Cunningham and Radley both suffered concussion in the Salford game.

A week is the minimum before being considered, 5 days.......

Let him go clear his name then

I'm sure he'll give the opinion of some anonymous randomer on the internet due consideration.

Indeed, its my opinion, and as a mod you should know and understand this.

Afterall you posted your way to modship

ATEOTD i seriously wonder how this will work now, would it not weigh on your mind a "situation" like this?

Would you be able to perform to the best of your ability in your job with this going on back home.

And just what if hes found guilty, how stupid would the club look again?

And the flip side for balance, if found innocent, how could we look then holding up a serious criminal investigaiton in Aus by not letting a player go sort his out.

but again its all opinion, isnt it.

It's not like as a club we've looked silly before is it?

Pathetic post as usual.

Why would the club look stupid? As has been pointed out but you seem unable to compute, there is a fundamental fact in law that you are innocent until proven guilty.

With Ellis named in the squad I feel a lot more confident, it's obvious how much of an affect he has on the field during the game so let's hope he can lead us to another home win against Leeds.

Indeed, but I'd be unhappy about saints playing someone with an outstanding Australian arrest warrant!!

Agree with this team but Sa looked injured to me so unfortunately Yeaman too play

You are but usually in the entertainment / sport industry there is extra caution applied and people in this circle tend to almost be handled as guilty until proved innocent. Completely different circumstances but recently there have been numerous 'celebrities' suspended / placed on leave whilst prove of guilt has been established.

I'm pretty sure the club will have done its homework both on the legal and moral issues surrounding this and will act accordingly ATEOTD he's not been charged or requested to return so I'd think it was business as usual until this happens

I'd agree. I think pearson is acutely aware of negative publicity following the issues which came to light when he took over. If this guy was some serious crim then the aussie police would be extraditing him

Radford says neither the NRL or police have contacted the club yet, which is strange, so as it stands is it only paper rumours?

Sorry to take you all back 8-odd pages but it's such a disappointment to read posts like this, belittling a player who's given so much to English rugby league.

I am, of course, taking about JJB. A player whose ruck-arsing antics are in a different dimension entirely, a fourth-man-in not afraid to see out the odd geological epoch before he disentangles himself from the tackle. To even mention Peacock's ruck-arsing instead of JJB's is just, well, wrong.

We'll lose tomorrow.

38-12 to Leeds.

It'll be grim.

You won't last long on here with that excessive optimism.

Joined yesterday, 1 post. You make this your first post? Ha, brilliant troll.

Fortunately the club still has a long way to go before it looks as silly as you make yourself look on here every single day.

The club has had no contact from the RFL, NRL, Australian police, or UK police.

So you reckon it would be good policy to drop player based only on an unconfirmed newspaper article? An [iAustralian[/i newspaper article?

Given the account name I rather suspect it's meant to be sarcastic/ironic.

He has been issued an arrest warrant by the Queensland Crime and Corruption Commision.
You think there is nothing going on or he won't be affected? If the club play him and he gets found guilty you know it will reflect badly on us (even though we have done nothing wrong)
Whatever you want to think, I think this is pretty serious and we should probably not play him until we know what is going on.

I don't disagree with the underlined bit, but unless and until the police in either country, or the Queensland Crime and Corruption Commission get in touch with him and/or the club, and there's no evidence of any contact, what are we supposed to do? Stand him down based on hearsay, or as Kosh says, an article in an Aussie paper?

It's getting more complicated in Australia.
The first 2 players have bailed for 2 months, but the police can't (seems odd) release any paperwork relating to the charges.
It has to be presented in court.
The clubs want more information from the players/police before considering reinstating them.

The arrest warrant, according to our only source - the Aussie press, is effective on Michaels' return to Australia. There has been no extradition request. Therefore no questionning can be done nor charges made (IF there are to be any) until he goes back home.

Hull are therefore in a very difficult situation. What are they supposed to do? Not play him or suspend him indefinitely? Pending what? There can be no investigation over here.

Request he returns to Australian soil to face the arrest and the possible consequences? Are Hull, as his employers, in a legal position to do that as the information comes from the press only and there has been no official contact from the Queensland Crime Commission nor the police. Under these circumstances would a suspension be in breach of his rights in any case?

I don't know the answers to these questions but my instinct tells me Hull don't have much choice but to persue their current actions in playing him at the moment.

Ah, seems as joyous on here as when I last posted



Will be a tough game tonight, but after watching the Leeds vs. Hudds highlights I can see us scoring some tries against them. Their defence was really poor for some tries. Trouble is, so was ours last week, albeit it was against the maverick/wizard/god who decided to turn up.

Defend like we did in the first couple and we can win the game. Ellis should help sure up that left side and Feka should add some aggro coming off the bench.

So do we think Michaels is deffo playing and if so where, Sa's spot?