politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » ICM finds voters totally split by Cameron’s third term anno
Options
Comments
-
Yeah, I was being silly!Tim_B said:
It's always introduced by speaker Bercow as "Questions to the prime minister".RobD said:
Prime Ministers Questions? Sounds like he can ask the LotO questions!Sunil_Prasannan said:
That's why it's called PMQs!SouthamObserver said:
Statement of fact. Leader of the opposition asks the questions at PMQ, he does not answer them.TGOHF said:
Desperate stuff.Scott_P said:
@BBCNormanS: Labour say Ed Miliband did not rule out Nics rise cos PMQs "not right time" to make announcementSimonStClare said:Looks like Cameron has managed to bounce Balls into this new announcement #winwin.
0 -
Check your email!Pulpstar said:
Do you have the daily VIs to 1 dp by the way ?Sunil_Prasannan said:
Monte Carlo? More of a Montreux man myself!Pulpstar said:
Your ELBOW seems to be concordant with Rod Crosby's sample machine.Sunil_Prasannan said:Tory lead in ELBOW across the six VI polls so far this week! 0.1%!
If so could you email me them ?0 -
2019 would be my best guess.Flightpath said:
Ah, 'Speaker Bercow'. How much longer before we do not have to hear those words?Tim_B said:
It's always introduced by speaker Bercow as "Questions to the prime minister".RobD said:
Prime Ministers Questions? Sounds like he can ask the LotO questions!Sunil_Prasannan said:
That's why it's called PMQs!SouthamObserver said:
Statement of fact. Leader of the opposition asks the questions at PMQ, he does not answer them.TGOHF said:
Desperate stuff.Scott_P said:
@BBCNormanS: Labour say Ed Miliband did not rule out Nics rise cos PMQs "not right time" to make announcementSimonStClare said:Looks like Cameron has managed to bounce Balls into this new announcement #winwin.
0 -
Regarding Clarkson's departure from Top Gear, where does this leave his business partner Andy Wilman, exec producer of the show? The BBC apparently pays a fee to their joint company.0
-
No tweets yet from Clarkson, but he has updated his status to:
"I used to be a presenter on the BBC2 motoring show,Top Gear"
Sad. I do think the Beeb could still have found a way here, but it's hard to argue with the even-handed statement by the DG.0 -
Aren't we forgetting something about Clarkson? This isn't the first time he's left Top Gear. Where's Quentin Wilson?0
-
I would think there's a very good chance that Clarkson, Wilman, Hammond and May will all defect with key members of the production team (probably not Tymon) to their new home.Tim_B said:Regarding Clarkson's departure from Top Gear, where does this leave his business partner Andy Wilman, exec producer of the show? The BBC apparently pays a fee to their joint company.
It's inconceivable that Wilman will carry on as Exec Producer without his best mate Jezza.
0 -
Well people were commenting on how the format had become stale, and a parody of itself. Having to make a new format to avoid copyright issues should help!Bob__Sykes said:
I would think there's a very good chance that Clarkson, Wilman, Hammond and May will all defect with key members of the production team (probably not Tymon) to their new home.Tim_B said:Regarding Clarkson's departure from Top Gear, where does this leave his business partner Andy Wilman, exec producer of the show? The BBC apparently pays a fee to their joint company.
It's inconceivable that Wilman will carry on as Exec Producer without his best mate Jezza.
0 -
Have you read Salmond's weird, flirtatious, flutes of pink champagne interview with Nelson in the Spectator ?Dair said:
It's a good cop, bad cop routine.Plato said:Anyone would think he was still in charge.
Most English and Welsh will believe he is. I'd be very narked if I were Ms Sturgeon.
Or is it a coordinated campaign against SLAB?
Salmond pretty much does not appear in Scottish media, his only appearances in the last 3 months I can recall being his interviews with BBC and STV politics shows on the day his book launched. Nothing before or since.
Meanwhile Nicola is building a very strong support base, both in Scotland and England. She is already the most popular party leader UK-wide and she's only done two days of public relations in England so far.
Meanwhile the media is too obsessed with Salmond to try to attack Nicola at all. It's a strong strategy and working well.
In it Eck reminded me of Hannibal Lecter.
0 -
I would be amazed if Clarksons team buddies didn't move with him...leaves the BBC with a bit of an empty sack0
-
Clarkson probably had to go, you can't condone violence on any level.
But this is a situation where everyone loses, and raise's the question for many middle aged blokes...'what does the BBC do for us nowadays?'0 -
Only 20 minutes? Is that all? Mr Tymon would not have lasted long with ooh say Mariah Carey.logical_song said:
OR, it could be because nobody is allowed to attack another BBC employee and get away with it.Patrick said:So Clarkson delenda est (for 5 minutes until he and May and Hammond reappear with a lookalike show for twice the money on Sky or somesuch).
Some think the Beeb has done this only ostensibly for waving his fists at some 'lazy Irish cnut' but in reality because Auntie's lefty suits can't bear his politics and worldview. So...I have a rocking great idea:
Kick off the new Top Gear on the BBC with presenters Frankie Boyle, Jimmy Carr and Ricky Gervais. It'd be a riot!
"It is understood a report into the so-called ‘fracas’ at a North Yorkshire hotel, concluded that presenter spent 20 minutes verbally abusing producer Oisin Tymon, before launching a 30 second physical assault on him. [Daily Telegraph]"
But Clarkson is stupid for being a prima donna and should not have got in a fight or hit anyone. I suspect the incident was overblown but there was no need for it to happen in the first place.
0 -
Who owns the "Top Gear" brand - BBC I think ?
Sold by Bezzer a while back ?
Does Clarkson still have skin in the game as a director/shareholder of any of Top Gear ?0 -
Well that article headline has manged to put an amazingly different slant to all the other journos that were at that lunch.Scott_P said:
Salmond didn't say he would unconditionally support Labour. He said he would unconditionally vote against a Conservative Queen's speech. Which is the oldest of old news.
0 -
Also, the DG's full statement:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/mediacentre/statements/jeremy-clarkson-dg-statement
...doesn't distinguish between the BBC's broadcast operations and BBC Worldwide. I assume Worldwide, which runs the Top Gear Live events and publishes Top Gear magazine (of which JC is a co-editor) and puts out the TG DVDs, is a separate organisation. Has it also given up its contracts with JC?
Also, will the BBC (and Dave, which it co-owns) now cease showing all the repeats of TG? It would be hypocrisy for them to now show them wouldn't it?0 -
A bit of a moot point. It'll be like the BBC holding the rights to 'Morcambe and Wise', but doing the show without Eric and Ernie.Pulpstar said:Who owns the "Top Gear" brand - BBC I think ?
Sold by Bezzer a while back ?
Does Clarkson still have skin in the game as a director/shareholder of any of Top Gear ?
