Gary Lineker/BBC Asylum Controversy - Printable Version

+- Pres Café (https://pres.cafe)
+-- Forum: Pres Café TV and Radio Forums (https://pres.cafe/forumdisplay.php?fid=1)
+--- Forum: News and Sport Presentation (https://pres.cafe/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Thread: Gary Lineker/BBC Asylum Controversy (/showthread.php?tid=381)

---

RE: Gary Lineker/BBC Asylum Controversy - Brekkie - 11-03-2023

(11-03-2023, 01:27 PM)Stockland Hillman Wrote:  

(11-03-2023, 01:00 PM)Adsales Wrote:  Not that anyone other than the courts can determine IR35 status, GL is fighting HMRC’s assessment of his status and should he be found to be inside IR35 then it would not only cost him but also the BBC which is why it is extremely unlikely for them to say anything other than he is outside IR35.

If he loses then they’re liable to pay years’ worth of national insurance contributions for GL and he would in fact be entitled to several years worth of holiday pay and other benefits provided to BBC staff.

So careful what you wish for.

I wish for someone paid millions of tax payers money to pay what is legally appropriate and - given his moral positions on others activities - morally due. 

I also wish BBC workers were treated consistently,  rather than privileges for a few.

This situation does highlight the fact BBC Sport needs a proper review. Does it do anything that can't be done in the open market?  Should it be paying commercial businesses fees for rights in a marketplace? Maybe for little wanted local sports rights,  but top flight Football  Rugby,  Cricket, Tennis?

God, what an absurd take on it.   Seems quite alot of this is bottom up rather than top down protests - people seeing how the BBC treat their most expensive and high profile presenter within BBC Sport and knowing that if they don't stand up for them then nobody will stand up for them.


Former Director Generals have gone for far less (didn't one go in a matter of days for the fault of his predecessor?) - I'd be amazed if Tim Davie survive the week.

---

RE: Gary Lineker/BBC Asylum Controversy - DTV - 11-03-2023

(11-03-2023, 01:53 PM)leewilliams Wrote:  I think the problem is that management seem not to have wargamed the possible outcomes of their decision - having to whip several programmes off air 15 minutes before they’re due to start is ridiculous and this will be used as a case study for years to come on how not to deal with a crisis.

It's certainly a good case study, but assuming that the BBC management will ever learn any lessons in crisis management is not a good prediction. It's genuinely amazing how many times BBC managment have managed to turn one day stories into week-long sagas or worse out of pure incompetence.

---

RE: Gary Lineker/BBC Asylum Controversy - Stockland Hillman - 11-03-2023

(11-03-2023, 01:31 PM)matthieu1221 Wrote:  

(11-03-2023, 01:27 PM)Stockland Hillman Wrote:  I wish for someone paid millions of tax payers money to pay what is legally appropriate and - given his moral positions on others activities - morally due. 

I also wish BBC workers were treated consistently,  rather than privileges for a few.

This situation does highlight the fact BBC Sport needs a proper review. Does it do anything that can't be done in the open market?  Should it be paying commercial businesses fees for rights in a marketplace? Maybe for little wanted local sports rights,  but top flight Football  Rugby,  Cricket, Tennis?

(Responding to the last paragraph)

Oh dear, we're now calling for a review to punish the entire Sports team are we?

Fact is, EVERY SINGLE PART of what BBC does could be done by the open market. Just that the BBC can in theory do it without external interference which a commercial channel may not be able to for various reasons. Unfortunately the government hasn't taken it upon itself to in effect interfere with the BBC leading to all this.

It's childish to view things through the lens of punishment or reward.

You misunderstood the point.  Making programmes on anything is fine, it's straw man argument to say anything is available in market.

Sport mentioned  have specific macro economics. Generally it's a ticket and goods sale business, and a performance for which rights are sold. There a plenty of buyers for these rights and benefits for choosing  certain bidders for rights (game marketing etc) choose a paywall and interest in your sport can decline - cricket springs to mind.

The content generated by sports coverage isn't particularly unique,  and the underlying rights to the material aren't the broadcasters. So what does the BBC bring that's unique?  Nothing for the major sports.  It plays a far more important role with minor sports and developing leagues such as woman's football.

Nearly everything else the BBC does - except online news - adds something unique to the content or adds to the BBC (Strictly may be a generic talent show but the rights bring cash to the BBC)

For Football,  this whole debacle reveals a department and talent with out of control ego and expectations. 

The leval of manipulation by vested interests is staggering in this situation. As is the hypocrisy. 

Where was Lineker, Chappel et al when  Marine Croxall was taken off air for breaching impartiality rules?

Yet we are to belive Lineker is some kind of hero to the lower rank BBC staff? Give me a break

---

RE: Gary Lineker/BBC Asylum Controversy - dvboy - 11-03-2023

5 Live still airing podcasts.
I assume the 6 Nations commentary that was due to be on Sports Extra at 13:30 will get moved to 5 Live.
There is due to be tennis commentary from Indian Wells on the website from 19:00. That would fill the gap left by 6-0-6.

