Gary Lineker

[jumbler]

You’ve probably seen there was no football on the BBC today. And this is because Gary was suspended from presenting. In response to which, his mates/colleagues walked out in support.

Which is fair enough. But now the debate has pivoted back to whether the BBC Director-General or Chairman should resign instead.

Correct me if I’m wrong, but in nearly any job, you sort of have to agree either to represent the company’s views, or failing that, take a neutral stance (which means not speaking out about issues).

So why is the media trying to deflect blame from Gary?? This is not about his opinion, he’s welcome to have that, but why does he think he shouldn’t get into trouble for tweeting about stuff which is: a. not related to sport; and b. going to put him on a collision course with the employer - because they also have to broadcast the news??

And how can senior managers be responsible when it’s Gary who’s spoken out?? Not them??

[RyCamp88]

Don’t agree with what he said, immigration needs handled but he did no wrong in voicing his opinion.

[John]

Don’t agree with what he said, immigration needs handled but he did no wrong in voicing his opinion.

He can have those opinions without public funding from those unlikely to agree with him. Also if people can't watch football without Gary Lineker then they have bigger problems.

[Kernow]

I think it’s just been blown up into a much bigger issue now. I’ve never read something that Gary Lineker has said on twitter and immediately thought that represents the views of the BBC.

I think maybe the problem is the BBC aren’t consistent with their enforcing of the rules. What would have happened if he agreed with the policy, would he have been asked to ‘stand back’? I don’t know.

Is there merit in the arguments people have brought up -

Andrew Neil editor of The Spectator while at the BBC?
An ex conservative member as director general?
The chairman’s donation to the Tory party and the loan/boris fiasco?
Lord Sugar seems to be allowed to tweet his political views..?

It seems a mess…I also think that the BBC are in a catch 22 situation, they’ve had years of being called bias because they didn’t support Brexit. So now they have shifted from left to right. This will always be an issue for as long as it’s publicly funded.

[RyCamp88]

Yet mouth pieces like Nolan can spout all they want and still employed by the bbc and have to agree they are becoming right wing

[KernowChris]

If the BBC wishes to control his speech it should employ him rather than offer him a freelance contract. He's totally in order in his own time to voice his views.

[ladsnet]

Exactly.
No other freelancer has ever been suspended in this way for speaking their mind.

And as it happened after a week of campaigning by the Mail, kGBNews and all the far right campaigners... add to the fact the DG and Chairman of the Beeb are massive Tory donors/supporters....

Not a terribly good advert for 'impartiality' is it ?

[Hugh]

Caught The Jeremy Vine Show last week, one on of the show they were talking about Gary Lineker.
One of the panellists said that we pay his wages. So I'm guessing that anyone who thinks that since the BBC is funded by the License Fee, Gary doesn't any views.

[ladsnet]

I believe that I pay Suella Braverman's wages.

Doesn't stop her spouting her 1930s Germany style propaganda at me every day.

[jumbler]

^^If Rishi Sunak’s claim is true (that 45 000 people arrived on boats last year), that is a city the size of Leicester every 8 years added to the population. Or a city the size of Leeds every 12 years.

Or 10 million people over the last 25 years. And that’s just the illegal migrants. Doesn’t include the legal ones with visas.

And as I know too well from work, everyone will settle down at some point, get naturalised, British passport for them/the wife/kids. Putting more strain on our public services.

It is a debate that needs to be had: whether an 80 year old commitment to help a few thousand people per year on a temporary basis is still appropriate when it’s being used by tens of thousands of people per year to gain residency, when it wouldn’t normally be available.

[Kernow]

Yeah, it definitely needs sorting but I think the whole Gary Lineker tweet was about the language Suella used. How we’re facing an ‘invasion’ ‘100 million people are coming here’ etc

It just doesn’t help the cause.

[MintyRox]

The same old conjecture from the usual members. Sigh.

Even *if* that 45,000 figure was representative of an average for every year (which it's not), 45k x 25 is nowhere near 10 million. Your phone has a calculator app, use it before you start citing rubbish.

[jumbler]

No, that is obviously not completely accurate - not for the whole period. But migration as a whole has risen that much.

---

Now that EU free movement had been closed off, you could see illegal migration could be the next pressure point.

[ladsnet]

Didn't take long for the Lineker discussion to turn into the same old same old ....... shit did it?


Good point yesterday, actually asked by a BBC journalist to their DG.

If Lineker had tweeted that he was completely in favour of the governments new policy 'something must be done about the boats and this new policy is brilliant'... do you think he'd have been suspended for making a political tweet.

Obv. the DG declined to 'get into hypotheticals'

[Pete]

The answer is simple. Abolish the telly tax, shift the BBC funding to a model where it is paid for by voluntary subscription, advertising, and/or sales, and Lineker can spout his dumbfuckery without it being a problem.

[paddyh92]

The answer is simple. Abolish the telly tax, shift the BBC funding to a model where it is paid for by voluntary subscription, advertising, and/or sales, and Lineker can spout his dumbfuckery without it being a problem.

It is voluntary

[chabang]

And as I know too well from work, everyone will settle down at some point, get naturalised, British passport for them/the wife/kids. Putting more strain on our public services.

And they will get jobs, pay taxes, spend money locally and generally contribute to the economy the same as everyone else (and it is well established that migrants on the whole actually contribute more in taxes etc than natives because migrants tend to be young and migrate to work) unless you're suggesting that the current tax levels in the UK aren't sufficient to support public services in which case the government can fix that by adjusting taxes / expenditure. None of what you highlight is in any way the fault of migrants.

[RRUK01]

You’ve probably seen there was no football on the BBC today. And this is because Gary was suspended from presenting. In response to which, his mates/colleagues walked out in support.

Which is fair enough. But now the debate has pivoted back to whether the BBC Director-General or Chairman should resign instead.

Correct me if I’m wrong, but in nearly any job, you sort of have to agree either to represent the company’s views, or failing that, take a neutral stance (which means not speaking out about issues).

So why is the media trying to deflect blame from Gary?? This is not about his opinion, he’s welcome to have that, but why does he think he shouldn’t get into trouble for tweeting about stuff which is: a. not related to sport; and b. going to put him on a collision course with the employer - because they also have to broadcast the news??

And how can senior managers be responsible when it’s Gary who’s spoken out?? Not them??

The issue is, that the BBC have taken Gary Lineker off air for his comments siting that he breached the social platform rules, however they have had other high profile stars do the same but not received any punishment. Lord Sugar who presents Apprentice, has used Twitter before to spread his political beliefs and nothing was said about him. Hence why I think the BBC have got themselves into trouble over this.

[Hugh]

Doesn't Lord Sugar have a bit of an issue with posting Tweets?
Has he ever been in trouble with the Beeb? Or just had backlash from the public

[Kernow]

I don’t think Lord Sugary has been in trouble with the beeb as far as I can remember, but not certain. Apparently the difference between him and Gary Lineker is that Lineker a ‘pan’ BBC presenter and does other big sporting events whereas Lord Sugar only does one show.

I don’t buy that reasoning at all.