Yet I bet you're the first to defend "freedom of speech" for islamic radicals advocating the overthrow of western civilisation and burning poppies etc.
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
Top Gear's Clarkson suspended by BBC
- Thread starter TomandJerry
- Start date
Is that the best you can do, bushy? You asked for evidence of a lie, I provided it. They said they didn't realise the significance of the number plate. Chinny f**king reckon. If it had all passed without incident, they'd have been in the studio giggling like kids over how funny it was to drive through Argentina proudly displaying FALKLANDS 1982 on their number plate.
And I bet I'm not. In fact, rather than act like a complete simpleton, why not point us in the direction of some evidence of me doing that rather than this "yet I bet..." drivel? I find that sort of behaviour just as offensive too, you see, and an embarrassment to the country.
Not everyone who objects to the mindless behaviour of Brits abroad has double standards when it comes to similar clowns within our own borders, even if you'd like us to believe it so, just that you can justify your own shìt standards.
Last edited:
Cian
Well-known member
If the BBC can him, he'll be off presenting an almost identical show somewhere else - likely for a US network or Netflix - within months.
That's far more of a risk to the sales of Top Gear internationally than not having him on Top Gear is, as they will be able to find a replacement for that role. Particularly if they manage to maintain the writers (Richard Porter etc).
That's far more of a risk to the sales of Top Gear internationally than not having him on Top Gear is, as they will be able to find a replacement for that role. Particularly if they manage to maintain the writers (Richard Porter etc).
Alan Partridge would be an inspired replacement. I'm off to start a petition for it to happen.
Kalimantan Gull
Well-known member
I find Clarkson boorish, racist, arrogant and a prat. I also find Top Gear hilariously funny, particulary the bits with Clarkson in it, and would be sorry if he went.
Its a slightly contradictory point of view, granted, but the funny bone likes what the funny bone likes.
Its a slightly contradictory point of view, granted, but the funny bone likes what the funny bone likes.
Nibble
New member
- Jan 3, 2007
- 19,238
Can't say I found him funny but nor did I find him offensive. Couldn't have seen TG continuing much longer anyway. Plus he's a millionaire many times over so I doubt he's hugely bothered about the suspension, likely he'll see it as a badge of honour and move onto presenting something else.
He'll be forgiven anyway by enough of the public that think he's amazing. There's only a few things that permanently ruin a TV career and it's usually spousal abuse/drugs/sex.
Look at Jonathan Ross and Russell Brand. People on the whole objected to their behaviour and both are back on mainstream telly with more air time than ever.
The only one I like on TG is James May and that's more to do with the other program's he has done. He's a good, engaging presenter on the other progs he's done.
He'll be forgiven anyway by enough of the public that think he's amazing. There's only a few things that permanently ruin a TV career and it's usually spousal abuse/drugs/sex.
Look at Jonathan Ross and Russell Brand. People on the whole objected to their behaviour and both are back on mainstream telly with more air time than ever.
The only one I like on TG is James May and that's more to do with the other program's he has done. He's a good, engaging presenter on the other progs he's done.
Anyone fancy starting a petition not to reinstate him?
As per my earlier post, find me one and I'll sign it!
34064 Fighter Command
New member
Jeremy on: violence
You may be familiar with a footballist called Joey Barton. Off the pitch, he's a fighty sort of soul, and, in recent years, he's done a bit of time for common assault. He has also been convicted of assault occasioning actual bodily harm. And once he ran over a man at 2am in Liverpool.
You might imagine that, on the pitch, things would be different. But no. He has been done for punching an opponent in the chest, and then, in the very last match of this year's thrilling Premiership, he took a quick look at the exposed throat of an opponent and plainly thought, "I think things would be better if I elbowed him in that". So he did.
He was given a red card by the referee, and he reacted to this by kicking another opponent and trying to headbutt yet another. As a result, he has been labelled as a nasty piece of work by most footy fans. But I'm not so sure.
As a general rule, I will not hit anyone, unless they are Piers Morgan. I went through all of my school years without getting into a fight, and even when some Doncaster town boys put dog crap in my school cap because I was wearing a Chelsea scarf, I remained calm and polite. If a bit tearful.
However, while I am not given to punching James and Richard in the chest, I do understand why the likes of Mr Barton feel the need to go around hitting their colleagues and rivals.
