Guest Posted June 8, 2015 Share Posted June 8, 2015 On the subject of challenges, none of them really stood out for me as 'the best', because I genuinely found them all enjoyable to watch. Although, I did find the 24 Hour Britcar race very informative and quite funny. Namely, as it gave some kind of insight as to what goes on behind the scenes for drivers at such an event e.g. Le Mans. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wombatofludham Posted June 8, 2015 Share Posted June 8, 2015 Clarkson assaulted another co-worker. The BBC had no choice but let him go. That's not a conceit or self righteous decision, nor is it a "pyrrhic" victory. It was the correct decision, given what happened, something Clarkson doesn't seem to actually disagree with. In any other situation anyone verbally or physically assaulting a co-worker would have been instantly dismissed no matter who they were or how valuable they were to the company. Indeed, one local here in the village is potentially up for dismissal from his job because he has been charged with abuse and a hate crime which occurred outside work, let alone to a fellow co-worker. No-one should be allowed to get away with violence or verbal assault whoever they are or however lucrative their work. I find it disappointing that some people still seem to think the BBC are wrong, or dismissing them as self-righteous, and that Clarkson's behaviour should be brushed aside in the interests of making money Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium jjb1970 Posted June 8, 2015 RMweb Premium Share Posted June 8, 2015 I love TG and love JC's documentaries outside of TG but you can't excuse what he did and the BBC had to act. I'm sure he'll be back on TV somewhere and wish him well, with any luck this experience will have taught him a lesson and calmed him down. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andyram Posted June 8, 2015 Author Share Posted June 8, 2015 Clarkson assaulted another co-worker. The BBC had no choice but let him go. That's not a conceit or self righteous decision, nor is it a "pyrrhic" victory. It was the correct decision, given what happened, something Clarkson doesn't seem to actually disagree with. In any other situation anyone verbally or physically assaulting a co-worker would have been instantly dismissed no matter who they were or how valuable they were to the company. Indeed, one local here in the village is potentially up for dismissal from his job because he has been charged with abuse and a hate crime which occurred outside work, let alone to a fellow co-worker. No-one should be allowed to get away with violence or verbal assault whoever they are or however lucrative their work. I find it disappointing that some people still seem to think the BBC are wrong, or dismissing them as self-righteous, and that Clarkson's behaviour should be brushed aside in the interests of making money I think the thread has rather moved on from debating the rights and wrongs of Clarkson's departure. That is old news. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
edcayton Posted June 8, 2015 Share Posted June 8, 2015 According to today's Daily Star (so it must be true) The BBC is in discussion with Clarkson, Hammond and May about a comeback. Ed Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andyram Posted June 8, 2015 Author Share Posted June 8, 2015 According to today's Daily Star (so it must be true) The BBC is in discussion with Clarkson, Hammond and May about a comeback. Ed Wait, hang on. April 1st has been and gone! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold chris p bacon Posted June 8, 2015 RMweb Gold Share Posted June 8, 2015 According to today's Daily Star (so it must be true) The BBC is in discussion with Clarkson, Hammond and May about a comeback. Ed Whereas there was a headline somewhere else today (can't remember) that had May and Hammond turning down £4M from the BBC and on the verge of signing with Clarkson and Wilman to another channel/outfit. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bon Accord Posted June 8, 2015 Share Posted June 8, 2015 Clarkson assaulted another co-worker. The BBC had no choice but let him go. That's not a conceit or self righteous decision, nor is it a "pyrrhic" victory. It was the correct decision, given what happened, something Clarkson doesn't seem to actually disagree with. In any other situation anyone verbally or physically assaulting a co-worker would have been instantly dismissed no matter who they were or how valuable they were to the company. Indeed, one local here in the village is potentially up for dismissal from his job because he has been charged with abuse and a hate crime which occurred outside work, let alone to a fellow co-worker. No-one should be allowed to get away with violence or verbal assault whoever they are or however lucrative their work. I find it disappointing that some people still seem to think the BBC are wrong, or dismissing them as self-righteous, and that Clarkson's behaviour should be brushed aside in the interests of making money £200 million per year in potential revenues can assuage a lot of disappointment, as the BBC will shortly find out. As for "in any other situation": in an idealistic world perhaps, but in the real world where money talks then management will do whatever they can get away with keep tp ensure the cash keeps rolling in. A few years back an old work acquaintance of mine threatened a colleague with a fire axe whilst in a drunken haze and chased him around with it. The end result was that the company sent him on a basket weaving course for a few months and gave him a severe ticking off as they quite simply couldn't afford to lose him, the "injured" party was given an extra bonus in their pay packet to keep quiet. The company concerned is globally recognised and a household name in the UK. