Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
sensible response Geneva....but who would buy a Porsche....and then leave it at home all the time? - (especially if they were out on a date)

 

I would, if I was drinking. Simple as that.

 

I like him as a player well enough, but what a d i ck head.

Posted
He was in a strip club as well apparently. That should get the holier than thou amongst you into more of a tizz.

 

At first glance I read this as "He was in the club strip" now that would have been funny.

Posted
Anybody who drink drives is an idiot.

 

And any footballer out drinking at 4.30 am during the season when they are supposed to be 'in training', ought to be fined a signficant chunk of the ridiculous wages they're paid.

Posted
He swerves to the left, he swerves to the rigghtt! Guly do prado, goes drink driving at night!!!

 

Very good!!

 

I can see that one being a regular if someone from the Northam end starts it!

 

Its not very kind to Guly though.

 

Still, neither was the 'BWP, he robs from the skates' but that caught on in a big way!

  • 2 weeks later...
Posted

finally we may see Guly dropped. I have been a defender (no, not on the pitch sadly) of his in the past, and thought he did OK at City, but what I saw during the Utd game and worse still in the Wigan match, have made up my mind. Thanks for the help with the promotions, but its really time to go

Posted
finally we may see Guly dropped. I have been a defender (no, not on the pitch sadly) of his in the past, and thought he did OK at City, but what I saw during the Utd game and worse still in the Wigan match, have made up my mind. Thanks for the help with the promotions, but its really time to go
I'm in the "Pro-Guly" camp, but if Cork is back fit and Ramirez is in the squad, I can't see how he'll make the squad. Unless Adkins feel that Cork could cover the Richardson role as well on the bench (being a midfield and right back option), which might still allow a place for Guly.
Posted
12 month ban reduced to 3 if he does the course.

 

£2,600 fine.

 

Barely any hardship for him really.

 

 

So thats probably equal to £100 fine to you and me, peanuts.

Posted
12 month ban reduced to 3 if he does the course.

 

£2,600 fine.

 

Barely any hardship for him really.

 

Some countries have a fines system related to income and ability to pay. For someone on the national average wage of c£28,000 thats about six weeks wages after tax. For someone like Guly its more like a day and a half. Not exactly equal deterrents.

Posted

although he was over the limit (and therefore gulity - of course) I'm glad that he didn't register over 100 ......especially at 4 in the morning.

 

There are quite a few people who might have got away with that -if they hadn't been followed by a police car.

 

Never mind Guly...pay the man and get on with your training.

Posted
12 month ban reduced to 3 if he does the course.

 

£2,600 fine.

 

Barely any hardship for him really.

 

Are you sure? Attendance at an awareness course could reduce by three months but I'm not sure a 75% reduction is right.

Posted
Are you sure? Attendance at an awareness course could reduce by three months but I'm not sure a 75% reduction is right.

 

It cuts1/4 so will do 9 months

Posted
Are you sure? Attendance at an awareness course could reduce by three months but I'm not sure a 75% reduction is right.

 

I'm sure that was a typo derry, he meant by 3 months.

Posted
Some countries have a fines system related to income and ability to pay. For someone on the national average wage of c£28,000 thats about six weeks wages after tax. For someone like Guly its more like a day and a half. Not exactly equal deterrents.

 

I remember that income related fines were introduced in this country a few years back - I think it was by Ken Clark in the last Tory government. When the richer people in society started getting fines that actually hurt, they had sufficient influence to see the policy quietly dropped. It was an early predecessor of "we're (not) all in this together".

Posted
I remember that income related fines were introduced in this country a few years back - I think it was by Ken Clark in the last Tory government. When the richer people in society started getting fines that actually hurt, they had sufficient influence to see the policy quietly dropped. It was an early predecessor of "we're (not) all in this together".

 

Weren't they called 'unit fines' or some such? Judge/magistrates took your living costs off of your income and then fined you a fixed tariff of your disposable income. Predictable Daily Mail headlines when (rich) people were fined 500 and 1000 for littering or other relatively 'minor' offences. Policy lasted a matter of weeks if I recall. Shame, in my opinion it was the way to go (I always chuckle when footballers are 'fined' X amountfor their various misdemeanours, it's the equivalent of fining an ordinary Joe a couple of quid).

Posted (edited)

I guess this is now passed (hopefully)... but I'm sure some idi*t will call out from the stands with a suitably stupid remark but it's interesting that another player in the news......

Rio Fredinand was also banned from driving on the same day, although it didn't make quite as big headlines as did Guly.

 

Rio (apparantly) drove over the speed limit on multiple occasions before the police finally decided to prosecute. Was he yellow-carded first, I wonder?

 

His argument was ...that he needed the car to drive his children to school .......obviously he walks... or cycles to the training ground?...

 

I suppose it's very nice for those who have cars in which they can do that, but meanwhile..if it's a taxi for Guly, then maybe we can say to Rio ..on your bike.......and don't forget your helmet.

Edited by david in sweden
Posted
Rio Fredinand was also banned from driving on the same day, although it didn't make quite as big headlines as did Guly
Did the Guly story really make more headlines than Ferdinand? Maybe in the Southern Daily Echo it did - but elsewhere?
Posted

From The Independent:

 

However, it has not all been positive for Southampton this week as Guly do Prado hit the headlines for the wrong reasons.

 

The 30-year-old was banned from the road for a year and fined £2,500 after admitting drink-driving in the early hours of August 27 in Southampton.

 

Asked what action has been taken against do Prado, Adkins said: "That has all been dealt with in-house.

 

"We obviously view the matter very strongly. We've got a high level of discipline here at Southampton.

 

"The players are all well aware of the role model status that they have and obviously we've dealt with that in-house straight away.

 

"He understands and all the players are well aware and Guly knows not to do anything detrimental to the club, the team or yourself.

 

"You face the consequences of your actions and he certainly felt the consequences of his action within the football club, likewise in the public domain."

Posted
And anybody who then picks him to come on as a sub against manu a few days after the incident is a bigger idiot IMO....what message does that send out to the youngsters.

 

got to admit that occurred to me as well, at the time, but then he was not guity at that point, only accused

Posted
got to admit that occurred to me as well, at the time, but then he was not guity at that point, only accused

 

How can you be accused of drink driving?

 

He was waiting for punishment... Not judgement.. Right

Posted
How can you be accused of drink driving?

 

He was waiting for punishment... Not judgement.. Right

Wrong, innocent until proven guilty. There could have been reasons for him not being found guilty, mostly technicalities, but nevertheless, it is still the case under English Law that you have to be proven guilty.

Posted
Wrong, innocent until proven guilty. There could have been reasons for him not being found guilty, mostly technicalities, but nevertheless, it is still the case under English Law that you have to be proven guilty.

 

How do you get proven guilty?

 

Doesn't the machine at the station prove your guilt?

Posted
Wrong, innocent until proven guilty. There could have been reasons for him not being found guilty, mostly technicalities, but nevertheless, it is still the case under English Law that you have to be proven guilty.

 

Well yeah technically but he had already admitted his guilt.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...