RugbyRebels

Digby wrote:I quite like Inverdale. I don't think hes quite as good as Balding, but along with someone like Irvine he seems a perfectly safe bet to front a number of events. Innerdale's salary seems quite reasonable to me as a consequence, though Balding certainly could use a hike, and Irvine could use some more work and a pay rise if it's wanted.

Lineker's salary is way OTT. If that was cut to £250k and he wanted to leave then fair enough, just employ someone else. And even his salary is slim pickings compared to the biggest sport media roles by salary (which mostly aren't at the BBC)

Find me a football anchor - and remember, football is the highest paying of these sports - who's as appealing to as many people as Linekar...

Truth is, he really is, and knows he is, the best at the job. So that's why he gets paid what he does. And that's also why I think that's fair: he actually is a talented host.

I didn't find Inverdale a useless boor years ago, but I think time has caught up with him. His comments are outrageous, and he offers zero enlightenment. He shouldn't be employed, nevermind be considered worthy of a high wage.

Stom wrote:

Digby wrote:I quite like Inverdale. I don't think hes quite as good as Balding, but along with someone like Irvine he seems a perfectly safe bet to front a number of events. Innerdale's salary seems quite reasonable to me as a consequence, though Balding certainly could use a hike, and Irvine could use some more work and a pay rise if it's wanted.

Lineker's salary is way OTT. If that was cut to £250k and he wanted to leave then fair enough, just employ someone else. And even his salary is slim pickings compared to the biggest sport media roles by salary (which mostly aren't at the BBC)

Find me a football anchor - and remember, football is the highest paying of these sports - who's as appealing to as many people as Linekar...

Truth is, he really is, and knows he is, the best at the job. So that's why he gets paid what he does. And that's also why I think that's fair: he actually is a talented host.

I didn't find Inverdale a useless boor years ago, but I think time has caught up with him. His comments are outrageous, and he offers zero enlightenment. He shouldn't be employed, nevermind be considered worthy of a high wage.

See my comments above as to why I think he shouldn't be emloyed

Stom wrote:

Digby wrote:I quite like Inverdale. I don't think hes quite as good as Balding, but along with someone like Irvine he seems a perfectly safe bet to front a number of events. Innerdale's salary seems quite reasonable to me as a consequence, though Balding certainly could use a hike, and Irvine could use some more work and a pay rise if it's wanted.

Lineker's salary is way OTT. If that was cut to £250k and he wanted to leave then fair enough, just employ someone else. And even his salary is slim pickings compared to the biggest sport media roles by salary (which mostly aren't at the BBC)

Find me a football anchor - and remember, football is the highest paying of these sports - who's as appealing to as many people as Linekar...

Truth is, he really is, and knows he is, the best at the job. So that's why he gets paid what he does. And that's also why I think that's fair: he actually is a talented host.

I didn't find Inverdale a useless boor years ago, but I think time has caught up with him. His comments are outrageous, and he offers zero enlightenment. He shouldn't be employed, nevermind be considered worthy of a high wage.

Find me someone who watches football 'cause of the anchor

And the poor comments from Inverdale have been poor, but they're hardly weekly, and it's not like even someone plenty of others haven't had the odd mistake live to camera

Lineker is paid vastly more than any other sports anchor. The next highest is Alan Shearer. So because football players earn vast salaries it follows that ex footballers presenting highlights shows should also earn vast salaries? Lineker seems to command his mainly by being about the only ex footballer who can string a sentence together. Don't get me started on past tense plural and singular misuse.

Digby wrote:

Stom wrote:

Digby wrote:I quite like Inverdale. I don't think hes quite as good as Balding, but along with someone like Irvine he seems a perfectly safe bet to front a number of events. Innerdale's salary seems quite reasonable to me as a consequence, though Balding certainly could use a hike, and Irvine could use some more work and a pay rise if it's wanted.

Lineker's salary is way OTT. If that was cut to £250k and he wanted to leave then fair enough, just employ someone else. And even his salary is slim pickings compared to the biggest sport media roles by salary (which mostly aren't at the BBC)

Find me a football anchor - and remember, football is the highest paying of these sports - who's as appealing to as many people as Linekar...

