberal supporter, he did a PPP with Jeremy Thorpe. He was not a committed Tory.

    You can watch Saville with Thorpe here
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t1RN0BQsBsE

    He also went to Chequers with the Blairs as he had done with the Thatchers, he was basically a Libertarian who sucked up to the powerful and establishment, which is not much of a surprise
    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2487217/Jimmy-Savile-harassed-music-boss-wife-Chequers-dinner-party-hosted-Tony-Blair.html
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 8,092
    Lineker was never booked on the field. Now it looks like he won't be booked off it.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,770
    I'm not sure the BBC should exist. But he's not a news presenter, he's a sports presenter. And he's allowed to have his own views (however foolish) and to disseminate them on Twitter.
  • EPGEPG Posts: 5,996
    HYUFD said:

    Has OGH also disclosed he was a former LD parliamentary candidate and LD county and district councillor? Not that much of a surprise he and former Daily Mirror editor Piers Morgan back Lineker in his tweets hostile to a relatively unpopular Tory government

    Of course he has "disclosed" that. How else did you know?
  • TresTres Posts: 2,161
    View from America:
    'If you’re wondering what happened in the uk, imagine that Trump was Prez and he got the host of Monday night football fired because that former QB called him out for saying some horrid fascist level stuff. And you’d still only be part way into how crazy this poor country is now"
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 14,086
    Tres said:

    Davie and Sharpe surely have to go.

    They should go, but how many times since 2019 have we said "X surely has to go"? And how many times have they actually gone?
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 24,585
    HYUFD said:

    Has OGH also disclosed he was a former LD parliamentary candidate and LD county and district councillor? Not that much of a surprise he and former Daily Mirror editor Piers Morgan back Lineker in his tweets hostile to a relatively unpopular Tory government

    Unpopular? You and AndyJS had the Tories barely behind Labour in the last thread if you take Labour's lowest poll and the Tories highest into account.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,517
    rcs1000 said:

    @kamski Jimmy Savile was a Liberal supporter, he did a PPP with Jeremy Thorpe. He was not a committed Tory.

    A PPB that can be watched in full here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t1RN0BQsBsE&ab_channel=futureisgosub

    To be fair, if you wanted to hang around with people with... how to put this... sexual baggage, then the 1970s Liberal Party Parliamentary Party was the place to be.
    People like Saville, or even Epstein, like being around power. Because power brings money, influence and a certain amount of protection. They will therefore gravitate towards whoever has power at that time. Because that's the way they operate.

    Like Donald Trump sucking up the Clintons in the 1990s.
  • StockyStocky Posts: 9,653
    edited March 2023
    murali_s said:

    Who isn’t with Lineker?

    Just the BBC, Cruella and the rest of the Tory filth who stands against Lineker.

    They stand against the specifics of what he said. But the more liberal wing, at least, are not against his freedom to say what he likes. They should be out criticising the BBC over this.

    Interesting that those on the illiberal left love cancel culture until someone who says what they think is cancelled - then they turn on a sixpence.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 24,585
    rcs1000 said:

    I'm not sure the BBC should exist. But he's not a news presenter, he's a sports presenter. And he's allowed to have his own views (however foolish) and to disseminate them on Twitter.

    Not if they p*ss off Suella, he's not!
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 20,695
    edited March 2023
    HYUFD said:

    @kamski Jimmy Savile was a Liberal supporter, he did a PPP with Jeremy Thorpe. He was not a committed Tory.

    You can watch Saville with Thorpe here
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t1RN0BQsBsE

    He also went to Chequers with the Blairs as he had done with the Thatchers, he was basically a Libertarian who sucked up to the powerful and establishment, which is not much of a surprise
    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2487217/Jimmy-Savile-harassed-music-boss-wife-Chequers-dinner-party-hosted-Tony-Blair.html
    Saville, like most predators, was very good are ingratiating himself with people who may one day be "helpful" to him.

    He was one of the ultimate masters of being able to play the game... He probably didn't have any true allegiances other than in the sense of what XYZ could do for him.
  • StockyStocky Posts: 9,653
    By the way, this cancelling of free speech is just the sort of thing that Ed Davey should be pouncing on.

    Any news yet?
  • solarflaresolarflare Posts: 3,623
    dixiedean said:

    So. Who's gonna be on MOTD?
    Will it even happen?

