Kid in the Riot Posted January 27, 2016 Report Share Posted January 27, 2016 My sources suggest BRFC aren't exactly confident about winning this appeal. 14 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whooooossshhhh Posted January 27, 2016 Report Share Posted January 27, 2016 Anyone got an idea of when full time is please? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I am the mole Posted January 27, 2016 Report Share Posted January 27, 2016 25 minutes ago, Kid in the Riot said: My sources suggest BRFC aren't exactly confident about winning this appeal. Hopefully!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aizoon Posted January 27, 2016 Report Share Posted January 27, 2016 45 minutes ago, Fordy62 said: And it's this sort of post that makes it oh so moronic when you start bleating on about how nasty the big bad police are. Honestly I'm not sure there's a bigger moron on these boards. A strong claim, that 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I am the mole Posted January 27, 2016 Report Share Posted January 27, 2016 6 minutes ago, Aizoon said: A strong claim, that Corleone and kachina would my two candidates!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NOTBLUE Posted January 27, 2016 Report Share Posted January 27, 2016 14 hours ago, slartibartfast said: They better ****** not, I live near there ! Better move now then,before your house becomes un-saleable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Posted January 27, 2016 Report Share Posted January 27, 2016 http://www.bristolpost.co.uk/Bristol-Rovers-appeal-Sainsbury-s-heart-wasn-t/story-28616452-detail/story.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barrs Court Red Posted January 27, 2016 Report Share Posted January 27, 2016 3 hours ago, Kid in the Riot said: My sources suggest BRFC aren't exactly confident about winning this appeal. I'm told there will be bigger news either way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KeepUpLino Posted January 27, 2016 Report Share Posted January 27, 2016 8 minutes ago, Barrs Court Red said: I'm told there will be bigger news either way. Like what? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eddie Hitler Posted January 27, 2016 Report Share Posted January 27, 2016 3 hours ago, Kid in the Riot said: 3 hours ago, Kid in the Riot said: My sources suggest BRFC aren't exactly confident about winning this appeal. I think they had to do it; I would have done. The original ruling seemed very considered and in line with the law. This appeal is based upon Sainsburys should have done the "right" thing rather than used the options within the contract to legally exit it. Sometimes this moral argument carries the day but they would be deluded to think they stand a strong chance of winning rather than it being something worth one more throw of the dice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Posted January 27, 2016 Report Share Posted January 27, 2016 31 minutes ago, Barrs Court Red said: I'm told there will be bigger news either way. good or bad? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eddie Hitler Posted January 27, 2016 Report Share Posted January 27, 2016 1 minute ago, Super said: good or bad? As the takeover approachs have been rumbling on for a while then it's probably good for Higgs as he gets to trouser some loot and escape, but bad for the people taking it over as they'll end up with the Rovers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bakes Posted January 27, 2016 Report Share Posted January 27, 2016 4 hours ago, Fordy62 said: And it's this sort of post that makes it oh so moronic when you start bleating on about how nasty the big bad police are. Honestly I'm not sure there's a bigger moron on these boards. You. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YorkshireSection Posted January 27, 2016 Report Share Posted January 27, 2016 5 hours ago, Fordy62 said: And it's this sort of post that makes it oh so moronic when you start bleating on about how nasty the big bad police are. Honestly I'm not sure there's a bigger moron on these boards. FFS even the biggest moron can see I'm having a laugh, maybe not to your taste but a joke it was still, oh the irony. Im not on here to be lectured at by a jumped up PCSO or whatever you are (a little joke for you Sir) this is a forum, a place for freedom of speech, you might be able to bully others due to your line of work, yet this is cyber space, it's not REAL LIFE so I will say what I want and when I want. what I said was in jest, AGAIN not to your or some others taste but in jest. Start looking closer to home when you dish out the word moron.....or better still use the ignore button if you don't want to read what I want to write in jest/bad taste, or in seriousness. PS just put me on ignore, I find it quite useful. WHOOOOOOOOOSSSSSSHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