Any 'new' Top Gear would be so removed, you might as well start a brand new show without the baggage.0 -
People can only see the leadership of political parties in terms of the example set by the Conservatives, Labour and the Lib Dems. They just can't accept a situation where the leading members of the party are working together, rather than engaging in non-stop internecine struggle, because they don't know anything else.Dair said:
It's a good cop, bad cop routine.Plato said:Anyone would think he was still in charge.
Most English and Welsh will believe he is. I'd be very narked if I were Ms Sturgeon.
Or is it a coordinated campaign against SLAB?
Salmond pretty much does not appear in Scottish media, his only appearances in the last 3 months I can recall being his interviews with BBC and STV politics shows on the day his book launched. Nothing before or since.
Meanwhile Nicola is building a very strong support base, both in Scotland and England. She is already the most popular party leader UK-wide and she's only done two days of public relations in England so far.
Meanwhile the media is too obsessed with Salmond to try to attack Nicola at all. It's a strong strategy and working well.0 -
http://www.oddschecker.com/politics/british-politics/warwick-and-leamington/winning-party
Constituency tip:
Betfred still 4-7 on Warwick and Leamington.0 -
Given that Chris Evans has already said today he will not replace Clarkson under any circumstances I think that is something of a forlorn hope. The programme may come back in some form but it will no longer be the BBC flagship export and I suspect the UK audiences will be a fraction of what they were.Scott_P said:
BBC 'hoping' to continue show in 2016Tim_B said:Regarding Clarkson's departure from Top Gear, where does this leave his business partner Andy Wilman, exec producer of the show? The BBC apparently pays a fee to their joint company.
Stupid decision from the BBC.0 -
Which highlights what a bizarre decision it was for the BBC to buy the rights from Clarkson.Slackbladder said:
A bit of a moot point. It'll be like the BBC holding the rights to 'Morcambe and Wise', but doing the show without Eric and Ernie.Pulpstar said:Who owns the "Top Gear" brand - BBC I think ?
Sold by Bezzer a while back ?
Does Clarkson still have skin in the game as a director/shareholder of any of Top Gear ?
Any 'new' Top Gear would be so removed, you might as well start a brand new show without the baggage.0 -
Cameron and Clegg despite one or two lovers' tiffs (Boundaries, AV) have managed it wellOblitusSumMe said:
People can only see the leadership of political parties in terms of the example set by the Conservatives, Labour and the Lib Dems. They just can't accept a situation where the leading members of the party are working together, rather than engaging in non-stop internecine struggle, because they don't know anything else.Dair said:
It's a good cop, bad cop routine.Plato said:Anyone would think he was still in charge.
Most English and Welsh will believe he is. I'd be very narked if I were Ms Sturgeon.
Or is it a coordinated campaign against SLAB?
Salmond pretty much does not appear in Scottish media, his only appearances in the last 3 months I can recall being his interviews with BBC and STV politics shows on the day his book launched. Nothing before or since.
Meanwhile Nicola is building a very strong support base, both in Scotland and England. She is already the most popular party leader UK-wide and she's only done two days of public relations in England so far.
Meanwhile the media is too obsessed with Salmond to try to attack Nicola at all. It's a strong strategy and working well. 0 -
How far would Clarkson have to have gone in abusing the producer before the BBC would have been justified in this decision?Richard_Tyndall said:
Stupid decision from the BBC.0 -
Yes, but that's because neither is after the other person's job, as leader of the Liberal Democrats/Conservatives.Pulpstar said:
Cameron and Clegg despite one or two lover's tiffs (Boundaries, AV) have managed it wellOblitusSumMe said:
People can only see the leadership of political parties in terms of the example set by the Conservatives, Labour and the Lib Dems. They just can't accept a situation where the leading members of the party are working together, rather than engaging in non-stop internecine struggle, because they don't know anything else.Dair said:
It's a good cop, bad cop routine.Plato said:Anyone would think he was still in charge.
Most English and Welsh will believe he is. I'd be very narked if I were Ms Sturgeon.
Or is it a coordinated campaign against SLAB?
Salmond pretty much does not appear in Scottish media, his only appearances in the last 3 months I can recall being his interviews with BBC and STV politics shows on the day his book launched. Nothing before or since.
Meanwhile Nicola is building a very strong support base, both in Scotland and England. She is already the most popular party leader UK-wide and she's only done two days of public relations in England so far.
Meanwhile the media is too obsessed with Salmond to try to attack Nicola at all. It's a strong strategy and working well.0 -
As SeanT has just said:
sean thomas knox @thomasknox
Whatever you think of Clarkson, his going means the BBC retreats ever more into a ghetto of left wing "acceptable" opinion: Guardian-on-TV
Indeed...0 -
Guess the news outlet...
July 2010
Jeremy Clarkson
In the same month, Alastair Campbell revealed on his blog that, in unaired comments, Clarkson had rebuffed claims that he wasn’t very sound on gay rights by replying “Oh yes I am. I demand the right not to be bummed.”0 -
Reputedly the feed for the Accident Press Conference
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yAQOSveCJqc0 -
I wonder if they will launch Clarkson off the end of an aircraft carrier?
Ahh, they will have a problem, unless they borrow the one parked in the Solent?0 -
On topic, off topic - @Nigel4England Mentioned Jodie Kidd last night - his record on current events/reality betting is pretty good and she is 5-1 at Ladbrokes.
Chris Evans looks far too short at 2-5 seeing as he doesn't want the job and doesn't need the money. I don't think the format would work with him in charge either.0 -
Put it this way. I have been the witness (I mean officially in inquiries) to four separate assaults in the workplace in the last 15 years. Three of them were completely unprovoked as far as I could see and all involved actual physical violence worse than Clarkson is accused of.Neil said:
How far would Clarkson have to have gone in abusing the producer before the BBC's would have been justified in this decision?Richard_Tyndall said:
Stupid decision from the BBC.
In only one of these cases was the accused dismissed. And that was because his actions were found to be due to drugs and he was dismissed for the drug taking not the assault.
In all three other cases - all with different companies - the attacker was docked pay, demoted and/or made to attend courses on anger management or some such. In one case there was a police involvement and he also received a suspended sentence for assault.
Companies do not generally sack people for assaults because they are liable to find themselves being hauled up in front of tribunals and the sacked employee can generally show lack of proper HR management, stress or some other reason why the firm was responsible.
I would be amazed if the BBC didn't have similar cases on its files where they have not sacked the attacker. If and when they come out it will make an interesting comparison.
There were a whole host of ways they could have dealt with this and the fact they used it as an opportunity to get rid of him is just plain dumb.
Clarkson was equally dumb to have made the attack in the first place but in the long run it is the licence fee payer who will lose out here having to compensate for the lost revenue not Clarkson.0 -
Presumably Tiff Needell and Chris Goffey are anxiously waiting by their phones.Pulpstar said:On topic, off topic - @Nigel4England Mentioned Jodie Kidd last night - his record on current events/reality betting is pretty good and she is 5-1 at Ladbrokes.
