UK Conservative Party Leadership Election

Do you believe if he'd used the same level of rhetoric but in the opposite political direction it wouldn't have caused a shitstorm?

Well let's imagine what that might look like, in fact all we need to do is use the government's own language.

So yeah, I think he'd still have been presenting MOTD.

---------------------

Good to see our government taking the strong action required to stop the invasion of illegal asylum seekers across the English Channel, we know most of these are healthy Albanian men with no legitimate claim to be here, and in many cases they have criminal backgrounds, I support Rishi and Suella in clamping down on this modern slavery system.
 
Well let's imagine what that might look like, in fact all we need to do is use the government's own language.

So yeah, I think he'd still have been presenting MOTD.

---------------------

Good to see our government taking the strong action required to stop the invasion of illegal asylum seekers across the English Channel, we know most of these are healthy Albanian men with no legitimate claim to be here, and in many cases they have criminal backgrounds, I support Rishi and Suella in clamping down on this modern slavery system.

Not sure that is in quite the same ballpark as the rhetoric he used, but even this milquetoast interpretation would have labour and immigration supporters up in arms to the bbc.

I wonder if any of his colleagues and friends now standing up for him over this, actually endorsed his view at the time enough to retweet it, I bet there were none ;)

The bbc have provided him with a national platform, yes he was well known as a footballer but without the weekly reminder [and earlier tv work] he would've probably faded to Teddy Sheringham levels of public fame and interest by now.
 
Last edited:
I honestly have no idea what your point even is. You seem to think Lineker's tax efficiency scheme is some sort of slam dunk auto-win button when it's got absolutely cock all to do with the issue at hand. It's something wealthy people do, it sucks, but it's legal and very common. If he loses his case against HMRC he'll have to pay a load of overdue tax and quite right too. Lord Rothermere - (owner of the Daily Mail, which I see is going for Lineker big time, today's issue was on sale in Shoprite when I did some shopping this morning) - isn't even resident in the UK for tax purposes, preferring instead to be a non-dom who lives in France (that's how much he loves the UK), and owns the parent company of the Daily Mail through a load of tax-dodging companies in Bermuda.

As for the Qatari world cup, I made my feelings on that clear at the time (here in the CM thread), you could argue they should have refused to cover it at all, but they had nothing to do with the decision of where to host it (we have FIFA's utterly mind-boggling corruption to thank for that), and commentary was made about Qatar's human rights record, which I felt was appropriate.

As for Lineker's pay, again, what does that have to do with his right (or not) to express a personal political view on Twitter? What he earns is agreed between himself and the BBC, he's amongst their top talent and hosts their flagship sports show, so he gets well paid. And yes we do pay the licence fee here on the IOM, we have a TV Licence for our house and have done for decades, I'm not entirely happy with how the BBC spends all its money (their news output at the moment is shameful, they are so badly cowed by the Tories), a mate of mine has boycotted Radio 4 because he can't tolerate its obvious political timidity and kow-towing to the government - but overall they produce a lot of good stuff. (I'd probably pay the licence fee just for Radio 6 TBH.)

Anyway, all of that is white noise around the core issue here, in that Lineker was singled out for expressing a political opinion that's critical of the government, as I said yesterday, if he'd Tweeted in support of the government's refugee policy, we all know he'd have been presenting MOTD as usual last night.
No, he hasn't been singled out for expressing a contrary opinion, he's been singled out because he's in breach of his contract. Not for the first time. Notwithstanding his erroneous and ignorant blurb comparing a rational action by an elected govt. to prevent illegal entants with the intent of those running the Third Reich, considered very offensive by some.
 
No, but he seems to have a point, as viewing figures were UP 20%:

(From BBC News) "Viewing figures were up by almost half a million to 2.58m."

People don't watch MoTD to see Captain Smarm, Shearer, Wright, Micah Michelin-Mann, Scott or whatever selection of clowns they overpay for their hour's work, but the FOOTBALL!
 
No, but he seems to have a point, as viewing figures were UP 20%:

(From BBC News) "Viewing figures were up by almost half a million to 2.58m."

