|
 |
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| International Board Member | 7367 | No
Team
Selected |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Aug 2002 | 22 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| Jan 2025 | Jan 2025 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
|
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote ="JWarriors"Absolutely gutted with this decision. We got rid of Joel Tomkins didn’t we? Double standards here.
We should be getting rid of him. It’s making a mockery saying he was on the last chance saloon when we signed him, then giving him another chance after that.
This will only go one way.'"
Sadly I think you are right.
Basically you are doing what we did at Leeds.
You are keeping him because he will be the difference in getting you the win as opposed to you losing.
JT couldn`t do that.
If he was crap at Leeds we would have shown him the door many times over not only for all his publicised wrong doings. But for all the other things he got up to such as not turning up to training or training whilst still under the influence.
I really do hope you can get the best out of him as there`s a flipping good player in there. |
|
|
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| Player Coach | 5018 | No
Team
Selected |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Sep 2006 | 18 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| Jan 2025 | Dec 2024 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
|
TO BE FIXED |
|
|
Quote ="JWarriors"Absolutely gutted with this decision. We got rid of Joel Tomkins didn’t we? Double standards here.
We should be getting rid of him. It’s making a mockery saying he was on the last chance saloon when we signed him, then giving him another chance after that.
This will only go one way.'"
I agree 100% JWarriors
I would ask all Wigan fans to read my post with an open mind and then make their own conclusions as to whether or not I have a valuable point.
I posted the comments made by Lenagan when Zak was initially signed when he stated that there would be no more controversies allowed from him
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/rugby-leagu ... lay-drugs/
Is this not a controversy from Zak?
IMO Lenagan is more than happy to get rid of players that step out of line when they aren't really a valuable asset on the field anymore,but he clearly has ulterior motives with his choices of who gets the bullet and who doesn't
Mossop was hung out to dry when he was the innocent party after an unsavoury incident with Bateman (although in reality his form was e since his return from the NRL and he also wasn't a playing asset to the club moving forward where as Bateman was a top line player)
Mossop's exit was an easy decision to make by Lenagan to get rid and he did
Joel Tomkins' "Rectum of Wigan" video was cringe worthy at best,but surely it was not worthy of him being made to move on to Hull KR was it?
Although Lenagan clearly realised that it was an ideal opportunity to get rid of Joel's salary from the wage bill as he was clearly past his sell by date and he did
Does Lenagan think that RL fans will not scrutinise his decisions and make their own conclusions regarding his motives?
Was Mossop actually the guilty party on that fateful day?
Was Rectumgate worthy of getting Joel the boot?
So why does Zak get his reprieve from his latest controversy?
IMO Lenagan would not be so sympathetic regarding Zak's drink driving indiscretion if he had run over a member of his own family (As is a very likely scenario when drivers over the limit take the decision to drive whilst under the influence of alcohol)
But the fact that Zak didn't actually run anyone over is obviously deemed OK by Lenagan,as is the fact that he is also the best Full Back in SL and is a valuable asset to Wigan
So Rehab it is for Zak and a slap on the wrist until his next indiscretion
Honest opinions guys am I right or are you happy with Lenagan's decisions? |
|
Quote ="JWarriors"Absolutely gutted with this decision. We got rid of Joel Tomkins didn’t we? Double standards here.
We should be getting rid of him. It’s making a mockery saying he was on the last chance saloon when we signed him, then giving him another chance after that.
This will only go one way.'"
I agree 100% JWarriors
I would ask all Wigan fans to read my post with an open mind and then make their own conclusions as to whether or not I have a valuable point.
I posted the comments made by Lenagan when Zak was initially signed when he stated that there would be no more controversies allowed from him
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/rugby-leagu ... lay-drugs/
Is this not a controversy from Zak?
IMO Lenagan is more than happy to get rid of players that step out of line when they aren't really a valuable asset on the field anymore,but he clearly has ulterior motives with his choices of who gets the bullet and who doesn't
Mossop was hung out to dry when he was the innocent party after an unsavoury incident with Bateman (although in reality his form was e since his return from the NRL and he also wasn't a playing asset to the club moving forward where as Bateman was a top line player)
Mossop's exit was an easy decision to make by Lenagan to get rid and he did
Joel Tomkins' "Rectum of Wigan" video was cringe worthy at best,but surely it was not worthy of him being made to move on to Hull KR was it?
