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.

Jeremy Clarkson bust up caused because he wanted STEAK for dinner and got a cheese platter
JEREMY Clarkson was involved in the furious bust-up, which led to his Top Gear suspension after being offered a cheese platter instead of a steak for his dinner after filming finished late.

Clarkson, 54, and his crew had a private dining room reserved for 8pm but did not arrive back at their country hotel until after 10pm – by which time the restaurant chef had gone home.

But staff at Simonstone Hall Hotel in Upper WensleyDale, North Yorks, had prepared a cheese platter, meat platter and soup after being warned of their late arrival.

But when told steak was no longer available Clarkson erupted in fury storming: “So, there is no food”.

It is understood producer Oisin Tymon, 36, bore the brunt of his anger as Clarkson seemingly looked to blame someone for not ensuring the chef stayed until he had arrived.

The ‘fracas’ occurred on Wednesday evening last week as the remote hotel held it’s weekly ‘local’s night’.

An eyewitness said: “Clarkson erupted when told there was only a cold platter. The general manager offered them everything the chef had prepared but Clarkson said, ‘So, there’s no food’. We were all thinking meat platter and soup – surely that’s food.

“We were so surprised at his reaction. He was shouting and swearing using every single word you can think of. There were F words and C words. The producer was being very quiet and looked very embarrassed.”

The witness revealed they did not see any punches being thrown but said Clarkson appeared to be held back.

He added: “There was no punch, he didn’t hit him. It was more like a scuffle.”

Another hotel guest said: “He had been due to arrive at the hotel at 8pm but didn’t arrive until after 10pm. By that time the chef had gone home

“Clarkson was extremely upset when they offered him sandwiches and soup instead of a juicy steak.

“Nobody saw any violence in the main bar area or dining room. But we understand he ended up getting a steak.”

It is understood that with no chef present general manager Robert Scott took to the kitchen to cook for the crew.

Clarkson enjoyed an 8oz sirloin steak in the private dining room along with fondant potatoes, pan fried wild mushrooms, grilled cherry toms and green peppercorn sauce. The meal cost £21.95.

“Clarkson was extremely upset when they offered him sandwiches and soup instead of a juicy steak.

“Nobody saw any violence in the main bar area or dining room. But we understand he ended up getting a steak.”

It is understood that with no chef present general manager Robert Scott took to the kitchen to cook for the crew.

Clarkson enjoyed an 8oz sirloin steak in the private dining room along with fondant potatoes, pan fried wild mushrooms, grilled cherry toms and green peppercorn sauce. The meal cost £21.95.

The Top Gear crew had been staying at Simonstone Hall Hotel in Upper WensleyDale, in the North York Moors National park all last week having booked out 11 rooms – including three delux rooms, after negotiating an £80-per night bed and breakfast arrangement with the management.

The entire crew bill came to £5,760 for the week

The news comes as Clarkson announced he was set to quit the BBC last night as rivals ITV considered a £10million bid to sign him up.

The controversial Top Gear host spent yesterday cracking jokes about the “fracas” which led to him being suspended.

But broadcasting sources claimed the 54-year-old presenter was prepared to leave the corporation whether reinstated or not.

They claim ITV and Sky plan a bidding war to secure the star’s name and a show which earns the BBC £50million a year.

Clarkson and co-hosts James May and Richard Hammond’s contracts expire next month and they were due to hold renewal talks.

But his suspension for allegedly punching Top Gear producer Oisin Tymon, 36, has left a massive question mark over the whole series.

The 6ft 5in Yorkshireman is understood to have denied throwing a punch but admitted there were “handbags and pushing”.

A friend told the Radio Times that his relationship with key BBC executives is so broken as to make his future untenable whatever the outcome of his disciplinary charge.

“Can I see him going back to film another BBC series?” one pal said. “I don’t think so. But he’ll be fine. The other broadcasters will bite his arm off.”

Yesterday, Clarkson emerged from his apartment in London’s Kensington to joke: “I’m off to the job centre. I’ve been suspended.”

Dressed in a quilted coat and trademark jeans, he added that his exile left him free to watch Chelsea play.

