I seriously hope Clarkson, Hammond and May's Amazon show is half-decent
I've never actually heard of anyone getting car sick while DRIVING. I've thought it was just something you got if you were reading in a car or sat in the back-seat and couldn't observe the moving road and scenery swishing past.
>sense of humour
Top Gear was old & tired a fucking decade ago. Finding anything funny in the overly scripted, heavy handed, hackneyed antics of a decrepit old man & his two sycophants is deeply sad.
I don't drive myself, so I can't say, but I got car sick as a kid no matter what.
I find it's the combination of car smells and motion that even to this day gives me a headache in some cars.
It's not like the reviews matter though, is it?
>this car doesn't have a boot, you can't fit into it unless you cut your legs off at the knees, which it will do for you the first time you swerve off the road thanks to its terrible handling, and it's actually slower than this other car that has all those things...
>But it goes vrrooooom when I press the pedal and I get a boner from this vroom that I don't get from the other vroooms, so this is definitely the best car in the
horrible show for britshits go get cucked and watch some more garbage
'Evans was forced to make a hurried exit from an Audi R8 V10, which was being driven at the Mazda Raceway track in Monterey by co-star Sabine Schmitz, in order to be sick.'
I'd throw up too if that mess was driving.
Imagine the type of person who has the money to throw on the supercars they had on, and who's actually dumb enough to buy a car based on Clarkson's review. How could you not be disgusted if meeting them?
Not when I'm the only person with the headache.
Cars with AC are the worst and some air fresheners just make it worse.
Also the bus smell of dust, sweat and moisture. Even thinking about makes me uncomfortable.
>mfw it's actually a stunt in the show where one of them drives the car and tries to make the other one sick, and this is just some stupid marketing stunt
Kind of surprised they haven't already done that with Clarkson or Hammond trying to make captain slow sick. They were never in the same car, were they?
toplel, the crew laugh at him
I'd actually watch that just to see Evans go through the same nausea I feel whenever he invades my tv screen. not a fan.
Nah, don't think they could stand being driven around by each other.
>aww poor diddums, need mummy to rub ya tummy? Wankah!
>Sure the Audi R8 is a triumph of German engineering, a precision instrument... excuse me...
>...a precision instrument...
>...*ahem*... a precision instrument and work of superior craftsmanship, beautifully put together and an absolute dream to drive, but...
>...but as magical...
>...but as magical a machine as it is, it is a boy's toy. The Audi R8 is an immoral thing because it is an instrument of patriarchy. Anyone who drives...
>...anyone who drives an R8 is simply put, a rapist. Now over to Chingchong Nipnong who is reviewing the much better, Kenyan-built zero-emissions automobile. Chingchong:
>Thanks Chris. This is the Kenyan BK01. Yes I know what you're all thinking, it doesn't look very stylish, and it looks slow, like it will go from 0-100 in 10 minutes. And yes, technically it's a wooden bicycle. But me and my co-hosts believe this is the car of the future. And we want to prove it to you with a test lap from our special driver. Some say ix was aware of your privilege since ix was born.
>Some say ix was born driving.
>All we know is that ix called 'The Stig'.
Something about Sabine Schmitz makes me hard as a rock.
>replacing the three white men with a ginger manlet beta, a woman and a shitskin
Does anyone know if Amazon Gear will feature the Stig?
>BBC have literally hired this Islamist mud for Top Gear to shill for diversity
why does the BBC hate white men so much brahs
>it's a BBC exec in charge of putting together the new show realizes what a horrible mistake he's made and ponders suicide episode
Why is he so rubbish?
(Like actually rubbish, not scripted for a laugh rubbish.)
He's actually one of the more docile, human looking ones.
Boicott this shit. I hope it drops hard. (kek.)
It's already fucked. That's a fact.
Top Gear in all forms was mainly hosted by journalists and professional broadcasters.
Sabine is neither and English isn't even her first language.
She couldn't host a wanking contest. She's fine for the guest woman role once a series.
The Stig was the nickname any new boy at the school Wilman and Clarkson attended together.
Using that without Wilman and Clarkson is fuckjgn crazy but at the same time the BBC have no choice as the Stig is literally a Top Gear trademark.
This is all hilarious.
>FINALLY WE CAN PUSH FOR OUR NEW PC TOP GEAR HUZZAH!
>ginger,woman,muslim? looks middle eastern
>production team know NOTHING about cars
>insufferable evans cant even drive and talk
DEAD ON ARRIVAL
only reason to watch this show
Why in the world are they bothering to reboot Top Gear anyway?
