| Norwood conviction 19:20 - Jul 12 with 1742 views | greyhound |
Considering the new era at the club it will be interesting to see how the club play this. Pleading not guilty then getting hit with a hefty ban and fine after having previous makes me just wonder what stance the club will take. Not suggesting they should tear his contract up but you would assume there would be in house consequences due to conduct and expectations of what he should represent. Difficult time for him now in my eyes. Few fans will have any sympathy, and let's all be honest, despite him be far and away our greatest threat there was already a group of clowns on socials baiting him and giving him a hard time before this.
I really liked Norwood, he's a real handful for defenders but I find this really hard on my moral compass |  | | |  |
| Norwood conviction on 19:22 - Jul 12 with 1702 views | HARRY10 |
did this need another thread ? | | | |
| Norwood conviction on 19:23 - Jul 12 with 1670 views | WD19 |
I am no Norwood apologist, but there are not many amongst the coaching staff in a position to throw stones on this. |  | | |
| Norwood conviction on 19:25 - Jul 12 with 1648 views | greyhound |
| Norwood conviction on 19:22 - Jul 12 by HARRY10 |
did this need another thread ? |
Maybe not I just read the article and popped my bit in, would you like me to delete it | | | |
| Norwood conviction on 19:45 - Jul 12 with 1543 views | BryanPlug |
| Norwood conviction on 19:22 - Jul 12 by HARRY10 |
did this need another thread ? |
[content removed at owner's request] |  |
| |
| Norwood conviction on 20:11 - Jul 12 with 1430 views | SitfcB |
| Norwood conviction on 19:45 - Jul 12 by BryanPlug |
[content removed at owner's request] |
|  |
| |
| Norwood conviction on 20:15 - Jul 12 with 1408 views | PhilTWTD |
Club statement: “Although this is a private matter, we have reminded James of his responsibilities as an employee of Ipswich Town Football Club and the level of conduct the club expects.
“James has expressed his deep regret over the incident that brought him to court and fully acknowledges that a charge - and conviction - of drink-driving is a very serious matter.

“The court has made its decision and James now wants to put the situation behind him and concentrate on his football.

“He has also volunteered to work with the Club’s charitable arm - the Ipswich Town Community Trust - on some initiatives within the local area." |  | | |
| Norwood conviction on 20:19 - Jul 12 with 1361 views | hype313 |
| Norwood conviction on 20:15 - Jul 12 by PhilTWTD |
Club statement: “Although this is a private matter, we have reminded James of his responsibilities as an employee of Ipswich Town Football Club and the level of conduct the club expects.
“James has expressed his deep regret over the incident that brought him to court and fully acknowledges that a charge - and conviction - of drink-driving is a very serious matter.

“The court has made its decision and James now wants to put the situation behind him and concentrate on his football.

