Lineker Tweet

boltonbonce wrote:

karlypants wrote:
Alan sugar is another cock.

Who didn't get pulled from The Apprentice when he attacked Corbyn.

That show wants axing regardless.

As always Jonathan Pie gets it spot on. Some of you really need to take note of the last 10 seconds.

Natasha Whittam wrote:As always Jonathan Pie gets it spot on. Some of you really need to take note of the last 10 seconds.

Absolutely brilliant and entirely correct. Thanks, Nat, for showing this piece of Pie....

There's two separate things in play here (three actually, I'll come to the third - which I think nearly everybody has missed, at the end).

The first thing is the government's policy on the 'boat people' which the Government announced this week.  

The second is a public service employee (Lineker is being employed (and paid) by the BBC in his capacity as a freelance journalist) making his political views public, knowing that it will directly reflect back on to the BBC, which is (or attempts to be) a political neutral, and impartial organisation.

There is nothing wrong in being against the government 'boat' policy.

There is nothing wrong in the BBC attempting to remain politically neutral and impartial organisation.

The choice of the individual knowing this and working for the BBC is to either keep their personal views to themselves whilst contracted to an organisation known to be impartial, or terminate your contract with them and speak your views publicly to your heart content.

You can't do both at the same time as if you do, the line is crossed and the BBC is shown then to be either an organisation that tolerates it's employees to embroil themselves publicly in political opinion - and everything that brings - let me remind you that the BBC is the state broadcaster of the country, or one that values its neutrality and impartiality and has to act to keep their neutrality and impartiality?

You've got a choice therefore of the BBC being seen to be leftist political leaning by the public (and no longer politically neutral) or to remove the high profile Lineker who has knowingly made the tweets clearly expecting it would cause some form of an issue to the BBC.

The BBC has been under attack by the political parties, notably the Conservatives, for many years and if it didn't act on Lineker, that attack would become that much stronger.

Politicians in every country wants to control the media.

You only have to look at what happens when they eventually do...

The third wheel to this that everybody seems to have missed, is why are the boat people coming here from a free and safe country to begin with?

The boats are coming from France, France is a free and safe country.

These immigrants are coming here for safety from a country they are already in which is free and safe itself!

The argument isn't that our politicians are Nazi like but rather why are these immigrants risking their lives to come here when they are already in a free and safe country - and whatever it is, we should identify and change it to what France does and therefore negate the reason they choose to come here at all.

It just shows that one person’s big ego has so much influence on other people in a big organisation such as the BBC is absolutely ridiculous.

It’s way beyond the point of no return for lineker and the bbc but the beeb will be begging him to return no doubt.

He has no respect for the company he works for with having far too much money than brains.

The bbc deserve to be fucked off too for eventually bending over and taking his shit!

The BBC have been exposed as under the thumb of the Tory Party and its backfired massively. If Lineker had come out in support of this hideous policy of demonising migrants would he have been removed from MOTD? Of course he wouldn't.

All the top people in the BBC have links to the Tory party and are not impartial. Lineker is a freelancer and doesn't just work for the BBC so should be free to give his opinion on his own twitter account. I don't remember anyone complaining when the likes of Andrew Neil was spouting his right wing agenda on the BBC

Let’s be honest Norpig, they are all overpaid arseholes with an agenda.

I just want my gas and electric bills to come back down like everyone else.

Let’s give someone new a chance that hasn’t already made their millions!

karlypants wrote:Let’s be honest Norpig, they are all overpaid arseholes with an agenda.

I just want my gas and electric bills to come back down like everyone else.

Let’s give someone new a chance that hasn’t already made their millions!

Gary Lineker supplies your gas and electricity?

Natasha Whittam wrote:

karlypants wrote:Let’s be honest Norpig, they are all overpaid arseholes with an agenda.

I just want my gas and electric bills to come back down like everyone else.

Let’s give someone new a chance that hasn’t already made their millions!