There's absolutely no new audience to gain, the brand is tied to Clarkson, Hammond and May and that won't change in people's minds.
It will get shunned no matter what.
Why change the format when they already have several other motorsport shows already?
This reboot is obviously motivated by a personal vendetta, not a business decision at all.
I think they were stupid enough to think Hammond and May would stay and they would get rid of Clarkson.
Reminder: Clarkson was not dismissed, they just didn't offer him a new contract.
People acting like Clarkson wasn't actually paid by the BBC to act like a comedy cunt on TV and that this act led to Top Gear being the most successful show internationally that the BBC ever made.
350million viewers worldwide.
>'Evans was forced to make a hurried exit from an Audi R8 V10, which was being driven at the Mazda Raceway track in Monterey by co-star Sabine Schmitz, in order to be sick.'
HAHAHA WHAT A FAGGOT!!!!
Oisin then tries to start a civil case against Clarkson after having 6 months off work on full pay.
starts another civil law suit after Clarkson signed £40m deal.
the guy IS a LAZY IRISH CUNT
It's actually various flavors of /b/. Which is to say, racism and autism in a constant struggle for dominance, with various "interests" to be filtered through this perverse gaze.
>This reboot is obviously motivated by a personal vendetta, not a business decision at all.
It's a political agenda.
The faggots, non-threatening castrated submissive beta males, and feminists have infiltrated and corrupted the media over the past few decades, and now they're trying to push their pretentious view of the world on the rest of us.
PLEASE tell me the gang are going to banter him for that and for not being able to drive while talking
I like Sabine, but I can't really see her being a popular presenter, especially with her accent. She also needs someone to banter with, Clarkson was the perfect foil, but I can't see that same partnership with Evans.
Finally got around to watching s22, took forever to show up online. Sad to see it go.
Why has there been no preview of what they are doing for Amazon yet? Haven't they been working on it since October or something?
sabine is literally the only decent host.
They should can the other two and try again. Probably the fuckers that do the magazine, at least they're into cars and technically in the brand already.
They didn't used to show previews for Top Gear until a few weeks before it would air so I can imagine they're doing the same. Or they could be waiting for the beeb to make their move first.
They don't even have a release date for Amazon yet though. At least they say that whatever the BBC thing is will be coming back in May.
There is almost no information about the Amazon thing other than they have 160 million pounds to make it with.
I vaguely remember Clarkson thanking Evans for letting slip the broadcast date for the new TG and said they will show a 'taster' around the same time (May). The show is due in September though.
the police have no choice but to prosecute if there has been a verified crime committed
Do you think ANY police force in the country would have wanted the press saying they 'let Clarkson off'?
No chance in hell.
Apparently this just came out today.
>comes out fall, maybe as late as november
>will be 4k
>£160 million to produce the whole thing
>3 series of 12 episodes each, once a week
>filmed around the world so no set studio
mite be cool
I don't know where you live, but the law doesn't work that way in the UK, especially for minor crimes like disturbing the peace and drunken punch-ups. If the victim doesn't want to press charges, then there is little the police or Crown prosecution can do other than investigate and report it. The police have released statements that they have investigated the incident, twice, but as I said, they can't do anything other than investigate it if the victim does not want to pursue it further, which he doesn't. The Paddy was more interested in suing for money than seeing Clarkson get community service.
The myth that an alleged victim can “drop the charges” probably stems from too many crime television shows where a plot twist occurs when the victim “drops the charges.” In Idaho the truth of the matter is it is not the “victim” that files the charges and it is not the “victim” that “drops the charges”.
A complaining witness can file a complaint with the the proper authorities, such as a police officer. The law enforcement agency then takes the complaint and files it with the prosecuting attorney’s office. The prosecuting attorney’s office then reviews the complaint and makes a determination whether to file charges, and what type of charges to file. It is the prosecuting attorney who then files the charges with the court. The court then makes an initial finding of probable cause, and then either issues a warrant for the defendant to be arrested, or a “summons” that orders the defendant to appear in court.
Since it is the prosecuting attorney who files the charges, the only person who can “drop the charges” is the prosecuting attorney. As you can imagine, if the prosecuting attorney already made a determination to file the charges, they are not frequently persuaded to then subsequently drop the charges, as alleged victims so frequently try to do.
The prosecuting attorney does have the discretion to file a motion to dismiss the case, and the judge will dismiss the case upon such motion, but it is not common for a prosecuting attorney to be persuaded to dismiss their case. Generally prosecuting attorneys will file a motion to dismiss a case when they subsequently become convinced that the evidence is unreliable, or that there is a fundamental failure in the case to prove the elements of the charge, or if there is a plea agreement that results in the defendant pleading guilty to some charges, and the prosecuting attorney dismissing the others.
