Re: Zak Hardaker - Statement : Wed Sep 03, 2014 9:44 pm  

Saddened! wrote:

You are focusing too much on the detail. The reality here, stepping back from the emotion, is that an allegation has been made against a player. It doesn't matter who makes the allegation or how fraudulently it comes about, those are things for the hearing. Leeds should step back from the controvery and release a statement saying 'Leeds are aware of the allegation and will cooperate fully with the investigation. Leeds expect all it's players to represent the values of the club and the sport' or something along those lines, potentially not saying anything at all. Once Hardaker's case is thrown out because of the evidence presented in his defense and a complete lack of evidence against him, the open the barrells at the ref. You don't do it beforehand. Fight for him tooth and nail IN the hearing, but don't lay yourself open to the possibility of being seen as publically supporting a player who has used homophobic abuse.

Don't you think GH is smart enough to say Zak, did you say it? and act from there. GH is arguably the most clinical administrator in the game. Leeds have done what they have done with total forsight of how it would play out.

Re: Zak Hardaker - Statement : Wed Sep 03, 2014 9:44 pm  

Saddened! wrote:

Protecting the reputation of the club comes first. Reacting the news the RFL are investigating it with such an emotive response isn't the best way to go.

I'll let GH know that saddened has some advice for him on the running of the club.

Re: Zak Hardaker - Statement : Wed Sep 03, 2014 9:45 pm  

Saddened! wrote:

You are focusing too much on the detail.

Always a foolish error of course....you should be employed by the RFL.

Re: Zak Hardaker - Statement : Wed Sep 03, 2014 9:46 pm  

FlexWheeler wrote:

I'll let GH know that saddened has some advice for him on the running of the club.

Where Rule 1 is, don't focus on the detail.

Re: Zak Hardaker - Statement : Wed Sep 03, 2014 9:50 pm  

sgtwilko wrote:

Don't you think GH is smart enough to say Zak, did you say it? and act from there. GH is arguably the most clinical administrator in the game. Leeds have done what they have done with total forsight of how it would play out.

And how likely do you think he is to say "Yeah boss, I did it"? When it would get him at least fined and potentially even sacked?

Tell you what, you've made it public now, so they should televise the hearing. I'd pay cinema prices to watch it, popcorn at the ready. It'd be a fantastic event, I don't really care which way it goes, both are quite appealing. A Leeds player being banned again, which is funny, or the RFL are proven to be corrupt, which is just as tantilising a prospect.

Re: Zak Hardaker - Statement : Wed Sep 03, 2014 9:52 pm  

Saddened! wrote:

And how likely do you think he is to say "Yeah boss, I did it"? When it would get him at least fined and potentially even sacked?

Tell you what, you've made it public now, so they should televise the hearing. I'd pay cinema prices to watch it, popcorn at the ready. It'd be a fantastic event, I don't really care which way it goes, both are quite appealing. A Leeds player being banned again, which is funny, or the RFL are proven to be corrupt, which is just as tantilising a prospect.

Do you think adding a lip reader to on field proceedings would add a new exciting dimension to games?

Re: Zak Hardaker - Statement : Wed Sep 03, 2014 9:55 pm  

Saddened! wrote:

Protecting the reputation of the club comes first. Reacting the news the RFL are investigating it with such an emotive response isn't the best way to go.

Sorry maybe you should jump on the phone to GH and put straight on how to run a club.

Re: Zak Hardaker - Statement : Wed Sep 03, 2014 9:59 pm  

Saddened! wrote:

And how likely do you think he is to say "Yeah boss, I did it"? When it would get him at least fined and potentially even sacked?

Tell you what, you've made it public now, so they should televise the hearing. I'd pay cinema prices to watch it, popcorn at the ready. It'd be a fantastic event, I don't really care which way it goes, both are quite appealing. A Leeds player being banned again, which is funny, or the RFL are proven to be corrupt, which is just as tantilising a prospect.

GH is much smarter than to believe a kids lie. If Leeds are in any doubt you don't do what they have done.

Re: Zak Hardaker - Statement : Wed Sep 03, 2014 10:09 pm  

The most concerning part of the whole thing so far, in my opinion, is if it's true the RFL have used a lip reader.

If that's true then, as I posted earlier, it puts the RFL in the position of having to watch every second of every available camera footage of every game to both pick up incidents the match officials missed and, with a lip reader, to work out every word, audible or visible, said by a player on the pitch.

Any swear words picked up are a game ban at least, depending on severity, according to the rules.

If Silverwood heard it why didn't he act upon it at the time?

Re: Zak Hardaker - Statement : Wed Sep 03, 2014 10:22 pm  

ThePrinter wrote:

How many times are various Saints fans going to compare this to the Liverpool/Suarez thing? They're already having a go at the Leeds team for wearing tshirts at Wigan supporting Hardaker even though it hasn't actually happened. LOL

Also with the Suarez/Evra thing. Suarez ADMITTED using the racist word but his defence was different context/meaning from his country........so no matter how many times you lot incorrectly claim "it's just like the Suarez thing" it really isn't.

So cos Suarez didnt mean it as in a bad way cos in his language its ok, thats ok?