People don't watch MoTD to see Captain Smarm, Shearer, Wright, Micah Michelin-Mann, Scott or whatever selection of clowns they overpay for their hour's work, but the FOOTBALL!

I suspect there was a lot of rubbernecking to see what was going to happen, let's see what transpires next week.
 
I suspect there was a lot of rubbernecking to see what was going to happen, let's see what transpires next week.
Why wait - there's another tonight.
 
No, he hasn't been singled out for expressing a contrary opinion, he's been singled out because he's in breach of his contract. Not for the first time. Notwithstanding his erroneous and ignorant blurb comparing a rational action by an elected govt. to prevent illegal entants with the intent of those running the Third Reich, considered very offensive by some.
Not sure that is in quite the same ballpark as the rhetoric he used, but even this milquetoast interpretation would have labour and immigration supporters up in arms to the bbc.

I wonder if any of his colleagues and friends now standing up for him over this, actually endorsed his view at the time enough to retweet it, I bet there were none ;)

The bbc have provided him with a national platform, yes he was well known as a footballer but without the weekly reminder [and earlier tv work] he would've probably faded to Teddy Sheringham levels of public fame and interest by now.

Andrew Neil worked for the BBC for years, whilst routinely expressing strong right wing opinions on Twitter and being the editor of The Spectator, a hard right wing publication. And of course he was a political journalist at the BBC, so far more of a conflict of interest than a sports commentator making a personal political comment on Twitter.

Did you see all us lefty liberal snowflakes getting up in arms about that? I knew full well Andrew Neil was very right wing (and very vocally so) but he seemed to keep it away from his job at the BBC and always gave politicians of any stripe a decent grilling when he was interviewing them, no big deal.

Lineker himself Tweeted 'Bin Corbyn' back in 2017, again, no fuss over that from all us woketards.

1678627863323.png

And yet now we have the Daily Mail and a load of right-wingers losing their absolute shit over a relatively innocuous Tweet by a sports personality, the same Daily Mail that bangs on about cancel culture and how you can't say anything nowadays without the WOKE MOB trying to shut you down.

It's a crystal clear case of blatant double standards, Lineker was targeted because of what he said, and about whom.

For the record I don't think it was a particularly useful thing to Tweet, going near '1930s Germany' in this kind of debate never tends to end well, even though what he was saying was essentially factually accurate. For my money he'd have been better off talking about the language of 1930s England, when the Daily Mail (who else....) was saying 'Hurrah for the Blackshirts'.

BUF_Banner_1574868238.jpg
 
Why wait - there's another tonight.

I never watch it anyway, can't stand football. Utterly and completely corrupted by billionaires.

Mate of mine is big into it though, whilst also accepting it has been corrupted beyond any possible redemption. He was watching that Liverpool/Man Utd match the other week.

1678628834247.png
 
Lineker looking positively circumspect whilst walking his pooch this morrow, stating simply "I can't say anything at the moment" :eek:

Now imagine he'd just done that from the outset!

Yet surely either reflective of protecting his golden contract, a dressing down or two (whilst watching the BBC 'Rome' itself into oblivion), or him waiting to announce something far bigger, akin to "F*** y'all, I've mutually terminated my BBC contract and am joining BT Sports, bitches"
 
Andrew Neil worked for the BBC for years, whilst routinely expressing strong right wing opinions on Twitter and being the editor of The Spectator, a hard right wing publication. And of course he was a political journalist at the BBC, so far more of a conflict of interest than a sports commentator making a personal political comment on Twitter.

Did you see all us lefty liberal snowflakes getting up in arms about that? I knew full well Andrew Neil was very right wing (and very vocally so) but he seemed to keep it away from his job at the BBC and always gave politicians of any stripe a decent grilling when he was interviewing them, no big deal.

Lineker himself Tweeted 'Bin Corbyn' back in 2017, again, no fuss over that from all us woketards.

View attachment 180700

And yet now we have the Daily Mail and a load of right-wingers losing their absolute shit over a relatively innocuous Tweet by a sports personality, the same Daily Mail that bangs on about cancel culture and how you can't say anything nowadays without the WOKE MOB trying to shut you down.