    Hmm. Some ideas:

    The Beeb get three randomers off the street who'll do it for a fraction of the cost and probably be glad to do so
    They do a MOTD Spitting Image puppets satire edition
    They cut back between match edits to an empty studio where the only noise is a porn sex moan through a mobile phone
    They get Ron Manager from the Fast Show to appear

    The list is endless! They should be happy this opportunity to shake up the format has arisen. Probably.
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 15,234
    Stocky said:

    murali_s said:

    Who isn’t with Lineker?

    Just the BBC, Cruella and the rest of the Tory filth who stands against Lineker.

    They stand against the specifics of what he said. But the more liberal wing, at least, are not against his freedom to say what he likes. They should be out criticising the BBC over this.

    Interesting that those on the illiberal left love cancel culture until someone who says what they think is cancelled - then they turn on a sixpence.
    Sadly - and naturally - this works both ways.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,517
    murali_s said:

    Who isn’t with Lineker?

    Just the BBC, Cruella and the rest of the Tory filth who stands against Lineker.

    Well, I'm not BBC or Cruella. And I don't think Lineker's in the right here - especially if what the BBC has said is correct.

    I don't think I'm 'Tory filth' either.
  • StockyStocky Posts: 9,653
    edited March 2023

    Stocky said:

    murali_s said:

    Who isn’t with Lineker?

    Just the BBC, Cruella and the rest of the Tory filth who stands against Lineker.

    They stand against the specifics of what he said. But the more liberal wing, at least, are not against his freedom to say what he likes. They should be out criticising the BBC over this.

    Interesting that those on the illiberal left love cancel culture until someone who says what they think is cancelled - then they turn on a sixpence.
    Sadly - and naturally - this works both ways.
    Indeed. As we are seeing.

    Dispassionate rationalism is in short supply.
  • TazTaz Posts: 10,703
    murali_s said:

    Who isn’t with Lineker?

    Just the BBC, Cruella and the rest of the Tory filth who stands against Lineker.

    😂😂😂😂🤡
  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 14,911
    EPG said:

    HYUFD said:

    Has OGH also disclosed he was a former LD parliamentary candidate and LD county and district councillor? Not that much of a surprise he and former Daily Mirror editor Piers Morgan back Lineker in his tweets hostile to a relatively unpopular Tory government

    Of course he has "disclosed" that. How else did you know?
    There's probably a dossier somewhere containing a list of all the traitors and enemies of the party.
  • murali_smurali_s Posts: 3,037
    rcs1000 said:

    I'm not sure the BBC should exist. But he's not a news presenter, he's a sports presenter. And he's allowed to have his own views (however foolish) and to disseminate them on Twitter.

    Nothing foolish about calling out an immoral and flawed policy. Where is SKS? Nowhere as usual!
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,014
    Lineker is a prick.
  • WhisperingOracleWhisperingOracle Posts: 8,480
    edited March 2023
    Tres said:

    Davie and Sharpe surely have to go.

    Indeed. But only a year and a half ago Johnson was still trying to have Paul Dacre installed at either the BBC or Ofcom ; whichever one could be fixed more easily, so I doubt the government will help too much in this in working to reinforce BBC's credibility, here.

    Starmer could show leadership in a year or two by bringing an end to all this nonsense, and changing not only things like the honours systems, the lords and the voting system, but bringing an end to all this quasi-banana state nonsense in the BBC's susceptibility to political patronage.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,392
    I think Piers' best point (blimey, that was a weird things to note) was that it's just silly to pretend that people like Lineker exist in some sealed BBC bubble.

    It's not a bad idea in theory for BBC employees in general to maintain political impartiality, but get away from the news sector of it, and especially up to the big celebrity end, and restricting them is just not going to work - is anyone going to be in any doubt that Lineker despises the government if he happens not to say it a lot from now on?

    Basically they might as well give up and just focus on keeping the news field impartial.
  • TazTaz Posts: 10,703
    Tres said:

    Davie and Sharpe surely have to go.

    Pat Sharp has already stood down.😱
  • StockyStocky Posts: 9,653

    Lineker is a prick.

    I quite like him but I think he postures. I don't believe he is actually the lefty that he sometimes presents himself as.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,014
    rcs1000 said:

    I'm not sure the BBC should exist. But he's not a news presenter, he's a sports presenter. And he's allowed to have his own views (however foolish) and to disseminate them on Twitter.

