The Sun newspaper should be sued

[Dee]

If we only get a fine next week, our club should sue the paper, for millions.
stupid paper, upset my whole day today.

[waterbuffalo]

Agreed, they have lost libel cases before, I believe.

[brightonr]

If we only get a fine next week, our club should sue the paper, for millions.
stupid paper, upset my whole day today.

No need for it to upset your day. Only you can let a story do that.

By far the best way of dealing with The Sun, which if it were down to me would happen, is not to allow them in to any of our 19 home league games next season, bar them from all press events and to have nothing at all do do with them for a year.

Upon reciept of an unconditional apology and a firm promise never to include us in their disgraceful attempts to sell papers in future, perhaps we will then allow them access the following season. But only if they behave themselves and take their punishment on the chin. Any whingeing would incur an extra seasons ban.

Then sit back and see who has the last laugh.

[Scarlet pimple]

I totally agree.

[ant8383]

Agree with that custis should be forced to reveal hes " source " or resign!!!

[Dale]

I'm glad we have demanded an investigation as The Sun will have to reveal there FA source who has compromised the hearing or admit it was fabricated

This could backfire bad for The Sun

[Dee]

No need for it to upset your day. Only you can let a story do that.

By far the best way of dealing with The Sun, which if it were down to me would happen, is not to allow them in to any of our 19 home league games next season, bar them from all press events and to have nothing at all do do with them for a year.

Upon reciept of an unconditional apology and a firm promise never to include us in their disgraceful attempts to sell papers in future, perhaps we will then allow them access the following season. But only if they behave themselves and take their punishment on the chin. Any whingeing would incur an extra seasons ban.

Then sit back and see who has the last laugh.

Be like SIR ALEX v BBC...........................best Idea.......you should be working for MI5

[Mellowhoop]

If the FA were taken to court for every porky they told then they would of gone under in the first year of publishing

[BUSHRANGER1982]

If the SUN were taken to court for every porky they told then they would of gone under in the first year of publishing

If only. :yush:

[qblockpete]

Putting a journalistic head on (and of course I am not one !!), it was a great article and you can see them mulling over a Warnock picture all Thursday.

Reading the article it has no substance, no direct quotes, just a "could of" or "should be" rant.

It done a job though, as it sold papers and gave other clubs like Norwich and Cardiff a real lease of life.

The reaility is, the situation is no different to what it was last night and he may well have spoken to a toliet cleaner at the FA

[stanleymarsh]

If we only get a fine next week, our club should sue the paper, for millions.
stupid paper, upset my whole day today.

Sued for what? What bit of law have they fallen foul of?

[qblockpete]

Think the point is this

QPR if found guilty, could demand this Custis fella give the "sources" name to the FA, as a decision had already made.

The FA clearly stimulate no-one at the FA would openly talk about the case, so its irrevelant if the alleged source is on the committee or not.

My opinion is, that he has not spoke to anyone at the FA, and just wrote a sensational headline and article.

[RussRanger]

Sadly, Custis has done no more than an advertising campaigner - used clever language to make us believe something is true than actually saying it is true. It's just implication on his part and he can back that up. He never actually said QPR WILL get a points deduction, just could. Which is his escape route. (Carlsberg is PROBABLY the best lager in the world, remember?)

He did say many inside the FA believe this will happen (the same as many people in your workplace may believe it will happen) and that really can't be proved one way or the other. He's probably right.

He can, however, be forced to name his source for the quotes if it is believed to have influenced or prejudiced the outcome the hearing. And, in that respect, am pretty sure our lawyers will be all over it. (Especially if 15 points deduction).

The relevant quote is: "If they aren't found guilty you might as well scrap the rules about 3rd party owners." Who said it and what position of influence do they have at the FA? Could be anyone from a cleaner to top official. Whoever it was - if they did? - shouldn't have said it to him or anyone. That's the murky bit.

[qblockpete]

Haven't got the article, as I wiped my backside with it earlier, but sure he also said.

" FA officials are talking openly about it"

[RussRanger]

Haven't got the article, as I wiped my backside with it earlier, but sure he also said.

" FA officials are talking openly about it"

Yep, Pete, sorry, I only skim-read but it does say: "Many at the FA are are openly discussing the case and reckon QPR are in big trouble." If true, FA will have to answer that allegation, if false, Custis is accountable.

Really not sure any party wants the hassle of litigation so hopefully this will all be resolved favourably.