Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

[Football] Gary Lineker to step back from presenting MOTD



Titanic

Super Moderator
Helpful Moderator
Jul 5, 2003
39,193
West Sussex

Gary Lineker is to step back from presenting Match of the Day until an agreement is reached on his social media use - BBC statement.
It follows an impartiality row over comments he made criticising the government's new asylum policy.
In a tweet, the presenter had compared the language used by the government to set out its plan to "that used by Germany in the 30s".
 




jackalbion

Well-known member
Aug 30, 2011
4,218
If that's a joke, it's in disgustingly poor taste. But if it's serious, and you genuinely think that the treatment of asylum seekers is completely akin to how the Germans treated the Jews and other minorities, then you really need to study a bit of history. Have you even heard of Belsen, Auschwitz, or the Holocaust?
Yes, my great grand father was a Jewish refugee from Russia, who settled in Germany, who then in turn moved to Stamford Hill and eventually Brighton. Who had to legally change his name from Moishe Rosenthal to Monty Rose to avoid persecution. I’ve visited Auchwitz myself with family. The laws which are trying to be introduced mean that Modern Slavery protections are not being afforded those who arrive illegally, meaning that there is an opportunity that the rights of those already here will be further dissolved, to allow the exploitation of the current undocumented population who are here. We only have to look at cases like the very complicated one of Shamima Begum to see that despite her being a British born citizen she has had her rights removed due to her south Asian heritage.
 
Last edited:






BadFish

Huge Member
Oct 19, 2003
17,206
I think the last sentence of point 3 is a fallacy. People who arrive in small boats do so because they know they have no chance of getting here via establsihed channels. If we change the rule to allow more people in but these people still won't be on the list, it won't stop them coming by small boats.

Never have I read anything that has shown this to be the case. I would be really interested to know where you got this from.

Infact the data around the number of asylum seekers who are given refugee status (90%) suggests that this is nonsense. https://www.rescue.org/uk/article/why-rishi-sunaks-stop-boats-bill-wont-work

As for France offering to let asylum seekers stay in France to claim asylum in the Uk, it's not going to work. When (as they will be) most are eventually rejected, they'll be in France and will be able to apply there. Sooner or later this will become politically untenable for Macron.

I didn't say that France should let then stay in france while they claim asylum. As you say its not going to work. What they can do is start the process over there and be bought to the UK for processing.

I agree point 1 except that it's clearly impossible, because the economic migrants mostly know the rules so won't admit they're economic migrants. People who want to get here and know they won't be allowed, tell lies. There's no practicable way to tell the difference between a lying economic migrant and a truth-telling refugee. That's where the truth of point 3 comes in, and why it's important to pick genuine refugees from genuine refugee camps rather than the small boats crop who are trying to escape from France.

It is only impossible to do this if you don't process them. The same process that you are advocating for from refugee camps to check validity can be done when processing in country. The only difference is location.

Point 5, I agree unequivocally. My brother agreed to house three Ukrainians and their approval was confirmed, but they had to wait two extra months in Poland because of a single form that took 2 months to get it signed. (Though I'm a bit wary about using immigrants as a way of cheap labour. We've been down that road before and it leads to problems. It may be that, what with language problems and pure poverty to start out with, and possibly a strong work ethic, they will take the lower paid jobs that longer-standing residents won't. But it's not something to aim for. Rather aim for the refugees to qualify as something, doctors, nurses, teachers, accountants, whatever.)
no mention from me about using immigrants as 'cheap labour' I agree not something to aim for.


FWIW I think that the 'economic migrant' taking their family on a boat that may kill them just to get free stuff from the UK is a total red herring designed to cloud the judgment of the electorate. Again the high numbers of granted asylum application show this to be less of an issue than some would have you believe.

Which is really back to point one, the difference between economic migrants, Refugees and asylum seekers. Surely the best way to separate the economic migrants is to process them. The mechanisms are in place, why doesn't the government use them?
 




jackalbion

Well-known member
Aug 30, 2011
4,218
On my goodness - we're abolishing anti-slavery laws now, are we?? :facepalm:
Pffft! Yeh right.
In that case, I've got a couple of £1K in my piggy bank, so ...... where do I go to buy a reasonably pretty female one? Answer?*
You're talking through your arse.

* And just for the record, no I wouldn't anyway.


Our prime minister tweeted this.

