Stitch_KTF Posted November 4, 2008 Share Posted November 4, 2008 Imo i hope the club have thrown the book at him and he loses the captains band ! But shez will bottle it and not do owt ! I certainly don't. I don't think drink driving offences should be nything to do with an employer, unless of course it directly impacts on the job. Nor do I think it should be in the paper. It's the business of Sean Gregan and the CPS, not us. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ohh Johnny Eyre Posted November 4, 2008 Share Posted November 4, 2008 Brings a whole new meaning to the song, "How many pints did Gregan have?" What a clown. He's a family man as well, he should know better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beag_teeets Posted November 4, 2008 Share Posted November 4, 2008 IF he loses his license how is he going to get from Harrowgate to training everyday? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ritchie82 Posted November 4, 2008 Author Share Posted November 4, 2008 IF he loses his license how is he going to get from Harrowgate to training everyday? Lids is getting a mini bus. Harrogate to Oldham via Dobcross. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldhamSheridan Posted November 4, 2008 Share Posted November 4, 2008 IF he loses his license how is he going to get from Harrowgate to training everyday? Half an hour on the train down to Leeds, then jump in with Liddell for a lift share isn't it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnnyPimp Posted November 4, 2008 Share Posted November 4, 2008 Although the Chron report doesn't make it absolutely clear, this does look like a case of the morning after the night before which I'm sure many of us on this site have been guilty of in the past. I'm not making excuses here because we're all well aware of the dangers of driving the morning after a belly full and as a pro footballer he should know better than most. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
opinions4u Posted November 4, 2008 Share Posted November 4, 2008 I find it very hard to defend drink driving. The potential consequences are awful. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LaticsAndy Posted November 4, 2008 Share Posted November 4, 2008 Although the Chron report doesn't make it absolutely clear, this does look like a case of the morning after the night before which I'm sure many of us on this site have been guilty of in the past. I'm not making excuses here because we're all well aware of the dangers of driving the morning after a belly full and as a pro footballer he should know better than most. I was just thinkin the same, everybody jumpin on it and am not defending him but it could just be the mornin after a heavy night which am sure most on here have done (except H2O Paddy) lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimsleftfoot Posted November 4, 2008 Share Posted November 4, 2008 I certainly don't. I don't think drink driving offences should be nything to do with an employer, unless of course it directly impacts on the job. Nor do I think it should be in the paper. It's the business of Sean Gregan and the CPS, not us. If he recieves a criminal conviction then I think he has to disclose it. If its a points on license jobby than he doesn't have to say anything. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ohh Johnny Eyre Posted November 4, 2008 Share Posted November 4, 2008 We had enough bad publicity when we got Hughes. Now that our captain has been caught DD, we are going to get much more flak. As a captain, he should be a role model on and off the pitch. Recently, he has been neither. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldhamSheridan Posted November 4, 2008 Share Posted November 4, 2008 We had enough bad publicity when we got Hughes. Now that our captain has been caught DD, we are going to get much more flak. As a captain, he should be a role model on and off the pitch. Recently, he has been neither. To be fair we've not had flack on the previous occurances of our players getting done for this very crime. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest oa_exile Posted November 4, 2008 Share Posted November 4, 2008 I was just thinkin the same, everybody jumpin on it and am not defending him but it could just be the mornin after a heavy night which am sure most on here have done (except H2O Paddy) lol Although the Chron report doesn't make it absolutely clear, this does look like a case of the morning after the night before which I'm sure many of us on this site have been guilty of in the past. I'm not making excuses here because we're all well aware of the dangers of driving the morning after a belly full and as a pro footballer he should know better than most. *Cough* http://www.owtb.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=...0&hl=gregan Check to thread date and time *Cough* Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diego_Sideburns Posted November 4, 2008 Share Posted November 4, 2008 ....Nor do I think it should be in the paper. It's the business of Sean Gregan and the CPS, not us. I may be completely wrong about this, but my interpretation of the current situation is that there is more chance of him being charged now it is in the media. The rarely wrong Chron includes in the story the sentence "Gregan is a well known and respected figure in the game." Now that everyone has read the story, if he isn't charged, the majority are bound to say it's because of who he is. The Police and CPS may want to avoid that criticism and therefore charge him, whereas if the story had been kept quiet, and there was any doubt about the evidence standing up to close scrutiny, then he may not have been charged and the whole matter dropped. Even if ihe is not charged, or the case is thrown out of court, there will always be 'no smoke without fire' theorists. