Crosswords0 min ago
Mccrirrick
Horrible, nasty creature...bleating about being encouraged to be sexist.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by ferlew. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.He was a contractor, his 'skill' is no longer requierd so its goodbye. He no doubt got paid vast sums(for what he did) whilst his face fitted so he should not be whinning now he is old hat and has no contract. This happens to many who work on contract.
//or not will depend on what's in his contract; as sandyRoe says, TV seldom gives jobs for life (though when they do, it's always to men). //
Not true is it? Think soaps for a simple start, plenty of 'old' women in them!
//or not will depend on what's in his contract; as sandyRoe says, TV seldom gives jobs for life (though when they do, it's always to men). //
Not true is it? Think soaps for a simple start, plenty of 'old' women in them!
my son used to work for an events company which once provided a bar service to the races at Newmarket. Mr McCririck demanded a tea, which the bar didn't sell, so he was directed to the caterers a bit further away. At that, he demanded to know if my son knew who he was (he didn't). The response was "I don't care who you are. we don't serve tea. go and see the caterers".
TV audiences do like 'characters', but characters have a shelf-life, and JM's time is up.
His eccentric persona was of its time, and C4 are looking for a slicker brand for the younger audience it wants to attract.
For that reason, contrary to his perception that he was 'sacked' - his contract was not renewed, which is not the same thing.
Channel 4 can, and will defend his lack of contract renewal by saying that they wanted a new look and format, and that will be accepted - there is no rule in employment law that says a pundit has to be retained if the company do not wish to continue to renew his contract of employment.
So Mr Mccrirrick is on a loser here - he is fighting his case on the grounds of age, Channel 4 can argue, perfectly reasonably, that his age was not the issue, and therefore their defence will be solid.
As far as Mr Mccririck's claim that beneath his chosen personna he is a top racing journalist, that is withouot doubt true, but again, that is not the issue under debate.
I loved him on TV - lots didn't, but either way, his style is not a fit for Cahhenl 4 in 2012, and that is why he has been dropped.
Shame - but fighting, and losing a fortune in the process, is not a clever way to proceed.
His eccentric persona was of its time, and C4 are looking for a slicker brand for the younger audience it wants to attract.
For that reason, contrary to his perception that he was 'sacked' - his contract was not renewed, which is not the same thing.
Channel 4 can, and will defend his lack of contract renewal by saying that they wanted a new look and format, and that will be accepted - there is no rule in employment law that says a pundit has to be retained if the company do not wish to continue to renew his contract of employment.
So Mr Mccrirrick is on a loser here - he is fighting his case on the grounds of age, Channel 4 can argue, perfectly reasonably, that his age was not the issue, and therefore their defence will be solid.
As far as Mr Mccririck's claim that beneath his chosen personna he is a top racing journalist, that is withouot doubt true, but again, that is not the issue under debate.
I loved him on TV - lots didn't, but either way, his style is not a fit for Cahhenl 4 in 2012, and that is why he has been dropped.
Shame - but fighting, and losing a fortune in the process, is not a clever way to proceed.
-- answer removed --
-- answer removed --
I do feel a bit sorry for JM - the security of a long-term contract has unfortunately inured him to the fact that it is just that - a contract - which can have its renewal clause unexercised if the employer so wishes - as has happened.
Like a lot of older people who is without his regular work ethic, he is finding adjustment difficult - but lashing out at his ex-employers in court is not going to help in any way - it makes him look boorish and petulant, the 'image' which has been deemed as anachronistic in the first place.
Like a lot of older people who is without his regular work ethic, he is finding adjustment difficult - but lashing out at his ex-employers in court is not going to help in any way - it makes him look boorish and petulant, the 'image' which has been deemed as anachronistic in the first place.
I got a taxi to work one day when it was the Ebor race meeting in York. The taxi driver mentioned that he was booked to pick up Mccrirrick from the station that day. I said I thought he was ghastly, the taxi driver said he had picked him up several times and he was actually one of the nicest, most generous people he'd met.
craft - we live in an age of media manipulation.
TV shows abound where editing will show a partoicular aspect of someone's character and infer that it is their entire character - and I am sure this applies to big Brother as much as anywhere else.
JM was hate bait in the BB house, and again on the swap show he did, but I am sure he was under no illusions about that.
However, to assume that the TV personna is the same as the man is like giving Stev McFadden a punch in the face if you see him in the street, because Phil Mitchell is a twenty-four carrat knob-head.
TV shows abound where editing will show a partoicular aspect of someone's character and infer that it is their entire character - and I am sure this applies to big Brother as much as anywhere else.
JM was hate bait in the BB house, and again on the swap show he did, but I am sure he was under no illusions about that.
However, to assume that the TV personna is the same as the man is like giving Stev McFadden a punch in the face if you see him in the street, because Phil Mitchell is a twenty-four carrat knob-head.