Club Statement: Gabriel Hamlin

[ancientnloyal]

Also why would he flee to australia if it was only a dodgy amount of nasal spray??

[endoman]

cos he'd have no job here.

[Wes]

"If you are going to post the rumour then you should at least give a little more information...
If all you have got is ale house gossip then you should keep your mouth shut."

This is the comment i got when i posted this rumour on a Wigan player taking drugs so who looks stupid now

Hamlin.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[The Yonner]

On the subject of "mental health issues" I was interested to read Hardakers revelation that he has a diagnosis for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. He was at pains to point out he is not using this as an excuse for past behaviour, but actually it explains quite a lot.

The latest thinking on this is that many mental "illnesses, conditions and disorders" are not medical in nature, but rather expressions of where the person sits on the neurodiversity spectrum. In short, neurodiverse people exhibit different sensitivities and behaviours to the neuronormal, but this should be recognized and accommodated in the same way that physical disabilities are, I.e. "reasonable adjustments" in the workplace.

Having said all that, neurodiverse people must nevertheless conform with some basic standards in the workplace, and this may lead to parting company in some cases.

My overall point is that the club as an employer should take an interest in the welfare of their employees, especially if there is reason to believe somebody is vulnerable to going off the rails by their behaviours.

I got the impression this was part of Steve McCormack's role at Wigan. Do these recent transgressions have anything to do with his departure?

[EagleEyePie]

On the subject of "mental health issues" I was interested to read Hardakers revelation that he has a diagnosis for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. He was at pains to point out he is not using this as an excuse for past behaviour, but actually it explains quite a lot.

The latest thinking on this is that many mental "illnesses, conditions and disorders" are not medical in nature, but rather expressions of where the person sits on the neurodiversity spectrum. In short, neurodiverse people exhibit different sensitivities and behaviours to the neuronormal, but this should be recognized and accommodated in the same way that physical disabilities are, I.e. "reasonable adjustments" in the workplace.

Having said all that, neurodiverse people must nevertheless conform with some basic standards in the workplace, and this may lead to parting company in some cases.

My overall point is that the club as an employer should take an interest in the welfare of their employees, especially if there is reason to believe somebody is vulnerable to going off the rails by their behaviours.

I got the impression this was part of Steve McCormack's role at Wigan. Do these recent transgressions have anything to do with his departure?

Those are very good points. I don't think you can really know if the recent transgressions are a result of Steve McCormack's departure. That would be assuming that both happened due to vulnerability but there's no evidence of that at present. I'm sure the details of each case will come out eventually and that might provide a bit more clarity.

It's a bit of a minefield right now when discussing mental health issues in relation to poor off field behaviour. Some people clearly think it's only brought up as an excuse once someone has done something wrong because they hope to mitigate the situation. However, it's also something that people hide, so it's not really a surprise if it hasn't been brought up before.

Rugby League has made great strides in the last few years in encouraging people to be more open about mental illness but it still relies on the individual seeing openness as a positive step. Thoughts aren't always rational. All the talk in the world about not stigmatising mental health issues might not help if someone is stuck in an irrational way of thinking. Or there could be just one or two people close to them who will actually will judge them negatively and that can be enough to ensure they keep hiding it. It's only when threatened with losing everything that being honest about it is seen as a better option.

It's a bit of a digression, but basically what I'm saying is it's entirely plausible for someone to not reveal mental health issues until they've done something wrong. Whether it's relevant in recent cases or past cases is another matter.

What does seem to be the big issue though is alcohol. It wouldn't surprise me one bit if the vast majority of off-field scandals involved alcohol abuse, or at least an unhealthy attitude towards it (certainly Wigan's most recent scandals suggest that). It seems rugby league in particular has a big drinking culture. Just look at Mad Monday when the season finishes! It's binge drinking to the extreme for a lot of players, and you don't just suddenly become able to handle all that booze, that's through developing a tolerance to it.

This is another issue for those with mental health issues in the sport because alcohol is the drug of choice for many who suffer. If the culture they are in promotes heavy drinking then you've got a real problem. The rest of the players might just see a vulnerable player drinking heavily as being one of the boys and not notice that there's an issue. The issue is almost certainly binge drinking. I doubt players are drinking regularly throughout the week because coaches would almost certainly notice and put a stop to it. So what most will do is binge drink when they get chance to relax for a few days.

Cocaine use seems to be another big problem in RL and again that seems to be tied to alcohol. I'm sceptical about mental health issues being directly responsible for players taking cocaine. I've worked with people with varying degrees of mental health issues for years now, plenty of them brutally honest about their issues and addictions, and coke doesn't really seem to come into it. It's not like players are getting caught because they wake up depressed and do a line to start the day.

