wykikitoon 16621 Posted October 26, 2012 Share Posted October 26, 2012 "The Halls and Shepherd..." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trophyshy 6434 Posted October 26, 2012 Share Posted October 26, 2012 Wolfy said he was from Singapore, didn't he? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wolfy 12 Posted October 26, 2012 Share Posted October 26, 2012 Absolutely correct, will always be number one in my eyes, and in most decent toon fans' eyes. Has anyone done an IP check on Wolfy? Is it North of the Tyne the address? Do you want my phone number as well.My IP address hahahaha. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McFaul 35 Posted October 26, 2012 Share Posted October 26, 2012 Do you want my phone number as well. My IP address hahahaha. No, I would just like to know what city you're from because it's not Newcastle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wolfy 12 Posted October 26, 2012 Share Posted October 26, 2012 No, I would just like to know what city you're from because it's not Newcastle. If you had been observant, you would have seen I'm from Hartlepool. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toonpack 6846 Posted October 26, 2012 Share Posted October 26, 2012 He was never, ever going to get 20miilion out of the club and I said so at the time. Both his lawyers and Keegan knew this and were basically trying it on. This is the bit of the Keegan case I have a HUGE problem with. In my opinion, he wasn't trying it on, he REALLY wanted the £20 Mill. No way do lawyers "try it on" if you are making frivolous claims in front of the beak, he'll chuck you out. If they didn't think there was a chance he could win it, they'd never have gone forward with it, seriously. That opinion is based upon the fact that I have been through litigation, as a plaintiff/claimant, and every penny of my claim (6 figures) had to be absolutely rationaly justified and backed up, some amounts which to anyone else would appear totally justifiable were stripped out as "in the eyes of the law" my lawyer reckoned it could muddy the waters. The law doesn't do "trying it on". Shit! I had to stump up for a QC to represent me, why? because my lawyer said the other side were putting a QC up and whilst he (my lawyer) was eminently qualified to present my case (which was cast iron in his opinion) the Judge could very well say "well a lawyers telling me this, but a QC is telling me the other" and in that situation the Judge would go with the QC and I shouldn't take the risk (for the sake of something like £900 an hour as I recall!!!). I was outraged (and still am) seeing I was brassic at the time. If a lawyer/QC goes before a Judge and makes non-serious claims or tries it on, the Judge will remember, no Lawyer/QC will put themselves in that position, they have to have reasonable grounds for anything they put forward. The law is an ass and it has a whole set of rules all for itself, it's a members club and you don't mess on with those higher up in the club than you and you don't waste a Judge's time. P.S. I won btw, recovered fuck all in the end though, but at least I won and learned an awfull lot about the law (none of it good) in the process. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Howmanheyman 26783 Posted October 26, 2012 Share Posted October 26, 2012 This is the bit of the Keegan case I have a HUGE problem with. In my opinion, he wasn't trying it on, he REALLY wanted the £20 Mill. No way do lawyers "try it on" if you are making frivolous claims in front of the beak, he'll chuck you out. If they didn't think there was a chance he could win it, they'd never have gone forward with it, seriously. That opinion is based upon the fact that I have been through litigation, as a plaintiff/claimant, and every penny of my claim (6 figures) had to be absolutely rationaly justified and backed up, some amounts which to anyone else would appear totally justifiable were stripped out as "in the eyes of the law" my lawyer reckoned it could muddy the waters. The law doesn't do "trying it on". Shit! I had to stump up for a QC to represent me, why? because my lawyer said the other side were putting a QC up and whilst he (my lawyer) was eminently qualified to present my case (which was cast iron in his opinion) the Judge could very well say "well a lawyers telling me this, but a QC is telling me the other" and in that situation the Judge would go with the QC and I shouldn't take the risk (for the sake of something like £900 an hour as I recall!!!). I was outraged (and still am) seeing I was brassic at the time. If a lawyer/QC goes before a Judge and makes non-serious claims or tries it on, the Judge will remember, no Lawyer/QC will put themselves in that position, they have to have reasonable grounds for anything they put forward. The law is an ass and it has a whole set of rules all for itself, it's a members club and you don't mess on with those higher up in the club than you and you don't waste a Judge's time. P.S. I won btw, recovered fuck all in the end though, but at least I won and learned an awfull lot about the law (none of it good) in the process. So did Miss Dominatrix-Whiplash get to keep the £900 then, even though you'd won? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toonpack 6846 Posted October 26, 2012 Share Posted October 26, 2012 So did Miss Dominatrix-Whiplash get to keep the £900 then, even though you'd won? The legal costs get settled first out of any recovery, aye they were fine, about £30K's worth of fine Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaddockLad 14584 Posted October 26, 2012 Share Posted October 26, 2012 This is the bit of the Keegan case I have a HUGE problem with. In my opinion, he wasn't trying it on, he REALLY wanted the £20 Mill. No way do lawyers "try it on" if you are making frivolous claims in front of the beak, he'll chuck you out. If they didn't think there was a chance he could win it, they'd never have gone forward with it, seriously. That opinion is based upon the fact that I have been through litigation, as a plaintiff/claimant, and every penny of my claim (6 figures) had to be absolutely rationaly justified and backed up, some amounts which to anyone else would appear totally justifiable were stripped out as "in the eyes of the law" my lawyer reckoned it could muddy the waters. The law doesn't do "trying it on". Shit! I had to stump up for a QC to represent me, why? because my lawyer said the other side were putting a QC up and whilst he (my lawyer) was eminently qualified to present my case (which was