It was explained rather well by the Labour MP Eric Joyce, who, earlier this year, had a drink in the House of Commons bar, saw a couple of Tories and hit them.
He says he's that sort of man. Some people settle their disputes with a pen, some with a recourse to law. He uses his fists and reckons that if two chaps want to settle an argument round the back of a pub, that's up to them. He's right. It is.
What's more, it's vital that we have all sorts of different people in Parliament, so that all walks of society are represented: toffs, vagabonds, cheats, liars, vicars and pub brawlers. Because how can you represent the people when you aren't representative?
In fact, I'd go further. We sometimes see foreign parliaments reduced to a heaving mass of punches and sweat, and I think that, from time to time, I'd like to see the same sort of thing in ours. So I say this to Mr Cameron: the next time Mr Miliband is being annoying, leap over the table and kick him firmly in the groin.
I'd like to see this sort of activity at Wimbledon too. You have sweated your whole life. You have trained and trained, not drunk, not smoked, and sacrificed all of the treats that life can offer to be the best of the best of the best. It's match point. The serve is out. But the linesman, an elderly geography teacher in a silly hat calls it in.
Your whole life has been wasted. So who could blame you, in the heat of the moment, for running up to the official and hitting him with your racquet?
Remember Nelson Piquet kicking and punching the useless Eliseo Salazar? Remember Michael Schumacher charging down the pit lane to ‘discuss' things with David Coulthard? We quite understand why. And more than this: we like it.
They're moments we savour and cherish. Over in America, people go to see a game of ice hockey not to witness speed and precision but for the fights. And here, the rugby crowd is always cheered immensely when two number eights start beating the living crap out of one another. Especially when the rest of the team joins in.
The trouble is that today we are programmed to stay calm. To turn the other cheek. And that's fine if you're me. I would hate to be punched. But in sport and politics where emotions are - and indeed should be - as charged as an equatorial summer storm, it's inhuman to take a deep breath and carry on. Perhaps that's why so many top sports stars and politicians these days are so robotic and dreary.
All of this brings me neatly to a picture we saw in the newspapers recently. It was of a middle-aged gentleman trying to cycle along a country lane while being kicked by a young woman. Apparently, he had been going too slowly in the middle of the road, and the woman had decided to teach him a lesson.
Everyone shared the opinion that the woman was a menace and should be locked up for the rest of measurable time. Because, while it may be all right to lash out in the heat of the moment on a sports pitch, it is extremely not all right to behave like that on the road.
However, before we lock away the woman, let's ask a question: what if she had received word that her mother had been taken to hospital and didn't have long to live? And, what if, while stuck behind the cyclist, fuming at his slow progress, word came through that her dear old Mum had died? Would it then be acceptable to kick the man who'd prevented her from having a last goodbye?
Very often, I am held up by someone who is driving along the A44 at a speed that they consider to be safe. They are often elderly. Their reactions are slow, and they do not feel confident going above 25mph. Plus, they are in no particular rush and feel the world would be a far better place if others were in no particular rush either. So they have no sense of guilt about the tail of overheating metal in their wake. Secretly, they may even feel empowered.
Mostly, I put up with it. If I can overtake, I will, and if I cannot, I will put on a nice tune and relax. But what if I were in bomb disposal and I had just moments to get to a terrorist nuke? What if my wife were in labour? What if a child needed its Dad? Then the moment is charged, and the rage will build, and it's only human to barge the elderly couple and their infuriating Peugeot into a hedge.
Cyclists lose their temper all the time, and I don't blame them, mostly. Because when a bus driver, fuelled by stupidity or arrogance, turns left without warning and you are nearly killed by his rear wheels, you become a skin bag full of dopamine, and serotonin and adrenalin. You are as psyched up as a frightened rabbit. And, in that instant, you can't really be held to account if you board the bus, unzip your flies and relieve yourself all over the driver.
So, there we are. Violence. I loathe it. I'm frightened of it. I wish the human knuckle was made from kapok. But sometimes? Hmmm.
Jeremy Clarkson, Column, Peugeot
Jeremy Clarkson, not advocating violence? Hmmm.
