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

[placeholder]

1 minute ago, JonnyF said:

You asked me to define it. I defined it.

 

You are free to disagree with my definition. Just as I am free to disagree with yours.

 

Isn't diversity of opinion wonderful!!!

There's a reason aseannow.com requires links to credible sources to support an assertion.  You are not a credible source when it comes to defining what poverty is. Neither am I. Neither are any of the members here on aseannow.com That is why the rules require members to link a credible source to back their claims. You linked to no credible source to justify your claim that most of Lineker's salary comes from the poor. Instead you offered your own personal assessment of what income level it takes to qualify as poor in the UK. Now, if you could link to a credible source that shows yearly income under 50000 pounds qualifies as poverty, then you win. But there is no such credible source. So, instead, you make things up. Stop making things up

[sungod]

2 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

I don't have to provide evidence on an opinion. Besides how would you propose that a show that provides highlights and commentary on a number of premiership matches does that with no commentators? How would they even break up the segments. Do you really think that they will risk  40 million people, who watch at least part of MOTD’s output each season to try that experiment? Do you get it now? that's a big if

I didn't realise how poor the MOTD viewing figures were to be honest, until they were being quoted this week. On that sort of money one would have thought them higher.

 

Didn't even make it into the top 50 according to this, and that's with Lineker at the helm in the week quoted.

 

Seems more prefer "Dancing on Ice' and 'Antiques Roadshow'  ????

 

https://www.thinkbox.tv/research/barb-data/top-programmes-report/

[JonnyF]

Just now, placeholder said:

There's a reason aseannow.com requires links to credible sources to support an assertion.  You are not a credible source when it comes to defining what poverty is. Neither am I. Neither are any of the members here on aseannow.com That is why the rules require members to link a credible source to back their claims. You linked to no credible source to justify your claim that most of Lineker's salary comes from the poor. Instead you offered your own personal assessment of what income level it takes to qualify as poor in the UK. Now, if you could link to a credible source that shows yearly income under 50000 pounds qualifies as poverty, then you win. But there is no such credible source. So, instead, you make things up. Stop making things up

I asked you to define poor. You refused and asked me to define it. So I did.

 

Now you're whinging that you don't like my definition ????.

 

No pleasing some people 

[Bkk Brian]

7 minutes ago, sungod said:

I didn't realise how poor the MOTD viewing figures were to be honest, until they were being quoted this week. On that sort of money one would have thought them higher.

 

Didn't even make it into the top 50 according to this, and that's with Lineker at the helm in the week quoted.

 

Seems more prefer "Dancing on Ice' and 'Antiques Roadshow'  ????

 

https://www.thinkbox.tv/research/barb-data/top-programmes-report/

Depends what format. Its top in iplayer

 

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/most-popular

[Chomper Higgot]

46 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

I define poor as anyone earning below 50,000 pounds per annum.

 

The average salary is around 38,000. 

 

Here are you stats.

 

https://www.statista.com/statistics/416139/full-time-annual-salary-in-the-uk-by-region/#:~:text=The median annual earnings in,pounds in the North East.

 

Defining poor at £50,000 a year and then providing the national average salary of £38,000 is a laughable way to attempt to get out of not being able to back up your claim:

 

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

 

[vinny41]

31 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

I don't have to provide evidence on an opinion. Besides how would you propose that a show that provides highlights and commentary on a number of premiership matches does that with no commentators? How would they even break up the segments. Do you really think that they will risk  40 million people, who watch at least part of MOTD’s output each season to try that experiment? Do you get it now? that's a big if

Well It's an assumption that sometime in the future he will be looking for a salary increase.

The BBC could try a 2 tier MOTD 

Tier 1 MOTD similar to last saturday no increase on license fee

Tier 2 Pay for view MOTD where the Luvvies pay extra to Watch Linker and his Crew and advise Linker that any salary increase is linked to the Pay for view MOTD viewing numbers

 

[James105]

47 minutes ago, roo860 said:

 

It could quite easily be argued due to the vagueness of the "Don't bring the BBC into disrepute" that comparing the Tories to the Nazis falls under that category as it diminishes the holocaust and the deaths of 6 million Jewish people in gas chambers.   