Chris Evans looks far too short at 2-5 seeing as he doesn't want the job and doesn't need the money. I don't think the format would work with him in charge either.
Jodie Kidd isn't half a bad shout though. Can't get odds on my work computer - anything on Steve Coogan?
0 -
William Shatner @WilliamShatner 4 mins4 minutes ago
Clarkson will be fine. Sponsors would be silly not to pick him up and establish a competitor show and the viewers will probably follow him.
Even Captain Kirk gets it.0 -
She was on plus 7 in The Times Yougov poll on Sunday, all the other leaders were negative.RobD said:
Have there been England-only polls on Nicola? I wouldn't call two days of PR "building a very strong support base".Dair said:
It's a good cop, bad cop routine.Plato said:Anyone would think he was still in charge.
Most English and Welsh will believe he is. I'd be very narked if I were Ms Sturgeon.
Or is it a coordinated campaign against SLAB?
Salmond pretty much does not appear in Scottish media, his only appearances in the last 3 months I can recall being his interviews with BBC and STV politics shows on the day his book launched. Nothing before or since.
Meanwhile Nicola is building a very strong support base, both in Scotland and England. She is already the most popular party leader UK-wide and she's only done two days of public relations in England so far.
Meanwhile the media is too obsessed with Salmond to try to attack Nicola at all. It's a strong strategy and working well.0 -
James May just said that he felt the three of them were a package, and that although Clarkson is a knob, he quite likes him.0
-
10s with Paddy.Ghedebrav said:
Presumably Tiff Needell and Chris Goffey are anxiously waiting by their phones.Pulpstar said:On topic, off topic - @Nigel4England Mentioned Jodie Kidd last night - his record on current events/reality betting is pretty good and she is 5-1 at Ladbrokes.
Chris Evans looks far too short at 2-5 seeing as he doesn't want the job and doesn't need the money. I don't think the format would work with him in charge either.
Jodie Kidd isn't half a bad shout though. Can't get odds on my work computer - anything on Steve Coogan?0 -
Disagree 100%.Richard_Tyndall said:
Put it this way. I have been the witness (I mean officially in inquiries) to four separate assaults in the workplace in the last 15 years. Three of them were completely unprovoked as far as I could see and all involved actual physical violence worse than Clarkson is accused of.Neil said:
How far would Clarkson have to have gone in abusing the producer before the BBC's would have been justified in this decision?Richard_Tyndall said:
Stupid decision from the BBC.
In only one of these cases was the accused dismissed. And that was because his actions were found to be due to drugs and he was dismissed for the drug taking not the assault.
In all three other cases - all with different companies - the attacker was docked pay, demoted and/or made to attend courses on anger management or some such. In one case there was a police involvement and he also received a suspended sentence for assault.
Companies do not generally sack people for assaults because they are liable to find themselves being hauled up in front of tribunals and the sacked employee can generally show lack of proper HR management, stress or some other reason why the firm was responsible.
I would be amazed if the BBC didn't have similar cases on its files where they have not sacked the attacker. If and when they come out it will make an interesting comparison.
There were a whole host of ways they could have dealt with this and the fact they used it as an opportunity to get rid of him is just plain dumb.
Clarkson was equally dumb to have made the attack in the first place but in the long run it is the licence fee payer who will lose out here having to compensate for the lost revenue not Clarkson.
For some things, there should be zero tolerance and physical violence is one of them. If I were to physically attack my boss, I would be gob-smacked if I wasn't sacked.
0 -
To be honest I don't know why the press bothers to interview Alex Salmond they'd save a lot of effort if they just cut the chase and made up the quotes, opinions and policy they wanted as from the last few days that is what they seem to do.0
-
Jodie Kidd? Seriously?Pulpstar said:On topic, off topic - @Nigel4England Mentioned Jodie Kidd last night - his record on current events/reality betting is pretty good and she is 5-1 at Ladbrokes.
Chris Evans looks far too short at 2-5 seeing as he doesn't want the job and doesn't need the money. I don't think the format would work with him in charge either.0 -
I'm continually amazed by the type of organisations that other posters work for. I have seen people sacked for a lot less than assaulting a colleague and I wouldnt give anyone much chance of claiming unfair dismissal if they were dismissed for the type of behaviour reported in this case.Richard_Tyndall said:
Put it this way. I have been the witness (I mean officially in inquiries) to four separate assaults in the workplace in the last 15 years. Three of them were completely unprovoked as far as I could see and all involved actual physical violence worse than Clarkson is accused of.Neil said:
How far would Clarkson have to have gone in abusing the producer before the BBC's would have been justified in this decision?Richard_Tyndall said:
Stupid decision from the BBC.
In only one of these cases was the accused dismissed. And that was because his actions were found to be due to drugs and he was dismissed for the drug taking not the assault.
In all three other cases - all with different companies - the attacker was docked pay, demoted and/or made to attend courses on anger management or some such. In one case there was a police involvement and he also received a suspended sentence for assault.
Companies do not generally sack people for assaults because they are liable to find themselves being hauled up in front of tribunals and the sacked employee can generally show lack of proper HR management, stress or some other reason why the firm was responsible.
I would be amazed if the BBC didn't have similar cases on its files where they have not sacked the attacker. If and when they come out it will make an interesting comparison.
There were a whole host of ways they could have dealt with this and the fact they used it as an opportunity to get rid of him is just plain dumb.
Clarkson was equally dumb to have made the attack in the first place but in the long run it is the licence fee payer who will lose out here having to compensate for the lost revenue not Clarkson.0 -
He's supposed to be the bad guy. For an affable, jovial chap like Eck to give that impression, it appears to be working well.MonikerDiCanio said:
Have you read Salmond's weird, flirtatious, flutes of pink champagne interview with Nelson in the Spectator ?Dair said:
It's a good cop, bad cop routine.Plato said:Anyone would think he was still in charge.
Most English and Welsh will believe he is. I'd be very narked if I were Ms Sturgeon.
Or is it a coordinated campaign against SLAB?
Salmond pretty much does not appear in Scottish media, his only appearances in the last 3 months I can recall being his interviews with BBC and STV politics shows on the day his book launched. Nothing before or since.
Meanwhile Nicola is building a very strong support base, both in Scotland and England. She is already the most popular party leader UK-wide and she's only done two days of public relations in England so far.
Meanwhile the media is too obsessed with Salmond to try to attack Nicola at all. It's a strong strategy and working well.
In it Eck reminded me of Hannibal Lecter.0 -
Wether they could have avoided it or not, the BBC have just destroyed one of their few worldwide brands.
The only other being Doctor Who really.0 -
Nigel4England knows his chips on this sort of stuff.TheWatcher said:
Jodie Kidd? Seriously?Pulpstar said:On topic, off topic - @Nigel4England Mentioned Jodie Kidd last night - his record on current events/reality betting is pretty good and she is 5-1 at Ladbrokes.