The broadcaster spluttered “No, no, no!” when asked about claims that the row was over food, before driving off in a Ford Kuga.

The hotel’s management declined to comment.

Corporation chiefs have delayed screening the final three episodes in the current BBC Two series and sources believe the show could be scrapped.

Mr Tymon’s lawyer said he “intends to await the outcome of the BBC investigation and will make no comment until that investigation is complete”.

Co-presenter James May said yesterday he knew “not very much” about the incident, adding: “I was blind drunk.”

Top Gear fans clamored online for the reinstatement of Clarkson yesterday.

BBC director general Lord Hall said: “We have got an investigation going on. I am a fan of Jeremy Clarkson but this is a serious thing that is alleged to have taken place.”

Former culture secretary Maria Miller said: “I think they need to sort this mess out quickly and not be seen to be punishing the fans.

“The BBC needs to be better at managing its talent.”

The row is the latest in a string of controversies. Clarkson was put on what he called his final warning last year after claims he used the racist “N-word” when reciting a nursery rhyme.

The BBC said: “Following a fracas with a BBC producer, Jeremy Clarkson has been suspended pending an investigation. No one else has been suspended.”

 SilverMK2 wrote:
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...

I'll wager we could fund a dozen programmes out of Clarkson's grossly inflated paycheque. Odds are, one of them will be just as good, maybe even two! And if none of them work, you can the lot and start over next year.

That's where theoretically original programmes come from, anyway. You wouldn't get Python today, because all the money goes to the next Dr Who/Top Gear/Jonathan Ross show. Don't get me wrong, I don't have a problem with paying a good wage for a good entertainer, but when you start hitting eight times the salary of the Prime Minister, we're entering the realms of lunacy considering the BBC is a state funded and protected organisation. If people want to be a millionaire diva celebrity, that's well and good, but they should do it on their own time, or work elsewhere. In an age of austerity and severe budget cuts, I don't pay my taxes so that Clarkson can get paid a million quid for making a show about cars. Sorry, but no dice.

If I had my way, we'd cap the salary for all BBC employees at £150,000 and leave it there. It's not an unreasonable sum, and if some big shot 'celebrity' feels they deserve more, good luck to them, and leave the rung nice and clean for the next person climbing the ladder.

The 6ft 5in Yorkshireman

Bloody hell, I never realised he was that tall. O.o

The above newspaper skirts over a couple of thorny issues.

Firstly the reason they were back so late is because Clarkson was sat in another pub for 2 hours and refused to leave.

Worst of all he was drinking Rose ! Who the hell does that.


... One also cannot help but notice that they don't mention any of the relevant staff at ITV ....

...Director of Comedy and Entertainment, Elaine Bedell.
She was the woman who had the dubious pleasure of being papped in an intimate clinch with him back in 2000 and 2003.

(It was the Mirror's use of
these photos which started the
Clarkson/Piers Morgan feud.)

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
The trio leave and go to Sky or ITV or whatever and make a new car show - Best Gear, or something. BBC is left with nothing.

So what you're saying is TV presenters should be allowed to scream abuse and take swings at production staff in ways that would have any normal member of the public charged with assault, and the network should ignore and even reward that behaviour in case they lose out on some revenue? If Sky or ITV are so ethically vacant as to hire this sad caricature of a man that's up to them, it shouldn't prevent the BBC from(for once) doing the right thing and chucking his arse out the door.

Most of Clarkson's bumbling idiocy is just him playing to his single-digit-IQ audience by shouting loudly about how "PC culture" or whatever doesn't anyone talk about the things he's talking about in the ways he talks about them at length, frequently, in the national media. Most of the rest is just his natural Tory-living-in-luxury showing through the veneer of Farage-style "regular blokie bloke" he puts on. This was a pampered man-child howling abuse and trying to hit a supposed-colleague because the after-filming craft services were not up to his exacting standards - anyone, anywhere, in any job should get the sack for that.

The problem there is your rathert missing a few points.

1) no one appart from the papers has said anyone was punched. James May has implied no one was, the producer involved has said he was not punched and the independant witness said nothing about a punch.

