Clarkson has been sacked
26 March 2015, 11:59 AM
#121
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 48,539
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes, and the perpetrator publicly laughed about it, too. I suspect adult ADHD, but that's no excuse, I'm afraid.
Apparently Morgan has now forgiven him after all those years, may be because he knows that his own karma somewhat got him this time.
Apparently Morgan has now forgiven him after all those years, may be because he knows that his own karma somewhat got him this time.
26 March 2015, 02:54 PM
#122
This explains a lot about you, Ali. If you're that easy going about physical assault at formal work place, then I can understand why you're so apathic towards virtual verbal assaults here e.g. people should be ready to be more offended etc.
What sort of work place is that, anyway? To my knowledge, even on the shop floors of some half prestigious factories, verbal as well as physical assaults are unacceptable. I hear that catering can be the industry where loads of verbal can be tolerated from the overworked chef, but I've known of a very recent incident when a top chef in some Italian has been sacked for pushing a temp waiter in a rage.
Absolutely right.
You have to be warped to think that one should 'get over it' and move on.
What sort of work place is that, anyway? To my knowledge, even on the shop floors of some half prestigious factories, verbal as well as physical assaults are unacceptable. I hear that catering can be the industry where loads of verbal can be tolerated from the overworked chef, but I've known of a very recent incident when a top chef in some Italian has been sacked for pushing a temp waiter in a rage.
Absolutely right.
You have to be warped to think that one should 'get over it' and move on.
I never condoned, nor would, so don't assume that.
What I have said is these thing do happen. And I have personal experience of it as victim and perpetrator. I've worked at lots of places...all small companies, the more "hands-on" and physically involving jobs tend to be the ones that saw more altercations when combined with a stressful+high pressure regime.*
So...
< lounges back on therapist's sofa >
Let me tell you about my childhood...
Seriously, playground fights, just involving men. Times have changed - the stuff that went on in the playground 20+years ago that was either ignored or kept quiet. There are plenty of folk who are a product of those elements, good and bad.
Some people I've worked with are friends - good friends, the same people I've got into fights with in the past. And talking about friends, some of my best friends are also the same ones that saw us having a punch ups back in our school days. We got over it, we moved on, we learnt our boundaries and how to get along, how someone can be pushed before snapping.
The end point being an assault occurred, and it appeared to diffuse and end quicker than it started. But management stuck their oar in and dragged it out and out until there was no other option.
If it were on going on numerous occasions, with the same person(s) then that’s a totally different matter.
Also what I find odd about all this, is was what did Tymons do ? What was his job role? We don't know. "Producer" is about as descriptive as me calling myself an Engineer.
If it was his fault for dragging a shoot out for so long that the team did not eat during the day, and they were too late for food at the hotel, then some clarity would appear as to why the situation flared up.
Also in workplaces there are rules on taking breaks. Did Tymons cause the team to break those rules, be intentional or by mistake?
We don't know. And I think the public statement of the inquiry only raises further question as it completely neglects the prior circumstances before the argument took place, nor why it took place either.
Very odd. IMO.
Last edited by ALi-B; 26 March 2015 at 02:55 PM.
26 March 2015, 03:50 PM
#123
Scooby Regular
This explains a lot about you, Ali. If you're that easy going about physical assault at formal work place, then I can understand why you're so apathic towards virtual verbal assaults here e.g. people should be ready to be more offended etc.
What sort of work place is that, anyway?
To my knowledge, even on the shop floors of some half prestigious factories, verbal as well as physical assaults are unacceptable. I hear that catering can be the industry where loads of verbal can be tolerated from the overworked chef, but I've known of a very recent incident when a top chef in some Italian has been sacked for pushing a temp waiter in a rage.
Absolutely right.
You have to be warped to think that one should 'get over it' and move on.
What sort of work place is that, anyway?
To my knowledge, even on the shop floors of some half prestigious factories, verbal as well as physical assaults are unacceptable. I hear that catering can be the industry where loads of verbal can be tolerated from the overworked chef, but I've known of a very recent incident when a top chef in some Italian has been sacked for pushing a temp waiter in a rage. Absolutely right.
You have to be warped to think that one should 'get over it' and move on.