Chris Evans looks far too short at 2-5 seeing as he doesn't want the job and doesn't need the money. I don't think the format would work with him in charge either.0 -
Anything on Coogan...Drugs...hookers.....makes Clarkson's "bad boy" antics look very small beer.Ghedebrav said:Jodie Kidd isn't half a bad shout though. Can't get odds on my work computer - anything on Steve Coogan?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-479134/Coogan-Barbarian-The-truth-man-blamed-leading-Owen-Wilson-brink-suicide.html0 -
I was physically attacked once at work... Wouldn't have dreamed of telling tales to the boss but I guess it takes all sortsmurali_s said:
Disagree 100%.Richard_Tyndall said:
Put it this way. I have been the witness (I mean officially in inquiries) to four separate assaults in the workplace in the last 15 years. Three of them were completely unprovoked as far as I could see and all involved actual physical violence worse than Clarkson is accused of.Neil said:
How far would Clarkson have to have gone in abusing the producer before the BBC's would have been justified in this decision?Richard_Tyndall said:
Stupid decision from the BBC.
In only one of these cases was the accused dismissed. And that was because his actions were found to be due to drugs and he was dismissed for the drug taking not the assault.
In all three other cases - all with different companies - the attacker was docked pay, demoted and/or made to attend courses on anger management or some such. In one case there was a police involvement and he also received a suspended sentence for assault.
Companies do not generally sack people for assaults because they are liable to find themselves being hauled up in front of tribunals and the sacked employee can generally show lack of proper HR management, stress or some other reason why the firm was responsible.
I would be amazed if the BBC didn't have similar cases on its files where they have not sacked the attacker. If and when they come out it will make an interesting comparison.
There were a whole host of ways they could have dealt with this and the fact they used it as an opportunity to get rid of him is just plain dumb.
Clarkson was equally dumb to have made the attack in the first place but in the long run it is the licence fee payer who will lose out here having to compensate for the lost revenue not Clarkson.
For some things, there should be zero tolerance and physical violence is one of them. If I were to physically attack my boss, I would be gob-smacked if I wasn't sacked.0 -
Sherlock?Slackbladder said:Wether they could have avoided it or not, the BBC have just destroyed one of their few worldwide brands.
The only other being Doctor Who really.
0 -
The speaker should have intervened and stopped Cameron from asking questions.SouthamObserver said:
I am sure he was. But it is a statement of fact that the LOTO does not answer questions at Prime Minister's Question Time.felix said:
Meanwhile in the real world Ed gets totally rogered again.SouthamObserver said:
Statement of fact. Leader of the opposition asks the questions at PMQ, he does not answer them.TGOHF said:
Desperate stuff.Scott_P said:
@BBCNormanS: Labour say Ed Miliband did not rule out Nics rise cos PMQs "not right time" to make announcementSimonStClare said:Looks like Cameron has managed to bounce Balls into this new announcement #winwin.
0 -
"Top Gear existed before US...."
“We work very much as a package.”
[who do you want to work with as replacement for Jeremy] "As much as I think he is a knob...I quite like working with Jeremy"
http://order-order.com/2015/03/25/watch-james-may-hints-hes-off-with-clarkson/
Sounds like Top Gear will need more than one new presenter.0 -
Clarkson reported himself. The producer did not report him.isam said:
I was physically attacked once at work... Wouldn't have dreamed of telling tales to the boss but I guess it takes all sortsmurali_s said:
Disagree 100%.Richard_Tyndall said:
Put it this way. I have been the witness (I mean officially in inquiries) to four separate assaults in the workplace in the last 15 years. Three of them were completely unprovoked as far as I could see and all involved actual physical violence worse than Clarkson is accused of.Neil said:
How far would Clarkson have to have gone in abusing the producer before the BBC's would have been justified in this decision?Richard_Tyndall said:
Stupid decision from the BBC.
In only one of these cases was the accused dismissed. And that was because his actions were found to be due to drugs and he was dismissed for the drug taking not the assault.
In all three other cases - all with different companies - the attacker was docked pay, demoted and/or made to attend courses on anger management or some such. In one case there was a police involvement and he also received a suspended sentence for assault.
Companies do not generally sack people for assaults because they are liable to find themselves being hauled up in front of tribunals and the sacked employee can generally show lack of proper HR management, stress or some other reason why the firm was responsible.
I would be amazed if the BBC didn't have similar cases on its files where they have not sacked the attacker. If and when they come out it will make an interesting comparison.
There were a whole host of ways they could have dealt with this and the fact they used it as an opportunity to get rid of him is just plain dumb.
Clarkson was equally dumb to have made the attack in the first place but in the long run it is the licence fee payer who will lose out here having to compensate for the lost revenue not Clarkson.
For some things, there should be zero tolerance and physical violence is one of them. If I were to physically attack my boss, I would be gob-smacked if I wasn't sacked.
0 -
If Hammond and May stay - which is a pretty big if - the BBC will only employ a woman as the new third presenter. Jodie Kidd mentioned yesterday would actually work - or at least it would work if they BBC did not bar any form of gender based humour - which they will.Richard_Tyndall said:
Given that Chris Evans has already said today he will not replace Clarkson under any circumstances I think that is something of a forlorn hope. The programme may come back in some form but it will no longer be the BBC flagship export and I suspect the UK audiences will be a fraction of what they were.Scott_P said:
BBC 'hoping' to continue show in 2016Tim_B said:Regarding Clarkson's departure from Top Gear, where does this leave his business partner Andy Wilman, exec producer of the show? The BBC apparently pays a fee to their joint company.
Stupid decision from the BBC.
Basically it's already dead.0 -
And of course in this case it was Clarkson not the producer who was attacked who reported the incident to the BBC.isam said:
I was physically attacked once at work... Wouldn't have dreamed of telling tales to the boss but I guess it takes all sortsmurali_s said:
Disagree 100%.Richard_Tyndall said:
Put it this way. I have been the witness (I mean officially in inquiries) to four separate assaults in the workplace in the last 15 years. Three of them were completely unprovoked as far as I could see and all involved actual physical violence worse than Clarkson is accused of.Neil said:
How far would Clarkson have to have gone in abusing the producer before the BBC's would have been justified in this decision?Richard_Tyndall said:
Stupid decision from the BBC.
In only one of these cases was the accused dismissed. And that was because his actions were found to be due to drugs and he was dismissed for the drug taking not the assault.
In all three other cases - all with different companies - the attacker was docked pay, demoted and/or made to attend courses on anger management or some such. In one case there was a police involvement and he also received a suspended sentence for assault.
Companies do not generally sack people for assaults because they are liable to find themselves being hauled up in front of tribunals and the sacked employee can generally show lack of proper HR management, stress or some other reason why the firm was responsible.
I would be amazed if the BBC didn't have similar cases on its files where they have not sacked the attacker. If and when they come out it will make an interesting comparison.
There were a whole host of ways they could have dealt with this and the fact they used it as an opportunity to get rid of him is just plain dumb.