 

If Lineker had not been so "6th form student" in his tweet and just said he disagreed with the Tory policy without referring to 1930s Germany then I doubt anyone would particularly care as it is quite common for rich millionaires living in predominantly white gated communities to support unfettered illegal immigration as they are completely unaffected by it.    

[brewsterbudgen]

4 hours ago, JonnyF said:

So the government is telling Gary to compare the government's policy to Nazis.

 

Got it...

 

The BBC is a hard left organization. Gary Lineker has become their chief political spokesman. Pretty much everything he preaches is left wing ideology and anti Tory. Claiming the government preaches it's ideology via the BBC is gaslighting of the highest order.

Good grief!  The Chairman and Director General of the BBC are both Conservatives.  If the BBC was even "soft-left" Gary's comments wouldn't have caused such a ridiculous fuss!   The BBC is right of centre and starting to lean even further right.  

[hotandsticky]

2 minutes ago, brewsterbudgen said:

Good grief!  The Chairman and Director General of the BBC are both Conservatives.  If the BBC was even "soft-left" Gary's comments wouldn't have caused such a ridiculous fuss!   The BBC is right of centre and starting to lean even further right.  

 

 

Are you serious ?

[Bkk Brian]

2 minutes ago, vinny41 said:

Well It's an assumption that sometime in the future he will be looking for a salary increase.

The BBC could try a 2 tier MOTD 

Tier 1 MOTD similar to last saturday no increase on license fee

Tier 2 Pay for view MOTD where the Luvvies pay extra to Watch Linker and his Crew and advise Linker that any salary increase is linked to the Pay for view MOTD viewing numbers

 

If that's your assumption then Lineker could already triple his salary:

 

Gary Lineker 'to be offered triple his wages' by ITV if Match of the Day host quits BBC

https://www.express.co.uk/sport/football/1745315/Gary-Lineker-news-pay-wages-ITV-BBC-Match-of-the-Day-Twitter-row-Suella-Braverman

[JonnyF]

24 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Defining poor at £50,000 a year and then providing the national average salary of £38,000 is a laughable way to attempt to get out of not being able to back up your claim:

 

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

 

We are all entitled to our opinions. I define poor as 50k or under.

 

Maybe you are blissfully unaware of the cost of living/inflation in the UK right now.

[vinny41]

11 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

If that's your assumption then Lineker could already triple his salary:

 

Gary Lineker 'to be offered triple his wages' by ITV if Match of the Day host quits BBC

https://www.express.co.uk/sport/football/1745315/Gary-Lineker-news-pay-wages-ITV-BBC-Match-of-the-Day-Twitter-row-Suella-Braverman

And I see on some UK forums that existing BT sports subscription customers have indicated if that happens they will be cancelling their BT sports subscription

[James105]

2 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

If that's your assumption then Lineker could already triple his salary:

 

Gary Lineker 'to be offered triple his wages' by ITV if Match of the Day host quits BBC

https://www.express.co.uk/sport/football/1745315/Gary-Lineker-news-pay-wages-ITV-BBC-Match-of-the-Day-Twitter-row-Suella-Braverman

Of course he could.   So why does he stay at the BBC when he is well aware the funding model of the BBC requires impartiality?   Is he an idiot or is he only too aware that being the face of the BBC means his dimwitted twittery is given more prominence and will cause the right wing media (who are against the antiquated and unprogressive nature of the TV licensing model) to give it headline news treatment as a stick to beat the BBC with?   Lineker puts this out of date funding model on the front page and I am pretty sure his bosses would prefer this was not the case as it puts their funding at risk.   

 

I can't even think of a prominent ITV sports presenter which suggests that if someone who worked there tweeted the same thing it would not generate headlines so his political activism would have less impact.    If he was on ITV, despite being paid significantly more, he would fade into the background very quickly no matter how many times he invoked Godwins law on social media.  

