[cite]Posted By: Chirpy Red[/cite]You're missing the point fella.
Andrew Marr knew his case meant absolutely nothing to the public. He took out the injunction to protect his family years ago. He realises now that his case is not in any way related to these new SUPER INJUNCTIONS.
He's made a good move to distance himself form the filth that are still holding out.
No one cares about Andrew Marr, and he knows that.
I see your point, and have done all along, but if the case means nothing to the public, why did he feel that he needed an injunction in the first place?
Ian Hislop certainly cares about Andrew Marr - as do a number of his contemporaries. Now you could argue that that is only because of the injunction BUT how could our country's most famous political reporter question an MP on, for example, a sex scandal when he had had one himself? That was the original point, which Marr tried to hide from...
Personally I'm just looking forward to Alan Shearer's comments on Match of the Day when Mr Giggs suffered the same fate that Terry did.....
I like footballers based on their football ability and how they conduct themselves on the pitch,
people like Cole, terry, rooney can sometimes leave a sour taste in your mouth on the pitch so that their antics you hear of off the pitch you perceive them in that same arrogant bullshit manor,
With Giggsy I couldn't care about the off field stuff, what a player and to have watched him live against my team in the peak of his career I am thankful . he is one of the best players I have seen and one of the best players to have graced our hallowed turf albeit in opposition colours
Them chances he missed, i was just laughing, thought he was shocking again, and yet the commentators were bum licking him so much they were half way up his arse!! Think he had a shocker last night!! Almost as bad as the time last week against whoever when he took a corner and kicked the corner post not the ball!! Embarrassing!
[cite]Posted By: MCS[/cite]Them chances he missed, i was just laughing, thought he was shocking again, and yet the commentators were bum licking him so much they were half way up his arse!! Think he had a shocker last night!! Almost as bad as the time last week against whoever when he took a corner and kicked the corner post not the ball!! Embarrassing!
No way, the goalie was best, Giggs was worse than Rio!! He is shit!
It is amazing how different people see the game in different ways, i will say this that i admit Giggs was good v Chelski, but last night he was hopeless!! Crap beard as well.
[cite]Posted By: MCS[/cite]Them chances he missed, i was just laughing, thought he was shocking again, and yet the commentators were bum licking him so much they were half way up his arse!! Think he had a shocker last night!! Almost as bad as the time last week against whoever when he took a corner and kicked the corner post not the ball!! Embarrassing!
No you are clueless if you think he is rolling back the years, rolling back the years to when, when he was crap and only 21! My opinion is he is over rated plop! Your opinion is he is rolling back the years, no need to call me clueless son.
[cite]Posted By: MCS[/cite]No you are clueless if you think he is rolling back the years, rolling back the years to when, when he was crap and only 21! My opinion is he is over rated plop! Your opinion is he is rolling back the years, no need to call me clueless son.
[cite]Posted By: MCS[/cite]No you are clueless if you think he is rolling back the years, rolling back the years to when, when he was crap and only 21! My opinion is he is over rated plop! Your opinion is he is rolling back the years, no need to call me clueless son.
You are clueless
I would use the term "utterly baffling" - Giggs has to be the most inoffensive top class player in 25 years!
[cite]Posted By: MCS[/cite]No you are clueless if you think he is rolling back the years, rolling back the years to when, when he was crap and only 21! My opinion is he is over rated plop! Your opinion is he is rolling back the years, no need to call me clueless son.
[cite]Posted By: Richard J[/cite]I hope its not Giggs , I've always admired him both as a player and person . Then maybe I'm completely naive when it comes to these things .
TBF to Marr he has still not named the female journo but has fessed up himself .
Exactly the point. He doesn't want people to change their opinion of him. If he was well known as a jack-the-lad who had been with a string of women there wouldn't be a lot of point trying to save your repitation would there?
PS Andrew Marr's bit was x, I think. And the timing coincided with Marrs profile being raised. He should be way more ashamed of himself that Giggs as it goes against everything he presents. To try and distance himself from it now it poor form.
The real question about super-injunctions is why are the English so obsessed with reading about the sex lives of famous people? What is the fascination?
In other Anglo countries, the US, Canada, Australia and NZ, the press do not report this stuff with anything like the regularity or intensity that Fleet Street does, its remarkable.
