The fact that reputable news programmes are stating he has been found guilty of Cocaine, and the fact that the Wigan website highlighted the fact that this is a metabolite of cocaine, should tell you enough about this one.

The most disappointing thing about this kind of thing is that if you go to the Wigan Warriors website they are trying to sell kids training camps for the summer. If you were a parent, wouldn't you seriously consider whether these are the kind of players that you want involved with your kids?

I also made this point about the likes of Reardon btw, so this isn't an anti-Wigan post. It is an anti-d!ckhead post.

news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/rugby_l ... 050357.stm any coincidence he was left out of this?

news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/rugby_l ... 050357.stm any coincidence he was left out of this?

He tested positive for Benzoylecgonine which is a drug found in cocaine and other medications, doesn't mean he been taking cocaine, as it's already been mentioned in this thread to stick to facts then that is what I'm doing.

IF true, then what an idiot. Even dumber than he looks, and that's saying somethin'!

Quote: Latchford Wolvesfan "They could and should have done, linking it to cocaine is easier because it's most commonly found in the said substance, I understand that all parties involved have to explore all avenues regarding the subject but what happened to innocent until proven guilty, he may have a very good excuse for it, like the one mentioned. Everybody is already labeling him a bag head and such like before he's given his side of the story, this thread title is way off for a start.'" Perhaps you should let these lot know too: news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/rugby_l ... 114871.stm www.skysports.com/story/0,19528, ... 62,00.html www.sportinglife.com/rugbyleague ... Wigan.html

Quote: Latchford Wolvesfan "They could and should have done, linking it to cocaine is easier because it's most commonly found in the said substance, I understand that all parties involved have to explore all avenues regarding the subject but what happened to innocent until proven guilty, he may have a very good excuse for it, like the one mentioned. Everybody is already labeling him a bag head and such like before he's given his side of the story, this thread title is way off for a start.'" Perhaps you should let these lot know too: news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/rugby_l ... 114871.stm www.skysports.com/story/0,19528, ... 62,00.html www.sportinglife.com/rugbyleague ... Wigan.html

He did play against France though didn't he. Surely if there was any sniff of this then he wouldn't have playd in that game.

But they have only had circa 24 hours to consider their approach. I should imagine a great deal of legal work is being done in the background looking for mitigation or a flaw in the sample process. Also should his B:Sample be negative he will be in the clear.

Bdum tsch!

do you not remember when everyone was complaining about eh MIA's from that squad, che smith came out and said the rfl had cocked up releasing this as the elite squad/have to let WADA know where they are 24/7 for testing purposes and everyone had assumed it was the england squad, when it wasn't.

I hope not.

If he's been tested positive Wigan should use him as an example to all the other over paid dic*heads we currently have at the club.

I don't care how good a player he is, we shouldn't be making excuses for him and he should be made to pay the price for what he's done.

I didn't dispute that. You stated that the thread title is wrong, yet all these reputable websites state almost exactly the same. These are not amateurs on a forum, they are professional websites with legal advisors.

Why is that difficult for you to understand?

Let's start a new thread for LWF...


MOD Idol

Yeah, I'm just pretty sure that had anybody known about this Smith wouldn't have selected him, as he probably won't be around for a couple of years.

I think any club should stand by their player if that player has been 'wronged'. However, I hope that IF guilty then wigan let things take their course and don't bring the "men in suits" into procedings to defend the indefensable!