|
Post by Chris W on Mar 5, 2012 22:30:18 GMT
Just to flag that we have already had one locked post/thread regarding the discussion this evening... we don't want to have another... The issue of one-unders/fatalities is a very emotive subject, so I'd like to ask members to use their discretion/common sense when discussing this episode. Many thanks ChrisW
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 5, 2012 23:15:52 GMT
Hi,
Just saw this thread and now understand why my thread was locked... well, sort of. I understand at least that it was for some legal reason.
would have been nice if you'd said taht on my thread, if I hadn't looked at this after I wouldn't have known!
I also think I should point out: what you, chris w, are calling common sense, simply isn't that to peopel like me, and it's not cause I am some sort of cretin with no common sense - it's that I don't have the specialist knowledge you do and I still honestly dunno what I can and cannot discuss
|
|
Phil
In memoriam
RIP 23-Oct-2018
Posts: 9,473
|
Post by Phil on Mar 5, 2012 23:27:44 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 6, 2012 0:04:44 GMT
I getcha Phil, but from my perspective I was/am discussing the restrictions, not the incidents themselves. I've no interest in the incidents whatsoever - I'm just interested in why there was all the blurring of station names and so on - and to be honest I still don't know why. I'm pretty certain the one under-ness has to do with it, and the fact you mentioned court cases were still ongoing actually pretty much gives me a good reason not to discuss it online. But it ain't easy to understand when one doesn't know what's going on Anyway, thanks for your moderation - some other forums I'm on I'd be building up "infraction points" and other rubbish! I think you've got the right balance here
|
|
|
Post by citysig on Mar 6, 2012 0:14:53 GMT
Basically, the blurring is to prevent certain people adding 2 and 2 and coming up with 5. Given the fairly recent nature of the filming, some of the scenes depicted could still upset those closest to the incident, and could also give too detailed a picture of the events in hand.
If someone knows that an event happened on x day at y station, then so be it, but it doesn't need widely addressing. The programme attempted to handle the whole subject in a tactful manner, and so here we also will do so. To address why the makers of the programme chose to blur some details and omit others, would be to make a mockery of the producer's efforts. A fare evader was also blurred during the programme, and because it is familiar to everyone why such techniques are used, I doubt the same questioning will apply.
|
|
|
Post by adehare2012 on Mar 6, 2012 6:58:49 GMT
I agree with the fact that last night's episode was very thought provoking and it was handled tactfully. I don't hav ethe luxury of seeing which stations were involved with the incidents, so I'm hopefully not going to get moderated. BUT, I doan't get what cases are still ongoing. Surely with these sad incidents, if they are not suspicious, then what cases could lead to legal problems. Sorry if that's a daft question, and if its better to not say on here, then so be it, was just wondering. Well done to all the staff and controllers who dealt with all those crowds at the Notting Hill Carnival as well. Sounds like it was busy but a good weekend
|
|
Phil
In memoriam
RIP 23-Oct-2018
Posts: 9,473
|
Post by Phil on Mar 6, 2012 9:55:01 GMT
BUT, I doan't get what cases are still ongoing. Surely with these sad incidents, if they are not suspicious, then what cases could lead to legal problems. Sorry if that's a daft question, and if its better to not say on here, then so be it, was just wondering. It's a coroner, and ONLY a coroner who can close a case, and in this instance he has not closed it yet........ As you say, very confusing to us, but legally it's quite simple; the coroner has adjourned the case for reasons which we mortals are deemed not to need to know .
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 6, 2012 10:08:54 GMT
On last night's episode of The Tube:
We begin with a driver inside a Picc. line depot inside a 1973 stock.
We then cut to the outside of the depot, where all of the trains have mysteriously morphed into 2009 stocks.
Hmmm...
|
|
|
Post by citysig on Mar 6, 2012 10:21:48 GMT
Only the picky will notice such things - yes I'm sure there are many of us on here just as picky. However, at no point did they actually claim the train and depot were linked (though of course, I grant you that to the average viewer it was suggested ;D )
|
|
Oracle
In memoriam
RIP 2012
Writing is such sweet sorrow: like heck it is!
