Ryan Giggs ‘only exposed because he took on Twitter’

Ryan Giggs only had his alleged affair with Imogen Thomas exposed because he tried to cover it up in the courts, according to commentators.

Miss Thomas’s publicist Max Clifford said no-one would have known about the former Big Brother contestant’s alleged relationship with the married footballer if he hadn’t taken out an injunction to protect his privacy.

The Manchester United star was finally named in the press on Monday after an MP used Parliamentary privilege to expose him.

Giggs – the most decorated player in the history of British football – is now the subject of countless headlines despite running up what is thought to be a huge legal bill to keep his identity secret.

If Ryan Giggs hadn’t taken out a super-injunction, probably we wouldn’t know what had been going on. Max Clifford

Lib Dem MP John Hemming said he only made the move because Giggs took legal action against the micro-blogging site Twitter to stop people gossiping about him. Mr Hemming said: “Before he sued Twitter, there was no public interest in naming him.”

Mr Clifford said: “I know that she never had any intention of selling her story.

“She came to me because she wanted to make sure the story didn’t come out, and I told her: ‘Phone Ryan Giggs and warn him that The Sun are looking into this, and knocking on your door, because if you don’t talk, and Ryan Giggs doesn’t talk, no-one will know’.

“And that’s the irony of it – if Ryan Giggs hadn’t taken out a super-injunction, probably we wouldn’t know what had been going on.

Law for the rich: the cost of Giggs' gagging

As Twitter rumours run into overdrive and The Mirror wins headline of the day with its splash 'Naming Private Ryan', Channel 4 News' FactCheck looks into the cost of Mr Giggs' gagging order and finds out how easy an injunction is to take out.

Read more: the cost of Giggs' gagging

“It’s only because of that, and of course the fact that, in that super-injunction that he got to protect his privacy and that of his family, he named Imogen, that the whole thing started down that trail that led to it coming out in Parliament yesterday.”

Asked if the other 80 people with injunctions should be worried, Mr Clifford said: “I think all the ones I’m aware of – and that’s probably most of them – are worried, because people around them know, so with what’s going on, there’s a chance that it will come out.

“But hopefully the days of the super-injunction are numbered, because it’s only a law that protects the rich.”

Ms Thomas said she was “outraged” at suggestions that she had tried to blackmail Giggs, after Mr Justice Eady told the High Court that evidence “appeared strongly to suggest” that the footballer was “being blackmailed”.

Before he sued Twitter, there was no public interest in naming him. John Hemming

Mr Hemming said he decided to name Giggs to stop people being jailed for talking about him on Twitter.

The Birmingham Yardley MP said in a statement: “When he sued Twitter, it was clear what he was doing. He was going after the ordinary people who have been gossiping about him on Twitter.

“To prosecute someone for contempt of court is quite a serious step. It comes with an up to two-year jail sentence.

“I have spoken to people of ordinary means who have received these injunctions. I have also spoken to people who faced jailing in secret hearings and who were subject to anonymity orders themselves. This is a really oppressive system.”

He said Giggs should be “held to account”, adding: “Before he sued Twitter, there was no public interest in naming him.

“However, when his lawyers decided to go on a ‘search and destroy’ against the ordinary people who gossip on Twitter, he had taken a step that should not be done anonymously.

“In Burma they jail people for criticising the king and people here are up in arms. Here they threaten to jail people for criticising a footballer and the lawyers say I should not name the footballer.”

Prime Minister David Cameron has written to the chairman of the Commons Justice Committee, Sir Alan Beith, and the chairman of the Commons Culture, Media and Sport Committee, John Whittingdale, asking them to convene a joint committee of both Houses to consider the issues of privacy and the use of injunctions.

Sports Personality odds slashed

The odds of Ryan Giggs being crowned this year’s Sports Personality of the Year have been slashed in the wake of the Twitter injunction, Channel 4 News has learned.

William Hill were offering odds of 150/1 for Giggs, who won the BBC prize in 2009, to receive the accolade again this year.

The bookmakers have cut the odds to 66/1 this week as the Manchester United star’s name finally hit the headlines.

That puts Giggs on a par with United team-mate Wayne Rooney and ahead of cricketer Kevin Pietersen on 80-1, but he remains an outsider.

Athlete Jessica Ennis, who came third in the public vote last year, is the favourite to scoop the award at 5-1.

A William Hill spokesman said: “It’s fair to say that the odds on Ryan Giggs have tumbled in the light of this week’s events. He wasn’t in the running before, despite another very successful season at Manchester United.”

The company is offering a number of other Giggs-related bets in the run-up to this weekend’s Champions League final at Wembley.

The player is 7-1 to score and 20-1 to score first in Saturday’s clash, while William Hill is offering odds of 100-1 on the prospect of Imogen Thomas popping up during live television coverage of the match wearing a Barcelona shirt.

Giggs is widely expected to be in the starting line-up on Saturday evening despite missing United’s open training session on Tuesday, a day after being named in Parliament as the player at the centre of the notorious privacy case.