Clarkson suspended by the BBC

[johncocker]

You think, he should get sacked out of principle, yet even the supposed victim dosn't attempt to establish a case.

anything between 100 or 200 jobs that his participation in the show supports warrant that it should be a different outcome.

in your world jobs don't matter, but minor injuries mean the world.

what you really don't like is that he isn't seduced by the magic of multiculturism, and has a record of mocking those who define themselves by how 'right on' they are? That's the real problem with you isn't it?

.

 

 

 

I think everyone accepts that he shouldn't have slapped his producer, but they had a long working day, and the BBC scrimpted (as they do), on accomodation (idiotic really, considering how much money TG brings in).

 

 

The only winners here are people like you, who would never even watch it, but like a dog in a manger, don't want anyone else to either.

[mjw47]

You think, he should get sacked out of principle, yet even the supposed victim dosn't attempt to establish a case.

anything between 100 or 200 jobs that his participation in the show supports warrant that it should be a different outcome.

in your world jobs don't matter, but minor injuries mean the world.

what you really don't like is that he isn't seduced by the magic of multiculturism, and has a record of mocking those who define themselves by how 'right on' they are? That's the real problem with you isn't it?

.

 

 

 

I think everyone accepts that he shouldn't have slapped his producer, but they had a long working day, and the BBC scrimpted (as they do), on accomodation (idiotic really, considering how much money TG brings in).

 

 

The only winners here are people like you, who would never even watch it, but like a dog in a manger, don't want anyone else to either.

 

Have you ever considered the idea of looking at previous posts and taking them into consideration before posting and making a complete fool out of yourself?

 

Where to start?

 

First of all ,I have posted that I do not want him sacked, I want TG to continue in order that Jezza can be contained to some degree and not appear in other programs that I like where he irritates me with his supercilious gormless smirk and his so called laddish sense of humour.

 

Secondly, in my world ' jobs don't matter ' would you mind explaining how you came to that ludicrous conclusion bearing in mind I wanted him to continue with TG?

 

For your information before retirement I was an employer.

 

There is no 'supposed' about the victim, the verbal and physical attack have been proven and that is why they cancelled his contract.

 

Has it occurred to you that the victim didn't complain precisely because he was scared he'd lose his job and not be reemployed ?

 

As for the BBC scrimped, this was how they 'scrimped with the licence payers money. http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CCIQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fsimonstonehall.com%2F&ei=owMYVbvoGMHQ7AbB3YGQCg&usg=AFQjCNGV0axn-Wl8oktkrsb8SVbm6g86wg&bvm=bv.89381419,d.ZGU

 

They also laid on a helicopter to ferry poor old weary Jeremy and his exhausted pals from the pub to this terribly unsatisfactory watering hole.

 

Long working day?

 

They'd overstayed their visit to the pub, which was what caused the problem in the first place.

 

Now you have made unfounded assumptions about me in your last two posts.

 

Let me make one about you, if you think what Jeremy and his equally cossetted pals get up to sounds like hard work, then you've probably never worked a decent day in your life.

[petcharlie]

Have you ever considered the idea of looking at previous posts and taking them into consideration before posting and making a complete fool out of yourself?

 

Where to start?

 

First of all ,I have posted that I do not want him sacked, I want TG to continue in order that Jezza can be contained to some degree and not appear in other programs that I like where he irritates me with his supercilious gormless smirk and his so called laddish sense of humour.

 

Secondly, in my world ' jobs don't matter ' would you mind explaining how you came to that ludicrous conclusion bearing in mind I wanted him to continue with TG?

 

For your information before retirement I was an employer.

 

There is no 'supposed' about the victim, the verbal and physical attack have been proven and that is why they cancelled his contract.

 

Has it occurred to you that the victim didn't complain precisely because he was scared he'd lose his job and not be reemployed ?

 

As for the BBC scrimped, this was how they 'scrimped with the licence payers money. http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CCIQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fsimonstonehall.com%2F&ei=owMYVbvoGMHQ7AbB3YGQCg&usg=AFQjCNGV0axn-Wl8oktkrsb8SVbm6g86wg&bvm=bv.89381419,d.ZGU

 

They also laid on a helicopter to ferry poor old weary Jeremy and his exhausted pals from the pub to this terribly unsatisfactory watering hole.

 

Long working day?

 

They'd overstayed their visit to the pub, which was what caused the problem in the first place.

 

Now you have made unfounded assumptions about me in your last two posts.

 

Let me make one about you, if you think what Jeremy and his equally cossetted pals get up to sounds like hard work, then you've probably never worked a decent day in your life.

Did someone say LONG WORKING DAY .What day was that then must have missed it.I hardly think he knows what a hard working day is.