[JonnyF]

13 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

If that's your assumption then Lineker could already triple his salary:

 

Gary Lineker 'to be offered triple his wages' by ITV if Match of the Day host quits BBC

https://www.express.co.uk/sport/football/1745315/Gary-Lineker-news-pay-wages-ITV-BBC-Match-of-the-Day-Twitter-row-Suella-Braverman

He should leave. Get 4,000,000 a year and then he's free to preach to people in poor areas about how they should stop complaining about illegal immigrants moving in next door, all while tweeting about climate change from his 5 litre Benz as he drives around the immigrant free West London suburb where he resides in a huge house.

 

His journey to champagne socialist would be complete. Top man that Gary...

[JonnyF]

22 minutes ago, brewsterbudgen said:

The BBC is right of centre and starting to lean even further right.  

Gaslighting extraordinaire.

[Bkk Brian]

16 minutes ago, vinny41 said:

And I see on some UK forums that existing BT sports subscription customers have indicated if that happens they will be cancelling their BT sports subscription

Really, I see claim with no link, so not comment needed

[Bkk Brian]

17 minutes ago, James105 said:

Of course he could.   So why does he stay at the BBC when he is well aware the funding model of the BBC requires impartiality?   Is he an idiot or is he only too aware that being the face of the BBC means his dimwitted twittery is given more prominence and will cause the right wing media (who are against the antiquated and unprogressive nature of the TV licensing model) to give it headline news treatment as a stick to beat the BBC with?   Lineker puts this out of date funding model on the front page and I am pretty sure his bosses would prefer this was not the case as it puts their funding at risk.   

 

I can't even think of a prominent ITV sports presenter which suggests that if someone who worked there tweeted the same thing it would not generate headlines so his political activism would have less impact.    If he was on ITV, despite being paid significantly more, he would fade into the background very quickly no matter how many times he invoked Godwins law on social media.  

So why does he stay at the BBC when he is well aware the funding model of the BBC requires impartiality

 

I thought that was being discussed with the head of BBC indicating that there would more flexible rules for Gary if he stayed? At least that's what the BBC reported.

 

 

[Bkk Brian]

16 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

He should leave. Get 4,000,000 a year and then he's free to preach to people in poor areas about how they should stop complaining about illegal immigrants moving in next door, all while tweeting about climate change from his 5 litre Benz as he drives around the immigrant free West London suburb where he resides in a huge house.

 

His journey to champagne socialist would be complete. Top man that Gary...

Nobody needs to follow his tweets and opinions. Would that be the same home in London where he accommodated 2 refugees?

 

[Chomper Higgot]

19 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

Gaslighting extraordinaire.

Hardly so given the political history of the BBC Director General and the stink of corruption sound Johnson appointing his chum as the BBC Chairman.

[Chomper Higgot]

24 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

He should leave. Get 4,000,000 a year and then he's free to preach to people in poor areas about how they should stop complaining about illegal immigrants moving in next door, all while tweeting about climate change from his 5 litre Benz as he drives around the immigrant free West London suburb where he resides in a huge house.

 

His journey to champagne socialist would be complete. Top man that Gary...

Still waiting for your evidence of Lineker being any kind of socialist.

 

Or is this another of your ‘make it up as you go along’ things?

[James105]

18 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

Nobody needs to follow his tweets and opinions. Would that be the same home in London where he accommodated 2 refugees?

 

I'm not sure a 20 day publicity stunt counts as "accommodated 2 refugees".   Following the links:

 

"in September 2020, after welcoming a student from Pakistan"

https://www.mirror.co.uk/3am/celebrity-style/gary-lineker-still-touch-two-29434358

 

Are students from Pakistan considered refugees?

[brewsterbudgen]

57 minutes ago, hotandsticky said:

 

 

Are you serious ?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Sharp_(BBC_chairman)

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tim_Davie

 

Hope this helps.

 

 

[josephbloggs]

2 hours ago, KhaoNiaw said:

But Lineker is a freelancer and was commenting on his own social media account. He's a sports presenter and not responsible for political content on the BBC. So the BBC's own guidelines suggest he hasn't done anything wrong. Does anyone actually believe that what he tweets out represent anything other than his own personal views?
Anyway, the question would be why pick on Lineker when there are so many other examples of other senior BBC presenters doing exactly the same thing. And we all know that there would have been no issue at all if he had tweeted political comments that were in support of government policy.

