Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content
GaelicFox

Vardy Double Blocked

Recommended Posts

Doesn't even look like him imo

I thought this too. Was looking in the club shop yesterday and couldn't really see similarities.

Don't understand why he jumped on the bandwagon now? There's been a whole season of Vardy hype. He has had his 5 secs of fame and should leave it there

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Look at Val Kilmer in the film The Doors and then look at the real Jim Morrison. Looks nothing like him other than the hair.

 

As for that pic, he's obviously been practicing in the mirror, looking mean and tilting his head down! I mean, who pulls those facial expressions naturally?!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To be fair. It has got a bit boring. Gmb talksport he seemed to be everywhere.

They even had a Beckham look a like offering his opinion on it on talksport today. Yet had they done some research by that point vardys missus had explained why earlier in the day.

I guess we all love the 80k a week idea

But occasionally there are some down sides. Needed or not it seems vardy is now paying for security outside his home. Not ideal. He shouldn't need that.

I'm bored of him maybe they are too especially if he's tagging himself in everything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To be fair. It has got a bit boring. Gmb talksport he seemed to be everywhere.

They even had a Beckham look a like offering his opinion on it on talksport today. Yet had they done some research by that point vardys missus had explained why earlier in the day.

I guess we all love the 80k a week idea

But occasionally there are some down sides. Needed or not it seems vardy is now paying for security outside his home. Not ideal. He shouldn't need that.

I'm bored of him maybe they are too especially if he's tagging himself in everything.

Ah Vardys Missus, she who must be obeyed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

lol according to reports this morning he could be looking at legal action from Vardy's management team if any endorsements or image rights are infringed upon.

 

Bet that's Dr. Frank N. Furters doing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

lol according to reports this morning he could be looking at legal action from Vardy's management team if any endorsements or image rights are infringed upon.

Bet that's Dr. Frank N. Furters doing.

It's getting very strange this now , it's obviously about money and not being annoying

Obviously the Vardy's are not dismissive of his look a like credentials

I heard it suggested the guy was booked to do an appearance at a car dealership, not one that has an agreement with Vardy , and that's when Vardy's management team reacted.

I had no idea a look a like can earn so much cash !

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He did no such thing, that's you reading what you want into what he said. Those words could be taken any number of ways.

lol lol Do you even know what you are saying? Libel can be done by implication. If your approach could actually be used as a defence, the very concept of libel would barely exist at all, and people would just say what they liked about anyone and then claim their remark was a completely innocuous one. Most people know what it means to "not be trusted around kids" and would think worse of a person about whom this comment was written. It's a euphemistic phrase generally used to imply someone is a paedophile and I don't know why you'd think the courts are so credulous that they'd think otherwise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If your approach could actually be used as a defence, the very concept of libel would barely exist at all, and people would just say what they liked about anyone and then claim their remark was a completely innocuous one. Most people know what it means to "not be trusted around kids" and would think worse of a person about whom this comment was written. It's a euphemistic phrase generally used to imply someone is a paedophile and I don't know why you'd think the courts are so credulous that they'd think otherwise.

He didn't say he was "not be trusted around kids". He said "Wouldn't trust him babysitting your kids would you". The second sentence could easily be argued that it was meant to infer he wasn't capable of babysitting for whatever reason they decide. Still defamation, but nowhere near as bad.

 

Most libel cases are about someone actually saying someone did something, or heavy implication, subtle implication is a hard one to prove. So I don't get your point about it not existing with that defence. There are numerous examples of libel cases being thrown out of court because of the judges stating the words printed "did not bear the defamatory meaning that the defamation solicitors were advocating".

 

Anyway, this is boring... the Vardy lookalike is boring as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He did no such thing, that's you reading what you want into what he said. Those words could be taken any number of ways.

Implied is all the court needs to consider , was it implied ? Yes it was !

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A lot of talk about'tagging' and 'pictures' on here. I suppose this must be a facetube or youbook.

Anyone care to explain it for the social media luddites on here?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest MattP

He did no such thing, that's you reading what you want into what he said. Those words could be taken any number of ways.

 

I don't think what Dan said was libellous but you can be done these days if a Judge ruled you impled anything in his opinion, not my idea of justice but that's where we are these days.

 

Remember Sally Bercow was ordered to pay damages for tweeting "Why is Lord McAlplne trending? Innocent face" - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-22652083

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think what Dan said was libellous but you can be done these days if a Judge ruled you impled anything in his opinion, not my idea of justice but that's where we are these days.

 

Remember Sally Bercow was ordered to pay damages for tweeting "Why is Lord McAlplne trending? Innocent face" - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-22652083

Lords that have a reputation and probably full time solicitors to uphold there image plus she was also in the media eye.

I don't think q postie lookalike that looked like he was gonna blow his load when he was invited on the team bus and spends most of his time time in full kit is really gonna be worried about libel for a comment that insinuates many different things

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He does seem a bit full on / obsessive / unnerving with it but if people are clamouring for photos and arranging PAs with a lookalike in the first instance it's not really him to blame is it?

Agreed, but you can understand him being blocked if he is tagging photos on there social media, and being warned by the management team.

If his talking about doing international events he could be mistaken for the real person by people that are not so familiar with the original.

Vardy is on the crest of a wave, why would you want a lookalike going on celeb bb, that could say anything or provoke more of a back story in the media eye.

Should've kept it low key to earn a little extra, not go on telly talking about this deal that deal and going full time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...