Truth is, he really is, and knows he is, the best at the job. So that's why he gets paid what he does. And that's also why I think that's fair: he actually is a talented host.

I didn't find Inverdale a useless boor years ago, but I think time has caught up with him. His comments are outrageous, and he offers zero enlightenment. He shouldn't be employed, nevermind be considered worthy of a high wage.

Find me someone who watches football 'cause of the anchor

And the poor comments from Inverdale have been poor, but they're hardly weekly, and it's not like even someone plenty of others haven't had the odd mistake live to camera

I think you may be in a minority if you think the comments were poor, they were unforgivable in many peoples eyes.

OK I'll give you the chubby Heather Watson dig - she's fecking lush.

But he did have a point about Bartoli.

Now I'll concede that I don't have an audience of 4 or 5 million and I'm not being paid half a million a year, but we'd all be having to haul on our hypocrite pants if we're going to get flustered over that shyte. Maybe Ms Bartoli's Ma would have been a tad upset, but 'unforgiveable'? I bet her Da has thought often enough that its a good job she makes a few lira on this tennis lark; sure 'tis the only way they're going to get the pizza-faced howler off their hands?

Numbers wrote:
I think you may be in a minority if you think the comments were poor, they were unforgivable in many peoples eyes.

Anyone that judgmental over a trivial issue in the big scheme, and one for which he recognised he made a mistake and apologised, probably isn't worth listening to. Similar to Balding making comments about that jockey's teeth we can criticise and move on.

You don't sweat much for a fat lass.

SerjeantWildgoose wrote:OK I'll give you the chubby Heather Watson dig - she's fecking lush.

But he did have a point about Bartoli.

Now I'll concede that I don't have an audience of 4 or 5 million and I'm not being paid half a million a year, but we'd all be having to haul on our hypocrite pants if we're going to get flustered over that shyte. Maybe Ms Bartoli's Ma would have been a tad upset, but 'unforgiveable'? I bet her Da has thought often enough that its a good job she makes a few lira on this tennis lark; sure 'tis the only way they're going to get the pizza-faced howler off their hands?

Lira? Bartoli is French.

I thought her olive oil tasted cheesey!

SerjeantWildgoose wrote:OK I'll give you the chubby Heather Watson dig - she's fecking lush.

This

Digby wrote:Similar to Balding making comments about that jockey's teeth we can criticise and move on.

This

Can't we all just be grateful that we don't know Barnes's salary. Imagine having to listen to that drivel whilst knowing he's earning a tasty six figure salary. I would say the same about Dewi Morris but I've convinced myself he's working for free in some care in the community programme.

Stom wrote:
Find me a football anchor - and remember, football is the highest paying of these sports - who's as appealing to as many people as Linekar...

Truth is, he really is, and knows he is, the best at the job. So that's why he gets paid what he does. And that's also why I think that's fair: he actually is a talented host.

I didn't find Inverdale a useless boor years ago, but I think time has caught up with him. His comments are outrageous, and he offers zero enlightenment. He shouldn't be employed, nevermind be considered worthy of a high wage.

That's the point. To attract a top class sports start with the right presentation skills requires serious money and Linekar is popular. Inverdale is just another multi-sport anchor who should be just tying the whole show together, but often ends up being the focus through his own daft comments. Is it too much to ask for BBC to find an ex-rugby player who is actually a decent enough presenter to front major rugby on the BBC who can offer some intelligent conversation?

This who saga is about to get very messy with demands to sort out the equality gap now.

In many organisation with published pay scales, you could make a clear argument why a male presenter with 30 years experience is paid more than a female one with 10 for being on the same show. But I suspect the BBC doesn't operate like that for the 'talent'.

Expect more commentary on how tax payers fund this, future of the BBC license fee, etc, etc.

SerjeantWildgoose wrote:OK I'll give you the chubby Heather Watson dig - she's fecking lush.

