Gary Lineker steps down from MOTD

[Guest David Oldfields Gate]

8 minutes ago, adam said:

At least read the tweet properly first before spouting off.

Yes I have, thanks Adam.

[jonathan_ross]

30 minutes ago, Unabomber said:

What makes you say that?

Because he’s a 🔔 end

[99 Problems]

1 minute ago, Ric Flair said:

Gary doesn't ever make any reference to his political views when he's working for the BBC or specifically on MOTD though. I really don't care too much what his views or unless wildly offensive or dangerous, so why should this be a problem?

I guess because he’s under a contract with the BBC that requires him to remain impartial while representing them and that includes his social media account when he’s not presenting MOTD. If it wasn’t part of his contract they wouldn’t have grounds to speak to him 

 

He’s also got previous for this so he’s clearly a knob. If wants to spout politics he should work for another organisation where it isn’t a problem. 

[st albans fox]

3 minutes ago, davieG said:

I don't like him he's become so self important and I don't agree with his comparison to the Nazi and the holocaust it's way to extreme. As for the government proposal I'm happy to let the judicial courts decide on it legitimacy.

He was speaking about the language of the thirties  - that led to the holocaust.  I think his intervention was a little clumsy but I don’t think he shouldn’t be allowed to tweet his personal opinions - he’s not working for bbc news/current affairs. 

[urban.spaceman]

 

 

[Corky]

I'm more bothered about his comments that downplay the club than this. Should be allowed his opinion on his own Twitter account but naturally the mob who complain about cancel culture want someone they don't agree with removed.

 

He'll get another job and will be fine. MOTD will survive. The BBC's efforts to be completely impartial will bring more problems down the line, however.

[OntarioFox]

Can't believe Rodgers lasted longer than 'are Gary. 

[Guest nathan.]

1 minute ago, jonathan_ross said:

Because he’s a 🔔 end

Did he shag your Mrs or something?

[Ric Flair]

1 minute ago, 99 Problems said:

I guess because he’s under a contract with the BBC that requires him to remain impartial while representing them and that includes his social media account when he’s not presenting MOTD. If it wasn’t part of his contract they wouldn’t have grounds to speak to him 

 

He’s also got previous for this so he’s clearly a knob. If wants to spout politics he should work for another organisation where it isn’t a problem. 

I was more meaning in response to you saying you don't like sports presenters using their political opinion on the job. Gary hasn't? If he's aired it on his social media frequently, that's his business. I agree if the BBC prevent that then that's a dispute with them, rightly or wrongly. I suspect he will leave and be paid extremely well elsewhere and be allowed to say what he thinks on his social media.

 

 

[sacreblueits442]

23 minutes ago, Sharpe's Fox said:

By the way no one cared about Gary's commitment to BBC impartiality when he literally tweeted "Bin Corbyn" in 2017. It's as if when there was a politician who actually cared about refugees he was fair game because he threatened Gary's big houses and tax dodging. Man's a virtue signalling clown.

 

 

...did you seriously believe going into a general election with Corbyn as the leader of the Labour Party, it was a vote winning strategy!!!

 Two things that was cropping up on door steps, and that was Corbyn and Brexit, Labour did not stand a chance.

 It appears everyone saw the futility of it, mostly notably the voting British public.

 Like Milliband before him, they were not someone the nation could believe in and support, but their ego won the day and put Labour into the wilderness.

 That Jeremy Corbyn?

[Finnegan]

2 minutes ago, FoxesWalk said:

BBC if afraid of the Government

 

The BBC IS the government. We currently have one of the least impartial and most politically biased forms of the BBC we've ever had. That's the problem. 

 

That and the fact that everyone treats politics like football these days. You support a team and you don't stray from it, in fact, changing sides is treachery. 

 

Which is why you'll have Tory voters stick their fingers in their ears and deny that Braverman is exactly what Lineker implied she is, because they don't want to feel like they're the Bad Guys. 

[foxinsox]

1 minute ago, The whole world smiles said:

Even if you strongly disagree with his veiws, you surley agree that he's allowed to voice them on his personal social media? 

Yes, it really is an issue of free speech and cancel culture. 

 

When the only opinions are ones that the government approves, and those that deviate get sacked, we do get a whiff of the thirties.

 

 

[urban.spaceman]

32 minutes ago, Sharpe's Fox said:

By the way no one cared about Gary's commitment to BBC impartiality when he literally tweeted "Bin Corbyn" in 2017. It's as if when there was a politician who actually cared about refugees he was fair game because he threatened Gary's big houses and tax dodging. Man's a virtue signalling clown.

 

 

Nobody cared because he was right about Corbyn and was proved so.

