Gary Lineker told to step back from presenting Match of the Day

[Chomper Higgot]

Just now, JonnyF said:

Ah so that's why the likes of Maitlis and Lineker were/are always attacking the government. It's because they are secretly acting as propaganda for them. I guess they just don't know that propaganda is supposed to promote something, not attack it.

 

It all makes perfect sense now. Thanks for explaining.

Lineker always attacking the Government?

 

Where did get that from?

[JonnyF]

8 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

I rather think if he does go to court he’ll pick up a nice fat settlement.

He might well do. More millions for Gary, paid for by even higher TV taxes for those pensioners freezing to death over winter.

 

I'm not too sure left wing ideology normally supports taking money from the poor to give to millionaire celebrities, but anyway it's good to see you to celebrating it. 

 

#screwthepoor

[James105]

1 hour ago, Chomper Higgot said:

You’ll need to produce the contract.

 

I rather hope Lineker takes this to court, but I suspect the BBC will see sense and stop censoring Lineker.

 

Your repetitive gripe about the funding of the BBC is absolutely nothing to do with Lineker being censored, though his censoring is a fact which knocks a gaping hole n your argument of a particular ideology.

 

Take it to court?  How ridiculous, he hasn't been fired.   The BBC charter (and the reason they get away with "taxing" the public for their funding) is based on them being impartial.   He signed a contract with the BBC and has been warned several times in the past about his behaviour on social media.    The problem with Lineker is that because he is the BBC's highest paid presenter whenever he demonstrates some political dimwittedness on social media it makes headline news which then calls into question BBC impartiality, which then threatens their future funding model and then BBC management have to act.

 

Gary Lineker is free to leave the BBC if he wants to demonstrate his stupidity on social media to the masses without fear of a talking to by BBC management, and I am sure BT sport will offer him double  or triple his salary.   

 

Good to see those on the left are learning about censorship though.   This is a momentous day.   Will be good to see you offering your support to the likes of JK Rowling, Katie Hopkins, Andrew Bridgen etc in the future when they are faced with actual censorship.

[RuamRudy]

Just now, JonnyF said:

He might well do. More millions for Gary, paid for by even higher TV taxes for those pensioners freezing to death over winter.

 

I'm not too sure left wing ideology normally supports taking money from the poor to give to millionaire celebrities, but anyway it's good to see you to celebrating it. 

 

#screwthepoor

As far as I know, it's not lineker but the government that decides who pays for the TV license. But the nasty party has significant experience in devising and implementing policies which cause pensioners to freeze to death.

[JonnyF]

10 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

The BBC’s rightwing political pandering has gone further, now singling out one episode of Attenborough’s latest series to be removed from general broadcast and only made available on BBC I-Player.

 

https://inews.co.uk/news/bbc-david-attenborough-documentary-not-broadcast-2201612

Completely unsubstantiated rumours.

 

The BBC has categorically denied the decision was political. 

 

"A source told The Guardian" - Of course it had to be The Guardian didn't it. What a joke.

[placeholder]

Just now, JonnyF said:

He might well do. More millions for Gary, paid for by even higher TV taxes for those pensioners freezing to death over winter.

 

I'm not too sure left wing ideology normally supports taking money from the poor to give to millionaire celebrities, but anyway it's good to see you to celebrating it. 

 

#screwthepoor

You're seriously claiming it's lefties who have made life for the poor worse? Crocodile tears much?

 

[JonnyF]

4 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

As far as I know, it's not lineker but the government that decides who pays for the TV license. But the nasty party has significant experience in devising and implementing policies which cause pensioners to freeze to death.

Lineker knows full well that if he sues the BBC and wins then it is mainly poor taxpayers that will be paying his settlement, in addition to his colossal salary.

 

I wouldn't expect that to bother him though. Fake morality. I've seen holograms with more substance than him. 

[JonnyF]

3 minutes ago, placeholder said:

You're seriously claiming it's lefties who have made life for the poor worse? Crocodile tears much?

 

Strawman.

 

Next...

[RuamRudy]

Just now, JonnyF said:

Lineker knows full well that if he sues the BBC and wins then it is mainly poor taxpayers that will be paying his settlement, in addition to his colossal salary.

 

I wouldn't expect that to bother him though. Fake morality. I've seen holograms with more substance than him. 

So your criticism of him is based on a scenario you devised in your head? Fair enough...

[Chomper Higgot]

10 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

He might well do. More millions for Gary, paid for by even higher TV taxes for those pensioners freezing to death over winter.

