thats not a retraction so may not placate them.

Regardless the RFL shouldnt be making statements it cannot stand by. If the RFL do retract their statement, or end up losing a libel case. Ralph Rimmer should be looking for a new job. It is unacceptable to be making a statement which puts the RFL in legal trouble to protect your reputation.

Agreed entirely. However, this looks more of a backdown from Moore more than anything, if he had a chance to recoup whatever he put in Bradford with a watertight case, why would you "settle" for an apology and a retraction? The most interesting thing of the article
It is a bit of a warning to them to make sure they cross all the t’s and dot all the i’s while maybe getting more stuff in print.
'"

so are we are at the point of a mexican standoff ??.....

who has the better poker hand..??

has Moore and co blinked first, has the beads of sweat started to form on the browline........do the rfl fold, call or raise........

You don't know much about libel. It isn't a public dick measuring contest, if one party apologises and retracts then there is little or no money to be had, and the libel court could (and very well might) take the view that a party ploughing on to a hearing refusing to accept an apology and retraction was wasting everyone's time, and stuff it for a very large amount of costs.

That's precisely what I'm suggesting? If I had a case against someone, for a decent sum of money, I wouldn't just settle for an apology and a retraction, and get the case thrown out!

Nach O'wensalsa

Brilliant name for a Mexican stand off

We were chasing Mark Mexico, but he's a prop.

Can they even pick up the cards with their cack hands?

Hmm. I'm not understanding you then, because you seem to me to be suggesting the opposite to what I am.

Don't be daft, they were still blind...

Then I apologise for any confusion my statement made! I am suggesting the offer of apology and retraction, weakens the case, and should it be accepted, whilst leaving the rfl rather sheepish, would lead to the end of the case. This was my take away comment from what you were suggesting also?

So far as I know there has been no apology or retraction, and all the RFL said was they would make no public comment at all.

In most cases a quick apology and retraction, maybe in appropriate cases with some costs and maybe even modest damages, should most certainly be considered very seriously.

If someone who has libelled you accept they did so, and acts quickly to set the record straight, then that minimizes the potential value in damages. And rightly so, the whole point being to try to get folk to settle their differences out of court, and encourage both sides to be reasonable in doing so.

Anything further from Mr Lamb?

give him a chance, there's no need to roast Lamb.