Gary Lineker

[Josephine Shaker]

Because he’s a football commentator, not a politician and most people don’t give a fig about his opinion. He should change careers if he thinks he knows best.

This is always such an interesting comment because you seem to suggest only politicians can comment on political matters and not you, me or anyone else. It’s not only the dumbest thing I hear about this, it also makes me despair that people genuinely have this level of trust in this government.
---

If you sign a contract with the BBC for millions of pounds and are then in breach of that, you can expect to be told as such. You can’t sit on your big pile of cash and still expect to be able to say what you like.

Lineker swapped freedom of speech for lots of money when he signed on the dotted line. As he now clearly has a crisis of conscience, he should be happy to hand all that money back.

For context I think all politicians are self serving twats, especially the current lot. And I couldn’t give two shits about football.

Actually what you’re saying is incorrect. In their guidance they actually state that presenters like science or sport ones are allowed to comment on matters of politics. It’s (not) surprising how many people first of all misquoted the tweet and then seem to think the BBC clearly forbid a personal opinion. And oh well let’s not forget it’s okay for Alan Sugar and the likes to express one as long as it’s supportive of the Tories. What Gary said is bang on and even if you don’t agree with his statement that’s fine too. We are all allowed to say what we think (within the limits of the law of course). The fact a Tory run bbc wants to curb that is the massive own goal they deserve after the institution was taken over by one political party.
---
What does a hugely unpopular government do when they are pretty sure they’ll be obliterated in the next election? They start scaremongering. Foreigners come to steal your jobs, and you houses. It’s to distract you from the shitshow they’ve run for 13 years. Speaking of that 13 years… they’ve been in power that amount of time and now all of a sudden they start with the rhetoric which is reminiscent of the 30s? Gee it’s almost like they know they’re fucked and are trying to save their skins. The reason this country is on its arse is not refugees. It’s mismanagement, Brexit and politicians who are not there for you and me: they’re there for themselves. The fact people don’t see that this latest move is a classic move when governments are about to fail is horrifying to me.

 

[Blueballs]

I'm Jewish and 2nd generation settled in the UK (born Scotland but live in England). My grandparents fled nazi Germany. They are appalled by Gary. This immediately conclusion to jump to fascism all the time for shock value takes away something from it as there's nothing worse to jump to.
Some of the language with invasion and swarming is extream and totally unnecessary. But these words used how they were are so so far away from 1930s Germany.
The government does have a duty to it's citizens safety to know who is entering and the statistics show a reasonable percent threaten the safety and stability. Its nice to think it's all doctors coming over to work hard, but we need to be realistic. They do need more legal routes so that people other than Afghan, Ukrainian etc can enter. Wanting to know who is entering the country does not make you anti immigration.
But all this language calling the torys Nazis is disgusting and disrespectful for those that suffered under the Nazis. Not that I support the Tories but this extream language to describe them isn't helpful. Other countries like America, Australia and Japan are far harsher on people crossing without permission, if Gary was informed and sensible he would draw parallels between them. But that wouldn't get the same shock value as jumping to the most extreme example, despite it not being a good fit.

 

[susan1375]

I have a History PhD and the language is entirely comparable. And PS there is nothing 'illegal' about claiming asylum in a different country. That's what international law actually says. It is a mere quirk of history that you aren't in one of those boats, by the way.

I agree and also if the uk hadn’t been so quick to intervene in certain countries there wouldn’t be refugees coming over here.

 

[Professor Yaffle]

BBC doesn't have much of a leg to stand on with regards to impartiality while Sharp remains Chairman.

Lineker made comments about Qatar during the WC with regards to human rights issues yet nothing happened. Alan Sugar went after Mick Lynch during some of the rail strikes - hardly remaining impartial. (He has also publicly backed the Tories on his social media). It's clear as day why such issue is being taken with Lineker in this individual instance.