 

I'm not too sure left wing ideology normally supports taking money from the poor to give to millionaire celebrities, but anyway it's good to see you to celebrating it. 

 

#screwthepoor

Take that up with the political operatives who decided to censor Lineker.

[placeholder]

Just now, JonnyF said:

Strawman.

 

Next...

When you write the kind of drivel I'm replying to, do you actually understand what it is you're doing? You're the party who created the strawman precedent by connecting a BBC sport commentator's high salary to the plight of the poor. It is to laugh.

[Chomper Higgot]

3 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

Lineker knows full well that if he sues the BBC and wins then it is mainly poor taxpayers that will be paying his settlement, in addition to his colossal salary.

 

I wouldn't expect that to bother him though. Fake morality. I've seen holograms with more substance than him. 

Lineker can only win in court if the decision to censor him has no legal basis.

In which case the blame for costs incurred is on those who decided to censor him.

 

 

 

[itsari]

2 hours ago, JonnyF said:

Why would they do that? He is a legal citizen of the UK, not an illegal asylum immigrant.

 

This isn't North Korea where you can be expelled for holding the wrong opinion. Yet....

The British Government can and do revoke British citizenship . A recent case was the girl that went to join a terrorist group named Ms Begum.

But the idea of the Tory government exporting refugees to Rwanda to stop refugees choosing to go to the UK for refuge is a big shame for the UK.

[Chomper Higgot]

18 minutes ago, James105 said:

Take it to court?  How ridiculous, he hasn't been fired.   The BBC charter (and the reason they get away with "taxing" the public for their funding) is based on them being impartial.   He signed a contract with the BBC and has been warned several times in the past about his behaviour on social media.    The problem with Lineker is that because he is the BBC's highest paid presenter whenever he demonstrates some political dimwittedness on social media it makes headline news which then calls into question BBC impartiality, which then threatens their future funding model and then BBC management have to act.

 

Gary Lineker is free to leave the BBC if he wants to demonstrate his stupidity on social media to the masses without fear of a talking to by BBC management, and I am sure BT sport will offer him double  or triple his salary.   

 

Good to see those on the left are learning about censorship though.   This is a momentous day.   Will be good to see you offering your support to the likes of JK Rowling, Katie Hopkins, Andrew Bridgen etc in the future when they are faced with actual censorship.

You need to present this contract.

 

 

[JonnyF]

7 minutes ago, placeholder said:

When you write the kind of drivel I'm replying to, do you actually understand what it is you're doing? You're the party who created the strawman precedent by connecting a BBC sport commentator's high salary to the plight of the poor. It is to laugh.

Another strawman.

 

I said it is mainly the poor that pay his salary.

 

Do try to keep up.

[JonnyF]

5 minutes ago, itsari said:

The British Government can and do revoke British citizenship . A recent case was the girl that went to join a terrorist group named Ms Begum.

She had dual citizenship so she can go to Bangladesh or wherever. Besides, she was a threat to national security. Morgan is simply obnoxious. Totally different cases.

 

As for Begum, good riddance to that garbage. Interesting that the BBC gave her a podcast though ????.

[Chomper Higgot]

16 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

Completely unsubstantiated rumours.

 

The BBC has categorically denied the decision was political. 

 

"A source told The Guardian" - Of course it had to be The Guardian didn't it. What a joke.

Well they would say that wouldn’t they.

 

Actions, however, speak louder than words.

It wouldn’t be the Daily Mail, The Telegraph or the Daily Express would it?!
We don’t get criticism of the Tories from that quarter.

 

 

[Chomper Higgot]

4 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

Another strawman.

 

I said it is mainly the poor that pay his salary.

 

Do try to keep up.

Mainly the poor?

[Chomper Higgot]

2 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

She had dual citizenship so she can go to Bangladesh or wherever. Besides, she was a threat to national security. Morgan is simply obnoxious. Totally different cases.

 

As for Begum, good riddance to that garbage. Interesting that the BBC gave her a podcast though ????.

On a point of logic.

 

If Government have the power to remove a citizen citizenship, it’s only a matter of time before a different Government arrives with a different set of reasons to use that power.

[JonnyF]

10 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Lineker can only win in court if the decision to censor him has no legal basis.

In which case the blame for costs incurred is on those who decided to censor him.

 

 

 

I'm sure that will be of great relief to the pensioners who can no longer afford to heat their homes due to the rise in their TV licence. "I'm freezing to death, but at least Gary got a few more millions of my taxpayers money".