Also cracking joke about keeping a woman as a slave, not really sure where you are going with that one but crack on.
 
Last edited:




Hugo Rune

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Feb 23, 2012
21,941
Brighton
It clearly triggers the cancel culture mob when people make comparisons with modern times and 30’s Germany. But in doing so, we can learn an awful lot. History is so very important. It’s about not making the same mistakes.

Take this right wing media mogul from the 30’s Germany.


Does he remind you of anyone?

All this stuff seem so very familiar:

“Hugenberg had a grand strategy to bring down "the System" as enemies of the Weimar Republic always called it. Hugenberg believed in the politics of polarisation under which German politics were to be divided into two blocs, the right-wing "national" bloc whose leader he envisioned as himself and the Marxist left consisting of the Social Democrats and the Communists. As part of strategy of polarisation, Hugenberg intended to seize upon wedge issues and present them in a highly inflammatory manner in order to create a situation where one could be either for and against the "national" bloc, which was intended to lead to the electoral decline of all centrist parties in Germany.” Wiki
 




Weststander

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Aug 25, 2011
64,877
Withdean area
In all those degrees of nasty murderous, leaders/regimes, you will find that the victims of their crimes were first described as a problem group of people, weakening the country, and then often had laws changed to allow them to be treated differently from other people. Linekers tweet described the language used in Bravermans selling of the Bill as similar to the type of language used, not that the Government is enacting the Nazi's Final Solution.

Braverman described the Civil service, lawyers and Labour as a left wing Blob, blocking the Government from doing what it must do in the National interest.
National Socialists did the same thing with the German civil service, lawyers and opposition, and then of course went further, but it started with the language they used, and we should remember where this language can and has lead in the past.
I just don’t see a process or pathway here. We’re in the last months of a very unpopular government. These are desperate dog whistle soundbites by inconsequential people in our history. At worst/best it might garner a couple of dozen marginal seats, damage limitation.

As for Lineker, clearly 1930’s Germany means the Nazi’s, it cannot mean anything else. The tiny period 01.01.30 to 29.01.33 was a proper democracy, the highlight of which was SA/SS murdering Communists and vice versa.
 




rogersix

Well-known member
Jan 18, 2014
7,919
Patience, her censure will be at the ballot box.

Lineker’s not being punished or shutdown, he talks freely to the world on all and sundry. He’s in a fixable dispute with one of his two employers (I shouldn’t say employer, the BBC and Lineker have created the veil of him being a freelance businessman to save £m’s each in National Insurance).
farcical demonising lineker for highlighting bravaman's ineptitude
 


portlock seagull

Why? Why us?
Jul 28, 2003
17,377
Spinning out of control appears to describe situation, with an emphasis on spinning.

If Linekers comment has caused BBC sport’s flagship programme to go ahead without Presenters for first time in its history, other contracted staff to strike, and now the PFA and players considering action too…doesn’t this underline why Gary should adhere to Auntie’s impartiality rules? Starting to feel like a hostage situation, and the BBC like every club is bigger than any one player - even its star.

If he manages to topple this government though… :)
 


jackalbion

Well-known member
Aug 30, 2011
4,218
I just don’t see a process or pathway here. We’re in the last months of a very unpopular government. These are desperate dog whistle soundbites by inconsequential people in our history. At worst/best it might garner a couple of dozen marginal seats, damage limitation.
I agree it’s unlikely that this is anything more than dog whistling, but let’s say they win the next election. They have a mandate to follow through this sort of thing, and even the mere suggestion of the kind of exclusionary and human right abusing policy show that there isn’t a low that they aren’t willing to sink to keep and gain power. How Suella can even face her family and state she is willing to reduce the rights of living human beings to gain a few votes at the ballot box, is baffling.
 




LamieRobertson

Not awoke
Feb 3, 2008
47,092
SHOREHAM BY SEA
Latest news….all sorted
 

Attachments

  • 7927312D-C6F3-470A-9593-4702407B1741.jpeg
    7927312D-C6F3-470A-9593-4702407B1741.jpeg
    341.6 KB · Views: 29


jackalbion

Well-known member
Aug 30, 2011
4,218
Spinning out of control appears to describe situation, with an emphasis on spinning.