You may be familiar with a footballist called Joey Barton. Off the pitch, he's a fighty sort of soul, and, in recent years, he's done a bit of time for common assault. He has also been convicted of assault occasioning actual bodily harm. And once he ran over a man at 2am in Liverpool.
You might imagine that, on the pitch, things would be different. But no. He has been done for punching an opponent in the chest, and then, in the very last match of this year's thrilling Premiership, he took a quick look at the exposed throat of an opponent and plainly thought, "I think things would be better if I elbowed him in that". So he did.
He was given a red card by the referee, and he reacted to this by kicking another opponent and trying to headbutt yet another. As a result, he has been labelled as a nasty piece of work by most footy fans. But I'm not so sure.
As a general rule, I will not hit anyone, unless they are Piers Morgan. I went through all of my school years without getting into a fight, and even when some Doncaster town boys put dog crap in my school cap because I was wearing a Chelsea scarf, I remained calm and polite. If a bit tearful.
However, while I am not given to punching James and Richard in the chest, I do understand why the likes of Mr Barton feel the need to go around hitting their colleagues and rivals.
It was explained rather well by the Labour MP Eric Joyce, who, earlier this year, had a drink in the House of Commons bar, saw a couple of Tories and hit them.
He says he's that sort of man. Some people settle their disputes with a pen, some with a recourse to law. He uses his fists and reckons that if two chaps want to settle an argument round the back of a pub, that's up to them. He's right. It is.
What's more, it's vital that we have all sorts of different people in Parliament, so that all walks of society are represented: toffs, vagabonds, cheats, liars, vicars and pub brawlers. Because how can you represent the people when you aren't representative?
In fact, I'd go further. We sometimes see foreign parliaments reduced to a heaving mass of punches and sweat, and I think that, from time to time, I'd like to see the same sort of thing in ours. So I say this to Mr Cameron: the next time Mr Miliband is being annoying, leap over the table and kick him firmly in the groin.
I'd like to see this sort of activity at Wimbledon too. You have sweated your whole life. You have trained and trained, not drunk, not smoked, and sacrificed all of the treats that life can offer to be the best of the best of the best. It's match point. The serve is out. But the linesman, an elderly geography teacher in a silly hat calls it in.
Your whole life has been wasted. So who could blame you, in the heat of the moment, for running up to the official and hitting him with your racquet?
Remember Nelson Piquet kicking and punching the useless Eliseo Salazar? Remember Michael Schumacher charging down the pit lane to ‘discuss' things with David Coulthard? We quite understand why. And more than this: we like it.
They're moments we savour and cherish. Over in America, people go to see a game of ice hockey not to witness speed and precision but for the fights. And here, the rugby crowd is always cheered immensely when two number eights start beating the living crap out of one another. Especially when the rest of the team joins in.
The trouble is that today we are programmed to stay calm. To turn the other cheek. And that's fine if you're me. I would hate to be punched. But in sport and politics where emotions are - and indeed should be - as charged as an equatorial summer storm, it's inhuman to take a deep breath and carry on. Perhaps that's why so many top sports stars and politicians these days are so robotic and dreary.
All of this brings me neatly to a picture we saw in the newspapers recently. It was of a middle-aged gentleman trying to cycle along a country lane while being kicked by a young woman. Apparently, he had been going too slowly in the middle of the road, and the woman had decided to teach him a lesson.
Everyone shared the opinion that the woman was a menace and should be locked up for the rest of measurable time. Because, while it may be all right to lash out in the heat of the moment on a sports pitch, it is extremely not all right to behave like that on the road.
However, before we lock away the woman, let's ask a question: what if she had received word that her mother had been taken to hospital and didn't have long to live? And, what if, while stuck behind the cyclist, fuming at his slow progress, word came through that her dear old Mum had died? Would it then be acceptable to kick the man who'd prevented her from having a last goodbye?
Very often, I am held up by someone who is driving along the A44 at a speed that they consider to be safe. They are often elderly. Their reactions are slow, and they do not feel confident going above 25mph. Plus, they are in no particular rush and feel the world would be a far better place if others were in no particular rush either. So they have no sense of guilt about the tail of overheating metal in their wake. Secretly, they may even feel empowered.
