Hardaker to Wigan

[andyscoot]

43 minutes ago, hunsletgreenandgold said:

Taking the litigation elements out of this for a minute, Cas behaved exactly the way they should've back then, even though they knew it would throw the biggest fortnight in their history into turmoil. Even then they still had the foresight and goodwill to offer Zak a job. HE turned it down.

I agree with what you say about Cas and I do agree with clubs taking action over players who behave badly but I still think it's important to the case that they had sacked him before offering him the job. 

Take just any old job - a shop supervisor say. They get done for doing drugs and so the company sack them. A little while later they invite them back to the job but on minimum wage. The person turns it down and the company sue the worker. Don't you think the sacking then attempted rehiring of the worker makes their defence a little weaker than had they sacked and pursued? It implies they wanted the worker back and have only opened up litigation because of it. I'm sure a defendant barrister could make the argument that the company sacked and then rehired to use the workers perilous position to essentially get the same service for less work. Lawyers have argued much worse.

It's important that Cas set their sights realistically so as to not open themselves up to those kinds of accusations which believe me, the legal system is not above doing. In my line of work you have to consider that at all times, you can come out of litigation the bad person, especially when you have bigger pockets than the person you sue.

[hunsletgreenandgold]

2 minutes ago, andyscoot said:

I agree with what you say about Cas and I do agree with clubs taking action over players who behave badly but I still think it's important to the case that they had sacked him before offering him the job. 

Take just any old job - a shop supervisor say. They get done for doing drugs and so the company sack them. A little while later they invite them back to the job but on minimum wage. The person turns it down and the company sue the worker. Don't you think the sacking then attempted rehiring of the worker makes their defence a little weaker than had they sacked and pursued? It implies they wanted the worker back and have only opened up litigation because of it. I'm sure a defendant barrister could make the argument that the company sacked and then rehired to use the workers perilous position to essentially get the same service for less work. Lawyers have argued much worse.

It's important that Cas set their sights realistically so as to not open themselves up to those kinds of accusations which believe me, the legal system is not above doing. In my line of work you have to consider that at all times, you can come out of litigation the bad person, especially when you have bigger pockets than the person you sue.

I take your point and there is no doubt if this does get so far as the need for a defence, he will have the same chaps/chapesses who got his ban reduced - clearly excellent lawyers. I can't agree with what you say about 'same service for less' - that's not what the new employment contract would've looked like, it would have been for a completely different role. Cas would also argue that they would've used this 'interim' job for Zak to prove his ability to reform (judges love a bit of reform chat) and then consider him for a playing contract in future when eligible. This is all speculation of course and there are many lawyers/solicitors out there who specialise in this area that will know more than me (knowing the full grounds for the case I should add) but unless Zak has a wildcard up his sleeve to use against Cas I don't see this going any other way than he/Wigan paying Cas a settlement figure....which essentially should amount to a 'transfer fee' that would be reasonable in the circumstances. 

[andyscoot]

I would agree with that. Definitely the more realistic and sensible thing that Cas should be aiming for the equivalent of a transfer fee rather than anything a little more arbitrary like loss of potential income to the club. Neither of us are privy to the full facts so we can only look at what we do know.

Even though it's (in all likelihood) against the club I support I hope Cas win because if they don't a dangerous precedent is set that will affect more clubs than Cas and could potentially go further into sport as a whole.

[hunsletgreenandgold]

2 minutes ago, andyscoot said:

I hope Cas win because if they don't a dangerous precedent is set that will affect more clubs than Cas and could potentially go further into sport as a whole

Agreed. This isn't about taking Hardaker (and by proxy Wigan) to the cleaners. As much as anything it should serve as a stark reminder that there will be consequences beyond a ban for this kind of breach. Otherwise the precedent is set that you can breach your contract and be fired only to be picked up and signed for 'free' by someone else. I think some people have forgotten it wasn't Cas who imposed any kind of ban on Hardaker, so had his breach not carried a ban he could've been playing for Wigan the week after. Cas lost either way. 