Although Lenagan clearly realised that it was an ideal opportunity to get rid of Joel's salary from the wage bill as he was clearly past his sell by date and he did
Does Lenagan think that RL fans will not scrutinise his decisions and make their own conclusions regarding his motives?
Was Mossop actually the guilty party on that fateful day?
Was Rectumgate worthy of getting Joel the boot?
So why does Zak get his reprieve from his latest controversy?
IMO Lenagan would not be so sympathetic regarding Zak's drink driving indiscretion if he had run over a member of his own family (As is a very likely scenario when drivers over the limit take the decision to drive whilst under the influence of alcohol)
But the fact that Zak didn't actually run anyone over is obviously deemed OK by Lenagan,as is the fact that he is also the best Full Back in SL and is a valuable asset to Wigan
So Rehab it is for Zak and a slap on the wrist until his next indiscretion
Honest opinions guys am I right or are you happy with Lenagan's decisions? | |
|
|
|
|
|
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| Player Coach | 3019 | No
Team
Selected |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Feb 2006 | 19 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| Aug 2020 | Aug 2020 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
|
TO BE FIXED |
|
|
Quote ="The Biffs Back"I agree 100% JWarriors
I would ask all Wigan fans to read my post with an open mind and then make their own conclusions as to whether or not I have a valuable point.
I posted the comments made by Lenagan when Zak was initially signed when he stated that there would be no more controversies allowed from him
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/rugby-leagu ... lay-drugs/
Is this not a controversy from Zak?
IMO Lenagan is more than happy to get rid of players that step out of line when they aren't really a valuable asset on the field anymore,but he clearly has ulterior motives with his choices of who gets the bullet and who doesn't
Mossop was hung out to dry when he was the innocent party after an unsavoury incident with Bateman (although in reality his form was poop since his return from the NRL and he also wasn't a playing asset to the club moving forward where as Bateman was a top line player)
Mossop's exit was an easy decision to make by Lenagan to get rid and he did
Joel Tomkins' "Rectum of Wigan" video was cringe worthy at best,but surely it was not worthy of him being made to move on to Hull KR was it?
Although Lenagan clearly realised that it was an ideal opportunity to get rid of Joel's salary from the wage bill as he was clearly past his sell by date and he did
Does Lenagan think that RL fans will not scrutinise his decisions and make their own conclusions regarding his motives?
Was Mossop actually the guilty party on that fateful day?
Was Rectumgate worthy of getting Joel the boot?
So why does Zak get his reprieve from his latest controversy?
IMO Lenagan would not be so sympathetic regarding Zak's drink driving indiscretion if he had run over a member of his own family (As is a very likely scenario when drivers over the limit take the decision to drive whilst under the influence of alcohol)
But the fact that Zak didn't actually run anyone over is obviously deemed OK by Lenagan,as is the fact that he is also the best Full Back in SL and is a valuable asset to Wigan
So Rehab it is for Zak and a slap on the wrist until his next indiscretion
Honest opinions guys am I right or are you happy with Lenagan's decisions?'"
I 100% agree with Lenners decisions.
He got rid of two overrated and overpaid deadbeats for free and is keeping hold of when in form the best no 1 in Super League.
I think it's called management, and Lenners is one of the best in that business.
If it goes pear-shaped at the rehab or after we can just sack him no trouble, we already have two players that can comfortably cover fullback so it's not really that much of a gamble TBH. |
|
Quote ="The Biffs Back"I agree 100% JWarriors
I would ask all Wigan fans to read my post with an open mind and then make their own conclusions as to whether or not I have a valuable point.
I posted the comments made by Lenagan when Zak was initially signed when he stated that there would be no more controversies allowed from him
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/rugby-leagu ... lay-drugs/
Is this not a controversy from Zak?
IMO Lenagan is more than happy to get rid of players that step out of line when they aren't really a valuable asset on the field anymore,but he clearly has ulterior motives with his choices of who gets the bullet and who doesn't
Mossop was hung out to dry when he was the innocent party after an unsavoury incident with Bateman (although in reality his form was poop since his return from the NRL and he also wasn't a playing asset to the club moving forward where as Bateman was a top line player)
Mossop's exit was an easy decision to make by Lenagan to get rid and he did
Joel Tomkins' "Rectum of Wigan" video was cringe worthy at best,but surely it was not worthy of him being made to move on to Hull KR was it?
Although Lenagan clearly realised that it was an ideal opportunity to get rid of Joel's salary from the wage bill as he was clearly past his sell by date and he did
Does Lenagan think that RL fans will not scrutinise his decisions and make their own conclusions regarding his motives?
