He needs a good kicking in the semanticshe is grasping at semantics
He needs a good kicking in the semanticshe is grasping at semantics
Both entail an act which is contrary to what is lawful. Whist they aren’t identical, as one tends to deal with what is proscribed by law and the other where it’s outside the bounds of the law, any comparison between the two is intellectually dishonest in the context of the subject matter, namely a clause in an agreement, which his only going to be criminal in the most extreme of circumstances.I am not sure he is wrong to be fair
I am not sure I understand what your saying or what your referring to but my point is that in order to have created the false accounts in the way that is suggested by the Premier league we would have had to have committed fraud which is illegal so I don’t think he is wrong to say thisBoth entail an act which is contrary to what is lawful. Whist they aren’t identical, as one tends to deal with what is proscribed by law and the other where it’s outside the bounds of the law, any comparison between the two is intellectually dishonest in the context of the subject matter, namely a clause in an agreement, which his only going to be criminal in the most extreme of circumstances.
Through the prism of rules that one organisation subjects the other to, unlawfulness is egregious. Any attempt to claim it’s not illegal is both a non-sequitur and simple semantics.
It’s akin to claiming that because you didn’t get sent to jail for speeding that provides some form of mitigation when it’s not an imprisonable offence.
It’s dishonest misdirection, nothing more.
Like I said previously, no point engaging with the ****.
I also don't fully understand all the musings of @gordondaviesmoustache , I do however know that miggsy is an utter twatI am not sure I understand what your saying or what your referring to but my point is that in order to have created the false accounts in the way that is suggested by the Premier league we would have had to have committed fraud which is illegal so I don’t think he is wrong to say this
Sorry mate, I think we are at cross purposes.I am not sure I understand what your saying or what your referring to but my point is that in order to have created the false accounts in the way that is suggested by the Premier league we would have had to have committed fraud which is illegal so I don’t think he is wrong to say this
annoyingly he is technically right, unlawful isnt illegal but its purely in terms of semantics, i mean if i was to punch delaney in the head in it would be illegal, if i was to lock him in a room with a tiger it would be unlawful.
I prefer ****, but each to their own.I also don't fully understand all the musings of @gordondaviesmoustache , I do however know that miggsy is an utter twat
I prefer ****, but each to their own.
Also, The Competition Act 1998 has criminal sanctions provided for under sections 42-4 and the power to compel a defaulting party to act in a particular way under sections 32-35 as well as the power to impose civil penalties under sections 36-40 So breaching that Act is potentially a criminal act and thereby an imprisonable offence, although most likely it would end in a fine.Illegal is a breach of a law.
Unlawful is ‘found not to be allowed by reference to specified legal principles.’ ‘Illicit’would serve better.
Maybe a BMer on X could send the daft **** this.View attachment 134749
How stupid does he think we are?
It's like a cult at this point -- Learn to dismiss reality, don't believe your eyes, don't trust your own common sense, don't believe your old ideals.. Just trust the red cartel and you'll be in a better world than this one!
Trust Red Cartel Jesus.