Mostly, I put up with it. If I can overtake, I will, and if I cannot, I will put on a nice tune and relax. But what if I were in bomb disposal and I had just moments to get to a terrorist nuke? What if my wife were in labour? What if a child needed its Dad? Then the moment is charged, and the rage will build, and it's only human to barge the elderly couple and their infuriating Peugeot into a hedge.
Cyclists lose their temper all the time, and I don't blame them, mostly. Because when a bus driver, fuelled by stupidity or arrogance, turns left without warning and you are nearly killed by his rear wheels, you become a skin bag full of dopamine, and serotonin and adrenalin. You are as psyched up as a frightened rabbit. And, in that instant, you can't really be held to account if you board the bus, unzip your flies and relieve yourself all over the driver.
So, there we are. Violence. I loathe it. I'm frightened of it. I wish the human knuckle was made from kapok. But sometimes? Hmmm.
Jeremy Clarkson, Column, Peugeot
Jeremy Clarkson, not advocating violence? Hmmm.
Last edited:
franks brother
Well-known member
I start watching again with guy
StonehamPark
#Brighton-Nil
The BBC have a tough decision to make.
The 3 presenters contracts are up this month and I doubt May or Hammond will sign another 3 years without Clarkson.
It's going to go one of two ways:
1: BBC slap JC on the wrist and business as usual.
2: BBC sack JC. May and Hammond decline to sign the 3 year contract and the trio are offered contracts with Sky or ITV.
Either way, I'm happy.
The trio won't break up as they make the show, whichever show it is they're doing this time next year.
The 3 presenters contracts are up this month and I doubt May or Hammond will sign another 3 years without Clarkson.
It's going to go one of two ways:
1: BBC slap JC on the wrist and business as usual.
2: BBC sack JC. May and Hammond decline to sign the 3 year contract and the trio are offered contracts with Sky or ITV.
Either way, I'm happy.
The trio won't break up as they make the show, whichever show it is they're doing this time next year.
I agree with all this, but if he's guilty the BBC just have to sack him, even if it's commercial suicide. The precedent it would set if they didn't would be toxic. They would have to amend the employees handbook to:
a) It's now ok to (attempt to) lamp a colleague - knock yourself out, folks!
OR
b) It's still not OK to (attempt to) lamp a colleague, UNLESS you earn the BBC a shed load of money - trebles all round!
Neither will work.
IMO, the only way he's not getting sacked is if he either didn't do it, or if the target of the alleged incident declines to give evidence.
Tom Hark Preston Park
Will Post For Cash
- Jul 6, 2003
- 72,327
May and Hammond are total lightweights, as any of their efforts to establish a career outside of Top gear will easily prove. Replaceable from central casting as easily as that Bleakley woman that used to do The One Show. Can think of any number of grumpy self-important humourless replacements for Clarkson, most of them 'comedians'. Alan Davies, Griff Rhys Jones spring to mind.
I've sent my CV in.
Easy 10
Brain dead MUG SHEEP
Unless he's beaten this other guy to a bloody pulp, could this not all be resolved with a sincere apology and an acknowledgment from Clarkson that he behaved like an utter tit ? Of course clumping someone at work is totally unacceptable, but I'd like to think that two fully grown men could resolve this without the need for a complete cancellation of the show and a sacking over this incident. He's a deliberately boorish oaf with plenty of previous, but none of it has ever involved violence so I think we can safely say this was a complete one-off. And while the howls for Clarksons sacking grow ever more shrill from some quarters, its worth mentioning that nobody even knows the full circumstances of the incident.
The Clarkson-haters have seized on this with glee though, and probably won't be fully satisfied until he's publically humiliated in the stocks before being tarred, feathered and strung up outside Halfords with a car jack rammed up his chuffer. But maybe everyone should just calm down a bit till the full facts emerge.
The Clarkson-haters have seized on this with glee though, and probably won't be fully satisfied until he's publically humiliated in the stocks before being tarred, feathered and strung up outside Halfords with a car jack rammed up his chuffer. But maybe everyone should just calm down a bit till the full facts emerge.
Tom Hark Preston Park
Will Post For Cash
- Jul 6, 2003
- 72,327
Why start now?
The over-indulgence of Clarkson is the BBC equivalent of the Telegraph tensions between editorial and commercial interests, in which the commercial interests invariably win the day. Clarkson should have been sacked several times over by now.