What sort of workplace is that,
anyway
The first rule of fight club is
26 March 2015, 04:37 PM
#125
Are you doing another psychological analysis on me again, TH? LOL I never condoned, nor would, so don't assume that. What I have said is these thing do happen. And I have personal experience of it as victim and perpetrator. I've worked at lots of places...all small companies, the more "hands-on" and physically involving jobs tend to be the ones that saw more altercations when combined with a stressful+high pressure regime.* So... < lounges back on therapist's sofa > Let me tell you about my childhood... Seriously, playground fights, just involving men. Times have changed - the stuff that went on in the playground 20+years ago that was either ignored or kept quiet. There are plenty of folk who are a product of those elements, good and bad. Some people I've worked with are friends - good friends, the same people I've got into fights with in the past. And talking about friends, some of my best friends are also the same ones that saw us having a punch ups back in our school days. We got over it, we moved on, we learnt our boundaries and how to get along, how someone can be pushed before snapping. The end point being an assault occurred, and it appeared to diffuse and end quicker than it started. But management stuck their oar in and dragged it out and out until there was no other option. If it were on going on numerous occasions, with the same person(s) then that’s a totally different matter. Also what I find odd about all this, is was what did Tymons do ? What was his job role? We don't know. "Producer" is about as descriptive as me calling myself an Engineer. If it was his fault for dragging a shoot out for so long that the team did not eat during the day, and they were too late for food at the hotel, then some clarity would appear as to why the situation flared up. Also in workplaces there are rules on taking breaks. Did Tymons cause the team to break those rules, be intentional or by mistake? We don't know. And I think the public statement of the inquiry only raises further question as it completely neglects the prior circumstances before the argument took place, nor why it took place either. Very odd. IMO.
I never condoned, nor would, so don't assume that. What I have said is these thing do happen. And I have personal experience of it as victim and perpetrator. I've worked at lots of places...all small companies, the more "hands-on" and physically involving jobs tend to be the ones that saw more altercations when combined with a stressful+high pressure regime.* So... < lounges back on therapist's sofa > Let me tell you about my childhood... Seriously, playground fights, just involving men. Times have changed - the stuff that went on in the playground 20+years ago that was either ignored or kept quiet. There are plenty of folk who are a product of those elements, good and bad. Some people I've worked with are friends - good friends, the same people I've got into fights with in the past. And talking about friends, some of my best friends are also the same ones that saw us having a punch ups back in our school days. We got over it, we moved on, we learnt our boundaries and how to get along, how someone can be pushed before snapping. The end point being an assault occurred, and it appeared to diffuse and end quicker than it started. But management stuck their oar in and dragged it out and out until there was no other option. If it were on going on numerous occasions, with the same person(s) then that’s a totally different matter. Also what I find odd about all this, is was what did Tymons do ? What was his job role? We don't know. "Producer" is about as descriptive as me calling myself an Engineer. If it was his fault for dragging a shoot out for so long that the team did not eat during the day, and they were too late for food at the hotel, then some clarity would appear as to why the situation flared up. Also in workplaces there are rules on taking breaks. Did Tymons cause the team to break those rules, be intentional or by mistake? We don't know. And I think the public statement of the inquiry only raises further question as it completely neglects the prior circumstances before the argument took place, nor why it took place either. Very odd. IMO.It's possible the presenters and the crew were lounging about in a pub and when they got back to the hotel there wasn't any hot food so the vicious clarkson lamped the nearest person to him.
It's also possible they spent much of the day freezing in a lake in a done-to-death Aqua car challenge and when the entire crew were annoyed, cold and wet they didn't get the hot meal they were promised. Sticking up for cast and crew clarkson went a step too far but the other presenters were reported to have been cooked for after the altercation as well.
As I say, the left wing hate mob would love for the writer in a right wing rag to be given the loutish name they've always pushed rather than wait for any facts to emerge. Hypocrisy from the usual suspects.
26 March 2015, 05:24 PM
#127
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 48,539
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Are you doing another psychological analysis on me again, TH? LOL
I never condoned, nor would, so don't assume that.
What I have said is these thing do happen. And I have personal experience of it as victim and perpetrator. I've worked at lots of places...all small companies, the more "hands-on" and physically involving jobs tend to be the ones that saw more altercations when combined with a stressful+high pressure regime.*
So...
< lounges back on therapist's sofa >
Let me tell you about my childhood...
Seriously, playground fights, just involving men. Times have changed - the stuff that went on in the playground 20+years ago that was either ignored or kept quiet. There are plenty of folk who are a product of those elements, good and bad.
Some people I've worked with are friends - good friends, the same people I've got into fights with in the past. And talking about friends, some of my best friends are also the same ones that saw us having a punch ups back in our school days. We got over it, we moved on, we learnt our boundaries and how to get along, how someone can be pushed before snapping.
The end point being an assault occurred, and it appeared to diffuse and end quicker than it started. But management stuck their oar in and dragged it out and out until there was no other option.
If it were on going on numerous occasions, with the same person(s) then that’s a totally different matter.
Also what I find odd about all this, is was what did Tymons do ? What was his job role? We don't know. "Producer" is about as descriptive as me calling myself an Engineer.
