Fined £200, court costs of £85 and victim surcharge of £15.

Hopefully he'll now be able to resume training at the club and keep his head down.

Presumably he is on a final warning from the club.

After the stick I've received in the last 24 hrs from Hull KR, Widnes, Warrington and Bradford fans, I think our reputation is in the gutter right now. I don't know what the answer is, but I think we have to be much tougher on future indiscretions than we have been so far. I appreciate the new regime have nothing to do with the drugs scandal, but Seymour and Aspinwall's indiscretions cannot be seen to be swept under the carpet.

In the same way that Rule had to go to the extreme when a couple of idiots meant the universal banning once again of alcohol in the ground, I think we need to show this kind of intent again, for the sake of the club's reputation.

Our club's name is mud, at the moment, and probably rightly so, but this is no fault of AP and his new set-up. I'm thinking that to avoid further sanctions from the RFL - as in the case of the drink - we need to make a tough moral stand and be seen to be doing it. Aspinwall is a Gentle/McRae signing. The new regime need to show the RFL our intentions moving forward. Sorry, Martin, but you've been a tit and should take the consequences. Scapegoat? Maybe, but any action by the club now may ensure there's no need for any more.

Absolutely right. Now cue the usual apologists saying it never did Knocker Norton any harm.

He will get another chance and rightly so as it was his first offence with the club. Lots of stories at the time suggesting it was more than drunk and disorderly but it clearly wasn't.

Needs to behave perfectly from here on in and needs to train harder than the other players to prove himself to Gentle.

Apologists? You mean people with a different opinion.

Interesting point though when people talk about Crane, Crooks and Norton they celebrate the fact they drank, smoked and played yet with current players they are hammered for it. Different era yes but its also double standards.

What is Seymours indiscretions since he has been a Hull player ?

Sacking him for being D&D would be a complete joke.
Making him a scapegoat would do nothing to help us right now.

Normally I'd agree, but these are unprecedented times for our club's reputation, and the new leadership needs to demonstrate their intentions moving forward.

If he doesn't go, a clear statement that action has been taken against him and a public declaration of the expectations of the club with regard to players' conduct should be made. And carried out moving forward.

Our problems are due to the old regime, we are now moving forwards and Gentle has already spoken to the players on the back of this incident.

I'm guessing this was a reference to his DUI in Australia following the end of season party at his old club. It's a bit of a grey area as although he was already signed I don't think that his contract had officially started.

He stole a wooly hat off a bouncer and refused to give it back. The Police were called, Aspinwall denied it was him whilst dropping the hat behind him. He then ran off but was stopped by a member of the public

. Police then asked him a few times to return said hat and apologise. Aspinwall refused telling them eventually where to get off. Then he tried to resist being arrested.

That, more or less, is the full account that was read out in court this morning. As a mate commented, I wonder if we should give trials to the member of public who stopped him.

I'm generally not a fan of gesture politics, and I'm definitely against treating people differently just to make a point. All the club need to do is apply the disciplinary process impartially and make sure that it's adequate going forward. Gentle has already spoken to the players to reinforce what's expected of them both on and off the field - that's good enough for me for now.

Sorry but I cant help but think of James Rule answering his front door to the police - "no this is definitely my woolly hat officer"...

Hope he toes the line now and goes on to have a good season for us.

The thing is if he had just asked their was probably one going spare..

...within a few months of being released from prison. It was his 3rd offence of 2011, and despite being given the chance to apologise and walk away, he didn't.
If prison didn't wake him up, a £200 fine won't either. Why would keep him, just waiting for his next offence?

Well said that man, porridge not sorted him

It's like another bad egg that used to ply his trade in the city.

Sack him. He's obviously an idiot and the club need to smarten up their act significantly

As I said, normally I'd agree. But it's precisely because the old regime left the legacy it did with this sort of thing, coupled with the PR disaster it has left us with, namely - to quote a Rovers fan - the three dopes, that we need to demonstrate a differentiation between them and the new board. I honestly think we need to do this to make clear our intentions to the RFL, our stock is that low.

I therefore think we cannot take a risk with Aspinwall, because the simple fact is that, given his previous - and his subsequent failure to learn from his mistakes - this particular player has the propensity, over and above most of the others, to let us down again. Also, Aspinwall wasn't a "previous regime legacy", he's Gentle and McRae's man, so correctly disciplining him will set the precedent.

I don't think he'll go, but if he doesn't, the club should make a publicly clear statement of why, and it's intent for the future.

Much more succinctly put!

wasnt there something else after that?? and wasnt it a female officer?

Lets say that we throw our disciplinary procedure out of the window and sack Aspinwall for a first offence. He then sues for breach of contract. How is that going to improve our PR profile?

not quite sure how this would work out of club hours as such. Genuine question, could you be sacked from your job for nicking a bouncers woolly hat?