Saw this on Cas forum

Here's the conspiracy theory:
Potential legal proceedings would be crippling.
Current deal with Wigan states if he breaks any of their stipulated clauses re conduct his contract is void.
He intentionally breaks them and is released to be picked up by Cas and therfore avoid having to pay out...
Image
Top

Seems a bit far fetched to me

Agreed. Since we signed Zak, you mainly use this one.

You just need to get over the fact that he's gone.

I dont understand this. Why didn't Cas just delay their decision on Hardaker until the WADA statement had been made? If anyone is at fault here it's Cas.

It's a bit like a poker player whinging after folding early despite them having a winning hand. Sorry......

It’s a shame we lost his playing ability.
However, as you’ll see from my posts from the point he was suspended, I never wanted him back. He’s not worth the hassle he brings, despite his on-field ability.
I’ve not posted here for a long time on the topic. I only visited to see if there was anything about his recent indiscretion.

The only bad news about Hardaker on here is the bad news you relentlessly seek to bring us.

But ultimately, so what?

If ZH has broken any of the stipulations in his new contract, he’s gone – at no cost to us. The main ones who’ll suffer are him and you lot, because he won’t be able to afford whatever remuneration you’ve convinced yourself you’re owed.

Not really. Harkaker breached his contract . As his employer, Cas are perfectly entitled to dismiss him and Perdue him for any financial loss. It’s basic employment law.
Had Cas not dismissed him, we would have been paying his wages during his ban, which the club weren’t prepared to do (quite rightly in my opinion). The CEO at the time just wouldn’t entertain paying someone to have a year off as a reward for taking a banned substance.

Just reading this again, I don't see the issue above.

Unless he's committed a crime like assault or behaved in a manner like Joel Tomkins then 'getting smashed' after an England match is what hundreds of thousands of young lads of a similar age did.

Then do what other clubs have done in the past, stick him on the transfer list for a fee.

Players have always breached contracts (some go back to Aus due to homesickness), some bet against their own clubs, some get banned for failing drug tests. Massive can of worms (in all sports) if clubs start suing players, is there a precedent for this?

What’s the source for this ZH “alleged” incident?

As for him going out, why would he not? He knows to behave himself or else he’s off before he gets a penny from Wigan. I don’t really see the issue.

I guess this is the way Cas can recoup the outlay. Putting a player on the transfer list who can’t play due to a WADA suspension is perhaps one of the more ridiculous ideas I’ve heard. Who on earth would pay to sign a player who is banned?!
It’s no can of worms at all. Suing an employee for a breach of contract that results in a financial loss happens on a daily basis in ETs around the country. It’s no different in sport. Cas sued Solomona for BoC. Chelsea successfully sued Adrian Mutu for a BoC almost identical to the one committed by Hardaker (cocaine use leading to a WADA ban). It’s just pretty simple really - employees are liable for any financial loss suffered by their employer due to a BoC.

Not sure if someone else has been posting bad news about him, but it’s the first time I’ve posted on here apart from when he initially signed. Hardly “relentless”!

You posted about him being out in Scarborough just after he signed didn’t you?

I’m not saying you’re not right and that these things aren’t happening but you do seem a tad desperate for him to balls this up. I’d guess he probably will but as and when that does happen, don’t get overly excited! It’s not worth changing your underpants for

Slightly different scenario as he was already under contract, but Wigan allegedly paid Hock during his ban. Perhaps they will already be paying ZH some sort of retainer?