Regular Snooker Scene readers will be aware of the way the WPBSA has used its members money to pursue Clive Everton, our editor, under the technicality that he was a billiards only member.
They admitted that the 'truth or falsity' of what he wrote was not at issue.
Earlier this month, a court hearing found in Clive's favour, as the Mail on Sunday reported yesterday.
Here is their story:
Clive Everton may still be hobbling around after breaking his hip on the eve of the World Snooker Championship final, but he can walk tall after winning an important victory for free speech.
The World Professional Billiards and Snooker Association brought a disciplinary case against Everton because of his repeated criticism of the running of the sport in 'Snooker Scene', the magazine he edits.
Even after the case failed when Everton resigned his membership, the governing body sought to recover their legal costs.
But a bankruptcy court hearing in Stourbridge this month rejected the WPBSA claim, leaving them to explain to their members why they have spent more than £100,000 hounding the BBC commentator.
8 comments:
Will Clive Everton be able to try and get his own legal expenses back?
Clive's done a full report of this in the new Snooker Scene out tomorrow - I don't want to get any details wrong by saying any more here!
Why a bankruptcy court?
DJ
Congratulations, Clive! (Brief note on that > http://www.prosnookerref.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,4.585.html
CJW
Dave,
I remember an interview in the Guardian some time back, where it said that Clive was barred from the BBC commentary box at venues covering tournaments. Was this true?
How did it work when it came to the press room, to make copy and audio work. Must have been very difficult.
But, I wholeheartedly support his and the magazine's views of the WPBSA.
After reading the financial figures in some reports, it makes the WPBSA look like Conrad Black!
Thanks, Joe
Clive was banned from press rooms for part of the 1998/99 season. He was allowed into commentary boxes because that wasn't in the WPBSA's jurisdiction.
He had to do his newspaper stuff from the TV scanner trucks or his hotel.
In the end, Embassy were so appalled that they took control of the pressroom at the Crucible and invited Clive in. The ban was dropped soon afterwards.
If the wpbsa put as much money into the junior game as they do into the lawyers pocket then it would impress me a little more.
Mr Everton does cut it close to the bone in his editorial comments, but in my opinion it is up to an individual to sue for defamation not an organisation. So if Peter Ebdon for eg thought he was defamed then he should act personally. I also think that the wpbsa board should be made up of people who have no buisness interests or connections with snooker players and bodies that might throw up issues that could be deemed as 'conflict of interest'
I think also though that Mr Everton should put his efforts into ensuring snooker is a growing sport not a diminishing one. Arguements and fueds can drag on and drag the sport down perhaps putting off potential sponsors.
Time to bury the hachet Clive...please I think it was a disgrace that you where banned and frog marched out of the snooker press room in Preston. I think it is a disgrace your mag is not available to buy at venues.
I do think though enough is enough...concentrate your pen on the positive side of the sport, get our sport in the 2012 olimpics ...run a campagin... if you care about the sport like I know you do please stop this in fighting for the good of the sport I love too
A few questions in response to the last entry:
* Are you under the impression that "cutting it close to the bone" is in any way a basis for anyone to be sued, either by an individual or an organisation?
Telling the truth, however hard it might be for some people to take, is no grounds for having action taken against you.
The WPBSA have just discovered this at a cost of almost £110,000.
* Given that you think that "Mr Everton should put his efforts into ensuring snooker is a growing sport not a diminishing one", have you read much of his magazine over the last 20 years?
This is exactly what he has done in every single issue.
* Why is it "time to bury the hatchet"? That's simply another way of saying that Clive should not report any future incompetence on the part of the WPBSA and let them make an even bigger mess of things.
* Do you really believe there is any sense in which Clive is responsible for, or capable of, stopping the in-fighting in snooker? The in-fighting is the result of decades of incompetence and corruption.
If you think that will stop if Clive stops writing about it, you could hardly be more wrong.
* What does "enough is enough" mean?
Post a Comment