It's a crystal clear case of blatant double standards, Lineker was targeted because of what he said, and about whom.

For the record I don't think it was a particularly useful thing to Tweet, going near '1930s Germany' in this kind of debate never tends to end well, even though what he was saying was essentially factually accurate. For my money he'd have been better off talking about the language of 1930s England, when the Daily Mail (who else....) was saying 'Hurrah for the Blackshirts'.

BUF_Banner_1574868238.jpg

I see Andrew Neil as more a blairite murdochian creature, similar to piers morgan, people of the left see them as 'right wingers'; the bbc probably gave him a job to deflect accusations of political bias, and to try to balance their overriding liberal/left viewpoint.

Look at many other former bbc presenters, they've all suddenly gone to work for lbc, home of woketard irritant James o'b. Maybe it's because the bbc wants to appear more impartial [to protect its licence fee/survival] and these folk know they can't hold their silence on twitter, and lbc is okay with that.

I get the feeling Gary's political knowledge is very limited, along with his perception of priorities and common sense of what is is in the general public's interest i.e. not these boat people turning up annually in their thousands.

Edit: Apparently AN is now doing a news show for channel 4, he can't be right wing if that's the case.
 
Last edited:
Andrew Neil not right wing? Come on mack, let's at least stay connected to the plane of reality! There's a whole lifetime of his work to point at! Yes he's now got a show on Channel 4 but how does that mean he can't be right wing? Michael Portillo did a whole series of shows for the BBC, you know, the massive Thatcher supporter who served in her cabinet. Is he not right wing either because he worked for the 'woke' BBC?

To be clear, I think Andrew Neil is an astute journalist and an excellent interrogator of politicians, and it seemed to me he never let his personal politics clash with his job at the BBC, but to claim he isn't and/or can't be right wing is pure nonsense.

I know it would be convenient to have Andrew Neil not be vocally right wing because it would neuter the massive hypocrisy at play with the Lineker situation, but he is a right winger - that's just an observable fact that can easily be evidenced.
 
Last edited:
And here we have a former Conservative politician recently employed by the BBC criticising a BBC colleague for having political opinions. A BBC which has Conservative Party members on its board and leadership team.

You can watch one of his BBC programmes on the iPlayer right now,

1678639297502.png

 
Yeah they're just opinion polls, but it's always interesting to see how these things split out.

It's not exactly emphatic when it comes to Tory voters either, which literally just limps over the 50% line when it comes to 'it was wrong to suspend Gary Lineker'.

(I'd absolutely love to see the age demographic of that 51%, I'd bet anyone a million pounds it's predominantly old people.)

Fq99v1AWIAUFmsU

Fq99DRYWwAAggQt
 
Description says it all, John Barnes is brilliant here.

I'm increasingly convinced the government really, really picked the wrong side on this one.

'Don't pick fights with people who are far more popular than you are' - a lesson the Tory government might do well to learn.

 
Yeah they're just opinion polls, but it's always interesting to see how these things split out.

It's not exactly emphatic when it comes to Tory voters either, which literally just limps over the 50% line when it comes to 'it was wrong to suspend Gary Lineker'.

(I'd absolutely love to see the age demographic of that 51%, I'd bet anyone a million pounds it's predominantly old people.)

Fq99v1AWIAUFmsU

Fq99DRYWwAAggQt
Are these the same Britons that many remainers were branding as 'thick' and/or racist when they voted for Brexit?

Suddenly become more insightful on current affairs in your book now have they?

You'd expect Labour supporters to at least have a rudimentary grasp of how employment contracts work, considering they traditionally have been the ones that fought for them...
 
Last edited:
Are these the same Britons that many remainers were branding as 'thick' and/or racist when they voted for Brexit?

Suddenly become more insightful on current affairs in your book now have they?

You'd expect Labour supporters to at least have a rudimentary grasp of how employment contracts work, considering they traditionally have been the ones that fought for them...

People are allowed to change their mind, that's the essence of democracy, the referendum was back in 2016 and a lot of people now understand they were duped into voting for something that was against their own best interests.

