I think it's Peet laying down a marker. No-one made more of a bold decision than Ferguson when he sold Whiteside and McGrath due to the drinking culture that had been established. He kept his star man in Robson but the culture was changed quickly enough.

Granted its a weak comparison to Hardaker's situation but Peet has made his bed and now has to lie in it. Will be interested to see what happens moving forward

Oh 100%. I'm definitely up for him setting standards and all that. I'm more just questioning if the type of punishment issued is the right one vs others.

Funnily enough, I'm in agreement on the Fergie stuff. I'd have happily back Peet and the club if they'd have let him go and brought in someone better suited to what Peet wants. Likewise, I'd have backed them if they'd have fined him to high heaven too.

I'm just not convinced that dropping him and the wider impact it has, is the right one.

100% the correct call from Peet and very admirable. If there was ever any doubt about who the gaffer was when Wane came back on board I think that's now out to bed. Michael McGuire instilled a harsh culture of taking no nonsense (see Martin Gleeson) and I'm glad to see Peet going the same way. Attitudes will soon change. I see Hardaker as our Paul Pogba. Quiet for a bit then just completely disruptive. I'm glad he signed for us (wasn't at the time) and I'm glad we have prolonged his career but it's best for both parties now that we go our separate ways at season's end. I just hope he is gratuitous enough to understand what the club has done for him. Saved his career and possibly his life.

Cause he's a Saints troll who seems to get his kicks off causing carnage on the Virtual Terrace Forum, previously known as:

Steph Curry
LeBron James
Jean Capdoozie

And many others I've probably forgot since!

Fining Zak would probably have had no wider implications other than hitting his pocket, it wouldn't have made social media and hardly anyone would be any wiser
By dropping him is a statement of intent by the club, to him and the rest of the squad.

All that matters when it comes to culture, are the internal staff isn't it? It doesn't sound like a PR exercise, so seems strange to involve social media in this.

I think where Wigan have got it wrong is by not disclosing the reasons. All that has done is to fuel the drugs/drink driving rumours.

Yes, I can see that too. I'm certainly not against his tough stance in any way whatsoever. I meant harsh in the sense of a couple of late arrivals and you're out of the biggest game of the season so far. If that's the standards he's setting though, then so be it. As fans, we're all benefiting from the vastly improved rugby this season and that has been culture lead so however Peet chooses to implement that I'm right behind him.

Interesting point that SP makes regarding the suitability of the punishment. I get his point (it's not dissimilar to calling it harsh) but I'm going to the match and, despite it harming our chances in this one game, I'm more than happy to back the decision win or lose simply because we can already see the difference the culture change has made. I think it comes down to the well worn "no player is bigger than the team" adage. Off what Peet says, Zak has taken it well so it's clearly been handled in the right manner.

You can't instil a culture by choosing which games players are dropped for and which they aren't otherwise players have no need for discipline leading into a big game because they know they won't be dropped. This shows that no matter who you are (Zak is an obvious starter) and no matter what the game is, you f*** up and you're out. If we lose the game due to Zak being out (kicks or a poor performance from his replacement), I expect there will be a big thing in meetings about how Zak let his team mates down (something Madge was very big on) and that creates the culture that what you do as an individual has a direct impact on your team mates.

100% agree with the decision, and well done to the coach (who some think only got the job for his accent) on making it.

Good post

And to put a business spin on it, if someone is working on a project and is constantly late for meetings and never comes prepared then you definitely take them off the project because they won't be giving the customer the best impression of your business and the rest of the team will be peed off at having to work twice as hard to cover for them.

Yeah you do, but you don't replace a guy on a senior salary with a junior. Or at least you don't tell the customer that you've done this. If the employee is as bad as what you say, then they are sacked most often than not too. Especially, from a business POV, if they've severely impacted your ability to deliver what was needed.

Agreed Egg. The Peet era so far has a Maguire "new broom" feel to it . That was something we absolutely needed so his Wigan accent will do for me!

So you sack them? Same deal.

It doesn't matter who you replace them with, you replace them (or you just remove them and work with one less but obviously we aren't going to play with 12 are we)

Think a bit of slack might be needed with Zak. Isn’t he travelling over from Ponte? And he has a baby and we all know how you feel after a bad nights sleep…..