Re: ZAK : Fri Sep 28, 2018 10:09 pm  

exiled Warrior wrote:

and that last bit is about as likely to happen as Lord Lucan and Elvis playing for Wigan next season. He might at a pinch say it but doing it....well ....just like he has apologised and said he will be a good boy after every incident and then....

If he can't behave enough to even get through a month training for a club that have given him a lifeline despite his long history and recent events then the time to get rid is now whilst there is time to make good - I do not care a jot how good a player he is (or can be) let him be someone else's problem.

I don’t disagree with any of that. I guess Wigan have until his court case to see who is available and work out a plan.

I can’t see him putting on a Wigan shirt, whether that ends up being the right decision remains to be seen.

Re: ZAK : Fri Sep 28, 2018 10:49 pm  

Agree with most that has been said.

What seems the case to me is that I've never heard of someone having their contract of employment terminated due to motoring offences.

Re: ZAK : Fri Sep 28, 2018 11:34 pm  

Father Ted wrote:

Agree with most that has been said.

What seems the case to me is that I've never heard of someone having their contract of employment terminated due to motoring offences.

That's what I thought.

But the other thought was the 'someone' with Class A drugs. Now Hardaker may not have have anything to do with that...............but he sure as hell knew who of his mates were on that sort of stuff. Or likely to be involved with that sort of stuff.

If he keeps going around with 'low lifes', then he has only himself to blame.

All this is not something new.

My old dad was a close friend of Martin Ryan. They went to St.Josephs together in the 1920's/ 1930's. In that same time frame was a lad, who was in my Dads opinion and many other RL players from the late 1930's/1940's, a bit of a prodigy. His name was Billy Ritchie - a scrum half. He was reputedly even more skilled than Andy Gregory .

But he loved 'ale' more than playing for Wigan. Sometimes it can't be fixed.

Re: ZAK : Sat Sep 29, 2018 6:20 am  

Father Ted wrote:

Agree with most that has been said.

What seems the case to me is that I've never heard of someone having their contract of employment terminated due to motoring offences.

And that’s the thing is t it?

It’s just motoring offences,as long as that’s all it is it’s a bit harsh to lose your job because of it unless driving is the main job and as far as I’m aware he won’t be driving the bus so it seems to me that’s what the club will look at,not as the baying mob would have,his ban included in his latest crime.

Gut instinct if it’s just a driving offence I think the club will stand by him under instruction that he moves here ASAP.

Re: ZAK : Sat Sep 29, 2018 7:04 am  

It’ll depend on what we’ve written in to his contract. If that was relating to drug offences then he’ll probably stay but if it’s general behaviour then surely he’ll be gone.

Not down playing drink driving as it is disgraceful imo but he could’ve done a whole number of things wrong and I’d want rid. The top and bottom line is that currently the guy needs to be squeaky clean to start building some trust. To do something as serious as this within a month of training with the club is simply ridiculous and a sign that it’s pointless trying to help him IMO.

Re: ZAK : Sat Sep 29, 2018 8:31 am  

His contract runs from November doesn’t it?

Re: ZAK : Sat Sep 29, 2018 9:06 am  

Father Ted wrote:

Agree with most that has been said.

What seems the case to me is that I've never heard of someone having their contract of employment terminated due to motoring offences.

There are lots of people who lose their jobs for drink driving, and other motoring offences such as dangerous driving speeding etc.

Re: ZAK : Sat Sep 29, 2018 9:06 am  

Father Ted wrote:

Agree with most that has been said.

What seems the case to me is that I've never heard of someone having their contract of employment terminated due to motoring offences.

There are lots of people who lose their jobs for drink driving, and other motoring offences such as dangerous driving speeding etc.

Re: ZAK : Sat Sep 29, 2018 9:50 am  

hengirl wrote:

And that’s the thing is t it?

It’s just motoring offences,as long as that’s all it is it’s a bit harsh to lose your job because of it unless driving is the main job and as far as I’m aware he won’t be driving the bus so it seems to me that’s what the club will look at,not as the baying mob would have,his ban included in his latest crime.

Gut instinct if it’s just a driving offence I think the club will stand by him under instruction that he moves here ASAP.

How about turning up for training having had a skinful the night before- is that not treating the club with disrespect?

Surely it would be in the mind of any new employee to try and make a good impression from the start especially one with a chequered history of previous issues. I am sure there are all sorts of clauses in his contract relating to behaviour and not getting into any kind of trouble - which he has not managed to do before even playing a game for the club.

If the club stands by him then it would send out a very dangerous message to other players about what the club will put up with if you are a good enough player - especially after standing up for the clubs image with the Joel Tomkins affair, standing by Hardaker would be hypocritical to say the least.

Re: ZAK : Sat Sep 29, 2018 10:17 am  

Father Ted wrote:

Agree with most that has been said.

What seems the case to me is that I've never heard of someone having their contract of employment terminated due to motoring offences.

someone I once worked with was dismissed for drink driving. They were arrested and charged with drink driving as they were on their way to work, they held an office job not a driving one. They intended to turn up for work intoxicated and so were dismissed. Tribunal upheld the decision.