blonde poker forum

Ok for some reason this is tilting me up not knowing, are his initials RG?

type in "super injunction footballer" into google and look at the realtime stuff on it..tells u

LOL they will be suing google next  :)

I didn't think there was any one who still didn't know who it was.

Has this footballer got the same adviser as Rooney when he said he wanted to leave? complete fail on the way to keep this quiet :)

I don't watch footy so didn't give a shit until it became apparent most people knew apart from me  :-X

wow - im astounded if that is true

ps if any premiership footballer wants to sue me they are more than welcome i would make more money selling my story afterwards than they could get out my bank account

Yeah I guess, was more surprised about the movie star one than this though.

Loved how the twitter users 'ganged' up and hundreds posted who it was (footballer).  Can't stand how these high profile household names are using the courts to cover up wrong doings because they can't keep their bloody pants on.  Bane and shame IMO, may keep them on the straight and narrow, or at least make them think twice

Just in case there is any doubt, No mention of the actual name of the footballer or any of the other individuals suspected or known to have superinjunctions currently running please, on a public blonde thread

Lol :D

fml censored how am i supposed to get sued now

Can't believe this was your only chance ;)

this time next year i could of been a millionaire guess i will just have to facebook it
i

Bryan Briggs?  :D

not only do I not know who it is I don't even know what you're all talking about

Rob Green?

Really?

I'm not sure I get these super injunctions. I thought he took one out against Imogen Thomas and the press, not the general public?

What happens if I saw the footballer and Imogen hooking up but wasn't aware of the super injunction. Am I then liable to be sued if I start posting it online and telling everyone I meet?

I'm a big fan of the footballer in question but he's fighting a losing battle with this, everyone knows, give up and save yourself some cash. Firmly in the super injunction the super injunctions camp.

I agree with the general point, he's wasting his money. Its widely known through search engines and the overseas press. Just man up. We saw with Andrew Marr the whole thing turns counter-productiver

As to the first point any media outlet that breaks the super injunction is in theory liable, a UK based poker forum included. We're the meeja, in a wider legal context, and we allow you to post....

Just don't fancy risking it, that's all, which I am sure you understand

lawyer for the footballer demands Twitter handover every a/c name mentioning affair with the girl!!

That's stupid, its going to spread like wildfire now, there will millions of mentions by the time they have all finished. Rage against the machine 'n all that.........

Agreed. Ridiculous, give up mate.

Must be an another reason why he's going through with it all and now at these lengths.  He and his missus must have had the discussion, she can't be that stupid or blind to what is all over the net.

So what's the point in denying it any longer, if the person he's trying to keep it from must now know anyway, so who's he trying to keep it a secret from if not her and family?

Or is image more important to said person?!

I think

The media outlets that are reporting the twitter story are breaking the super injunction - because they mean that nobody can report on the fact that an injunction exists; by reporting the twitter story they are reporting that such an injunction exists.

The perfectly valid defence to this is that they are allowed to if it is already in the public domain

But if they were the ones who put it into the public domain to start with (via twitter) then the defence falls apart and they can be sued.

I think that's what the current action is aiming to achieve - I don't think anyone is trying to keep a lid on the story, they're working out who to sue.

knowing imogens history he is probably scared the video will come out

Not really since no announcement has been made as to who has an injunction against who and what can or can't be said. The injunction wasn't made against me unless they forgot to tell me in which case how can i break it ?

Sandy

Good point....in theory nobody even knows an injuction exists!!....so if you report you saw X with Y....how can you get into trouble??

Anyway back to the real football world,did anyone catch Football Focus today........ what do we think of "Michael Vaughan the interviewer"!!?? ;whistle;

its quite funny

this apparently all started when she asked him for 100k to stay schtum - reports are that the legal costs to do this are circa 50k

therefore you could argue that the silence sum should be 50k - and get them to sign something to that effect??

It must be tearing you apart.

well I know now. took about 3 seconds on google. how on earth can anyone who knew that this story existed not manage to find out who it was about?

Don't know but I'm pished and thought I was being quite clever.

Feck knows how I'm going to be as subtle about Michelle Own, Didgier Drugba  et al

In a wider discussion though.

what does everybody think of the Lib Dem MP who used Parliamentary privilege to out Fred Goodwin's alledged affair with another Senior manager at the bank?