Posts: 3,234
|
Post by Oracle on Mar 6, 2012 10:27:11 GMT
Very interesting...I watched in iplayer. My late grandfather was a P/way Ganger Foreman from around 1930 to 1942ish as I have said before, and had to deal with incidents such as that. I thought that the producers had tackled the subject very sympathetically to all parties.
My query is what was the location for the two-road brick shed? Was it Queens Park South Shed?
|
|
|
Post by 21146 on Mar 6, 2012 11:46:05 GMT
Given the rules concerning potential contempt of court. Let's just say that if a "hypothetical" death should occur at a "hypothetical" LU station and the aftermath be filmed, and that the Coroner's Inquest had not taken place by the time post-production had finished (not by the time of planned transmission), then it may be decided prudent not to identify the "hypothetical" station. The Inquest may indeed have taken place by the time of broadcast, but that would not necessarily be known at the time of editing. Certainly, in some cases, station locations were clearly identified last night and/or referred to. All "hypothetical" of course!
|
|
Chris M
Global Moderator
Forum Quizmaster
Always happy to receive quiz ideas and pictures by email or PM
Posts: 19,425
|
Post by Chris M on Mar 6, 2012 12:06:30 GMT
Indeed it's very different talking about an incident that happened recently and an incident that happened several years ago. In the latter case all the legal proceedings have finished and so there is nothing to prejudice.
The way this series has been produced has been a very good example of responsible and sensitive documentary making. By showing that it can be done there should be even less of an excuse for sensationalist programs such as the Channel 4 program apparently was (I've not seen it).
|
|
Phil
In memoriam
RIP 23-Oct-2018
Posts: 9,473
|
Post by Phil on Mar 6, 2012 12:35:33 GMT
less of an excuse for sensationalist programs such as the Channel 4 program apparently was (I've not seen it). But they always are (C4). I was amazed on Sunday to hear a food "expert" (doctor etc.,) blithely inform the viewers that "of course, all jars of peanut butter have the remains of at least 50 insects in them". Responsible? How then does a vegan parent explain to a vegan child that all such jars of peanut butter have the 'suitable for vegans' logo in large size on the side? C4 is very good at presenting "facts" (many of them not totally true at that) without ever considering the consequences; viz the ridiculous stunt to hijack a nuclear waste train. Proved nothing apart from the producer being an absolute prat but scared an awful lot of viewers who didn't appreciate the absurd outcome that would arise (the hijackers being killed as soon as they tried to open it). Back round the circle (sorry!!) to the BeeB and they are proving precisely the opposite with this series - sensitive and honest. Congratulations to them - may the rest of the series be as good as so far.
|
|
|
Post by dagdave on Mar 6, 2012 13:16:31 GMT
Did anyone think that the BTP were a bit over zealous in stopping the drunk man travelling home. Yes, he was drunk but he was walking around and having a reasonable discussion with the officers. He realised he had drunk too much so had left his mates to go home to his missus. Quite what they expected him to do was not clear.
|
|
|
Post by trt on Mar 6, 2012 13:40:31 GMT
Quite what they expected him to do was not clear. I thought it was quite clear. Go and get some fresh air and a coffee, have a sit down for half an hour, then come back. It didn't seem to be getting close to lamping out time.
|
|
kabsonline
Best SSL Train: S Stock Best Tube Train: 92 Stock
Posts: 686
|
Post by kabsonline on Mar 6, 2012 13:40:35 GMT
Interesting episode once again! I thought that the subjects handled last night were handled in an informative yet sensitive way. Well done BBC 2!
|
|
Oracle
In memoriam
RIP 2012
Writing is such sweet sorrow: like heck it is!
