Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Yeah I don't see Clarkson getting fired honestly. I am happy that he continues to insist on having his own way as well. What makes the show so amusing is the fact that it is not shy to go a little overboard at times and a Clarkson that didn't speak his mind would be amazingly dull.

As I understand it, the Top Gear brand is owned jointly between Clarkson and the senior producer of the show.
No Clarkson, No Top Gear.

 Chongara wrote:
I don't get the point of this. His whole appeal is that he is an obstinate 13yr old boy in a grown man's body. Why suspend for being the idiot that he is? That's what's he's been making them off of all this time.

He is supposed to have punched someone he works with, allegedly in an argument about food. Would you like to work with or employ someone like that?

Realistically how can the BBC condone yet another idiotic thing that the man has done? He may make them money but there is a limit and the BBC is supposed to have integrity.

The man in an absolute arse and TV land would be a much better place without him.

Politicians ruin the entire country on a daily basis and keep their jobs.


BBC need him back or they will be losing out big time.
However, the BBC's business sense is much like GW's.

 marv335 wrote:
As I understand it, the Top Gear brand is owned jointly between Clarkson and the senior producer of the show.
No Clarkson, No Top Gear.

Not any more - Clarkson sold his rights back to the BBC a couple of years ago.

 Pete Melvin wrote:

 angelofvengeance wrote:

 Pete Melvin wrote:
He makes them too much cash, theres no way theyd be stupid enough to ditch him (where, as has been said, he will simply go to Sky or somewhere else) for punching some media studies spod.

BBC are a set of prats.

Sadly, I must QFT

Many in the BBC are gunning for him because of his politics. He has outserved his purpose.

 Silent Puffin? wrote:

 Chongara wrote:
I don't get the point of this. His whole appeal is that he is an obstinate 13yr old boy in a grown man's body. Why suspend for being the idiot that he is? That's what's he's been making them off of all this time.

He is supposed to have punched someone he works with, allegedly in an argument about food. Would you like to work with or employ someone like that?

How much am I getting paid, that's a pretty big factor. Like assuming his punches don't do any real damage I'd be willing to get socked by the moron once every month or so for the right price.

Am I the only one here that thinks he's a dinosaur. The guys a moronic over paid oaf, and that's the only thing that makes him funny.

 loki old fart wrote:
Am I the only one here that thinks he's a dinosaur. The guys a moronic over paid oaf, and that's the only thing that makes him funny.

I'm entirely onboard with that description. Watching him is sort of a guilty pleasure.

 loki old fart wrote:
Am I the only one here that thinks he's a dinosaur. The guys a moronic over paid oaf, and that's the only thing that makes him funny.

I thought that was the point? I like watching that show because of exactly those reasons.

 Silent Puffin? wrote:
The man in an absolute arse and TV land would be a much better place without him.

You have to be joking?

There's a limit to how much bs management will take from their talent. The more money that talent makes, the more bs the organisation will accept, but no amount of money ever pushed the tolerance up to 'infinite bs'.

People are quick to latch on to the BBC part of this, but look at Chuck Lorre & Charlie Sheen - Two and Half Men made ludicrous piles of cash for everyone, but in enough time Sheen's behaviour caused CBS to pull the plug.

 Paradigm wrote:
It is, according to the Guiness book of records, the most watched 'factual' (ha) program... in the world. So I'd guess it's their highest rated, and it's certainly their biggest export (they've sold it to 214 countries apparently).

That's pretty good going, when there's less than 200 countries in the world

If he did indeed punch somebody, I honestly don't know the answer to this one. There doesn't seem to be a clear cut way through.
Someone who is so so high profile on a family entertainment show should in theory set a better example than to go lamping someone they disagree with. However human nature doesn't work that way. Everyone is flawed.

But if I were to physically assault someone in a working environment, I'd expect to be fired or face disciplinary action. Reinstating him immediately, per the petitions circulating, would also show a tremendous lack of respect for the person he allegedly punched.

I like Top Gear, and I love that it gives people I care for a source of entertainment. But Clarkson is such a parody of himself at this point, I do wonder at what stage it is no longer funny, and we're watching an older man genuinely struggle to cope in a progressive world. Aaah, he can't use his sat nav. Aaaah, some joke about hybrid cars. In a few years time, will this still be considered witty, or just deeply sad?

 Buttery Commissar wrote:
I like Top Gear, and I love that it gives people I care for a source of entertainment. But Clarkson is such a parody of himself at this point, I do wonder at what stage it is no longer funny, and we're watching an older man genuinely struggle to cope in a progressive world. Aaah, he can't use his sat nav. Aaaah, some joke about hybrid cars. In a few years time, will this still be considered witty, or just deeply sad?

He isn't actually struggling to cope with the modern world, he's just found a grumpy old fart persona that works. But for that joke to keep being funny you have to keep taking it further and further. Sooner or later every 'personality' becomes a parody of themselves.

