Re: Zak Hardaker - Statement : Fri Jun 06, 2014 10:37 pm  

meatpaste wrote:

He won't cop a ban. He is a Leeds player (not allowed).

Peacock won't get one either. (same reason)

Lol.

Whatever you do don't go out of your front door. They're waiting for you...

Re: Zak Hardaker - Statement : Sat Jun 07, 2014 5:52 pm  

Fans of Championship clubs keep telling us the disciplinary treats them more harshly than SL clubs.

Let's see if Sarsfield's attack to the head of a grounded player with the arm, subsequent head butt and then "attempted" punching is punished more severely than Peacock's toe to toe punching shall we?

Oh, and had Thaler spotted the original offence and blown his whistle, none of that would have kicked off. Still, too much to expect that arrogant show pony to do his job.

Re: Zak Hardaker - Statement : Mon Jun 09, 2014 3:36 pm  

meatpaste wrote:

He won't cop a ban. He is a Leeds player (not allowed).

Peacock won't get one either. (same reason)

I DON'T BELIEVE YOU YOU ARE A LYAR

Re: Zak Hardaker - Statement : Mon Jun 09, 2014 3:47 pm  

Peacock grade B punching, sarsfield not charged. Hmm.

Re: Zak Hardaker - Statement : Mon Jun 09, 2014 3:49 pm  

Hardaker has been charged with a grade E offence of using verbal abuse based on race/colour/religion/sexual preference.

That carries a potential ban of between 4 and 8 matches.

Re: Zak Hardaker - Statement : Mon Jun 09, 2014 4:07 pm  

Thought there was an RFL conspiracy that made certain that none of our players got banned???

Along with Ablett, we're going to have arguably our best 3 players so far this year all banned for Hudds. One strange bloody conspiracy is that.

Re: Zak Hardaker - Statement : Mon Jun 09, 2014 4:25 pm  

ThePrinter wrote:

Thought there was an RFL conspiracy that made certain that none of our players got banned???

Along with Ablett, we're going to have arguably our best 3 players so far this year all banned for Hudds. One strange bloody conspiracy is that.

Maybe you guys have been seeing how far you can push it. Picking televised games to: kick someone in the head / punch people 3/4 times / scream 'homophobic' abuse may have been taking it too far?

Re: Zak Hardaker - Statement : Mon Jun 09, 2014 4:34 pm  

Cripesginger wrote:

Maybe you guys have been seeing how far you can push it. Picking televised games to: kick someone in the head / punch people 3/4 times / scream 'homophobic' abuse may have been taking it too far?

Or the more likely alternative, people who come up with daft claims like 'conspiracy' are stupid.

Re: Zak Hardaker - Statement : Mon Jun 09, 2014 4:49 pm  

Also quite funny if you look at the forums of all the other teams in SL on RLFans the only ones with threads going on about Hardaker getting charged and banned are.....Warrington, Saints, Wigan and Hudds.

So solely the other contenders for the GF when the year began.......coincidence I'm sure

Re: Zak Hardaker - Statement : Mon Jun 09, 2014 4:52 pm  

Absolutley ridicoulous , and before anyone starts banging on i do not agree with recent suspensions for punching from other teams . Unprovoked attacks should carry bans but sorry the aggresor on Friday got what he deserved and for him to get off scott free because he was not capable of putting up a show once Peacock was stood up should not render him sin binning sufficient . Peacock was dealt with by Thaler and that should be the end , of course the RL Want to ban Peacock , i suggest they ban Thaler as well because his recent performances have been on a par with James Child .