When he was presenter of Top Gear Jeremy Clarkson appeared on The One Show and said that striking public sector workers (nurses, teachers and civil servants) should be shot in front of their families.
 

“I’d have them all shot,” the 51-year-old said on the BBC’s prime-time One Show.

“I would take them outside and execute them in front of their families,” he added. “I mean how dare they go on strike when they have got these gilt-edged pensions that are going to be guaranteed while the rest of us have to work for a living?”

Nothing happened to him. At all. 

But call out the current government for their policies and you're immediately off the air.

[JonnyF]

24 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

Nobody needs to follow his tweets and opinions. Would that be the same home in London where he accommodated 2 refugees?

 

I don't believe there was any evidence that he followed up on this publicity stunt and took any real refugees in for any length of time.

 

He may have wheeled them in for a couple of days for a photo shoot, I don't recall.

[Will B Good]

2 hours ago, roo860 said:

 

It says......... "if your work requires you to maintain impartiality....."........he is a football commentator so he is entitled to be 'impartial' when it comes to politics......?

 

He shouldn't however be supporting Leicester City. 

[sungod]

1 hour ago, Bkk Brian said:

Depends what format. Its top in iplayer

 

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/most-popular

Yes, without Lineker

[James105]

12 minutes ago, josephbloggs said:

When he was presenter of Top Gear Jeremy Clarkson appeared on The One Show and said that striking public sector workers (nurses, teachers and civil servants) should be shot in front of their families.
 

“I’d have them all shot,” the 51-year-old said on the BBC’s prime-time One Show.

“I would take them outside and execute them in front of their families,” he added. “I mean how dare they go on strike when they have got these gilt-edged pensions that are going to be guaranteed while the rest of us have to work for a living?”

Nothing happened to him. At all. 

But call out the current government for their policies and you're immediately off the air.

Only complete fools would suggest that Jeremy Clarkson meant that as anything other than a joke.   I don't recall any stories of him following up on this where he actually lined up any nurses and shot them in front of their families which does suggest that he didn't mean it literally.   

 

Pretty sure he says the same thing about cyclists/caravan owners as well.   His TV persona is a character of a grumpy old man which proved very successful for the BBC.   Gary Lineker doesn't have that kind of TV persona and if he did then I don't think anyone would bat an eyelid if he demanded similar treatment for the Tories.   

[brewsterbudgen]

2 minutes ago, sungod said:

Yes, without Lineker

Most people (including me) tuned in to see what it would be like.  Most people will not be bothering again, if it stays as 20 minutes of goal highlights with fake crowd noise!  

 

Fortunately, it's looking likely that a compromise has been reached and it will be back to normal for the BBC's FA Cup quarter-final coverage.  Welcome back Gary and friends! ????????

[JonnyF]

21 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Still waiting for your evidence of Lineker being any kind of socialist.

 

Or is this another of your ‘make it up as you go along’ things?

He's certainly left wing, liberal and progressive.

 

 

I mean, I don't believe they issue Socialist identity cards yet so I am not sure what evidence you are expecting me to produce. Membership of the Socialist Worker magazine? Would that be evidence enough for you? Probably not...

 

The socialist worker appears to agree with his standpoint on pretty much everything though.

 

https://socialistworker.co.uk/letters/gary-lineker-is-right-about-the-1930s/

 

His tweets and opinions are certainly consistent with the views of a socialist. 

 

Does he have a "I am a socialist" tattoo? I'm not sure. Would you consider that to be proof if he did? Probably not. You'd ask for links proving it wasn't done when he was drunk or as one of those Hipster "ironic" tattoos.

 

But in my opinion, he is a socialist. All the evidence points that way. It would be disingenuous to claim otherwise. I'm sure that won't stop you though ????

 

[JonnyF]

7 minutes ago, Will B Good said:

It says......... "if your work requires you to maintain impartiality....."........he is a football commentator so he is entitled to be 'impartial' when it comes to politics......?

 

He shouldn't however be supporting Leicester City. 

Is comparing the policy of the government to the Nazi's respectful and courteous?