Guided Missile Posted 19 February, 2011 Share Posted 19 February, 2011 A few may remember a thread started by me, which resulted in an infraction and a banning. To be honest, with my record of carefully checking my facts and never being one to libel anyone, the ban p! $$ed me off. I have searched through the site and cannot find reference to the article below, published in the Daily Mail, on the 1st February, 2011: Former Southampton crowd favourite Francis Benali claims to be taking legal action against the club's executive chairman Nicola Cortese over alleged unpaid bills. Cortese was living in a house Southampton rented from Benali's property company. The former defender said: 'We had to get contract cleaners in and there was also unpaid rent. It's a legal matter now.' Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/article-1352310/Charles-Sale-Replays-FA-Cup-revamp.html#ixzz1EOxXXZog On the 26th September, 2010 I posted this on this website, which was hastily removed and for which I was banned for three months: Frannie Benali is suing Cortese for £50K for damage to his house and outstanding rent while Cortese was living there. I would appreciate an apology and a statement that this website has not sacrificed freedom of speech on the altar of Cortese's personal ambitions. I would have thought that this site's administrators would have learnt from Keith Legge and his doomed love affair with Wilde... ...I won't be holding my breath, though and I await the junta's removal of this post and suppression of any future negative posts against the Cortese regime... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint_clark Posted 19 February, 2011 Share Posted 19 February, 2011 (edited) After clarification from GM i'll let this thread run. Edited 19 February, 2011 by Saint_clark Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guided Missile Posted 19 February, 2011 Author Share Posted 19 February, 2011 (edited) Thanks, Clarkie. I think it may be worth reposting the original post, the most sensitive part of which has been published in the Daily Mail. For the benefit of readers and administrators, it is important to note that the claims below are facts that have been reported to a close friend of mine, directly from the person(s) involved. So, it was claimed that: Frannie Benali is suing Cortese for £50K for damage to his house and outstanding rent while Cortese was living there. Cortese charges employees for parking whilst they are at work. The club pays for Cortese's wife's manicures. The Liebherr family aren't interested in Saints and let Cortese do what he wants apart from spend too much money. Whether these claims are true,or not, it should be of concern to all Saints fans, however the team are doing on the pitch. The reason is that although Cortese is undoubtedly an excellent and talented administrator, SFC has always been a family club and one that has maintained great links with former players. That these stories exist is confirmation that there is something wrong about the relationship in some areas and it needs to be addressed. Cortese will only address it if the fans force him to, in my opinion. For Francis Benali to feel like he has to sue over what is simply a matter of money, surely isn't right. Cortese/SFC should have settled the matter privately and not allowed it to become a public issue. Edited 19 February, 2011 by Guided Missile Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Verbal Posted 19 February, 2011 Share Posted 19 February, 2011 So how's the court case going? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saint_bert Posted 19 February, 2011 Share Posted 19 February, 2011 Thanks, Clarkie. I think it may be worth reposting the original post, the most sensitive part of which has been published in the Daily Mail. For the benefit of readers and administrators, it is important to note that the claims below are facts that have been reported to a close friend of mine, directly from the person(s) involved. So, was claimed that: Frannie Benali is suing Cortese for £50K for damage to his house and outstanding rent while Cortese was living there. Cortese charges employees for parking whilst they are at work. The club pays for Cortese's wife's manicures. The Liebherr family aren't interested in Saints and let Cortese do what he wants apart from spend too much money. Whether these claims are true,or not, it should be of concern to all Saints fans, however the team are doing on the pitch. The reason is that although Cortese is undoubtedly an excellent and talented administrator, SFC has always been a family club and one that has maintained great links with former players. That these stories exist is confirmation that there is something wrong about the relationship in some areas and it needs to be addressed. Cortese will only address it if the fans force him to, in my opinion. For Francis Benali to feel like he has to sue over what is simply a matter of money, surely isn't right. Cortese/SFC should have settled the matter privately and not allowed it to become a public issue. So does the General Hospital. Whats your point? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ericofarabia Posted 19 February, 2011 Share Posted 19 February, 2011 Is this because Nasty Nic is an Expat (albeit an Italian one)? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guided Missile Posted 19 February, 2011 Author Share Posted 19 February, 2011 So how's the court case going? I was told last week that it is going to court. Benali will be talking through his lawyers, if at all. I think that if there was damage to his property and there was rent outstanding, it should not have been necessary for a former player to sue the club or Cortese. You would have thought a quick private meeting and agreement regarding the amount owing would have avoided any public spat that could damage the reputation of the club. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Verbal Posted 19 February, 2011 Share Posted 19 February, 2011 I was told last week that it is going to court. Benali will be talking through his lawyers, if at all. I think that if there was damage to his property and there was rent outstanding, it should not have been necessary for a former player to sue the club or Cortese. You would have thought a quick private meeting and agreement regarding the amount owing would have avoided any public spat that could damage the reputation of the club. I'm genuinely surprised. This sort of stuff rarely gets to a day in court. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hatch Posted 19 February, 2011 Share Posted 19 February, 2011 Can someone remind me why I would be interested in this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dingbattigger Posted 19 February, 2011 Share Posted 19 February, 2011 Again only one side of the stuation. The mail also states Southampton say they have received no legal correspondence from Benali and insist there is money owed back from Cortese's deposit. Saints believe the dispute has more to do with Benali no longer being a club ambassador Why should we be concerned with second hand, one sided gossip? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gingeletiss Posted 19 February, 2011 Share Posted 19 February, 2011 I suggest GM, you revisit the Daily Hell's world exclusive, here, let me help! Former Southampton crowd favourite Francis Benali claims to be taking legal action against the club's executive chairman Nicola Cortese over alleged unpaid bills. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JustMike Posted 19 February, 2011 Share Posted 19 February, 2011 i would have kept you banned Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guided Missile Posted 19 February, 2011 Author Share Posted 19 February, 2011 I suggest GM, you revisit the Daily Hell's world exclusive, here, let me help! Former Southampton crowd favourite Francis Benali claims to be taking legal action against the club's executive chairman Nicola Cortese over alleged unpaid bills. I don't have to read the Daily Mail for information regarding this. Still, due to the overwhelming pro-Cortese lobby on this site, I'll refrain from posting anymore of the information I have recently heard regarding this. I wouldn't want to upset any of you in case you stain your Go-Wilde tee shirts with your tears Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ART Posted 19 February, 2011 Share Posted 19 February, 2011 "IN GM WE TRUST" Welcome back, maybe sanity and fact will rule once again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doggface Posted 19 February, 2011 Share Posted 19 February, 2011 It's a private & domestic matter IMO. I love mlt & fb but think nc has done a good job so far. I sit somewhere in the middle, I know for fact that cortese tried to build bridges with mlt and was told to get ****ed. So clearly it's not just cortese being a tyrant Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raging Bull Posted 19 February, 2011 Share Posted 19 February, 2011 Due to the fact the car park could be parked in by anybody and nobody would know if they were working at the club or not, maybe they do have to pay for parking and get to claim it back with receipts at the end of the month. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jam Posted 19 February, 2011 Share Posted 19 February, 2011 Due to the fact the car park could be parked in by anybody and nobody would know if they were working at the club or not, maybe they do have to pay for parking and get to claim it back with receipts at the end of the month. Yes, it would be totally impossible for the club to provide cards for employees to put in their windscreens or record their license plate numbers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Window Cleaner Posted 19 February, 2011 Share Posted 19 February, 2011 Yes, it would be totally impossible for the club to provide cards for employees to put in their windscreens or record their license plate numbers. Or even an electronic key the same as are used the whole world over, even in developing countries. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VectisSaint Posted 19 February, 2011 Share Posted 19 February, 2011 I don't have to read the Daily Mail for information regarding this. Still, due to the overwhelming pro-Cortese lobby on this site, I'll refrain from posting anymore of the information I have recently heard regarding this. I wouldn't want to upset any of you in case you stain your Go-Wilde tee shirts with your tears OMG here we go again, the childish accusations of the being pro-Cortese if you don't agree with one of the vocal minority who seems to have a grudge and need to form themselves into school playground gangs, you're not in my gang you are in the pro-Cortese gang. 99% of SFC Supporters are neither pro or anti-Cortese, no one actually gives a flying **** about Cortese, he is just the current Chairman of the Football Club. There are 2 sides to this story, none of us know the full facts about both sides. Just because the other party to this dispute is an "untouchable" then everyone else has to be wrong. This stance against anything Cortese does is just so irrational, but of course GM knows better and I am sure will now label me as pro Cortese because it is the only way he can deal with life, pigeon-holing everyone and not understanding that there are shades of grey. 'Charging for car parking - get out into the real world, many companies do the same, or do not provide sufficient parking on site. Not nice, but reality. Mrs Cortese's manicures - who cares if they get paid for by the Club, it is Liebherr/Cortese that put the money in so if they agree, fine by me. If we were a plc and watching every penny I would have a different view but we are not so I don't give a toss. And as for the Liebherrs not caring, well maybe thats true, but if it was I suspect they would have pulled the plug by now, in any case there appear to be other backers potentially lined up. GM - we don't really care about this, its a private spat between 2 people of Italian descent who seem to have fallen out over a private matter. Move on (bloody hell I wish there was game today so that we had something better to talk about). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dronskisaint Posted 19 February, 2011 Share Posted 19 February, 2011 With your opening declaration that you have a record of carefully checking facts..I'd underline that last word if I knew how - you should be wary of two words - Claims (when used as a verb) and hearsay. These words are not renowned for standing up to scrutiny in any court. Personally I will remember Franny for the way he was last Sunday night & for the service he gave us...I'm happy with the way the club is being run & I really could not care less about your knowledge of 'claims'. This really isn't personal to you...I didn't know that you had been infracted and it would make no difference if I'd noticed your or any other's departure...I really, really don't care about petty squabbles whether real or imagined, that have nothing to add to my enjoyment of supporting Saints. Thank you Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
70's Mike Posted 19 February, 2011 Share Posted 19 February, 2011 Welcome back John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint Fan CaM Posted 19 February, 2011 Share Posted 19 February, 2011 I would have thought that if there was a massive rift Benali would not be welcome at SMS. He looked pretty comfortable in the Mick Channon suite during the Man Utd game. Beyond that though, like others have said, this is nothing to do with 99% of Saints fans...move on. Oh and be careful what you wish for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baldsaint Posted 19 February, 2011 Share Posted 19 February, 2011 below are facts that have been reported to a close friend of mine, directly from the person(s) involved. So, it was claimed that: The Liebherr family aren't interested in Saints and let Cortese do what he wants apart from spend too much money. So either the Liebherr family OR Cortese (the people involved) told your friend this then? I find that hard to believe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
musesaint Posted 19 February, 2011 Share Posted 19 February, 2011 OMG - who was stupid enough to give GM the oxygen of further self publicity ??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint-scooby Posted 19 February, 2011 Share Posted 19 February, 2011 S.U.M.O is a good book Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
docker-p Posted 19 February, 2011 Share Posted 19 February, 2011 Its a pity that rather than sort this in private, NC decides to add to his long list of pointless public disputes. When next will his peculiar brand of management appear? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpine_saint Posted 19 February, 2011 Share Posted 19 February, 2011 i would have kept you banned Me too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quickfire Double Posted 19 February, 2011 Share Posted 19 February, 2011 Its a pity that rather than sort this in private, NC decides to add to his long list of pointless public disputes. When next will his peculiar brand of management appear? It's unlikely to appear before your next tiresomely repetitive anti-Cortese post, I'll wager. If there's more than one record in your collection, now might be time for a change... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
suewhistle Posted 19 February, 2011 Share Posted 19 February, 2011 Its a pity that rather than sort this in private, NC decides to add to his long list of pointless public disputes. Er, what has NC said in public? I prefer these things, if they really have to get that far, to be decided in court, when matters then become a matter of public record and not 'he said, she said' claims which none of us are in a possition to corroborate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guided Missile Posted 19 February, 2011 Author Share Posted 19 February, 2011 Me too. Like you ain't done time, rude boy... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Window Cleaner Posted 19 February, 2011 Share Posted 19 February, 2011 Er, what has NC said in public? I prefer these things, if they really have to get that far, to be decided in court, when matters then become a matter of public record and not 'he said, she said' claims which none of us are in a possition to corroborate. do not the Italians have a proverb which goes 'to pay and to die there is always time" or something of that ilk?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dronskisaint Posted 19 February, 2011 Share Posted 19 February, 2011 Its a pity that rather than sort this in private, NC decides to add to his long list of pointless public disputes. When next will his peculiar brand of management appear? Er - these are the points in contention:- Frannie Benali is suing Cortese for £50K for damage to his house and outstanding rent while Cortese was living there. Cortese charges employees for parking whilst they are at work. The club pays for Cortese's wife's manicures. The Liebherr family aren't interested in Saints and let Cortese do what he wants apart from spend too much money. Would you like to point out where Cortese has decided to do or say anything about them that wasn't in private? I'm not sure why I even posted this.....I have no agenda...you & the OP can't see beyond your own. I do like to see accuracy & honesty however so it stays. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deppo Posted 19 February, 2011 Share Posted 19 February, 2011 OMG here we go again, the childish accusations of the being pro-Cortese if you don't agree with one of the vocal minority who seems to have a grudge and need to form themselves into school playground gangs, you're not in my gang you are in the pro-Cortese gang. 99% of SFC Supporters are neither pro or anti-Cortese, no one actually gives a flying **** about Cortese, he is just the current Chairman of the Football Club. There are 2 sides to this story, none of us know the full facts about both sides. Just because the other party to this dispute is an "untouchable" then everyone else has to be wrong. This stance against anything Cortese does is just so irrational, but of course GM knows better and I am sure will now label me as pro Cortese because it is the only way he can deal with life, pigeon-holing everyone and not understanding that there are shades of grey. 