    He is, but right now with the BBC he's trying to have his cake and eat it.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 25,045
    @kamski apologies for tagging you in to the above post - it was meant for @OnlyLivingBoy
    GIN1138 said:

    HYUFD said:

    @kamski Jimmy Savile was a Liberal supporter, he did a PPP with Jeremy Thorpe. He was not a committed Tory.

    You can watch Saville with Thorpe here
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t1RN0BQsBsE

    He also went to Chequers with the Blairs as he had done with the Thatchers, he was basically a Libertarian who sucked up to the powerful and establishment, which is not much of a surprise
    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2487217/Jimmy-Savile-harassed-music-boss-wife-Chequers-dinner-party-hosted-Tony-Blair.html
    Saville, like most predators, was very good are ingratiating himself with people who may one day be "helpful" to him.

    He was one of the ultimate masters of being able to play the game... He probably didn't have any true allegiances other than in the sense of what XYZ could do for him.
    He certainly made an odd choice with the 1970's liberals then. I'm inclined to think RCS's theory is right.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 27,835
    Feels like this may be a pivotal moment.
    The authority of the government and Daily Mail draining away entirely.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 48,916

    Lineker is a prick.

    OK... so, even if he is a prick, how is cancelling him gonna solve the Small Boats problem?
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 15,234
    Stocky said:

    By the way, this cancelling of free speech is just the sort of thing that Ed Davey should be pouncing on.

    Any news yet?

    Ed Who?
  • Northern_AlNorthern_Al Posts: 7,459
    edited March 2023
    Once we've had a few weeks of Nicholas Witchell presenting MotD, everybody will be begging for Gary and his mates to return.
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 20,695

    Lineker is a prick.

    He was very cocky when interviewed outside his house yesterday. Bet he's not so cocky now lol... ;)
  • stodge said:

    I commented last evening Lineker's initial tweet was intemperate but that's now being matched by the response.

    Are we to believe Lineker is such an influential figure his every utterance is of cosmic import? I don't think so either.

    After nearly 14 years in Government, you have to expect a little criticism and negative comment - the notion of popular acclaim and rose petals strewn where'er a Minister strides is fanciful in extremis.

    The other side is the extent to which Lineker, as a BBC employee, is bound by the charter of the Corporation. Does a individual, posting from their own Twitter account, speak for the organisation for whom they work?

    That leads to the question of whether the BBC should be neutral or impartial and there's a big difference between the two. Neutrality is more about saying nothing - impartiality is showing both sides of an argument and allowing the viewer/listener to make up their own mind.

    I don't want to be told what to think by any news organisation - indeed, as soon as a news outlet says they are "fair and balanced" I assume the very opposite is the case. I'm happy to hear the arguments from both sides and indeed all sides - the role of the investigator is to ask the difficult questions, probe the weaknesses and uncover the fallacies in the argument. That's what I want the BBC to do (because Sky, GB News and Talk TV won't).

    Asking questions about the legislation, asking questions about the £500 million we are handing over to France to help them stop the boats - that's how democracy works and that's how political decisions should be questioned.

    Lineker is irrelevant to this - he's a football pundit. A more self-confident Government would ignore his views - a more self-confident BBC would ignore the calls of Government supporters and treat it as an internal matter. The fact both have seen fit to respond as they have speaks volumes.

    Excellent post
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,014
    Tres said:

    View from America:
    'If you’re wondering what happened in the uk, imagine that Trump was Prez and he got the host of Monday night football fired because that former QB called him out for saying some horrid fascist level stuff. And you’d still only be part way into how crazy this poor country is now"

    So, this view is a hyperbolic tweet from a leftwing American twitter account then?
  • Stocky said:

    By the way, this cancelling of free speech is just the sort of thing that Ed Davey should be pouncing on.

    Any news yet?

    I think Ed was cancelled shortly after becoming leader.
  • Alphabet_SoupAlphabet_Soup Posts: 2,700
    edited March 2023
    rcs1000 said:

    @kamski Jimmy Savile was a Liberal supporter, he did a PPP with Jeremy Thorpe. He was not a committed Tory.

