Re: ZAK : Sat Sep 29, 2018 1:29 pm  

The Whiffy Kipper wrote:

It doesn't work like that for drink driving though does it, your either over the limit and guilty or you are not, If you are going to court then you are guilty end of, you can can offer mitigating circumstances but that will only go towards the severity of the outcome

It does. As things stand he has been charged for driving over the limit and without an MOT & insurance. I think we all know what the result of the court case is going to be however at this time he has been charged not found guilty in a court of law.

Re: ZAK : Sat Sep 29, 2018 1:35 pm  

Trainman wrote:

It does. As things stand he has been charged for driving over the limit and without an MOT & insurance. I think we all know what the result of the court case is going to be however at this time he has been charged not found guilty in a court of law.

Your not getting what i'm trying to say and i can't be arsed trying to retype it all so i'll leave it

Re: ZAK : Sat Sep 29, 2018 1:38 pm  

Wigan can't sack someone who is not employed by them, don't forget his contract doesn't start until his ban is up. I hope what they can do is have a clause that will nullify the contract, either before or after it starts, because of pre-determined unacceptable behavoir.

Re: ZAK : Sat Sep 29, 2018 2:56 pm  

proper-shaped-balls wrote:

Wigan can't sack someone who is not employed by them, don't forget his contract doesn't start until his ban is up. I hope what they can do is have a clause that will nullify the contract, either before or after it starts, because of pre-determined unacceptable behavoir.

I don’t care how we do it, just get rid of the plank.

Re: ZAK : Sat Sep 29, 2018 3:13 pm  

Trainman wrote:

It does. As things stand he has been charged for driving over the limit and without an MOT & insurance. I think we all know what the result of the court case is going to be however at this time he has been charged not found guilty in a court of law.

I think the point isn’t that this particular offence is pretty clear cut in terms of evidence. You can’t really dispute not being over the limit if the intoximeter records you as over the limit. If he hadn’t been over the limit he wouldn’t have been charged.
Ten bets he can go is plead guilty and mitigate. Pleading innocence is never a good idea in drink driving cases, unless of course you want to incur the wrath of the magistrate who has to listen to a pointless argument.

Re: ZAK : Sat Sep 29, 2018 3:41 pm  

The Whiffy Kipper wrote:

You really need to give your head a shake, It's just motoring offences, What if he had knocked over a little kiddy or even killed a little kiddy, even worse what if it had been a member of your family, would it still be acceptable behaviour as it's just motoring offences?, The way some fans are sticking up for him is unbelievable, He has been given a last chance, It doesn't matter what he has done, by getting arrested he has p!$$ed all over it and proved that he is a lost cause, The club should cut their losses now before he can do more damage, Let him go to some other club that's stupid enough to sign him and if he does come back and score tries against us then big whoopedy doo, players are always going to score against us, That's the whole point of the game ffs

You need to give your head a shake also. What if the club do let him go and he reaches rock bottom and then follows the same route as Terry newton. Now imagine if that was a member of your family. just a little food for thought.
BTW I don't condone what Zak did and i too was originally calling for his head but i've since calmed down and looked at the bigger picture.

Re: ZAK : Sat Sep 29, 2018 3:57 pm  

hatty wrote:

You need to give your head a shake also. What if the club do let him go and he reaches rock bottom and then follows the same route as Terry newton. Now imagine if that was a member of your family. just a little food for thought.
BTW I don't condone what Zak did and i too was originally calling for his head but i've since calmed down and looked at the bigger picture.

That is a very noble sentiment but deeply flawed, effectively what you are saying is that a club (or employer) could not sack someone no matter what they do if there is the slightest risk that the individual could then do something unfortunate, surely there must be a line where the club has to protect its own interest and reputation, duty of care can only go so far. Obviously the club in this case will have to consider all possibilities (and they will have far more information about the individual than anyone here will have so should be in a better position to make a judgement) but from the outside it would seem the best option is to get rid to protect the club.

For me what it does do is question the judgement of the club in employing him in the first instance and I have no doubt that they would have stayed well clear if he was an average player - I wonder if the fact of how good a player he can be over-rode other considerations - I guess we will never know.

Re: ZAK : Sat Sep 29, 2018 4:12 pm  

hatty wrote:

You need to give your head a shake also. What if the club do let him go and he reaches rock bottom and then follows the same route as Terry newton. Now imagine if that was a member of your family. just a little food for thought.
BTW I don't condone what Zak did and i too was originally calling for his head but i've since calmed down and looked at the bigger picture.

What a load of old rubbish, Sick of people using the Terry Newton scenario for certain agendas, Zak is a complete ar$e, The type of guy that would lie and claim he was depressed to get his own way, I don't for one minute think he is mentally disturbed, he's just some chavy council estate scummer who doesn't want to leave that lifestyle behind, I suspect he really can't wait till he can be with his mates full time again selling gear, mugging old grannies, twocing cars and doing burglaries, No fan on here is genuinely scared of him doing a Terry Newton, your all just sh!tt1ng yourselves in case he get's given the boot and ends up at Warrington and scores loads of tries against us.

Re: ZAK : Sat Sep 29, 2018 5:19 pm  

Terry newton was a different scenario altogether. He was left out to dry. had little support.
Hardaker has had nothing but help, counselling, and various people willing to help him change. Some people don’t want to be helped.

Re: ZAK : Sat Sep 29, 2018 6:31 pm  

jools wrote:

Terry newton was a different scenario altogether. He was left out to dry. had little support.
Hardaker has had nothing but help, counselling, and various people willing to help him change. Some people don’t want to be helped.

Newton socialised with the same druggie gangster as the boxer "hitman" and look at the results of that lifestyle choice.