MCFCTrick
Well-Known Member
Not much difference for me. I always record it, fast forward to our game, switch off and delete straight after it. I never listen to their bolleux and sniping.
Just fucking stop.It’s not so different from the policy Australia had in recent years. Hardly the precursor the next holocaust. Anyway, I’m not particularly interested in the policy which will probably end up getting thrown out by legal challenges anyway.
My point is simply that it is antisemitic to minimise the holocaust. Lineker has done that here, in a minor way, but he has done it none the less. This isn’t a unique standard I’ve invented for Lineker. I’ve highlighted the recent example of Andrew Bridgen. Look back to past years and you’ll find plenty of other times minimising the holocaust is considered antisemitic.
At the end of the day, Lineker has done that here in a crass unthinking way. It more ignorance than malice and I don’t think he needs to be sacked over it, but a word and perhaps some education would be helpful.
If Lineker has concerns about the future he should make his argument by setting those out.
He shouldn’t indulge in lazy tropes that minimise the evils of the Nazi regime. Presumably, Lineker’ concern isn’t that the UK government will shortly begin rounding up Jews and sending them to gas chambers (unless he is entirely unhinged). So it is not appropriate to invoke the Nazis and therefore ultimately the holocaust as a parallel, and doing so only serves to minimise those events.
If Lineker had taken out the '1930's Germany' reference then I think there would have been little fuss. His use of over the top inflammatory language is just political mischief making which is fine when among friends but not so for the BBC where neutrality is it's whole DNA. If the multi millionaires Sugar and Lineker want to preach politics then fine, do it on commercial stations, not the politically neutral BBC.
I’m very well rewarded professionally for doing just that.How do you remain polite to massive morons like this?
How could he have made it better?I have no problem with him making it & I agree with the premise of his argument but he needs to make it better when using a platform that encourages outrage.
The bbc has dehumanised people for ever, it’s a national broadcaster used for propaganda otherwise they’d have sold it off with the gas & water.
The majority of the sports team backed Lineker and as such they had no option but to do the absolute minimum to satisfy the contact with the PL They now have a huge issue on their hands to sort this out utter ridiculous managementJust seen it. Very funny and feels like they threw their toys out the pram with the presentation of it.
What was the reason for:
- Not playing the theme song?
- Not showing team lineups and formations?
- Not having commentary in the games? (I'm sure they could've used some of the official Premier League commentary used on the international feed if they'd asked nicely)
- Not showing stats such as shots on target, possession, corners etc at the end?
So you maintain that if someone talks about 1930s Nazi Germany that there isn’t always a subtext of what is to come? I’m sorry, you may be able to compartmentalise history in that way but to most people talk of the Nazis will automatically invoke WW2 and the holocaust, book burning and so on.Firstly, there isn't; that's inference on your part. If I tell you a young lad from the academy reminds me of Messi, and you then repeat to all and sundry that we have a player in the academy as good as prime Messi, then you've manipulated my words and blown a comparison out of all proportion.
Secondly, the language used by the Tories with this policy is repugnant. It's used to get the hard-right nationalists onside before the GE and simultaneously distract from the real issues plaguing the country; the objective of the bill (which is flagrantly illegal, btw), is to gets large swathes of knuckle draggers blaming all the ills of this country on "foreigners".
Mission accomplished for the party of compassion.
This is you and your lunacyIt’s not so different from the policy Australia had in recent years. Hardly the precursor the next holocaust. Anyway, I’m not particularly interested in the policy which will probably end up getting thrown out by legal challenges anyway.
My point is simply that it is antisemitic to minimise the holocaust. Lineker has done that here, in a minor way, but he has done it none the less. This isn’t a unique standard I’ve invented for Lineker. I’ve highlighted the recent example of Andrew Bridgen. Look back to past years and you’ll find plenty of other times minimising the holocaust is considered antisemitic.
At the end of the day, Lineker has done that here in a crass unthinking way. It more ignorance than malice and I don’t think he needs to be sacked over it, but a word and perhaps some education would be helpful.
Great post, C, but would the people involved in this be open to 'some education'? Lineker sent his son to a fee-paying school and expected that the fees would deliver the top results regardless of how intelligent the student was. I think they would be the last to accept that they need educating.It’s not so different from the policy Australia had in recent years. Hardly the precursor the next holocaust. Anyway, I’m not particularly interested in the policy which will probably end up getting thrown out by legal challenges anyway.
My point is simply that it is antisemitic to minimise the holocaust. Lineker has done that here, in a minor way, but he has done it none the less. This isn’t a unique standard I’ve invented for Lineker. I’ve highlighted the recent example of Andrew Bridgen. Look back to past years and you’ll find plenty of other times minimising the holocaust is considered antisemitic.
At the end of the day, Lineker has done that here in a crass unthinking way. It more ignorance than malice and I don’t think he needs to be sacked over it, but a word and perhaps some education would be helpful.
Ok, care to produce some of the quotes in context of the startling similarities in language? Or is it the case that they don’t particularly exist, or if they do they’re very much something and nothing? A kind of Hitler drank water so water is evil type argument.I disagree. I think it is an appropriate comparison, at the right point in time. It isn't the first either, and shouldn't be the last. And he should have every right to make it.
By the same logic, you are now 'minimising holocoust' by exaggerating his comment to that extent.
You’re absolutely right but that raises another point; there isn’t currently a show that *does* provide intensive tactical analysis.I'm not going to get into the ins and outs of boats, the conservatives, or the BBC because I skew to the left of most people here and I'm not sure there's much to discuss really.
But I will say that Match of the Day isn't really for hardcore football fans who go to the games and post on football forums. It's for a much, much more casual viewer. It's a magazine format, punditry is required to talk people through basic interpretations of the law rather than intensive tactical analysis. I tend not to watch because by the time the evening comes around I've watched half of the games, usually attended one of them, and have already read and watched highlights on others. Most people aren't like me or us.
Maybe not, but the BBC could’ve provided him with some material, perhaps from the IHRA or some such body that set out the issue. I suspect Lineker is clued up enough to get it. I suppose the issue from the BBC side is that Lineker has already had one warning and now he has courted controversy again.Great post, C, but would the people involved in this be open to 'some education'? Lineker sent his son to a fee-paying school and expected that the fees would deliver the top results regardless of how intelligent the student was. I think they would be the last to accept that they need educating.
I've just read a book about the holocaust in Lithuania, where locals were as much a party to the murders as the Nazis, and more so in some towns. But get them to accept their murderous part in it? Little chance.
I’m very well rewarded professionally for doing just that.
Live by the sword, die by the sword.Lol. That is some perverse twisting there, take a bow.