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimsleftfoot Posted November 4, 2008 Share Posted November 4, 2008 I was just thinkin the same, everybody jumpin on it and am not defending him but it could just be the mornin after a heavy night which am sure most on here have done (except H2O Paddy) lol Agree on this. Most people who get done for drink driving tend to do so the morning after a heavy one (think office christmas party) and probably don't think they will get done. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Markoasis Posted November 4, 2008 Share Posted November 4, 2008 Simple fact is it's gone to court means the information will be in the public domain .... therefore someone in the media will pick up on it eventually!! Best the club are open and announced what is happening .... hence they have. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
outoftheblue Posted November 4, 2008 Share Posted November 4, 2008 In 1999 I was b-tested at 11.30 am on a saturday after a few drinks on the friday night. I failed the roadside test, which amazed me, as I felt certain the previous nights beer was almost fully out of my system. I was not arrested - but taken to Collyhurst police station (I would have been arrested if I had declined to go voluntarily), and was subsequently given ONE test on the intoximeter. The results proved I was nowhere near the limit, and I was allowed to leave after a 'friendly advice' chat with the desk sergeant. Roadside meters are apparently notoriously inaccurate, but if Gregan has been tested by this method and then used his right to a urine or blood sample at the local nick - then there remains suspicion until conclusive evidence from the tests is produced. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prendy_1984 Posted November 4, 2008 Share Posted November 4, 2008 But even a blood or urine test would be back by now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daznathe Posted November 4, 2008 Share Posted November 4, 2008 Simple fact is it's gone to court means the information will be in the public domain .... therefore someone in the media will pick up on it eventually!! Best the club are open and announced what is happening .... hence they have. spot on. and its always going to make the papers, therefore the debate about what should/ shouldnt make the press is irrelevant. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Diego_Sideburns Posted November 4, 2008 Share Posted November 4, 2008 Simple fact is it's gone to court means the information will be in the public domain .... therefore someone in the media will pick up on it eventually!! Best the club are open and announced what is happening .... hence they have. For the avoidance of doubt: It has NOT gone to court; He has NOT been charged; The Club has NOT commented awaiting more details.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
24hoursfromtulsehill Posted November 4, 2008 Share Posted November 4, 2008 For the avoidance of doubt: It has NOT gone to court; He has NOT been charged; The Club has NOT commented awaiting more details.. All the same, it's a bit stupid to even get as far as being held on suspicion of drink driving. Even the day after a bender, or even sometimes a quiet night out, you're better off not getting behind the wheel. I wouldn't consider driving the same day even after only a pint or glass of wine with a meal, not because that's illegal, but because it's dumb and dangerous. Be safe kids. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Markoasis Posted November 4, 2008 Share Posted November 4, 2008 For the avoidance of doubt: It has NOT gone to court; He has NOT been charged; The Club has NOT commented awaiting more details.. Not being that familiar with law (more female law students)... what does it mean being held on bail?? My understanding is this simply a legal process that all parties need to comply with until it's decided if charges are to be brought forward? I take back my 'going to court ' comment and raise you a bail now I've read the article again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buckshawlatic Posted November 4, 2008 Share Posted November 4, 2008 Presumably he will be though, he wouldn't have been bailed if he wasn't bang to rights when they tested him. No... If he was "bang to rights" he would have been charged there and then. The fact he has been bailed would suggest that he blew over the limit of 35 but below 50 meaning he has the option of blood if he chooses. He obviously did and has been bailed for the results, usually about 6 weeks Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SAV Posted November 4, 2008 Share Posted November 4, 2008 Presumably he will be though, he wouldn't have been bailed if he wasn't bang to rights when they tested him. Not True,I was arrested(not drink driving),for something i didn't do and was on bail for 3 months,not a very nice experience! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leeslover Posted November 4, 2008 Share Posted November 4, 2008 Not True,I was arrested(not drink driving),for something i didn't do and was on bail for 3 months,not a very nice experience! I've also spent a month on bail for something I didn't do, definitely no fun. I was thinking though that they either have the evidence for drink driving or they don't. IT does make sense what Lags and JWhite are suggesting now I think about it although it disagreed with the first internet page I randomly selected to act as the gospel truth in the matter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forte_Baby Posted November 4, 2008 Share Posted November 4, 2008 (edited) So go on how this How many pints chant come from did an incident off the pitch get it going? Edited November 4, 2008 by oafctom Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.