hypochondriac

Maybe but it's either a version of that or a subscription model. Trying to be all things to all people hasn't been working and it needs reform wherever you stand on the BBC.

Who are the "usual suspects?" I couldn't give a monkeys how much it's watched.

And that's a valid point but it should not be beyond a task force of some kind to use a combination of surveys, data, experts etc to ascertain what a slimmed down BBC should concentrate on. Clearly not going to please everyone but I can see some pretty obvious things that use up a fair amount of resources and which it would be hard to argue for. You're right that relying solely on citizens assemblies would be a bad idea. That's kind of like extinction rebellion and their batty demands.

It's not a spelling error, but the messed up way that most Americans pronounce "buoy." it's buoy short for buoyancy numbnuts not "booee".

I think you have to be realistic about costs, do a plan for what the largest number of people would deem to be absolutely necessary and then concentrate on that and maybe diversify slightly into areas that are for the greater good even if they aren't as popular if you've got resources left over. Bit like the NHS really...

That's just scaremongering. No evidence of that at all so far.

You're right and it seems we agree. There needs to be a sensible discussion about what the BBC actually should be doing.

The point wasn't how far ahead we were from 18th, it was how close we were/are to 40 points. Even if we were on 31 right now, I'd absolutely back us to get 9 points from 11 games which will be more than enough to stay up. We weren't going down and your meltdown was embarrassing.

Lightweight. I'm off to bed...

No we can't. Not a chance will Bournemouth be catching us from this position. Also not a chance will all of Newcastle, Palace, Brighton, villa west ham and Watford get enough points to get above us. We need something like 4 points from 11 games to guarantee it which would be I think our worst form since promotion. Not going to happen. Safe, safe, safe.

It would have to take an absolutely epic collapse. We are safe and it will be confirmed in the next four or five games.

Smallbone looking good so far

Soggy are you suggesting that you aren't allowed to object to the concept of the license fee if you are currently viewing or using the BBC? I could love everything on the BBC and watch it avidly and still not want a license fee.

Why do you think that's some sort of gotcha? Everyone uses the BBC at the moment because everyone has to pay for it and there is no alternative to somethibg like match of the day. That wouldn't be the case if it was on commercial television. You're missing the fundamental point. I am prevented from watching any number of freeview channels that I may want to watch if I have not paid a fee to support an unrelated enterprise that I may not support or want anything to do with.

The point is that currently there is no option whether to pay for it or not. Its not about whether individuals who are currently forced to pay the license fee subsequently use the things they are paying for. I'd rather have the option not to pay for it and then I'll use websites other than bbc for my news and sport if necessary although it's possible I'd pay for the online sports coverage if that were an option.

Don't worry. You had the literal communist Ash Sarkar on to provide the right-on counter narrative.

"racist to the core." Blimey, I'd hate to inhabit this world that some of these loons live in. Imagine genuinely believing that about Britain in 2020. I almost feel sorry for you.

How is that relevant? You don't have to pay for sky in order to watch TV. I do have to pay the license fee even if I have no interest in watching anything paid for by the license fee.

No idea what you're talking about here. You don't HAVE to pay for the other channels that's the entire point. I wasn't selective at all, I have a lot of praise for what the BBC used to be but the BBC of the last decade is jot something I have an interest in paying for.

No sexy time makes you angry.

What gave you that idea? There's no reason that the match of the day format could not be replicated on terrestrial telly elsewhere.

That isn't what I said at all you've misunderstood. I mostly want the BBC to produce shows of value that would be difficult to produce elsewhere due to commercial pressure. Something like strictly come dancing is very entertaining to some people but it's incredibly similar to existing shows on commercial channels and there's no reason to spend license fee money on it when it can easily be produced elsewhere. The BBC should not be sticking reality TV on to compete with the likes of pop idol on itv or whatever they are showing. Similarly with the football. I happen to enjoy Match of the day but I fail to see how they can justify its existence on the BBC considering the cost. Comedy used to be a jewel in the Crown of the BBC on television but as I said, most classic BBC comedies are now decades old and that's just one example. There's loads of things on the BBC I wouldn't be interested in but I can absolutely see their value on a national broadcaster. There's also loads of stuff that shouldn't be on there. That all changes however if they move to a subscription model then they can do whatever they want really.

Who are you talking about when you say posters?

I'd give him an extended run too. Hopefully we are safe in the next five games and then we can play him regularly until the end of the season.

Where have I ever said that alternative broadcasters haven't produced poor programming? I have never said that. The difference is I'm not forced to pay a license fee to other broadcasters. I'm sure that certain factions think it's worthwhile to produce a show about exploring whiteness but I vehemently disagree and I resent the fact that I have even a small part to play in funding things like that. The sooner stuff like this is stopped the better.