Personally, I thought it was rather opportunistic and completely uncalled for..especially since he didn't have the balls to later repeat the claim on C4 news.

It's complete bollocks. Because Fred is a villain in the public eye the MP is trying to score some points by over ruling the super injunction. Moron. Its just chapter 2358 in bash the bankers.

Bash the banker - that's a euphemism if ever I've heard one :D

http://twitpic.com/50z730 (http://twitpic.com/50z730)

One paper trying hard to keep it quiet...

LOL that's a bit risky  :D

lol..Can't wait for the massive lawsuit that is sure to follow.

Pretty sure the Sunday Herald would have run that front page past their lawyers before printing it.

After all, Scotland has a separate legal system so can't see how a court order in England has any power up there.

So they can just name him then ?

Yeah I'm sure they have..but reckon it probably came down to a "How much money would it cost if we have to pay a fine and how much money would we make from the extra publicity of doing this little stunt"

Yes.

They're not saying that he had an affair with Imogen, they're just saying that he has taken out an injunction to prevent people saying that she alleges that she did.

Do we think his lawyers are ignorant of the Streisand Effect (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streisand_effect), incompetent, or they just don't care as long as they get more cash?

did any players have new chants at old trafford today?

Ha ha, you were all wrong........

http://europeansportsnews.paddypower.com/index.php?fn=Stuart&ln=Hopkin&nc=Stringfellows

that's amazing!!!!

Couple of songs in the making floating around on Man U forums:

bRyan Riggs.. bRyan Riggs.. Bangin' Imogen..
bRyan Riggs.. bRyan Riggs.. Bangin' Imogen..
Don't Tell The Wife
Don't Tell The Kids..
bRyan Riggs.. bRyan Riggs..

****************************************************************

to the tune of "Imagine" by Lennon


"Imogen" shagged old gi**sy
she's easy if you try
Hiding in a hotel
and now its all on Sky


You may say that I dream't it.
But the truth by everyone
and the courts tried to stop us
but we all know Gi**s is the one


(edited for legal reasons)

If I were to say something like. Cos slept with a goat, because this isn't technically accurate AND there is no super injunction I can say it?


If I were to say Edwin van de sar bums kittens then that is also fine because there is no injunction that we cant know?

but the second you say something that is true you can get in trouble for it even if you have no reason to know there is an injunction?


this all seems like a complete load of bolloxs.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-13503847 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-13503847)

The BBC say it's Ryan Giggs.

Sandy

"With about 75,000 people having named Ryan Giggs on Twitter it's obviously impractical to imprison them all," said Mr Hemming.

I want to be an MP, just to abuse my Parliamentary privilege.

Incred!!

 
LOL, excellent work fella :)

haha where do people find this sh!t

John Prescott weighing into the prick on newsnight

Abs Quality

Prescott was a bullying pice of crap tonight... imo

FYP.

Whatever - Hemming is a complete tosser, pretending to be protecting twitter users and Giles Coren.  I suppose he thinks its ok to name rape and abuse victims, if someone names them on twitter.  He didn't have the facts behind the injunction but spouted his mouth off anyway, he prob knows the writing is on the wall for his party and is trying to create a career as a "personality".

Of course you're completely right. Hemming is a complete twat for having done what he did. I reckon parliamentary privilege should be suspended TBH. I just can't think of a good reason for keeping it if this is the way MPs start behaving.

WTF is this bollocks in the news of the world? That's pretty piss poor if true..........

Elaborate?

Just seen this on Twitter lol.
(http://s3.amazonaws.com/twitpic/photos/full/314073771.jpg?AWSAccessKeyId=AKIAJF3XCCKACR3QDMOA&Expires=1307269630&Signature=x7e9Y%2Bbw4tjEA5DO3C0cXGbkeJ8%3D)

LOL, look at their website u lazy bastard  :D

Oh, I see. Eight year affair with the wife of his brother?

more interested in the pics of pippa's triathlon tbh

lol at ever paying for the NOTW.

I'd pay towards it not existing!

LOL at thinking I'd ever pay for it  :)

+1 This paper is much better imo...

http://bit.ly/9EmiOA

Fuck that your blog is better, I'm just waiting for the Thailand edition warts and all, even if they are on your knob..... :D