Dylan Hartley; villain or just misunderstood?

First topic message reminder :

He's considered by many as the villain in rugby. I've never been overly concerned by his disciplinary record but then again I'm not a Saints or England fan. In spite of this he is a pretty good hooker from what I've seen, and his villainous is perhaps exaggerated. I recently read an article which stated that he'd be seeing a psychologist to deal with his disciplinary problems and I thought that was a bit of an extreme measure. Now today I've just witnessed him lie on the floor and trip a scrum half as he made the break; another yellow card to add to Hartley's record. So perhaps seeing a psychologist may be the right answer? The following article highlights his worst offences: http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/rugby-union/30955529

He's involved in a fair share of misdemeanours, but I think a lot of players are. Does Hartley get a bit of unfair stick, or is it justified?

The question is, "it's the last two minutes of England V New Zealand in the RWC final, England are leading by one point and New Zealand are camped on the England 22, the Kiwis only need a drop goal or penalty to win - a ruck forms and effectively whoever wins the ruck is going to win the RWC, would you trust Hartley in this position"?

I would. What about a lineout 5 metres out to either go for the drive or secure your own ball in defense. Who would you rather have?

i die a little bit inside every time i see tom youngs throwing in the ball in the final 10 minutes in a close match...

hartley would be fine in the example above, as with the home crowd the ref is going to ping McCaw for hands in the ruck...

his invisibility cloak doesnt work outside of NZ, and Joubert wont get near a final again after his last showing.