Given what Maguire has managed to do with the likes of Joel and Hansen, it would be fascinating to see what he could do with natural like Hock.

Unfortunatey, he can't start doing anything until Hock's ban is served, so it could be quite a while before we see something special.

Was..........2 years is a looong time to be out of the game

Lol there is nothing better than a pessimistic Wigan fan.

Two years isn’t that long out of the game for a 26 year old who is still keeping himself in condition.

Like another poster said a pro can get back into condition after about 10 weeks of hard graft and this will be drastically reduced if he’s already been doing some work anyway. I fully expect Hock to step up his training when he’s almost ready to return.

Hock, if started on the bench, will easily be able to handle the speed of SL as his game has never been based around a high work rate like that of a Bailey or Hansen but Hock’s game is based around brute strength and banging out of tackles.

Like I said Hock is only gonna be 27/28 and I can’t see him losing many of the talents which made him one of the best 2nd rows in the world.

When Hock was playing, Wigan were so predictable that the opposition knew when he was recieving the ball and therefore gang-tackled him, sometimes causing him to lose the ball.
If he stepped into the present system of dummy runners and good ball movement he would be sensational. Just hope he has reformed.

I think he will play for wigan again.I also hope he does

Here's a question:

I know that Wigan are not allowed to have anything to do with Gareth in rugby terms for the duration of his ban.
i.e. Gaz can't train with the squad, be paid at all, etc.

However - Is Mark Bitcon allowed to give him a training plan?
Also, is Mike Maguire allowed to give him alist of things to work on whilst he's out of the game?

I would hope that we can still pass information/guidance to Gareth that will allow him the best chance of returning to the game (even if not to Wigan) at the end of his ban.
Otherwise, the ban could be removing more than the 2 years that it is supposed to - It could be completely removing a persons ability to earn a living in their chosen profession.

Hope it doesn't smell to much then

I really dont see how they could stop bitcon giving him a routine! Couldnt he just type it on a computer and post it through his front door? Also same with maguire, he may not be able to train with the squad, but he can train like the squad if you get my drift!

How would they stop us?

It’s obvious the Wigan club are in touch with him for testing and contract purposes so who knows what info they pass on.

How would they stop MM speaking to him? At the end of the day you can’t stop someone speaking to another person nor can you stop Bitcom ‘recomeding’ a good personal trainer to use can you.

I realise he can’t be involved in official training programmes but there is very little the RFL can do as they don’t have the power to stop him socializing with current Wigan players can they.

Good points, but what I'm asking is whether any provision is made for the banned player to have an "official" training regime provided by the club, all legally and above-board.

Or would any banned player be forced to pursue "under-handed" tactics to keep himself in a position to earn a living after his ban?

dont know but im sure there no law against anyone hiring bitcon on a personal basis, im sure if i gave him £150 for a routine there would be nothing to stop him doing it, as long as he declared it for tax purposes of course!

I know loads of people who do "private" work so cant see there being a problem here

I doubt he'll be able to do any officially organised training but I doubt there will be much difference in what he does to what the team does.

As I said before the RFL are powerless to stop Hock’s movements nor can they stop who he sees and talks to. For example what can the RFL do if Lockers invites Hock round for a beer on a Saturday night or Hock attends a BBQ at the house of a Wigan player that Bitcom or MM are at?

If the club do sign Hock up then I’m 100% convinced he’ll be following a club based programme from the day he puts his signature on the dotted line.

Bitcom will get him fit and Hock’s age and talent are such that I expect him to slip easily back into SL when he returns.

i think it would be foolish of people to think that wigan are having no involvment in the way hock is training right now. If wigan are to re sign him they will be having a big influence in what he is doing

Agreed.

I'm more interested in how "the law" (by which I mean both the RFL and WADA rules) allow players to maintain their ability to perform in their chosen profession after serving the required ban.

It would be nice if anyone with any knowledge of WADA/RFL rules or pointers to official documents could point me in the right direction.

