Technically, that’s an FV433 Abbot self-propelled gun, not a tank.
You think that if they could afford to hire an SPG, they could have found an actual racing helmet for ‘The Stig’…
IIRC, May and Clarkson (or maybe it was Andy Wilman, but same difference) said at the time that if Hammond wasn’t well enough to come back, then Top Gear was over because they were not going to go on without him. So May and Hammond refusing to do the show without Jeremy doesn’t surprise me at all.
What does surprise me is that the BBC has let this drag out so long. Top Gear earns them hundreds of millions of dollars, and I’m sure they sunk quite a pretty sum into the pre-filmed segments that haven’t been shown yet. Maybe I’ve become overly cynical about the business world, but the idea of a corporation flushing away so much money because a known ass acted like an ass does not compute for me.
You ride her 'til she bucks you, or you don’t ride at all. Maybe they figured Clarkson would cross the line at some point, but might as well rake in the bucks until he does (or did).
The thing about female stig was just throwing something out there.
My point was simply that rather than publicly berating a guy who had done a great job for 7 years, they should have just taken the opportunity to revitalize the concept in some way, and got on with it.
But FTR, yeah…I think I could tell the difference between a man and a woman wearing a racing suit.
The first news article I read about this had a denial of a punch.
And every article I’ve read since had talked of an “alleged punch”. So any chance of showing an article from a uk source (which can be sued for libel) which states that he punched this person?
And I’ll make that what I will.
Interesting - do you think you could find that article with the denial again? I’ve been able to find this:
So even on this account, if there wasn’t an actual punch there was “contact” which can be characterised as “fisticuffs” which apparently led to an A&E visit. We haven’t had, as far as I can see, a strong denial along the lines of “I never touched him.” If there is one, I’d love to see it.
Angry shouting –> physical contact –> A&E visit. There are very few workplaces where that wouldn’t be a firing offence. Why should the BBC be any different?
So… what *do *you make of it?
No publication is going to drop the word “alleged” until the BBC issues its report. That’s standard legal advice. So if I were basing my claim that Clarkson punched Tymon on having read the words “Clarkson punched Tymon” in a newspaper, I would now be apologising for wasting everyone’s time. But I’m not. I’m basing my claim on the facts and witness statements reported in the papers, from which I have come to a conclusion using my own judgement. It’s a conclusion people are free to agree or disagree with as they see fit, of course, but I like to think that in stating my opinion in the teeth of bureaucratic hand-wringing and the general discomfort of people who don’t like seeing their idols criticised, I’m following in the footsteps of Jeremy Clarkson himself. No mealy-mouthed PC equivocation here - just the plain facts as I see 'em no matter how uncomfortable it makes people. I don’t need the media to tell me what to think.
finishes pint, wipes foam off lips with sleeve, leaps into Bugati and drives into sunset
Telegraph says he’s going to be sacked tomorrow
And that they’re going to try to keep the show going. Hah. I’m not watching a Clarkson-less Top Gear and I can’t imagine many others will, either. And Hammond and May’s contracts are up in a few days, and I really don’t think they’re going to renew under these circumstances unless they’ve somehow managed to waste all their money and are flat broke and desperate.
Well that’s unfortunate. They had quite a good thing going. I wonder if some new channel would pick up the series and air it next to Top Gear and crush it. Unlikely, given the timing of British seasons, but it’d be amusing. Maybe an episode or two of overlap.
I’d be interested to see it. Right now, like I’ve said, I think the format is way past its best before date*, but the three guys’ personalities still make it worth watching…just about.
If they tried to carry on TG with exactly the same format and new faces…it’s doomed, big time. It will be just like the various international TGs, which have largely been unsuccessful, with the added factor that the show is so tired now.
But if they’re brave enough to shake up the format somewhat, and try some new ideas, they have an (outside) chance of still having a hit show, because the niche is still there.
- From the “on today’s show” clips I can tell you what most of the jokes will be. The only reason to watch a new episode versus a re-run on Dave is for the car reviews. And even those follow a very fixed pattern (e.g. if Clarkson starts listing gripes about a car, you know he’ll finish by saying that the speed or feel of the car is awesome and more than makes up for all the gripes).