2) your acting again like the papers talking about how anyone else shouting at someone would get the sack. They wouldn't nessaceraly. Someone shouting and swearing at someone who failed to do there job may be dissablined, but not automatically sacked. In many companies it would be considerd normal management behaviour. I'm not saying it's right, but it does happen. Look at Gordan Ramsey. He runs several restaurants and is well known to shout and swear at staff. I don't with it agree at all, but it's not always even a case of being seen as wrong.

You seem to hate him personaly though, and by the sound of it disslike him because of his money and success. The bumbling idiot on TV is a caricature of the real person. He openly says it himself. If you look at his background he is far from a privalaged background. I'm not someone to defend the privalaged who don't know how their rich Parants gave them what they have and say "anyone can do it if they work hard", like many in media, but he is someone who has come from humble background to do well.

That's an episode of Fawlty Towers.

For real.

Almost exactly.

They should have offered him Waldorf Salad.

 Yodhrin wrote:
So what you're saying is TV presenters should be allowed to scream abuse and take swings at production staff in ways that would have any normal member of the public charged with assault, and the network should ignore and even reward that behaviour in case they lose out on some revenue? If Sky or ITV are so ethically vacant as to hire this sad caricature of a man that's up to them, it shouldn't prevent the BBC from(for once) doing the right thing and chucking his arse out the door.

Yep. That'e exactly what I said. Word for word Mr. Scarecrow.

I agree with Toad of Toad Hall.

(video in the link)

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/celebritynews/11467611/Jeremy-Clarkson-suspended-Nigel-Farage-on-why-he-wont-be-signing-petition-to-bring-back-Top-Gear-host.html

 Wyrmalla wrote:
Is Top Gear still the highest rated show on the BBC? Fire the guy over policy, even though they aught to, is still going to have the higher ups booting the ones who do it. Its all about the money, and its not as if the BBC has scruples. =P

I read in the Evening Standard that Death In Paradise is the BBC's most watched show.

However it isn't all about the money. For one, the BBC is not a for profit company and for two, every company has to obey the law. If the producer -- who apparently is 36 years old, pretty experienced as you would expect for someone working on a big show -- raises a grievance the BBC will have to be seen to deal with it correctly. Also you cannot put up with infinite BS from your talent, you have to put the foot down somewhere.

Apparently Chris Evans is in the frame to take over at Top Gear. He would be a good choice, popular, experienced, and keen on cars. He might easily achieve the chemistry with the other two presenters, if they decided to stay with the show.

Chris evens may fit the role, but dropping him into s slot so filled for so long by another, 22 seasons, 13 years and the only other presenter was replaced in a year of starting with james may in 2003

Going to be hard to get him to fit right when the trio as is has had years to build up a way of working, interacting and audience opinion.

It sounds like quite a bit of drinking had been going on. Clarkson had been drinking Rose(?!) and James May was 'blind drunk', maybe a lot of of the crew had been too. And some people get really difficult when they've been drinking.

Agh, god, not Chris Evans! I find him possibly the most sycophantic, bland and uninteresting presenter on the BBC (or TV as a whole). Yes, he's a bit of a petrolhead, but I just can't stand to watch him!

 Kilkrazy wrote:

 Wyrmalla wrote:
Is Top Gear still the highest rated show on the BBC? Fire the guy over policy, even though they aught to, is still going to have the higher ups booting the ones who do it. Its all about the money, and its not as if the BBC has scruples. =P

I read in the Evening Standard that Death In Paradise is the BBC's most watched show.

However it isn't all about the money. For one, the BBC is not a for profit company and for two, every company has to obey the law. If the producer -- who apparently is 36 years old, pretty experienced as you would expect for someone working on a big show -- raises a grievance the BBC will have to be seen to deal with it correctly. Also you cannot put up with infinite BS from your talent, you have to put the foot down somewhere.

Apparently Chris Evans is in the frame to take over at Top Gear. He would be a good choice, popular, experienced, and keen on cars. He might easily achieve the chemistry with the other two presenters, if they decided to stay with the show.

For a moment there, I genuinely believed you were talking about Captain America, and thought "Well, he does love his motorbikes, but I'm not sure he's that big of a fan of cars!"

