clarkson suspended by BBC

[darmstadt]

JC didn't come across as the violent type to me. A loud-mouthed arse at times, sure... but the type who would consider throwing a punch as the mark of a thug.

Piers Morgan?

[TykeMerc]

It must be frustrating for May and Hammond that their futures are directly under the control of JC not being a berk. Obviously both have been quite prolific on the BBC recently (unlike JC who hasn't done much at all IIRC) but still, having to end TG when you've done nothing wrong would be galling.

I do wonder if they could continue it without him - possibly, but another network taking the whole show would make more sense.

Or, JC will make a public apology, give £1m to a charity for babies, and they'll carry on.

I expect that's a familiar situation for the co-stars/sidekick personalities in many shows and bits of TV, the main star acting like a plank can screw them over, just a risk of the job.

My initial reaction is this was a stunt to promote something, but it's looking more serious now.

If the BBC do can Top Gear I won't be shocked to see the 3 of them appearing in a similar production via another broadcaster. Plenty of acts (and Top Gear is an entertainment show in truth) have swapped channels in the past, but unlike Morecambe and Wise the "brand" isn't officially the people, that may make it a bit complicated. The BBC may well lose the cash cow though.

As someone pointed out in the thread the BBC putting out a statement of a "final warning" was probably unwise.

[NickFitz]

He is the show, no two ways about it with Jeremy there is no show.

BBC painted themselves into a corner with the "final" warning last time so they had no choice but to do it, even if it means losing one of their most profitable shows.

Not really, because the "final warning" related to objectionable speech, so has no relevance in this case, where he's been suspended for allegedly being a violent thug.

[NickFitz]

I thought they were planning to change the TV license anyway, to make it a household charge that anyone pays whether they have a TV or not

That's just a vague idea that was floated by some committee that will cease to exist, along with its vague ideas, after May 5th.

[SimonMac]

Not really, because the "final warning" related to objectionable speech, so has no relevance in this case, where he's been suspended for allegedly being a violent thug.

No I mean the next action, no matter what it was big or small would have to be taken seriously.

[NickFitz]

No I mean the next action, no matter what it was big or small would have to be taken seriously.

If the final warning was relevant he would have been sacked, not suspended. It isn't relevant because it was solely relating to things he said, not things he did.

I would hope that any employer would take a violent assault in the workplace (attempted or actual) seriously

[BlasterBates]

Not really, because the "final warning" related to objectionable speech, so has no relevance in this case, where he's been suspended for allegedly being a violent thug.

A thug is someone who wears a knuckle duster and makes sure he breaks your nose, not someone who loses his temper and swings a punch.

Still a good opportunity for pink tie wearing lefties to get on their soap boxes and get Top Gear replaced by Blue Peter.

[d000hg]

A thug is someone who wears a knuckle duster and makes sure he breaks your nose, not someone who loses his temper and swings a punch.

Maybe on the street - but in an office environment any violence is thuggish and unacceptable.

[BlasterBates]

Maybe on the street - but in an office environment any violence is thuggish and unacceptable.

It's not an office it's a Top Gear race track

[eek]

If the final warning was relevant he would have been sacked, not suspended. It isn't relevant because it was solely relating to things he said, not things he did.

I would hope that any employer would take a violent assault in the workplace (attempted or actual) seriously

Its very hard to sack people on the spot (any HR lawyer will tell you its a bad idea). You suspend on full pay and follow due process then sack them

Its cheaper to pay the weeks salary than to deal with the tribunal...