: Thu Feb 26, 2009 9:43 pm  

mark_m wrote:

Ideally organising the defensive shape and the sliding structure should be the job of your fullback.

That is my concern with Riley. Does he have the confidence to bark at the senior players?

: Fri Feb 27, 2009 1:54 am  

I actually think he does. I'm sure at saints I saw him yapping away, could have been my eyes though

Re: BACK TO BASICS : Fri Feb 27, 2009 8:44 am  

newky wrote:

yes i am
In order to prove defamation, you have to prove that what was said or written about you was false. However, you may bring an action for libel or slander if the comments are so reprehensible and false that they affect your reputation in the community or cast aspersions on you. Consult your law book kid

Couple of points there Rumpole....

1. It's true. He did laugh. Within reason, you can say what you like if it's true. That's how this stuff works.
2. That allegation won't affect his reputation in the community or cast aspersions.
3. It would be the weakest case in English legal history.

I repeat what I said earlier. I saw Matt King laughing on Saturday night. It was in Warrington at around 745pm.

In any event, if anyone is going to get in trouble with the law it's King himself - he's been impersonating a top Rugby League player for the last year.

Re: BACK TO BASICS : Fri Feb 27, 2009 10:37 am  

Ian [77] wrote:

In any event, if anyone is going to get in trouble with the law it's King himself - he's been impersonating a top Rugby League player for the last year.

Fraud Act 2006 - Fraud by false representation?

: Fri Feb 27, 2009 5:49 pm  

simons2107 wrote:

half the problem to me seems that since briers was released as captin we dont seem as organised on the field, as this was one of his strenghts. dont get me wrong i am not a briers fan, but that seems to be our missing link. Morley is a good leader but you dont see him organising our defence.

Decent point you make there, though I would add that when Briers was organising the defence, he should have been repeatedly yelling the phrase "Don't rush out of the line" to himself.

Re: BACK TO BASICS : Fri Feb 27, 2009 7:47 pm  

Wires71 wrote:

Fraud Act 2006 - Fraud by false representation?

no i dont need to ive proven my point

Re: BACK TO BASICS : Fri Feb 27, 2009 7:48 pm  

Ian [77] wrote:

Couple of points there Rumpole....

1. It's true. He did laugh. Within reason, you can say what you like if it's true. That's how this stuff works.
2. That allegation won't affect his reputation in the community or cast aspersions.
3. It would be the weakest case in English legal history.

I repeat what I said earlier. I saw Matt King laughing on Saturday night. It was in Warrington at around 745pm.

In any event, if anyone is going to get in trouble with the law it's King himself - he's been impersonating a top Rugby League player for the last year.

yes truth is the only way, out but it is not true, and you cant prove its true.

Re: BACK TO BASICS : Sun Mar 01, 2009 5:22 pm  

newky wrote:

yes truth is the only way, out but it is not true, and you cant prove its true.

Look Matt, you can keep defending yourself all you like. There are numerous people who saw you laughing and joking after the game against Catalans.

I seen you do the same against Wakefield aswell.

Re: BACK TO BASICS : Sun Mar 01, 2009 5:58 pm  

newky wrote:

yes truth is the only way, out but it is not true, and you cant prove its true.

I don't care. MATT KINGS LAUGHS WHEN WARRINGTON GET BEAT - MATT KING LAUGHS WHEN WARRINGTON GET BEAT - I HAVE NO PROOF - I DON'T CARE!!!!

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

(Ahem)

: Sun Mar 01, 2009 7:35 pm  

Dico wrote:

I actually think he does. I'm sure at saints I saw him yapping away, could have been my eyes though

What he needs is a hooded top.