Did anyone read the whole of that report in sporting life.

There's definately a joker working there.

"He was placed on report by referee Richard Silverwood for the punching incident but was subsequently cited by the RFL's match-review panel for the more serious charge of gouging.

Hock, who was also fined £300, missed out on selection for Wigan's team for the Challenge Cup final nine days ago[u but has caught the eye [/uwith his performances in the last two league games."

A grade E offence carries a ban of 4-8 games so as there was no injury inflicted to the letter of the law 4 games plus 1 for the punch looks to be about right, anyway that'll do so much for "he'll be like a new signing" see you next year you fool.

At least we now know the little s**t wont be seen again this season

5 games is fair enough I think.

I bet Hock isn't too bothered. he doesn't strike as somebody that will be particularly sorry about his actions etc. The RFL have given him the minimum, seems right to me, at a push I'd have gone halfway and given him six for the eye and left the punch out, just issued a warning, plenty of punches thrown in SL, you get 10 mins.

As a comparison, was it 10 games that Newton got when he assaulted Long & IIRC Albert was it that night?

I'm with you, season ending ban, fair enough for me.

Haven't the RL missed a chance to send a message to all players that this type of behaviour is not acceptable?
The maximum ban would have sent a much more powerful message.

I five match ban is a pretty reasonable message don't you think? It must be one of the severest bans handed out this season (for an on field infringement) for what was the severest infringement. Unless of course you're advocating an increase for all punishments?

I wouldn't have been disappointed or surprised if he got all 8 though; can't say he wouldn't have deserved it. Reckless and completely unnecessary.

I, Personally, would have preffered the maximum as a sentence and he probably would have got that if the rfl believed it was intentional!

I don't know how they came to the decision it was accidental but it does highlight how toothless they are.

Yep, i'm satisfied. Five games is about right. I'm actually more aggrieved with Maguire's "There's nothing much there. Obviously emotions were running high throughout the game." comment. As if he's saying 'oh i'm alright with my player eye gouging somebody, i don't care. if it's a high intensity game i have no problem with it!'

He's not going to play again for wigan this season, and could conceivabley miss a couple of games at the start of next season too. It also (fortunately) ends any faint hopes he might have had regarding a return to the England setup for the four nations.

Harrison didn't suffer any damage, and it is possible that contact with the eyes was accidental (I doubt it, only Hock knows for certain), so I'd say the punishment is about right. I would also hope that the RFL have made it perfectly clear that 11 matches suspended in a period of less than 18 months (not counting his drugs ban) means he will not receive any leniency whatsoever in future.

I agree 5 games is fair and correct.

I thought it would have been treated the same as the biting incident. 5 games for Hock isn't really fair on Howell, is it?

At the start of the season both Lima and Radford was up for the same thing Radford got a caution Lima 2 game ban the rfl couldn't organise a **** up in a brewery

People saying it should be more shut up his season is done be happy at that the 1 game for a punch is a joke it's been done a few times this season we are turning into fairyball

How does the fact he was banned from playing for 2 years mean that the panel were inclined to be leniant on him?
I dont understand the logic of that whatsoever!

They probably just took it as he's been clean as a whistle for the past 2 years, the disciplinary committee hasn't seen him once!

Bet his nose hasn't.

The saddest thing is that could easily be the case.
The system needs looking at, this year it has been a mockery of sham. For what its worth, I think the ban he has received is about right. The explanation as to how they came to it is crazy!

I wasn't saying it should be more, I was saying it wasn't fair on Howell, as they both committed nasty foul play, yet Hock - hardly a clean fella - got a game less.

As for telling people to shut up, with a track record like yours, don't you think you should take your own advice? Just occasionally?

The first part of my post was aimed at you about the whole Lima/Radford situation

The last part was for the people saying he will get 5 years if he did it on the street etc...

sindie would be too short for that thug
once saw a player get sindie for chastising a ref fo giving a goal that missed the posts
but he wasent playing for WIGAN jus a Wigan lad

Spot on!! Unfortunately its not just on here!
Hes been punished! I didnt see an outcry against Whitehead for biting but because its Hock its seems open season.
Think the fact that Harrison wasnt injured has helped him, the punch was a nothing punch and if thats worth a game then there should have been quite a few more given throughout the season.

I liked Wane's comment that this sort of thing is out of character for Hock. Is it 8 or 9 times he's been up before the beak? Unless he specifically meant the offence in question - in which case it's even more amusing.

5 games is enough. Over a month's worth of games and ends his season.

He's an odd bloke Hock.

I don't think it'll be too long before you turn on the TV and Gazza's trying to intervene with chicken & lager.

He just never seems settled in his head, I've never seen him look happy.

IIRC a London Skolars player got a 4 game ban for Gouging, Hock's is 4 for the Eyes and 1 for the Punch.

RFL actually been consistent for once...