cast iron in his opinion) the Judge could very well say "well a lawyers telling me this, but a QC is telling me the other" and in that situation the Judge would go with the QC and I shouldn't take the risk (for the sake of something like £900 an hour as I recall!!!). I was outraged (and still am) seeing I was brassic at the time. If a lawyer/QC goes before a Judge and makes non-serious claims or tries it on, the Judge will remember, no Lawyer/QC will put themselves in that position, they have to have reasonable grounds for anything they put forward. The law is an ass and it has a whole set of rules all for itself, it's a members club and you don't mess on with those higher up in the club than you and you don't waste a Judge's time. P.S. I won btw, recovered fuck all in the end though, but at least I won and learned an awfull lot about the law (none of it good) in the process. I got as far as taking legal advice after I left one employer about a decade ago...there were a few things, but the main one was the withdrawl of the company vehicle that I had been issued with the day I started. They wanted to use it on another contract, or so they said, and seeing as the job was as a mobile electrical service engineer, it was pretty much essential to the job. I was told to use my own transport so I jacked. The lawyer said I pretty much had a cast iron case for constructive dismissal, but I would only be entitled to lost monies for the period I was out of work, and as I had a job lined up when I walked it was pointless going through with it. Thats what made me think KK's lawyers were at it, in his case it was slightly different because of the fixed term nature of contracts in football the the principle remains, you dont get oodles of extra cash in constructive dismissal cases, you get what you're due if the case is proven in your favour. Regardless of how they calculated the 20mill, KK's lawyers knew they wouldnt get it. It was frivilous to try to claim that. Your legal history is interesting, but even I could have told them they wouldnt get it and all the scaremongering about "ruining the club financially" if he'd have been awarded the full sum was frankly fuckin poppycock, it was just media scaremongering on the back of extreme optimism from lawyers who it would appear should have known better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NYD 0 Posted October 26, 2012 Share Posted October 26, 2012 (edited) A question for the west brom fan, do you bank at the West Bromwich and district building society ? Edited October 26, 2012 by NYD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wolfy 12 Posted October 26, 2012 Share Posted October 26, 2012 A question for the west brom fan, do you bank at the West Bromwich and district building society ? You might have a problem with Gemmill but there's no need to post his pic up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McFaul 35 Posted October 28, 2012 Share Posted October 28, 2012 10. And finally, score predictions. 2-1 to the toon. Will be a shite game imo. Told you brummie lad, to a tee that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StevenL 0 Posted October 29, 2012 Share Posted October 29, 2012 Physic cunt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted October 29, 2012 Share Posted October 29, 2012 That's what Steven hawkings ex-wife calls him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McFaul 35 Posted October 29, 2012 Share Posted October 29, 2012 Physic cunt. 2. What are your opinions our our start to the season so far? Seems like Steve Clarke has taken to management well, (his last management toe dipper was a 6-0 defeat as manager of NUFC) early days though, you have some half decent players, if Lukaku was more prolific you could even be higher. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew 4218 Posted October 29, 2012 Share Posted October 29, 2012 if your striker scored more you'd be higher up stunning insight Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McFaul 35 Posted October 29, 2012 Share Posted October 29, 2012 if your striker scored more you'd be higher up stunning insight No but you wouldn't just say that though. I said it cos he misses loads of sitters, he's only 19 though he's got good movement, I think truthfully we should put a sly bid in, I was quite impressed. Andy Cole used to miss loads of sitters, but he got loads of chances because of his movement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew 4218 Posted October 29, 2012 Share Posted October 29, 2012 Chelsea paid £13 million for him I dont reckon a sly bid will come to much unless you meant on loan? in which case, I agree Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gene_Clark 12 Posted October 29, 2012 Share Posted October 29, 2012 Was Clarke's only game in charge not a 5-1 loss at Old Trafford? I thought Nigel Pearson was in charge for the 6-0 after Allardyce was bulleted.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LiamBaggies 0 Posted October 29, 2012 Author Share Posted October 29, 2012 A question for the west brom fan, do you bank at the West Bromwich and district building society ? I'm 17 so as of yet, don't really do banking as such. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LiamBaggies 0 Posted October 29, 2012 Author Share Posted October 29, 2012 Told you brummie lad, to a tee that. Not as good as mine. I had correct prediction and first goalscorer: http://westbrom.com/forum/index.php?topic=9544.0 And I'm not a Brummie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McFaul 35 Posted October 29, 2012 Share Posted October 29, 2012 Was Clarke's only game in charge not a 5-1 loss at Old Trafford? I thought Nigel Pearson was in charge for the 6-0 after Allardyce was bulleted.... Aye it was the 5-1 my mistake. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McFaul 35 Posted October 29, 2012 Share Posted October 29, 2012 Not as good as mine. I had correct prediction and first goalscorer: http://westbrom.com/...hp?topic=9544.0 And I'm not a Brummie. Whey its all the same once you get past Stoke isn't it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LiamBaggies 0 Posted October 29, 2012 Author Share Posted October 29, 2012 Whey its all the same once you get past Stoke isn't it? Not really, no. Black Country me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reddiebaggie 0 Posted October 29, 2012 Share Posted October 29, 2012 Whey its all the same once you get past Stoke isn't it? You Mackems are all the same Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now