    A PPB that can be watched in full here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t1RN0BQsBsE&ab_channel=futureisgosub

    To be fair, if you wanted to hang around with people with... how to put this... sexual baggage, then the 1970s Liberal Party Parliamentary Party was the place to be.
    ISTR Jeremy Thorpe ridiculed in the 1970s after telling an interviewer how he liked to start his day with a Brandenburg Concerto. Later we discovered how he really liked to start his day. He should have stuck with Bach.
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 6,287
    System said:

    Even Piers Morgan is backing Garry Lineker – politicalbetting.com

    Bad news @GaryLineker – I’m your defence. ?? https://t.co/1XEniEhFyO

    Read the full story here

    So whatx? Morgan is a cnut, no wonder Clarkson decked Jim.
  • Northern_AlNorthern_Al Posts: 7,459
    GIN1138 said:

    Lineker is a prick.

    He was very cocky when interviewed outside his house yesterday. Bet he's not so cocky now lol... ;)
    Why? He could earn even more away from the BBC. He won't be that bothered, but I think he believes in public service broadcasting.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,392
    GIN1138 said:

    Lineker is a prick.

    He was very cocky when interviewed outside his house yesterday. Bet he's not so cocky now lol... ;)
    I'll be he is - easy to find a presenting job outside the BBC as a free speech martyr, if he wants. Or they end up backing down.

    It all seems appropriate on letter of BBC 'law'. But people don't seem to care about that, even those with no reason to agree with Lineker.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 24,585
    ...

    Lineker is a prick.

    Great to see another non-partisan post from non- partisan Casino. Before you off-topic me again, on- topic, I believe cancelling Lineker in the name of non-partisanship is very worrying.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 25,045
    GIN1138 said:

    Lineker is a prick.

    He was very cocky when interviewed outside his house yesterday. Bet he's not so cocky now lol... ;)
    I bet he's delighted. A few days ago he was a grubby tax dodger, now he's a hero of free speech. He can go and get paid more somewhere else. The BBC would have revamped the show and ditched him sooner or later anyway.
  • StockyStocky Posts: 9,653
    stodge said:

    I commented last evening Lineker's initial tweet was intemperate but that's now being matched by the response.

    Are we to believe Lineker is such an influential figure his every utterance is of cosmic import? I don't think so either.

    After nearly 14 years in Government, you have to expect a little criticism and negative comment - the notion of popular acclaim and rose petals strewn where'er a Minister strides is fanciful in extremis.

    The other side is the extent to which Lineker, as a BBC employee, is bound by the charter of the Corporation. Does a individual, posting from their own Twitter account, speak for the organisation for whom they work?

    That leads to the question of whether the BBC should be neutral or impartial and there's a big difference between the two. Neutrality is more about saying nothing - impartiality is showing both sides of an argument and allowing the viewer/listener to make up their own mind.

    I don't want to be told what to think by any news organisation - indeed, as soon as a news outlet says they are "fair and balanced" I assume the very opposite is the case. I'm happy to hear the arguments from both sides and indeed all sides - the role of the investigator is to ask the difficult questions, probe the weaknesses and uncover the fallacies in the argument. That's what I want the BBC to do (because Sky, GB News and Talk TV won't).

    Asking questions about the legislation, asking questions about the £500 million we are handing over to France to help them stop the boats - that's how democracy works and that's how political decisions should be questioned.

    Lineker is irrelevant to this - he's a football pundit. A more self-confident Government would ignore his views - a more self-confident BBC would ignore the calls of Government supporters and treat it as an internal matter. The fact both have seen fit to respond as they have speaks volumes.

    Great post - to answer your question - why would anyone think that an individual, posting from their own Twitter account, speaks for the organisation for whom they work? Bizarre to me that anyone would think that. Working for an organisation doesn't control your life 24/7.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,014
    The trouble is that the BBC know Lineker is making a coordinated political attack on the Government, with bedfellows like Alistair Campbell, and he knows it too - he has all but admitted he wants to be an MP.

    He crossed a line by comparing them to Nazis, and well he knows it. He just think he has enough support out there to face the BBC down and call their bluff. He's goading them.

    He will probably find that, just like Clarkson and Top Gear, he is not indispensable.

    No-one is.
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 6,287

    Once we've had a few weeks of Nicholas Witchell presenting MotD, everybody will be begging for Gary and his mates to return.

