It's the classic loaded question, Ensil. That or 'Have you stopped beating your wife?'. "Are you a murderer?", is loaded in a different way, as it's a no-smoke-without-fire problem. The mere suggestion that you may be a murderer is damaging, even if it's baseless.
All very true, but it's supposed to be the most basic loaded question. People who you'd expect to know better have slipped up on similarly avoidable suggestions.
I'm no lawyer. But to me, a question like that, unless asked in the context of a discussion about Tennis, would be loaded with innuendo, and presumption of guilt.
Come on, Ensil. It's paxmans' job to be Devil's advocate. He does seem to go a little OTT at times; But, to be fair he's very democratic - he's rude to everybody. Especially mealy-mouthed politicians, which I love.
Back on topic, I was browsing through the Fail on my lunch and one of their many annoying reporters, Martin Samuel - Sports Journalist of the Year, reckons Stoke should be considered contenders for 4th. I guesswe could finish 7th afterall then? A particularly amusing point (sic) he brought up, he claimed that had Tottenham have beaten Liverpool at home and drawn with Chelsea, aswell as 2 wins against Hajduk Split, we'd be taken seriously - whereas poor little stoke aren't Stoke are well known for getting results against the big teams at home so it's really nothing new. It's also worth reminding him that Blackpool were 4th this time last year.
It would be libelous for Paxman to ask "So, Mr Redknapp, when are you going to pay your taxes?" because that is making a clear statement of fact that no taxes are being paid.
Stoke have pretty decent depth this season, in all honesty. They may need it if they progress in Europe, though.
It's my understanding that "Did you evade your taxes?" isn't libellous but "Is it true that you evaded your taxes?" is libellous -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- It is also my understanding that you can be good poster, or an irritating, thread de-railing twat! I'm glad to see you've ditched the latter...eventually! and this thread back on topic. Martin Samuel! ...If Stoke finish 4th, I'll run naked to Stoke!
I expect that when he's in the office, and wants to talk to his colleagues, he has to bend over so that they can hear him better. !
Also, I feel it incumbent upon me to point out that should Paxman say to Harry "I think you are a twitchy, sniveling, pug-faced, tight-arsed weasel, not fit to lick my boots, Mr Redknapp! What have you to say to that?" that that would probably amount to no more than an insult, and lack the necessary legal elements to amount to an actionable slander. Of course, Paxman would probably be sacked by the Beeb for losing his noddle, should he ever say such a thing. I hope that clears everything up on that particular point?
All opinion of course - No ****, pal! I didn't think it was possible, but you're even more deluded than Wenger.
Please ignore Jayram. He's known to be massively deluded by his fellow Goons, so it should come as no surprise that he's made a comment like that.
So judging by your logic, just because a team hasn't finished above another for a while, that then means they can't have aspirations of finishing above them for the current season, correct? So first off, you're basically saying teams shouldn't have some sort of ambition to improve and push on from the past season. Secondly, by continuing your logic, does that then mean Man City can't talk about finishing in the top 2/ winning the league because they haven't done that in God knows how many years and therefore are just "deluded"? Teams generally try to improve year by year, leading to them setting higher targets than the previous campaign.
