Lineker has been warned countless times but believes that he is above the need to abide by the rules that his paymasters decree.
The content of this recent tweet was offensive and unneccessary.
His virtue signalling mates and others paid by the BBC who are showing solidarity are presumably too stupid to understand any of the above.
I hope they are all dispensed with now and that for once the BBC does the right thing.
MOD is outdated now and the smug sneering together with some appalling shouty commentary will not be missed by me.
As another poster here has said - they are all shouting about free speech being gagged but if they don't like other people's views they cancel them in the same way!
The boot is on the other foot and they do not like it!

Edited by The Dolphin (11 Mar 2023 9.18am)

Hear Hear
I agree with the general thrust of the sentiments.

With respect it is the BBS that has decided that Lineker's comments breached their impartiality guidelines.

If one listens to the odious Alastair Campbell, it is all the fault of a right-wing cabal in the Conservative Party and the Mail, Telegraph etc.Total and utter codswallop but of course it provides him with an opportunity to attack my party.

My days of watching MOTD after spending Saturday evenings studiously avoiding the football results are long gone. I find the clips of games too brief and the pundit's ramblings too long.

But, do you know what, in the absence of Lineker, pundits and commentators I might actually watch it tonight. I will see more of the games and I can form my own opinions about the outcomes.

I hope that tonight, the BBC sees the highest audience of this outdated show ever just to show Lineker and his supporters how inconsequential they are.

Dad and I watched games standing on the muddy slope of the Holmesdale Road end. He cheered and I rattled.

Funny that you're not on here complaining about what Fiona Bruce said on Question time.

If Gary Lineker had tweeted support for Braverman's policy even in valid cases, would he be disciplined by the BBC for lack of impartiality?

Or is it ok to be political provided you support the government?

Fiona Bruce and QT are a joke nowadays.
She is way out of her depth on there and the bias is too much to bear.
I actually do not have an issue jug ears posting stuff but this content was out of order in so many ways.
If you get warned by your boss about something but you continue to disobey then you get the chop.
I actually wonder whether he has engineered it?

Edited by The Dolphin (11 Mar 2023 10.16am)

It is understood that 'Football Focus' will not air as pundits have withdrawn from the programme.
From my perspective it is a moribund programme well past its 'Sell-By date'.
There will be no outpouring of grief in the Willo abode.

Tunbridge

Very impartial I would say, as her husband is a Tory donor.

And Richard Sharp, BBC Chairman arranged a loan for Johnson.

But that's ok then, nothing to see here?

--------------------------------------------------------------------
Richard Sharp is also a self proclaimed donor to the tory party and Boris Johnson recommended him to be BBC chairman after he helped arrange loan for him.

I said a few days ago that it seemed Linekers removal looked inevitable given the positions on both sides and so it has been proved.

Leaving aside the comments about MOTD itself, its tiredness and lack of actual football and concentrating only on the issue of whether Lineker should be able to make whatever comments he likes, on anything he wants, in his own time, I can see both sides of the argument. You don't have to agree with what Lineker said to agree with that.

I can see the need for the BBC to not only be impartial but to be seen to be impartial. However, I can also see the need for the BBC to be free of government influence and be seen to be free of government influence.

This is a much bigger issue than just what has happened to Lineker, or whether you agree, or disagree with his political views or those of the government. With another government the reverse could happen.

I read what Greg Dyke said today and am persuaded by it. I won't repeat it all, but essentially he thinks the precedent in the BBC is that news and current affairs employees are expected to be impartial, and not the rest. Otherwise, no-body working in another area could ever express an opinion about anything, which clearly doesn't happen. Dyke, a former BBC Chairman, thinks what the BBC did yesterday was a mistake.

If news and current affairs presenters can discuss sports in their private lives, and they obviously do, why cannot sports presenters discuss politics in theirs?

Politics are not discussed on MOTD. Political actions by the players might be, but that's in context.

This could well be a crunch point for Richard Sharp, the BBC Chairman who is already seen as being too close to the government. If he fails to back his staff he may face a growing rebellion from them. Whether Tim Davie, the BBC Director General, can pour oil on the water and find a workable compromise is an open question, but it doesn't appear likely at the moment.

I know the BBC haters will be rejoicing at Lineker and the BBC "finally" being put in their place and suffering some "cancel culture" medicine of their own, but this is more important than political point scoring. Those of us who believe the BBC to be an essential bastion against government interference, and ultimate control, over what we are allowed to be told, will be watching and waiting to make sure it's preserved.

For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.