    Everybody.. I doubt it. I think you will be surprised suorised that Lineker is not as popular as his twitter feed makes him think he is .
  • pingping Posts: 3,724
    ping said:

    I wonder what Nilüfer Demir makes of it all?

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nilüfer_Demir

    The power of photojournalism.

    Remarkably, she has just 291 followers on Twitter.

    Her only clear reference to the photo that had such a monumental impact on British politics, is (translated);

    “Raise your voice to the policies that make that baby the subject of this photo, not to the person who took the photo!”


  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,014

    ...

    Lineker is a prick.

    Great to see another non-partisan post from non- partisan Casino. Before you off-topic me again, on- topic, I believe cancelling Lineker in the name of non-partisanship is very worrying.
    "Non-partisan."

    That's what you say when someone posts something that doesn't accord with your politics, right?

    I don't care enough about you to off-topic you either. I tend to ignore your posts.

    Sorry.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,014

    System said:

    Even Piers Morgan is backing Garry Lineker – politicalbetting.com

    Bad news @GaryLineker – I’m your defence. ?? https://t.co/1XEniEhFyO

    Read the full story here

    So whatx? Morgan is a cnut, no wonder Clarkson decked Jim.
    This isn't news.

    Morgan has backed Lineker many times before.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,061
    dixiedean said:

    So. Who's gonna be on MOTD?
    Will it even happen?

    Yes, who knows:


  • ThomasNasheThomasNashe Posts: 4,920

    rcs1000 said:

    @kamski Jimmy Savile was a Liberal supporter, he did a PPP with Jeremy Thorpe. He was not a committed Tory.

    A PPB that can be watched in full here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t1RN0BQsBsE&ab_channel=futureisgosub

    To be fair, if you wanted to hang around with people with... how to put this... sexual baggage, then the 1970s Liberal Party Parliamentary Party was the place to be.
    ISTR Jeremy Thorpe ridiculed in the 1970s after telling an interviewer how he liked to start his day with a Brandenburg Concerto. Later we discovered how he really liked to start his day. He should have stuck with Bach.
    I get up to Bach before 7 on Radio 3: it’s worth the price of the licence fee alone.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,770

    rcs1000 said:

    @kamski Jimmy Savile was a Liberal supporter, he did a PPP with Jeremy Thorpe. He was not a committed Tory.

    A PPB that can be watched in full here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t1RN0BQsBsE&ab_channel=futureisgosub

    To be fair, if you wanted to hang around with people with... how to put this... sexual baggage, then the 1970s Liberal Party Parliamentary Party was the place to be.
    People like Saville, or even Epstein, like being around power. Because power brings money, influence and a certain amount of protection. They will therefore gravitate towards whoever has power at that time. Because that's the way they operate.

    Like Donald Trump sucking up the Clintons in the 1990s.
    The Liberal Party of the 1970s being the very epicenter of power and patronage.
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 20,695

    The trouble is that the BBC know Lineker is making a coordinated political attack on the Government, with bedfellows like Alistair Campbell, and he knows it too - he has all but admitted he wants to be an MP.

    He crossed a line by comparing them to Nazis, and well he knows it. He just think he has enough support out there to face the BBC down and call their bluff. He's goading them.

    He will probably find that, just like Clarkson and Top Gear, he is not indispensable.

    No-one is.

    Life goes on. Ob-La-Di Ob-La-Da...
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,014

    Lineker is a prick.

    OK... so, even if he is a prick, how is cancelling him gonna solve the Small Boats problem?
    He's not being cancelled.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,061

    Lineker is a prick.

    OK... so, even if he is a prick, how is cancelling him gonna solve the Small Boats problem?
    He's not being cancelled.
    He is. He has been ousted by his employer for expressing an opinion.
  • Northern_AlNorthern_Al Posts: 7,459
    edited March 2023

    Once we've had a few weeks of Nicholas Witchell presenting MotD, everybody will be begging for Gary and his mates to return.

    Everybody.. I doubt it. I think you will be surprised suorised that Lineker is not as popular as his twitter feed makes him think he is .
    Oh dear. My comment was in jest. And more about the unpopularity and hand-wringing sycophancy of Witchell than anything about Lineker. But never mind.
  • TresTres Posts: 2,161

    Lineker is a prick.