Posts: 3,234
|
Post by Oracle on Mar 6, 2012 13:49:46 GMT
As the lady officer said, they ddn't want the drunko wandering around and falling on the tracks, etc. or words to that effect.
|
|
|
Post by londonstuff on Mar 6, 2012 14:37:00 GMT
+1 I thought it was more than clear. The way he was slurring his speech and left without his phone shows he was incapable of acting for his own safety. It wasn't you, was it Dagdave ;D Quite what they expected him to do was not clear. I thought it was quite clear. Go and get some fresh air and a coffee, have a sit down for half an hour, then come back. It didn't seem to be getting close to lamping out time.
|
|
|
Post by auxsetreq on Mar 6, 2012 15:25:53 GMT
The continuity on this show is dreadful. But so long as you know what is what, then it doesn't really matter. It's good that it's educating your average Evening Stinkard, aka The Wooden Spoon, reader into seeing something a little more real than the made up stories and subsequent outraged editorials.....................
........but, but, but..................Yet again, we have the playing up to the cameras phenomenon. Utter utter daftness was coming from many of those on screen. If there was a daftness knob then it was cranked up to the max for Mr Piccadilly Line driver. He was coming out with such silly comments I ended putting my fingers in my ears. It was only when Ceiling Cat later told me what he had said that I decided to go an lie in a darkened room. "The Central Line is a librarian" Among the many other silly things he came out with apparently...........
.................. So for my Piccadilly Line colleague I'm gonna quote the poacher from Withnail And I - "You need working on boy!" Listen my dear work mate. I know a good head doctor and Ceiling Cat said I should cancel my next appointments so you can take my place for some intensive treatment. It doesn't hurt that much. A rubber bung between the gnashers and a thousand volts across the temples from the wet sponge electrodes..............
Even Howard Collins was acting all silly and larging it with his Bull-brown stuff-Horn for the cameras. Giving the weather forecast for next years carnival to to the bombed out brains of the throng. Strange he can talk to them, but he can't say a nice word, or stand up to the lies of the Wooded Spoon on behalf of his over stretched staff................
All in all a mixed bag last night. Bad continuity, even dafter comments than week one juxtaposing the eye opening and sad scenes of the Emergency Response guys...........
|
|
|
Post by adehare2012 on Mar 6, 2012 15:54:12 GMT
BUT, I doan't get what cases are still ongoing. Surely with these sad incidents, if they are not suspicious, then what cases could lead to legal problems. Sorry if that's a daft question, and if its better to not say on here, then so be it, was just wondering. It's a coroner, and ONLY a coroner who can close a case, and in this instance he has not closed it yet........ As you say, very confusing to us, but legally it's quite simple; the coroner has adjourned the case for reasons which we mortals are deemed not to need to know . Thanks Phil, I understand now why they had to be so careful in whawt they did and didn't show. It may not have been obvious to a lot of people, but I heard some announcements which gave the game away pretty quickly, however, I shall say no more so as not to say anything I shouldn't. Whatever else, last night's show was very well done. Yes the Notting Hill Carnival bit showed people going over the top, but isn't that what Carnival is all about. However, the BBC did do a very good job when it came to handling the more sensitive issues of the show. Everybody involved in the production should be congratulated and lets hope that the drivers, station staff and controllers get a bit more understanding when things go wrong
|
|
|
Post by dagdave on Mar 6, 2012 18:07:38 GMT
Quite what they expected him to do was not clear. I thought it was quite clear. Go and get some fresh air and a coffee, have a sit down for half an hour, then come back. It didn't seem to be getting close to lamping out time. I was sober as a judge watching it and I thought he was no worse than the average Friday night traveller.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 6, 2012 20:07:33 GMT
With regard to the police stopping the drunk from travelling there is a strong element of welfare to it. Once you come into contact with the police, the police have a responsibility for your welfare. Therefore as someone has correctly pointed out if that person had been allowed to continue and an incident had happened that had caused that drunk to suffer harm the police could be deemed to be responsible, hence why they also contacted the drunks girlfriend. The officer concerned had to act in a manner that places the persons welfare at the forefront even if at the time it may seem they acted harshly.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 6, 2012 20:28:25 GMT
The drunk guy was Paraletic whatever that is according to his girlfriend on the phone! That must have played a role in why he wasnt allowed home!
