Jeremy Clarkson suspended over "fracas" with producer

As already mentioned in this thread Tony Hall has said...
"I have also asked her to look at how we put out the last programmes in the current series."
Ref: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-32054004

I guess a lot depends on whether on whether they can get Hammond & May into the studio and how much pre-incident footage is usable/complete. If there's enough unused material complete then theoretically they could link the items together with the Top Gear sting in the event that they're unable to film in the hanger with the remaining presenters.

^They also need to rebook the celebrity guests too.

Highly unlikely that they'd bother with Star in a Reasonably Priced Car without Clarkson, surely? That was *his* thing and I don't think I can remember an occasion where he didn't present it. I'm sure there was one time where he lost his voice and still did it!

Then again, what else can they fill the hour with? I'd be semi-surprised to see May and Hammond do the last ones without him, especially after May made a comment today about the three being a 'set' or something.

Would they remake the shows as an hour long show? Could it be condensed into just half an hour?

Its only 45 mins in the international market. News is cut which is 5-9mins, so an extra 6mins has to be cut...

Its a right mess mainly caused by Danny Cohens arrogance - sack him especially as he allegedly briefed against the corporation (Private Eye)

I think you'll13 0nn find its mainly caused by Clarkson physically attacking a fellow employee.

I think you will find that Cohen backed everyone into a corner by going public on what is an internal disciplinary matter.

I think, given the circumstances, the BBC has come out of this as well as can be expected. And I'll be interested to see how some sections of the press who usually adopt an anti-BBC line report this tomorrow.

I also thought Tony Hall came across well in his written statement. It was clear, succinct and devoid any management speak or obfuscation. It actually read like something he had written, rather than the words of a press officer.

With the outcome being what? The BBC brush it under the carpet and it finds its way out into the public in a year or so time and makes them look complicit. Or you keep him on the air whilst a serious investigation is ongoing? I can't understand how anyone can point fingers at others within the company, or blame the BBC themselves. Don't hit a member of your staff, simple.

This started out as a stupid thing to do and was deliberately exacerbated by Cohens action briefing the Mail & leaking to the press. All that rubbish comparing Clarkson to Saville. It backed the DG into a corner. Clarkson hit someone and it was wrong and should be punished. Cohen used this to push his own agenda and briefed against the corporation. That cant be tolerated either and he should go now.

Prove it.

The comparison to Saville was very relevant - the offence may be much less but in the real world it's one of the most serious misdemeanours you could commit at work and in most cases should be a sackable offence. The point is that the BBC cannot put the popularity of the talent or their commercial value above the need for them to conform to the most basic of expectations of an employee.

Think for a minute if the roles had been reversed - there is no way a producer would keep their job if they hit a presenter.