Zak Hardaker

[gingerjon]

1 hour ago, RP London said:

There is also the balance to the duty of care to the other people you "look after" ie the rest of the squad/team etc.. at which point does his behaviour cause serious "duty of care" issues for the other people you employ... 

I would include that in it too. Where I used to work we had a resident whose behaviour caused issues for others. He had to leave. But he wasn’t just thrown out - there was support for that.

[RBKnight]

There's an immediate issue for Leigh now in how Hardaker will travel to the club for training from his home in Pontefract. The move to Leeds, when Wigan got shot of him, was sold as a way of keeping him on the straight and narrow and close to his family...... 

I'm curious as to why Leigh would be happy to let him drop taking his ADHD medication. 

[JohnM]

This whole "duty of care" thing seems to be a minefield.

For example, "Duty of care may be considered a formalisation of the social contract, the established and implicit responsibilities held by individuals/entities towards others within society. It is not a requirement that a duty of care be defined by law, though it will often develop through the jurisprudence of common law."

In addition, are comparisons with what happens in other sports of any relevance? 

[Chrispmartha]

21 minutes ago, sweaty craiq said:

There is a long list of high profile soccer players done for DD who play the following week. There is a smaller list of soccer players going to jail then playing on release. There are a number of sports stars who get banned get little support and take their own life’s. Zak has been brilliant for Leigh and especially its fans, and as this had been known about for weeks the hierarchy will have debated its actions probably with the senior player group - Zak seems to be a key part of the group, albeit a very stupid but lucky one

Because other sports do it doesn't mean RL should.

What you are basically saying there is that Zak is a decent player so he gets a free pass.

 

[RBKnight]

12 minutes ago, JohnM said:

This whole "duty of care" thing seems to be a minefield.

For example, "Duty of care may be considered a formalisation of the social contract, the established and implicit responsibilities held by individuals/entities towards others within society. It is not a requirement that a duty of care be defined by law, though it will often develop through the jurisprudence of common law."

In addition, are comparisons with what happens in other sports of any relevance? 

I'm really not sure what "Duty of Care" Leigh were showing in letting him come off ADHD medication......

[RP London]

6 minutes ago, RBKnight said:

I'm really not sure what "Duty of Care" Leigh were showing in letting him come off ADHD medication......

Sorry and I don't mean to be flippant but are you a Doctor or Phycologist? 

They don't have any need to tell us anything about someone's personal medication or conditions and sometimes, as I understand it, medication needs to change due to a number of circumstances. perhaps the next medication doesn't need a TUE?

[M j M]

34 minutes ago, sweaty craiq said:

Zak has been brilliant for Leigh

I think you said the quiet part out loud.

I get all the duty of care stuff but Hardaker should be on such a tight lead that every indiscretion since and including the 2014 homophobic comments and especially the 2015 incident with the student should have seen him sacked by the clubs he was at. The fact that clubs have indulged him and treated him in a way they wouldn't a lesser or junior player is fundamentally wrong.

[JohnM]

14 minutes ago, RBKnight said:

I'm really not sure what "Duty of Care" Leigh were showing in letting him come off ADHD medication......

Hence "minefield". To what extent does any club have "a duty of care".  Leigh, as a reputable organisation, are better placed than most of us, to know and to act.  All I know (or suspect) is that his friends and family have at least a moral  "duty of care". He doesn't have to accept that care, of course. 

[Dunbar]

35 minutes ago, sweaty craiq said:

There is a long list of high profile soccer players done for DD who play the following week. There is a smaller list of soccer players going to jail then playing on release. There are a number of sports stars who get banned get little support and take their own life’s. Zak has been brilliant for Leigh and especially its fans, and as this had been known about for weeks the hierarchy will have debated its actions probably with the senior player group - Zak seems to be a key part of the group, albeit a very stupid but lucky one

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 indeed very fortunate.

I am all for giving people a chance to turn their life around and have a second chance – but after a while the positives of providing people with a chance of redemption really do turn into the negative of being able to act stupid over and over and still get a gig.  In fact, not just getting a gig, be part of the senior group apparently.

I think the negative column is overflowing now.  All this is saying to the Academy and development players in Rugby League is that you can walk out on your country, leave your club in the lurch, get fined for homophobic language, assault a student, take banned substances, get caught drink driving once and then again while turning your car over being chased by police... but hey, if you are a good player you can get a contract and your club will issue a statement supporting you.

[Pen-Y-Bont Crusader]

7 minutes ago, M j M said:

I think you said the quiet part out loud.

I get all the duty of care stuff but Hardaker should be on such a tight lead that every indiscretion since and including the 2014 homophobic comments and especially the 2015 incident with the student should have seen him sacked by the clubs he was at. The fact that clubs have indulged him and treated him in a way they wouldn't a lesser or junior player is fundamentally wrong.

In soccer, clubs that I'm aware of are now refusing to have those who cant behave in or outside of the club in their squads at academy levels.

[Dave T]

11 hours ago, Chrispmartha said:

And driving at 88 in a 30 then overturning the car.

I just feel like you are nit-picking.

[RP London]

10 minutes ago, Dunbar said:

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 indeed very fortunate.

I am all for giving people a chance to turn their life around and have a second chance – but after a while the positives of providing people with a chance of redemption really do turn into the negative of being able to act stupid over and over and still get a gig.  In fact, not just getting a gig, be part of the senior group apparently.