Was Mossop actually the guilty party on that fateful day?
Was Rectumgate worthy of getting Joel the boot?
So why does Zak get his reprieve from his latest controversy?
IMO Lenagan would not be so sympathetic regarding Zak's drink driving indiscretion if he had run over a member of his own family (As is a very likely scenario when drivers over the limit take the decision to drive whilst under the influence of alcohol)
But the fact that Zak didn't actually run anyone over is obviously deemed OK by Lenagan,as is the fact that he is also the best Full Back in SL and is a valuable asset to Wigan
So Rehab it is for Zak and a slap on the wrist until his next indiscretion
Honest opinions guys am I right or are you happy with Lenagan's decisions?'"
I 100% agree with Lenners decisions.
He got rid of two overrated and overpaid deadbeats for free and is keeping hold of when in form the best no 1 in Super League.
I think it's called management, and Lenners is one of the best in that business.
If it goes pear-shaped at the rehab or after we can just sack him no trouble, we already have two players that can comfortably cover fullback so it's not really that much of a gamble TBH. | |
|
|
|
|
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| International Chairman | 8155 | No
Team
Selected |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Dec 2001 | 23 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| Jan 2025 | Jan 2025 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
|
TO BE FIXED |
|
|
Yes I'm OK with the way it is being handled.
Zak has a problem with alcohol which obviously he has now admitted to himself.
Only known two people with the same problem. One a lady who drank a half bottle of gin prior breakfast and a bottle of whisky before lunch. She went for rehab became tt and is leading a full and rewarding life. The other a bloke who always said drink would never get the better of him and refused help offered. His funeral was very sad, as they all are.
Zak could come back having ditched the booze and become the better player and better person he mentions in his statement.
I certainly do hope he does for mainly his benefit but also the club's who have shown a duty of care to an employee and given him the best chance he can have to overcome his problem.
Well done IL and Rads and good luck to Zak Hardaker.
|
|
|
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| International Chairman | 1988 | No
Team
Selected |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Feb 2002 | 23 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| May 2021 | Dec 2020 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
|
TO BE FIXED |
|
|
[size=85Tick[/size Tick [size=150TICK[/size
|
|
|
|
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| Club Captain | 1855 | No
Team
Selected |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Feb 2016 | 9 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| Jan 2025 | Nov 2024 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
|
TO BE FIXED |
|
|
Only time will tell whether this turns out to be the correct decision or not.
To answer Biffs question, absolutely, playing ability has a lot to do with whether a club sticks by a player or not. Sean Long at St Helens is a classic example of that.
|
|
|
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| Player Coach | 4722 | No
Team
Selected |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Apr 2010 | 15 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| Dec 2024 | Sep 2024 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
|
TO BE FIXED |
|
|
Quote ="The Biffs Back"I agree 100% JWarriors
I would ask all Wigan fans to read my post with an open mind and then make their own conclusions as to whether or not I have a valuable point.
I posted the comments made by Lenagan when Zak was initially signed when he stated that there would be no more controversies allowed from him
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/rugby-leagu ... lay-drugs/
Is this not a controversy from Zak?
IMO Lenagan is more than happy to get rid of players that step out of line when they aren't really a valuable asset on the field anymore,but he clearly has ulterior motives with his choices of who gets the bullet and who doesn't
[uMossop was hung out to dry when he was the innocent party after an unsavoury incident with Bateman[/u (although in reality his form was poop since his return from the NRL and he also wasn't a playing asset to the club moving forward where as Bateman was a top line player)
Mossop's exit was an easy decision to make by Lenagan to get rid and he did
Joel Tomkins' "Rectum of Wigan" video was cringe worthy at best,but surely it was not worthy of him being made to move on to Hull KR was it?
Although Lenagan clearly realised that it was an ideal opportunity to get rid of Joel's salary from the wage bill as he was clearly past his sell by date and he did
Does Lenagan think that RL fans will not scrutinise his decisions and make their own conclusions regarding his motives?
Was Mossop actually the guilty party on that fateful day?
Was Rectumgate worthy of getting Joel the boot?
So why does Zak get his reprieve from his latest controversy?