    OK... so, even if he is a prick, how is cancelling him gonna solve the Small Boats problem?
    He's not being cancelled.
    You're embarrassing yourself again.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,392
    Stocky said:

    stodge said:

    I commented last evening Lineker's initial tweet was intemperate but that's now being matched by the response.

    Are we to believe Lineker is such an influential figure his every utterance is of cosmic import? I don't think so either.

    After nearly 14 years in Government, you have to expect a little criticism and negative comment - the notion of popular acclaim and rose petals strewn where'er a Minister strides is fanciful in extremis.

    The other side is the extent to which Lineker, as a BBC employee, is bound by the charter of the Corporation. Does a individual, posting from their own Twitter account, speak for the organisation for whom they work?

    That leads to the question of whether the BBC should be neutral or impartial and there's a big difference between the two. Neutrality is more about saying nothing - impartiality is showing both sides of an argument and allowing the viewer/listener to make up their own mind.

    I don't want to be told what to think by any news organisation - indeed, as soon as a news outlet says they are "fair and balanced" I assume the very opposite is the case. I'm happy to hear the arguments from both sides and indeed all sides - the role of the investigator is to ask the difficult questions, probe the weaknesses and uncover the fallacies in the argument. That's what I want the BBC to do (because Sky, GB News and Talk TV won't).

    Asking questions about the legislation, asking questions about the £500 million we are handing over to France to help them stop the boats - that's how democracy works and that's how political decisions should be questioned.

    Lineker is irrelevant to this - he's a football pundit. A more self-confident Government would ignore his views - a more self-confident BBC would ignore the calls of Government supporters and treat it as an internal matter. The fact both have seen fit to respond as they have speaks volumes.

    Great post - to answer your question - why would anyone think that an individual, posting from their own Twitter account, speaks for the organisation for whom they work? Bizarre to me that anyone would think that. Working for an organisation doesn't control your life 24/7.
    If they are working in news it would still probably be a bad idea, as there is potential for confusion (not least since many of them will post actual news on their accounts as well), even if they said their views were their own. Price of the job, or work for a news outlet happy to have a very public slant.

    The BBC guidelines will have to catch up - people just don't buy that everyone in the organisation with a voice needs to muzzle themselves, certainly not celebrity football presenters, even if that is what the rules say. We now already know his views, so enforced silence won't change that people know what he likely thinks.
  • Alphabet_SoupAlphabet_Soup Posts: 2,700
    The BBC's quandary would be eased if they could find another so-called 'talent' prepared to tweet a diametrically opposite opinion to Lineker. Then they could demonstrate the 'balance' of their 'broad church'. But they probably can't find one because everyone agrees with Gary. That's their real problem.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,080
    So the judge shortlists the Bearded Collie, Belgian Shepherd x 2, Border Collie, Old English Sheepdog, Samoyed, Swedish Valhund and White Swiss Shepherd from the Pastoral group of 34 breeds entered. Commiserations to the Pumi.
  • ...

    Lineker is a prick.

    Great to see another non-partisan post from non- partisan Casino. Before you off-topic me again, on- topic, I believe cancelling Lineker in the name of non-partisanship is very worrying.
    "Non-partisan."

    That's what you say when someone posts something that doesn't accord with your politics, right?

    I don't care enough about you to off-topic you either. I tend to ignore your posts.

    Sorry.
    Talking about the BBC and not you or other posters - the relevant point is "non-partisan".

    The BBC apparently has judged Lineker and Attenborough to be non-partisan. But "the BBC" is not non-partisan. The people who have to sign off this kind of thing are partisan.

    How - with a straight face - can anyone defend Tory implants at the BBC signing off the removal of Lineker and Attenborough for being non-partisan? Because there is no way at all the Director General hasn't OK'd this. And he is hardly on his own in being a Tory implant.

    That is the basic problem with the faux-outrage over especially the Lineker tweet. The BBC cannot fairly declare his tweet to be in breach of policy when the people running the policy are in breach of policy themselves...
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 25,045

    The BBC's quandary would be eased if they could find another so-called 'talent' prepared to tweet a diametrically opposite opinion to Lineker. Then they could demonstrate the 'balance' of their 'broad church'. But they probably can't find one because everyone agrees with Gary. That's their real problem.

    Because it's not balanced or a broad Church.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,517
    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    @kamski Jimmy Savile was a Liberal supporter, he did a PPP with Jeremy Thorpe. He was not a committed Tory.

