Hugo Lloris

  • The Fighting Cock is a forum for fans of Tottenham Hotspur Football Club. Here you can discuss Spurs latest matches, our squad, tactics and any transfer news surrounding the club. Registration gives you access to all our forums (including 'Off Topic' discussion) and removes most of the adverts (you can remove them all via an account upgrade). You're here now, you might as well...

    Get involved!

Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports

Sort by date Sort by reaction score
Super Jan Fan said:
Two glasses of wine, get behind the wheel and there is a good chance you will hurt someone innocent.
Click to expand...

Define "good chance".

Some of you speak as if anyone over the limit by the slightest amount is an absolute danger to society and is on the verge of killing off a small community.

Being just over the legal limit increases your reaction time by 0.1 seconds. It's extremely rare that 0.1 seconds is the difference between life and death. Drink driving isn't right, but some of the melodrama here is pretty extreme.

79 milligrammes and he's a gent, a captain and an example to society. 81 and he's a menace, a danger and a criminal?
 
Last edited:
r-u-s-x said:
That's exactly what happens you get punished less because you broke the law less badly
Click to expand...

You believe in "less badly" dead then? (For simplicity think murder, rather the legal vagueness of "killing").

I assume not.

Maybe my explanation isn't up to scratch (my bad, if so) but you're missing the nuance to my point.

Key to my point here is "base" level.
 
Clynelish said:
Will always be Kane or Jan. Eriksen is a lovely player, but can't see him captain Spurs.
Click to expand...
I just would love a player with his ability and intelligence to be calling the shots, having the power and authority when demanding the ball or putting across tactical instructions.
Similarly I see Jan as doing some of that so I would not be disappointed with him having it.

Plus I think it might help tie Eriksen down AND get the best out of him, like for his country.
 
Airfixx said:
You believe in "less badly" dead then? (For simplicity think murder, rather the legal vagueness of "killing").

I assume not.

Maybe my explanation isn't up to scratch (my bad, if so) but you're missing the nuance to my point.

Key to my point here is "base" level.
Click to expand...
Every one gets life for murder? No more severe cases get harsher sentences.

Analogy getting stretched now but happy to continue as you seem to be supporting my point.

Most people don't have black and white but grey, they can distinguish between things and will wait until full information is there before deciding the level of judgement.

*edit after a Google. every murder does get life but sentence varies massively depending upon severity so punishment varies etc.
 
Last edited:
Jayc1 said:
Define "good chance".

Some of you speak as if anyone over the limit by the slightest amount is an absolute danger to society and is on the verge of killing off a small community.

Being just over the legal limit increases your reaction time by 0.1 seconds. It's extremely rare that 0.1 seconds is the difference between life and death. Drink driving isn't right, but some of the melodrama here is pretty extreme.

79 milligrammes and he's a gent, a captain and an example to society. 81 and he's a menace, a danger and a criminal?
Click to expand...

The law draws that line.... Not the morality on show or otherwise on here.

The Law dictates that if you are over the limit that you are seen as a potential danger and a menace; so yes.
 
I just don't understand why a top sportsman is drinking at all. It's a socially accepted drug but it's a drug nonetheless. Loathe the stuff personally and haven't had alcohol in 20 years.
 
Airfixx said:
The Law dictates that if you are over the limit that you are seen as a potential danger and a menace; so yes.
Click to expand...

What do you reckon the reaction speed difference is from 79mg to 81? 0.001 seconds?

It's such a grey area. The law has to draw the line at some point, but I'm pretty surprise by how fiercely people on here react to this. We don't even know the entire story or how much he was over.
 
Airfixx said:
The law draws that line.... Not the morality on show or otherwise on here.

The Law dictates that if you are over the limit that you are seen as a potential danger and a menace; so yes.
Click to expand...
You as against speeding?

No one is defending him or even saying he was only just over if he was though speeding seems to be more likely to cause an accident.
 
I don't drive and if I did, not one drop would pass my lips. Harsh, I know, but if they banned all drinking before driving, then there would be no ambiguity. If you cannot do without a drink for a few hours, then get a cab .... simples!
 
I am very stringently against driving under the influence and am surprised by and disappointed in Hugo.

But the drunk driving laws criminalize quite low-risk activity, relative to the latent risk of driving. It's just that it's a totally unjustifiable, socially unsympathetic risk.
 
The law is the law and for people to say "Oh, but I was only a little bit over the limit" is irrelevant.
It is the equivalent of saying "The thing I stole was only worth £5". It is still theft.
I would not have even 1 bottle of beer and drive.
It is totally reckless and irresponsible.
 
Mrs Perryman said:
I don't drive and if I did, not one drop would pass my lips. Harsh, I know, but if they banned all drinking before driving, then there would be no ambiguity. If you cannot do without a drink for a few hours, then get a cab .... simples!
Click to expand...


Totally agree Mrs P

No excuse and very surprised at Hugo

Zero tolerance for drink driving

You still get some pratts who say that they drive better with a drink in them
:avbhumph:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom