Exactly, so if she fails on that then her reputation will be in tatters. So she will hang on like a bull mastiff to recover that money plus.
Hmm, I disagree on that.
Depends how she fails.
If she fails without trying then yep, agreed.
If she shows some interesting strategies and still fails then nope, reputation still intact.
I still think the Northampton play would have actually helped her reputation in certain circles (not football ones!) more than it hindered. As an attempt to conjure something from nothing, it showed a certain ruthlessness and drive and imagination that would be appreciated by certain parties...
Has your keyboard lost the capital letters?sought (couldn't resist the urge to be pedantic :sorry
I really don't think she expected the opportunity to appeal as I said above and unfortunately I think you may be right. This lifeline will have given her/them new impetus.
I'm pretty much always wrong on these things but I really think we were close to the end of all this until this decision.
Personally think she was going to keep going with appeals until she gets what she wants. So the quickest way for it to end would be allow JR2 and get it over with.
You don't win "Brownie points" when picking people up on Grammar It makes you look more of a "Dickhead" Not everyone can spell, or pronounce correctly, but everyone has the inherent right to express their views and opinions on this, or any forum.
So as well as saying Fernando, Grendel and Torchy are dickheads, you are clearly admitting you are one as well for picking Grendel up on his grammar.
Picking up people on their grammar shouldn't happen. Some people have personal problems that make it difficult for them. And when they see it they can lose all confidence on posting.
It doesn't make me lose confidence. All it does is make me think that the person is a dick head, typically I already thought that they were anyway so all they're doing is reaffirming my conclusion about them. In that respect I can't loose
I dunno either, but it might be a case of washing your hands with it. If someone doesn't like what you tell them, its probably easier to refer them to your boss to sort out. Pass the buck and let the boss tell them to piss off.
/resists biting on obvious grammatical mistakeIt doesn't make me lose confidence. All it does is make me think that the person is a dick head, typically I already thought that they were anyway so all they're doing is reaffirming my conclusion about them. In that respect I can't loose
There is a point where it has to be fresh evidence but I don't think we're at that part yet. Think at this stage its just another judge looking at it and deciding there's enough doubt it needs going over again.
Would love to know how they select judges for cases. The chap in the last round was a business partner of Cherie Blair which hardly seems the most neutral person to have when one side in the case is a Labour council!
Totally agree mate.
By the way, you missed a full stop after the word 'Grammar'.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
If we're going to start conspiracy theories how about Cherie Blairs connections to Mark Labovich? Based on that and you're assumption that the judge can hardly be the most neutral person the fact that he rejected it out of hand must mean that the case has no footing whatsoever. Using your logic that is.
So? She left the Labour Party long before that and she was only ever Tory light at best. Doesn't she also have links to Cayman island registered investment funds? Sure I remember reading that years ago? She seems to have more in common with Joy Seppala than she does the Coventry Labour Party that's for sure. Using your logic that is
Must of been how they won the right to appeal. The legal system is clearly in it with SISU
Using Dave's logic anyway.Calm down, you'll have a heart attack getting so worked up. I wasn't accusing your precious council of anything just a general question about how judges were chosen.Must of been how they won the right to appeal. The legal system is clearly in it with SISU
I would have thought even the slightest suggestion that you might listen more favourably to one side rather than the other, whichever side that happened to be, would rule you out of presiding over a case.
My precious council. Good one.
Anyhow seems Tony also loves the hedge funds Subscribe to read
How was Mark introduced to SISU before landing at CCFC? Any idea?
I don't know myself but as you're on the conspiracy theory trail I thought you might.
Interesting that you think the British legal system is so corrupt though.
Last edited:
