Lineker steps down from MOTD

Originally Posted by tatty

Have Labour not been involved in this ‘row’?

No, I don't think they have... how have they been involved (participants rather than commentators).

Originally Posted by measlyshark

No, I don't think they have... how have they been involved (participants rather than commentators).

Well, you didn’t say that originally.

The question is now have they been participants rather than commentators?

Can you qualify participation in this context?

Originally Posted by tatty

Well, you didn’t say that originally.

The question is now have they been participants rather than commentators?

Can you qualify participation in this context?

Stop being silly. I asked how the 'left-wing' political party, commonly known as 'Labour', have been involved in an argument between the government and the government run televisual station known as the 'BBC'.

They haven't.

Participant - involved in something.
Commentator - commentating on something.

You are a card.

Originally Posted by red red robbo

I quite agree with you.

But the BBC don't have the right to tell him what he can and can't say as a private individual, so long as they are legal.



That's not what he said though, that's what the tories want you to think he said. He said some of the language being used is similar to that used in Germany in the 1930s,about which he is entirely factually correct.

I’m not aware that the BBC has said he can’t say what he wants (and you are right to say they don’t have that right). What has been said is that saying it puts him in breach of his contract with the BBC, which is an entirely different matter.

I know what he said. And he knows that the general public will take his words as a comparison with the Nazis.

Originally Posted by red red robbo

It's not a different discusion at all,if the restriction is unreasonable then he can't be sacked for it.

Depends. If he is an employee, then any dismissal may well be unfair if the view was that the restriction was unreasonable (or more accurately, one that no reasonable employer would dismiss for in the circumstances - which accomodates that different employers may have different views).

But if he is not an employee (and both he and the BBC agree that he does not have employment status, although that is not definitive of the issue as the answer is a matter of law), then the reasonableness of the restriction is irrelevant. The only question is then if he is in breach if contract.

Actually, just shut the BBC down. It’s full of illiterate idiots. I thought I just heard its media correspondent on the main news say “the test of impartiality is whether the people believe you”. I re-wound it. I did hear it. Thankfully my hearing isn’t going, but I’m despairing about everything else.

Tories never wanted Lineker sacked, rather kept in place so they could continue to rile their boomer base with fibs about the "left wing BBC". But their stooges who now run the Corporation were too dim to grasp this.

The tories must love these little media frenzies which all conveniently keep distracting from them running the country into the ground.

https://twitter.com/grahambassett56/status/1635039756873797632?s=46&t=Otbphvg3J89z5ic2-GdV9g

Wait, what?

Originally Posted by arnold muhren

https://twitter.com/grahambassett56/...j89z5ic2-gdv9g
wait, what?

😂

nothing she says is right. ever.

Originally Posted by Arnold Muhren

https://twitter.com/grahambassett56/...J89z5ic2-GdV9g
Wait, what?

Sorry but surely this lady doesnt put that column into production, somebody must have to check it before the info goes live. The incompetency

https://www.independent.co.uk/tv/spo...-b2106103.html

Bit of awareness lads come on

Returning this week. BBC to review their policies.

Lineker has done them.

Originally Posted by suedeshoes

Returning this week. BBC to review their policies.

Lineker has done them.

Don’t think he’d have managed to have the same impact if he was white.

Originally Posted by suedeshoes

Returning this week. BBC to review their policies.

Lineker has done them.

It's obvious really, £#%&! knows how they thought they could get away with it. The precedent it would set is unmanageable to the extreme, and would be unworkable for the hundreds of freelance pundits and presenters they have across all genres and all of BBC's platforms.

Would it mean Ian Wright can't express his own opinions on his own podcast that's on a completely different platform? Would he have to have his potential guests vetted by the BBC first before they appear on his podcast on the Apple platform? Would he not be able to agree with a valid political point one of his guests makes on his podcast in fear that he might somehow breach incredibly vague and open to interpretation, 'impartiality' rules.

And that's one sports pundit on the BBC with one project outside of the BBC. If you then stretch to people that present or provide punditry on any factual program program on the BBC then it's an absolute farce. Go further into the entertainment side of it, then half the £#%&!ers on the BBC should have been sacked years ago.

Unworkable nonsense that was a targeted attack at the behest of this absolute shambles of a Government. There should be a couple of heads rolling from the BBC as a result of this mess, and none of them are Gary Lineker.

Originally Posted by Patty_b

It's obvious really, £#%&! knows how they thought they could get away with it. The precedent it would set is unmanageable to the extreme, and would be unworkable for the hundreds of freelance pundits and presenters they have across all genres and all of BBC's platforms.

Would it mean Ian Wright can't express his own opinions on his own podcast that's on a completely different platform? Would he have to have his potential guests vetted by the BBC first before they appear on his podcast on the Apple platform? Would he not be able to agree with a valid political point one of his guests makes on his podcast in fear that he might somehow breach incredibly vague and open to interpretation, 'impartiality' rules.

And that's one sports pundit on the BBC with one project outside of the BBC. If you then stretch to people that present or provide punditry on any factual program program on the BBC then it's an absolute farce. Go further into the entertainment side of it, then half the £#%&!ers on the BBC should have been sacked years ago.

Unworkable nonsense that was a targeted attack at the behest of this absolute shambles of a Government. There should be a couple of heads rolling from the BBC as a result of this mess, and none of them are Gary Lineker.

I know where I'd start...

Originally Posted by Patty_b

It's obvious really, £#%&! knows how they thought they could get away with it. The precedent it would set is unmanageable to the extreme, and would be unworkable for the hundreds of freelance pundits and presenters they have across all genres and all of BBC's platforms.

Would it mean Ian Wright can't express his own opinions on his own podcast that's on a completely different platform? Would he have to have his potential guests vetted by the BBC first before they appear on his podcast on the Apple platform? Would he not be able to agree with a valid political point one of his guests makes on his podcast in fear that he might somehow breach incredibly vague and open to interpretation, 'impartiality' rules.

And that's one sports pundit on the BBC with one project outside of the BBC. If you then stretch to people that present or provide punditry on any factual program program on the BBC then it's an absolute farce. Go further into the entertainment side of it, then half the £#%&!ers on the BBC should have been sacked years ago.

Unworkable nonsense that was a targeted attack at the behest of this absolute shambles of a Government. There should be a couple of heads rolling from the BBC as a result of this mess, and none of them are Gary Lineker.

Well said.

Originally Posted by Stickman

Sorry but surely this lady doesnt put that column into production, somebody must have to check it before the info goes live. The incompetency

It took less than a minute to see that her last article for the guardian was written seven years ago. Certainly less time than it would have needed a random twitter user called grahambassett56 to mock up an image like that for absolutely no engagement.

https://www.instagram.com/p/CpudcarM5ZX/?igshid=YmMyMTA2M2Y=

2 years to train up that utter £#%&!ing tin of beige paint Jenas as his replacement then.