If it was his fault for dragging a shoot out for so long that the team did not eat during the day, and they were too late for food at the hotel, then some clarity would appear as to why the situation flared up.
Also in workplaces there are rules on taking breaks. Did Tymons cause the team to break those rules, be intentional or by mistake?
We don't know. And I think the public statement of the inquiry only raises further question as it completely neglects the prior circumstances before the argument took place, nor why it took place either.
Very odd. IMO.
I never condoned, nor would, so don't assume that.
What I have said is these thing do happen. And I have personal experience of it as victim and perpetrator. I've worked at lots of places...all small companies, the more "hands-on" and physically involving jobs tend to be the ones that saw more altercations when combined with a stressful+high pressure regime.*
So...
< lounges back on therapist's sofa >
Let me tell you about my childhood...
Seriously, playground fights, just involving men. Times have changed - the stuff that went on in the playground 20+years ago that was either ignored or kept quiet. There are plenty of folk who are a product of those elements, good and bad.
Some people I've worked with are friends - good friends, the same people I've got into fights with in the past. And talking about friends, some of my best friends are also the same ones that saw us having a punch ups back in our school days. We got over it, we moved on, we learnt our boundaries and how to get along, how someone can be pushed before snapping.
The end point being an assault occurred, and it appeared to diffuse and end quicker than it started. But management stuck their oar in and dragged it out and out until there was no other option.
If it were on going on numerous occasions, with the same person(s) then that’s a totally different matter.
Also what I find odd about all this, is was what did Tymons do ? What was his job role? We don't know. "Producer" is about as descriptive as me calling myself an Engineer.
If it was his fault for dragging a shoot out for so long that the team did not eat during the day, and they were too late for food at the hotel, then some clarity would appear as to why the situation flared up.
Also in workplaces there are rules on taking breaks. Did Tymons cause the team to break those rules, be intentional or by mistake?
We don't know. And I think the public statement of the inquiry only raises further question as it completely neglects the prior circumstances before the argument took place, nor why it took place either.
Very odd. IMO.
We can guess, even if they don't tell us, come on. My guess is, as I said in one of my previous posts, that even if the victim called him the worst names on this earth, JC didn't need to lose his rag and physically assault him. JC comes out worse with his worse actions in compare hence - "Goodbye, JC!"
Say if the other one punched JC on his teeth first, then he should also be given a sack.
Mind you, JC was on his final warning, wasn't he? That could be the reason why he gets what he gets.
Last edited by Turbohot; 26 March 2015 at 05:30 PM.
26 March 2015, 05:40 PM
#129
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (9)
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: .
Posts: 20,035
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Exactly, there are 2 sides of a story.
It's possible the presenters and the crew were lounging about in a pub and when they got back to the hotel there wasn't any hot food so the vicious clarkson lamped the nearest person to him.
It's also possible they spent much of the day freezing in a lake in a done-to-death Aqua car challenge and when the entire crew were annoyed, cold and wet they didn't get the hot meal they were promised. Sticking up for cast and crew clarkson went a step too far but the other presenters were reported to have been cooked for after the altercation as well.
As I say, the left wing hate mob would love for the writer in a right wing rag to be given the loutish name they've always pushed rather than wait for any facts to emerge. Hypocrisy from the usual suspects.
It's possible the presenters and the crew were lounging about in a pub and when they got back to the hotel there wasn't any hot food so the vicious clarkson lamped the nearest person to him.
It's also possible they spent much of the day freezing in a lake in a done-to-death Aqua car challenge and when the entire crew were annoyed, cold and wet they didn't get the hot meal they were promised. Sticking up for cast and crew clarkson went a step too far but the other presenters were reported to have been cooked for after the altercation as well.
As I say, the left wing hate mob would love for the writer in a right wing rag to be given the loutish name they've always pushed rather than wait for any facts to emerge. Hypocrisy from the usual suspects.
Welcome to the 1970s 
26 March 2015, 05:45 PM
#131
Scooby Senior
So, if the BBC own the format of Top Gear - how much of Top Gear is protected if JC, RH and JM are given contracts by ITV to start a new show?
The trained racing driver is a given but what else could they not do?
The trained racing driver is a given but what else could they not do?
26 March 2015, 07:25 PM
#132
,
Me too ! :: As he hasn't actually been sacked (only not had his contract renewed), I'm sure the BeeB will be looking to bring him back in a year or so.....
Christmas 2016 Special (from a Hotel in North Yorkshire ! ) ??
Me too ! :: As he hasn't actually been sacked (only not had his contract renewed), I'm sure the BeeB will be looking to bring him back in a year or so.....
Christmas 2016 Special (from a Hotel in North Yorkshire !
