: Sun Apr 12, 2009 2:32 pm  

Nick NJ wrote:

Reality is most clubs have players of the sort...

Okay, but sticking with a player is one thing, signing him while he's under investigation is another.

...

We have this at the Catalans with Bird, no, we ain't happy either.

: Sun Apr 12, 2009 2:41 pm  

Everyone must be perfect on Rlfans and never needed a second chance.

: Sun Apr 12, 2009 2:59 pm  

BlackNwhite wrote:

Take a look on the hull forum. ive not seen 1 post that condones anything he has done or anyone who actually supports what the club has done.

I suggest you try reading it again with glasses and not tinted specs.

: Sun Apr 12, 2009 3:34 pm  

Wire_Yed_79 wrote:

i was glad they got rid of Reardon, i wish we'd never signed Clarke too for the same reason.

Agreed with Castleford
Disgusted with Hull FC/KR

Personally i think the RFL should start stepping in like the NRL already do and de-register these players actually FYI

I think that stepping in and deregistering players can work and it's the right thing to do in certain cases, where people are facing criminal charges for example. But it would be a joke if the RFL started acting like the NRL under David Gallop, who IMO seems to have made a complete hash of every one of those similar situations down under. There's probably only Todd Carney I can think of who's ultimately not just been allowed to switch teams and play on.

For me, it really must be the responsibility of the clubs involved - both dealing appropriately with 'troublesome' players and choosing not to sign those who admit to being complete thugs. Easy? - if they employ their consience!

The only way I can measure what's 'appropriate' action is to ask, surely if most of us were busted doing half the crap some of these guys get away with, we'd get the bloody sack?! I'm not saying I'm against giving second chances (or in the case of Leon, a third and fourth chance) but these blokes have to earn it.

One thing's for sure, there isn't a club in the land who at one stage or another (or for many years in most cases) hasn't knowingly employed these people, so nobody should be singling out either Hull club, or anyone else for that matter.

: Sun Apr 12, 2009 5:15 pm  

oxford-pie-eater wrote:

I think that stepping in and deregistering players can work and it's the right thing to do in certain cases, where people are facing criminal charges for example. ...

One thing's for sure, there isn't a club in the land who at one stage or another (or for many years in most cases) hasn't knowingly employed these people, so nobody should be singling out either Hull club, or anyone else for that matter.

I don't agree with your first point. It's okay for the RFL to deregister people who have been convicted, but "facing criminal charges" is not a good reason. We presume innocence in this country and should legislate our sport in this way. (Though if they plead guilty that's another matter).

I agree that we shouldn't single out FC/KR, I do find it interesting that the topic has come up now, since us at sang-et-or went over this a while back. Interesting to see how views change if the player is an asset.

: Sun Apr 12, 2009 10:05 pm  

Article on this http://timesonline.typepad.com/rugby_league/

Article on this http://timesonline.typepad.com/rugby_league/

: Sun Apr 12, 2009 11:36 pm  

bikerpie wrote:

Should have kept Briscoe, then you wouldn't have a problem at full back.

Where have i heard that one before?

: Mon Apr 13, 2009 9:54 am  

Durham Giant wrote:

i wonder how all those HUJJ FC fans who posted on the HKR site about Cockayne are feeling now.

Wife beater or drunken thug

So because Hull FC signed somebody involved in domestic violence, Hull FC fans are suddenly a fan of people that commit domestic violence?

: Mon Apr 13, 2009 10:39 am  

BalearicHullFan wrote:

:? So because Hull FC signed somebody involved in domestic violence, Hull FC fans are suddenly a fan of people that commit domestic violence?

Dress it up however you like.

Bottom line is that the definition of hypocrisy will be re-written based on this.

: Mon Apr 13, 2009 10:49 am  

Reardon isn't a "wife beater".