 SilverMK2 wrote:
and as he is really keen on all things green,

Surely you jest...

This is Clarkson we're talking about... the idiot who's always yelling about "POOWWWWA" and things like that... hell, he showed the world that he dont know how to drive in snow, with snow chains on in the recent trip to Canda


I think the producers keep putting him in "green" cars to spite him (notice recently how many awesome cars May gets to drive?)

 Soladrin wrote:

 loki old fart wrote:
Am I the only one here that thinks he's a dinosaur. The guys a moronic over paid oaf, and that's the only thing that makes him funny.

I thought that was the point? I like watching that show because of exactly those reasons.

Indeed. Clarkson is an arse and a buffoon, he just happens to be one that, on a good day, is flippin' hilarious! Yes, he has become a parody of himself (so are the other 2, really), but that doesnt stop it being funny.

 sebster wrote:
Sooner or later every 'personality' becomes a parody of themselves.

Aye, I'll agree. Apart from Tom Baker who is somehow managing to be markedly less insane as he ages. His autobiography is a glorious lesson in self-depreciation.

Well, that escalated quickly:
Jeremy Clarkson suspension leaves BBC facing multimillion-pound bill
The BBC is facing a multimillion-pound bill over its decision to suspend Jeremy Clarkson from Top Gear, with foreign broadcasters eligible for compensation and rival TV companies poised to poach the embattled presenter.

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:
Surely you jest...

Yes, I (and the radio station) do

 Buttery Commissar wrote:

Jeremy Clarkson suspension leaves BBC facing multimillion-pound bill
The BBC is facing a multimillion-pound bill over its decision to suspend Jeremy Clarkson from Top Gear, with foreign broadcasters eligible for compensation and rival TV companies poised to poach the embattled presenter.

Read a bit of the article, and watched the little "interview" with Captain Slow and all I really have to say is.... Really May??? You drive ridiculous vehicles for a living, are presumably quite wealthy and have a nice car and all that.... and your front door squeaks!?!?!

Can't wait to see this explode in the BBC's face!

 angelofvengeance wrote:
Can't wait to see this explode in the BBC's face!

I do hope I get whatever channel Jeremy goes to should BBC be dumb.

The BBC have moved to put a few of the old series of Top Gear on YouTube. 2,3 and 4 are now available to watch. This was not the case before all this sparked off. I wonder why?

As for Clarkson himself. The blokes an outmoded, outdated idiot. And that's why I love watching him.

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:

 angelofvengeance wrote:
Can't wait to see this explode in the BBC's face!

I do hope I get whatever channel Jeremy goes to should BBC be dumb.

I hope some other channel rushes in to poach him and he continues his behavior or continues to get worse and does something Really bad that explodes in the new companies face.

 sarpedons-right-hand wrote:
The BBC have moved to put a few of the old series of Top Gear on YouTube. 2,3 and 4 are now available to watch. This was not the case before all this sparked off. I wonder why?

As for Clarkson himself. The blokes an outmoded, outdated idiot. And that's why I love watching him.

What I find exceptionally odd/amusing/somewhat hypocritical of the BBC is that, while channel-hopping the other night, I came across some of the last series of TG on BBC3. What is the point of suspeding the current series on the basis that the presenter has misbehaved, yet showing some of the older stuff? What is the difference to either them or the viewer whether it's a new episode or an older one?

 Paradigm wrote:

 sarpedons-right-hand wrote:
The BBC have moved to put a few of the old series of Top Gear on YouTube. 2,3 and 4 are now available to watch. This was not the case before all this sparked off. I wonder why?

As for Clarkson himself. The blokes an outmoded, outdated idiot. And that's why I love watching him.

What I find exceptionally odd/amusing/somewhat hypocritical of the BBC is that, while channel-hopping the other night, I came across some of the last series of TG on BBC3. What is the point of suspeding the current series on the basis that the presenter has misbehaved, yet showing some of the older stuff? What is the difference to either them or the viewer whether it's a new episode or an older one?

None, your right, that makes no sense.

It's probably a put up job.
He wants to retire.
Or it was getting a bit stale, and they wanted to spice it up.

To everyone saying that he'll move and make loads of money elsewhere, I would be fine with that. It means that airtime and funding (which comes from the taxpayer to a large extent) would be available to help push some fresh talent and new programmes, as opposed to just seeing the same ten people on multi-million pound contracts with inflated concepts of their own self-worth soaking it all up.

 Ketara wrote:
To everyone saying that he'll move and make loads of money elsewhere, I would be fine with that. It means that airtime and funding (which comes from the taxpayer to a large extent) would be available to help push some fresh talent and new programmes, as opposed to just seeing the same ten people on multi-million pound contracts with inflated concepts of their own self-worth soaking it all up.

Agreed.
But thinking about it, didn't that happen before.?

Or we could get yet more crap filling up the airwaves, rather than something mildly entertaining that isn't a show you have to phone in and vote for something...