) ??
Last edited by albob; 26 March 2015 at 07:26 PM.
26 March 2015, 07:43 PM
#133
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 48,539
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry, a bit more on your post>
Good to know that. About my assumption, you gave me a reason to assume. It's in black and white in your one of the previous posts where you say that people get over it, and carry on. You can't blame me for assuming for that sounds as if you support JC's action of giving a pasting to the other bloke. But now as you say you in fact do not condone it, cool.
Ok, May be they do even get involved in physical fights, get over it, and carry on; at your workplace. IMO they shouldn't, and it's still not justifiable. And if people can't handle stress at their job, they're not fit for doing that job, or it could be that the job/line of work is sh7t. IMO again.
Clarkson's line of work doesn't exactly seem to be a fist flying one. He's no Muhammad Ali or even Amir Khan FGS! He's an exception as an impulsive man at his workplace, and he has been tolerated by his workplace for his popularity, as his fans like him to be one. They feed off his impulsivity, and then act that out on line or in real life. Saddos.
Ok, Ali. That's a childhood playground fight scenario. When a grown up acts like a child and goes around punching people, I'm afraid that's not right. That person needs help. As you do not support JC doing that, I am sure you agree that 54 year old JC acting like a child is unacceptable, and he can do with some help. It starts with getting him down a peg or two. Good on BBC to decide not to renew his contract.
I've commented on above before, but once again, these things happen on school playgrounds when someone says- "Sir/Miss, he called me names first, and that's why I knocked him hard on his head". Basically, a table turning, blame shifting exercise; in order to justify your worse doing in comparison. Common happening among under 16's in schools, I know. But come on, an adult resorting to hitting someone to retaliate a verbal is a bit too much. No wonder you never condone JC's punch, nor would you. Good on you.
About what's known and not known, nothing is that odd about it. Don't you think that the ones that investigated this case professionally would have looked at JC's story as well? Why do you think they would want to let the top man go, who they know, had a potential to get millions of signatures on his 'for' petition? LOL at the end of the day, even a PM of the country is disposable, so who TF is Jeremy Clarkson??!! If he has any leg to stand on, he has ample money to contest the decision in court.
Look at Andrew Mitchel. He sued for being defamed as a verbal assault perpetrator, and now is under 300k or something with losing the case. JC can do the same, if the other one is more to blame for provoking him. If he wins, he can prove to the world how well-behaved adult he is.
Certain things you just do not do. You do not hit people in an argument, and you don't go too far with your mockery, end of. Immature losers do it, not mature people with developed brain FFS! JC did it because he thinks he's above his station, and takes a pith of people by hitting and mocking them. As I say, he's so thickskinned egomaniac that he has been laughing about this incident as well, as he laughed about the Morgan one. IMO he got what he deserved.
What I have said is these thing do happen. And I have personal experience of it as victim and perpetrator. I've worked at lots of places...all small companies, the more "hands-on" and physically involving jobs tend to be the ones that saw more altercations when combined with a stressful+high pressure regime.*
Clarkson's line of work doesn't exactly seem to be a fist flying one. He's no Muhammad Ali or even Amir Khan FGS! He's an exception as an impulsive man at his workplace, and he has been tolerated by his workplace for his popularity, as his fans like him to be one. They feed off his impulsivity, and then act that out on line or in real life. Saddos.
So...
< lounges back on therapist's sofa >
Let me tell you about my childhood...
Seriously, playground fights, just involving men. Times have changed - the stuff that went on in the playground 20+years ago that was either ignored or kept quiet. There are plenty of folk who are a product of those elements, good and bad.
Some people I've worked with are friends - good friends, the same people I've got into fights with in the past. And talking about friends, some of my best friends are also the same ones that saw us having a punch ups back in our school days. We got over it, we moved on, we learnt our boundaries and how to get along, how someone can be pushed before snapping.
The end point being an assault occurred, and it appeared to diffuse and end quicker than it started. But management stuck their oar in and dragged it out and out until there was no other option.
If it were on going on numerous occasions, with the same person(s) then that’s a totally different matter.
< lounges back on therapist's sofa >
Let me tell you about my childhood...
Seriously, playground fights, just involving men. Times have changed - the stuff that went on in the playground 20+years ago that was either ignored or kept quiet. There are plenty of folk who are a product of those elements, good and bad.
Some people I've worked with are friends - good friends, the same people I've got into fights with in the past. And talking about friends, some of my best friends are also the same ones that saw us having a punch ups back in our school days. We got over it, we moved on, we learnt our boundaries and how to get along, how someone can be pushed before snapping.
The end point being an assault occurred, and it appeared to diffuse and end quicker than it started. But management stuck their oar in and dragged it out and out until there was no other option.