    A PPB that can be watched in full here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t1RN0BQsBsE&ab_channel=futureisgosub

    To be fair, if you wanted to hang around with people with... how to put this... sexual baggage, then the 1970s Liberal Party Parliamentary Party was the place to be.
    People like Saville, or even Epstein, like being around power. Because power brings money, influence and a certain amount of protection. They will therefore gravitate towards whoever has power at that time. Because that's the way they operate.

    Like Donald Trump sucking up the Clintons in the 1990s.
    The Liberal Party of the 1970s being the very epicenter of power and patronage.
    It was certainly an (ahem) happening place. But I think my point still stands: even the Liberals had connections and some power - in the same way Labour in opposition has some patronage and power.
  • FlatlanderFlatlander Posts: 3,853
    edited March 2023

    Coupled with the attack on David Attenborough this is not a good look for the Tories.

    Has anyone actually attacked David Attenborough publicly?

    I wonder if the programme went too far with the gloom and doom and wasn't the kind of thing that fitted in a slot for what is essentially a light programme with pretty pictures and cheesy musack.

    Never really been a fan of these so called block-buster wildlife documentaries, although I've nothing against Attenborough himself.

    For a contrast with how programmes used to be done, it might be interesting to view the new series against Julian Pettifer's 'The Living Isles'.

  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 48,916

    Lineker is a prick.

    Great to see another non-partisan post from non- partisan Casino. Before you off-topic me again, on- topic, I believe cancelling Lineker in the name of non-partisanship is very worrying.
    "Non-partisan."

    That's what you say when someone posts something that doesn't accord with your politics, right?

    I don't care enough about you to off-topic you either. I tend to ignore your posts.

    Sorry.
    Conservative_Royale.
  • IanB2 said:

    So the judge shortlists the Bearded Collie, Belgian Shepherd x 2, Border Collie, Old English Sheepdog, Samoyed, Swedish Valhund and White Swiss Shepherd from the Pastoral group of 34 breeds entered. Commiserations to the Pumi.

    And which of these delightful animals will be presenting MOTD tomorrow? Because at this rate nobody else will.
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 20,695
    Whoever does finish up presenting MOTD you can bet viewing figures will go up as tens of thousands who had forgotten it was even a thing tune in to see what all the fuss is about lol..
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 48,916

    IanB2 said:

    So the judge shortlists the Bearded Collie, Belgian Shepherd x 2, Border Collie, Old English Sheepdog, Samoyed, Swedish Valhund and White Swiss Shepherd from the Pastoral group of 34 breeds entered. Commiserations to the Pumi.

    And which of these delightful animals will be presenting MOTD tomorrow? Because at this rate nobody else will.
    Collie Murray.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,392
    Foxy said:

    Lineker is a prick.

    OK... so, even if he is a prick, how is cancelling him gonna solve the Small Boats problem?
    He's not being cancelled.
    He is. He has been ousted by his employer for expressing an opinion.
    Glad we agree he is an employee.

    Employers can be permitted to oust or punish employees for expressing an opinion. It surely depends what is in their contracts. Personally I find that angle on this to be misguided, since there's nothing untoward, to me, in the BBC having some rules about what those who work for it can say. ITV didn't like what Piers had to say and fired him/forced him to be sacked, and as his employer that was their right.

    The issue is whether the BBC rules are realistic for big stars, or reasonable to apply to everyone in the organisation, such as in entertainment. I imagine they fear what might be unleashed if all their employees were able to express their political views. But the current seemingly blanket restriction just isn't going to work.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,061
    edited March 2023
    GIN1138 said:

    Whoever does finish up presenting MOTD you can bet viewing figures will go up as tens of thousands who had forgotten it was even a thing tune in to see what all the fuss is about lol..

    I dount it. It currently gets 7 million viewers, so 10% of the population. Not bad for a late night show.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,014
    Foxy said:

    Lineker is a prick.

    OK... so, even if he is a prick, how is cancelling him gonna solve the Small Boats problem?
    He's not being cancelled.
    He is. He has been ousted by his employer for expressing an opinion.
    Hang on, I thought the BBC wasn't his employer.