I mean, who gives a stuff if Ryan Giggs has been porking Esther Rantzen? What difference does that make to anyone's life at all?
The only good reason for outing somebody for an affair is if they are an elected public official and have actively marketed themselves as a "Family Man" and then get caught shagging their assistant, that's hypocrisy and the public have a right to know about it.
But the sex lives of actors, footballers and journalists should be of no interest to the public at all and they absolutely have the right to protect their privacy.
[quote][cite]Posted By: Ormiston Addick[/cite]The real question about super-injunctions is why are the English so obsessed with reading about the sex lives of famous people? What is the fascination?
In other Anglo countries, the US, Canada, Australia and NZ, the press do not report this stuff with anything like the regularity or intensity that Fleet Street does, its remarkable.
I mean, who gives a stuff if Ryan Giggs has been porking Esther Rantzen? What difference does that make to anyone's life at all?
The only good reason for outing somebody for an affair is if they are an elected public official and have actively marketed themselves as a "Family Man" and then get caught shagging their assistant, that's hypocrisy and the public have a right to know about it.
But the sex lives of actors, footballers and journalists should be of no interest to the public at all and they absolutely have the right to protect their privacy.[/quote]
[quote][cite]Posted By: Ormiston Addick[/cite]The real question about super-injunctions is why are the English so obsessed with reading about the sex lives of famous people? What is the fascination?
In other Anglo countries, the US, Canada, Australia and NZ, the press do not report this stuff with anything like the regularity or intensity that Fleet Street does, its remarkable.
I mean, who gives a stuff if Ryan Giggs has been porking Esther Rantzen? What difference does that make to anyone's life at all?
The only good reason for outing somebody for an affair is if they are an elected public official and have actively marketed themselves as a "Family Man" and then get caught shagging their assistant, that's hypocrisy and the public have a right to know about it.
But the sex lives of actors, footballers and journalists should be of no interest to the public at all and they absolutely have the right to protect their privacy.[/quote]
[cite]Posted By: Goonerhater[/cite]Never forget his shot from inside his own half that hit the bar at The Valley in the 3v3 game.
Same here, he wasn't even looking at the goal and hit the crossbar from his own half! If I ran sky sports I would be playing that clip as often as possible yet only those at the game remember it.
You have to envy fans who get to see him play each week.
Giggs is absolute quality and probably Man Utd's most influential player last night - nearly everything they created went through him or he was on the end of. Absolute class.
The US most certainly do go in for this stuff, just not so much in their newspapers. They do have stacks and stacks of magazine weeklies full of it though. The difference is it is almost impossible to sue or get a retraction from the press in the US. Therefore they can basically say whatever they like and those in question can do nothing abou it. This in turns leads to so many far-fetched stories that the US public don't always know what is true and what isn't, so half believe everything.
The reason so many celebs sue through Britain is because we have the toughest libel laws in the world. Maybe if we followed everyone elses example and had little more press freedom we wouldn't be in this position.
MCS is a good lad, he loves Charlton and helps out people whenever he can. I've only met him once. However his opinion of Ryan Giggs is a bit silly. Probably started as a joke, like Gavin's mum Pam when she said she was a veggie, it's just got out of control and he can't go back on it.
Anyone who knows anything about football, or anyone who knows nothing about football but loves it, knows that Ryan Giggs is a top quality player. A consummate professional and a great ambassador for football and Manchester United.
[cite]Posted By: DRF[/cite]The US most certainly do go in for this stuff, just not so much in their newspapers. They do have stacks and stacks of magazine weeklies full of it though. The difference is it is almost impossible to sue or get a retraction from the press in the US. Therefore they can basically say whatever they like and those in question can do nothing abou it. This in turns leads to so many far-fetched stories that the US public don't always know what is true and what isn't, so half believe everything.
The reason so many celebs sue through Britain is because we have the toughest libel laws in the world. Maybe if we followed everyone elses example and had little more press freedom we wouldn't be in this position.
And stop saying 'if it is Giggs'.
Good point. They (US Mags) printed lots about Beckham, he didn't sue for reasons stated above. He's hardly suffered has he?
Comments
I see your point, and have done all along, but if the case means nothing to the public, why did he feel that he needed an injunction in the first place?
