AndyinLiverpool

Poor start to this half

Well done, Harry Kane

Bellingham is some player

56 minutes ago, Abu Derby said:

Bring back the highlights without Lineker and the pundits. Stringing out the program by more than double the highlights content by citing supposition, cogitating and providing inane comments - none of which is going to change the results. 
Aside from that, saving several millions in wages. 

You can watch highlights of individual games on YouTube. You don't need to watch Match of the Day.

50 minutes ago, BaaLocks said:

I'm definitely missing something with this, the last scene with her daughter is being described as one of those "you can't watch it without crying" moments. I could. It felt like a poor man's Scott Pilgrim to me, without the wit and interplay. Glad you enjoyed it but, for me, I'm feeling a bit jealous that I didn't see all the things that have won it so many plaudits.

I hated it. Couldn't connect with it at all. Only stayed to the end because I was with her indoors.

6 hours ago, EtoileSportiveDeDerby said:

I don't get Tomori ahead of Maguire.

Deschamp does the opposite, if a player plays for CL club wherever that might be, he will consider the player for the France team. The simple reason is that the level of CL is on a par with international football, and Ligue 1 isn't.

I don't understand this

39 minutes ago, ramsbottom said:

The guy who opens the door knows the reaction that's coming, can barely stop himself laughing...

Ainsworth, Redknapp, Warnock, Holloway, Gregory, Francis (Gerry & Trevor)...  What is it with QPR signing absolute whoppers as manager???

They are a small fish in a big pond. They won't get noticed in the capital for their football so they need something else. QPR seem to have decided that unlikeable managers is their 'something else'.

Gareth, it'll cost you about £20 to fly to Milan for a weekend.

Or perhaps you can watch him on the telly. He'll be one of those actually getting a game.

1 hour ago, cstand said:

It would be classed as a possible hate speech towards the Jewish community.

People need to understand it’s about the language he used, not the fact he was criticising the government.

 

 

Sorry but that's b*******

5 minutes ago, PistoldPete said:

This from the BBC's own website
 

"There are also others who are not journalists or involved in factual programming who nevertheless have an additional responsibility to the BBC because of their profile on the BBC.

"We expect these individuals to avoid taking sides on party political issues or political controversies and to take care when addressing public policy matters."
 

So Lineker still not guilty then? I don't think there is any doubt he is in breach it is just a matter of what is a proportionate response from the BBC. 

According to the quoted statements, it's hard to see how anybody could be guilty of anything, such is the vagueness of the language.

The BBC has been dumbing down for years but if it seriously believes that people might mistake Lineker's words as representing BBC policy then it really doesn't have a lot of respect for its audience, does it?

20 minutes ago, Norman said:

Where are those statements with those words being used to promote the new asylum policy?

The Home Secretary said this in the House of Commons when introducing her bill.

'There are 100 million people around the world who could qualify for protection under our current laws. Let’s be clear. They are coming here'

53 minutes ago, cstand said:

You only need to read the comments section of the BBC website on a regular basis to understand the BBC is against the Tories. Try posting anything different it’s removed on a regular basis.

Or see the bias on question time.

This is why there are now trying to prove they are independent.

You realise that comment sections are populated by anybody at all who wants to comment and not by people following editorial policy?

3 minutes ago, Tyler Durden said:

Do you accept the statement I've put forward?

I'm assuming you do, which is why you've ignored replying to it's content as you like others don't want to accept that Lineker is able to express his right of free speech, likewise the BBC is well within their rights to then advise an employee of theirs when said statement breaches their rules on impartiality.

Yes, I do. But have you actually seen the guidlines? The statement that they base their actions on? The guidlines that on Friday morning the BBC were satisfied had not been broken?

5 minutes ago, Tyler Durden said:

And the BBC, as his employer, also have the right to advise any of their employees when they are making open statements that would be seen to contravene their impartiality standards - a fact which a few posters appear unable to appreciate or accept without throwing in the usual whatabouttery smokescreen. 

It cuts both ways. 

Have you seen the BBC's impartiality guidelines?

8 minutes ago, bcnram said:

Sack him, sack Wright, sack Shearer, sack any others in football focus etc. programmes who refuse to work. The programmes need refreshing anyway. The BBC cannot and should not back down in this. He thinks he is untouchable, time to cancel his contract. 

He doesn't think he's untouchable. He thinks he has a right to express his opinions.

17 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

So you'd literally have nobody on the BBC that had ever spoken a political view? Dont think there would be too many programmes to air if that was the case.

I think there is a quite clear distinction between people who represent the BBC and people that just appear on it.

I very much doubt that people who just appear on BBC shows are ever informed of their guidelines.

This would be the logical conclusion, yes. Those calling 'hypocrite' should surely see this. That's why upholding some mythical standard of impartiality is obviously nonsense. 

4 minutes ago, cstand said:

Most celebrities will side with what will keep them in a future job they know how the cancel culture works in this country.

 

Or perhaps people just want to support their friend. People do that, you know.

34 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

So I'll take that as a no.

Already said I have absolutely no issue with the comments Lineker has made by the way and I'm glad he still has a platform where he can make them, unlike the right wingers who seem to be de-platformed when they say something that the left don't like.

Blimey, you're on top form today. I've already filled my GStar Ram bingo card and it's barely 10 o'clock.

12 minutes ago, cstand said:

Reading this  it’s getting worse for Lineker.

If he has used the comments about illegal migrants just to get back at his employers for not footing the bill for his legal defence to avoid paying taxes he deserves to hung dry.

https://inews.co.uk/inews-lifestyle/money/gary-lineker-tax-clash-bbc-paying-legal-fees-2201702

 

Not so big on free speech now then?

Just now, therealhantsram said:

You could say the BBC have lost the dressing room on this one.

Not to mention a spine

1 hour ago, sage said:

 

'Plodding mediocrity'

Seems like a phrase that should be used more often.

1 minute ago, Magicman said:

Dobbin been on 20 mins done SFA

Surprised it took you 20 minutes

2 hours ago, Ramarena said:

Poor old Chris Martin, what has he done to deserve being managed by that guy?

Left Derby

1-0 at half time.

Hilarious.

4 hours ago, i-Ram said:

I didn’t know where to put this, and didn’t want to start a new thread, but is anyone following the Yorkshire CC case? Tim Bressnan appears to be being accused of making a racial slur towards young attractive Asian women. On the BBC website it doesn’t say however what the ‘slur’ is. Can anyone help? My wife is keen to know if I might be a racist too given my undeniable sexual interest in Isa Guha.

It's easy enough for you to find out. But then  of course, that wasn't the point of your post.