If it were on going on numerous occasions, with the same person(s) then that’s a totally different matter.
Also what I find odd about all this, is was what did Tymons do ? What was his job role? We don't know. "Producer" is about as descriptive as me calling myself an Engineer.
If it was his fault for dragging a shoot out for so long that the team did not eat during the day, and they were too late for food at the hotel, then some clarity would appear as to why the situation flared up.
Also in workplaces there are rules on taking breaks. Did Tymons cause the team to break those rules, be intentional or by mistake?
We don't know. And I think the public statement of the inquiry only raises further question as it completely neglects the prior circumstances before the argument took place, nor why it took place either.
Very odd. IMO.
If it was his fault for dragging a shoot out for so long that the team did not eat during the day, and they were too late for food at the hotel, then some clarity would appear as to why the situation flared up.
Also in workplaces there are rules on taking breaks. Did Tymons cause the team to break those rules, be intentional or by mistake?
We don't know. And I think the public statement of the inquiry only raises further question as it completely neglects the prior circumstances before the argument took place, nor why it took place either.
Very odd. IMO.
About what's known and not known, nothing is that odd about it. Don't you think that the ones that investigated this case professionally would have looked at JC's story as well? Why do you think they would want to let the top man go, who they know, had a potential to get millions of signatures on his 'for' petition? LOL at the end of the day, even a PM of the country is disposable, so who TF is Jeremy Clarkson??!! If he has any leg to stand on, he has ample money to contest the decision in court.
Look at Andrew Mitchel. He sued for being defamed as a verbal assault perpetrator, and now is under 300k or something with losing the case. JC can do the same, if the other one is more to blame for provoking him. If he wins, he can prove to the world how well-behaved adult he is.
Certain things you just do not do. You do not hit people in an argument, and you don't go too far with your mockery, end of. Immature losers do it, not mature people with developed brain FFS! JC did it because he thinks he's above his station, and takes a pith of people by hitting and mocking them. As I say, he's so thickskinned egomaniac that he has been laughing about this incident as well, as he laughed about the Morgan one. IMO he got what he deserved.
26 March 2015, 07:54 PM
#135
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 48,539
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
His devoted fans contribute to that, so who can we blame, eh. Good riddance. Make a new show on some other channel from scratch now. Go on. A 54 year old grown up man acting like a child! Anyone over 16 is not right in their head for behaving like that.
26 March 2015, 09:11 PM
#136
Well I think we all agree that punching someone is not acceptable.
BUT, and its a real but:
One has to understand and clarify what makes someone who normally is calm and mild mannered (off screen), snap.
We all have limits, beyond exasperation we become unpredictable. No matter how old we all are. Nobody can be pacifists all the time for all of their lives (I bet even Ghandi had a paddy in his younger years )
Its funny talking about this as only today I had two gaffers having a power struggle between each other. These are men in their 50's and 60's. Maybe that's what men do when they get past the 50 barrier? I'm not there yet so I don't know.
Of course its not condonable, BUT, it happens. Why does it happen? Its because there is something there in all of our subconscious, a suppressed annoyance, anger that builds and builds - something will give if its not relieved or addressed, it always does; I have a hole on the wall of the downstairs loo.....I made it. I'm not proud (at least I didn't hit the plumber
).
"She pours herself another cup of coffee, as she contemplates the stain across the wall". That stain?...Its from the last cup. Why did she do it? Exasperation.
Anyhoo.
The outcome of this: The other two presenters will likely leave TG. If TG ceases to be, the crew will also lose their job. The owners of the track will have lost their contacts; more jobs lost. Oisin, probably won't have a job at TG either.
So this is the worst of all outcomes. TG ends as we know it, for both fans and staff.
Translating this to my own workplaces of past and present...we'd just turn up the next day and carry on....ask which is worse? Having a job...or not? Where I've worked - the job was more important than the politics and disagreements.
BUT, and its a real but:
One has to understand and clarify what makes someone who normally is calm and mild mannered (off screen), snap.
We all have limits, beyond exasperation we become unpredictable. No matter how old we all are. Nobody can be pacifists all the time for all of their lives (I bet even Ghandi had a paddy in his younger years )
Its funny talking about this as only today I had two gaffers having a power struggle between each other. These are men in their 50's and 60's. Maybe that's what men do when they get past the 50 barrier? I'm not there yet so I don't know.
Of course its not condonable, BUT, it happens. Why does it happen? Its because there is something there in all of our subconscious, a suppressed annoyance, anger that builds and builds - something will give if its not relieved or addressed, it always does; I have a hole on the wall of the downstairs loo.....I made it. I'm not proud (at least I didn't hit the plumber
)."She pours herself another cup of coffee, as she contemplates the stain across the wall". That stain?...Its from the last cup. Why did she do it? Exasperation.
