Jump to content

Zak Hardaker

Chrispmartha
 Share

Recommended Posts


  • Replies 211
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

phiggins
phiggins

Whatever the rights and wrongs are on what punishment should be given by a club, on top of punishment given by a court, I think everyone can agree that the club's official comment was poor.

Click
Click

Drink driving is a serious offence, and it annoys me how some people on SM seem to be dismissing it as something that shouldn't be treated seriously. Just like the clubs statement on it. This is

Dunbar
Dunbar

Lucky is a very apt word here. When you read through his list of misdemeanours over the last decade or so, the fact he is still able to apply his trade at the highest level in this country is ind

Gooleboy

Gooleboy

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Worzel said:

Punish him. A period of suspension as a minimum. Any other line of work he’d be lucky to keep his job. 

Fair comment, but losing his livelihood is a big call. As an RL player who still has something to offer on the field, if Leigh give him the heav ho, probably another club would take him on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
wakeyranger

wakeyranger

Posted
Posted
15 minutes ago, Gooleboy said:

Fair comment, but losing his livelihood is a big call.

Well I wouldn't keep my job if I'd of done what he's done.

 

As an RL player who still has something to offer on the field, if Leigh give him the heav ho, probably another club would take him on.

Then that's on the club that takes him on, Leigh would've set a marker down that his behaviour isn't up to the standards of their club.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
daz39

daz39

Posted
Posted
58 minutes ago, Gooleboy said:

Fair comment, but losing his livelihood is a big call. As an RL player who still has something to offer on the field, if Leigh give him the heav ho, probably another club would take him on.

So is getting behind the wheel of a car whilst pist, Mr Hardaker made that knowing it could end in disaster, are we supposed to take pity on him?

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Worzel

Worzel

Posted
Posted
9 hours ago, Gooleboy said:

Fair comment, but losing his livelihood is a big call. As an RL player who still has something to offer on the field, if Leigh give him the heav ho, probably another club would take him on.

A month's suspension without pay wouldn't have been a big call, and would have sent a clear message - to him, to other players, and to the community around us. This isn't his first rodeo. There will be behaviour clauses in his contract to cover it, unless they're even dafter than I think. 

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites
phiggins

phiggins

Posted
Posted
17 hours ago, daz39 said:

surely Leigh supporters cannot be happy with the stance from their club on this?

I'm not happy with the statement that they put out, but I don't know what conversations have happened, or what actions, if any, have been taken by the club, so cannot comment. If the statement is a full reflection of the club's stance, then it is poor. But I'm in complete favour of the club helping him get off the booze and to deal with his ADHD, though they could've done that as well as stand him down for a week or two.

I don't believe for one second that they're just thinking let him play because he's a good player. In fact, given he plays down the side where we are particularly weak, I wouldn't be surprised if his contract money could be better spent elsewhere anyway. 

As for the man of the match award, that is chosen by sponsors. The sponsor probably was on the wind up, but I don't think the club could really push back, once he was selected to play. Especially given he was one of only a few players not to have a completely error strewn game. They then put a single post on X, Facebook and I imagine Instagram, as they would any other game, as promised to sponsors when selling various packages.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dave W

Dave W

Posted
Posted

When a player's extracurricular activities over a prolonged period continue to cause concern, could they be said to have brought the game into disrepute?

If so, the RFL/SL should step up and ban the player from their competitions for a period of time. 

That would force the player to go ply their trade elsewhere in France or RU or wherever. 

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tre Cool

Tre Cool

Posted
Posted
Just now, phiggins said:

All matter of opinion. I don't think a fringe player would be sacked for the same offence, you do. I hope we never have to find out.

Did i say anything about anyone getting sacked? Discipline him, put out a statement condemning him for breaking the law and putting other people's lives at risk. Again. Dont just ignore it and play him. Pathetic.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
phiggins

phiggins

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, Tre Cool said:

Did i say anything about anyone getting sacked? Discipline him, put out a statement condemning him for breaking the law and putting other people's lives at risk. Again. Dont just ignore it and play him. Pathetic.

As I said before, we don't know what has been said or done, to be able to say that it has just been ignored.

The statement was very poor though.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tre Cool

Tre Cool

Posted
Posted
19 minutes ago, phiggins said:

As I said before, we don't know what has been said or done, to be able to say that it has just been ignored.