Ian Hislop certainly cares about Andrew Marr - as do a number of his contemporaries. Now you could argue that that is only because of the injunction BUT how could our country's most famous political reporter question an MP on, for example, a sex scandal when he had had one himself? That was the original point, which Marr tried to hide from...
Personally I'm just looking forward to Alan Shearer's comments on Match of the Day when Mr Giggs suffered the same fate that Terry did.....
Other things on his mind?
TBF to Marr he has still not named the female journo but has fessed up himself .
people like Cole, terry, rooney can sometimes leave a sour taste in your mouth on the pitch so that their antics you hear of off the pitch you perceive them in that same arrogant bullshit manor,
With Giggsy I couldn't care about the off field stuff, what a player and to have watched him live against my team in the peak of his career I am thankful . he is one of the best players I have seen and one of the best players to have graced our hallowed turf albeit in opposition colours
It is amazing how different people see the game in different ways, i will say this that i admit Giggs was good v Chelski, but last night he was hopeless!! Crap beard as well.
was amusing at first
I would use the term "utterly baffling" - Giggs has to be the most inoffensive top class player in 25 years!
Your a twat.
Exactly the point. He doesn't want people to change their opinion of him. If he was well known as a jack-the-lad who had been with a string of women there wouldn't be a lot of point trying to save your repitation would there?
PS Andrew Marr's bit was x, I think. And the timing coincided with Marrs profile being raised. He should be way more ashamed of himself that Giggs as it goes against everything he presents. To try and distance himself from it now it poor form.
In other Anglo countries, the US, Canada, Australia and NZ, the press do not report this stuff with anything like the regularity or intensity that Fleet Street does, its remarkable.
I mean, who gives a stuff if Ryan Giggs has been porking Esther Rantzen? What difference does that make to anyone's life at all?
The only good reason for outing somebody for an affair is if they are an elected public official and have actively marketed themselves as a "Family Man" and then get caught shagging their assistant, that's hypocrisy and the public have a right to know about it.
But the sex lives of actors, footballers and journalists should be of no interest to the public at all and they absolutely have the right to protect their privacy.
In other Anglo countries, the US, Canada, Australia and NZ, the press do not report this stuff with anything like the regularity or intensity that Fleet Street does, its remarkable.
I mean, who gives a stuff if Ryan Giggs has been porking Esther Rantzen? What difference does that make to anyone's life at all?
The only good reason for outing somebody for an affair is if they are an elected public official and have actively marketed themselves as a "Family Man" and then get caught shagging their assistant, that's hypocrisy and the public have a right to know about it.
But the sex lives of actors, footballers and journalists should be of no interest to the public at all and they absolutely have the right to protect their privacy.[/quote]
[quote][cite]Posted By: Ormiston Addick[/cite]The real question about super-injunctions is why are the English so obsessed with reading about the sex lives of famous people? What is the fascination?
In other Anglo countries, the US, Canada, Australia and NZ, the press do not report this stuff with anything like the regularity or intensity that Fleet Street does, its remarkable.
I mean, who gives a stuff if Ryan Giggs has been porking Esther Rantzen? What difference does that make to anyone's life at all?
The only good reason for outing somebody for an affair is if they are an elected public official and have actively marketed themselves as a "Family Man" and then get caught shagging their assistant, that's hypocrisy and the public have a right to know about it.
But the sex lives of actors, footballers and journalists should be of no interest to the public at all and they absolutely have the right to protect their privacy.[/quote]
this
your opinion on giggs is somewhat hard to understand.
then i get a wedding invite with no date on from someone who's in the print.
i now realise your brain has turned to mush.
;-)
Never forget his shot from inside his own half that hit the bar at The Valley in the 3v3 game.
Ewen McGregor
You have to envy fans who get to see him play each week.
The reason so many celebs sue through Britain is because we have the toughest libel laws in the world. Maybe if we followed everyone elses example and had little more press freedom we wouldn't be in this position.
And stop saying 'if it is Giggs'.
Anyone who knows anything about football, or anyone who knows nothing about football but loves it, knows that Ryan Giggs is a top quality player. A consummate professional and a great ambassador for football and Manchester United.
Good point. They (US Mags) printed lots about Beckham, he didn't sue for reasons stated above. He's hardly suffered has he?