You don't get charged and bailed to Court for having a "skinfull"

I do agree about reserving judgement, though.

Then why post irrelevant twaddle about having a drink problem then?

A time when the game was different. In what way. I see a team that plays games on a rugby pitch. Players that are idolised by kids and are role models for those kids. Knocker, Crooks, etc were my heroes. I used to sit in top club or the supporters club with my parents and see these players after a game drinking and I wanted to be just like them.
They were professionals who also had ft day jobs. They played more games and to that end really shouldn't have been drinking. The two I mention were also the top of their profession being internationals. So yes its a different era but the responsibilities were exactly the same.

As for Fry well I used him as an example of how society has forgiven someone who has made a mistake in the past. He was young he went to jail / borstal whatever it was and we forgive and conveniently in some cases forget. The same can be said of many other people in society. Pop stars with drug convictions, no doubt some of your work colleagues etc. Yet because all the people who have been mentioned on this thread are rugby players some won't forgive. Why is that. I take it they are all very happy in their ivory towers.

I would also suggest that whatever your profession getting ratted and working the next day will always affect your performance. It certainly does for me, and is why I don't drink excessively on a school night.

The sad thing for sports stars in teams is that social events are all part of the team bonding. Its also part of every day life for anyone who works in a team. Martin may well need to ask himself if he should be part of that kind of bonding event. If he decides he shouldn't his mates should appreciate it and not outcast him as can sometimes be the case.

As for others claiming he wasn't the only one who was ratted. Well he was the only one who it would seem upset a copper and I would imagine got plenty of warnings to move on and take himself out of harms way. If the Sun's report is correct (I have no reason to doubt it) then I suspect he over stepped the mark once too often and the end result would be inevitable. In most cases i am sure it would end with an £80 fine and no more said about it. Due to his previous drink related offence he has to face a court.

His previous suspended sentence was spent when he went down so will not be part of any future sentence.

Any way Merry Christmas. I am off work now till the 3rd so off to get ratted.

The reference to Stephen Fry was a bit mis-judged. Comparing apples with pairs, comparing someone who went off the rails, who then got his butt in gear and shaped up. To someone who seams to have a never ending supply of problems.

As I said earlier all sides have em, and every time they do something stupid plenty is said about them. Someone said that with it being a new club then he deserves a second chance depending upon the infringement. This maybe true however the alternative view point is just as valid, that given his previous, with this being a new club you would think he would want to keep his nose cleaner than his team mates. (how many other players are suspended)?

Also given recent years where Hull FC have flattered to deceive, you could say that this event is a sign that FC supporters now wait for each year to say that things have not changed. It maybe a false sign, but given the new coach and board, everyone maybe waiting with renewed optimism, but from experience are waiting for the disappointment to hit.

It used to be a similar thing with Wire each year. Every year was going to be the year of the wolf, but every year something would pop up and dash that new year optimism. Until one year it held.

Martin has managed to inject those familiar doubts before the new year, which is some record in itself regardless of the incident.

The responsibilities weren't exactly the same, at all. The game has moved on immeasurably since the Crooks/Norton era. Players these days are (relatively) well paid, full time, professional athletes. This, in my book, brings with it the responsibility to look after yourself as well as possible. Going out and getting so drunk that you end up in the cells doesn't fall into that category.



We're not talking about someone who got into bother as a youth and has gone on to have a successful career and law-abiding private life since. We're talking about a bloke who has just been in prison, who has a history of problems at other clubs and who, only a few weeks into his new contract, has been arrested for being drunk and disorderly. Your comparison with Fry is not only irrelevant, it's also ridiculous.

Has anyone connected Radders boxing event with the Aspinwall alleged offence?

said like a true non drinking, non smoking christian no doubt!!!


The crusade you are on on here to discredit the lad and get everyone to agree is well like you are ripped yourself
the club will deal with it as they seem fit
you have a sweet alcohol free xmas mate!!

What the hell has that got to do with anything?

[iYou[/i mentioned that having a drink problem is very serious (it is), but then went on to state that that's not the issue here. So if having a drink problem is nothing to do with Aspinwall's behaviour, why mention it in the first place?

I don't think I need to discredit him - he's doing a great job all by himself. And I'm not on any crusade, merely giving an opinion. It's nice to see that your most recent reincarnation is no more capable of rational thought than the last one, however.

I think on the era we should agree to disagree. Players have always had a responsibility to respect their fitness. I would also hazard a guess that Aspinwall is not on a massive salary either. Some salaries are pitiful. You only have to listen to Martin Offiah to know that. Full time does not mean mega riches.

I will accept Fry not the best example just the first one that came to mind. I could name hundreds more if I could be truly bothered. The point is we allow people off the rails to get back on. Its as I said part of a civilised society. You and others on here seem to think that rugby players shouldn't be given another chance. Please explain why.

All we are assuming here is that Martin was ratted. Now how do we know that he had a skin full. Has anyone thought he has been over training to prove a point. Keeping himself fit and healthy and one night off 7 weeks from the big ko ( I am sure he can have that) and due to being over tired very fit and well, 3 pints as opposed to a skin full have tipped him over. Its certainly happened to me before.
So do we sack him? In your eyes yes and no doubt before the 30th when he gets his say.

Let's just take the emotion out of this whole debate and see how events pan out. If come the 30th he is found guilty or pleads guilty then and only then try and condemn him. If he is guilty then just look to help and not wash our hands of him. That my friend is what a civilised society does. Which brings me full circle.

??