Verbal

The club he supported wasn't relevant, and it wasn't, in the sense you mean it, a wind up. I've gone over this before in the dim distant past (and under another user-name), so here's a potted summary. tommac (real name Tom McLoughlin) claimed that he was the managing director of an airline leasing company and he worked out of a luxury office in Mayfair. Actually, he was a local manager of an American leasing company, and he worked in an industrial estate in Fulham. In the course of his job, booking executive jets for the hobnobs, he met two lawyers from Paul Allen's umbrella company in Seattle. They have (or had) a number of American sports interests, including a basketball franchise I think. Now, tommac being tommac thought he could make a killing out of this opportunity, and knew that Saints were up for sale. He pitched the idea of Allen taking over Saints to the lawyers, who by all ccounts gave a non-committal 'yeah, yeah, that's interesting' response. tommac then reported this 'interest from Allen' to the Southampton board, and presented himself as a go-between. The news was gushingly leaked (by Leon, I think?), and the share price went into orbit. When Mary Corbett, among others, tried to follow up this supposed 'interest', there was absolutely nothing there. Allen had, it seems, never been told of the lawyers' conversation with tommac. Indeed, I imagine the lawyers completely forgot about it.

How irrational do you have to be to blurt out the personal details of someone else's child to The Sun?

Yes, but he made it impossible, in a buyer's market, to sell the club to more credible buyers than SISU. His actions made the collapse of the club (or the public company controlling it) nigh on inevitable.

The former.

Oh, that's how it started - during the putsch by the execs, who then tried to bounce the shareholders into the deal while (I think) securing decent bonuses/pay-ffs for themselves. I must have blanked this from my memory. Horrible.

On this issue, of a small child's terminal illness, a little circumspection wouldn't go amiss. And actually who has libelled whom here? Brown didn't say the information was hacked, nor did The Guardian.

Oh that, certainly. I had to deal with him a couple of times. Fantasist doesn't begin to cover it. Some persist in disbelieving it on here, but he was the sole source of the Paul Allen rubbish that ramped the share price to such unaffordable levels that a take-over was all but impossible. All's well that ends well, I suppose, but it's also easy to forget how close we came to extinction.

Good luck. It doesn't sound a very pleasant prospect.

No. He did not raise the issue.

Solely on my say-so, it was canned. hypo stepped off the bus and into traffic.

What's the betting Leicester just miss the play-offs this year?

We have nothing to thank tommac for.

Try it with any crook you care to mention. 'Richard Nixon, did you sanction the Watergate break in?' 'Good God! Absolutely not! I can't believe you just suggested that! Absolutely no!'

To his credit, Phil, Brown didn't throw a stone. He didn't want the whole thing dragged over again and has always been pretty consistent in the way he's protected his family.

Their speciality was a 'take it or leave it' ultimatum to Roops (or was it the other lot?) to pick up the club for pennies. Had a LOT of support on here I recall.

Puncheon in Bus Plunge Shock.

Inspired by the design studio of A Hitler.

Not before merging it with the new rumours thread.

How would you know from where you're standing?

You seem to have ever so slightly missed the point.

As Saintsweb's answer to Warren Buffet, it's time for you to invest your mortgage (alright, every last 5p in your jam jar), in News International.

At times like these I can't think of a more important issue.

Quite impressive that the lasting impression of the evidence given by the police to the Select Committee today was that they were a bunch of incompetent, corrupt, lazy, wide boys (and girl). I'm sure that's the message they wanted to convey...

Not by the Competition Commission. The FAPP test is applied by Ofcom, who are now looking into it and presumably waiting to see who ends up in jail. If Murdoch goes the way of Lord Black, as he might after another raft of allegations that have not received any coverage on the all-important Saintsweb, then I think you could be sure that M is not a FAPP.

There's quite a technical argument to be had by referring the bid for BSkyB to the Competition Commission, and it has as much to do with his dominance of the market in television itself as with any influence from other parts of NI. What's at stake, as far as the CC is concerned, is whether Murdoch's owning 100% of BSkyB means he unfairly monopolises rights to sports, movies, etc, to the detriment of competitors. As things stand, whether he owns the papers or not, it's highly questionable he'd pass the competition test. And remember, the usual outcome of a referral to the CC is that the bid fails.