[Bigthumb]

You think, he should get sacked out of principle, yet even the supposed victim dosn't attempt to establish a case.

anything between 100 or 200 jobs that his participation in the show supports warrant that it should be a different outcome.

in your world jobs don't matter, but minor injuries mean the world.

what you really don't like is that he isn't seduced by the magic of multiculturism, and has a record of mocking those who define themselves by how 'right on' they are? That's the real problem with you isn't it?

.

 

 

 

I think everyone accepts that he shouldn't have slapped his producer, but they had a long working day, and the BBC scrimpted (as they do), on accomodation (idiotic really, considering how much money TG brings in).

 

 

The only winners here are people like you, who would never even watch it, but like a dog in a manger, don't want anyone else to either.

 

It would appear that JC is off to Australia next month to save the BBC's ass. There were threats of legal action against the BBC if they didn't fullfill their obligation to put on the Top Gear road shows, and Clarkson, May and Hammond are prepared to front these shows without BBC billing. So no doubt the BBC will lose its revenue on these shows.

 

Afterwards it appears that Clarkson, May and Hammond will be joined by producer Andy Wilman to produce a show called Top Speed for Sky. So there will be jobs, just not at the BBC and probably not in Britain.

[petcharlie]

You think, he should get sacked out of principle, yet even the supposed victim dosn't attempt to establish a case.

anything between 100 or 200 jobs that his participation in the show supports warrant that it should be a different outcome.

in your world jobs don't matter, but minor injuries mean the world.

what you really don't like is that he isn't seduced by the magic of multiculturism, and has a record of mocking those who define themselves by how 'right on' they are? That's the real problem with you isn't it?

.

 

 

 

I think everyone accepts that he shouldn't have slapped his producer, but they had a long working day, and the BBC scrimpted (as they do), on accomodation (idiotic really, considering how much money TG brings in).

 

 

The only winners here are people like you, who would never even watch it, but like a dog in a manger, don't want anyone else to either.

 

He should get the sack because he was on his last warning the important word here is LAST.He throws a infantile tantrum thumps his work mate because he expects his own way as usual and gets the sack.Now to me I think because he his on his LAST warning he can not expect any thing else can he.I can not see the problem.

[Bigthumb]

He should get the sack because he was on his last warning the important word here is LAST.He throws a infantile tantrum thumps his work mate because he expects his own way as usual and gets the sack.Now to me I think because he his on his LAST warning he can not expect any thing else can he.I can not see the problem.

 

I doubt Clarkson can see a problem either. Because of all the bleating from the rabid dogs his profile and cudos has increased massively. He will undoubtedly get paid more in future for his new show as well as his newspaper columns.

His show will still go out to the world and folk will still buy his DVDs.

 

Of course the BBC won't be producing any of this and will therefore not benefit from any of the revenues. On the other hand Clarkson, May and Hammond will all gain rather a lot from their royalties on Top Gear's back catalogue.

 

So everyone is a winner.

[The Joker]

I doubt Clarkson can see a problem either. Because of all the bleating from the rabid dogs his profile and cudos has increased massively. He will undoubtedly get paid more in future for his new show as well as his newspaper columns.

His show will still go out to the world and folk will still buy his DVDs.

 

Of course the BBC won't be producing any of this and will therefore not benefit from any of the revenues. On the other hand Clarkson, May and Hammond will all gain rather a lot from their royalties on Top Gear's back catalogue.

 

So everyone is a winner.

 

As long as I no longer have to contribute to the idiot's £1million salary, I'm happy.

[mjw47]

I doubt Clarkson can see a problem either. Because of all the bleating from the rabid dogs his profile and cudos has increased massively. He will undoubtedly get paid more in future for his new show as well as his newspaper columns.

His show will still go out to the world and folk will still buy his DVDs.

 

Of course the BBC won't be producing any of this and will therefore not benefit from any of the revenues. On the other hand Clarkson, May and Hammond will all gain rather a lot from their royalties on Top Gear's back catalogue.

 

So everyone is a winner.

 

And if you wished to lay the blame for this situation upon someone, who would you say was the person that caused it to happen?

[altus]

I think everyone accepts that he shouldn't have slapped his producer, but they had a long working day, and the BBC scrimpted (as they do), on accomodation (idiotic really, considering how much money TG brings in).

 

Clarkson's day would have been shorter if he hadn't spent two hours in a pub after filming finished before getting the helicopter back to the hotel.

 

The only winners here are people like you, who would never even watch it, but like a dog in a manger, don't want anyone else to either.

 

And before you level that accusation at me, I used to watch it before it got samey and boring.

[Bigthumb]

As long as I no longer have to contribute to the idiot's £1million salary, I'm happy.

 

You never did. The program made huge profits for the BBC after the salaies of all invloved were taken into account. But you will now have to contribute to the salaries of many who were previously subsidised out of the Top Gear windfall.