IMO Lenagan would not be so sympathetic regarding Zak's drink driving indiscretion if he had run over a member of his own family (As is a very likely scenario when drivers over the limit take the decision to drive whilst under the influence of alcohol)
But the fact that Zak didn't actually run anyone over is obviously deemed OK by Lenagan,as is the fact that he is also the best Full Back in SL and is a valuable asset to Wigan
So Rehab it is for Zak and a slap on the wrist until his next indiscretion
Honest opinions guys am I right or are you happy with Lenagan's decisions?'"
not entirely true |
|
Quote ="The Biffs Back"I agree 100% JWarriors
I would ask all Wigan fans to read my post with an open mind and then make their own conclusions as to whether or not I have a valuable point.
I posted the comments made by Lenagan when Zak was initially signed when he stated that there would be no more controversies allowed from him
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/rugby-leagu ... lay-drugs/
Is this not a controversy from Zak?
IMO Lenagan is more than happy to get rid of players that step out of line when they aren't really a valuable asset on the field anymore,but he clearly has ulterior motives with his choices of who gets the bullet and who doesn't
[uMossop was hung out to dry when he was the innocent party after an unsavoury incident with Bateman[/u (although in reality his form was poop since his return from the NRL and he also wasn't a playing asset to the club moving forward where as Bateman was a top line player)
Mossop's exit was an easy decision to make by Lenagan to get rid and he did
Joel Tomkins' "Rectum of Wigan" video was cringe worthy at best,but surely it was not worthy of him being made to move on to Hull KR was it?
Although Lenagan clearly realised that it was an ideal opportunity to get rid of Joel's salary from the wage bill as he was clearly past his sell by date and he did
Does Lenagan think that RL fans will not scrutinise his decisions and make their own conclusions regarding his motives?
Was Mossop actually the guilty party on that fateful day?
Was Rectumgate worthy of getting Joel the boot?
So why does Zak get his reprieve from his latest controversy?
IMO Lenagan would not be so sympathetic regarding Zak's drink driving indiscretion if he had run over a member of his own family (As is a very likely scenario when drivers over the limit take the decision to drive whilst under the influence of alcohol)
But the fact that Zak didn't actually run anyone over is obviously deemed OK by Lenagan,as is the fact that he is also the best Full Back in SL and is a valuable asset to Wigan
So Rehab it is for Zak and a slap on the wrist until his next indiscretion
Honest opinions guys am I right or are you happy with Lenagan's decisions?'"
not entirely true | |
|
|
|
|
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| Moderator | 14395 | No
Team
Selected |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Dec 2001 | 23 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| May 2024 | May 2022 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
|
TO BE FIXED |
Moderator
|
| Quote ="Ziggy Stardust"I 100% agree with Lenners decisions.
He got rid of two overrated and overpaid deadbeats for free and is keeping hold of when in form the best no 1 in Super League.
I think it's called management, and Lenners is one of the best in that business.
If it goes pear-shaped at the rehab or after we can just sack him no trouble, we already have two players that can comfortably cover fullback so it's not really that much of a gamble TBH.'"
I think it's called hypocrisy. Using duty of care as the excuse (and that it what it is) to retain Hardaker has left IL open to that charge given how the club treated Joel Tomkins. Applying different rules for different people is also not good management and inspires mistrust not loyalty. I expect the club to behave consistently, not selectively regardless of whether or not the player in question is deemed good or at the end of his career or whatever. It bins off a player who had played 237 games for the club on his first offence of being under the influence and behaving like a prize idiot (to put it mildly) and made no attempt to adopt a duty of care with him. No second chance for JT yet it rolls out the red carpet for a player that has been a serial offender who has never played a game for the club citing duty of care as the excuse. It owes Hardaker no loyalty whatsoever. The fact it has got two ready made replacements is every reason to walk away. Yes we'd probably be worse off as a team if Hardaker can find his old form but it's so transparently obvious what is going on here it puts IL and the club in a bad light. If Mo Lindsay had done this, the forum would be in meltdown. |
|
|
|
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| Player Coach | 3019 | No
Team
Selected |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Feb 2006 | 19 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| Aug 2020 | Aug 2020 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
|
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote ="DaveO"I think it's called hypocrisy. Using duty of care as the excuse (and that it what it is) to retain Hardaker has left IL open to that charge given how the club treated Joel Tomkins. Applying different rules for different people is also not good management and inspires mistrust not loyalty. I expect the club to behave consistently, not selectively regardless of whether or not the player in question is deemed good or at the end of his career or whatever. It bins off a player who had played 237 games for the club on his first offence of being under the influence and behaving like a prize idiot (to put it mildly) and made no attempt to adopt a duty of care with him. No second chance for JT yet it rolls out the red carpet for a player that has been a serial offender who has never played a game for the club citing duty of care as the excuse. It owes Hardaker no loyalty whatsoever. The fact it has got two ready made replacements is every reason to walk away. Yes we'd probably be worse off as a team if Hardaker can find his old form but it's so transparently obvious what is going on here it puts IL and the club in a bad light. If Mo Lindsay had done this, the forum would be in meltdown.'"