 

If he had any morals he either wouldn't sue or donate any winnings to charity. Highly doubtful, to be honest I doubt automatic doors open for Gary.

 

Anyway, totally hypothetical situation. 

 

That you hope he sues and wins is telling though.

[JonnyF]

5 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Mainly the poor?

Define poor.

[Chomper Higgot]

3 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

I'm sure that will be of great relief to the pensioners who can no longer afford to heat their homes due to the rise in their TV licence. "I'm freezing to death, but at least Gary got a few more millions of my taxpayers money".

 

If he had any morals he either wouldn't sue or donate any winnings to charity. Highly doubtful, to be honest I doubt automatic doors open for Gary.

 

Anyway, totally hypothetical situation. 

 

That you hope he sues and wins is telling though.

Faux outrage.

 

And a swerve on who is responsible for this decision into the bargain.

[vinny41]

20 minutes ago, itsari said:

The British Government can and do revoke British citizenship . A recent case was the girl that went to join a terrorist group named Ms Begum.

But the idea of the Tory government exporting refugees to Rwanda to stop refugees choosing to go to the UK for refuge is a big shame for the UK.

Its not an original idea as Labour wanted a similar solution in 2004

Blair wants asylum-seeker camp in Africa

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/blair-wants-asylumseeker-camp-in-africa-71062.html

[Chomper Higgot]

10 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

Define poor.

Sorry Johnny, your comment was:

 

”I said it is mainly the poor that pay his salary.”

 

I’ve questioned this ‘Mainly the poor’.

 

Now you come back with the absurdity of asking me to define poor when it was you that injected ‘the poor’ into the discussion.

 

There are a number of possibilities amongst which are these:

 

1. You fabricated the whole ‘mainly the poor’ argument and you don’t have any evidence to back up your assertion.

 

2. You are not engaging in honest good faith debate.

 

Inserting arguments about ‘the poor’ into a discussion and then asking others to define ‘ poor’ for you is utter nonsense.

 

 

 

Edited March 13, 2023 by Chomper Higgot

[itsari]

1 minute ago, vinny41 said:

Its not an original idea as Labour wanted a similar solution in 2004

Blair wants asylum-seeker camp in Africa

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/blair-wants-asylumseeker-camp-in-africa-71062.html

Thankfully the idea was not adopted .

I never realised that Blair came up with that idea  . 

Thank you

[sungod]

Really enjoyed MOTD when I watched it on catch up Sunday morning, didn't have to fast forward through Lineker, Shearer etc to watch the actual action.

 

Seems half a million extra viewers thought the same, hope they keep the new format.

[roo860]

3 minutes ago, sungod said:

Really enjoyed MOTD when I watched it on catch up Sunday morning, didn't have to fast forward through Lineker, Shearer etc to watch the actual action.

 

Seems half a million extra viewers thought the same, hope they keep the new format.

Exactly, get rid of Shearer, Wrighty and the rest of em including that women, get some new blood in, would be breath of fresh air.

[Bkk Brian]

It is easily arguable that the BBC needs Gary Lineker more than he needs the BBC. He could earn far more than his freelance fee of £1.35m per year on other, commercial platforms.

share of the British population, or around 40 million people, who watch at least part of MOTD’s output each season. The flagship Saturday night show can routinely attract 4m viewers, with up to three million tuning in to MOTD2 on Sundays. Tens of millions of additional fans each season request the shows on BBC iPlayer.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-11848777/Match-Day-just-football-free-air-reliable-format.html

 

[vinny41]

1 minute ago, roo860 said:

Exactly, get rid of Shearer, Wrighty and the rest of em including that women, get some new blood in, would be breath of fresh air.

Here is the Italian version of Gary Lineker

https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport/football/10906300/floriana-messina-gary-lineker-presenter/

[sungod]

1 minute ago, Bkk Brian said:

It is easily arguable that the BBC needs Gary Lineker more than he needs the BBC. He could earn far more than his freelance fee of £1.35m per year on other, commercial platforms.

share of the British population, or around 40 million people, who watch at least part of MOTD’s output each season. The flagship Saturday night show can routinely attract 4m viewers, with up to three million tuning in to MOTD2 on Sundays. Tens of millions of additional fans each season request the shows on BBC iPlayer.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-11848777/Match-Day-just-football-free-air-reliable-format.html

 

Half a million more this week without him