Clarkson was equally dumb to have made the attack in the first place but in the long run it is the licence fee payer who will lose out here having to compensate for the lost revenue not Clarkson.
For some things, there should be zero tolerance and physical violence is one of them. If I were to physically attack my boss, I would be gob-smacked if I wasn't sacked.
0 -
So you think that punching colleagues is OK?Slackbladder said:Wether they could have avoided it or not, the BBC have just destroyed one of their few worldwide brands.
The only other being Doctor Who really.
0 -
So that's the practical end of Top Gear, James May has also left the show, he now refers to himself as a former presenter on his twitter status, though he is still willing to offer advise on cars:
James May @MrJamesMay · 1h 1 hour ago
Reporters outside my house: if you're going to hang around on small streets with your car engines idling all day, don't buy a bloody diesel.0 -
And the BBC name itself, of course.Slackbladder said:Wether they could have avoided it or not, the BBC have just destroyed one of their few worldwide brands.
The only other being Doctor Who really.
0 -
Funnily enough in the corporate world yours is the view that would be considered palaeolithic.murali_s said:
Disagree 100%.Richard_Tyndall said:
Put it this way. I have been the witness (I mean officially in inquiries) to four separate assaults in the workplace in the last 15 years. Three of them were completely unprovoked as far as I could see and all involved actual physical violence worse than Clarkson is accused of.Neil said:
How far would Clarkson have to have gone in abusing the producer before the BBC's would have been justified in this decision?Richard_Tyndall said:
Stupid decision from the BBC.
In only one of these cases was the accused dismissed. And that was because his actions were found to be due to drugs and he was dismissed for the drug taking not the assault.
In all three other cases - all with different companies - the attacker was docked pay, demoted and/or made to attend courses on anger management or some such. In one case there was a police involvement and he also received a suspended sentence for assault.
Companies do not generally sack people for assaults because they are liable to find themselves being hauled up in front of tribunals and the sacked employee can generally show lack of proper HR management, stress or some other reason why the firm was responsible.
I would be amazed if the BBC didn't have similar cases on its files where they have not sacked the attacker. If and when they come out it will make an interesting comparison.
There were a whole host of ways they could have dealt with this and the fact they used it as an opportunity to get rid of him is just plain dumb.
Clarkson was equally dumb to have made the attack in the first place but in the long run it is the licence fee payer who will lose out here having to compensate for the lost revenue not Clarkson.
For some things, there should be zero tolerance and physical violence is one of them. If I were to physically attack my boss, I would be gob-smacked if I wasn't sacked.
0 -
In light of the fact that all three presenters are about to come to the end of their present contracts with the BBC, that’s a very interesting comment by James May.Tim_B said:James May just said that he felt the three of them were a package, and that although Clarkson is a knob, he quite likes him.
0 -
I do not believe it is "telling tales" to notify your employer that your physical safety has been compromised. If an employee of mine attacked another one, I would probably sack him, and certainly so if he was on a final warning for other matters.isam said:
I was physically attacked once at work... Wouldn't have dreamed of telling tales to the boss but I guess it takes all sortsmurali_s said:
Disagree 100%.Richard_Tyndall said:
Put it this way. I have been the witness (I mean officially in inquiries) to four separate assaults in the workplace in the last 15 years. Three of them were completely unprovoked as far as I could see and all involved actual physical violence worse than Clarkson is accused of.Neil said:
How far would Clarkson have to have gone in abusing the producer before the BBC's would have been justified in this decision?Richard_Tyndall said:
Stupid decision from the BBC.
In only one of these cases was the accused dismissed. And that was because his actions were found to be due to drugs and he was dismissed for the drug taking not the assault.
In all three other cases - all with different companies - the attacker was docked pay, demoted and/or made to attend courses on anger management or some such. In one case there was a police involvement and he also received a suspended sentence for assault.
Companies do not generally sack people for assaults because they are liable to find themselves being hauled up in front of tribunals and the sacked employee can generally show lack of proper HR management, stress or some other reason why the firm was responsible.
I would be amazed if the BBC didn't have similar cases on its files where they have not sacked the attacker. If and when they come out it will make an interesting comparison.
There were a whole host of ways they could have dealt with this and the fact they used it as an opportunity to get rid of him is just plain dumb.
Clarkson was equally dumb to have made the attack in the first place but in the long run it is the licence fee payer who will lose out here having to compensate for the lost revenue not Clarkson.
For some things, there should be zero tolerance and physical violence is one of them. If I were to physically attack my boss, I would be gob-smacked if I wasn't sacked.0 -
Presumably anyone could last an unlimited amount of time being verbally abused, by Mariah Carey or anyone else.Flightpath said:
Only 20 minutes? Is that all? Mr Tymon would not have lasted long with ooh say Mariah Carey.logical_song said:
OR, it could be because nobody is allowed to attack another BBC employee and get away with it.Patrick said:So Clarkson delenda est (for 5 minutes until he and May and Hammond reappear with a lookalike show for twice the money on Sky or somesuch).
Some think the Beeb has done this only ostensibly for waving his fists at some 'lazy Irish cnut' but in reality because Auntie's lefty suits can't bear his politics and worldview. So...I have a rocking great idea:
Kick off the new Top Gear on the BBC with presenters Frankie Boyle, Jimmy Carr and Ricky Gervais. It'd be a riot!
"It is understood a report into the so-called ‘fracas’ at a North Yorkshire hotel, concluded that presenter spent 20 minutes verbally abusing producer Oisin Tymon, before launching a 30 second physical assault on him. [Daily Telegraph]"
But Clarkson is stupid for being a prima donna and should not have got in a fight or hit anyone. I suspect the incident was overblown but there was no need for it to happen in the first place.
Presumably there was no need for Clarkson to have reported it to the Beeb, but once he'd done so they had to investigate.
0 -
Hence the 'wether they could have avoided it or not' point Mike....MikeSmithson said:
So you think that punching colleagues is OK?Slackbladder said:Wether they could have avoided it or not, the BBC have just destroyed one of their few worldwide brands.
The only other being Doctor Who really.0 -
It's not OK do to that, however there are other methods to punish and humiliate the one doing the punching without shooting yourself on the foot.MikeSmithson said:
So you think that punching colleagues is OK?Slackbladder said:Wether they could have avoided it or not, the BBC have just destroyed one of their few worldwide brands.
The only other being Doctor Who really.0 -
@Richard_Tyndall
"Funnily enough in the corporate world yours is the view that would be considered palaeolithic. "
Along with honesty, integrity, and fairness?0 -
Nathalie Bennett at 100-1
0 -
Oh of course! You da man xxxNeil said:
And of course in this case it was Clarkson not the producer who was attacked who reported the incident to the BBC.isam said:
I was physically attacked once at work... Wouldn't have dreamed of telling tales to the boss but I guess it takes all sortsmurali_s said:
Disagree 100%.Richard_Tyndall said:
Put it this way. I have been the witness (I mean officially in inquiries) to four separate assaults in the workplace in the last 15 years. Three of them were completely unprovoked as far as I could see and all involved actual physical violence worse than Clarkson is accused of.Neil said:
How far would Clarkson have to have gone in abusing the producer before the BBC's would have been justified in this decision?Richard_Tyndall said:
Stupid decision from the BBC.
