Unless I have missed it, isn't this the first time that Richard agar has been directly implicated into this whole sorry affair?

Sean Long's testimony explictly states that once aware of the situation, Agar talks about "pulling the game".

Up until today, Agar hadn't been involved had he?

There are still more questions than answers, and this is why should be an independent inquiry. Who exactly knew what?

I thought the DPA only covered data stored in electronic format and not the written word

No it's both. And verbal, too, I believe. My company is governed by the DPA, and part of my job is to ensure that the act is adhered to by all within my department.

I'm fairly sure it would.

If I were any of the folk whose details have appeared on that anti-RL website I'd be lodging a complaint and/or consulting a solicitor.

Surely it can't be lawful for Gleeson to have been given the file by UKAD, as stated by sportingintelligence?



It's almost as if UKAD were giving him the ammunition to, if not clear his name, then certainly to implicate others. It's ludicrous. And it can only be concluded that sportingintelligence are getting their info via Gleeson.

True.
So either Gleeson and/or sportingintelligence are making it up or the UKAD have questions to answer.