WiganWarriorsFans.com

Talking RL: Why the Bateman saga can not be closed yet


http://www.wigantoday.net/news/columnis ... -1-7966681

josie andrews wrote:Talking RL: Why the Bateman saga can not be closed yet


http://www.wigantoday.net/news/columnis ... -1-7966681

No Phil, you WANT it to rumble on because it keeps you in a job, you are going to be very disappointed when he comes back in the team and plays like he has never been away.

TrueBlueWarrior wrote:

josie andrews wrote:Talking RL: Why the Bateman saga can not be closed yet


http://www.wigantoday.net/news/columnis ... -1-7966681

No Phil, you WANT it to rumble on because it keeps you in a job, you are going to be very disappointed when he comes back in the team and plays like he has never been away.

???????????????????????? I thought exactly the same ????????????????

robspark wrote:Personally I would have let him go

Agree Rob. I'm appalled by the hypocrisy and double standards of some posters. He's trouble To compare him with Ellery by one poster I find incredulous Welcome back to the "funny farm" CP

I only been a spectator since 1961 so what do I know?

josie andrews wrote:

medlocke wrote:Just a shame the instigator didn't get reprimanded as well, just to be fair

Do you know what exactly happened??

Who is this "instigator" you're referring to??

How do you know what punishment has been handed out to the "instigator" as you put it?

We know what the club has told us. That should be sufficient. They should be commended on their handling of this incident & the outcome.

I know that I am very happy to know that John Bateman will remain at the greatest club in the world, Wigan Warriors ????????

Let's now forget about it, get on with watching our great game & stop pointing fingers ????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

Disagree with just about all of that Josie!

It involved another player, the club said so and yet only one player has been punished. It's no use saying they might have been, officially only one player has been yet two were involved in a "fracas".

Which is why what the club has told us is NOT sufficient. Why? Because it leaves people asking the obvious question why wasn't the other player punished and given the often made accusations of favouritism it just stokes that kind of fire.

People are happy Bateman hasn't been sacked, me included, but just because our worst fears have not been confirmed doesn't mean the club has come up smelling of Roses in this.

For a start they might ask themselves what sort of bonkers idea was it letting the players go to a booze fuelled event like the races mid-season. It went downhill from there never mind what has gone on afterwards.

SJ wrote:

robspark wrote:Personally I would have let him go

Agree Rob. I'm appalled by the hypocrisy and double standards of some posters. He's trouble To compare him with Ellery by one poster I find incredulous Welcome back to the "funny farm" CP

Can you tell us what he did to warrant being sacked?

DaveO wrote:

josie andrews wrote:

medlocke wrote:Just a shame the instigator didn't get reprimanded as well, just to be fair

Do you know what exactly happened??

Who is this "instigator" you're referring to??

How do you know what punishment has been handed out to the "instigator" as you put it?

We know what the club has told us. That should be sufficient. They should be commended on their handling of this incident & the outcome.

I know that I am very happy to know that John Bateman will remain at the greatest club in the world, Wigan Warriors ????????

Let's now forget about it, get on with watching our great game & stop pointing fingers ????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

Disagree with just about all of that Josie!

It involved another player, the club said so and yet only one player has been punished. It's no use saying they might have been, officially only one player has been yet two were involved in a "fracas".

Which is why what the club has told us is NOT sufficient. Why? Because it leaves people asking the obvious question why wasn't the other player punished and given the often made accusations of favouritism it just stokes that kind of fire.

People are happy Bateman hasn't been sacked, me included, but just because our worst fears have not been confirmed doesn't mean the club has come up smelling of Roses in this.

For a start they might ask themselves what sort of bonkers idea was it letting the players go to a booze fuelled event like the races mid-season. It went downhill from there never mind what has gone on afterwards.

When did you find out Mossop wasn't punished?

JB has altered the heading on his twitter account. Read what you like into that, reference to wigan rl used to be there. Quite significant I think personally.

Billgreenwoodss​on​ wrote:I only been a spectator since 1961 so what do I know?

Sorry for any offence Billy

It's only my opinion and that's no better or worse than yours Stick to what you believe