What's new

Player Watch: Hugo Lloris

Streetspur77

Happy Clapper
Jul 20, 2017
2,792
9,404
Im not saying this is the case for Hugo at all and any drunk driving is obviously bad but how can people say there’s no grey area in drink driving?

What if you’re 0.01 over the limit? Are you then a horrible person but someone who is exactly on the limit is still a good person? Where’s the line? There’s 100% a grey area, even though it’s best just to not drink at all.
 

BringBack_leGin

Well-Known Member
Jul 28, 2004
27,719
54,929
He is being charged for drink driving. In my opinion that is a pretty much as good indication as you can get that he was caught drink driving.

How is it not black and white?
It's a black and white situation. There really is no grey area.

Do you have to be an expert now to give an opinion?
He’s been charged, until he’s found guilty, and we know what he’s guilty of, it’s not black and white. On the basis of the limited information we currently have available, for it to be black and white we must 1) be certain that he is guilty of the offence, which we won’t know until 11.9.2018 and 2) know exactly how drunk he was- I.e. was it a case of he had just 1 unit but as a light man who’d had a light dinner, that was enough to push uk his blood alcohol level, or was he blind drunk having just down a litre of vodka.

Drunk driving is unacceptable, but you know what else is unacceptable? Condemning someone without full facts.
 

tooey

60% banana
Apr 22, 2005
5,228
7,948
Nothing like a drink driving story to bring out the holier than thou attitude of the masses. I'm not down playing the seriousness of it because drink driving costs lives, but do people really feel the need to let everybody know how disgusted they are and how they would never do such a thing? To whoever said it doesn't matter how over the limit he is, I would disagree, there's a massive difference between scraping over the limit and being blind drunk in terms of your impairment.
 

MyNameIsNicolaBerti

Well-Known Member
Jan 28, 2013
2,035
3,834
Lloris is, let us not forget, NOT Guilty of drink driving. He has been arrested and charged. Does not imply guilty whatsoever. So, lets wait and see hear the facts....at court. Not the court public opinion.
While in most cases I would agree with this, this is the one area where you can't really say this. Why? Because when you're arrested for drink driving it's based on machine recorded evidence, and I believe you then have a second test at the police station. So unless the machines are faulty there really isn't much scope for the presumption of innocence.
 

Metalhead

But that's a debate for another thread.....
Nov 24, 2013
25,351
38,294
How the hell should I know, I’ve never a) had an employee who committed a crime or b) run a billion £ organisation,

But I like that you’re trying to get me to give you something to argue with, it shows how much you think about me, I feel special.
I'm sure that the club have a policy in place for these eventualities
 

aussie spur

Well-Known Member
May 25, 2009
211
402
That's all true but it's still not a defence. If you drink anything and then drive, you're taking a risk, for yourself and on behalf of others.

It's not a defence at all, but it does affect the seriousness of the offence. A court will treat a person who is just over more leniently than someone who is toasted.

Whilst I agree that the best policy is not to drive if you have had any alcohol, the law (in Australia at least) says that you can. This means that people who drink also have the right to assess their own level of intoxication before they drive. I think that that shows the stupidity of the current legal limit (it should be set at such a low level that only minor residual readings are safe), but there it is.

As a role model, Hugo will have to have some additional punishment from the club, but I think we have to see the circumstances before one can say what that should be.
 

Jules_PF

Well-Known Member
Nov 26, 2014
252
450
Are you being serious ? You think they’d charge someone with drink driving who wasn’t over the limit ? Does anyone also know if it’s standard to be held in custody for 7 hours seems a bit excessive.

We have a legal system and due process for a reason.

The simple fact he has been charged does not make him or anyone else guilty. Sorry but if you can't see the difference I can't explain it to you.
 

SpursDave88

Well-Known Member
Aug 31, 2012
2,193
5,831
The club captain should not be out til 2:30 am before a game. He should not drink much if any alchohol as a professional athlete and he certainly should not drink and drive.

Had this been a more junior player or youth player he may have had his contract torn up.

Pathetic all round really.
 

MyNameIsNicolaBerti

Well-Known Member
Jan 28, 2013
2,035
3,834
Nothing like a drink driving story to bring out the holier than thou attitude of the masses. I'm not down playing the seriousness of it because drink driving costs lives, but do people really feel the need to let everybody know how disgusted they are and how they would never do such a thing? To whoever said it doesn't matter how over the limit he is, I would disagree, there's a massive difference between scraping over the limit and being blind drunk in terms of your impairment.
And there's a massive diffegrence between getting behind the wheel of a car after a drink and ordering a taxi and having a snooze in the back on the way home.
 

hughy

I'm SUPER cereal.
Nov 18, 2007
31,842
56,934
Im not saying this is the case for Hugo at all and drunk driving is obviously bad but how can people say there’s no grey area in drink driving?