Disagree completely!!
Where has the club rolled out the red carpet?
Sent a player to residential rehab, without doubt, the conditions of this is sort your alcohol abuse or bye -bye.
JT was filmed abusing Wigan people in a Wigan pub, slagging off Wiganers, his career at the club was untenable.
Your dislike for Lenners is well known, and the fact you mention Mo is laughable.
Check Wigans record under Lenners, pretty good reading for me, the best chairman we've ever had!! |
|
|
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| International Star | 2494 | No
Team
Selected |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Jan 2014 | 11 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| Jan 2025 | Jan 2025 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
|
TO BE FIXED |
|
|
Quote ="The Biffs Back"I agree 100% JWarriors
I would ask all Wigan fans to read my post with an open mind and then make their own conclusions as to whether or not I have a valuable point.
I posted the comments made by Lenagan when Zak was initially signed when he stated that there would be no more controversies allowed from him
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/rugby-leagu ... lay-drugs/
Is this not a controversy from Zak?
IMO Lenagan is more than happy to get rid of players that step out of line when they aren't really a valuable asset on the field anymore,but he clearly has ulterior motives with his choices of who gets the bullet and who doesn't
Mossop was hung out to dry when he was the innocent party after an unsavoury incident with Bateman (although in reality his form was poop since his return from the NRL and he also wasn't a playing asset to the club moving forward where as Bateman was a top line player)
Mossop's exit was an easy decision to make by Lenagan to get rid and he did
Joel Tomkins' "Rectum of Wigan" video was cringe worthy at best,but surely it was not worthy of him being made to move on to Hull KR was it?
Although Lenagan clearly realised that it was an ideal opportunity to get rid of Joel's salary from the wage bill as he was clearly past his sell by date and he did
Does Lenagan think that RL fans will not scrutinise his decisions and make their own conclusions regarding his motives?
Was Mossop actually the guilty party on that fateful day?
Was Rectumgate worthy of getting Joel the boot?
So why does Zak get his reprieve from his latest controversy?
IMO Lenagan would not be so sympathetic regarding Zak's drink driving indiscretion if he had run over a member of his own family (As is a very likely scenario when drivers over the limit take the decision to drive whilst under the influence of alcohol)
But the fact that Zak didn't actually run anyone over is obviously deemed OK by Lenagan,as is the fact that he is also the best Full Back in SL and is a valuable asset to Wigan
So Rehab it is for Zak and a slap on the wrist until his next indiscretion
Honest opinions guys am I right or are you happy with Lenagan's decisions?'"
Great post
Lets go back a few years. At Featherstone under Powell Zac was no problem but he moved on to Leeds and went off the rails. Back at Cas under Powell he was no problem (not seen "up ponte"icon_wink.gif but then by his own admission he got drunk at home and took cocaine. It seems it was then only after his suspension he went completely off the rails and was spotted almost nightly with his "plastic gangster" mates. I thought that once he got back training and playing with Wigan he would be ok but this sadly hasn't been the case. I know his mates get a lot of the blame but any one who has seen it will tell you it is Zac that wants to be one of them and not the other way round. Best of luck for Zac and Wigan but I feel IL has taken the option that see's the best financial option for him. |
|
Quote ="The Biffs Back"I agree 100% JWarriors
I would ask all Wigan fans to read my post with an open mind and then make their own conclusions as to whether or not I have a valuable point.
I posted the comments made by Lenagan when Zak was initially signed when he stated that there would be no more controversies allowed from him
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/rugby-leagu ... lay-drugs/
Is this not a controversy from Zak?
IMO Lenagan is more than happy to get rid of players that step out of line when they aren't really a valuable asset on the field anymore,but he clearly has ulterior motives with his choices of who gets the bullet and who doesn't
Mossop was hung out to dry when he was the innocent party after an unsavoury incident with Bateman (although in reality his form was poop since his return from the NRL and he also wasn't a playing asset to the club moving forward where as Bateman was a top line player)
Mossop's exit was an easy decision to make by Lenagan to get rid and he did
Joel Tomkins' "Rectum of Wigan" video was cringe worthy at best,but surely it was not worthy of him being made to move on to Hull KR was it?
