Grimmy wrote:
There is also the employment law aspect of it. Clubb appears to have been found guilty by an RFL tribunal 'on the balance of probability'. That is clearly the level of proof required to ban and fine someone, and I doubt Clubb paid for legal representation, because it wouldn't be worth it to avoid a £500 fine.
Compare that with dismissing someone. I'm not sure that the level of proof will be 'balance of probability'. Bare in mind that the club have probably said very positive things about his character during that tribunal, which he could now use against them if they tried to say he is racist after all. The lost earnings would be enough to make it worth Clubb hiring a solicitor to bring an unfair dismissal claim against Wigan if he has a case. Much less risky for Wigan to put him on an equality and diversity course then just to wait a few months until his contract expires anyway. They don't have to select him, they could even pay up the rest of his contract and tell him he is surplus to requirements for performance reasons.
I agree 100% with the first 3/4 of the post
But when you start getting into shoulda woulda couldas it starts to muddy waters and creates perception that your doing x because of y etc.
The length remaining on his contract is irrelevant IMO, we should treat him the same whether he has 6months or 3 years left on the deal.