I have no rancour in me for anyone who voted for Brexit, my dad - (who I love profoundly and deeply, he's the most magnificent man I've ever known, I'd be dead ten times over if it weren't for him) - voted for Brexit, based on a false prospectus of lies and nonsense. Really good people can make mistakes sometimes, and it's not necessarily their fault.

Contempt for the conmen, compassion for the conned.
 
Last edited:
No, but he seems to have a point, as viewing figures were UP 20%:

(From BBC News) "Viewing figures were up by almost half a million to 2.58m."

People don't watch MoTD to see Captain Smarm, Shearer, Wright, Micah Michelin-Mann, Scott or whatever selection of clowns they overpay for their hour's work, but the FOOTBALL!

I'm not Bri'ish (so my viewership isn't counted) but I watched MOTD last night just for the novelty. Never watch it otherwise. I strongly suspect there were about 500k of those in Britain last night that did exactly the same.
 
Andrew Neil not right wing? Come on mack, let's at least stay connected to the plane of reality! There's a whole lifetime of his work to point at! Yes he's now got a show on Channel 4 but how does that mean he can't be right wing? Michael Portillo did a whole series of shows for the BBC, you know, the massive Thatcher supporter who served in her cabinet. Is he not right wing either because he worked for the 'woke' BBC?

To be clear, I think Andrew Neil is an astute journalist and an excellent interrogator of politicians, and it seemed to me he never let his personal politics clash with his job at the BBC, but to claim he isn't and/or can't be right wing is pure nonsense.

I know it would be convenient to have Andrew Neil not be vocally right wing because it would neuter the massive hypocrisy at play with the Lineker situation, but he is a right winger - that's just an observable fact that can easily be evidenced.

Mr Rajan also pointed out that, in 1997, Mr Neil argued the republican side in a debate and asked whether he still held republican views.

While on BBC Radio 4's 'The Media Show', Mr Neil replied: "Not really.

“I am not a cheerleading monarchist, I can see the strength of a republic.

My main objection to the Royal Family at that time was basically Marxist.

"It behaved like it was the pinnacle of a class system, and they were the top ones.

My Sunday Times was devoted to breaking up Britain's class system, and I thought it would be (im?)possible to have a Royal Family separate from the class system."
 
Alas it looks like the smarmy drip will be back on MoTD next week. BBC missed a great opportunity to refresh the show, save some cash and get rid of the stale dead wood. I was hoping we could have Klinnsman presenting it, an international player who actually won something. Or Fiona Bruce who specializes in antiques. If not, Prince Harry and Megan, slightly less annoying than the existing on-strike crew?
 
The Daily Express, often referred to with good reason as "The Daily Basket Case"

I am inclined to disagree with 80% or so of what Gary Lineker tweets, however, quietening the dissenting voice is very worrying, especially as the right wing press and sections of the Tory Party have been leaning heavily on the BBC.

Glad to see they have back tracked and Lineker will now be back on MOTD next Saturday.

That said, this whole sorry saga reinforces my view that the licence fee is an outdated model and in 2023 the State ie us, should no longer fund the BBC

BTW @ChopleyIOM love your avatar :D
 
Description says it all, John Barnes is brilliant here.

I'm increasingly convinced the government really, really picked the wrong side on this one.

'Don't pick fights with people who are far more popular than you are' - a lesson the Tory government might do well to learn.


Quite, who is going to win in a popularity contest, a government that has sailed the country into an iceberg of Titanic sinking proportions, or a former England Captain who scored 48 times for his country?
 
No, but he seems to have a point, as viewing figures were UP 20%:

(From BBC News) "Viewing figures were up by almost half a million to 2.58m."

People don't watch MoTD to see Captain Smarm, Shearer, Wright, Micah Michelin-Mann, Scott or whatever selection of clowns they overpay for their hour's work, but the FOOTBALL!
You do not have to be Albert Einstein to have realised that the number of people viewing MOTD on Saturday night was going to be significantly up as a result. What with no commentary, presenters, pundits or interviews, people were going to be intrigued as to what it would be like. We even caught up with it last night on iPlayer. LOL
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Click here for Red Cherry Casino

Meister Ratings

Back
Top