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wombatofludham Posted June 8, 2015 Share Posted June 8, 2015 I think the thread has rather moved on from debating the rights and wrongs of Clarkson's departure. That is old news. Except it hasn't. People are still saying that because Top Gear earned hundreds of millions for the BBC that somehow that means that they were wrong to not continue to employ Clarkson, and that it is an example of a self-righteous management culture. It may be old news but people are still saying that effectively the BBC should have turned a blind eye in the interests of programme sales. And it's not an ideal world to expect someone to pay the price of aggressive or violent behaviour. Just because some private companies might put profit before principals, a publicly funded and publicly accountable organisation that people have no choice but to fund if they wish to watch TV must play by a higher set of rules. I wonder what the "globally recognised and a household name in the UK" would have done if their irreplaceable axe-wielding drunk had fallen under a train in his drunken haze. They'd have had no choice but to lose him then. The irony of all this is despite being polar opposites politically I do quite like Clarkson and Top Gear, and enjoy his other appearances on other shows. It is sad it all ended this way. However I also think the outcome and actions taken over the affair were appropriate, correct and fair. I suspect that after a period of purdah all three will individually be back on other projects and programmes for a variety of broadcasters including the BBC, producers won't be able to resist the publicity and ratings bounce they will get. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andyram Posted June 8, 2015 Author Share Posted June 8, 2015 Except it hasn't. People are still saying that because Top Gear earned hundreds of millions for the BBC that somehow that means that they were wrong to not continue to employ Clarkson, and that it is an example of a self-righteous management culture. It may be old news but people are still saying that effectively the BBC should have turned a blind eye in the interests of programme sales. And it's not an ideal world to expect someone to pay the price of aggressive or violent behaviour. Just because some private companies might put profit before principals, a publicly funded and publicly accountable organisation that people have no choice but to fund if they wish to watch TV must play by a higher set of rules. I wonder what the "globally recognised and a household name in the UK" would have done if their irreplaceable axe-wielding drunk had fallen under a train in his drunken haze. They'd have had no choice but to lose him then. The irony of all this is despite being polar opposites politically I do quite like Clarkson and Top Gear, and enjoy his other appearances on other shows. It is sad it all ended this way. However I also think the outcome and actions taken over the affair were appropriate, correct and fair. I suspect that after a period of purdah all three will individually be back on other projects and programmes for a variety of broadcasters including the BBC, producers won't be able to resist the publicity and ratings bounce they will get. I was actually referring to this particular thread which, if you read the more recent posts, you will realise has moved on from the Clarkson debate. Whether it is still being debated in the press was not my argument. You are the one who had brought it up again when the last few posts were discussing other aspects of the show. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DavidB-AU Posted June 8, 2015 Share Posted June 8, 2015 According to today's Daily Star (so it must be true) The BBC is in discussion with Clarkson, Hammond and May about a comeback. That's old news. Hammond and May have outright refused the BBC's offer. Clarkson, Hammond, May and Wilman are close to signing a deal with Netflix for a new show. Cheers David Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andyram Posted June 9, 2015 Author Share Posted June 9, 2015 I do hope so There is something about the BBC I really don't like....We aint allowed to sat the L word on here apparently It will be interesting to see how close to the original any new show on Netflix would be. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DavidB-AU Posted June 9, 2015 Share Posted June 9, 2015 It will be interesting to see how close to the original any new show on Netflix would be. My guess is almost identical in all but name. Cheers David Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gordon s Posted June 9, 2015 Share Posted June 9, 2015 A bit of fuel to the froth….:-) http://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2015/jun/07/chris-evans-making-top-gear-film-replace-jeremy-clarkson http://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2015/jun/08/top-gear-fans-glimpse-final-show-clarkson-hammond-may-bbc Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndyID Posted June 9, 2015 Share Posted June 9, 2015 If you are suffering from TGWS (Top Gear Withdrawal Syndrome) you might find this mildly entertaining. (Warning: It's a lot different!) http://www.cartalk.com/ Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