---

RE: Gary Lineker/BBC Asylum Controversy - lhx1985 - 11-03-2023

Remind me, what was Martine's job at the BBC?

Then try to explain how your not comparing an apple to an orange.

---

RE: Gary Lineker/BBC Asylum Controversy - orange - 11-03-2023

Posted in the wrong thread by mistake, but there was another push notification sent out nearly 10 minutes ago. That’s the 4th today - and they haven’t sent notifications out about any other story. Quite interesting to observe!

---

RE: Gary Lineker/BBC Asylum Controversy - Adsales - 11-03-2023

(11-03-2023, 02:05 PM)Stockland Hillman Wrote:  

(11-03-2023, 01:31 PM)matthieu1221 Wrote:  (Responding to the last paragraph)

Oh dear, we're now calling for a review to punish the entire Sports team are we?

Fact is, EVERY SINGLE PART of what BBC does could be done by the open market. Just that the BBC can in theory do it without external interference which a commercial channel may not be able to for various reasons. Unfortunately the government hasn't taken it upon itself to in effect interfere with the BBC leading to all this.

It's childish to view things through the lens of punishment or reward.

You misunderstood the point.  Making programmes on anything is fine, it's straw man argument to say anything is available in market.

Sport mentioned  have specific macro economics. Generally it's a ticket and goods sale business, and a performance for which rights are sold. There a plenty of buyers for these rights and benefits for choosing  certain bidders for rights (game marketing etc) choose a paywall and interest in your sport can decline - cricket springs to mind.

The content generated by sports coverage isn't particularly unique,  and the underlying rights to the material aren't the broadcasters. So what does the BBC bring that's unique?  Nothing for the major sports.  It plays a far more important role with minor sports and developing leagues such as woman's football.

Nearly everything else the BBC does - except online news - adds something unique to the content or adds to the BBC (Strictly may be a generic talent show but the rights bring cash to the BBC)

For Football,  this whole debacle reveals a department and talent with out of control ego and expectations. 

The leval of manipulation by vested interests is staggering in this situation. As is the hypocrisy. 

Where was Lineker, Chappel et al when  Marine Croxall was taken off air for breaching impartiality rules?

Yet we are to belive Lineker is some kind of hero to the lower rank BBC staff? Give me a break

Croxall said what she said live on the news, in her role as news presenter. She was also an employee bound by any policy as amended from time to time. 

From a personal perspective, I found her comments highly apt and entertaining though.

If you want to compare then use Andrew Neill or Alan Sugar. Neither have ever been called out for the personal social media posts, in fact the BBC has publicly stated AN may do as he pleases unless he is presenting a BBC programme.

---

RE: Gary Lineker/BBC Asylum Controversy - London Lite - 11-03-2023

(11-03-2023, 02:05 PM)Stockland Hillman Wrote:  

(11-03-2023, 01:31 PM)matthieu1221 Wrote:  (Responding to the last paragraph)

Oh dear, we're now calling for a review to punish the entire Sports team are we?

Fact is, EVERY SINGLE PART of what BBC does could be done by the open market. Just that the BBC can in theory do it without external interference which a commercial channel may not be able to for various reasons. Unfortunately the government hasn't taken it upon itself to in effect interfere with the BBC leading to all this.

It's childish to view things through the lens of punishment or reward.

You misunderstood the point.  Making programmes on anything is fine, it's straw man argument to say anything is available in market.

Sport mentioned  have specific macro economics. Generally it's a ticket and goods sale business, and a performance for which rights are sold. There a plenty of buyers for these rights and benefits for choosing  certain bidders for rights (game marketing etc) choose a paywall and interest in your sport can decline - cricket springs to mind.

The content generated by sports coverage isn't particularly unique,  and the underlying rights to the material aren't the broadcasters. So what does the BBC bring that's unique?  Nothing for the major sports.  It plays a far more important role with minor sports and developing leagues such as woman's football.

Nearly everything else the BBC does - except online news - adds something unique to the content or adds to the BBC (Strictly may be a generic talent show but the rights bring cash to the BBC)

For Football,  this whole debacle reveals a department and talent with out of control ego and expectations. 

The leval of manipulation by vested interests is staggering in this situation. As is the hypocrisy. 

Where was Lineker, Chappel et al when  Marine Croxall was taken off air for breaching impartiality rules?

Yet we are to belive Lineker is some kind of hero to the lower rank BBC staff? Give me a break

I'm not right wing, but....

---

RE: Gary Lineker/BBC Asylum Controversy - dvboy - 11-03-2023

I've noticed the BBC's live sports pages don't have the names of the reporters at the top of them today.

---

RE: Gary Lineker/BBC Asylum Controversy - Roger Darthwell - 11-03-2023

Sorry if I post this but......I just had to
https://twitter.com/cleanfeed_ttvr/status/1634537545429123077 

---