Gary Lineker supplies your gas and electricity?

No but the Tories chums do!

Sugar retweeted a mocked up picture of Corbyn sitting next to Hitler.

Cajunboy wrote:
I agree, total drivel.

Pretty much agree. All the goal highlights are available on YT not long after the games end. And all I want to see are the goals.
Mind you, the BBC has so little sport these days, they might have to go back to horse racing.

Sick of hearing about  that smug git Lineker and his back-slapping cronies.

boltonbonce wrote:
Pretty much agree. All the goal highlights are available on YT not long after the games end. And all I want to see are the goals.
Mind you, the BBC has so little sport these days, they might have to go back to horse racing.

Neigh!!!!!

boltonbonce wrote:

Cajunboy wrote:
I agree, total drivel.

Pretty much agree. All the goal highlights are available on YT not long after the games end. And all I want to see are the goals.
Mind you, the BBC has so little sport these days, they might have to go back to horse racing.

I’m pretty sure that they are only available on the clubs YouTube once the highlights have been aired on the TV. 

It seems be this at Bolton’s unless the video uploader is too lazy to upload them straight away.

Did lineker ever house some migrants at his Mansion like he said he would a while back? 

I’m curious!

karlypants wrote:Did lineker ever house some migrants at his Mansion like he said he would a while back? 

I’m curious!

Just two in 8 years according to this...

EXCLUSIVE: Gary Lineker is still in touch with the two refugees he took in, says proud son George

https://www.mirror.co.uk/3am/celebrity-style/gary-lineker-still-touch-two-29434358


Even Rashford has been seen down his favourite foodbank more than that!





Fair play to them both actually but it seems their commitment from both of them suggests to me that it is more of a token gesture from them, than a real passion of theirs to change the world on these things.

Interesting to see neither of them have done much personally commitment  about their passions recently other than the famous 'tweet' have they?

I'm certain they didn't do it simply as some sort of publicity stunt, surely not, seeing how utterly committed they both are to this day...



Also I'm absolutely certain that Lineker isn't influenced in any way at all against the BBC or the government's in respect of his currently ongoing court case about the tax avoidance scheme he is alleged to have participated in to avoid paying £5m tax to the public purse...

HMRC is pursuing the football presenter for £4.9 million that it claimed should have been paid on income received between 2013 and 2018.

https://www.independent.co.uk/money/hmrc-wanted-tax-avoidance-law-to-apply-in-gary-lineker-case-lawyers-say-b2291197.html


Just a pure coincidence obviously...

GB NEWS. Love it. Comedy gold.

Not quite Fox News standard yet, but getting there.

boltonbonce wrote:GB NEWS. Love it. Comedy gold.

Not quite Fox News standard yet, but getting there.

I really only posted up the tweet for a laugh - the bloke who tweeted it is the Editor of The Guardian's, Sports Section but your comment above does happen to underline the point I've been making from the very start of this thread, in that how credible does any TV company become when it looses it's perceived impartiality?

The BBC when all said and done, and with all it's imperfections and the battering it takes from BOTH sides of the political spectrum, is still the nations broadcasting company and does achieve a level of impartiality and credibility that surpasses any other broadcasting company.

It is owned, if you will, by us the people - although, yes, it's Director General is in the gift of the government of the day.

To be honest I see the Lineker instance and those of Sugar, Brady, etc, akin in a way to how VAR is working - namely the guidelines are there for both, just that the implementation of them for both is open to human interpretation, and that varies from one person to another - hence the ongoing inconsistences.

However in Lineker's case you simply can't have some high profile person on the BBC publicly likening government policy to the Nazism of Hitler.

Something clearly had to be done.

The rest that follows is down to your own individual political polarism, if you are Labour you back Lineker, if you are Tory, you don't.

The simple fact is, is the incident is not a political one, it is a contractual, ethical one.

Lineker should have kept his view to himself or terminated his contract with the BBC to say it.

It really was as simple as that.