Sometimes the odd political comment is allowed however any reference to the 1930's, WW2 and the genocide that happened during that period is of particular abhorrence. There are not many people still alive and who bore witness to the unimagineable discriminate torture and killing of that time. One some levels it is happening to this day, we should protect genuine asylum seekers by accepting them without them having to make the dangerous crossing is a flimsy dinghy. However as they keep on coming by illegal means do we assume that they land that way becuase if they applied for asylum it would be refused due to not being victimised and in fear of their lives from the country where they originate?

 

[ordinaryjelly]

MoTD last night was right weird.

I think the treatment of Lineker has been disgusting and it has been heartening to see all the other pundits and PFA come out in support of him.

Andrew O'Neil was allowed to peddle his political opinions on air via the BBC for years and years. One tweet from Lineker that questions the Government and all the Tory shills at the top of the corporation wet their beds.

Glad I don't pay a licence fee.

 

[KS1066]

Lineker's ignorant tweet was deeply offensive to the Jewish community. He should take a history lesson.

Gary if you are reading this, apologise, pay your tax bill and stick to crisps.

 

[FoxyBingo]

All this "support of Lineker" and "solidarity". He's loving this attention and all these pundits are jumping on the bandwagon out of fear of not "showing support". Move on and get on with the jobs you are paid (very well) to do.

 

[ordinaryjelly]

His tax is fully paid, so we can stop banging on about that.

 

[KS1066]

His tax is fully paid, so we can stop banging on about that.

He owes 4.9 million

 

[Weathergirl]

The brilliant Jonathan Pie nails it as usual.

 

[Spid]

Lineker's ignorant tweet was deeply offensive to the Jewish community. He should take a history lesson.

Gary if you are reading this, apologise, pay your tax bill and stick to crisps.

Why on earth would he be reading this?

Also do you stick to only talking about work?

 

[KS1066]

Why on earth would he be reading this? - Of course he wont be

 

[Catfan2]

This is always such an interesting comment because you seem to suggest only politicians can comment on political matters and not you, me or anyone else. It’s not only the dumbest thing I hear about this, it also makes me despair that people genuinely have this level of trust in this government.
---

Actually what you’re saying is incorrect. In their guidance they actually state that presenters like science or sport ones are allowed to comment on matters of politics. It’s (not) surprising how many people first of all misquoted the tweet and then seem to think the BBC clearly forbid a personal opinion. And oh well let’s not forget it’s okay for Alan Sugar and the likes to express one as long as it’s supportive of the Tories. What Gary said is bang on and even if you don’t agree with his statement that’s fine too. We are all allowed to say what we think (within the limits of the law of course). The fact a Tory run bbc wants to curb that is the massive own goal they deserve after the institution was taken over by one political party.
---
What does a hugely unpopular government do when they are pretty sure they’ll be obliterated in the next election? They start scaremongering. Foreigners come to steal your jobs, and you houses. It’s to distract you from the shitshow they’ve run for 13 years. Speaking of that 13 years… they’ve been in power that amount of time and now all of a sudden they start with the rhetoric which is reminiscent of the 30s? Gee it’s almost like they know they’re fucked and are trying to save their skins. The reason this country is on its arse is not refugees. It’s mismanagement, Brexit and politicians who are not there for you and me: they’re there for themselves. The fact people don’t see that this latest move is a classic move when governments are about to fail is horrifying to me. View attachment 2022170

Of course we can all have opinions on political matters or anything else. My problem with Lineker is that he’s always stirring the pot and making inflammatory comments (Tweets). He enjoys the backlash and attention it gives him. If it was a one off I don’t think it would have gained the headlines that it has. Oh and I for one enjoyed watching the football with no inane comments or observations
---

Why on earth would he be reading this? - Of course he wont be

No he’ll be on Twitter feeling the outpouring of love and support

 

[ordinaryjelly]

He owes 4.9 million

IR35 is a flawed piece of legislature. Employee, employer. Potato, potahto.

 

[mcfeez]

Sometimes the odd political comment is allowed however any reference to the 1930's, WW2 and the genocide that happened during that period is of particular abhorrence. There are not many people still alive and who bore witness to the unimagineable discriminate torture and killing of that time. One some levels it is happening to this day, we should protect genuine asylum seekers by accepting them without them having to make the dangerous crossing is a flimsy dinghy. However as they keep on coming by illegal means do we assume that they land that way becuase if they applied for asylum it would be refused due to not being victimised and in fear of their lives from the country where they originate?

