Not aimed at you, but frankly - I don't care.

He's not a Wigan player/Wigan problem any longer, so he can ply his trade in Leeds, Fev, Leigh or the Outer Hebrides for all I care.

Good question, anyone on here clued up about the cap implications when someone is released like this ?

It was be fantastic to see him go to Leigh, him and Beaumont would probably go out on the lash together.

Peet indicates it frees up cap space in his Wigan TV interview. Doubt we’ll get to spend it mins but you never know.

Sounds like you lot have hung him out to dry in the end, when he most needed support. But it’s a two way street I guess. Must have been a tough call as your a weaker team without him…..

It’s funny that, cos we’ve put up with miles more of his s**t than any of his previous clubs have, yourselves included.

How so?

Just found this on the Examiner live about MPs interview...

Initial comments

Firstly, I want to put on record my best wishes to Zak. I told him this personally. There is a genuine desire from this club to see him be okay and to thrive as a person first and foremost. We all know he can play rugby but we just want him to have a happy and content life and whatever support he needs, the club and the game remain there for him.

The lads have all been involved in our culture and they wish him well as a friend first and foremost and that's how I feel, I hope he's alright.

How difficult it was to make the decision

It's difficult because there is a level of care for Zak and a want to see him come here and meet the standards. But as well, we know what we have to do for the best of the club, what culture we're trying to build and to have standards you have got to have accountability. Whether that's in team selection or people not remaining on the journey. Unfortunately, that's where it has got to.

Is the decision related to the initial incident that saw him dropped, or something different?

It's related, it's a consistent theme, we have standards and repeated breaches you could say, repeatedly not meeting what is expected. That's not what is expected from me specifically, I am a massive part of it, but it's the group, the club and what we want to stand for. Zak has been part of the conversations where we have said what we want to be about, as have all the team and staff. For that reason, it becomes an obvious decision even if it's not an easy one.

Was it a necessary decision to make a point about the importance of culture and stands?

It's no good saying all the right things and you never get your culture perfect, it's a life thing. Good things happen and bad things happen but what defines your culture is how you react to it. There are two sides to it - there is the care for Zak as an individual which I will continue to stress, but there's care for all the other individuals in the club, players, staff, fans and academy. We have to do the right thing for the majority.

How important is it to not let it be a distraction for the Salford game?

I can one million per cent guarantee it won't be a distraction.

How have the players reacted?

I don't know what they'll be like, I'm sure they will all touch base and reach out to Zak, as will I and encourage them to do so as a friend, but it's business as usual.

Do you feel let down?

No, not really, I don't take it personally. I'm disappointed for Zak because I know he did want to make it work here. But it's not to be.

Did Zak show he wanted to put it right?

Consistently. I think at heart Zak wants to make it work. But I think, as I said, there has to be accountability. People make mistakes, we've worked with Zak, as we do a lot of our players, people make mistakes, but like I say, we've got to see people learning from them mistakes and unfortunately that wasn't the case.

How long did it take to come to the decision to tear up his contract?

Well firstly, it wasn't just my decision. I had a feeling on how things should go. But there was collaboration throughout the club, proper processes, proper discussions and disciplinary process and in the end, multiple stakeholders, including the baord and the owners, it was considered the right thing to do for the club. I had my own opinion on what the right thing to do was from a team and performance point of view but there's more to it than that.

Did the leadership group have a role?

I'm not going to go into too much detail but the players are the culture and know what is expected. There's time we reflect on things that haven't or have gone well, we have regular meetings to discuss our progress. They weren't asked directly but some of them would be involved in conversations.

Will you look to recruit a replacement?

We always have one eye on that and there will be cap space, but that's not been mentioned at all yet. This was a standalone decision. In an ideal world, Zak would still be here, he's a quality player and a popular member of the group. Zak at his best adds a lot. That discussion might come up at some point but my mind is focused on this week's game.

Reading between the lines of what Matty Peet said about it gives a hint that there's more to it than just someone who had a few beers during an alcohol ban.

Understandably because of ZH's well documented mental health issues the club have done the decent thing for ZH, his team mates, the club and the fans by quickly drawing a line under whatever has happened and moved on with the minimum of fuss.

Personally I can't stand the guy, but that doesn't mean I think he should be hung out to dry for whatever has happened.

The club have gone above and beyond for ZH, and to be fair to him he's responded to an extent, but no employer can put the needs of one person above everyone else so it's absolutely the right thing to send him on his merry way.

That’s not actually true . See my post on the other ‘Zak’ thread.

Well what has he actually done that’s so bad? Doesn’t sound like enough to sack him from what I’ve head, and club statements still talk about him in glowing terms!
Don’t forget you got him cheap too, given the circumstances……

From what you've heard? So I take it from that you're fully conversant with all the facts. Do share. The rest of us would love to know exactly what's happened.

I don’t know, but it’s nothing illegal or dangerous, so I’m wondering too why the sacking?

Yet you've made a statement that whatever it was wasn't bad enough to justify a sacking. At the same time you're now admitting you don't actually know what he's done. Which is it?

Do fans and the GBP have a right to know exactly what ZH did or didn't do? So we can all get up on our hind legs and pontificate about whether sacking him is justified or not?

I'd say no. Matty Peet is right to draw a line under it, I think. Which, of course, is as much for Zak's benefit as anyone else's.