Where is the 12 matches coming from? If it's from the Barba ban then they're completely different cases and Hardaker's is worse.

Its been rumoured by the Yorskshire Press for a few weeks.

I wouldnt be surprised if thats all he gets. I suppose it will depend on his defence.

if I were stains, I'd be talking to him, Barba will be back to NRL when he can set something up, mark my words.
Straight swap for them, one cokehead for another, even same position.

We have 2 very handy full backs, unless we see him as a centre?

Must be plucked from the Barba case which is silly because it was a ban handed down from another organisation in another country out of competition. What examples are they of UKAD only giving out 12 match bans for in competition failures? Not any I believe. No chance he'll only be getting a 12 match ban.

Barba was out of season (albeit straight after the Grand Final). My understanding is that that’s the difference in the regulations. Out of competition is 12 matches, during competition is generally 2 years.

Hock is a more comparable case IMHO

OOC isn't actually a ban, that was an NRL imposed ban because it was his 2nd strike regarding cocaine

Without muddying the water, and I must state I have zero idea what the outcome will actually be, I believe the argument regards OOC is whether or not the Play Off Series/Grand Final is officially classed as a stand alone event or classified as a fixture within the Super League season. If a stand alone event, the days leading up to the said event would be classed as OOC. If that makes any sense?

That makes sense to me, however even if the Play Offs etc are standalone, they're still a sporting competition and must be governened by UKAD/WADA rules surely?

True, hard to dissect the little information I've heard, but it seems to around the days before/after a stand-alone event even if governed by UKAD. Very tough one to call as it really sets a precedent for future cases.

Say for instance his sample is from the day after the Saints game, then if the play off fixture was a stand alone event, the next stand alone event would be the Grand Final and between those two fixtures Zak would be OOC.

Sounds like his legal rep will have something to play with.

I completely understand that, although if it is the case it does set a dangerous precedent! It's obvious that the situation isn't straightforward as there's been no official ban yet has there? Unless I've missed something

Not really because it was after the Super 8's game vs Leeds a few weeks before that he failed.

If we want to as a club help someone with "issues" why don't we go and find a 16 or 17 year old lad with "issues" but with potential? It'll be just as hard but with less financial outlay.
I cannot agree with the signing of Hardaker in any circumstance other than perhaps he has served say a 5 year ban from playing and has also evidence to show that he has for example done lots of community work within the amateur game.

Cruncher nobody is perfect but where do you draw the line?
What does a player need to do before you say "Nah, no matter how good you are you are we wont touch you with a bargepole"?

How many other players have we signed where we knew for a fact that they take Class a drugs??

If it was a first offence then I would like to think that Cas or any other club would support him however, it isn't.
I very uncomfortable that this sounds like a done deal.