El Diablo wrote:
Sorry, I would agree with a lot of this IF the case against the guy was proven.
But what you actually appear to suggest here is sacking Hardaker because you "suspect" he committed an offence?
Please can we not sit together at the tribunal?
Process is actually quite important. As is burden of proof.
Of course we should follow the process in determining guilt or innocence and my view that he should be dismissed, of course, follows from my suspicion as I stated that he once again did use this sort of language. The process of weighing the evidence and allowing Hardaker to defend himself is important. It may be found that the charges are not proven or not even brought forward.
But Leeds's complaint is not about that part of the process, which has not yet or barely begun. Leeds seem to be complaining about the way that evidence is being assembled. Save for what Silverwood and Flanagan and anyone else on the pitch have to say the only primary evidence of import is the footage. Silverwood is a dick and not a reliable witness, but the footage is key. Who cares how the issue was first raised officially? It was being commented on before the game had even finished - I got a text at 9.31pm about it, seconds after it happened.
But back to Hardaker's future. We know that, last November, he was given a written warning and a £2,500 fine by the club. Then in May he made his remarks at Warrington and was found guilty by the RFL. I have to assume that there was a parallel internal disciplinary process for comments made during the course of his job that would be considered outrageous in any normal work environment. If he was already on a written warning from November then, at best, he should now be on a final warning unless Leeds for whatever reason decided that he was innocent or that the external punishment meant no internal action was required.
If the latter was the case it would, in my judgement, have been unwise. A Rugby League pitch is not a normal work environment. But it is still a work environment and not a social one. Leeds have already made their minds up, it seems, on this most recent incident. So Hardaker will stay, regardless of what happens next from the RFL. I wonder if office staff or Academy players would get the same kind of leeway.
) it still isn't conclusive that it was, it was just opined that it was.