I've given no opinion of my own on the legislation around asylum seekers.

My comment almost solely discusses the BBC and the supposed issue of employees remaining 'impartial' and how they only want to trot it out when the impartial comments they make are ones criticising the government and their policies.

 

[L3moning]

IR35 is a flawed piece of legislature. Employee, employer. Potato, potahto.

The use of limited companies to reduce personal tax liability is clearly taking the piss though. As long as the government allow it I'm not going to criticise people for doing it, because if it's that much of an issue they could very easily change the law.

 

[ordinaryjelly]

The use of limited companies to reduce personal tax liability is clearly taking the piss though. As long as the government allow it I'm not going to criticise people for doing it, because if it's that much of an issue they could very easily change the law.

Exactly. If the Government didn't want it to happen they would fix IR35. They want it to apply to cases where it simply doesn't and they close their minds to anything on the contrary. Anyone with an accountant who can do their job well is using it.

We should go after the Goverment, not individuals who are correctly using our antiquated tax code correctly.

 

[SkippyDoo]

The fuss over this is incredible. Who cares who presents the football. Lineker’s main quality is/was being a former international footballer just about the right mixture of quietly personable and bland that he could speak before and after they show the goals from today on TV without being too annoying or offensive (in the role itself). He made some virtue-signalling tweet for the easy Likes in my opinion and perhaps to distract from his taxes. Yes he is technically allowed to speak his mind, but if he signed a contract that said he would limit this on his public social media, then his employers are for their part, allowed to get annoyed with him on the basis of that contract. That’s for his lawyers and the BBC lawyers to sort out and doesn’t require rolling news coverage.

I don’t like how the BBC is run and we need to have that conversation, and in particular, on their nauseating double standards on “impartiality”, but Lineker isn’t the best poster boy for this one.

 

[Lady_H]

I've given no opinion of my own on the legislation around asylum seekers.

My comment almost solely discusses the BBC and the supposed issue of employees remaining 'impartial' and how they only want to trot it out when the impartial comments they make are ones criticising the government and their policies.

Could you give an example of an employee of the Beeb making political statements in support of the government and their policies, and not being criticised? I am genuinely interested as they may well exist. People cite Andrew Neil so I guess that is an example, although I’m not sure of the exact context and didn’t he end up leaving anyway?

I do agree that the BBC has not enforced this policy consistently and now they’re in deep doo-doo because of that. One example of that is Lineker himself who has been doing this kind of stuff for years. If the government has really been putting pressure on the BBC about Lineker they’ve been pretty laid back about it over the years, and other than a slap on the wrist he’s not really got into trouble over it. And it’s now blown up in their faces.

I also think there seems to be a general confusion in the BBC of what it means to be a freelancer. I would think that if a freelancer is representing your organisation, they abide by the rules of the organisation. That’s certainly how it works in most companies! They just don’t seem to be clear on this.

I was not offended by Lineker’s tweet (I am more offended by the arrogance of a man who doesn’t care that his salary is paid for by the general public many of whom don’t agree with his viewpoints) but many people including some members of the Jewish population were. It cannot be defended on the grounds of “not really being about the holocaust”: it was deliberately inflammatory because anything that evokes the rise of Nazi Germany is. It was also grossly inappropriate: Germany in the 30s was not trying to prevent a large influx of refugees; the policies actually created large numbers of refugees. Lineker could have made a comparison with Australian policies, which would have been more appropriate and relevant and much less controversial but he chose not to do that.

Regarding MOTD it’s a big mess and the BBC now can’t back down and I can’t imagine what sort of compromise could possibly satisfy that massive ego! In freedom of speech terms, he has the right to say what he wants, but he should probably walk away from the BBC if that’s his priority as this clearly isn’t going to work. Or the BBC can let their commentators say what they want if they choose, but then they need to walk away from the license fee.

 

[welp]

I just want to point out that this saga is even here in Germany one of the top news. This is so funny to me