You could say a precedent was set when Joel Tomkins was shown the door. Maybe that was the line drawn in the sand for the players. Behave like professionals or your out!

Wigan will sack him if they decide he has brought the club into disrepute rather than the offence itself. I’ve no doubt that will be a clause in his and most if not all contracts.

Wigan also can’t make any public statement or decision until the court case which I think I read somewhere is the 11th October. Should he be found guilty then we have a decision to make, if not then he plays for us next year.

Bottom line is we have until the court case to prepare for a guilty verdict and decide what to do should that happen. Until then we won’t hear any more from the club about it.

Clutching at straws thinking he might be found not guilty. Drink driving is pretty simple - if you’re over the prescribed limit then you’ve not really got anywhere to go. Pleading not guilty is asking for a more severe punishment.
I’m not sure is necessarily the drink driving that’s going to get him sacked, but the fact that getting caught has highlighted the fact that he’s out on the razz when he’s supposed to be training the next day.

I didn’t say I thought he would be not guilty, nor am I clutching at straws. Try reading a post before replying.

What I said was Wigan cannot and will not act before the court case. The law in this country is innocent until proven guilty.

It doesn't work like that for drink driving though does it, your either over the limit and guilty or you are not, If you are going to court then you are guilty end of, you can can offer mitigating circumstances but that will only go towards the severity of the outcome

It does. As things stand he has been charged for driving over the limit and without an MOT & insurance. I think we all know what the result of the court case is going to be however at this time he has been charged not found guilty in a court of law.

Your not getting what i'm trying to say and i can't be d trying to retype it all so i'll leave it

Wigan can't sack someone who is not employed by them, don't forget his contract doesn't start until his ban is up. I hope what they can do is have a clause that will nullify the contract, either before or after it starts, because of pre-determined unacceptable behavoir.

I don’t care how we do it, just get rid of the plank.

I think the point isn’t that this particular offence is pretty clear cut in terms of evidence. You can’t really dispute not being over the limit if the intoximeter records you as over the limit. If he hadn’t been over the limit he wouldn’t have been charged.
Ten bets he can go is plead guilty and mitigate. Pleading innocence is never a good idea in drink driving cases, unless of course you want to incur the wrath of the magistrate who has to listen to a pointless argument.

You need to give your head a shake also. What if the club do let him go and he reaches rock bottom and then follows the same route as Terry newton. Now imagine if that was a member of your family. just a little food for thought.
BTW I don't condone what Zak did and i too was originally calling for his head but i've since calmed down and looked at the bigger picture.

That is a very noble sentiment but deeply flawed, effectively what you are saying is that a club (or employer) could not sack someone no matter what they do if there is the slightest risk that the individual could then do something unfortunate, surely there must be a line where the club has to protect its own interest and reputation, duty of care can only go so far. Obviously the club in this case will have to consider all possibilities (and they will have far more information about the individual than anyone here will have so should be in a better position to make a judgement) but from the outside it would seem the best option is to get rid to protect the club.

For me what it does do is question the judgement of the club in employing him in the first instance and I have no doubt that they would have stayed well clear if he was an average player - I wonder if the fact of how good a player he can be over-rode other considerations - I guess we will never know.

What a load of old , Sick of people using the Terry Newton scenario for certain agendas, Zak is a complete ar$e, The type of guy that would lie and claim he was depressed to get his own way, I don't for one minute think he is mentally disturbed, he's just some chavy council estate scummer who doesn't want to leave that lifestyle behind, I suspect he really can't wait till he can be with his mates full time again selling gear, mugging old grannies, twocing cars and doing burglaries, No fan on here is genuinely scared of him doing a Terry Newton, your all just t1ng yourselves in case he get's given the boot and ends up at Warrington and scores loads of tries against us.

Terry newton was a different scenario altogether. He was left out to dry. had little support.
Hardaker has had nothing but help, counselling, and various people willing to help him change. Some people don’t want to be helped.

Newton socialised with the same druggie gangster as the boxer "hitman" and look at the results of that lifestyle choice.