In only one of these cases was the accused dismissed. And that was because his actions were found to be due to drugs and he was dismissed for the drug taking not the assault.
In all three other cases - all with different companies - the attacker was docked pay, demoted and/or made to attend courses on anger management or some such. In one case there was a police involvement and he also received a suspended sentence for assault.
Companies do not generally sack people for assaults because they are liable to find themselves being hauled up in front of tribunals and the sacked employee can generally show lack of proper HR management, stress or some other reason why the firm was responsible.
I would be amazed if the BBC didn't have similar cases on its files where they have not sacked the attacker. If and when they come out it will make an interesting comparison.
There were a whole host of ways they could have dealt with this and the fact they used it as an opportunity to get rid of him is just plain dumb.
Clarkson was equally dumb to have made the attack in the first place but in the long run it is the licence fee payer who will lose out here having to compensate for the lost revenue not Clarkson.
For some things, there should be zero tolerance and physical violence is one of them. If I were to physically attack my boss, I would be gob-smacked if I wasn't sacked.
0 -
True, but new kids ont he block like HBO and Netflix are eating into that brand.SouthamObserver said:
And the BBC name itself, of course.Slackbladder said:Wether they could have avoided it or not, the BBC have just destroyed one of their few worldwide brands.
The only other being Doctor Who really.0 -
I doubt you'll get too many big names from the corporate world willing to say that they wouldnt sack someone for assaulting a colleague.Richard_Tyndall said:
Funnily enough in the corporate world yours is the view that would be considered palaeolithic.murali_s said:
Disagree 100%.Richard_Tyndall said:
Put it this way. I have been the witness (I mean officially in inquiries) to four separate assaults in the workplace in the last 15 years. Three of them were completely unprovoked as far as I could see and all involved actual physical violence worse than Clarkson is accused of.Neil said:
How far would Clarkson have to have gone in abusing the producer before the BBC's would have been justified in this decision?Richard_Tyndall said:
Stupid decision from the BBC.
In only one of these cases was the accused dismissed. And that was because his actions were found to be due to drugs and he was dismissed for the drug taking not the assault.
In all three other cases - all with different companies - the attacker was docked pay, demoted and/or made to attend courses on anger management or some such. In one case there was a police involvement and he also received a suspended sentence for assault.
Companies do not generally sack people for assaults because they are liable to find themselves being hauled up in front of tribunals and the sacked employee can generally show lack of proper HR management, stress or some other reason why the firm was responsible.
I would be amazed if the BBC didn't have similar cases on its files where they have not sacked the attacker. If and when they come out it will make an interesting comparison.
There were a whole host of ways they could have dealt with this and the fact they used it as an opportunity to get rid of him is just plain dumb.
Clarkson was equally dumb to have made the attack in the first place but in the long run it is the licence fee payer who will lose out here having to compensate for the lost revenue not Clarkson.
For some things, there should be zero tolerance and physical violence is one of them. If I were to physically attack my boss, I would be gob-smacked if I wasn't sacked.
0 -
BBC America has 4 episodes of Top Gear repeats today.Slackbladder said:Wether they could have avoided it or not, the BBC have just destroyed one of their few worldwide brands.
The only other being Doctor Who really.
Kitchen Nightmares perhaps? Or the dreadful "Mud, Sweat and Gears" featuring a presenter from Fifth Gear.
What will become of The Stig, a Wilman creation? Presumably that's part of the Top Gear format.0 -
Richard Hammond @RichardHammond · 7m 7 minutes ago
Gutted at such a sad end to an era. We're all three of us idiots in our different ways but it's been an incredible ride together.
Read that into it what you may....0 -
Sadly not as much of a man as someone who can take a beating with style.isam said:
Oh of course! You da man xxxNeil said:
And of course in this case it was Clarkson not the producer who was attacked who reported the incident to the BBC.isam said:
I was physically attacked once at work... Wouldn't have dreamed of telling tales to the boss but I guess it takes all sortsmurali_s said:
Disagree 100%.Richard_Tyndall said:
Put it this way. I have been the witness (I mean officially in inquiries) to four separate assaults in the workplace in the last 15 years. Three of them were completely unprovoked as far as I could see and all involved actual physical violence worse than Clarkson is accused of.Neil said:
How far would Clarkson have to have gone in abusing the producer before the BBC's would have been justified in this decision?Richard_Tyndall said:
Stupid decision from the BBC.
In only one of these cases was the accused dismissed. And that was because his actions were found to be due to drugs and he was dismissed for the drug taking not the assault.
In all three other cases - all with different companies - the attacker was docked pay, demoted and/or made to attend courses on anger management or some such. In one case there was a police involvement and he also received a suspended sentence for assault.
Companies do not generally sack people for assaults because they are liable to find themselves being hauled up in front of tribunals and the sacked employee can generally show lack of proper HR management, stress or some other reason why the firm was responsible.
I would be amazed if the BBC didn't have similar cases on its files where they have not sacked the attacker. If and when they come out it will make an interesting comparison.
There were a whole host of ways they could have dealt with this and the fact they used it as an opportunity to get rid of him is just plain dumb.
Clarkson was equally dumb to have made the attack in the first place but in the long run it is the licence fee payer who will lose out here having to compensate for the lost revenue not Clarkson.
For some things, there should be zero tolerance and physical violence is one of them. If I were to physically attack my boss, I would be gob-smacked if I wasn't sacked.
0 -
Shatner's twitter is bizarre, he's 70 but seems to have the attitudes and interests of a 20 something hipster. He live tweets half the shows on The CW.Slackbladder said:William Shatner @WilliamShatner 4 mins4 minutes ago
Clarkson will be fine. Sponsors would be silly not to pick him up and establish a competitor show and the viewers will probably follow him.
Even Captain Kirk gets it.0 -
And spoilt the fun !!!MikeSmithson said:
The speaker should have intervened and stopped Cameron from asking questions.SouthamObserver said:
I am sure he was. But it is a statement of fact that the LOTO does not answer questions at Prime Minister's Question Time.felix said:
Meanwhile in the real world Ed gets totally rogered again.SouthamObserver said:
Statement of fact. Leader of the opposition asks the questions at PMQ, he does not answer them.TGOHF said:
Desperate stuff.Scott_P said:
@BBCNormanS: Labour say Ed Miliband did not rule out Nics rise cos PMQs "not right time" to make announcementSimonStClare said:Looks like Cameron has managed to bounce Balls into this new announcement #winwin.