Although Lenagan clearly realised that it was an ideal opportunity to get rid of Joel's salary from the wage bill as he was clearly past his sell by date and he did
Does Lenagan think that RL fans will not scrutinise his decisions and make their own conclusions regarding his motives?
Was Mossop actually the guilty party on that fateful day?
Was Rectumgate worthy of getting Joel the boot?
So why does Zak get his reprieve from his latest controversy?
IMO Lenagan would not be so sympathetic regarding Zak's drink driving indiscretion if he had run over a member of his own family (As is a very likely scenario when drivers over the limit take the decision to drive whilst under the influence of alcohol)
But the fact that Zak didn't actually run anyone over is obviously deemed OK by Lenagan,as is the fact that he is also the best Full Back in SL and is a valuable asset to Wigan
So Rehab it is for Zak and a slap on the wrist until his next indiscretion
Honest opinions guys am I right or are you happy with Lenagan's decisions?'"
Great post
Lets go back a few years. At Featherstone under Powell Zac was no problem but he moved on to Leeds and went off the rails. Back at Cas under Powell he was no problem (not seen "up ponte"icon_wink.gif but then by his own admission he got drunk at home and took cocaine. It seems it was then only after his suspension he went completely off the rails and was spotted almost nightly with his "plastic gangster" mates. I thought that once he got back training and playing with Wigan he would be ok but this sadly hasn't been the case. I know his mates get a lot of the blame but any one who has seen it will tell you it is Zac that wants to be one of them and not the other way round. Best of luck for Zac and Wigan but I feel IL has taken the option that see's the best financial option for him. | |
|
|
|
|
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| International Star | 2494 | No
Team
Selected |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Jan 2014 | 11 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| Jan 2025 | Jan 2025 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
|
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote ="Ziggy Stardust"Disagree completely!!
Where has the club rolled out the red carpet?
Sent a player to residential rehab, without doubt, the conditions of this is sort your alcohol abuse or bye -bye.
JT was filmed abusing Wigan people in a Wigan pub, slagging off Wiganers, his career at the club was untenable.
Your dislike for Lenners is well known, and the fact you mention Mo is laughable.
Check Wigans record under Lenners, pretty good reading for me, the best chairman we've ever had!!'"
Under " Lenners" how much have they lost in the last 2 years? Its another reason he's kept an asset (not a player) with a price tag on it like a lump of pork. |
|
|
|
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| Player Coach | 3019 | No
Team
Selected |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Feb 2006 | 19 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| Aug 2020 | Aug 2020 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
|
TO BE FIXED |
|
|
|
|
|
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| Club Captain | 34 | No
Team
Selected |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Dec 2017 | 7 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| Oct 2018 | Oct 2018 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
|
TO BE FIXED |
|
|
I think Wigan have done the right thing what’s happened has happened hope Zak can get sorted. Time to sit back and wait for the new season and the new look of the team and management taking shape .Heres to 2019!!
|
|
|
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| Club Captain | 427 | No
Team
Selected |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Sep 2018 | 6 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| May 2022 | May 2022 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
|
TO BE FIXED |
|
|
Anyone who believes that IDIOT BOY just go drunk and decided to have a white powder chaser as a one off and then unluckily has the drug testers knocking on his door is very much deluded.
I would suggest he has been the best full back but at the moment he's had over a year out the game, clearly not been involved in any keep fit regime for his return, used cocaine, drank regularly and clearly has mental health issues and people expect him to stride back into SL as good as he was before he drifted into drink and powder as a pastime that's a big ask.
|
|
|
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| Player Coach | 2319 | No
Team
Selected |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Jan 2010 | 15 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| Jan 2025 | Dec 2024 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
|
TO BE FIXED |
|
|
Makes you wonder if Joel was forced out and didn’t get paid off if he’s speaking to a solicitor playing the one rule for one and one rule for another card. This decision is quite hypocritical of IL but guessing he didn’t make this decision alone.
|
|
|
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| Club Captain | 332 | No
Team
Selected |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Jul 2016 | 8 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| Jul 2022 | Feb 2020 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
|
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote ="newgroundb4wakey"Great post
Lets go back a few years. At Featherstone under Powell Zac was no problem but he moved on to Leeds and went off the rails. Back at Cas under Powell he was no problem (not seen "up ponte"icon_wink.gif but then by his own admission he got drunk at home and took cocaine. It seems it was then only after his suspension he went completely off the rails and was spotted almost nightly with his "plastic gangster" mates. I thought that once he got back training and playing with Wigan he would be ok but this sadly hasn't been the case. I know his mates get a lot of the blame but any one who has seen it will tell you it is Zac that wants to be one of them and not the other way round. Best of luck for Zac and Wigan but I feel IL has taken the option that see's the best financial option for him.'"