On the other hand, when a complaining witness no longer wishes to pursue a case, the prosecuting attorney will often take this into consideration when deciding whether to take a case to trial, to plead it out, or straight out dismiss it. This is especially true when it doesn’t appear that the complaining witness is someone who needs to be protected, such as in a property crime case. If the property owner no longer desires that someone be prosecuted for trespass, then the prosecuting attorney may have no desire to continue to prosecute the defendant. On the other hand, if it is a domestic violence case for example, and it is the wife of the defendant that no longer wishes to press charges, then her desire for the defendant to be prosecuted may not be relevant to the prosecution’s will to prosecute. Although it may still be relevant to what time of plea agreement the prosecutor is willing to extend to the defendant.
Most cases, especially domestic violence cases, are not even the result of a complaint being filed by a victim. Quite frequently the alleged victim does not desire that charges be pressed in the first place, but the police file a complaint with the prosecuting attorney anyway. This is a perfectly legitimate means of starting a criminal prosecution. It is not required that a victim file a complaint for criminal charges to be pressed against a defendant
>people are still trying to claim clarkson didn't punch anyone
Jeremy Clarkson has been in the news a lot recently for punching his producer and, as a consequence, getting sacked from his role as presenter of Top Gear (a popular television show about cars apparently).
On 27th March 2015 it was announced that there would not be any criminal charges pursued against Mr Clarkson. This is, in the circumstances, probably pretty sensible (not always the hallmark of the CPS it has to be said) – where is the public interest in a prosecution?
But one thing needs to be addressed. The headline in the Guardian read “Top Gear producer Oisin Tymon will not press charges against Jeremy Clarkson”. This is a common misconception – that it is up to the complainant in a case as to whether there will be a prosecution.
Often, of course, it is straightforward. A person feels that they are the victim of a criminal act and report it to the police. The police then investigate and charge the suspect. Although this is common, it is important to remember that the police (and the CPS) are not the lawyers for the victim.
Firstly, the police have to make an investigation before the CPS decides whether someone should be charged. There is a specific test that has to be passed (set out in the Code for Crown Prosecutors) which requires both that there is sufficient evidence to ensure a realistic prospect of conviction and that there is a public interest in prosecuting.
If these aren’t met, then that is the end of it – no prosecution by the CPS (whether the CPS always apply this test, and apply it correctly, is a matter of some dispute). The complainant can start a private prosecution, but of course they will have to pay for it.
This cuts the other way though. Every case brought by the CPS will be called R v Jones. R stands for ‘Regina’, Latin for ‘Queen’. She actually isn’t involved of course, even the most ardent royalist would struggle to defend everything done in her name.
Anyway, this is to indicate that the prosecution is brought on behalf of the public, due to the harm done to the public. Sometimes this will be clear – possession of drugs, as an example, where there may be no actual victim.
But even where the allegation is an assault, although we speak of the ‘victim’ as the person who got punched, the perpetrator is actually being prosecuted and punished for the damage done to society as a whole. Many victims don’t understand this and see the prosecutor at court as ‘their lawyer’, but this isn’t right.
One consequence is that it is not up to the victim whether or not a case proceeds. Although the wishes of the victim will be taken in to account, the CPS will frequently ignore the wishes of the victim that the case is dropped.
Although this seems wrong, it does make sense when you think about it. As an example, there are often pressures put on a victim to ‘drop’ a case and if they had complete control over whether a case proceeded, this would increase.
For this reason, victims who are reluctant to attend court can and are arrested to ensure that they give evidence. Although it does raise issues over the autonomy of victims, it can be seen why this is necessary.
So, the Guardian is not right to say that the case was not proceeded with because Mr Tymon did not wish it to do so. The fact that he did not is something that would have been taken into account, but would not be determinative.
>qt brit slags will never laugh at you for being a soft cunt
I HATE that Jeremy Clarkson thrusted coffee at that guy. That is bitchy DIVA shit. He should always have to think about why he lost a gig for being a fag like that.
But! You guys are right, BBC is retarded. And it's really too bad.
but you only buy a supercar for the feeling you get when it goes VROOOM, which is worth a lot of money to some people. They're not for getting from A to B in the most practical manner.
When it comes to normal cars, they're all reasonably similar in that you get wheels, seats and controls. Some have slightly comfier seats, others have more luggage space, others have better infotainment, but none of those things would be a dealbreaker to me, while I'd be very reluctant to buy a totally joyless car.