0 -
Kitchen Nightmares is Channel 4.Tim_B said:
BBC America has 4 episodes of Top Gear repeats today.Slackbladder said:Wether they could have avoided it or not, the BBC have just destroyed one of their few worldwide brands.
The only other being Doctor Who really.
Kitchen Nightmares perhaps? Or the dreadful "Mud, Sweat and Gears" featuring a presenter from Fifth Gear.
What will become of The Stig, a Wilman creation? Presumably that's part of the Top Gear format.0 -
Just think, this site is called Political Betting, yet 40 days before a GE we are all wired up about a TV show, and so is the rest of the country.
The shredding of Top Gear by the BBC has in effect shortened the GE campaign by quite a bit.0 -
He must be more than 70.Dair said:
Shatner's twitter is bizarre, he's 70 but seems to have the attitudes and interests of a 20 something hipster. He live tweets half the shows on The CW.Slackbladder said:William Shatner @WilliamShatner 4 mins4 minutes ago
Clarkson will be fine. Sponsors would be silly not to pick him up and establish a competitor show and the viewers will probably follow him.
Even Captain Kirk gets it.
0 -
I don't think that pb has taken the news of Jeremy Clarkson's dismissal with sufficient gravity. The blog should now have a black border and be playing sombre martial music.0
-
If adolf hitler, Harold shipman, Fred west and jimmy Savile returned as ghosts , haunted Farages house and carried on with the deeds they did while alive, would the conservative guardianistas on here
a) talk up their good points
b) blame farage for bringing it on himself
c) make jokes about testicular cancer patients
d) invent bets they never had to look shrewd?
0 -
Both May and Hammond stopped contract negotiations when Clarkson was suspended. I hope they will all leap together and pop up in a new home.SimonStClare said:
In light of the fact that all three presenters are about to come to the end of their present contracts with the BBC, that’s a very interesting comment by James May.Tim_B said:James May just said that he felt the three of them were a package, and that although Clarkson is a knob, he quite likes him.
0 -
A nation weeps. Violent thug brought low by politically-correct leftist groupthink.antifrank said:I don't think that pb has taken the news of Jeremy Clarkson's dismissal with sufficient gravity. The blog should now have a black border and be playing sombre martial music.
0 -
Presumably those defending Clarkson on the grounds that attacking someone for forgetting to order food is acceptable would be OK with a husband punching his wife if she hadn't cooked dinner?
"Ooh, but poor Clarkson was stressed and tired after a hard day without grub!" -- he had enough energy to b*ll*ck the guy for 30 solid minutes I notice.0 -
LOL.....antifrank said:I don't think that pb has taken the news of Jeremy Clarkson's dismissal with sufficient gravity. The blog should now have a black border and be playing sombre martial music.
TBH, given the other news about, it is rather minor. The BBC will try to continue with Top Gear and Clarkson will sign with somebody else...now in other news I believe there might be a General Election or something coming up.0 -
Sacking Clarkson for this minor fracas is like Man U sacking Ferguson after the Beckham boot incident.TGOHF said:Taking on the Top Gear seat would be like David Moyes taking over at Man U after Sir Awex.
The BBC management can't manage.0 -
James May has changed his Twitter status to say "former TV presenter".FrancisUrquhart said:Richard Hammond @RichardHammond · 7m 7 minutes ago
Gutted at such a sad end to an era. We're all three of us idiots in our different ways but it's been an incredible ride together.
Read that into it what you may....0 -
Didn't know that - it's on BBC here.Slackbladder said:
Kitchen Nightmares is Channel 4.Tim_B said:
BBC America has 4 episodes of Top Gear repeats today.Slackbladder said:Wether they could have avoided it or not, the BBC have just destroyed one of their few worldwide brands.
The only other being Doctor Who really.
Kitchen Nightmares perhaps? Or the dreadful "Mud, Sweat and Gears" featuring a presenter from Fifth Gear.
What will become of The Stig, a Wilman creation? Presumably that's part of the Top Gear format.0 -
You can't have it allNeil said:
Sadly not as much of a man as someone who can take a beating with style.isam said:
Oh of course! You da man xxxNeil said:
And of course in this case it was Clarkson not the producer who was attacked who reported the incident to the BBC.isam said:
I was physically attacked once at work... Wouldn't have dreamed of telling tales to the boss but I guess it takes all sortsmurali_s said:
Disagree 100%.Richard_Tyndall said:
Put it this way. I have been the witness (I mean officially in inquiries) to four separate assaults in the workplace in the last 15 years. Three of them were completely unprovoked as far as I could see and all involved actual physical violence worse than Clarkson is accused of.Neil said:
How far would Clarkson have to have gone in abusing the producer before the BBC's would have been justified in this decision?Richard_Tyndall said:
Stupid decision from the BBC.
In only one of these cases was the accused dismissed. And that was because his actions were found to be due to drugs and he was dismissed for the drug taking not the assault.
In all three other cases - all with different companies - the attacker was docked pay, demoted and/or made to attend courses on anger management or some such. In one case there was a police involvement and he also received a suspended sentence for assault.
Companies do not generally sack people for assaults because they are liable to find themselves being hauled up in front of tribunals and the sacked employee can generally show lack of proper HR management, stress or some other reason why the firm was responsible.
I would be amazed if the BBC didn't have similar cases on its files where they have not sacked the attacker. If and when they come out it will make an interesting comparison.
There were a whole host of ways they could have dealt with this and the fact they used it as an opportunity to get rid of him is just plain dumb.
Clarkson was equally dumb to have made the attack in the first place but in the long run it is the licence fee payer who will lose out here having to compensate for the lost revenue not Clarkson.
For some things, there should be zero tolerance and physical violence is one of them. If I were to physically attack my boss, I would be gob-smacked if I wasn't sacked.0 -
Who cares about PM questions?Big_G_NorthWales said:
And spoilt the fun !!!MikeSmithson said:
The speaker should have intervened and stopped Cameron from asking questions.SouthamObserver said:
I am sure he was. But it is a statement of fact that the LOTO does not answer questions at Prime Minister's Question Time.felix said:
Meanwhile in the real world Ed gets totally rogered again.SouthamObserver said:
Statement of fact. Leader of the opposition asks the questions at PMQ, he does not answer them.TGOHF said:
Desperate stuff.Scott_P said:
@BBCNormanS: Labour say Ed Miliband did not rule out Nics rise cos PMQs "not right time" to make announcementSimonStClare said:Looks like Cameron has managed to bounce Balls into this new announcement #winwin.
Or about the GE?
This week is all about Top Gear this and Clarkson that.0 -
It has certainly changed in the 30 or so years I have been working. I would agree with you if you were talking about a couple of decades ago but nowadays the huge explosion of litigation means that more companies look at the costs involved in fighting cases and decide that - if they believe it was a one off case - they are better of making sure the victim is compensated and the attacker receives the appropriate councilling. Even though I am only a consultant I am forever having to attend these daft team building sessions with all sorts of different clients where we all get colour coded and have to recognise how to approach and deal with 'reds' and how to get the best out of 'greens'.Neil said:
I'm continually amazed by the type of organisations that other posters work for. I have seen people sacked for a lot less than assaulting a colleague and I wouldnt give anyone much chance of claiming unfair dismissal if they were dismissed for the type of behaviour reported in this case.