Of course he’s taken the best result financially and in terms of sporting success, why would he do anything different? People seem to forget sport is a results business, not a community interest company or charity.
Nobody moaned this much about Ben Barba, who had many many misdemeanours before coming to Super League. |
|
|
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| Club Coach | 6308 | No
Team
Selected |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Nov 2004 | 20 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| Dec 2024 | Aug 2024 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
|
TO BE FIXED |
|
|
So here is my take.
Wigan have done the correct thing as an employer. They have considered the health and well being of a troubled individual over and above him as an asset and are sending him to rehab under the treatment of a professional service with the sporting chance. clinic. Zak has never been in to rehab and had serious help from one of these organisations. If wigan cut him loose, he would have simply imploded.
In this instance if he self distructs again, absolutely no one in world rugby will ever touch him. This is his last chance.
Dont forget what happened to Terry Newton when he was banned. Zak has an issue and the consequences of the easy option could have been severe.
Well done Wigan, your approach is professional, considered and thoughtful, looking after the individuals health and well being over anything else.
Yes if it works, its a huge benefit to Wigan however there is a long road for ZAK to go before he hits the heights of where he has been before.
Will it pay off, time will tell but Wigan have taken a responsible approach.
|
|
|
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| Club Captain | 34 | No
Team
Selected |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Dec 2017 | 7 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| Oct 2018 | Oct 2018 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
|
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote ="Tricky Dicky"So here is my take.
Wigan have done the correct thing as an employer. They have considered the health and well being of a troubled individual over and above him as an asset and are sending him to rehab under the treatment of a professional service with the sporting chance. clinic. Zak has never been in to rehab and had serious help from one of these organisations. If wigan cut him loose, he would have simply imploded.
In this instance if he self distructs again, absolutely no one in world rugby will ever touch him. This is his last chance.
Dont forget what happened to Terry Newton when he was banned. Zak has an issue and the consequences of the easy option could have been severe.
Well done Wigan, your approach is professional, considered and thoughtful, looking after the individuals health and well being over anything else.
Yes if it works, its a huge benefit to Wigan however there is a long road for ZAK to go before he hits the heights of where he has been before.
Will it pay off, time will tell but Wigan have taken a responsible approach.'" couldn’t have been a more thought of response pal top post! |
|
|
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| Club Captain | 53 | No
Team
Selected |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Oct 2017 | 7 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| Nov 2024 | Oct 2024 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
|
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote ="Tricky Dicky"So here is my take.
Wigan have done the correct thing as an employer. They have considered the health and well being of a troubled individual over and above him as an asset and are sending him to rehab under the treatment of a professional service with the sporting chance. clinic. Zak has never been in to rehab and had serious help from one of these organisations. If wigan cut him loose, he would have simply imploded.
In this instance if he self distructs again, absolutely no one in world rugby will ever touch him. This is his last chance.
Dont forget what happened to Terry Newton when he was banned. Zak has an issue and the consequences of the easy option could have been severe.
Well done Wigan, your approach is professional, considered and thoughtful, looking after the individuals health and well being over anything else.
Yes if it works, its a huge benefit to Wigan however there is a long road for ZAK to go before he hits the heights of where he has been before.
Will it pay off, time will tell but Wigan have taken a responsible approach.'"
The individuals health and well being over anything else. You sure about that?
‘We have thought long and hard about what the correct thing to do is for Wigan’.
I don’t doubt that’s what they want folk to believe; they just forgot to tell the bloke writing the script! |
|
|
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| International Star | 2795 | No
Team
Selected |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Jun 2011 | 14 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| Nov 2024 | Nov 2023 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
|
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote ="Returnee"The individuals health and well being over anything else. You sure about that?
‘We have thought long and hard about what the correct thing to do is for Wigan’.
I don’t doubt that’s what they want folk to believe; they just forgot to tell the bloke writing the script!'"
The correct thing for Wigan has to be looked at in more detail than just what ZH can offer as a player. There’s a significant reputational risk to the club either way. If they sacked him and he imploded and in the worst case scenario followed the Terry Newton path, the club would be heavily criticised for not placing his welfare at the forefront of their decision making. By keeping him on there’s an element of fans from both inside and outside of the club who think he’ll let the club down again and that the club are condoning all his misdemeanours.