BBC executive who tells the paper he believes Clarkson is "self-destructing".

 Steve steveson wrote:
The problem there is your rathert missing a few points.

1) no one appart from the papers has said anyone was punched. James May has implied no one was, the producer involved has said he was not punched and the independant witness said nothing about a punch.

2) your acting again like the papers talking about how anyone else shouting at someone would get the sack. They wouldn't nessaceraly. Someone shouting and swearing at someone who failed to do there job may be dissablined, but not automatically sacked. In many companies it would be considerd normal management behaviour. I'm not saying it's right, but it does happen. Look at Gordan Ramsey. He runs several restaurants and is well known to shout and swear at staff. I don't with it agree at all, but it's not always even a case of being seen as wrong.

You seem to hate him personaly though, and by the sound of it disslike him because of his money and success. The bumbling idiot on TV is a caricature of the real person. He openly says it himself. If you look at his background he is far from a privalaged background. I'm not someone to defend the privalaged who don't know how their rich Parants gave them what they have and say "anyone can do it if they work hard", like many in media, but he is someone who has come from humble background to do well.

1. Note I said "take swings", not "hit", since from the story I read he did not actually hit the guy but had to be held back to prevent him doing so.

2. And yes, they would; any normal person in a normal job does not get to scream "f'ing c't!" etc at their colleagues or even subordinates without getting the sack, and referring to another entitled TV-celeb manbaby like Ramsey is hardly an argument that disproves that point. Clarkson went to the pub after shooting rather than right to the hotel, and by the time he sauntered in the chef had been gone for hours - despite that, the hotel laid on food, and Clarkson decided to throw a tantrum because baby wanted his steak dinner and apparently the producer should have been able to telepathically divine Clarkson's intention to lump around in a pub rather than come back and force the chef to stay on hours after their shift would have been over. There is no part of the scenario as its been described which is the producers fault, and nothing he did or failed to do made him deserving of the level of vitriol he was subjected to.

As for the rest; no, I don't "hate" him, that would require a level of emotional investment I'm not even remotely arsed to dedicate to a TV presenter. I do think he's a cretin, not because he's wealthy but because regardless of where he came from, now he's a snob and a berk, and not just when he's "in character", and I do think it's a shame that there's a large enough audience out there that believes "speaking your mind" means "being a rude and abrasive arse" to support the careers of people like him.

 loki old fart wrote:
BBC executive who tells the paper he believes Clarkson is "self-destructing".

I wouldn't be surprised if a front page like that wasn't actionable. Clarkson has allegedly behaved in a very unprofessional manner. To say he is 'like a mass child raping paedophile' is just ridiculous. There was some discussion about misleading titles during the Leverson Inquiry, as while the small print goes on to say other things, a glance at the headline could reasonably lead someone to conclude Clarkson was a paedophile.

Indeed, the Saville analogy is entirley misleading and frankly uncalled for. One was an absolutely despicable monster of a hunman being who consistently abused his position of power, the other is someone who, in a single instance, acted out of turn (I'm not saying what Clarkson did is right, if the 'facts' we have are true, but neither is it something to completely vilify him for. Everyone makes mistakes)

Typical sensationalist headline from the Daily Hate Mail there. When I glanced at that headline this morning I really thought I'd missed something and woken up in a surrealist, disjointed reality. Clarkson 'like Saville'?! WTF? Yes, Clarkson acted out of turn and if he punched his producer then he should suffer the consequences. But, as Paradigm pointed out, to compare him to a Paedophile as prolific as Saville is just wrong. If I was Clarkson I would seriously be considering legal action, or at least a retraction. Just wrong.

Claskson is a right eejit. I hope they do fire him, no one should be able to get away with that sort of behaviour just because they are popular.

"There's no food." Grow up, Jeremy.

I think they are comparing Clarkson's apparent Teflon armour with Savile's. If you remember, it was widely suspected that there was something a bit wrong about Savile for years, but every bit of complaint and evidence was hushed up, often by the BBC.

This is not to say that Clarkson has done anything like Savile's crimes, but there is possibly a parallel in the BBC hushing up Clarkson's misdemeanours for the sake of the ratings.