[Dahnsouff]

It’s a strange on tbh, if you bitch and moan on your personal social media about suppliers, customers, etc, I would certainly get in hot water at work, not quite the same but similar. BBC cocked it right up though, they should have just asked him to publicly desist and left it at that.

[TJQuik]

2 minutes ago, sacreblueits442 said:

...did you seriously believe going into a general election with Corbyn as the leader of the Labour Party, it was a vote winning strategy!!!

 Two things that was cropping up on door steps, and that was Corbyn and Brexit, Labour did not stand a chance.

 It appears everyone saw the futility of it, mostly notably the voting British public.

 Like Milliband before him, they were not someone the nation could believe in and support, but their ego won the day and put Labour into the wilderness.

 That Jeremy Corbyn?

You seem to be an avid viewer of the BBC

[FosseSpark]

5 minutes ago, davieG said:

I don't like him he's become so self important and I don't agree with his comparison to the Nazi and the holocaust it's way to extreme. As for the government proposal I'm happy to let the judicial courts decide on it legitimacy.

He didnt mention the holocaust, it was Braverman who bought that up to shift the emphasis (Trump tactic). Lineker said the rhetoric of demonising the most desperate immigrants with aggressive posters and posturing was not unlike 1930s germany. Kind of saying - 'be careful because its a slippery slope'. And hes right, Suella Braverman is a c*nt whose stated dream is to wave a flight full of immigrants off to rwanda.

[Sharpe's Fox]

Just now, urban.spaceman said:

Nobody cared because he was right about Corbyn and was proved so.

Gary Lineker cares a lot about refugees until someone becomes available to vote for who actually has a track record of advocating for their human rights. Maybe because that same someone also wants to tax properly Gary Lineker's exorbitant wealth for very, very little work.

[CosbehFox]

Last night live on air 

 

 

[Guest]

9 minutes ago, davieG said:

I don't like him he's become so self important and I don't agree with his comparison to the Nazi and the holocaust it's way to extreme. As for the government proposal I'm happy to let the judicial courts decide on it legitimacy.

"His comparison to the Holocaust"? He said that the language used to discuss refugees was similar to that used in 1930s Germany, which it is. As it happens, the same accusation has been levelled at Braverman by a Holocaust survivor.

[cityfanlee23]

22 minutes ago, davieG said:

I don't like him he's become so self important and I don't agree with his comparison to the Nazi and the holocaust it's way to extreme. As for the government proposal I'm happy to let the judicial courts decide on it legitimacy.

That’s fine you can believe what you want on him individually and you’re entitled to not agree with his comparison, it’s worth noting that many global organisations such as the United Nations Refugee Council and even the Board of Deputy’s of British Jews have openly condemned the language that Gary condemned.
 

The language she uses can absolutely be compared to the sort of blame that happened in the 1930s. You can disagree with that idea but surely that’s not a reason to celebrate someone’s freedom of speech being attacked by government?

Edited 10 March 2023 by cityfanlee23

[Corky]

1 minute ago, CosbehFox said:

Last night live on air 

 

 

This is the result of trying to maintain "balance"

[Bordersfox]

2 minutes ago, Dahnsouff said:

It’s a strange on tbh, if you bitch and moan on your personal social media about suppliers, customers, etc, I would certainly get in hot water at work, not quite the same but similar. BBC cocked it right up though, they should have just asked him to publicly desist and left it at that.

Sorry mate but no.  As has been pointed out plenty of people who make coin from the BBC (e.g. Sugar) have spouted political stuff on personal social media accounts and got away with it.

 

You can't ignore it for one and then get your knickers in a twist (the BBC not you) for another because it criticises the government.

[Dahnsouff]

Just now, Corky said:

This is the result of trying to maintain "balance"

It is, in all the wrong places.

[davieG]

Just now, cityfanlee23 said:

That’s fine you can believe what you want on him individually and you’re entitled to not agree with his comparison, it’s worth noting that many global organisations such as the United Nations Refugee Council and even the Board of Deputy’s of British Jews. 
 

The language she uses can absolutely be compared to the sort of blame that happened in the 1930s. You can disagree with that idea but surely that’s not a reason to celebrate someone’s freedom of speech being attacked by government?

Who said I'm celebrating? I don't celebrate that I've come to dislike someone I used to admire.

[davieG]

3 minutes ago, Guest said:

"His comparison to the Holocaust"? He said that the language used to discuss refugees was similar to that used in 1930s Germany, which it is. As it happens, the same accusation has been levelled at Braverman by a Holocaust survivor.

Ok that's fine I'll revisit that but my original post and I stand by it is I don't like how he's become this self important know it all that's always correct.