Grant Holt fails to turn up for trial

[Pete Raven 276]

http://www.pinkun.com/content/pinkun/norwich-city/story.aspx?brand=PINKUNOnline&category=Norwich&tBrand=PINKUNOnline&tCategory=xDefault&itemid=NOED06%20Aug%202010%2012%3A13%3A49%3A257

[morty 0]

Looks like common sense prevailed.Take your points and your fine Holty!

[Sephiroth Owa 0]

Nicely done Holty :) Time to bag us a couple of goals tonight :)

[Willmeister 35]

Guess he will be playing then. I can''t believe he still lives in Carlisle, thats a fair old treck.

[Brendo 0]

[quote user="Sephiroth Owa"]Nicely done Holty :) Time to bag us a couple of goals tonight :)[/quote]Perfecto. [Y]Just wondering Pete, what was it does anyone know? Speeding, drink driving...?

[Sephiroth Owa 0]

Speeding. Doing 69 in a 60.

[Brendo 0]

[quote user="Sephiroth Owa"]Speeding. Doing 69 in a 60.[/quote]Seriously? That''s not that bad, why was he in court? Did he ignore the fine or something?

[Butterbean_Canary 0]

[quote user="Brendo "][quote user="Sephiroth Owa"]Nicely done Holty :)

Time to bag us a couple of goals tonight :)
[/quote]Perfecto. [Y]

Just wondering Pete, what was it does anyone know? Speeding, drink driving...?
[/quote]

Speeding, 69 in a 60

[Excited Canary 19]

I''m sure I read the trial was because he failed to confirm who the driver was over a limited period of 31 days? Still, great news...he shouldn''t be starting mind imo.

[Pete Raven 276]

[quote user="Brendo "][quote user="Sephiroth Owa"]Speeding. Doing 69 in a 60.[/quote]Seriously? That''s not that bad, why was he in court? Did he ignore the fine or something? [/quote]Says it all in that link....

[Sephiroth Owa 0]

He failed to identify the driver of the car to the police.

[Guest]

[quote user="Brendo "][quote user="Sephiroth Owa"]Speeding. Doing 69 in a 60.
[/quote]Seriously? That''s not that bad, why was he in court? Did he ignore the fine or something?
[/quote]

 

Why don''t you read the article ... it will reveal all the answers to your questions

[CanaryJames 0]

6 points on the license, & a £1,000 fine is the maxium punishment he can now get (I believe) for failing to name the driver.

More points for the actual ''speeding'' as well.

Great to have him fit and ready to play for us! Holt & Martin up-front tonight please!

[Matt Juler 211]

[quote user="Brendo "]Seriously? That''s not that bad, why was he in court? Did he ignore the fine or something? [/quote]Click on the bloody link!

[Beauseant 0]

This really is the definition of a  non story. Loads of fuss about the magistrates failing to change the date, the "will he/won''t he get back in time " panic, and then he simply doesn''t turn up, which presumably is what he and his legal people had already decided.

Still, fills a space in the paper, I suppose....

[First Wazzock 1,014]

Call Dog, The Bounty Hunter.

[Anderz 0]

Beauseant: Don''t you think that the Club has played it''s part in the scenario as well though to an extent..? I actually think it''s been drummed up and made a big thing of to throw Watford''s plan off-kilter.

Let''s review what we know/understand to have transpired:
Up until this afternoon we (the supporters) and more importantly they (Watford FC) didn''t even know if Holt would be back in time, when City and Holt obviously have known for days that he''ll be here (Norwich). Archant, with their links to City''s hierarchy, may have been told to run the story as a red herring, or possibly they were drip-fed misinformation to create what I would agree to be pretty much a non-story. Of course no-one''ll openly admit to it, but in my opinion, Archant could be a fairly useful tool which the Club can use to manipulate and confused other Clubs planning via.    

All in all, if it''s affected Watford''s planning in any way shape or form and plays it''s part in us getting a win tonight, I''d be happy to have non-stories like this every Friday/Saturday. 

[Brendo 0]

I agree. In fact, I wouldn''t have minded if we didn''t reveal that he was back till we have to name the team sheets.

[Beauseant 0]

[quote user="Anderz"]

Beauseant: Don''t you think that the Club has played it''s part in the scenario as well though to an extent..? I actually think it''s been drummed up and made a big thing of to throw Watford''s plan off-kilter.

Let''s review what we know/understand to have transpired:
Up until this afternoon we (the supporters) and more importantly they (Watford FC) didn''t even know if Holt would be back in time, when City and Holt obviously have known for days that he''ll be here (Norwich). Archant, with their links to City''s hierarchy, may have been told to run the story as a red herring, or possibly they were drip-fed misinformation to create what I would agree to be pretty much a non-story. Of course no-one''ll openly admit to it, but in my opinion, Archant could be a fairly useful tool which the Club can use to manipulate and confused other Clubs planning via.    

All in all, if it''s affected Watford''s planning in any way shape or form and plays it''s part in us getting a win tonight, I''d be happy to have non-stories like this every Friday/Saturday. 

[/quote]

You could well be right!

[nutty nigel 7,902]

Am I reading this right where it suggests Grant Holt was in the middle of signing for us on April 27th last year?

 

[pete_norw 0]

[quote user="Sephiroth Owa"]Speeding. Doing 69 in a 60.
[/quote]

Yes a real top notch offence that had been dragged out all this time, I thought he had been caught with a bottle of scotch in his mouth while raceing to Norwich to sign his new contract, the way they were going on about it, these sort of cases can be delt with by proxy and therefor should have been sorted ages ago. So instead of the normal fixed penalty he will be slapped with court costs now which will probably be around £200, It''s a farse.    

[lincoln canary (& Golden Coppel) 0]

........ owns a Peugeot 307! Of all the cars to get caught speeding in!

[Canary1902 0]

And also confuses Watford as to whether he''d be playing or not, so don''t complain

[pete_norw 0]

 

Who said he own''s it now? I saw him in a Reliant Robin last week. 

[TIL 1010 5,246]

[quote user="lincoln canary"]........ owns a Peugeot 307! Of all the cars to get caught speeding in![/quote]

Getting caught doing 69mph means he had his foot hard on the floor!

[TIL 1010 5,246]

[quote user="lincoln canary"]........ owns a Peugeot 307! Of all the cars to get caught speeding in![/quote]

Getting caught doing 69mph means he had his foot hard on the floor!

[Kathy 823]

Tempting................

[William Darby 0]

[quote user="lincoln canary"]........ owns a Peugeot 307! Of all the cars to get caught speeding in![/quote]He doesn''t does he?  It''s the point of the case, he''s accused of withholding the information of who owns the car.  As far as I can make out.

[Attleborough_Canary 96]

[quote user="ſilly ſauſage"][quote user="lincoln canary"]........ owns a Peugeot 307! Of all the cars to get caught speeding in![/quote]

He doesn''t does he?  It''s the point of the case, he''s accused of withholding the information of who owns the car. 

As far as I can make out.
[/quote]

He does, the car was registered to Holt. The case is to determine who was driving the car at the time of the offence.

[Pete Raven 276]

[quote user="Attleborough_Canary"]

[quote user="ſilly ſauſage"][quote user="lincoln canary"]........ owns a Peugeot 307! Of all the cars to get caught speeding in![/quote]He doesn''t does he?  It''s the point of the case, he''s accused of withholding the information of who owns the car.  As far as I can make out.[/quote]

He does, the car was registered to Holt. The case is to determine who was driving the car at the time of the offence.

[/quote] “He has always admitted he was the driver of the car and was going at excess speed.”