Sack Jeremy Clarkson

[Ballacraine]

The bloke tries to be controversial and often suceeds.

 

I doubt that he ever expects anyone to take his comments literally.

 

He is out to provoke a reaction. He uses hyperbole to good effect.

 

Often I find him very funny. He does get up my nose sometimes, but despite that I can't help liking the fella.

 

I like his disrespect of the established order.

 

Nige.

[belfastguzzi]

I like his disrespect of the established order.

 

Nige. 

58424[/snapback]

Uh! The guy is the stereotype of conservative, reactionary, narrow-minded, bigotted establishment. Controversial? You have to have ideas if you want to be controversial and it also helps if you can present a reasoned argument.

[ferguzzi]

He's not so bad because even he doesn't take what he says seriously. He plays the asshole next to the two other "straight guys" in the show(both bikers by the way), and the resulting chaos turns out to be humerous. Or thats the idea. I quite like the programme, the non-pc side of it can be a breath of fresh air next to all the other shite on the box.

[Admin Jaap]

Uh! The guy is the stereotype of conservative, reactionary, narrow-minded, bigotted establishment. Controversial? You have to have ideas if you want to be controversial and it also helps if you can present a reasoned argument.

58433[/snapback]

BFG, you just can't take it when someone is funnier than you, can you?

[pete roper]

I have no idea who this woofling galah is but regardless of whether what hes says is meant to be humorous or not if he's on a television program that is shown nationally, (and it would seem internationally.) then at least some of his viewers, especially on a tappet-head show, are going to be 'Epsilon Minuses', (Thank you Mr. Huxley!). The back-to-front baseball cap and ciggies rolled up in the T-shirt arm brigade can't be trusted not to think that such an idea might be fun to try and you can bet your arse that if some poor bloke commuting to work on his CD200 Honda gets beheaded by some idiots idea of a practical joke slimeball, yuppy, hooray-henry type, so-called journalists won't be getting the blame and-or if the finger is pointed they will claim that their comments were only made in jest and that 'Nobody' could possibly take them seriously.

 

I've experienced quite sufficient road-rage/threatening behavior in the last few years to be seriously pissed off with people like this, if ever there was a candidate for taking out the back for a good kicking this bloke sounds like it.

 

Hopefully this program doesn't get out here by Foxtel or Sky, the last thing I need is some pimply in a warmed up Nissan Pulsar stringing barbed wire across the roads around Canberra. We already had one motorcyclist forced off the road and killed in South Canberra this year by just such a carload of youths. The coppers got 'em eventually and I think their trial is ongoing as I write. I'm hoping for a considerable custodial sentence, but I'm not holding my breath

 

Pete

[Paul Minnaert]

Pete, to see what he looks like:

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/topgear/profiles/

 

at the downloads you find some examples of what they do in the program.

[Guest slowpoke]

Many of the TV personalities on both sides of the pond go for the shock value akin to the writings of the tabloids. It's unfortunate when some daft person takes their ramblings to heart and causes injury. Hopefully most take the comedy in stride and leave it as it is: a good laugh. So, three cheers for the English and their civilized irreverence.

[belfastguzzi]

BFG, you just can't take it when someone is funnier than you, can you? 

58576[/snapback]

I'm just acting the 'Jeremy' with a few straightforward opinions that may or may not be correct! Actually, I kind of agree with Paul – that he has produced probably the most watchable motoring programme for tv, though that's not saying a lot.

 

I don't have satellite, so I bought some of those Discovery Channel dvd's of the Mak Evan's programmes: A Car is Reborn, A Bike is Reborn, A Plane is Reborn etc, where he builds machines from scratch or refurbishes/modifies them from 'scrap'. He does various racing cars, aeroplane, helicopter, chopper bike... I particularly wanted to see the hybrid Land Rover build. So far I've watched the old Harley restoration and the Triumph Bonneville.

I like his big workshop.

[belfastguzzi]

PS

 

Spot the difference.

 

I thought that the level of sophistication in this on-line tv programmes listing description of Top Gear was a pretty good reflection of the depth and sophistication to be found in the programme itself.

 

How many differences can you spot between the short programme description and the long 'detailed' description? Quiz points should be awarded.

 

>

Top Gear

Short Description

Motoring magazine programme that tests and reviews the latest models of cars on the market, as well as covering older 'classic' models and news in the motoring world.

Long Description

Motoring magazine programme which tests and reviews the latest models of cars that on the market, as well as covering older 'classic' models and news in the motoring world.

[belfastguzzi]

OK sonny,

how dare you mention another tv presenter in MY thread!

MarK Evans? Chris Evans? Who's he? He's UNCOOL for sure.