Bottom line. I agree with you and Murali. Attacking someone probably should be a sackable offence unless there are real extenuating circumstances. But that is not the corporate world these days - at least not the one I seem to be working in. And the BBC could and should have found a way to handle it all better.0 -
No mention anywhere on BBC News website re tomorrow's C4/Sky Cameron/Miliband programme.
Back in 2010 at the equivalent time before the first debate it was the lead story everywhere.
So looks as if the C4/Sky programme at least is not going to get any general media hype.
I think we can expect much more for the ITV 7 person debate next week but it may well be that that is the only event which gets lead story coverage across all media.
0 -
How about waiting until May 8th and asking Nick Clegg?FrancisUrquhart said:
LOL.....antifrank said:I don't think that pb has taken the news of Jeremy Clarkson's dismissal with sufficient gravity. The blog should now have a black border and be playing sombre martial music.
TBH, given the other news about, it is rather minor. The BBC will try to continue with Top Gear and Clarkson will sign with somebody else...now in other news I believe there might be a General Election or something coming up.0 -
84, I think...SouthamObserver said:
He must be more than 70.Dair said:
Shatner's twitter is bizarre, he's 70 but seems to have the attitudes and interests of a 20 something hipster. He live tweets half the shows on The CW.Slackbladder said:William Shatner @WilliamShatner 4 mins4 minutes ago
Clarkson will be fine. Sponsors would be silly not to pick him up and establish a competitor show and the viewers will probably follow him.
Even Captain Kirk gets it.0 -
It's one thing asking the Prime Minister about the present government's actions and plans, it's another asking him about a putative future government's actions and plans the other side of an election. At that point it would seem quite in order for the Prime Minister to respond in kind, especially when he's given a direct answer to the question posed to him.MikeSmithson said:
The speaker should have intervened and stopped Cameron from asking questions.SouthamObserver said:
I am sure he was. But it is a statement of fact that the LOTO does not answer questions at Prime Minister's Question Time.felix said:
Meanwhile in the real world Ed gets totally rogered again.SouthamObserver said:
Statement of fact. Leader of the opposition asks the questions at PMQ, he does not answer them.TGOHF said:
Desperate stuff.Scott_P said:
@BBCNormanS: Labour say Ed Miliband did not rule out Nics rise cos PMQs "not right time" to make announcementSimonStClare said:Looks like Cameron has managed to bounce Balls into this new announcement #winwin.
If this is the level of gaming that Ed Miliband's team is up to, I fear for him in the debates.0 -
Coogan as himself is a non event. Arguably Clarkson is a good impersonation of Alan Partridge. Foster does some boring show or other on a Discovery type channel. I'm guessing Rowan Atkinson has better thongs to do and Evans has t=ruled himself out - although the BBC really would be putting the boot in employing a ginger.FrancisUrquhart said:
Anything on Coogan...Drugs...hookers.....makes Clarkson's "bad boy" antics look very small beer.Ghedebrav said:Jodie Kidd isn't half a bad shout though. Can't get odds on my work computer - anything on Steve Coogan?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-479134/Coogan-Barbarian-The-truth-man-blamed-leading-Owen-Wilson-brink-suicide.html
I suggest that in playing 'Guess the Replacement', people start thinking of journalists. Clarkson, as if his antics did not give the game away, is a journalist.
We should remember that TG itself took time to settle down, when its first never repeated first season had a section on second hand cars. At that time it was trying to pretend it was a programme about motoring. TG treads its size 12's along a fine line between irreverent and crass. It trod definitely into the second in its trip through the deep south of the USA for instance. We can all think of others. You cannot manufacture that. Still there are always celebrities wanting to flog their latest book... er, aren't there.
0 -
@Richard_Tyndall
"Look Jeremy, this is your final final warning, after that, I am afraid we will have to give you a final warning"0 -
I can see The Stig being reborn in the new series as The Cnut. As a back-handed tribute to a previous producer....Tim_B said:
BBC America has 4 episodes of Top Gear repeats today.Slackbladder said:Wether they could have avoided it or not, the BBC have just destroyed one of their few worldwide brands.
The only other being Doctor Who really.
Kitchen Nightmares perhaps? Or the dreadful "Mud, Sweat and Gears" featuring a presenter from Fifth Gear.
What will become of The Stig, a Wilman creation? Presumably that's part of the Top Gear format.
0 -
Cammo's speculations. It seems that whatever Cammo says the MSM will try to find a negative. Our pathetic press and pollsters.0
-
I remember that first season...Jason Dawe banging on about second hand motors...zzzzzzzzzzzz...Flightpath said:
Coogan as himself is a non event. Arguably Clarkson is a good impersonation of Alan Partridge. Foster does some boring show or other on a Discovery type channel. I'm guessing Rowan Atkinson has better thongs to do and Evans has t=ruled himself out - although the BBC really would be putting the boot in employing a ginger.FrancisUrquhart said:
Anything on Coogan...Drugs...hookers.....makes Clarkson's "bad boy" antics look very small beer.Ghedebrav said:Jodie Kidd isn't half a bad shout though. Can't get odds on my work computer - anything on Steve Coogan?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-479134/Coogan-Barbarian-The-truth-man-blamed-leading-Owen-Wilson-brink-suicide.html
I suggest that in playing 'Guess the Replacement', people start thinking of journalists. Clarkson, as if his antics did not give the game away, is a journalist.
We should remember that TG itself took time to settle down, when its first never repeated first season had a section on second hand cars. At that time it was trying to pretend it was a programme about motoring. TG treads its size 12's along a fine line between irreverent and crass. It trod definitely into the second in its trip through the deep south of the USA for instance. We can all think of others. You cannot manufacture that. Still there are always celebrities wanting to flog their latest book... er, aren't there.
0 -
Getting equal billing with Clarkson at presentSpeedy said:
Who cares about PM questions?Big_G_NorthWales said:
And spoilt the fun !!!MikeSmithson said:
The speaker should have intervened and stopped Cameron from asking questions.SouthamObserver said:
I am sure he was. But it is a statement of fact that the LOTO does not answer questions at Prime Minister's Question Time.felix said:
Meanwhile in the real world Ed gets totally rogered again.SouthamObserver said:
Statement of fact. Leader of the opposition asks the questions at PMQ, he does not answer them.TGOHF said:
Desperate stuff.Scott_P said:
@BBCNormanS: Labour say Ed Miliband did not rule out Nics rise cos PMQs "not right time" to make announcementSimonStClare said:Looks like Cameron has managed to bounce Balls into this new announcement #winwin.
Or about the GE?
This week is all about Top Gear this and Clarkson that.0
This discussion has been closed.