The way that those with mental health issues end up taking drugs like this almost certainly comes down to alcohol. It's a social drug. The issue isn't so much that players are addicted to drugs like this or need them to deal with mental health issues, it's that they go out drinking and while they are out drinking and their inhibitions are lowered they find these drugs readily available.

My guess would be it's a social issue that's particularly prevalent in working class towns like the typical rugby league heartlands. Lots of players will end up playing for local teams and not really move out of the area they grew up in. They will keep the same group of mates and there's a good chance that those mates who don't play sport will be drinking and taking drugs at the weekend. Then when new players come to the club and start socialising with the local players they end up socialising with the same social group providing the same temptations. Most, when thinking rationally, will be smart enough to refuse but get someone drunk enough and who knows what might happen.

Basically, the problem is alcohol. Impose an alcohol ban or very controlled alcohol use and you'll solve an awful lot of problems. The only issue there is that those who become dependent on it, including those hiding mental health issues, will start hiding their drinking and do it in secret, where it becomes harder to detect and prevent. It's an incredibly difficult situation for clubs to deal with, but I think there's enough evidence to suggest drinking is a big issue in rugby league.

[DaveO]

My overall point is that the club as an employer should take an interest in the welfare of their employees, especially if there is reason to believe somebody is vulnerable to going off the rails by their behaviours.

If an employer employs someone who has mental health issues they can only go so far with what support they can offer. I don’t mean there is some arbitrary or financial limit on what they can do but a practical one. In the work environment they can make allowances and so on. Put in place strategies so any such player doesn’t make even basic mistakes like not turning up for training (not as fanciful a thought as you might think for people with such issues).

I have experience of this as my eldest has had his problems in that he is somewhere on the neurological spectrum that presents a few difficulties. When at Uni there was some support but one of the ironies of this is the person the support is for must ask for it and engage with it. A big reason they may not is because of the very condition they have. Plus an unwillingness to want to be seen as different. It was a real struggle for us to get my son to take advantage of what was son offer.

Outside of work, an employer or institution can do diddly squat. So Wigan could have one of the best approaches to mental health issues of any organisation but this only applies in work time. Even if they were to offer education and support for those such as Hardaker they can only do it during work time and can only do it if the player wants to engage with the support.

All this said of all the recent cases we have seen at Wigan, the alleged Bateman saga, Tomkins incident, Mullen and now Hamlin, is there any evidence at all there are mental health issues involved in any of them? I am pretty certain the answer to that is no.

I am afraid my view is more in line with Eagle in that a lot of these stem from the simple stupidity by players often as a result of excess alcohol intake who ought to know better. I do not think the club owes them anything if this is the case.

[josie andrews]

Deadline approaching for Wigan Warriors' Gabe Hamlin... but when will we know his decision?

Today is the deadline for suspended Gabe Hamlin to make a decision on whether he plans to challenge his doping violation.

Wigan Warriors' executive director Kris Radlinski revealed the prop has until midnight to inform UK Anti-Doping his intentions. Hamlin can either accept the violation - and the punishment already outlined to him in writing - or he can dispute the charge. But either way, there is no guarantee his decision will be made public soon.

UKAD does not comment on individual cases, or even confirm or deny whether an athlete has been charged, until the process has run its course. If Hamlin decides to accept the charge (and consequences), UKAD will publish an 'agreed issued decision' on its website - but it seems unlikely to be immediate.

However, the prop has the option to challenge the charge, or punishment. If the 22-year-old's violation relates to a failed doping test, he can request a B sample - and it will take time for a World Anti-Doping Agency-accredited lab to test the frozen sample, which would have been taken at the same time as the initial A sample.

He has the right to request a hearing to dispute the violation, outline mitigation or ask for a reduced ban - in which case proceedings can drag on for weeks or even months. With UKAD keeping names anonymous throughout proceedings, it is actually for the athletes themselves to reveal details of the cases, if they choose.

The RFL, which suspended Hamlin, does not name charged players either - and Wigan only revealed Hamlin had been issued a "UKAD violation" after getting his written consent before he flew home to Australia. It has not even been made public what he has been charged with (not all UKAD's 10 violations are for taking prohibited substances; it also includes, for example, evading a test or possession of a prohibited substance). And unless Hamlin chooses to reveal today's decision - either himself, through his solicitor or via Wigan Warriors - it seems likely it will remain private until proceedings have been concluded.

He has not posted about his suspension on his Twitter or Instagram accounts and his Facebook account is private.

https://www.wigantoday.net/sport/rugby- ... -1-9698680