All in all, no matter what happens it could work in our favour, we get rid of a few vastly overpaid duds without paying any compensation, and the fines can be used to support our grassroots.

Winner winner, Chicken Dinner...

It would have been very easy for the club to mention this in their statement to put to bed any speculation.

It's PR 101.

You have to wonder why the statement didn't mention that they were aware of an incident and thought they had dealt with it, however the video showed the incident was much worse than they thought had happened and they felt the new sanctions appropriate.

At the moment nobody knows who to believe and that is the club's fault due to that statement.

The owner of the bar went to the club five weeks ago with the complaint and given the video is of that incident how can it not be five weeks old? The players didn't agree to stage a reenactment did they!

If he's not seen it you have to ask why not and how come the club has ended up looking like it's reacting to it being posted only fining and banng now? The players knew they were on video, you can can see Sam T react to being videoed so the idea this would have come all as a big surprised to the club sounds far fetched to me.

Did they pass it by IL or just dealt with it in-house, looks like its the first time IL has seen it, maybe not the first time SW and KR have seen it.

Ive had great faith in IL and still have, but head at the top need to roll tomorrow if this has not been let known to the board and chairman, suppose we will wait and see.

Just reporting reader comments from Mail online. As I said, I have no idea about those things.

Someone? By saying that somebody on the internet has said something about Joel's eyes? The poster doesn't make the claim.

I will preface this by sayin that in no way do I think Wigan should pursue this at all, just a thought I had imagining the scenario having higher reaching consequences and involving much larger figures.

Say Wigan did pay her off to withold the footage - now the footage is online, is there a legal precendent for essentially a breach of contract? She was paid to ensure that video footage never made it online and it did. By accepting money for an express purpose it could constitute a contract between them which is now broken - contracts don't have to be signed on paper these days to be legally binding; It's often seen as you enterring into a countract with a Car Park firm once you buy a ticket for example.

Just an interesting idea - especially if the figures were much higher.

If the club didn't approach her but instead the other way round, is that extortion?

Unless there was a signed non disclosure agreement there’s is absolutely jack all the club could do about it. Even if there was and the club did, it would be a total PR disaster and would be spun to show the club defending ST/JT’s actions. It would cause more damage than good.

Clearly someone knew the video existed, I suspect the players themselves did rather than the club and attempted to hush it by paying the barmaid off. IF this is the case both players should be sacked IMHO. It’s sheer stupidity, they must have known the video will find its way into the public domain eventually one way or the other.

Hang on, the video makes it clear that the incident was being... well, videoed. So the players knew there was a video, no doubt. Or, at least, Sam did; Joel looks too far out of it to take anything in.

So when they spoke to KR they surely informed him about the existence of the video? And, additionally, it's not credible to me that the bar owner didn't mention the existence of the video when he reported it to the club at the time. So, from two sources, I find it very hard to believe that the club only just found out about the video.

The big one for me is the £1000. Whose money was it, and who authorised it and knew about it? If the club had any involvement in this, that's a very bad look indeed.

This.

On the front page of the Mirror today...hope they are both as ashamed of themselves as I am for them.

It is quite evident that the 4-week suspension for Joel is in place so that the new coach may decide if he wants JT for next year, the ST situation is sorted as he's off anyway. If the new coach doesn't want JT for 2019 then we can expect Joel to have his contract terminated in the coming weeks. They have simply bought time to ensure the new management has a say.

The rumour regards Shaun Wane resigning due to being undermined seem fairly evident here, I don't think he will be very happy about JT's suspension for the next month. The fall-out from this will be quite epic and I would expect a few developments between now and Thursday. What I will say is that we can expect very little from ST if he is picked to play, the toys are well and truly out of the pram.

All reasons they both should have been sacked straight away for gross misconduct.

Front page? Crikey that’s not good.
Must be a slow news day, mind...