[Les Tonks Sidestep]

6 hours ago, hunsletgreenandgold said:

I take your point and there is no doubt if this does get so far as the need for a defence, he will have the same chaps/chapesses who got his ban reduced - clearly excellent lawyers. I can't agree with what you say about 'same service for less' - that's not what the new employment contract would've looked like, it would have been for a completely different role. Cas would also argue that they would've used this 'interim' job for Zak to prove his ability to reform (judges love a bit of reform chat) and then consider him for a playing contract in future when eligible. This is all speculation of course and there are many lawyers/solicitors out there who specialise in this area that will know more than me (knowing the full grounds for the case I should add) but unless Zak has a wildcard up his sleeve to use against Cas I don't see this going any other way than he/Wigan paying Cas a settlement figure....which essentially should amount to a 'transfer fee' that would be reasonable in the circumstances. 

I believe Cas offered him a playing contract (on much reduced terms) to commence when his ban ended, so not a different role at all.

[Gates1]

39 minutes ago, Les Tonks Sidestep said:

I believe Cas offered him a playing contract (on much reduced terms) to commence when his ban ended, so not a different role at all.

I understand Cas offered him a none playing contract whilst banned (probably linked to the job he was doing for one of the Cas sponsor's) followed by a playing contract on reduced terms post ban (rumoured not to be as heavily reduced as some might think).  His Wigan contract is reputed to be bigger than his pre ban contract with Cas.

[Exiled Wiganer]

2 hours ago, hunsletgreenandgold said:

Agreed. This isn't about taking Hardaker (and by proxy Wigan) to the cleaners. As much as anything it should serve as a stark reminder that there will be consequences beyond a ban for this kind of breach. Otherwise the precedent is set that you can breach your contract and be fired only to be picked up and signed for 'free' by someone else. I think some people have forgotten it wasn't Cas who imposed any kind of ban on Hardaker, so had his breach not carried a ban he could've been playing for Wigan the week after. Cas lost either way. 

It is actually a worrying stance to take. Did anyone sue Carney, or Barba, or Chase? 

Is this the sort of thing that is likely to help a troubled person? We are constantly told how we need to consider player welfare - Cas sacked him and now sue him, which as far as I know is a first for a league club. This isn’t someone doing a Solomona it is someone who went off the rails. 

It is entirely motivated by a wish to get cash from Wigan, and with complete disregard to the potential toll it could take on Hardaker. I am glad that Wigan went down a different route with Hock, and hope that Hardaker gets good advice and strong support. 

[Padge]

HEADLINE:

Strapped for cash club will do anything to raise funds.

STOP:

 

[kiyan]

8 hours ago, Exiled Wiganer said:

It is actually a worrying stance to take. Did anyone sue Carney, or Barba, or Chase? 

Is this the sort of thing that is likely to help a troubled person? We are constantly told how we need to consider player welfare - Cas sacked him and now sue him, which as far as I know is a first for a league club. This isn’t someone doing a Solomona it is someone who went off the rails. 

It is entirely motivated by a wish to get cash from Wigan, and with complete disregard to the potential toll it could take on Hardaker. I am glad that Wigan went down a different route with Hock, and hope that Hardaker gets good advice and strong support. 

Off the rails?

Shouting some homophobic abuse in a stupid moment mid game is off the rails and while deserving punishment, should not end a career If a lesson was learnt.

Battering a 19 year old student while too drunk to remember is off the rails and deserves a punishment and also a last chance.

After all those chances a professional sportsperson, taking a CLASS A, illegal drug deserves a ban and be sacked.  There are plenty of jobs, most paying a lot less, which will get you sacked if you test positive for drugs.

Castleford paid a lot of money to sign him, if he has now signed a new contract ( club is not important) earning good money then fair play to Cas to attempt to recoup some of the money they paid for him ( much of which is from tickets holders earning a lot less than ZH) for breach of the contract.

That breach is against HIM, not the club who signed him.

How many clubs have now lost money standing by him?  At some point he needs to be responsible for his decisions.

