Maybe nonsense to you, but its my opinion. Time will tell and you may turn out to be right, but lets wait and see

1. Morals and integrity ??? I’m sorry but we have signed worse than hardaker in the past and I doubt it will stop us in the future, we’ve literally just signed Liam Watts who is hardly Mary Poppins
2. See point 1
3. See point 1
4. Pressure from the sponsors that were willing to pay him a wage to work for them until his ban was up ?
5. They sacked him before he even got a ban how were the club to know how long he would get ?? It’s long been rumored on the Cas fb pages that he was contesting the full charge. The club are far from skint these days and I’d suggest investing a few more quid into the best full back (if not player on his day) in the league was an investment worth taking especially considering the amount already invested.
6. At least research you point, he was man of steel 2 years before joining us, had one bad year then made the shortlist for man of steel the year after. Zak Hardakers ability can never be in question imo.
7. It wasn’t like he meant to get caught 3 days before OT, he wasn’t just sat there bored before the final and thought to himself he would do his best Scarface impression. It was months before he failed a test the timing of when this came out was just terrible (unless your a loiner) timing.

And how would Castleford know that he was only going to get a 14 month ban then ?

That’s great but do morals, integrity, saving money and setting examples to youngsters win silverware? Also you don’t know whether point 4 is true, I’d say that sacking Hardaker isn’t going to stop someone from taking cocaine, he definitely wasn’t rubbish the seasons before. It was a massive cock up from Cas and it would be interesting to see why Steve Gill left.

If you can’t see the stupidity in sacking your best player who you’ve just payed £150,000 for when you don’t know how long they’re going to be banned and when they are now going to sign for a rival for free then you’re an idiot.

Is the answer not obvious? Anyone with common sense would know to wait for the outcome of the hearing.

There was a recent example where a tennis player (Dan? Evans) picked up a one year ban for summat similar. Didn't read the background reports; maybe he'd been caning the Pimms?

His was a 'washing accident':
[i
....the ITF accepts that Mr Evans has met his burden of proving on the balance of probabilities how the cocaine got into his system, i.e., by inadvertent contamination of his fingers and/or the medication he was handling with cocaine residue when he went into the pocket of his washbag to take out and ingest his medication in the hours before giving the sample on 24 April 2017.[/i

...although the results of his sample analysis showed he'd ingested a tiny amount consistent with his claim:

[iThe ITF's expert, Professor Martial Saugy, agreed that the analytical data are consistent with exposure to a tiny amount (1‐3 mg) of cocaine in the hours prior to provision of the sample.[/i

This.

Cas were damned whatever they did.

Pay Zak full wage for being banned for 14-24 months ? ( Why was rangi chase banned for 24 months and he's cited mental health reasons in the past ?)


There were rumours we offered him reduced terms; he declined them and also showed no remorse.

I understood the mental health card when he went to Oz in 2016; Leeds were dreadful, he was copping flack, huge bust up with missus resulting in abortion
. In 2017 he was arguably playing the best rugby of his career, absolutely buzzing week in week out. Now I know mental health doesn't just disappear but for me this length of ban sets a poor precedent.

It is what it is though. I do back the club for sacking him but I think we should have done it straight away rather then hedge our bets for a few months .

Nothing to do with Wigan. Recent rumours suggest that he will be going to Wire. The second rumour doing the rounds is that the drugs test was incorrectly administered leading to a technical defence and then a plea bargain.

Hardaker’s mental health issues go back a very long way. He was diagnosed with a MH condition years ago and has been taking medication (when he remembered) for years, as made clear in the judgement.
My bemusement is that this isn’t what the panel used to justify a lesser ban. They gave him a shorter ban because he was intoxicated when he took cocaine. They panel have even said it was lucky he took cocaine and not more alcohol.
To be honest, I would not be surprised if UKAD don’t appeal the ban. It’s opened the door for anyone who gets caught to say they were intoxicated at the time and get a lesser suspension.

I've not seen the judgement, but these things often only get released after the deadline for an appeal has passed.

As you say, the reasons for mitigation are somewhat bizarre and as I said earlier some recent judgements have opened up several cans of worms for future cases.

Two wigan directors in there capacity in the England set up have represented Zak with evidence to reduce the ban, job done the signing of the player should now be sooner than later.

I believe Chris Brookes non exec director of Wigoon and Mark Bitcon director of performance of Wigoon have swinged it in Zaks favour.

So, in a sport with a robust salary cap - Castleford should have just paid ZH his usual three grand a week even though the ban could have been anything up to 4 years and not even known how long the verdict was going to take to be processed? If we (Cas Tigers) had any idea how long the ban would be and how long it would take to come to a conclusion we would have been able to make a more accurate decision. Hindsight is a wonderful thing.

I can't see him going to Warrington, it's too far from the "bright lights" of Pontefract - I know, but he loves it there apparently!

Three clubs that insist on their players moving near to their set-up are Saints, Wigan and Warrington.

If I were a betting man I would say clubs that could potentially look to sign ZH are Toronto, Cas, Hull KR, Hull FC and Wigan.

Do you really see that as an option?

I'm sure many Cas fans would welcome him back, but there must be quite a few with the same opinion as me, he basically ruined the clubs best chance of reaching the pinnacle of the game, & for that I could never forgive.

I’d never want him back.
Not only for what he has already done, but what he will inevitably do in future.
His defence for this case was basically that he can’t control his decision-making. It’s like playing Russian Roulette. At some point, the worst will happen again.

Haven't Cas already said they offered him a new (reduced) contact that he rejected?

I'll stick my neck out and say it's already a done deal that he's signed for Wigan. I even tried to have a bet on it but couldn't find a bookmaker who'd give odds.

Unfortunately for your theory, this ban was presided over by UKAD and not the RFL so the "how craply run RL is" line doesn't really work.

Then why are 2 Wigan Directors giving evidence in the UKAD process to support the Hardaker Legal Team to reduce the ban. Surely the RFL will be aware whether directly or indirectly of the Wigan involvement and there intentions.

Quote ="Angelus"For anyone who wants to have a read of the judgements before jumping to conclusions they can be found here https://www.ukad.org.uk/anti-doping-rul ... tegory=541. although the Zak Hardaker one keeps coming up access denied. i assume it hasnt been uploaded properly yet or something (or Wigan dont want to release it )'" “He was not a cocaine user...” but was a regular cocaine user. Do these suits think the general public are thick or something?

Quote ="Angelus"For anyone who wants to have a read of the judgements before jumping to conclusions they can be found here https://www.ukad.org.uk/anti-doping-rul ... tegory=541. although the Zak Hardaker one keeps coming up access denied. i assume it hasnt been uploaded properly yet or something (or Wigan dont want to release it )'" “He was not a cocaine user...” but was a regular cocaine user. Do these suits think the general public are thick or something?

This mental health issues thing is a load of bull s in my opinion. If he was your average labourer he wouldn’t be saying he has mental health issues, it’s just because he’s a high profile player in RL that he’s been told to say it to excuse why he acts like a tool. It’s just there as an excuse for a very thick human being who is acting out his intelligence level in society.

What advisers and witnesses Hardaker used is somewhat irrelevant - the decision-making is still nothing to do with the RFL.

The Wiganers involvement makes it abundantly clear who he's signing for though.