I don't even know why I ant to clarify this point?
Probably just personal noseyness.

[url=http://www.therfl.co.uk/clientdocs/Operational%20Rules%20part%204.pdfSection D3, Page 31 onwards[/url

Thanks Andy.

Found the rule, but it's so vague as to be useless:


So basically, Gareth can't be involved in any activity that has been arranged or even authorised by the club.

If you really wanted to push it, that would in fact exclude him from things like barbeques, if the club "recognises" it as a team day.

I would say that it would certainly cover any organised training schedules, but as mentioned above, there's nothing to stop him from employing Mark Bitcon as a "personal trainer", for a nominal fee and the club not recognising this as official, but not objecting either.

It's all very grey.
I thought these rules were supposed to be clearer than this.

That's a possibility IMO.



As is that but I think he really wants to play for Wigan so provided he wasn't offered peanuts he could well forgo a better offer though given how short the rest of his career will be he's be daft to IMO.



That is the interesting question. We have HH, JT, Mossop and Farrell. None of whom have been banned for drug use and the first three are looking excellent in SL under the new training regime and Farrell is supposedly playing very well.

Why should any of these lose their place to a player who has been banned for two years for taking drugs? I don't think it's the same thing as Wigan simply signing a better player than any of those four I mention which in theory could always happen so they would lose out on merit. They would be losing out to a player who let the team, the fans and the sport down.



If we sign those four I mentioned up on decent contracts to keep them at Wigan paying a high wage for another back row forward means a lot of the cap money is being spent there. So perhaps a smaller offer would be made and as I said above he may take it as he wants to play for Wigan but as I also said he'd be daft not to maximise his earnings.



If he went elsewhere and was as good as he was previously it would not bother me because it would IMO send the right message out and that message would be hard work and dedication will be rewarded and unprofessional behaviour won't be tolerated. This is after all the sort of ethos Maguire and Wane are trying to promote IMO so re-signing him doesn't seem very compatible with that. This is why the first point of yours I quoted is a possibility IMO.

Dave

I don't think it's vague. He simply can't have any involvement with the club unless it is with a drugs education program and I don't think the club would conclude the rules were vague enough for them to do otherwise. It's just too risky and I doubt they would sanction the bending of the rules as you suggest either. Not what the current regime is about IMO.

According to cpwigan on Mike's board Hock has employed his own fitness expert and it's not Mark Bitcon.

Dave

I don't like that idea much. I think he has proved his worth in the 2nd row and I think him being missing from there when covering for Carmont last week was a big factor in the loss. If Liam Farrell is good enough to force JT into the centres he must be absolutely amazing because IMO JT has been our best back row forward so far.

As to Hock at prop we may well have a vacancy there but I have always felt this idea was dreamt up as a way to get him back in the side a no ones else's expense (as in no one in the back row making way) rather then because it was a particularly good idea. I don't know if he can hack it there or not but I have never really seen him as a prop.

Dave

As things stand I can see Feka and Bailey leaving the club so that would leave us two forwards down.

It's impossible to say what the make up of our pack would be after that for 2011 but i'd expect it to really revolve around homegrown players including Hock(for the 2nd half of the season anyway). I'd really like to see us bulk Mossop up abit and gradually ease him into the prop position and I think that can be done intime for Hock coming back.

What happens besides that is anyones guess! We may sign a new forward besides Hock or Maguire may trust guys like O'Carroll, Mossop and Farrell to really step up in that early part of 2011.

Hock has been training daily at a little boxing gym in Bryn. Apparently he is being beasted by the owner (Adele). Also Mike Forshaw as been known to go there, as well as numerous other rugby players past and present.

Very true, apparently just as fit as he's ever been if not fitter. Would be really stupid to just let him go, bring him in and judge him on the pitch.

Where is this announcement we where supposed to be getting regards to Hock at the end of February?

Shhhhhhhhhhh !!!!