If Linekers comment has caused BBC sport’s flagship programme to go ahead without Presenters for first time in its history, other contracted staff to strike, and now the PFA and players considering action too…doesn’t this underline why Gary should adhere to Auntie’s impartiality rules? Starting to feel like a hostage situation, and the BBC like every club is bigger than any one player - even its star.

If he manages to topple this government though… :)
Or alternatively why not let him say his views, and stop showing clear political bias in decision making?
 


Weststander

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Aug 25, 2011
64,877
Withdean area
Spinning out of control appears to describe situation, with an emphasis on spinning.

If Linekers comment has caused BBC sport’s flagship programme to go ahead without Presenters for first time in its history, other contracted staff to strike, and now the PFA and players considering action too…doesn’t this underline why Gary should adhere to Auntie’s impartiality rules? Starting to feel like a hostage situation, and the BBC like every club is bigger than any one player - even its star.

If he manages to topple this government though… :)
MOTD is eternally slagged off in this parish. Why are we on near the end? Triffic, just 5 minutes on our game. ManU TV. Why did they only talk about our opponents failings? Shearer, he’a awful. Danny Murphy, he’s awful.

On that basis, nsc won’t miss it anyway.
 




Weststander

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Aug 25, 2011
64,877
Withdean area
I agree it’s unlikely that this is anything more than dog whistling, but let’s say they win the next election. They have a mandate to follow through this sort of thing, and even the mere suggestion of the kind of exclusionary and human right abusing policy show that there isn’t a low that they aren’t willing to sink to keep and gain power. How Suella can even face her family and state she is willing to reduce the rights of living human beings to gain a few votes at the ballot box, is baffling.
They really won’t and I’ve got early money riding on that, good odds. Take me to task if Sunak is PM in 2025.

I was genuinely surprised to see that she was actually in the cabinet. I remembered her as a shit, right wing person of cabinets past.
 




dsr-burnley

Well-known member
Aug 15, 2014
2,204
Never have I read anything that has shown this to be the case. I would be really interested to know where you got this from.

Infact the data around the number of asylum seekers who are given refugee status (90%) suggests that this is nonsense. https://www.rescue.org/uk/article/why-rishi-sunaks-stop-boats-bill-wont-work
I've seen that article before, and the point was it doesn't give any numbers. The number of asylum seekers whose cases had been processed was tiny, single figure percentage of the total applicants, from memory.

But it stands to reason anyway. Anyone who at present is so desperate to get to UK that they will leave France in a ropey old dinghy, will do so however many legal ways into the country there are - if they aren't successful by the legal means. And unless we have 100% permission, come one come all, all applications are approved, then there will still be people who come by small boat because they can't get here any other way.
 


jackalbion

Well-known member
Aug 30, 2011
4,218
They really won’t and I’ve got early money riding on that, good odds. Take me to task if Sunak is PM in 2025.

I was genuinely surprised to see that she was actually in the cabinet. I remembered her as a shit, right wing person of cabinets past.
Yeah fair enough don‘t disagree, I don’t think he’ll be PM in 2025 In my gut, but there’s always the horrendous fear of what could be, and this is the road we could head down.

It’s desperation for sure but will it pay off that’s the question.
 




Baldseagull

Well-known member
Jan 26, 2012
11,027
Crawley
I just don’t see a process or pathway here. We’re in the last months of a very unpopular government. These are desperate dog whistle soundbites by inconsequential people in our history. At worst/best it might garner a couple of dozen marginal seats, damage limitation.

As for Lineker, clearly 1930’s Germany means the Nazi’s, it cannot mean anything else. The tiny period 01.01.30 to 29.01.33 was a proper democracy, the highlight of which was SA/SS murdering Communists and vice versa.
I don't see a pathway either, but I can see challenges to the laws and conventions put in place to try and prevent that from ever being a possibility. If those safe guards are removed, then we are one big step closer to it becoming possible.
 


portlock seagull

Why? Why us?
Jul 28, 2003
17,377
Or alternatively why not let him say his views, and stop showing clear political bias in decision making?
Perhaps, and maybe he should be chastised for using, abusing and marshalling the evils of history’s most abhorrent regime to score political points? It depends where you sit on the spectrum I suppose, but anyone equating The Tories to the Nazi Party loses the argument in my opinion. It’s simply not creditable. Maybe he didn’t do history at school, because he was making it in football. Can’t be good at everything though, evidently modern history’s not his strongest suit.
 


Albion and Premier League latest from Sky Sports


Top
Link Here