>BBC is retarded.
What could they do though. Jezza's actions and admission pretty much made the decision for them. There's only so much shit they can defend and overlook. Smacking someone is the final straw and the actions of a man who thinks the rules do not apply to him, probably due to avoiding any consequences for his actions for so long.
If the victim doesn't want to testify the charges are effectively dropped even if technically they should keep going. If the victim doesn't agree to turn up in court there's not much of a case to answer.
Unless it's murder, obvs.
>But! You guys are right, BBC is retarded. And it's really too bad.
Nah, he assaulted his boss on top of all his other shit. You can't let that shit fly otherwise he would have had the BBC's balls in a vice till the end of time. It fucking sucks that it happened but they had to stand up for themselves.
No mater how trivial you personally find them, the society we live in will complain, and as a publicly-funded broadcaster, the BBC has a duty to acknowledge and respond. They've stood by him for years and defended his behaviour. He then went and essentially challenged them to sack him, which they had no choice but to.
>Some say he infringes on BBC intellectual property laws
>All we know is he's called the Stog
>the same cunts probably complain about every other programme on tv
They do. Ever watched Points of View? Faggots complaining about two weeks of tennis on the BBC. Faggots complaining about bright lights in news studios. Faggots complaining that female TV hosts are showing too much chest.
>>does everything in its power to destroy it
Clarkson has done a lot of shit that would get normal people fired, but he's given immense leeway due to him being respectable and fan attracting. They just went full panic mode with the fight, then went into DEFCON mode when Hammond and May left with him to amazon, and now on suicide watch when others don't want to touch the project.
Just fuckup after fuckup.
>not owning prime just because of the shipping benefits
Amazon is shit unless you're rich as fuck and buy tons of blurays, games and technology all the time. ebay is much better for used goods.
>You get to see actual pictures of the exact item you're buying
>Before you even click anything they tell you what postage will cost and where they ship to
>You get to see if the seller is someone trustworthy and hear from previous customers
It's just such a better site for buying stuff on, Amazon gets better deals on new stuff but for used goods ebay is king and there's fuck all reason to get Amazon Prime unless you buy tons of new shit all the time.
>70 quid a year to watch Top Gear
Dude Topgear fucking BLEW UP crazy on streaming websites. So much so on netflix (which is ~$96 a year) that Hulu bought the rights to stream it.
Anyone who's into topgear will have get it and streamfags will probably already have prime to begin with since netflix + prime is still cheaper than cable (not sure about you bongs though)
>buying used from nobodies on amazon
i agree but literally nobody does this
>Evans already crashed a Jaguar and now this
It sure is awesome if the state forces the people to pay for your show, no matter how shit it is.
>get harrassed by your own gubment
>HAH I REALLY SHOWED THEM
you lads are hilarious
>Tv man says he'll call the police
>Call his bluff
>He walks back to his van and drives off
Even if they do call the police they never turn up, the police hate the tv licence men as much as the rest of us.
Whats so wrong about punching someone? He is a dude, have you never punched anyone in your life, even some cunt who didnt deserve it?
If the other dude was an actual man, he would have punched jeremy back, not cry and hide like a little bitch and then tell on him with his mothers husband
>If the other dude was an actual man, he would have punched jeremy back, not cry and hide like a little bitch and then tell on him with his mothers husband
The other dude didn't tell. He went to the hospital to get checked out and in the meantime everyone who saw it happen went around gossiping. Clarkson was drunk and so was the other guy and they had a punch up, the guy who got hit didn't cause the sackings the BBC was just looking for an excuse.
Those aren't real officers and the warrant isn't signed, the general public doesn't know the difference and so falls for this stuff.
I had a mate who was a TV license knob for 2 years.
Their reviews are shit.
The drive cars I will never get my hands on. Their reviews of average joe price cars are mostly jokes. information about how the ride feels and handles can be questionable, because that has an element of personal taste, but if it's horrible to drive they are generally blunt about it. They at least point out common flaws and fuck ups with some models. There's a fair amount of 'hybrids/electric is a joke and bad', they don't touch 4WD/off road + modification much, they don't really talk about modifications at all really.
In the end it's just 3 idiots having fun with ever escalating shenanigans and cars as a the vehicle to the fun. Sometimes I wish they did away witht eh car reviewing pretext and just gave them loads of cash to do stupid shit for 12 episodes a year + a special where they travel the world. The cameramen doing all that shit was great.
>tfw no Top Gear/Moaning of Life crossover show