edcayton Posted June 9, 2015 Share Posted June 9, 2015 It will be interesting to see how close to the original any new show on Netflix would be. My guess is almost identical in all but name. Cheers David I so hope they won't try to keep this tired format. Try something new please. Ed One of the clips in Gordon's link shows them destroying caravans. That's a new idea! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold 30801 Posted June 9, 2015 RMweb Gold Share Posted June 9, 2015 One of the clips in Gordon's link shows them destroying caravans. That's a new idea! Did they drop a Marina on it while James May pretended to accidentally drive into the back of Richard Hammond? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adrian Posted June 9, 2015 Share Posted June 9, 2015 Probably - was it in the script? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
34theletterbetweenB&D Posted June 9, 2015 Share Posted June 9, 2015 ...a publicly funded and publicly accountable organisation that people have no choice but to fund if they wish to watch TV must play by a higher set of rules... I agree. They have therefore to stick to responsible news, weather, current affairs debate, documentary and high brow programming of cultural value, and leave the coarser entertainment to commercial businesses. This will enable the BBC licence fee to be eliminated, as the Responsible BBC (RBBC) will be able to derive enough income for this much smaller task from the legacy programme stockpile that we have all paid to have made over the past seven or so decades. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
darren01 Posted June 9, 2015 Share Posted June 9, 2015 Just seen an add for Top gear on .......BBC 2 ! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Butler Henderson Posted June 9, 2015 Share Posted June 9, 2015 Just seen an add for Top gear on .......BBC 2 ! There is one more episode, although it will probably be the films only and no studuo banter. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andyram Posted June 9, 2015 Author Share Posted June 9, 2015 Missed the advert. When is the episode on? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wombatofludham Posted June 9, 2015 Share Posted June 9, 2015 I was actually referring to this particular thread which, if you read the more recent posts, you will realise has moved on from the Clarkson debate. Whether it is still being debated in the press was not my argument. You are the one who had brought it up again when the last few posts were discussing other aspects of the show. So was I. Posts 73 and 74 suggested that the BBC were wrong by not continuing with the original format Top Gear, so it's not out of context. The Clarkson debate is the reason why the original format can't continue. .I wasn't referring to the press. But whatever, some people will always believe that the whole affair was a lot of fuss over nothing, I personally think no matter how much money the programme earned some things can't be accepted. We will probably never agree. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andyram Posted June 9, 2015 Author Share Posted June 9, 2015 So was I. Posts 73 and 74 suggested that the BBC were wrong by not continuing with the original format Top Gear, so it's not out of context. The Clarkson debate is the reason why the original format can't continue. .I wasn't referring to the press. But whatever, some people will always believe that the whole affair was a lot of fuss over nothing, I personally think no matter how much money the programme earned some things can't be accepted. We will probably never agree. I agree with you that the BBC were probably right to fire Clarkson, he had had far too many warnings. The show belongs to the channel so if they want to do the same thing with new presenters they could. Time will tell I suppose. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Premium jjb1970 Posted June 10, 2015 RMweb Premium Share Posted June 10, 2015 The BBC ended up in a bit of a mess IMO by not renewing his contract for entirely justified reasons and then going on to say he was great and the door was open for him to return to the BBC later. If I assaulted a co-worker I suspect my employer wouldn't say in effect "look, you've got to go as we can't allow this, but give us a call when the dust has settled and we'll find you a new role as we realise you are good at what you do and we make a fortune out of you", that basically ends up with them losing a lot of the credibility they deserve for taking the decision to drop him in my view. I am not saying he should not be allowed back on the BBC as I think that would be too much but equally I wasn't impressed that they were so explicit in the immediate aftermath of dropping him which stank of desperately trying to appease his fans (of which I count myself) in a classic BBC attempt to try and not upset anybody at all. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.