Contrary to Auxy, I found Piccdilly driver quite funny!
|
|
metman
Global Moderator
5056 05/12/1961-23/04/2012 RIP
Posts: 7,400
|
Post by metman on Mar 6, 2012 23:29:42 GMT
Same, Mrs Metman found him very funny. I was more interested in the work done by the sole 1973ts car pulling the rest of the train out of Northfields. Great to see the 1960ts in shot too.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 6, 2012 23:45:08 GMT
Same, Mrs Metman found him very funny. I was more interested in the work done by the sole 1973ts car pulling the rest of the train out of Northfields. Great to see the 1960ts in shot too. I think the bit about one car pulling the rest out was because maybe the front car was on the juice but the rest of the train wasnt yet?
|
|
|
Post by 21146 on Mar 7, 2012 0:09:43 GMT
Frankly, the Piccadilly Line T/Op, and Bakerloo Line CSA, were plain embarrassing.
Even the Bakerloo Line lady T/Op was borderline, do ordinary travellers or even tourists want to hear her homespun wisdom?
You don't see many documentaries on the emergency services played out in this way.
Instead this type of series seems to focus on "eccentrics", normally as camp as possible (think Jeremy of Airline or that guy in Hotel [Liverpool] "cooook, won'cha!!!").
Howard C as LUL boss? Erm, there's a person higher (MB), and not seen on cam yet either.
So far 60% good, but too many attention-seekers allowed to dominate the screen-time.
|
|
metman
Global Moderator
5056 05/12/1961-23/04/2012 RIP
Posts: 7,400
|
Post by metman on Mar 7, 2012 7:40:40 GMT
Same, Mrs Metman found him very funny. I was more interested in the work done by the sole 1973ts car pulling the rest of the train out of Northfields. Great to see the 1960ts in shot too. I think the bit about one car pulling the rest out was because maybe the front car was on the juice but the rest of the train wasnt yet? That's exactly what it was, but it was still interesting to see and hear the motors trying to pull the 6 cars out the shed. The noise changed quickly as the rest of the train got on the juice!
|
|
|
Post by citysig on Mar 7, 2012 8:18:55 GMT
So far 60% good, but too many attention-seekers allowed to dominate the screen-time. I wasn't on screen that long ;D Seriously though, wouldn't you given the chance? Often this crew turned up out of the blue. Put yourself in the position that you want to try and demonstrate what you do, and try and demonstrate how hard it is - and nothing happens. The desire to look good sometimes ends up with the person looking a little strange. Had the incident not happened on my shift, we would have had a few minutes of us making small talk, and no doubt similarly embarrassing quotes would have been evident. There was certainly a chunk of conversation I am very happy they cut out.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 7, 2012 10:07:33 GMT
A very interesting episode, which showed more of the track incidents than I expected. As someone who's best friend was killed under a train (not on the Underground though) it was quite moving to see the operational side of things. However, I thought it was odd that they blurred the station signs when it was clear to anyone who travels in London which station they were at, but they didn't blur the very prominent platform adverts.
|
|
|
Post by 21146 on Mar 7, 2012 11:35:33 GMT
So far 60% good, but too many attention-seekers allowed to dominate the screen-time. I wasn't on screen that long ;D Seriously though, wouldn't you given the chance? Often this crew turned up out of the blue. Put yourself in the position that you want to try and demonstrate what you do, and try and demonstrate how hard it is - and nothing happens. The desire to look good sometimes ends up with the person looking a little strange. Had the incident not happened on my shift, we would have had a few minutes of us making small talk, and no doubt similarly embarrassing quotes would have been evident. There was certainly a chunk of conversation I am very happy they cut out. 80% - 90% of my colleagues and I refused to be filmed when the film crew repeatedly turned up. The agreement was we would be filmed from behind or in long-shot but not directly. I think many of us didn't want to get caught out saying something deemed off-message, or un-PC, with potential consequences later if the footage went out. It was actually quite intimidating to have the production team hanging around for hours on end (hoping that something would break or someone would jump under a train), and a great relief to all when they packed up and went! No feet up, no ties off, no food on the desk, no newspapers - even though nothing was happening! (Quite right too, I hear some say!) Fortunately, they were only really interested in interviewing staff of Duty Manager grade or above, and LU was clearly happy to steer them in that direction.
|
|