Tomkins exclusive: “I’m deeply ashamed”

[moto748]

At least he's man enough to admit to his behaviour, without in any way trying to mitigate it.

He's a good bloke Joel Tomkins.

It's interesting that he said no one at the club had seen the video until last Saturday. Think that's blown a few of the conspiracy posters out of the water.

Well it does if you believe JT.

[SJ]

The mans an idiot in a club run by idiots and just recruited another idiot The fans deserve better. My sports psychology is "no tolerance" they are not babies. Wait - perhaps they are? No I'll stick with idiots. Get rid

[fozzieskem]

How many times have we seen celeb x once they’ve been caught coming to the press saying how sorry they are..I might have sympathy if the whole incident wasn’t 5 weeks ago and seemingly tried to have been hushed up.

[captinjack]

Couldn't give a monkeys chuff, get him out, crap player, crap excuse of a person, only apologising because he's been told to

Only apologising because it is out in the open! Should be shown the door as soon as the club found out about it, not when it came to kick them in the bollocks.

[ian b]

its sad but make an example of him and get rid

[endoman]

Sam has just posted video #2 on Twitter........

[jobo]

At least he's man enough to admit to his behaviour, without in any way trying to mitigate it.

He's a good bloke Joel Tomkins.

It's interesting that he said no one at the club had seen the video until last Saturday. Think that's blown a few of the conspiracy posters out of the water.

Well it does if you believe JT.

Very true.
However, if you think about it, what are the chances that KR and IL would have been daft enough to try and cover up, in the knowledge that such a damning video existed.

I don't think are that daft, or even that devious.

[DaveO]

What Bateman did was worse and now he's a fan favourite and nobody wants him to leave. What Flower did was worse and he's been at the club for several years now.

I find Joel's behaviour in that video to be pretty vile. However, it doesn't seem like he's had disciplinary issues off the field before. Anyone I've spoken to who knows him has been shocked by this. I'm happy for the club to give second chances. They did with Bateman and he now seems to have made changes and is a leader on the field. I don't see how the club can give several people a second chance and not another, especially when there are people still at the club (and being brought into the club) who have done worse.

I think his form on the field affects what some people want to happen to him. I was happy for him to pack his bags when I first found out about this, but to sack him would just suggest that it depends more on ability that what deserves punishment.

Those putting ability before morals are not the fans but the club. They didn't sack Bateman, they didn't sack Flower and they have recruited Hardaker. Other clubs have sacked problem players who have later gone on to find success with other clubs but on balance I think Wigan have headed down a risky track. As Hardaker said himself, the odd fine didn't change him much.

Without the video this incident was clearly going the same way as the Bateman one and would have been one of those vague incidents people alluded to who were in the know when the player was discussed.

It think some other clubs would have just sacked Tomkins already and Bateman as well at the time without considering how good a player they are or might be. Not sure about FLower as that was an on-field incident and not off field violence and intimidation.

Wigan seem to be prepared to tolerate such off-field behaviour.

[DaveO]

[quote="DaveO]Those putting ability before morals are not the fans but the club. They didn't sack Bateman, they didn't sack Flower and they have recruited Hardaker. Other clubs have sacked problem players who have later gone on to find success with other clubs but on balance I think Wigan have headed down a risky track. As Hardaker said himself, the odd fine didn't change him much.

Without the video this incident was clearly going the same way as the Bateman one and would have been one of those vague incidents people alluded to who were in the know when the player was discussed.

It think some other clubs would have just sacked Tomkins already and Bateman as well at the time without considering how good a player they are or might be. Not sure about FLower as that was an on-field incident and not off field violence and intimidation.

Wigan seem to be prepared to tolerate such off-field behaviour.

You say problem players but to be fair, it seems like this is the first incident for Joel. How many incidents did it take for Leeds to get rid of Hardaker?

I get your point about the club putting ability before morals, but if they were to sack Joel that would all but confirm it. As abhorrent as Joel's behaviour is, I can't really see how the club can sack him after one very bad incident and welcome Hardaker with open arms after his many issues.

If the club had taken a harsher stance on other players then I think it would be justifiable, but you could argue the club were right to give Bateman and Flower second chances, as they seem to have made a positive impact since then.[/quote]

I agree signing Hardaker puts the club in a moral dilemma. Shows if you sign a player with his record you tie your hands over other players misbehaviour.

Do you honestly think if there was a video of what Bateman did circulating he'd not have been sacked on the spot? Or if Flower had been videoed having exercised that level of violence off-field (even in retaliation to a punch) either would still be a Wigan player?

I don't. It wouldn't matter if they were first offences and my problem with the JT saga is I think it would have gone the same way as the Bateman one without the video. Of which there are now two BTW:

https://twitter.com/samtomkins1/status/ ... 82944?s=19

[DaveO]

For me, when it comes to disciplinary matters the club need to ensure that the process is a) open and honest (and that's already very dubious unless the club explain the bar owners comments about reporting the incident to them) and b) fair and proportional. With regards to the latter, they've shot themselves in the foot by signing Hardaker.

I think it's left the club with a problem reconciling "fair" and "proportional". It might well be proportional to his offence to sack JT but he might not consider that fair treatment since Bateman wasn't also sacked. Does that matter though?

It then comes down to whether or not the club wants to persist with an attitude that could be perceived as lax to such incidents to be fair to a player who has just done what JT did or whether it says enough is enough.