There'd definitely be t-shirts.Yeah, this won't lead to anything, especially because we are still widely despised for ruining a lot of people's childhood .
If this were Liverpool on the other hand... they'd have stopped airing the BBC in Scouseland.
Johnson is a shit stain, so at least that'll be fine.There'd definitely be t-shirts.
And a Keir Starmer tweet blaming Boris.
Their source:
We’ll probably charge them a sponsorship fee.United have issued a statement strongly confirming the news to be absolutely true.
It's not that deep, it was an intern pissing aboutUnfortunately they are completely and utterly bang on
Apart from De Gea and Ronaldo the "senior" players are an absolute embarrassment to the club. But oh they don't care they'll still get their obscene wages
Having to watch Liverpool come so close to a historic quadruple, which would have eclipsed our historic treble, while watching our players stroll round the pitch losing to nearly everyone made this the season from fecking hell and I'm so glad it's over
The only SLIGHT positive is its got so bad it seems to have finally set about the winds of change. Structural changes, and an exciting manager brought in, however I shall reserve judgement until I see what happens with the transfer market
If I see Lingard offered a huge new contract to stop him leaving, it may finish me off...
Damn, it's not every day the BBC tears you a new one. And in public no less! Considering the power of the BBC there's definitely an extra degree of humiliation involved. Then again, sometimes you just got to take it on the chin and accept the sticky situation.
I worked for the BBC, it's really no surprise how things like this end up on TV, surprised more of it doesn't actually happen, bunch of amateurs for the most part non of which know anything computer "I.T" related, the amount of stuff they delete and need to recover "urgently" and f##k ups they do is a weekly thing
Why is it always black Chelsea players being accused of things they didn't do?Oh dear
It's neither of those things, is it? It's taking the piss at the BBC.Mods need to get rid of the images above. This is either defamatory of the player or could be seen as contempt of court. Not a good idea either way
There is talk about one thing with the pic there. That, my friend, is all a judge needs to see. But maybe you've got a better law degree than me...It's neither of those things, is it? It's taking the piss at the BBC.
Strictly speaking you're right, but it would never even make it to court, it is obviously a genuine mistake and can be shown to be one very easily.There is talk about one thing with the pic there. That, my friend, is all a judge needs to see
but the images remain on here, which could be seen as repeating defamation - and that's often seen as worse by a judge. I know it's very unlikely to happen but mods are quick enough to stamp down on some things and this seems rather more important to meStrictly speaking you're right, but it would never even make it to court, it is obviously a genuine mistake and can be shown to be one very easily.
The fact that Sterling's picture is removed immediately (I imagine they were talking about his transfer to Chelsea in the story before and left the picture up a couple of seconds too long) and that the presenter clearly says the player can not be named also help a lot. There's no real contempt or defamation here really. If the Twitter account claimed that Sterling was the player (it didn't and he isn't) then possibly it could open it up for a legal challenge.
but the images remain on here, which could be seen as repeating defamation - and that's often seen as worse by a judge. I know it's very unlikely to happen but mods are quick enough to stamp down on some things and this seems rather more important to me
What are you on aboutMods need to get rid of the images above. This is either defamatory of the player or could be seen as contempt of court. Not a good idea either way
it's called possible defamation. look it up. we have a screenshot (and therefore published) a mistake made on TV. If false, it's defamatory. if turns out the player is charged, a judge could see it as contempt (a defence lawyer worth a few quid would be remiss not to to try to press that case)What are you on about
'we' haven't published anything, it is an embedded tweet that contains a video, published on Twitter. I don't think Niall will be getting life for it.it's called possible defamation. look it up. we have a screenshot (and therefore published) a mistake made on TV. If false, it's defamatory. if turns out the player is charged, a judge could see it as contempt (a defence lawyer worth a few quid would be remiss not to to try to press that case)
it's called possible defamation. look it up. we have a screenshot (and therefore published) a mistake made on TV. If false, it's defamatory. if turns out the player is charged, a judge could see it as contempt (a defence lawyer worth a few quid would be remiss not to to try to press that case)
How do you know when a knob has a law degree?…..because they tell you.That, my friend, is all a judge needs to see. But maybe you've got a better law degree than me...
Oh dear
but we haven't put up that sign, have we? No we've just screenshotted the mistake. Turns out qualifications are pretty good. and if you look back, I was asked how I know it could be seen as defamatory. but I'm sure you know best just like I know about brain surgery because I know it's located in your head...How do you know when a knob has a law degree?…..because they tell you.
also…turns out your law degree might not be all that good after all. For a defamatory statement to be actionable it needs to be false. What Samid posted was accompanied by a big heading signalling that the player in the image being accused by the BBC was the “wrong” player. There is nothing false about that.
I think you might need to buy the Ladybird Book on Law, which will tell you what "published" means when it comes to defamation...'we' haven't published anything, it is an embedded tweet that contains a video, published on Twitter. I don't think Niall will be getting life for it.
I think you need to stop being such an anorak oddball.I think you might need to buy the Ladybird Book on Law, which will tell you what "published" means when it comes to defamation...