“He has also volunteered to work with the Club’s charitable arm - the Ipswich Town Community Trust - on some initiatives within the local area." |
So in other words, "He's on a high salary and in a post covid world it would be difficult to sell him, so we need to protect our asset" |  |
| |
| Norwood conviction on 20:53 - Jul 12 with 1215 views | Cheltenham_Blue |
| Norwood conviction on 19:45 - Jul 12 by BryanPlug |
[content removed at owner's request] |
Small point of order.
Pleading 'Not Guilty' is NOT the same as lying under oath. And if your on about Norwood saying he had drunk "just under two pints".
a) Two pints of what?
b) The judges opinion that this isn't credible, is exactly that, an opinion, not a fact.
Norwood has already crucified himself, there's no need to start accusing him of perjury no matter how much you don't like him. |  |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Norwood conviction on 21:01 - Jul 12 with 1162 views | WD19 |
| Norwood conviction on 20:53 - Jul 12 by Cheltenham_Blue |
Small point of order.
Pleading 'Not Guilty' is NOT the same as lying under oath. And if your on about Norwood saying he had drunk "just under two pints".
a) Two pints of what?
b) The judges opinion that this isn't credible, is exactly that, an opinion, not a fact.
Norwood has already crucified himself, there's no need to start accusing him of perjury no matter how much you don't like him. |
A) “less than 2 pints” of Bierre Moretti (4.6%)
Spread over several hours.
Honest.
M’lud. | | | |
| Norwood conviction on 21:03 - Jul 12 with 1155 views | wkj |
40 months is severe, he is very lucky not to face jail time with a ban that size - unless the ban length was to offset jail time. |  |
| |
| Norwood conviction on 21:03 - Jul 12 with 1157 views | BryanPlug |
| Norwood conviction on 20:53 - Jul 12 by Cheltenham_Blue |
Small point of order.
Pleading 'Not Guilty' is NOT the same as lying under oath. And if your on about Norwood saying he had drunk "just under two pints".
a) Two pints of what?
b) The judges opinion that this isn't credible, is exactly that, an opinion, not a fact.
Norwood has already crucified himself, there's no need to start accusing him of perjury no matter how much you don't like him. |
[content removed at owner's request] | |
| |
| Norwood conviction on 21:04 - Jul 12 with 1159 views | PhilTWTD |
| Norwood conviction on 21:03 - Jul 12 by wkj |
40 months is severe, he is very lucky not to face jail time with a ban that size - unless the ban length was to offset jail time. |
I'm told that a three-year ban is standard for a second offence within 10 years and the additional four is probably down to him pleading not guilty. | | | |
| Norwood conviction on 21:08 - Jul 12 with 1116 views | wkj |
| Norwood conviction on 21:04 - Jul 12 by PhilTWTD |
I'm told that a three-year ban is standard for a second offence within 10 years and the additional four is probably down to him pleading not guilty. |
being a second offense makes it harder, as a fan, to believe the sincerity of his appology - either way. I hope ITFC do the right thing (in my mind) and move him on | |
| |
| Norwood conviction on 21:19 - Jul 12 with 1044 views | HARRY10 |
| Norwood conviction on 21:04 - Jul 12 by PhilTWTD |
I'm told that a three-year ban is standard for a second offence within 10 years and the additional four is probably down to him pleading not guilty. |
It is actually mandatory, with three years being the starting point of the sentence.
The extra 4 months would seem to be down to an earlier not guilty plea.
Unless it can be proved that the readings were inaccurate, ie below 35 mgs then you will certainly be found guilty.
A rather stupid plea. | | | |
| Norwood conviction on 21:41 - Jul 12 with 944 views | Cheltenham_Blue |
| Norwood conviction on 21:03 - Jul 12 by BryanPlug |
[content removed at owner's request] |
You've proof, I suppose? | |
| |
| Norwood conviction on 21:41 - Jul 12 with 939 views | BlueBadger |
| Norwood conviction on 21:08 - Jul 12 by wkj |
being a second offense makes it harder, as a fan, to believe the sincerity of his appology - either way. I hope ITFC do the right thing (in my mind) and move him on |
He is extremely sorry he got caught.
Again. |  |
| |
| Norwood conviction on 21:42 - Jul 12 with 933 views | BlueBadger |
| Norwood conviction on 21:41 - Jul 12 by Cheltenham_Blue |
You've proof, I suppose? |
Two pints over several hours will not produce the blood results that he did. | |
| |
| Norwood conviction on 21:48 - Jul 12 with 891 views | Cheltenham_Blue |
| Norwood conviction on 21:42 - Jul 12 by BlueBadger |
Two pints over several hours will not produce the blood results that he did. |
It varies from person to person. Thats why it is best to not drink at all. The whole thing about being legal on 2 pints and over the limit on 2.5 is total BS.
1 pint can tip you significantly over 35MG/L depending on your food intake, metabolism at the time, levels of dehydration and multiple other factors.
Moreover, Norwood hasn't stated the time between those two pints, who's to say he didn't cane those two pints right at the end of the night having been on the soft stuff earlier? You'd imagine there's CCTV so why wasn't it produced?
However its all irrelevant as blowing over the limit is the measure of what he did wrong, there's no need to add anything else. He's guilty of drink driving, thats plenty enough for anyone, or at least it should be. [Post edited 12 Jul 2021 21:50]
| |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
