The Sunday Supplement thread 2014/15

[laserblue]

Re: Sunday Supplement 14/15 Thread

Haha. I don't know what's funnier - the "50 million dollars" or the "day - facto". Slobbering jealous clueless c**ts the lot of them.

Continues to amaze me how you can be so uninformed as a purported journalist. Not even an attempt to understand the facts.

I'd agree with George on this one - slander pure and simple. The continuous use of the word "liars" and "fraud". Best thing we can do is batter Arsenal this afternoon.

Agree, but it is libel rather than slander if spoken on television.

Correct. The legal definition of libel is a slur on permanent record. It's mostly written of course but it includes TV, video or cassette tape recordings. Similarly slander is a non-permanent record. This is usually a spoken slur but could, at least theoretically, include a written message in the snow saying for example "XYZ is a paedo" because the snow will eventually melt and the record will be lost.

That XYZ is a bit of a bastard though.

 

[Henkeman]

Re: Sunday Supplement 14/15 Thread

Haha. I don't know what's funnier - the "50 million dollars" or the "day - facto". Slobbering jealous clueless c**ts the lot of them.

Continues to amaze me how you can be so uninformed as a purported journalist. Not even an attempt to understand the facts.

I'd agree with George on this one - slander pure and simple. The continuous use of the word "liars" and "fraud". Best thing we can do is batter Arsenal this afternoon.

Agree, but it is libel rather than slander if spoken on television.

Correct. The legal definition of libel is a slur on permanent record. It's mostly written of course but it includes TV, video or cassette tape recordings. Similarly slander is a non-permanent record. This is usually a spoken slur but could, at least theoretically, include a written message in the snow saying for example "XYZ is a paedo" because the snow will eventually melt and the record will be lost.

That XYZ is a bit of a bastard though.

Especially all his whingeing that people pronounce his name wrong.

 

[cookster]

Re: Sunday Supplement 14/15 Thread

City don't provide much copy for the press, which they hate. So any little nugget, they go to town.

The Lampard situation was/is a PR disaster and has given the likes of Lipton and Barclay ammo but we'll learn from it.

 

[Wilf Wild 1937]

Re: Sunday Supplement 14/15 Thread

Just watched the clip from today's programme that's been posted. Lipton states that we have to balance the books to comply with FFP
by the end of June (ie £49m net spend for the season) not by the end of this window. Am I right in saying that the Negredo deal becomes
permanent on the 1st June? If that's the case we have no issue at all in signing Bony and the press are fully aware of that fact.

Does anybody the details of the Negredo deal in terms of timing?

 

[Stuuuuuu]

Re: Sunday Supplement 14/15 Thread

Haha. I don't know what's funnier - the "50 million dollars" or the "day - facto". Slobbering jealous clueless c**ts the lot of them.

Continues to amaze me how you can be so uninformed as a purported journalist. Not even an attempt to understand the facts.

I'd agree with George on this one - slander pure and simple. The continuous use of the word "liars" and "fraud". Best thing we can do is batter Arsenal this afternoon.

Agree, but it is libel rather than slander if spoken on television.

Correct. The legal definition of libel is a slur on permanent record. It's mostly written of course but it includes TV, video or cassette tape recordings. Similarly slander is a non-permanent record. This is usually a spoken slur but could, at least theoretically, include a written message in the snow saying for example "XYZ is a paedo" because the snow will eventually melt and the record will be lost.

That XYZ is a bit of a bastard though.

What if someone comes along and takes a photo of said snow message?

 

[tonea2003]

Re: Sunday Supplement 14/15 Thread

Lipton ranting and foaming at the mouth about City, the City Group, NYCFC, and the Lampard deal.(you should have his face)

Accused City of *lieing*, and was rebuked/warned by Neil Ashton.

It's interesting some of you chaps think that defamation of our club on national TV "isn't that bad"

here is the slander, City lawyers please note

[video]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cxUdHGjD8es&feature=youtu.be[/video]

I Think it was bad.. and the PR people at city should not let sky or lipton just get away with.. make the c**ts grovel..as a marker

to be fair to neil ashton he nipped the lie jibe in the bud immeadiately

 

[FanchesterCity]

Re: Sunday Supplement 14/15 Thread

Sadly, it's not all that easy to sue these days.
The defamation laws changed in 2013 requiring requiring any profit making business (City) to prove serious financial loss regardless of what's said.

Also, if the person making the accusations has a genuine / honest belief, and that most honest people could come to the same conclusion as he/she did, then that's an allowable defence.

We wouldn't win this case. Sorry. It's not right what he said, and he clearly had very little knowledge of our business, but we'd simply not win this case.

 

[laserblue]

Re: Sunday Supplement 14/15 Thread

Agree, but it is libel rather than slander if spoken on television.

Correct. The legal definition of libel is a slur on permanent record. It's mostly written of course but it includes TV, video or cassette tape recordings. Similarly slander is a non-permanent record. This is usually a spoken slur but could, at least theoretically, include a written message in the snow saying for example "XYZ is a paedo" because the snow will eventually melt and the record will be lost.

That XYZ is a bit of a bastard though.

What if someone comes along and takes a photo of said snow message?

Good point. Then it becomes libel.

 

[yeah whatever !!]

Re: Sunday Supplement 14/15 Thread

Agree wasn't that bad.. I think the Lampard situation by City was to protect Lampard

Patrick Barclay thinks FUFP is a good thing & blames the free market for cementing the status quo. Under free market rules somebody can buy into a business & invest all the money he wants to make it grow bigger & stronger & be competitive. This bellend contradicts himself & doesn't realise he's doing it.

One day he will realise that ffp is actually destroying the game all its doing is keeping the biggest clubs at the top. It was brought in to stop city but they were to slow.
What it is doing is stopping the likes of villa and Everton from being sold because no one is going to invest if you can't get a return on their money.
The turkeys all voted for Christmas and now they have realised they have been stuffed

PSG are also another club that this was supposed to stop..

strange how its us and PSG that are the only clubs sanctioned so far with fines and squad restrictions in the CL.. or is it.??

 

[yeah whatever !!]

Re: Sunday Supplement 14/15 Thread

Barclay talks about FFP and comments it is good for the game , then in the next sentence refer to Aston Villa's/Randy lerners difficulty at selling their club, is it any wonder ? FFP means any investment in premiership football club like villa,newcastle,everton etc will be less attractive , becuase it is now impossible for an owner to invest the neccessary funds to make a mid table team into a champs league competitor. FFP is the death of 95% football supporters hopes of playing at an elite level , and the retards on SS are oblivious to this.

spot the fuck on fella.. who wants to buy a club they cant invest in for fear of being left out of the only competition that would allow them to try to recoup their investment.

FFP my arse.