But he did have a point about Bartoli.

Now I'll concede that I don't have an audience of 4 or 5 million and I'm not being paid half a million a year, but we'd all be having to haul on our hypocrite pants if we're going to get flustered over that shyte. Maybe Ms Bartoli's Ma would have been a tad upset, but 'unforgiveable'? I bet her Da has thought often enough that its a good job she makes a few lira on this tennis lark; sure 'tis the only way they're going to get the pizza-faced howler off their hands?

If I made comments like that in the workplace I would be sacked, no two ways about it.

Numbers wrote:

SerjeantWildgoose wrote:OK I'll give you the chubby Heather Watson dig - she's fecking lush.

But he did have a point about Bartoli.

Now I'll concede that I don't have an audience of 4 or 5 million and I'm not being paid half a million a year, but we'd all be having to haul on our hypocrite pants if we're going to get flustered over that shyte. Maybe Ms Bartoli's Ma would have been a tad upset, but 'unforgiveable'? I bet her Da has thought often enough that its a good job she makes a few lira on this tennis lark; sure 'tis the only way they're going to get the pizza-faced howler off their hands?

If I made comments like that in the workplace I would be sacked, no two ways about it.

Quite. What I say to my mates over a beer is very different to how I act in work.

Numbers wrote:If I made comments like that in the workplace I would be sacked, no two ways about it.

Hmmmm ... I may have to rethink my plans to go into public broadcasting!

Numbers wrote:

SerjeantWildgoose wrote:OK I'll give you the chubby Heather Watson dig - she's fecking lush.

But he did have a point about Bartoli.

Now I'll concede that I don't have an audience of 4 or 5 million and I'm not being paid half a million a year, but we'd all be having to haul on our hypocrite pants if we're going to get flustered over that shyte. Maybe Ms Bartoli's Ma would have been a tad upset, but 'unforgiveable'? I bet her Da has thought often enough that its a good job she makes a few lira on this tennis lark; sure 'tis the only way they're going to get the pizza-faced howler off their hands?

If I made comments like that in the workplace I would be sacked, no two ways about it.

They couldn't be very concerned about losing you if so, or maybe you've already racked up a good few issues in the past.

Sandydragon wrote:This who saga is about to get very messy with demands to sort out the equality gap now.

In many organisation with published pay scales, you could make a clear argument why a male presenter with 30 years experience is paid more than a female one with 10 for being on the same show. But I suspect the BBC doesn't operate like that for the 'talent'.

Expect more commentary on how tax payers fund this, future of the BBC license fee, etc, etc.

Me and her indoors was talking about this the other night. By only revealing the salary and crucially the number of roles they do within the year the list is only of limited value. Take Dan Walker who is on the list, for his breakfast show work he is paid the same as his female co-presenter but crucially he also does radio, the Olympics, and football focus. The one show presenters are in a similar boat.

There is an obvious gap that should be addressed but there are other factors that would be helpful to inform debate. Years experience is important, number of jobs at the BBC is important, what would difference in wage would be seen as "normal" for any role? It is unusual to see two members of staff paid exactly the same. There are a load of presenters paid from external companies (the bake off lot and top gear for example). Graham Norton gets hefty sum from the production company of his show, we may see his whole salary moved there and only his other BBC work included in the list.

In my experience on the whole men tend to be better negotiators.

SerjeantWildgoose wrote:Chlamydia Winklecunt is fecking awful. I am going to refuse to pay my license fee in protest at the pointless heifer being paid a penny more than the hoof up the blurt her blether deserves.

Awww.....I like her.
I don't know what show she does but I like her. She's a nice girl next door. She's 10x the woman of that Susannah bitchface who stars with Piers Moron.

I haven't actually looked at the list,.....how much does Laura Kunstfeatureberg get paid for her tragic apologies for the establishment..?.

canta_brian wrote:Lineker is paid vastly more than any other sports anchor. The next highest is Alan Shearer.

Shearer gets more than Alan Hansen...?. F*ck off.
Ah. Hansen retired..?.