Anyhoo.
The outcome of this: The other two presenters will likely leave TG. If TG ceases to be, the crew will also lose their job. The owners of the track will have lost their contacts; more jobs lost. Oisin, probably won't have a job at TG either.
So this is the worst of all outcomes. TG ends as we know it, for both fans and staff.
Translating this to my own workplaces of past and present...we'd just turn up the next day and carry on....ask which is worse? Having a job...or not? Where I've worked - the job was more important than the politics and disagreements.
26 March 2015, 10:55 PM
#138
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 48,539
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well I think we all agree that punching someone is not acceptable.
BUT, and its a real but:
One has to understand and clarify what makes someone who normally is calm and mild mannered (off screen), snap.
We all have limits, beyond exasperation we become unpredictable. No matter how old we all are. Nobody can be pacifists all the time for all of their lives (I bet even Ghandi had a paddy in his younger years )
BUT, and its a real but:
One has to understand and clarify what makes someone who normally is calm and mild mannered (off screen), snap.
We all have limits, beyond exasperation we become unpredictable. No matter how old we all are. Nobody can be pacifists all the time for all of their lives (I bet even Ghandi had a paddy in his younger years )
As I say, fist flying doesn't suit grown ups. For a grown up to throw punches about, the trigger has to be of very, very serious nature. Even then, physical assault impulse is better kept to oneself tbh. The ones that offer punches over usual work stress and minor problems may be suffering from some underlying issues that can be helped by right professionals. Angry fist flyers obviously need help.
Its funny talking about this as only today I had two gaffers having a power struggle between each other. These are men in their 50's and 60's. Maybe that's what men do when they get past the 50 barrier? I'm not there yet so I don't know.
Of course its not condonable, BUT, it happens. Why does it happen? Its because there is something there in all of our subconscious, a suppressed annoyance, anger that builds and builds - something will give if its not relieved or addressed, it always does; I have a hole on the wall of the downstairs loo.....I made it. I'm not proud (at least I didn't hit the plumber ).
"She pours herself another cup of coffee, as she contemplates the stain across the wall". That stain?...Its from the last cup. Why did she do it? Exasperation.
Of course its not condonable, BUT, it happens. Why does it happen? Its because there is something there in all of our subconscious, a suppressed annoyance, anger that builds and builds - something will give if its not relieved or addressed, it always does; I have a hole on the wall of the downstairs loo.....I made it. I'm not proud (at least I didn't hit the plumber
)."She pours herself another cup of coffee, as she contemplates the stain across the wall". That stain?...Its from the last cup. Why did she do it? Exasperation.
Anyhoo.
The outcome of this: The other two presenters will likely leave TG. If TG ceases to be, the crew will also lose their job. The owners of the track will have lost their contacts; more jobs lost. Oisin, probably won't have a job at TG either.
So this is the worst of all outcomes. TG ends as we know it, for both fans and staff.
Translating this to my own workplaces of past and present...we'd just turn up the next day and carry on....ask which is worse? Having a job...or not? Where I've worked - the job was more important than the politics and disagreements.
So this is the worst of all outcomes. TG ends as we know it, for both fans and staff.
Translating this to my own workplaces of past and present...we'd just turn up the next day and carry on....ask which is worse? Having a job...or not? Where I've worked - the job was more important than the politics and disagreements.
On the professional level these BBC guys without Clarkson aren't hand to mouth. I think they'll all be fine, and find work opportunities within the mega org. BBC itself, as, it is to note that they all haven't been officially sacked. What happened there in BBC cannot be fully translated to your workplace, as yours seems to be a different line, scale and nature of work. This fist flying culture is not suitable to the British Broadcasting Corporation. It's not a matter of any politics whatsoever, it's a matter of principle that the politics doesn't always recognise. Keeping your gob shut, becoming punch bags for a job blackmail is closer to politics than the principle of not hitting someone, no matter what.
You may say- "Yeah, but BBC is corrupt as fvvk with hundreds of other flaws, while we only fly fists at our invisible but honest and hard grafting workplace." I'd say that you may be raising a valid point, if true, and you could be even better if you lot at your work could control your fist flying impulses.
