Are you thick? Show me where i have said i believe, or condone any part what he has done? I am only reporting what has happened, and what's been been said in court, and the club are supporting him going forward. If you're not happy with this situation........Tough $hit.

Ok cokey, putting the unnecessary personal insults aside, your messages seemed to do a good job of portraying someone who; thinks the club are right to support him/keep him in the squad and thinks his tales are believable. I'm sorry if I misinterpreted.



For clarity then, do you believe his 'excuses'?

Most rational people can't put themselves into the minds of addicts and their grossly irresponsible behaviour.



You'd hope Zak might have chilled out for the sake of his youngest if nothing else but this appears not to be the case.



Leigh have always done well with the previous members that had "history" given the statement it would appear the intent is not to fail anyone.



If he can't bunk up at Josh's house then he's going to have to get the train or national express.



In fact his life seems to mirror the service you get from transpennine

So cokey is basically saying it’s the fault of the police lol

You are asking me whether i believe (what you call excuses) that what has been sworn upon,and then what determined the outcome in court. I haven't seen where the judge has deemed Zak's statement on the incident to be an excuse.



So..........



For clarity, are they excuses? If so, could you please provide proof of this?



Once again i don't condone any part of what he's done but, I don't, unlike some who would want him sine die.

Ill take that as you do believe him then, which kind of renders your previous rant as pointless. He miscalculated his drinks and thought he was going to be carjacked, hardly things you can disprove as theyre going on entirely between his ears but if youre not 'thick', sound like an addict (for which i am empathetic) grasping for some sort of fictional rationale, i dont care where he said it, its BS.

NO! Take it as that you can't answer the question.

errm, you didnt answer mine about whether you believed him.



on your 'proof' question ive answered above.

ill rephrase then. Regardless of where hes said it, do you believe him that he a) thought he was going to be carjacked and b) miscalculated his drinks? or do both sound like a desperate addict with previous grasping for credibility?

I can only believe what the outcome of the verdict was in court. There should've been no sort of miscalculation of drinks, he simply shouldn't have even had a sip of alcohol before getting behind the wheel, hence why i keep saying i don't condone any part of what he's done. Whether anyone believes the carjacking, i'm only reporting that it was used as mitigation in court. I can't comment whether it's true or not, and can't believe it either way. You did say it was an excuse, so can you please provide that evidence?

Good to hear your stance on the alcohol issue, addiction or not drink driving cannot be taken lightly.



As ive said, you cant provide evidence either way for someones thoughts (that he was being carjacked) but for reasons already stated I know how it sounds, maybe the drink was responsible for is overactive imagination.

What Are Unmarked Police Cars Used For? Unmarked cars can be used for anything from cruising an area of interest without drawing the focus onto themselves to, more commonly, enforcing traffic laws and making sure people aren't putting other driver's lives in danger with illegal actions.



Your argument for the police's actions are really grasping at straws Cokey. Zac has been caught for this not once, twice but thrice. He wont ever learn, nor change.

Roy, I know what unmarked police cars are used for, and I'm not grasping at straws for any argument. I've NOT condoned anything that happened. I'm not defending Zak in any way, and only been reporting what was said in court. Yes the police should've flashed their lights immediately in my view to defuse the situation, they didn't, hence the speed chase. If folk don't agree with me, fine, I won't lose any sleep over that.



Here's what was said in court. another report passed on from me if you understand.





Leeds Magistrates’ Court was told Hardaker, of Pontefract, had dropped a friend off after going socialising when an unmarked police car began following him.



In his mitigation, it was heard the car was following close behind leading to him fearing he may be carjacked or that the car wanted to race, leading to him increasing his speed to at least 70mph in a residential area.



The prosecutor told the court police had to drive at 88mph to keep up with Hardaker.



When police turned the lights on, it was heard Hardaker put his brakes on but due to his speed lost control of the vehicle, leading to it flipping into a roadside embankment.

Seriously how can a club support a player after that.

Give Degsey a ring and ask him.

I suggested that , should we of had the option of a top class player , that being Sailor , we may of been more inclined to serve a more harsher punishment instead of saying we would support him, coming across like he is the victim in all of this .



You don’t agree ,which is fine but the comment saying we would be worse off with out Zak is 100% true in the current climate

So if Sailor came in, Zak gets' harsher punishment?

The penny has finally dropped.

No, that is very strange thing to say LC.

He's banned for 3 years. So he won't be doing that again whilst at Leigh. Isn't it better to try and help someone. Absolutely mad and reckless what he's done and, thank god no innocent people were killed, but he will be under no illusions that he is in the last chance saloon. Another misdemeanour of any sort and he will be out. Lammy, Chester and the rest of the team will sort him out. Put it to bed and move on and Zak needs to thank his lucky stars he isn't facing a manslaughter charge and jail.

Hang on, You say that the we would be worse off without Zak is 100% true in the current climate but if Sailor came in we condemn him, and punish him? Really? I'm glad you're not running our club.

Good grief this is getting hard work.

My point was , and still remains the same, if we had a plethora of talent then it would have been a lot easier to release him.

At the moment, we don’t have that luxury.

Hope my opinion on this matter , which is purely an opinion makes sense now.

This player has been high maintenance for several seasons now.His choice of drug has cost him jobs.

Would anyone else but Lam have taken him at the stage he was at.Was the contract on a last chance basis.Are we actually better keeping him

With us he seems to have replaced a contentious drug with alcohol.Pleased to see his is seeking professional help.

Can he be trusted for the future.Will team mates consider were they safe when he was taking his turn driving.Will team mates be happy to put themselves out to get him into work.Will other team matea have lost trust including those with injury problems or who had offers to play elsewhere.Its all natural.

Our veterans will have to be better than last year in order for us to stand still.Can one of our younger payers step up will one of our backrowers be able to comvert to the backline at the required standard.Will the check book come out with change of emphasis from full back can we find someone from uk not nany about at first look.

All of these factors increase pressure on squad.Maybe we struggle to win those marginal games we did last year and the task becomes greater for eveyone.

Our performance on pitch effects our rating we have shown no improvements elsewhere.

I fully understand your point but, my approach would be different to yours, so we will have to agree to disagree on this one.