That particular "little rat" copped more abuse from opposition fans than Hardaker ever has, despite the latter's homophobic outbursts, and he copped it purely because fans (including me) hated the fact he didn't play for their team, and they feared him accordingly.

He also played with pride and distinction for England, and long may he continue to do so, and is now amongst those flying the flag for England down-under.

Hardaker is disliked for totally different reasons, and I suspect he is as unlikeable off the field as he is on it.

I can't see you beating Castleford , with all the ball and field position you had Saturday you never really blown us away like a top team would of don,t look at this as sour grapes cause I wouldn't begrudge sinfield winning the challenge cup so i'm happy to see either team win

Unless he gets p****d the night before and then loses his chance. Well, either getting p****d or verbally abusing people with homophobic slurs. Or both.

You know, because that's just what he does....

I fear that Hardaker is a very talented Rugby League player but he is not the sharpest tool in the box and I feel that he will consistently court controversy.
I hesitate to compare him with Hock but have some sympathy with the argument.
In the latest incident I think he has been very fortunate. Another example of top players at top clubs being given the benefit of the doubt. I wonder if the outcome would have been in the same if that incident had occurred in a lower division match.

Hill has received 8 match ban for attacking Hardakers finger with his eyelash.

Hardaker has made mistakes of the pitch with England and was rightfully punished for the homophobic abuse but AFAIK has no record of foul play, so comparison with Hock is unwarranted.
Regarding players from top clubs getting treated more leniently than others, Briers and Monaghan may well agree with you.

Hardly sour grapes. He's already done more wrong in his short career than Sam Tomkins ever did and he got dogs abuse because his game to other teams fans other than Wigan's seemed to be primarily based on trying to milk a penalty before all else. But he never acted the goat in an England camp nor called a ref a "faggot". Or was your booing (as well as other clubs, granted) of Tomkins different and justified?

Hardaker, whether he "eye gouged" Hill or not, comes across as a right weasel like an English footballer style of sportsman rather than one of our Men of Steel. Maybe that's why he belongs on the Wembley turf because he's just another Wayne Rooney or Jack Wilshire?

Just because it's your player doesn't mean that everyone should think of him the way his own fans do and it doesn't mean it's sour grapes. Leeds well deserved the win on Sat and i don't think this was a "eye gouge" (purposeful) anyway. But so far i think he's a bit of a dick more than i think he's a good player.

Dont try and defend yourselves against the "sour grapes" comments guys.

These are Leeds fans remember, any kind of debate is instantly considered "sour grapes", " haters", or "jealousy".

(cue the "not arrogant, just better than you." picture that's also used instead of a coherent response.)