26 March 2015, 11:33 PM
#139
Scooby Regular
The problem for JC is - he is a populist, and thrives on exposure - sure money, but he has a lot (I totally get that "a lot" is never enough)
But any entertainer wants to entertain - above all else (and JC is a very good entertainer)
Give an entertainer a £100 to perform in front of a single person or £50 to perform in front of 100's and I think most would take the later
I suspect that's why he stayed at the BBC - it gives what he craves, exposure and establishment legitimacy
Myself a case in point - the only reason I ever get exposed to JC is via the BBC/Topgear - I have never read/bought the Sun, and would never waste money on subscription TV
if he goes to Sky he would completely disappear from my cultural radar
I am sure he must have been offered silly money to move to "chav" TV before now
But any entertainer wants to entertain - above all else (and JC is a very good entertainer)
Give an entertainer a £100 to perform in front of a single person or £50 to perform in front of 100's and I think most would take the later
I suspect that's why he stayed at the BBC - it gives what he craves, exposure and establishment legitimacy
Myself a case in point - the only reason I ever get exposed to JC is via the BBC/Topgear - I have never read/bought the Sun, and would never waste money on subscription TV
if he goes to Sky he would completely disappear from my cultural radar
I am sure he must have been offered silly money to move to "chav" TV before now
Last edited by hodgy0_2; 26 March 2015 at 11:54 PM.
27 March 2015, 12:30 AM
#141
The fist flying abusive culture where people can punch other people, and the victims put up with it because they can't risk losing their jobs?
Not really, I'm talking about one-off incidents because the next day almost every time everyone has reflected on the events, meets a common ground and respect. The circumstances that led up to the event are usually looked into and changes are made to avoid it happening in future. Its not about it being totally dog eat dog.
This should be a bit of incitement for your analysis of me: My Dad was once on a attempted murder charge over a workplace "fracas". That's about as extreme as you can get in terms of workplace violence. There was mitigating reasoning behind it from the circumstances that led up to the event....I won't say what it is though, as seeing BBC management also saw fit to hide the facts of the circumstances that led up the event with Clarkson. I think I'll do the same. But, the twist here is he didn't get sacked...the victim did!
What went wrong on that day at TG? We'll likely never truly know. To make a better/calmer workplace is not to stop the fisticuffs by saying "this is not allowed, or you will be sacked"...but acknowledged the issue that caused the tension in the first place and making changes to prevent it happening in future. If that means making strict rules about not doing 10hour stints without food/proper breaks in future; well that would be reasonable. Sacking someone because they snapped doesn't address the core issue - as there is a risk another person in the same situation could also snap and punch somebody.
As I said earlier facts are rather misty. But what I gathered it was 10hours without proper food. If that's true. Well, that's unacceptable in any workplace. How often has that happened at TG? If so were these problems notified and highlighted before? And who was responsible for allowing it to happen? What has been done to prevent that happening in future? Sacking Clarkson didn't address this workplace failing. For all we know this could be something from as previous issue that hadn't been properly dealt with; I don't think the Argentina filming went down to well - who was responsible for that?
The end point being is oversimplifying into punch somebody=sack doesn't necessarily address or resolve workplace issues.
27 March 2015, 12:41 AM
#143
From what I gathered Oisin has made no complaints nor did he want to. I honestly believe he wanted it to blow over as quick as Clarkson did, so they could carry on as normal.
The only odd even was the report saying he drove himself to A&E because he felt dizzy...if that's to be believed. (why would you drive whilst feeling unwell? )
A further pondering...which overpaid cretin at the BBC is leaking info and malicious gossip to the press? Doubt they'll get sacked
The only odd even was the report saying he drove himself to A&E because he felt dizzy...if that's to be believed. (why would you drive whilst feeling unwell? )
A further pondering...which overpaid cretin at the BBC is leaking info and malicious gossip to the press? Doubt they'll get sacked
Last edited by ALi-B; 27 March 2015 at 12:43 AM.
27 March 2015, 01:27 AM
#145
Ali, I understand a lot of what you are saying, and agree about dealing with underlying workplace issues rather than just sacking someone who has lashed out, but.......
Assuming it is true that the reason he was late to the hotel, thus missing the hot food, was because he went off for some drinks before making his way there, he couldn't have been that desperately hungry after a day going without? Why not just go straight to the hotel and have both hot food and drinks there? Perhaps he wasn't aware what time the cut off for hot food was, perhaps he assumed he'd just get what he wanted regardless of the time due to prior arrangement, therefore he didn't feel there was a rush, but personally, if I'd had a long day at work, with limited breaks, and little or no food, I'd be going straight to where I could get some, especially considering I'd also be able to have the few drinks I wanted there as well. That's just me though.
Like you say, we may never know the full details, we are making our own judgements based on bits and pieces of information the media are giving us.
Before anyone jumps on my comments, I didn't want to see Clarkson sacked/not have his contract renewed as I'll miss my Top Gear fix, and I truly don't think it would be the same without the three of them together. Sadly though, he (over?)reacted in the heat of the moment and gave the BBC the perfect opportunity to part company with him.