By sending him to residential rehab, the club has acted very responsibly. He addresses his issues from a welfare perspective and has the best possible chance of rebuilding his life and his career. He is more inclined to feel a commitment to the club in return for their support and hopefully will deliver on the field.
In addition any player who is considering joining the club will clearly see that welfare is important to the management team.
All in all the club were in a very difficult position and in considering what’s correct for the club, they have managed the situation perfectly. Demonstrated a real focus on welfare, minimised reputational risk and retained a very good player.
Let’s not forget that as well as being rugby players, these are also just people and sometimes, people need to be put first. |
|
|
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| Club Coach | 9549 | No
Team
Selected |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Feb 2005 | 20 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| Jan 2025 | Jan 2025 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
|
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote ="Bigredwarrior"Quote ="Returnee"The individuals health and well being over anything else. You sure about that?
‘We have thought long and hard about what the correct thing to do is for Wigan’.
I don’t doubt that’s what they want folk to believe; they just forgot to tell the bloke writing the script!'"
The correct thing for Wigan has to be looked at in more detail than just what ZH can offer as a player. There’s a significant reputational risk to the club either way. If they sacked him and he imploded and in the worst case scenario followed the Terry Newton path, the club would be heavily criticised for not placing his welfare at the forefront of their decision making. By keeping him on there’s an element of fans from both inside and outside of the club who think he’ll let the club down again and that the club are condoning all his misdemeanours.
By sending him to residential rehab, the club has acted very responsibly. He addresses his issues from a welfare perspective and has the best possible chance of rebuilding his life and his career. He is more inclined to feel a commitment to the club in return for their support and hopefully will deliver on the field.
In addition any player who is considering joining the club will clearly see that welfare is important to the management team.
All in all the club were in a very difficult position and in considering what’s correct for the club, they have managed the situation perfectly. Demonstrated a real focus on welfare, minimised reputational risk and retained a very good player.
Let’s not forget that as well as being rugby players, these are also just people and sometimes, people need to be put first.'"
Top post. |
|
|
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| Club Captain | 427 | No
Team
Selected |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Sep 2018 | 6 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| May 2022 | May 2022 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
|
TO BE FIXED |
|
|
Ok lets be honest he's already let the club down with the drink driving conviction.
He has had support and chances at both his SL clubs and let them down.
He wasn't at Featherstone long enough to get in trouble clearly a talented player attracting the attention of a number of SL clubs and he opted for Rhinos and Rovers got some brass out of it.
A happy ending would be great for him and the game but the odds are against him, he's really starting from less than zero, unfit, overweight, possible short/long term effects of his drug and drink abuse, mental health issues,will he come back anywhere close to being SL standard? A frighteningly steep hill to climb and his track record, well no one can deny it's p@ss poor
|
|
|
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| International Star | 4791 | No
Team
Selected |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Jan 2015 | 10 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| Jan 2025 | Jan 2025 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
|
TO BE FIXED |
|
|
Whilst I agree with pretty much all Bigredwarrior says, nevertheless I am very pessimistic about outcomes. I can't see ZH being a long-term success on the field after all this. As Rick points out above.
|
|
|
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| Club Captain | 70 | No
Team
Selected |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Jun 2017 | 8 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| Aug 2022 | Jul 2021 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
|
TO BE FIXED |
|
|
I have to say as an outsider looking in, Wigan seem to have dealt with this matter in a very professional manner. Well done.
Hopefully, as a club, they can get Hardaker to knuckle down and toe the line.
We need our best players on the back pages not the front.
|
|
|
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| Player Coach | 2988 | No
Team
Selected |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Jul 2008 | 16 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| Jan 2025 | Jan 2025 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
|
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote ="Davc1h"I have to say as an outsider looking in, Wigan seem to have dealt with this matter in a very professional manner. Well done.
Hopefully, as a club, they can get Hardaker to knuckle down and toe the line.
We need our best players on the back pages not the front.'"
Hiya Zackariah good to see that it has only taken you until Tuesday to recover from your Friday night out in Pontecarlo.
You're fitness levels are obviously are on the up because you looked so ruff on Friday I thought that we wouldn't hear from you until at least the end of the week.
A bit of an update from over here in Wigan is that The Tudor pub has reopened and this should be a regular haunt for you as you can make lots of new chums there with the students from the college across the way. |
|
|
|
|
|