[kiyan]

2 hours ago, Padge said:

HEADLINE:

Strapped for cash club will do anything to raise funds.

STOP:

 

REALITY:

Club well known for signing/supportive of thugs, signs another self confessed homophobic, ABH, druggie and claim they are a rehabilitation centre! 

Wigan are believed to be considering having him mentored by some brothers with lots of Public Relations experience.

STOP

[MattSantos]

On 6/13/2018 at 3:26 PM, Exiled Wiganer said:

Is this really clear cut though? In that case every employer could sue anyone they sack for gross misconduct couldn’t they. So, they get both to get someone off their books without having to give notice or wait for the contract to end, and get paid for it. The contract does have behaviour clauses, but they also provide a sanction - dismissal - which clearly has a demonstrably adverse affect on the person not getting paid and a benefit to the club not having to pay them. 

Given Cas’ level of dislike for Wigan, this does not surprise me in the slightest, but I am struggling to see the logic. 

Is there a vote down button?

 

[MattSantos]

2 hours ago, Padge said:

HEADLINE:

Strapped for cash club will do anything to raise funds.

STOP:

 

Another extremely one eyed post.

 

[Padge]

5 hours ago, MattSantos said:

Another extremely one eyed post.

 

Good grief 

[Padge]

5 hours ago, kiyan said:

REALITY:

Club well known for signing/supportive of thugs, signs another self confessed homophobic, ABH, druggie and claim they are a rehabilitation centre! 

Wigan are believed to be considering having him mentored by some brothers with lots of Public Relations experience.

STOP

I'll take that, Wigan shouldn't be signing him.

[Gates1]

9 hours ago, Padge said:

HEADLINE:

Strapped for cash club will do anything to raise funds.

STOP:

 

I know, wait until Hull find out we are planning to pay the Liam Watts transfer fee with 5p's gained returning used carries bags over the next 70 years.

[MattSantos]

1 hour ago, Padge said:

Good grief 

My thoughts exactly

[andyscoot]

7 hours ago, kiyan said:

Battering a 19 year old student while too drunk to remember is off the rails and deserves a punishment and also a last chance.

Not that it matters or is relevant here but it's griped me since it happened - the person he assaulted was 22. Similar to my point in the Tomkins thread, a certain angle is played to exaggerate and in this instance, lies are told. He was a year older than the person he assaulted and the fact he was a student is completely irrelevant. The fact he battered someone (2 on 1 too) is bad enough; lets stop. It's not a case of a grown man beating up a child (and a student!!!) as is often mentioned.

I feel that whenever a player is banned and then subsequently leaves the club to then sign for someone else, that club should pursue for a transfer fee and disagree with people on this thread that it's all about fleecing. I'm not saying go after the player and skin them, just something akin to a transfer fee and I would have supported that had it come about with Barba, Chase etc (Hocks different because he was retained by the club). 

As I mentioned, people will turn it into a money spin and I don't see it as that, but whenever you open up litigation you run the risk of being perceived the bad guy.

7 hours ago, kiyan said:

REALITY:

Club well known for signing/supportive of thugs, signs another self confessed homophobic, ABH, druggie and claim they are a rehabilitation centre!.

STOP

Cas were more than happy to play him knowing those things. Cas were more than happy to continue to play Rangi Chase with his issues. Find me a club that hasn't had a dodgy player on their books and I'll find you a pig that can fly. Lets not turn this into a game of "my club is more virtuous than yours". That goes for the Wiganers trying to imply Cas are only pursuing because they need money too.

[Dave T]

4 hours ago, Gates1 said:

I know, wait until Hull find out we are planning to pay the Liam Watts transfer fee with 5p's gained returning used carries bags over the next 70 years.

Where do you get paid 5p for used carrier bags? I have millions of the bleeders!

[muckymunksy]

Wigan looking to get rid b4 he’s played a game Iv heard. 

[Kenilworth Tiger]

1 hour ago, muckymunksy said:

Wigan looking to get rid b4 he’s played a game Iv heard. 

