WiganWarriorsFans.com

jao711 wrote:I wonder if Sam will change his mind.

I wonder how those who sanctioned his move are feeling tonight?

DaveO wrote: Think it will hinge on the court case myself. It doesn't sound good though. Drink driving is bad enough but no insurance and no M.O.T on top just compounds it.

Probably a 24 month driving ban, a fine (say around £600) and points on his license. Not much more would happen than that from his court case I'm afraid.

Will not go to jail - no one does for this sadly

What the club does next should be obvious but depends what (if any) breeches of the clauses placed into his contract for "good behavior" have been broken

fozzieskem wrote:

jao711 wrote:I wonder if Sam will change his mind.

I wonder how those who sanctioned his move are feeling tonight?

Maybe they should re-watch the Rec—- of Wigan videos and remind themselves of the 6 month lay off for a drunken injury, and conclude that losing 2 Tomkins and gaining 1 Hardaker leaves them with 1 fewer off the field problem. (Arguably we have 2 fewer seeing as we are losing a player who got drunk and assaulted one of his team mates). They got shut of a non running full back who provided zero value for money. So, then rest easy I would say.

Caboosegg wrote:

DaveO wrote:

mickw wrote:there was a time when the club wouldn't have touched a player like him with a barge pole.
Now they've got a real headache,the blokes totally unreliable at the very least.

My thoughts exactly. Talented player available due to past misdemeanors cheaper than Sam T. Just looks like to me the club compromised principles to save some cash. Come back to bite them pretty quick.

I was not in favour of the move originally but had reconciled myself to the fact he was a Wigan player and so thought no point doing other than seeing what he could do.

I can't believe he's been so stupid. If he is sacked what a cock up by the club. Got rid of an influential player and will have lost the replacement before he set foot on the pitch.

Think it will hinge on the court case myself. It doesn't sound good though. Drink driving is bad enough but no insurance and no M.O.T on top just compounds it.

There was also a time when the current cap could fit multiple of the best players in the world under it and not rely on a marquee rule

Are you suggesting that is a reason to toss principle aside?

Exiled Wiganer wrote:

fozzieskem wrote:

jao711 wrote:I wonder if Sam will change his mind.

I wonder how those who sanctioned his move are feeling tonight?

Maybe they should re-watch the Rec—- of Wigan videos and remind themselves of the 6 month lay off for a drunken injury, and conclude that losing 2 Tomkins and gaining 1 Hardaker leaves them with 1 fewer off the field problem. (Arguably we have 2 fewer seeing as we are losing a player who got drunk and assaulted one of his team mates). They got shut of a non running full back who provided zero value for money. So, then rest easy I would say.

Wow. Bateman has now become an "off field problem" you are lobbing into the debate to apparently defend the club signing Hardaker.

If you think the club is well rid of Joel T and now Bateman why did the club seek out another problem player?

As to your comments about Sam T, he may or may not be a bit of an obnoxious idiot off field but if you can't see him and Bateman have been the two most influential players in the second half of the season in getting us to a semi final slot, I give up.

wall_of_voodoo wrote:

DaveO wrote: Think it will hinge on the court case myself. It doesn't sound good though. Drink driving is bad enough but no insurance and no M.O.T on top just compounds it.

Probably a 24 month driving ban, a fine (say around £600) and points on his license. Not much more would happen than that from his court case I'm afraid.

Will not go to jail - no one does for this sadly

What the club does next should be obvious but depends what (if any) breeches of the clauses placed into his contract for "good behavior" have been broken

Yes of course you are right. That will be the kind of outcome we can expect. I suppose I was thinking the judiciary may take a dim view of his ban for drugs but I don't think he was charged with anything over that never mind convicted.

Interesting to see how the club reacts. I had almost forgotten about Joel T until Exiled brought that incident up. He lasted five minutes before being shown the door and while he had behaved appallingly I still think without a video he'd still be here and the fact there was one was a rather a convenient excuse to get a wage off the cap. The club set itself a standard there so if it lets Hardaker off for this that is going to be controversial.

If he is given the boot I can't help thinking it will be very disappointing which for me is very ironic since I was not in favour of him coming in the first place. It's just after he started training Wigan and had seemingly served his ban without incident I felt a bridge had been crossed and he may well have been set for bright future at the club, then he goes and does this.

fozzieskem wrote:

jao711 wrote:I wonder if Sam will change his mind.

I wonder how those who sanctioned his move are feeling tonight?

Exactly.

DaveO wrote:

Caboosegg wrote:

DaveO wrote: My thoughts exactly. Talented player available due to past misdemeanors cheaper than Sam T. Just looks like to me the club compromised principles to save some cash. Come back to bite them pretty quick.

I was not in favour of the move originally but had reconciled myself to the fact he was a Wigan player and so thought no point doing other than seeing what he could do.

I can't believe he's been so stupid. If he is sacked what a cock up by the club. Got rid of an influential player and will have lost the replacement before he set foot on the pitch.

Think it will hinge on the court case myself. It doesn't sound good though. Drink driving is bad enough but no insurance and no M.O.T on top just compounds it.

There was also a time when the current cap could fit multiple of the best players in the world under it and not rely on a marquee rule

Are you suggesting that is a reason to toss principle aside?

No im suggesting you cant go off the past way the club opperated.
Look at some of the best players in superleague are large chunk have issues and if we avoid them all like the plague what are you left with?

I didnt want and still dont want hardaker at Wigan, however clubs have to take these chances to get the better players (barba for example)

Caboosegg wrote:

DaveO wrote:

Caboosegg wrote: There was also a time when the current cap could fit multiple of the best players in the world under it and not rely on a marquee rule

Are you suggesting that is a reason to toss principle aside?

No im suggesting you cant go off the past way the club opperated.
Look at some of the best players in superleague are large chunk have issues and if we avoid them all like the plague what are you left with?

I didnt want and still dont want hardaker at Wigan, however clubs have to take these chances to get the better players (barba for example)

I cant see how Wigan can keep him now its a PR nightmare i mean so much for the interview with Carney where he said he knew he was in last chance saloon

The guy is just an absolute idiot

I cant believe how many people want to cut him more slack, how many more chances can he have?

Its happened at the worst possible time too because some season ticket sales were probably pinned on ZH's arrival now many of the people dont want to see him at the club

If wigan let him play they have truely lost the moral compass, everyone deserves a second change, but ZH is just taking the mick

Wow. Bateman has now become an "off field problem" you are lobbing into the debate to apparently defend the club signing Hardaker.

If you think the club is well rid of Joel T and now Bateman why did the club seek out another problem player?

As to your comments about Sam T, he may or may not be a bit of an obnoxious idiot off field but if you can't see him and Bateman have been the two most influential players in the second half of the season in getting us to a semi final slot, I give up. [/quote]

Whether you give up or not is your choice.

On the pitch, by far our best performance came without Tomkins, where the benefits of a running full back were there to see. Bateman though has been fabulous.

I am not defending Hardaker at all - for what it’s worth I would have got rid of Flower, Bateman after his assault and Tomkins after he injured himself while on the lash. I would get rid of Hardaker now, and thought the club was right to get rid of Joel. If someone wants to make an argument on behavioural grounds that Hardaker should go, that’s one thing. As long as they then condemn other disgraceful off field behaviour of others.