If Hardaker's ban is anything to go by, I expect Thomas Minns to get a slap on the wrist and told not to do it again.

"Why would they sack him?"

1. Morals/integrity.
2. To set the record for the rest of the team.
3. To make an example to their young fans.
4. Under pressure from their sponsors.
5. To avoid paying his wages for 14 months whilst he is ineligible to play.
6. After 14 months out he is likely to return a shadow of his former self (remember he'd been rubbish the seasons before he joined Cas).
7. Because he let the team down at the absolute biggest moment.

My take on this is that this is one of those bizarre moments when you just wish the sport was a properly run professional game so you could get the truth about things and not the nonsensical PR spin that will inevitably come out.

There are so, so many issues with this and precisely none of them will ever be resolved by any of the parties involved, just ignored. The time it took to announce his ban is too long, the time it took to charge him was too long, it was 20 days after his failed test that he played against St Helens in the semi final. The public statements released are nonsense, there were no 'exceptional circumstances' just like there weren't when the last five or six players to be caught got lenient bans either. Anyone who got a 2 year ban should be contacting their solicitors about now to make a compensation claim.

But for me the biggest, most glaring anomaly in this is that Wigan clearly knew when his ban would expire months before it was announced. They have been shuffling their cards for a couple of months now to accomodate him in their squad and have not only agreed a deal with Hardaker but also moved on or attempted to move on other players. Now how could they do that so confidently when the ban was still up in the air? Clearly they had inside knowledge of not only the process but the outcome before it was even decided. Rugby League is a professional sport and wherever money goes so does greed and corruption. This whole situation reeks and again Cas are royally shafted.

The competition itself is stronger for him returning though, it adds one more quality player to the handful we already have in Super League. Huge risk for Wigan, especially if they release Tomkins rather than move him or Hardaker to another position.

Moving a few miles doesn’t solve mental health issues, which is why Hardaker can’t make rational decisions. He’ll make the same irrational decisions.

So if someone constantly gets into trouble, its automatically "Mental Health Issues"? What happened to just being a prat who never learns?

That’s the strange thing for me. The panel did not accept that his personals issues meant the ban should be shorter than normal, but then decided that it should be shorter because he was battered at the time.
At point 42 they even write that it was fortuitous that he chose to take cocaine rather than drink more alcohol. Very, very strange given than one is a banned substance and the other isn’t! It’s so strange that I wonder if they mean the opposite, as in the next sentence they say that if he had drunk more alcohol he wouldn’t have been before the panel.

Have UKAD and the RFL set a Precedent here by introducing a mitigating factor, drinking 6 pints of lager and sharing bottles of Whiskey/Vodka with your mates before snorting cocaine is OK to reduce the ban from 2 years to 14 months.

Read the judgement. It’s clear he’s been diagnosed with mental health issues years ago. It’s not like he’s suddenly developed them now he faces a drugs ban.

Yep, tough it’s nothing to do with the RFL.
UKAD have decided that being intoxicated means a shorter ban.

1. The time taken to get the test results is the time that it takes - it is the same for ALL sports. There isn't just one test that takes a couple of hours that gives the results for everything they are looking for. The athlete then has to be contacted and asked if he wants the 'B' sample testing which then requires more time for the testing procedure to be repeated.
2. The time taken to announce his ban is on the same timescale as for other cases where there has been an appeal/dispute of the results and a hearing has to be arranged and conducted - both sides need time to prepare there cases - so not unexpected it's taken so long (a recent ban from boxing was only announced a year after the doping offence).

Having said all that, going out with someone he knew had regular access to drugs, getting blind drunk and then taking drugs seems a bit of a feeble reason to essentially reduce the ban on extenuating grounds. Despite what has been said, some recent judgements have opened several cans of worms and I expect the 'anniversary of a distressing event'/impaired mental function (either due to an event or congenital) cards to be played quite a lot in the future.

Maybe nonsense to you, but its my opinion. Time will tell and you may turn out to be right, but lets wait and see

1. Morals and integrity ??? I’m sorry but we have signed worse than hardaker in the past and I doubt it will stop us in the future, we’ve literally just signed Liam Watts who is hardly Mary Poppins
2. See point 1
3. See point 1
4. Pressure from the sponsors that were willing to pay him a wage to work for them until his ban was up ?
5. They sacked him before he even got a ban how were the club to know how long he would get ?? It’s long been rumored on the Cas fb pages that he was contesting the full charge. The club are far from skint these days and I’d suggest investing a few more quid into the best full back (if not player on his day) in the league was an investment worth taking especially considering the amount already invested.
6. At least research you point, he was man of steel 2 years before joining us, had one bad year then made the shortlist for man of steel the year after. Zak Hardakers ability can never be in question imo.
7. It wasn’t like he meant to get caught 3 days before OT, he wasn’t just sat there bored before the final and thought to himself he would do his best Scarface impression. It was months before he failed a test the timing of when this came out was just terrible (unless your a loiner) timing.

And how would Castleford know that he was only going to get a 14 month ban then ?

That’s great but do morals, integrity, saving money and setting examples to youngsters win silverware? Also you don’t know whether point 4 is true, I’d say that sacking Hardaker isn’t going to stop someone from taking cocaine, he definitely wasn’t rubbish the seasons before. It was a massive cock up from Cas and it would be interesting to see why Steve Gill left.

If you can’t see the stupidity in sacking your best player who you’ve just payed £150,000 for when you don’t know how long they’re going to be banned and when they are now going to sign for a rival for free then you’re an idiot.

Is the answer not obvious? Anyone with common sense would know to wait for the outcome of the hearing.