In the Net Posted January 27, 2016 Report Share Posted January 27, 2016 2 hours ago, Super said: good or bad? Good! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Joker Posted January 27, 2016 Report Share Posted January 27, 2016 27 minutes ago, In the Net said: Good! riddance Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Esmond Million's Bung Posted January 27, 2016 Report Share Posted January 27, 2016 i've just read the evil post report on 'the appeal', did Sainsbury's not have a legal team at this hearing?, because if they did the post did not report anything about it whatsoever. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rich Posted January 27, 2016 Report Share Posted January 27, 2016 4 minutes ago, Esmond Million's Bung said: i've just read the evil post report on 'the appeal', did Sainsbury's not have a legal team at this hearing?, because if they did the post did not report anything about it whatsoever. They won't, it's all hyped up to portray the thieves as the good guys. That's why NH made the recent statements in the hope of somehow pumping up the pressure and influencing the judges (lying worked with AV), while also portraying Sainsbury's as the bad guys for halting an improving club on the up. It also makes the headlines more dramatic if they lose the appeal. At the end of the day the media get a good story. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rich Posted January 27, 2016 Report Share Posted January 27, 2016 4 minutes ago, cynic said: Case closed a day early. Either a clear cut victory for them or a kick in the teeth. Hopefully the latter. The dice have been rolled and the fat bird is clearing her clack... Probably knew each others cases so well prior to the hearing, that there was no need for extra representations or questions on the third day. Sounds as if the thieves are hoping that the judges will see Sainsbury's as not playing the game and award in the thieves favour or, Sainsbury's used the law as was intended, covered their backs, and because of delays and the thieves trying to change the contract, upholding the original decision. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 27, 2016 Report Share Posted January 27, 2016 (edited) 1 hour ago, Esmond Million's Bung said: i've just read the evil post report on 'the appeal', did Sainsbury's not have a legal team at this hearing?, because if they did the post did not report anything about it whatsoever. It does seem rather slanted. That said Sainsburys case could have simply been 'The High Court was right' 14 minutes ago, Rich said: Probably knew each others cases so well prior to the hearing, that there was no need for extra representations or questions on the third day. Yeah they would have done. Each would have submitted what's called a skeleton argument, being the bones of their case so the court and the other side can be prepared. Edited January 27, 2016 by Guest Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ciderup Posted January 27, 2016 Report Share Posted January 27, 2016 So let me see if I've got this right. The scum presented nothing new, just said Sainsbury's were still held by the contract (which the previous judge released them from) and then said the previous judge was wrong? It's hardly compelling evidence to force 3 judges to disagree with their esteemed colleague now is it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Esmond Million's Bung Posted January 27, 2016 Report Share Posted January 27, 2016 3 minutes ago, 29AR said: It does seem rather slanted. That said Sainsburys case could have simply been 'The High Court was right' Yeah they would have done. Each would have submitted what's called a skeleton argument, being the bones of their case so the court and the other side can be prepared. The few quotes attributed to Sainsbury's seem to have come from the original appeal, it really looks as though their legal team never showed up. isn't this just leave to appeal though?. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedRock Posted January 27, 2016 Report Share Posted January 27, 2016 I find it all pretty bizarre. The Sags appear to be basing their appeal on theft the fact that Sainsbury's weren't very nice to them. That may be so, but hardly something that stands up in a court of law. I suspect the appeal judges recessed to the pub and had a good laugh. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ciderup Posted January 27, 2016 Report Share Posted January 27, 2016 1 minute ago, Moor2Sea said: I find it all pretty bizarre. The Sags appear to be basing their appeal on theft the fact that Sainsbury's weren't very nice to them. That may be so, but hardly something that stands up in a court of law. I suspect the appeal judges recessed to the pub and had a good laugh. I'm inclined to agree M2Sea. It strikes me of a case of 'it's not fair so I'm taking my ball home'. There are no grounds to accept the appeal as far as I can see as naff all new was presented apart from the sags saying the judge was wrong! Is that right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gasbuster Posted January 28, 2016 Report Share Posted January 28, 2016 The 15ers should appoint Lieutenant George as their counsel. He would be perfect for them. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nPk43lZPkTI 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rocky Posted January 28, 2016 Report Share Posted January 28, 2016 When's the verdict? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gert Mare Posted January 28, 2016 Report Share Posted January 28, 2016 23 hours ago, I'm Sparti-Bob said: Don't forget the references to the Thatcher years, dogs dying, etc :-) I've got that as my text message notification! 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HoldenBall Posted January 28, 2016 Report Share Posted January 28, 2016 They just signed Rory Fallen the gift Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Posted January 28, 2016 Report Share Posted January 28, 2016 3 minutes ago, Iron Man said: They just signed Rory Fallen the gift Blimey is he still playing Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 28, 2016 Report Share Posted January 28, 2016 39 minutes ago, Rocky said: When's the verdict? The Post seem to think March was intimated. In reality, when the court is ready. Could be sooner, could be later. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.