The statement was very poor though.

Well we do know what they've said to the public from their statement, and we do know he played.  What point are you trying to make?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
phiggins

phiggins

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, Tre Cool said:

Well we do know what they've said to the public from their statement, and we do know he played.  What point are you trying to make?

Suspension from matches isn't the only form of punishment available. My point is, that you or I don't know what actions the club have taken with the player since the incident at the end of last month. Or why they have taken that action / inaction.

But the club should've publically condemned his actions. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tre Cool

Tre Cool

Posted
Posted
12 minutes ago, phiggins said:

Suspension from matches isn't the only form of punishment available. My point is, that you or I don't know what actions the club have taken with the player since the incident at the end of last month. Or why they have taken that action / inaction.

But the club should've publically condemned his actions. 

I would say it's a safe bet that Derek just wants to make sure he keeps Zak happy and playing.  Until they actually show any evidence to the contrary I think that's a fair assumption. Although yes, they maybe have disciplined him privately. But i doubt it.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
dkw

dkw

Posted
Posted
17 minutes ago, phiggins said:

Suspension from matches isn't the only form of punishment available. My point is, that you or I don't know what actions the club have taken with the player since the incident at the end of last month. Or why they have taken that action / inaction.

But the club should've publically condemned his actions. 

I think the biggest problem for the club at the moment is public perception is he has completely gotten away with it with his employees, their main worry is protecting him. Its a terrible look.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
phiggins

phiggins

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, dkw said:

I think the biggest problem for the club at the moment is public perception is he has completely gotten away with it with his employees, their main worry is protecting him. Its a terrible look.

The public perception is a reflection on the comms / messaging coming out of the club, which has undoubtedly been poor. But I'm not going to use that as a stick to beat Lam, Chester and Beaumont on how they've handled the matter internally. 

Public perception would be pretty low on my list of things to consider when deciding on a course of action. What happened, what is he doing about it, what punishment has he already received would be further up my list to be honest. The last point probably the most relevant. (Though, when I read the punishment given, which was a fairly light fine and the inevitable 3 year ban, I was surprised to read the report of him being well over the limit and driving at such speeds)

A few on here convinced they would be sacked if in the same position. Looked at the code of conduct I work to, and I could be sacked if in that position, but it's not a given.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Angelic Cynic

Angelic Cynic

Posted
Posted

I seem to remember it was inferred,by Ian Lenagan, that Castleford should have addressed the problems...

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2018/oct/19/zak-hardaker-rehab-drink-driving-wigan

It now seems all the clubs,and Sporting Chance,have failed in the rehabilitation. 

Not good publicity for the sport...

     No reserves,but resilience,persistence and determination are omnipotent.                       

Link to comment
Share on other sites
dkw

dkw

Posted
Posted
20 minutes ago, phiggins said:

The public perception is a reflection on the comms / messaging coming out of the club, which has undoubtedly been poor. But I'm not going to use that as a stick to beat Lam, Chester and Beaumont on how they've handled the matter internally. 

Public perception would be pretty low on my list of things to consider when deciding on a course of action. What happened, what is he doing about it, what punishment has he already received would be further up my list to be honest. The last point probably the most relevant. (Though, when I read the punishment given, which was a fairly light fine and the inevitable 3 year ban, I was surprised to read the report of him being well over the limit and driving at such speeds)

A few on here convinced they would be sacked if in the same position. Looked at the code of conduct I work to, and I could be sacked if in that position, but it's not a given.

I`m absolutely certain the vast majority would be sacked for a second offence of this nature, I know I would.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tommygilf

Tommygilf

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Damien said:

I'd definitely be sacked the first time.

As would I.

Getting behind the wheel when that drunk (to blow 80? at custody he will have been a a fair bit over that when they got to him originally in Knottingley), is bad enough.

To then go nearly 3 times the speed limit in a residential area is frankly so reckless and stupid I don't even have the words.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
meast

meast

Posted
Posted
10 hours ago, Dave W said:

When a player's extracurricular activities over a prolonged period continue to cause concern, could they be said to have brought the game into disrepute?

If so, the RFL/SL should step up and ban the player from their competitions for a period of time. 

That would force the player to go ply their trade elsewhere in France or RU or wherever. 

 

 

They could cancel his registration couldn't they?

  • Like 1

Huddersfield Giants Supporters Association

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.