bridge too far

Found this contact on his blog: skysportsclub@bskyb.com He's not very old, is he. Good luck Ed.

I can't remember that I did anything to annoy my parents but I do remember that my children decided it would be fun to send a letter to Santa one Christmas whilst at my parents' house. They lit the letter and it flew up the chimney. The chimney caught fire and loads of soot came down. My dad had to redecorate the sitting room.

The media coverage will be seen / heard by the gruesome twosome I imagine. Unless you have access to his diary, how will we know when he's 'actually there'?

:shock:

I lolled a bit at these bits. The 'bent' side of football eh?

Showing my age here - I think it's Mutt 'n' Jeff :smt102 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutt_&_Jeff

Quite agree about the innocent until proven guilty bit but have you decided that the female in question is guilty, then? Certainly sounds like it

2 - 2 Saga :shock: MLT surprised he wasn't on at the start

Sky saying we're a completely different side to the first half

But it's going to be cold :smt095

I could choreograph the march. You know - left, right, left, right :smt102

We should all wear badges with our forum names \\:D/

I beg to differ, m'lud "A defence recognized in most jurisdictions is "opinion". If the person makes a statement of opinion as opposed to fact, the statement may not support a cause of action for defamation" http://www.expertlaw.com/library/personal_injury/defamation.html

I always understood that 'opinion' could not be considered to be slanderous, only stuff stated as being 'factual'. Look at this from Wiki. It would seem to suggest that internet fora are not 'publishers' and therefore not liable to the charge of libel. Slander is spoken, libel is published. "Slander and libel The common law origins of defamation lie in the torts of slander (harmful statement in a transitory form, especially speech) and libel[4][5] (harmful statement in a fixed medium, especially writing but also a picture, sign, or electronic broadcast), each of which gives a common law right of action. "Defamation" is the general term used internationally, and is used in this article where it is not necessary to distinguish between "slander" and "libel". Libel and slander both require publication.[6] The fundamental distinction between libel and slander lies solely in the form in which the defamatory matter is published. If the offending material is published in some fleeting form, as by spoken words or sounds, sign language, gestures and the like, then this is slander. If it is published in more durable form, for example in written words, film, compact disc (CD), DVD, blogging and the like, then it is considered libel." The debate whether Internet blogs or Bulletin Boards are publishers is a key subject being addressed, whereas an Internet based community is more akin to conversations in a bar or pub, with content being written as an ongoing dialog which is generally not edited or regulated such as in the publishing industry. "out-law.com" (August 8th, 2008)".

Going off at a tangent here, but I heard an item on the radio this morning about prepack administration and I recalled that some were thinking that this might be something RL had in mind. However, it looks like the rules are going to be more stringent now: http://www.companyrescue.co.uk/company-rescue/options/Pre-Packaged-Administration.aspx

Make a conscious decision not to fall prey to the purveyors of cards, alcohol, food, lingerie etc.who inflate their prices apparently 'in the name of luuuuuurrrrrrvvvvvveeeee'. Load of old hogwash.

Look - look I tell you! Look at my back! See the knife?

Rod's allegedly been a naughty boy and has embarrassed his friend Lord Jonathan Marland: http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2009/jan/27/digger-ecb-marland So that's two of Rupey's buddies who've been a bit 'circumspect' with FSA / Stock Exchange Rules allegedly. The other one being the bloke from Carphone Warehouse allegedly

To be pedantic (for a change) - there is a question mark at the end of the thread title

Sorry - I didn't spot that!

How odd - no mention of us in that piece :confused:

If Leon is prepared to put that sum of money in out of his own pocket, then maybe we're not quite so close to administration. I can't see that he would risk his own money by propping up the current cabal, only to lose it all if we still went belly up. He must be fairly sure he won't lose it.

Not exactly. A director can be banned from being a Director in the future if s/he's declared bankrupt. It's also illegal to continue to trade an insolvent company.

So RL has stitched it all up and made it bomb proof eh? I'm so very, very sad about what's happening to this club. The original founders must be turning in their graves. Started off as a christian association and it has fallen prey to Mammon