The BBC is still mired in the post-Savile fallout and probably wants to avoid any appearance of favouritism towards another presenter going off piste.

As for it being actionable, if these remarks were made in private, then the Daily Mail certainly could face a libel suit from Clarkson, but the BBC guy would be in the clear.

However the Daily Mail has plenty of media law experts on hand and I doubt they would make such a schoolboy error in a high profile case like this.

Isn't it pathetic that with the huge amount of fething gak going on in the world, ISIS, the Vanuatu crisis, the Grexit and so on, the news agenda is dominated by the possibility of a car show presenter losing his job?

They're not really quoting anyone, they're just attributing comments to some unnamed source. The way they phrase it on their cover is implying something that it shouldn't.

That's even worse, then. They are making the statements.

 Da Boss wrote:
Claskson is a right eejit. I hope they do fire him, no one should be able to get away with that sort of behaviour just because they are popular.

"There's no food." Grow up, Jeremy.

It is important to note this wasn't a "work place incident" but happened after they'd finished work, just the nature of their job being what it is they don't necessarily get to go home at the end of every day like the majority of people.

Secondly, it is not the first time in the history of the world that a drunk person with low blood sugar made a bad call on their own behaviour. If we were to fire people for getting cross with someone because they were drunk and hungry, there'd be a lot of new jobs being advertised every Monday morning.

There's a world of difference between lamping a colleague in the middle of the office on a Tuesday afternoon and falling out with them hours after work on the outside of a few pints. The only reason this is a thing is because he's famous and has a reputation.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Incidentally, I just realised I was typing my last post in front of a BBC program presented by Richard Bacon.

The same Richard Bacon who got fired from Blue Peter (a real "jewel in the crown" BBC children's TV program that's been going since the 1950s for anyone unfamiliar) for getting caught taking cocaine, but then subsequently has enjoyed a successful time presenting on BBC radio and regularly popping up on TV too, once the dust had settled.

It really would be massively hypocritical for the BBC to fire someone for being drunk and grumpy when they're evidently willing to forgive consumption of class A.

Oh, and Angus Deyton got fired from Have I Got News For You for something didn't he?

He still pops up in BBC stuff all over the shop.

 Azreal13 wrote:
The only reason this is a thing is because he's famous and has a reputation.

Or if someone, most likely the producer, made a formal complaint. I certainly would have.

In reality this kind of behaviour would not be tolerated by my employer and I see no reason why some apparently pampered 'celebrity' should be any different, especially considering that Clarkson is by his own admission on his final warning.

Apparently, Clarkson himself reported the event to the BBC, the producer in question didn't mention it.

 Silent Puffin? wrote:

 Azreal13 wrote:
The only reason this is a thing is because he's famous and has a reputation.

Or if someone, most likely the producer, made a formal complaint. I certainly would have.

In reality this kind of behaviour would not be tolerated by my employer and I see no reason why some apparently pampered 'celebrity' should be any different, especially considering that Clarkson is by his own admission on his final warning.

What, you'd run a chance of getting fired if you fell out with a colleague you were spending time with outside of work hours?

Highly doubtful.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Paradigm wrote:
Apparently, Clarkson himself reported the event to the BBC, the producer in question didn't mention it.

Yep, this is apparently the case, and the cynic in me wonders why all this happened very close to contract renewal time.

Azreal: I think you are being a bit disingenuous by suggesting that it's "outside of working hours". Their working hours are not defined like ours, and it clearly happened in a work context.

Plus, hell yeah I might get fired if I had attacked another member of staff like that and used language like he used. Absolutely. Especially if I had a history of bad behavior.

I have no interest in making excuses for Clarkson. He's obviously a pampered man-child.

They'd been in a pub for 2 hours before returning to a hotel.

If they were still on the clock at that point then they'd all need firing for a whole bunch of other reasons.

 Azreal13 wrote:

What, you'd run a chance of getting fired if you fell out with a colleague you were spending time with outside of work hours?
Highly doubtful.

If I had a highly visible alcohol fueled tantrum that required me to be restrained in a work setting? At the very least I would get a severe bollocking, if I had a history of being a bellend I would almost certainly be getting a P45.