[weloveyouwakefield2]

17 hours ago, muckymunksy said:

Wigan looking to get rid b4 he’s played a game Iv heard. 

Yeah why would they be interested in Jake Mamo? Seems a bit weird..

[kiyan]

On 6/15/2018 at 9:56 AM, andyscoot said:

Not that it matters or is relevant here but it's griped me since it happened - the person he assaulted was 22. Similar to my point in the Tomkins thread, a certain angle is played to exaggerate and in this instance, lies are told. He was a year older than the person he assaulted and the fact he was a student is completely irrelevant. The fact he battered someone (2 on 1 too) is bad enough; lets stop. It's not a case of a grown man beating up a child (and a student!!!) as is often mentioned.

I feel that whenever a player is banned and then subsequently leaves the club to then sign for someone else, that club should pursue for a transfer fee and disagree with people on this thread that it's all about fleecing. I'm not saying go after the player and skin them, just something akin to a transfer fee and I would have supported that had it come about with Barba, Chase etc (Hocks different because he was retained by the club). 

As I mentioned, people will turn it into a money spin and I don't see it as that, but whenever you open up litigation you run the risk of being perceived the bad guy.

Cas were more than happy to play him knowing those things. Cas were more than happy to continue to play Rangi Chase with his issues. Find me a club that hasn't had a dodgy player on their books and I'll find you a pig that can fly. Lets not turn this into a game of "my club is more virtuous than yours". That goes for the Wiganers trying to imply Cas are only pursuing because they need money too.

Take ANY other job with a salary over 50k and would he still be employed?

Would you want a Doctor, an airline pilot, (even  a policeman or nurse (earning a lot less)) with his list of issues to be still in their job?

[JohnM]

3 hours ago, kiyan said:

Take ANY other job with a salary over 50k and would he still be employed?

Would you want a Doctor, an airline pilot, (even  a policeman or nurse (earning a lot less)) with his list of issues to be still in their job?

Hmmmm...really. .....https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/doctor-escapes-being-struck-off-over-nude-patient-photos-nxx9mn25vkg

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/hazeardous-drugs-doctor-escapes-being-struck-off-6797134.html

https://www.fifetoday.co.uk/news/bogus-doctor-escapes-being-struck-off-1-4292541

Of course,  Cas can sue who they want, when they want, and indeed it might even put a stop to what at times seems to be the somewhat cavalier attitude some players seem to take with their contracts. Thinking mainly of players who come here then get homesick .

It would be a shame if we we were not to see a chastened and reformed Zak work his magic on the field any more,...if he is chastened and reformed. That is of course, the big unknown,  unless hes been up to his old tricks again.

What surprises me most is that given the general left-leaning position of the forum members, so many posters seem to have deserted their principles over Zak. 

[Exiled Wiganer]

1 hour ago, JohnM said:

Hmmmm...really. .....https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/doctor-escapes-being-struck-off-over-nude-patient-photos-nxx9mn25vkg

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/hazeardous-drugs-doctor-escapes-being-struck-off-6797134.html

https://www.fifetoday.co.uk/news/bogus-doctor-escapes-being-struck-off-1-4292541

Of course,  Cas can sue who they want, when they want, and indeed it might even put a stop to what at times seems to be the somewhat cavalier attitude some players seem to take with their contracts. Thinking mainly of players who come here then get homesick .

It would be a shame if we we were not to see a chastened and reformed Zak work his magic on the field any more,...if he is chastened and reformed. That is of course, the big unknown,  unless hes been up to his old tricks again.

What surprises me most is that given the general left-leaning position of the forum members, so many posters seem to have deserted their principles over Zak. 

As Cas see Wigan as all high n mighty they may well see this grubby cash grab as something any socialist would applaud? 

[Spidey]

I really don’t see how any legal action is any of Wigan’s concern. The contract was between Castleford & Hardaker. As soon as Cas “sacked” him I’m sure they didn’t expect him not to sign with anyone. 

Regardless of whether he signed for Wigan or anybody else I’d imagine the legal procedings would have been taken anyway?