Having asked a few questions to family who have an idea of "community reseloution" it is apparatly something the police use to deal with "minor" crimes. I would say The Printer way of thinking is correct. A £200 fine each hardly reeks of the kray twins.

That being said and I expect this to happen, the club will take further action in disciplining both players, and rightfully so. Let's hope this is the last we hear of zak in a negative manner in the press, and he kicks on and gets back to playing the high level rugby he does so well for us

Quite so. Hardaker's misdemeanour is barely worse than giving the wife a slap when she gets a bit lippy.

Quite - it would be interesting to see how those siting Hardaker's actions as trivial would react if a work colleague slap them around a bit?

Sport brings out the worst traits in some - the incident in the Bradford v Reading game is a live example - its sports so it somehow transcends acceptable social behaviour.

Sal, considering In the last couple of years you have lambasted Hetherington on his views on Bird and Carney, and that we shouldn't be looking away from these players because of their indiscretions, you don't think you are actually been hypocritical?

Same goes for a couple of others, who talk about legends in the last 15 years, yet a couple of those have far worse records than Mr Hardaker. But no, it appears that was ok. Hypocritical yet again.

Sports fans always make me laugh, only gave him a couple of black eyes... I wonder how some of these posters would feel if they walked to a neighbours to complain about excessive noise at 3am, and got put on their .

But Hardakers a talented player so short of murdering someone, Leeds will stick by him.

if Zak is picked on Friday, I'd expect he will get a lot of support from the vast majority of the crowd.
When the players run out onto the pitch I'd be very surprised if his name is not the first to be chanted

Fans are fickle, and when it's one of 'their own' he will always be innocent to many.

One chant I definatly won't be singing

It all depends what actually happened. Nobody on here actually knows.

If there was provocation from the "victim" then it elicits a big fat "meh" from me.

If not then it's more serious.

The "punishment" suggests, in my opinion, there was at least some provocation. However that's only in my opinion, as we don't know what actually happened.

Had Hardaker been in any other job he likely wouldn't even face disciplinary of any sort. Because no-one would know about it. It wouldn't be in the papers so his bosses would never know and even if they did, unless he was charged nothing would happen.
So let's not pretend there's some kind of moral outrage to be had here, either with Hardaker or the club.

Daft lad does something daft. Happens every night of the week. And worse was regularly committed by some RL legends.

My view on Hetherington on both Bird and Carney was simply that he was trying to protect his own position i.e. under investment in the team by trying to prevent other teams strengthening their squads. He wasn't interested in the quality of SL just saving a few quid at Leeds. That is not the same as what has happened with Hardaker - Carney is an alcoholic - not sure he goes about punching people? - which causes his issues which if they can be sorted he would add massively to the quality of a competition that is suffering from the lack of top quality players. Unlike Zac Carney has performed at the pinnacle of the game - chalk and cheese.

My point about Walker and Bailey was the comparison between them and Woodgate and Bowyer and the variations in sentencing. Don't think either has since transgressed?

I can't think of any players at Leeds with a worse disciplinary record than Hardaker, that is in the public domaine?

All players deserve a second chance but when the don't learn from their mistakes how many chances do you give someone before you say enough is enough. To me Zac is disaster waiting to happen and it is only a question of time.

You claim not to have favourites but you do and Zac is one of them - you are entitled to your opinion we don't agree

Not sure why you always want to make out favourites as a some form of argument? Not sure what the relevance is.

So you are saying that if the player is of a quality that YOU deem good then it is ok to have these indiscretions, but not if you don't deem them of sufficient quality? Yet you say you are not been Hypocritical, and you say talk to me about favourites.

I agree entirely with you on Bird and Carney, hence why my view is consistent. Yours it appears is not.

McDermott and Senior had much worse records than Hardaker by the way. Something conveniently forgotten about by many. And I am talking Barrie, but of course our esteemed coach can be classed as worse also.

My view was clear earlier on this thread, so a bit rich to talk about favourites. I don't believe any player should be out gallivanting and drinking in the middle of the night, regardless of days off or not. It is up to the clubs to have those rules in place, and considering he is not the only one, it would appear those rules are not in place. Therefore what exactly is this problem you are forming this opinion on?

It was the very same thing with the England situation. Out on a day off, no rule in place. When pulled for it he gets the hump and leaves the camp. Quickly forgiven and picked again.

My view again is one where you treat something on the incident alone. If this incident is deemed sufficient for sever punishment then I would back that, so long as that is the same for all players. What I wouldn't back is blowing out of proportion previous issues, and using them along with a current incident. That isn't favouritism that is common sense.

I go back to your initial post, you preach Hypocritical, but you seem to be the one who should be labelled that.

I wondered when the "PC brigade" and "worse in the 70s" quotes would come out.

Right up there with "can't have been that bad if it didn't go to court".

As G1 says - and frankly, I'll take his view on legal matters above everyone else's on here thanks - the community resolution route is one the police would be eager to go down as it's easiest for them. Unless the victim disagrees or there are aggravating factors (such as race in the Woodgate/Bowyer incident for example), they'll try to settle most assaults in this matter rather than drag them through the courts.

It doesn't lessen the severity of the crime, or the inability of Hardaker in particular to control his temper in pressure situations. Who was it that made the comment a while ago about a generation of young players who are more interested in what their latest phone is like or their new tattoo than knuckling down and working hard to become better? Would be a shame to see Hardaker fall into that category and waste the talent he's got by making stupid choices.