I saw that one yesterday and pondered that the fine was probably a much more reasonable percentage of his salary than what some less well-off pay. I could, of course, be wrong.
|
Blaming a burglary which caused him considerable anxiety and distress.
The burglary had also caused a "considerable financial loss" to the player and his family, with thieves reportedly taking £70,000 worth of jewellery, watches and clothes.
Firmino reportedly earns £100,000 a week.
So, loosing less than a weeks wages caused him "considerable anxiety and distress" which lead to him drinking too much.
Hmmm!
|
I didn't realise the maximum fine was that high.
However, he was fined around 1.5days pay. That seems very light.
|
>>That seems very light.>>
But would buy me a lot of Guinness...:-)
|
I thought the same as Mark but the fine is unlimited apparently...
www.gov.uk/drink-driving-penalties
Other pages have a figure of £5k max so I guess it must have changed recently.
|
Does anybody know what is a typical fine for a "normal" person with a similar grade of offence?
|
I reckon aroundd 400 quid. Low reading, no real aggravating factors.
Last edited by: R.P. on Thu 2 Feb 17 at 17:31
|
YA YA Toure was reportedly fined £64K a few months back.
|
And the average in the UK is about £500, although that is a flawed, or at least misleading, average.
That said, it still means that the "average" man is fine more than 5 days pay and this footballer was fined around 2 days salary. And don't forget that the footballer's salary is only part of his remuneration. Performance bonuses and sponsorship deals, appearances etc. etc. all mount up.
I doubt he'd care either way over much, but he should have been fined more.
|
For a fraction of his week's income he can afford to get a driver. So that's one person who can work full-time as a driver for 12 months.
|
The question is why he didn't have one instead of drink driving.
|
£29 million salary - obscene
|
>> £29 million salary - obscene
Obscene? It's bonkers. It's mad. It's disproportionate. But why obscene? Why even objectionable? Just what a bloke earns for doing an honest day's work.
Obscene: (Of the portrayal or description of sexual matters) offensive or disgusting by accepted standards of morality and decency. Offending against moral principles; repugnant.
|
>>Offending against moral principles; repugnant.
I think that covers it pretty well actually.
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Tue 7 Feb 17 at 14:53
|
Depends on what your moral principles are though. That would need a definition of morality and whether there is such a thing as an absolute morality or not.
Presumably footballers and FTSE CEOs do not find it repugnant to earn large sums of money.
Is it obscene for all of us in the UK to be earning far more that 98% of the world's population? If not why is obscene for a footballer to be earning far more than an office cleaner.
Morality is tricky.
|
"Morality is tricky."
Read the Guardian on the evils of tax avoidance and then read the internet about how the Scott Trust (which owns the Guardian) set up an overseas subsidiary in a tax haven - to avoid tax.
Strangely enough, the Guardian deletes comments on its site about that.. But is pro free speech....
Last edited by: madf on Tue 7 Feb 17 at 15:19
|
But assuming that is true Mapmaker you would have no moral problem with it anyway?
|