    Which one is it?
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,392

    The BBC's quandary would be eased if they could find another so-called 'talent' prepared to tweet a diametrically opposite opinion to Lineker. Then they could demonstrate the 'balance' of their 'broad church'. But they probably can't find one because everyone agrees with Gary. That's their real problem.

    I don't think everyone agrees with him. In fact, I think those defending him on the basis of him being 'right' distract things a little bit, since that suggests he should be permitted to say things because he was right, rather than the more powerful defence that he should be permitted to say things even though he was wrong.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 26,279
    Why does Match of the Day need presenters? Just show the action.
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 21,723

    The BBC's quandary would be eased if they could find another so-called 'talent' prepared to tweet a diametrically opposite opinion to Lineker. Then they could demonstrate the 'balance' of their 'broad church'. But they probably can't find one because everyone agrees with Gary. That's their real problem.

    it's not balanced or a broad Church.
    Agreed but not in the way you think
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,014

    Lineker is a prick.

    Great to see another non-partisan post from non- partisan Casino. Before you off-topic me again, on- topic, I believe cancelling Lineker in the name of non-partisanship is very worrying.
    "Non-partisan."

    That's what you say when someone posts something that doesn't accord with your politics, right?

    I don't care enough about you to off-topic you either. I tend to ignore your posts.

    Sorry.
    Conservative_Royale.
    Whereas you wildly zig-zag your vote election by election like a nutcase and the have the temerity to critics others depending on how the wind subsequently blows.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,061

    Foxy said:

    Lineker is a prick.

    OK... so, even if he is a prick, how is cancelling him gonna solve the Small Boats problem?
    He's not being cancelled.
    He is. He has been ousted by his employer for expressing an opinion.
    Hang on, I thought the BBC wasn't his employer.

    Which one is it?
    Rather a side issue. Do you agree he should be losing his job for expressing political opinions on a site not linked to the BBC?
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,080
    And the Old English Sheepdog (known as the Dulux dog) wins the group...
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 61,571

    The trouble is that the BBC know Lineker is making a coordinated political attack on the Government, with bedfellows like Alistair Campbell, and he knows it too - he has all but admitted he wants to be an MP.

    He crossed a line by comparing them to Nazis, and well he knows it. He just think he has enough support out there to face the BBC down and call their bluff. He's goading them.

    He will probably find that, just like Clarkson and Top Gear, he is not indispensable.

    No-one is.

    Like the utter shower currently in government. True.
  • Foxy said:

    Lineker is a prick.

    OK... so, even if he is a prick, how is cancelling him gonna solve the Small Boats problem?
    He's not being cancelled.
    He is. He has been ousted by his employer for expressing an opinion.
    Hang on, I thought the BBC wasn't his employer.

    Which one is it?
    AIUI Lineker has been told by HMRC that he is an employee of the BBC. BBC have told Lineker and HMRC that he is not. One of the attack lines against Lineker is that he is a tax dodging bastard. For having a contract and employment status imposed on him by the BBC.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 53,770

    rcs1000 said:

    I'm not sure the BBC should exist. But he's not a news presenter, he's a sports presenter. And he's allowed to have his own views (however foolish) and to disseminate them on Twitter.

    He is, but right now with the BBC he's trying to have his cake and eat it.
    But you wouldn't support kicking Clarkson off the BBC for expressing political views on Twitter or in his Sunday Times column, right?
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 91,392
    edited March 2023
    Andy_JS said:

    Why does Match of the Day need presenters? Just show the action.

    They might well do that, essentially just extended highlights. Might need to cut out the post match interview clips they do sometimes as well, in case they spend all their time going on about this controversy.

    Viewing figures might even be ok. But if viewers really only wanted highlights packages without punditry I feel like that would have happened before now - people like to see some old pros trading banter and stock analysis, makes it feel more chummy, the sort of thing millions of people do themselves when discussing the matches the next day at work or school.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 24,585
    edited March 2023


    In that case would you mind rescinding the earlier off-topics you gave me. Thanks in anticipation.

    ...

    Lineker is a prick.

    Great to see another non-partisan post from non- partisan Casino. Before you off-topic me again, on- topic, I believe cancelling Lineker in the name of non-partisanship is very worrying.
    "Non-partisan."

    That's what you say when someone posts something that doesn't accord with your politics, right?

    I don't care enough about you to off-topic you either. I tend to ignore your posts.

    Sorry.
This discussion has been closed.