Assuming it is true that the reason he was late to the hotel, thus missing the hot food, was because he went off for some drinks before making his way there, he couldn't have been that desperately hungry after a day going without? Why not just go straight to the hotel and have both hot food and drinks there? Perhaps he wasn't aware what time the cut off for hot food was, perhaps he assumed he'd just get what he wanted regardless of the time due to prior arrangement, therefore he didn't feel there was a rush, but personally, if I'd had a long day at work, with limited breaks, and little or no food, I'd be going straight to where I could get some, especially considering I'd also be able to have the few drinks I wanted there as well. That's just me though.
Like you say, we may never know the full details, we are making our own judgements based on bits and pieces of information the media are giving us.
Before anyone jumps on my comments, I didn't want to see Clarkson sacked/not have his contract renewed as I'll miss my Top Gear fix, and I truly don't think it would be the same without the three of them together. Sadly though, he (over?)reacted in the heat of the moment and gave the BBC the perfect opportunity to part company with him.
27 March 2015, 07:06 AM
#146
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Arborfield, Berkshire
Posts: 12,387
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
27 March 2015, 07:50 AM
#147
Ali, I understand a lot of what you are saying, and agree about dealing with underlying workplace issues rather than just sacking someone who has lashed out, but.......
Assuming it is true that the reason he was late to the hotel, thus missing the hot food, was because he went off for some drinks before making his way there, he couldn't have been that desperately hungry after a day going without? Why not just go straight to the hotel and have both hot food and drinks there? Perhaps he wasn't aware what time the cut off for hot food was, perhaps he assumed he'd just get what he wanted regardless of the time due to prior arrangement, therefore he didn't feel there was a rush, but personally, if I'd had a long day at work, with limited breaks, and little or no food, I'd be going straight to where I could get some, especially considering I'd also be able to have the few drinks I wanted there as well. That's just me though.
Like you say, we may never know the full details, we are making our own judgements based on bits and pieces of information the media are giving us.
Before anyone jumps on my comments, I didn't want to see Clarkson sacked/not have his contract renewed as I'll miss my Top Gear fix, and I truly don't think it would be the same without the three of them together. Sadly though, he (over?)reacted in the heat of the moment and gave the BBC the perfect opportunity to part company with him.
Assuming it is true that the reason he was late to the hotel, thus missing the hot food, was because he went off for some drinks before making his way there, he couldn't have been that desperately hungry after a day going without? Why not just go straight to the hotel and have both hot food and drinks there? Perhaps he wasn't aware what time the cut off for hot food was, perhaps he assumed he'd just get what he wanted regardless of the time due to prior arrangement, therefore he didn't feel there was a rush, but personally, if I'd had a long day at work, with limited breaks, and little or no food, I'd be going straight to where I could get some, especially considering I'd also be able to have the few drinks I wanted there as well. That's just me though.
Like you say, we may never know the full details, we are making our own judgements based on bits and pieces of information the media are giving us.
Before anyone jumps on my comments, I didn't want to see Clarkson sacked/not have his contract renewed as I'll miss my Top Gear fix, and I truly don't think it would be the same without the three of them together. Sadly though, he (over?)reacted in the heat of the moment and gave the BBC the perfect opportunity to part company with him.
He travels the world as part of his job, anyone who has stayed in a hotel knows the kitchen closes at X o'clock and the staff go home, so it's not like he'd not know that he may well come back to nothing, the producer probably didn't know what time they'd be turning up so opted for a cold buffet, sounds perfectly reasonable in that context, something is better than nothing.
I think in hindsight when Clarkson got the hump it would have been better if the others stepped in but they were probably too busy giggling and things got a little out of hand, 30 mins is an awful long time to be standing there arguing, most people would struggle beyond 30 seconds, sounds more like they were both on the wind up and it went a little pear shaped.
But hey it's all speculation as we can't handle the truth.
27 March 2015, 08:11 AM
#148
Scooby Regular
What seems clear is that people have pretty low expectations of what is exceptable behaviour from a colleague in the work place (or any place tbh) - "chav Briton"
Luckily not something I recognises personally or professionally
27 March 2015, 08:27 AM
#149
30 mins of verbal abuse is an awful long time to be standing there, why would anyone stand there to be abused, Ok I know Clarkson was senior to him but most people would just walk off muttering **** head under their breath, it just doesn't add up.
Maybe he was a mole sent in by the BBC to create a situation or bribed by another channel.
Ok I know Clarkson was senior to him but most people would just walk off muttering **** head under their breath, it just doesn't add up.Maybe he was a mole sent in by the BBC to create a situation or bribed by another channel.