I think the negative column is overflowing now.  All this is saying to the Academy and development players in Rugby League is that you can walk out on your country, leave your club in the lurch, get fined for homophobic language, assault a student, take banned substances, get caught drink driving once and then again while turning your car over being chased by police... but hey, if you are a good player you can get a contract and your club will issue a statement supporting you.

Your last paragraph is the biggest problem in all sports IMHO.. 

[Dave T]

12 minutes ago, M j M said:

I think you said the quiet part out loud.

I get all the duty of care stuff but Hardaker should be on such a tight lead that every indiscretion since and including the 2014 homophobic comments and especially the 2015 incident with the student should have seen him sacked by the clubs he was at. The fact that clubs have indulged him and treated him in a way they wouldn't a lesser or junior player is fundamentally wrong.

I don't have an issue with this tbh. Clubs live and die by those kind of decisions, and they have to live with the culture they create. But I do think they should have been firmer in their press release. 

I'm ok with forgiving, I'm ok with supporting and going down whatever route they choose, but I do think it is a little tone deaf to only mention support and not any kind of condemnation/punishment to highlight that as a club they do not condone this behaviour.

Leigh have a responsibility to not only the player, but their brand, employees, fans etc. I think they have got it slightly wrong in their communications here.

[RP London]

2 minutes ago, Dave T said:

I just feel like you are nit-picking.

to be fair if we're nipicking it was the police car doing 88 hardaker was doing 70 becuase he didnt want to get into a race.. 

[Dave T]

Just now, RP London said:

to be fair if we're nipicking it was the police car doing 88 hardaker was doing 70 becuase he didnt want to get into a race.. 

see, that's better....

[RigbyLuger]

36 minutes ago, Chrispmartha said:

What you are basically saying there is that Zak is a decent player so he gets a free pass.

That's always how it works, and it shouldn't. Look how he and Minichella were treated at Leeds.

[gingerjon]

1 minute ago, RP London said:

Your last paragraph is the biggest problem in all sports IMHO.. 

Can’t think of a professional sport where even raping a woman would see you not have a career.

The only exception is should a player fiddle with a fifteen year old. Then you won’t find a club. Other than that, if you’re good enough and don’t wreck the clubhouse then you will get back somewhere.

[dkw]

1 hour ago, RP London said:

to be fair if we're nipicking it was the police car doing 88 hardaker was doing 70 becuase he didnt want to get into a race.. 

 

[Just Browny]

It's for Leigh to decide whether the pros of Hardaker outweigh the cons. I don't think he should automatically be subjected to further punishment in the workplace because he has committed an offence outside of it, but Leigh might well consider that he has brought the club into disrepute. 

It has been a source of amusement to me how many clubs have claimed to have 'fixed' Hardaker now and then been made to look daft by him. Including clubs like Wigan and Leeds who are usually good at this sort of thing.

[daz39]

13 hours ago, meast said:

I don't feel sorry for the guy and I've no doubt some Leigh fans and bleeding hearts won't like this but any other sport or walk of life he would have been sacked and made a pariah.

How this fella keeps his job with his history is unbelievable.

Absolute grade A plank!

Mental health? #bekind and all that obviously?

[daz39]

5 hours ago, Expatknight said:

I am no fan of Hardaker, The guy has obviously got some serious issues, it isn’t normal behaviour to continue behaving as he does. However would sacking him and abandoning him do anyone any good? He should be stood down from the playing roster and be given the help and support he obviously needs, as has been said , they knew what they were signing so there is a duty of care . It is very sad that a talented individual ends up like this, we have seen it time and again in all manner of sports, not just Rugby League, 

Hasn't he had that before and still acted like a dick on many more occasions?

[daz39]

1 hour ago, Just Browny said:

It's for Leigh to decide whether the pros of Hardaker outweigh the cons. I don't think he should automatically be subjected to further punishment in the workplace because he has committed an offence outside of it, but Leigh might well consider that he has brought the club into disrepute. 

It has been a source of amusement to me how many clubs have claimed to have 'fixed' Hardaker now and then been made to look daft by him. Including clubs like Wigan and Leeds who are usually good at this sort of thing.

With an owner like theirs i doubt they even know what disrepute is at that club!

[sweaty craiq]

2 hours ago, Dave T said:

I don't have an issue with this tbh. Clubs live and die by those kind of decisions, and they have to live with the culture they create. But I do think they should have been firmer in their press release. 

I'm ok with forgiving, I'm ok with supporting and going down whatever route they choose, but I do think it is a little tone deaf to only mention support and not any kind of condemnation/punishment to highlight that as a club they do not condone this behaviour.

Leigh have a responsibility to not only the player, but their brand, employees, fans etc. I think they have got it slightly wrong in their communications here.

I totally agree with the press release comment btw the stance seems to say we were aware, we have dealt with it and we have nothing more to comment. More meat on dealt with it was needed.

[phiggins]

15 minutes ago, daz39 said:

With an owner like theirs i doubt they even know what disrepute is at that club!

It will be Lam and Chester that make the call

[dkw]

1 hour ago, sweaty craiq said:

I totally agree with the press release comment btw the stance seems to say we were aware, we have dealt with it and we have nothing more to comment. More meat on dealt with it was needed.

Do you think he should be sacked?