 

And --- PETITION! What petition! Namby pamby waste of time for got-no-life losers. Did Mark Evans start that? Note that Mark rhymes with Park – which is what he should do.

 

If I can publish this codswollop (below) through the BBC about his majesty the Prime Minister then don't you think that I can say just whatever I like about girly bikers. You bet I can: and the Beeb loves it... heh, he, loads of

 

BBC endorsed codswollop, or as I like to call it, Jeremywollop, example:

"One day, long before he's too deranged to care, history will judge Mr Blair to have been a lying, two-faced opportunist. That mad grin will go back in its jar and all his friends will have long since deserted him for his replacement, whose New Old Labour policies will undo everything he did in the first place. He'll be left a lonely and broken man whose life's work will have been for nothing. ??And if this come-uppance doesn't get you off to sleep at night, imagine the big-eared clown being transported to his funeral in a big yellow Hummer. Where, instead of a 21-gun salute, the priest will play AC/DC's Highway to Hell... I guarantee you'll be sleeping peacefully by the second verse.'

 

Stick that in your pipe and smoke it. Yeah – your poncy stainless carbon-titanium exhaust pipe. Biker

[Martin Barrett]

How many differences can you spot between the short programme description and the long 'detailed' description? Quiz points should be awarded.

 

>

Top Gear

Short Description

Motoring magazine programme that tests and reviews the latest models of cars on the market, as well as covering older 'classic' models and news in the motoring world.

Long Description

Motoring magazine programme which tests and reviews the latest models of cars that on the market, as well as covering older 'classic' models and news in the motoring world.

 

 

Quiz point for me please - its the usage of "which" as opposed to "that"

 

Being a practinorer of the English Language ( but not English spelling) I just do it and not sure of the gramatical niceties so i looked it up on Wikipedia and came up with the following (almost )

 

In syntax, the concept of "restrictiveness" applies to a variety of syntactical constructions. Language learners most commonly encounter it in the context of relative clauses, where it is particularly problematic for learners of English, but linguists use the concept in a broader range of contexts.

 

A number of different terms may be used. Most linguists speak of restrictive and non-restrictive clauses, but textbooks for non-specialists are more likely to refer to defining and non-defining relative clauses. Others again speak of integrated clauses and supplementary clauses, or of identifying and non-identifying relative clauses. Or the non-restrictive clause may be called a descriptive clause. Foreign learners of English are sometimes taught to call them necessary and unnecessary clauses, but this is easily misunderstood, as the information in an "unnecessary" clause may be necessary on other levels of importance.

 

The concept can perhaps most easily be explained by contrasting two examples:

 

Given a choice of TV motoring magazine programmes, one made by the BBC and one made by Independant TV makers:

The one made by the BBC is shitte.

This is restrictive: that was made by the BBC resolves ambiguity - by identifying to which of the two programmes one refers. The relative clause serves to disambiguate; it defines the antecedent, restricts its reference, and is thus integrated into the basic idea of the main clause and is necessary if the main clause is to have its intended meaning.

 

Given a group of programmes of various types, including Topgear:

Topgear, which was made by the BBC, is shitte.

This is non-restrictive: which was made by the BBC provides additional, supplementary information, almost as an afterthought. It does not define the antecedent, because the question of identity is already resolved, there being only one Topgear , but it may describe the antecedent.

 

In English, a restrictive clause is not preceded by a comma, whereas a non-restrictive clause is separated from its referent by a comma. Some writers follow a normative rule that that should be used only in restrictive clauses and which should be used only in non-restrictive clauses, in cases where the antecedent is a non-human; for humans, who and whom would be used, depending on grammatical case, and irrespective of whether the clause is restrictive or non-restrictive. However, many writers do not adhere to this rule, and in particular, which is widely used for non-humans, in both types of clauses.

 

See also: Relative pronoun, Relative clause, English relative clauses

 

There hope it was worth it if you made it this far

[jrt]

Quiz point for me please - its the usage of "which" as opposed to "that"

58667[/snapback]

 

So....BFG should have said "Stick which in your pipe and smoke it." ???

 

Being a practinorer of the English Language ( but not English spelling)

58667[/snapback]

 

beautiful, just beautiful (fragmentary clause)

[Guest Nogbad]

Eh!????? What is he on about......

[pete roper]

Quiz point for me please - its the usage of "which" as opposed to "that"

 

(snip)

 

 

58667[/snapback]

 

For a copper he ain't 'arf smart

 

Pete

[dlaing]

Off with his head!

Martin missed the extra "that" in the long verison

But he should get a point for using that word, "disambiguate".