What if you’re 0.01 over the limit? Are you then a horrible person but someone who is exactly on the limit is still a good person? Where’s the line?
No. No. And more no.

If you're stupid enough to not know the strength of an alcoholic drink, don't drink.
If you're stupid enough to not know the legal limit, don't drink.
If you think you may be close to the limit but "one more half-pint wont hurt as that'll only put me 0.01 over the limit" DON'T FUCKING DRINK.

Follow the above rules, and you'll save yourself a lot of embarrassment. It really isn't rocket science.
 

glospur

Well-Known Member
May 19, 2015
2,608
9,806
Im not saying this is the case for Hugo at all and any drunk driving is obviously bad but how can people say there’s no grey area in drink driving?

What if you’re 0.01 over the limit? Are you then a horrible person but someone who is exactly on the limit is still a good person? Where’s the line? There’s 100% a grey area.
Yep.

This is why I'm personally in favor of a limit of 0. If that was the case it would be unambiguous. You've either go alcohol in your system, or you don't. It would also minimize the chances of people miscalculating, and dissuade people from risking whether they're over the limit or not.
 

Johnny J

Not the Kiwi you need but the one you deserve
Aug 18, 2012
18,124
47,893
It's not a defence at all, but it does affect the seriousness of the offence. A court will treat a person who is just over more leniently than someone who is toasted.

Whilst I agree that the best policy is not to drive if you have had any alcohol, the law (in Australia at least) says that you can. This means that people who drink also have the right to assess their own level of intoxication before they drive. I think that that shows the stupidity of the current legal limit (it should be set at such a low level that only minor residual readings are safe), but there it is.

As a role model, Hugo will have to have some additional punishment from the club, but I think we have to see the circumstances before one can say what that should be.
I agree with this. I meant that the crime is the same, regardless of the punishment.
 

Metalhead

But that's a debate for another thread.....
Nov 24, 2013
25,351
38,294
Nothing like a drink driving story to bring out the holier than thou attitude of the masses. I'm not down playing the seriousness of it because drink driving costs lives, but do people really feel the need to let everybody know how disgusted they are and how they would never do such a thing? To whoever said it doesn't matter how over the limit he is, I would disagree, there's a massive difference between scraping over the limit and being blind drunk in terms of your impairment.
Or maybe drink driving genuinely angers people. Maybe people on here have been personally affected by it in the past.
 

SpursDave88

Well-Known Member
Aug 31, 2012
2,193
5,831
We have a legal system and due process for for a reason.

The simple fact he has been charged does not make him or anyone else guilty. Sorry but if you can't see the difference I can't explain it to you.

He failed a breathaliser test and then spent 7 hours in a cell.

Can someone fail a breathaliser test if they haven't been drinking?
 
Last edited:

Saoirse

Well-Known Member
Aug 20, 2013
6,143
15,550
Im not saying this is the case for Hugo at all and any drunk driving is obviously bad but how can people say there’s no grey area in drink driving?

What if you’re 0.01 over the limit? Are you then a horrible person but someone who is exactly on the limit is still a good person? Where’s the line? There’s 100% a grey area, even though it’s best just to not drink at all.
The grey area for me is readings between ~10mg and 80mg, which is legal but still proven to substantially increase your likelihood of causing an accident. Legally you get away with it, morally I think it's completely wrong if you know you're in that zone but choose to drive anyway. Over the limit, which is deliberately extremely generous to ensure it's near-impossible without having knowingly drunk, is past the grey area.
 

Jules_PF

Well-Known Member
Nov 26, 2014
252
450
While in most cases I would agree with this, this is the one area where you can't really say this. Why? Because when you're arrested for drink driving it's based on machine recorded evidence, and I believe you then have a second test at the police station. So unless the machines are faulty there really isn't much scope for the presumption of innocence.

No, its an absolute. No one is guilty unless convicted BY A COURT, not the read out from a machine. What if the machine is faulty (as electro mechanical devices can be) or hasn't been calibrated correctly. To many variables. That is why we have a court hearing to determine guilt.
 

werty

Well-Known Member
Aug 8, 2005
25,074
26,310
Im not saying this is the case for Hugo at all and any drunk driving is obviously bad but how can people say there’s no grey area in drink driving?

What if you’re 0.01 over the limit? Are you then a horrible person but someone who is exactly on the limit is still a good person? Where’s the line? There’s 100% a grey area, even though it’s best just to not drink at all.
The line is in the Law where it says X amount is acceptable and anything over isn't. It couldn't be more black and white.
 

tooey

60% banana
Apr 22, 2005
5,228
7,948
And there's a massive diffegrence between getting behind the wheel of a car after a drink and ordering a taxi and having a snooze in the back on the way home.

But that's not what's being discussed is it? You're the holier than thou type I'm referring to. Get in the real world, people fuck up, all the time. We don't know how drunk he was or the circumstance around it, so untill then I'll keep the pitch fork and petrol soaked effigie in my shed.
 
Top