Well, there's a difference between making an impromptu joke when somebody else uses a phrase and intentionally using a phrase to imply something. 'Build a bridge' is the standard phrase everybody uses in that context. There's simply not enough grounds to assume the intent was to imply "We're here to offend people and generally cause trouble". Because the bare fact is, they generally don't. Of all the trips and races they've done, how many of them have ended in much controversy? Two. The one that's a reference to - when the vast majority of people in the UK didn't even know the word they used had racist connotations anyway - and the Patagonia trip when the logic that is required to 'prove' they intended to cause offence is tortuous to say the least. Have they caused trouble in any of their races or trips across Europe? no. And let's be honest here, if there's one nation Clarkson would be happy to offend it's the French and they've gone through France pretty much every time s they certainly had the opportunity. Have they caused any trouble in the specials in Africa and Asia? No. In fact they've usually shown how welcoming and hospitable people around the world are.

The idea they go round the world specifically intending to rile people up for television purposes doesn't really stand up to rational analysis, frankly.

Oh, no, there's the trip to deep south of the US when they wrote slogans on the cars. That one is possibly the only example I can think of where they specifically went out of their way to do something they thought the locals wouldn't like. Which was more an attempt to get each other in trouble really and patently backfired on them. Since then I'd argue they've never done anything which would cause that kind of reaction intentionally.

I though that was all rather fun in a completely silly kind of way.

I thought this was possibly their most pointless episode yet, which even by their standards, is saying something!

The only bit that was mildly amusing was Clarkson in his "ambulance" being confronted with his patient's, erm, appendage! Nice to see Ricciardo doing his lap in the old car.

Richard Hammond’s patient delivery system at the end was predictable, but funny.

Is that still on? *walks off*

They are pretty doing it by the numbers now, with the occasional flash of hilarity.

Where was that abandoned village they were careering around in? We both suspect it’s either a military or police training property.

Did anyone else hear Hammond say to James that Ricciardo set that lap time on three consecutive laps?

Yeah, Hammond said he did three laps that were pretty much an identical time. That's F1 drivers for you - consistent as well as fast.

Not enough bullet holes for the military

Edit : from another forum it seems it was an army training range in Lydd.

Jezza to be beheaded


http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-31824040

I'm not sure why they aren't broadcasting the show this Sunday. What does it serve? It's not as if he's paid by appearances (and if rumours are true, he doesn't need the money anyway) and they haven't actually finished investigating what's happened yet according to the statement. Is it simply because some of the links are recorded just before filming- today for this weekend's show I think - and therefore he can't do them while suspended?

If it's just an attempt to pour cold water on the media bunfight that's about to start, I think there's pretty much no power on earth that will be able to stop it.

The drag race between the gt86 and the low drag thingy was a joke.

The gt86 is £30,000 ish.
The low drag thing is £840,000.

What's the point in doing that?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Slightly less. I put pretty much all the toys on mine and it didn't make £29,000. If you went for the most expensive paint job and paid for ludicrous and ugly decal stripes you might nudge £30K.


The low drag thing also had roughly twice the horsepower. The result of the race was never really in doubt.


It was a kind of 'meta joke'. They played it as a way for Clarkson to rant about how things were better in his day, when in fact anyone who knew it was able to realise he was actually being an idiot.

Did enjoy the Jag piece never the less and I do think the new MX-5 is in fact a very nice car indeed, looked a bit like the Type-F's junior brother. But the sad fact is you can't be a decent sized bloke and drive one and not look stupid. There's a very good reason they let Hammond do that one...

To illustrate that more money does not equal a faster car. You're buying something besides outright power (which, let's face it, for ~£30k you can step into something more pokey than a gt86).
I've no doubt the gt86 will make me smile for miles and miles, but I'd still rather own that Eagle. I think.
Oh bugger it, for £840,000 I'd have a garage full of cars that'll make me grin.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-31839677

Sadly for Clarkson, having the PM's backing usually means getting the sack