'Charging for car parking - get out into the real world, many companies do the same, or do not provide sufficient parking on site. Not nice, but reality. Mrs Cortese's manicures - who cares if they get paid for by the Club, it is Liebherr/Cortese that put the money in so if they agree, fine by me. If we were a plc and watching every penny I would have a different view but we are not so I don't give a toss. And as for the Liebherrs not caring, well maybe thats true, but if it was I suspect they would have pulled the plug by now, in any case there appear to be other backers potentially lined up. GM - we don't really care about this, its a private spat between 2 people of Italian descent who seem to have fallen out over a private matter. Move on (bloody hell I wish there was game today so that we had something better to talk about). Exactly what I'd expect to hear from you pro-Cortese lot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liquidshokk Posted 19 February, 2011 Share Posted 19 February, 2011 Yes, it would be totally impossible for the club to provide cards for employees to put in their windscreens or record their license plate numbers. When I parked at the stadium the other day the machine at the barrier has a message on it telling staff to swipe their pass to enter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
um pahars Posted 19 February, 2011 Share Posted 19 February, 2011 A few may remember a thread started by me, which resulted in an infraction and a banning. To be honest, with my record of carefully checking my facts and never being one to libel anyone, the ban p! $$ed me off. ... John, I was on my "sabbatical" when this first came out, so apologies if I'm not that well informed on the issue, but couldn't the issue surrounding the initial furore be more to do with it being a somewhat "dodgy" claim i.e. "dodgy" in that at that point the allegation was fairly new on the block and involved two people going to court and the last thing this forum wanted was to be somehow implicated in an already butter dispute. I could understand if the forum owners were unsure of its veracity, particularly as it turns out there still seems to be some contention over the facts with "Benali's" side claiming it is going through the due legal process, whilst the Club are saying they have heard nothing and are aware of nothing???? I'm not doubting your sincerity or personal integrity (I think you are a thoroughly decent chap), just suggesting that the motive for stamping on the initial post might be to do with saving this forums ar5e as opposed to Cortese's. On a similar note, was anyone aware of a rumour that Lee Hoos and Matty Oakley had a dispute when Hoos was renting Oakleys house??? Iwas led to believe it was only resolved when some lumps paid Mt Hoos a visit (could of course be total ******). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barry the Badger Posted 19 February, 2011 Share Posted 19 February, 2011 Whether these claims are true,or not, it should be of concern to all Saints fans, however the team are doing on the pitch. Disagree completely. I couldn't care less and find it amazing that anybody would get so excited about something so trivial. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lordswoodsaints Posted 19 February, 2011 Share Posted 19 February, 2011 If GM is proved right then there should be some sort of apology but is this really football related news/gossip?? I couldn't give a rats arse if cortese trashed benali's gaff in fact I hope cortese did trash it as IMO benali is a tool. I am all for justice for GM but this should be resigned to one of the other forum categories. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guan 2.0 Posted 19 February, 2011 Share Posted 19 February, 2011 A few may remember a thread started by me, which resulted in an infraction and a banning. To be honest, with my record of carefully checking my facts and never being one to libel anyone, the ban p! $$ed me off. I have searched through the site and cannot find reference to the article below, published in the Daily Mail, on the 1st February, 2011: Former Southampton crowd favourite Francis Benali claims to be taking legal action against the club's executive chairman Nicola Cortese over alleged unpaid bills. Cortese was living in a house Southampton rented from Benali's property company. The former defender said: 'We had to get contract cleaners in and there was also unpaid rent. It's a legal matter now.' Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/article-1352310/Charles-Sale-Replays-FA-Cup-revamp.html#ixzz1EOxXXZog On the 26th September, 2010 I posted this on this website, which was hastily removed and for which I was banned for three months: Frannie Benali is suing Cortese for £50K for damage to his house and outstanding rent while Cortese was living there. I would appreciate an apology and a statement that this website has not sacrificed freedom of speech on the altar of Cortese's personal ambitions. I would have thought that this site's administrators would have learnt from Keith Legge and his doomed love affair with Wilde... ...I won't be holding my breath, though and I await the junta's removal of this post and suppression of any future negative posts against the Cortese regime... Or the fact that they are repsonsible for any libel you make, may have something to do with it On the internet the rules are exactly the same. There are no special internet defences. The only advantage is that web sites tend to have a smaller number of users, (so less people see it hence it's less defamatory so it's rarely worth the bother of going to court) and allegations can be removed promptly on protest from a defamed party. On the web, the writer, the web site owner and the ISP can all be sued just like the writer, the magazine and the distributor in the print field. A link could also be potentially defamatory if you are linking to defamatory material. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scudamore Posted 19 February, 2011 Share Posted 19 February, 2011 Can someone remind me why I would be interested in this. Nope. Still the image thrown up of Cortese and his family treating his rented accommodation like a squat and tearing the place apart does rather amuse me... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sotonjoe Posted 19 February, 2011 Share Posted 19 February, 2011 I still can't work out why Benali would be so desperate for cash that he would be prepared to move out of his nice house in Chilworth just to let Cortese live there for a bit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chocco boxo Posted 19 February, 2011 Share Posted 19 February, 2011 Was Benali left back? or even a left back? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
St Chalet Posted 19 February, 2011 Share Posted 19 February, 2011 I've looked at the old thread, and as Saint_Clark has said it was the MODs that infracted and banned. To be fair to that decision there was no substantiation around the posts or indeed a source. I agree with Um Pahars, the decision would have been based on the need to stop the forum being sued, as opposed to upsetting the club. I for one I am glad you are back as your posts are normally a good read and usually come true (Excepting your Enoch Powell moment in respect of ex-pats). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guided Missile Posted 19 February, 2011 Author Share Posted 19 February, 2011 Or the fact that they are repsonsible for any libel you make, may have something to do with it Yet again, I will post this: 2009: High Court ruling on bulletin board cases The High Court has ruled that defamation on internet bulletin boards is akin to slander rather than libel. Mr Justice Eady hearing a case regarding posts on an investors bulletin board (or forum) has said that such comments are not to be taken in the same context as a formal newspaper (etc) article and are more like slander due to the casual or conversational nature of them. Mr Justice Eady stated that posts on bulletin boards "are rather like contributions to a casual conversation (the analogy sometimes being drawn with people chatting in a bar) which people simply note before moving on; they are often uninhibited, casual and ill thought out...Those who participate know this and expect a certain amount of repartee or 'give and take'." As such "When considered in the context of defamation law, therefore, communications of this kind are much more akin to slanders (this cause of action being nowadays relatively rare) than to the usual, more permanent kind of communications found in libel actions...People do not often take a 'thread' and go through it as a whole like a newspaper article. They tend to read the remarks, make their own contributions if they feel inclined, and think no more about it." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dune Posted 19 February, 2011 Share Posted 19 February, 2011 This is one of those threads where it'd be unwise to give an opinion other than to comment on the facts. Clotese will not be amused. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pancake Posted 19 February, 2011 Share Posted 19 February, 2011 I've looked at the old thread, and as Saint_Clark has said it was the MODs that infracted and banned. Just for clarity, the "Mods" or the "Admins"? And was it an outrage ban, or a point accumulation ban? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dune Posted 19 February, 2011 Share Posted 19 February, 2011 Just for clarity, the "Mods" or the "Admins"? And was it an outrage ban, or a point accumulation ban? Outrage at jeopardising the dataco licence probably. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpine_saint Posted 19 February, 2011 Share Posted 19 February, 2011 Like you ain't done time, rude boy... Didnt come on here bleating about it afterwards though......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GenevaSaint Posted 19 February, 2011 Share Posted 19 February, 2011 Its a pity that rather than sort this in private, NC decides to add to his long list of pointless public disputes. When next will his peculiar brand of management appear? And you're sure there was 50K of damage to Benali's house are you? Why? Because Benali said so honest guv. Please we do only have one side of the story and even that's not directly from the horses mouth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
St Chalet Posted 19 February, 2011 Share Posted 19 February, 2011 Just for clarity, the "Mods" or the "Admins"? And was it an outrage ban, or a point accumulation ban? At the time I am not 100% sure which user group applied to the person who was the last poster on the thread, or the person who administered the ban at the time. My statement was to confirm that it wasn't the current admins - Steve & Baj. The ban was for points accumulation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
up and away Posted 19 February, 2011 Share Posted 19 February, 2011 If there is to be any legal action, I really doubt it will be against Cortese directly, the club possibly. As Franny had to move out of offices within Saints because of some issue, it would not surprise me for something going on here in relation to Franny and the club. He's had more than enough time to get this to court and if it's not got there by now, I doubt it will! If any of the players were staying in his house, there is no way he would be directing anything personal at the player for recompense, but the club. 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