Someone on another forum claimed that a season of top gear costs around 10m US. That’s astoundingly cheap for a show with such a trave/stunt/production value budget. I assumed it would be far more expensive.
If that’s the case - Netflix already spends that much on 2 episodes of some of its original content. Netflix has the advertiser-independence needed to make top gear work (they can’t have their ad time bought up by car companies who they can now not badmouth), and more importantly, the potential worldwide distribution. Top Gear is a huge international hit, and Netflix could increase their worldwide market share hugely by hosting one of the biggest shows in the world. And their production cost is pocket change to netflix. Assuming non-compete clauses don’t affect this (because Clarkson was fired and the other two just ran out their contract), this is one of the most obvious business decisions ever.
Make it happen.
If I close my eyes and visualise “buffoon” I get an image of Clarkson. I think you need to check the definition of the word.
I’m guessing that after the incident Clarkson realised that he had been on final warning already and that he was deep, deep in the shit. He phoned his agent/wife/best buddy/media advisor/lawyer etc and they said “you are in huge, huge trouble. The worst thing for you is for this to come out via other sources (and it will). Get in there and report it and apologise like you really, really mean it. It’s your only chance.”
Whether he really really meant it is an issue I will leave to the reader.
I hope Top Gear continues. Richard Hammond and James May may be glad to see the back of Clarkson. Apparently he’s been drinking and difficult for awhile. Working along side somebody like that can be pretty miserable.
I think May and Hammond are good friends of Clarkson, and will very likely walk if he does.
Still not seen anything which confirmed he punched the producer. I suspect its far more he shoved him, still, no matter, the BBC is the definition of political correctness so Clarkson was always going to exit ungracefully.
I suspect the last few years of controversial comments were aimed at winding up both the BBC, and the self appointed moral preachers that are the UK tabloids (Daily Wail specifically rates itself the most morally pure of them all).
Netflix will get a good boost if they get him and Hammond and May. I doubt they’ll get the name though. I won’t be watching Top Gear nowadays anyway, was never about cars for me, was about a bit of comedy here and there and that was Clarkson, Hammond and May.
a “shove” is still assault. If you or I did it to a co-worker we’d be fired and likely be facing charges. It disgusts me that so many people are lining up to defend this prick just because he amuses them.
I wonder if this means he’ll finally get from the BBC? 
Though to be honest I have never liked Clarkson anyway. :smack:
I’m not defending for him, I’m pointing out that people seem to continually saying that he punched someone, when the term is assault, which does NOT mean the same thing.
A punch vs shove vs a push vs a grab of an arm, all assault, some would be an overreaction to sack someone on some of them.
As for defending him, what he has done is not CLEAR yet. He has not been charged with any offense by the police, and the BBC has not published any report yet.
(Isn’t the BBC glacial in this respect? 12 days since the incident? Have they got forensics in there? Getting psychics in? Perhaps they’re filming it for Panorama. Making a 500 page document? Wish they’d done something close to that with Saville).
Why shouldn’t the investigation take 12 days?
How long should it have taken, and why?
The inquiry is now leaking like the proverbial, first to the Telegraph and now more widely; “sources close to the inquiry” say that:
A 30-second assault is much longer than needed for one punch, or one shove, grab, poke in the ribs or whatever gentle stroking landed a bleeding man in A&E.
A 20-minute verbal tirade because he couldn’t get steak and chips, while not a sacking offence, marks the man as a total fucking prima donna. He’s meant to be a no-nonsense ordinary bloke: the descent into a screaming “do you know who I am, I’m going to have you sacked” fit over trivial bullshit smacks of the pampered, out of touch narcissist.
Sources also say that Clarkson won’t be “sacked” as such - but his contract is up at the end of March and it won’t be renewed. Which has largely the same effect as sacking, but is a sop to Clarkson’s reputation.
Nah, I think even fans of him know he’s a twat. Nobody is surprised by this…