Which is an appalling decision.

He's got zero respect for anyone.

After his history he make the conscious decision to drink drive. He still went out and had a skinful and drove. After his previous offences. He still didn't book a taxi or be the designated driver. He put his own, his mate who he allegedly dropped off, the Police and the general public at danger. All because of his actions.

The man has a history of making pathetic choices that effect so many more people than himself. Unfortunately the only way he's going to learn is to lose everything. However, yet another arm around poor Zac and Bob's your uncle he'll be done for Coke next.

How he continues to take everything for granted after ALL of things he's done astounds me.

I'm looking forward to another "im more mature now" statement to make everything better...

No one is condoning what Zak has done. Folk should be reminded that an awful lot of more serious incidents are vindicated these days, and it seems to give a licence to certain folk to act with impunity. Just back off.

Apparently he 'miscalculated his drinks that night'. Counting beyond one can be challenging for some, give him a break.

Cokey, if Zak was doing all this at another club you'd let rip and be saying they should tear up his contract, his carjacking claim is the equivalent of the dog eating his homework. How many more chances does he get? Plenty of mitigation when the players talented and plays for your club right. Oh no driving at 80 in a residential area never killed anyone.

[uNo i wouldn't, and i never did before either.[/u I will repeat myself once more for those who aren't listening; No one is condoning what he's done, and he's been a very silly naughty boy. Whether his claim of carjacking is true or not, that's what was said in court. Also why did the unmarked police car not flash it's lights before setting off on a speed chase first? Folk can make their own minds up, but it seems his previous clubs fans are all over this like a rash.

So, weve tales of 'miscalculated drinks' and fear of carjacking as well as his long line of previous discretions. You want to believe him because of the shirt he wears, anyone with a functional frontal lobe isn't buying any of it.

Are you thick? Show me where i have said i believe, or condone any part what he has done? I am only reporting what has happened, and what's been been said in court, and the club are supporting him going forward. If you're not happy with this situation........Tough $hit.

Ok cokey, putting the unnecessary personal insults aside, your messages seemed to do a good job of portraying someone who; thinks the club are right to support him/keep him in the squad and thinks his tales are believable. I'm sorry if I misinterpreted.

For clarity then, do you believe his 'excuses'?

Most rational people can't put themselves into the minds of addicts and their grossly irresponsible behaviour.

You'd hope Zak might have chilled out for the sake of his youngest if nothing else but this appears not to be the case.

Leigh have always done well with the previous members that had "history" given the statement it would appear the intent is not to fail anyone.

If he can't bunk up at Josh's house then he's going to have to get the train or national express.

In fact his life seems to mirror the service you get from transpennine

So cokey is basically saying it’s the fault of the police lol

You are asking me whether i believe (what you call excuses) that what has been sworn upon,and then what determined the outcome in court. I haven't seen where the judge has deemed Zak's statement on the incident to be an excuse.

So..........

For clarity, are they excuses? If so, could you please provide proof of this?

Once again i don't condone any part of what he's done but, I don't, unlike some who would want him sine die.

Ill take that as you do believe him then, which kind of renders your previous rant as pointless. He miscalculated his drinks and thought he was going to be carjacked, hardly things you can disprove as theyre going on entirely between his ears but if youre not 'thick', sound like an addict (for which i am empathetic) grasping for some sort of fictional rationale, i dont care where he said it, its BS.

NO! Take it as that you can't answer the question.

errm, you didnt answer mine about whether you believed him.

on your 'proof' question ive answered above.

ill rephrase then. Regardless of where hes said it, do you believe him that he a) thought he was going to be carjacked and b) miscalculated his drinks? or do both sound like a desperate addict with previous grasping for credibility?

I can only believe what the outcome of the verdict was in court. There should've been no sort of miscalculation of drinks, he simply shouldn't have even had a sip of alcohol before getting behind the wheel, hence why i keep saying i don't condone any part of what he's done. Whether anyone believes the carjacking, i'm only reporting that it was used as mitigation in court. I can't comment whether it's true or not, and can't believe it either way. You did say it was an excuse, so can you please provide that evidence?

Good to hear your stance on the alcohol issue, addiction or not drink driving cannot be taken lightly.

As ive said, you cant provide evidence either way for someones thoughts (that he was being carjacked) but for reasons already stated I know how it sounds, maybe the drink was responsible for is overactive imagination.

What Are Unmarked Police Cars Used For? Unmarked cars can be used for anything from cruising an area of interest without drawing the focus onto themselves to, more commonly, enforcing traffic laws and making sure people aren't putting other driver's lives in danger with illegal actions.

Your argument for the police's actions are really grasping at straws Cokey. Zac has been caught for this not once, twice but thrice. He wont ever learn, nor change.

Roy, I know what unmarked police cars are used for, and I'm not grasping at straws for any argument. I've NOT condoned anything that happened. I'm not defending Zak in any way, and only been reporting what was said in court. Yes the police should've flashed their lights immediately in my view to defuse the situation, they didn't, hence the speed chase. If folk don't agree with me, fine, I won't lose any sleep over that.

Here's what was said in court. another report passed on from me if you understand.



Leeds Magistrates’ Court was told Hardaker, of Pontefract, had dropped a friend off after going socialising when an unmarked police car began following him.

In his mitigation, it was heard the car was following close behind leading to him fearing he may be carjacked or that the car wanted to race, leading to him increasing his speed to at least 70mph in a residential area.

The prosecutor told the court police had to drive at 88mph to keep up with Hardaker.

When police turned the lights on, it was heard Hardaker put his brakes on but due to his speed lost control of the vehicle, leading to it flipping into a roadside embankment.

Seriously how can a club support a player after that.

Give Degsey a ring and ask him.

I suggested that , should we of had the option of a top class player , that being Sailor , we may of been more inclined to serve a more harsher punishment instead of saying we would support him, coming across like he is the victim in all of this .

You don’t agree ,which is fine but the comment saying we would be worse off with out Zak is 100% true in the current climate

So if Sailor came in, Zak gets' harsher punishment?

The penny has finally dropped.

No, that is very strange thing to say LC.