Why would I as a fan arrange a meeting with the owner of the club???? I'm giving my opinion of a subject based on what I believe has happened, the club has dealt with it in a way they see fit, Hock has moved on and I will be doing the same starting by sitting in the stands in the coming week. I can have an opinion on the subject without needing to get involved to that level surely. several others believe what I believe to be the truth, maybe we should get a whole team of representatives to go down to the club en masse carrying "team Hock banners"

Well I believe he was made aware of at least some of it but can't/won't act as Hock won't discuss the matter and I have not seen repeated assertions by anyone he wasn't.

Because you are one of a few people who claim to know what has gone on and also claim that the owner doesn't. The en masse Hock banners is stupid to the extreme.

As I said it would be in IL and the clubs best interest if this whole affair was brought to a close and the truth outed. That is why I suggested a private meeting.

No drama, just a fair conclusion. If Hock has been wronged he deserves it.

This is brilliant. Because myself and Vectra has offered a second opinion on events which we know is true we are expected to hold a private meeting with the chairman of the club?! Ha!

I think IL would be inundated with fans knocking at his door if the solution was a private meeting each time fans disagreed on a forum.

I suspect there is more to what has gone on (just about everyone does) I wouldn't have an interest in this thread if I didn't - in a situation like this the full truth never or very rarely comes out. Hock himself has not really said very much so we do not have his side of the story and until he does outline his side of things there will be room for doubts. Given the strongly worded statement from the club I can only conclude that Hock has a good reason for saying very little (beyond the fact that he is still contracted to the club).

I am not one who falls into the unquestioning group - given some things that have happened in the past I doubt anyone could be (under ML for instance).

I also know that rumours have a habit of being amplified and made more interesting with the telling (whatever the untold story is)- where the full truth lies I have no idea but until someone, preferably Hock himself or someone speaking on his behalf, actually does put the other side of the story in the public domain then there will be rumours/claims etc - just I choose not to believe them to be the gospel truth.

I will continue to watch events and maybe one day (although I won't hold my breath) the full story will emerge - but somehow I doubt it.

But do you know for definite that's its true, or are you taking one side of the story as 'gospel' ?

I've not really got involved in this discussion until now. I was relatively undecided about what was happening but I now think the truth lies closer to IL's version of events due to some recent information received.

What I would like to know is how you know your version to be the truth? Not trying to get into a row, be accused of bullying or anything else like that. Just curious as to how you know it to be true. All of you can't have been at the meeting or seen all the events leading up to this. Is it one mans story from the other forum that you all believe?

This is getting old. I'm finding that I'm repeating myself over and over.

Its back in the thread somewhere think it was vectrabeast but may be wrong. Am on my phone so its a nigtmare sifting back through.

If i can be bothered tonight (highly unlikley though) ill go back and post the link to the post.

Vectra if it wasnt you who said il doesnt have a clue as to whats going on accept my appologies but it was one of the conspiracy theorists.

Fair enough, I can't be bothered looking back over 50 pages either. I was told IL had been informed of at least some of the goings on by someone with a name familiar to many as a players agent.

I for one hope that the site mods have kept details of all IP addresses and PM messages as if IL's legal team get involved it could get messy.

I've been through this a thousand times and this will be my last.
I am not willing to expand any further, I don't have to and I will not.
I do not care if people believe me whatsoever.
I do not need to justify my comments with relation to expanding any further, I know what has happened as do several others on here etc.

Overtime I believe more information will naturally surface. But for now, people are rightfully stating they aren't going to expand.

Wasn't me, I haven't discussed any details. I just said that it doesnt add up to IL being aware as if he was aware of what I believe had gone on then I couldn't see how another senior person would still be employed by the club any longer apart from as somebody else suggested that Gaz Hock had refused to implicate the other senior member of staff. My understanding is slightly different though, that Hock hadn't spoken directly to IL that all discussions had been done through Hock's agent.

So now you are telling us that Ian Lenagan isn't telling the truth, as he has openly stated that he has had face to face meetings with Hock?

My information is from quite a few different sources all unconnected to each other but directly connected to what has gone on, some incredibly reliable sources and some not so but the information all ties in with each other, I've not got a plan on the wall or anything with testemonies or photo evidence etc just been told a lot of different information that all amounts to one accurate story by several people well placed. I wouldn't have stated as much as I have in defence of my information without being as close to 100% as is possible. The information I have simply can't be ignored.

Sorry about that then

You said earlier that your main source was 'Category A' ie someone actually involved in the rumour. This would be either IL, SW, Hock or Mystery Third Party Person.

You also said you've never met/spoken to Hock - so its not him.
IL is in the dark on all this (allegedly) - so its not him.
SW - Doubt he would tell you as such a rumour would jepordise his career.

This leaves Mr Third Party - why would he/she put such a rumour out and involve themselves with staff at the club?

???

Keep digging

If that is how you want to decipher it then thats up to you. I have been led to believe that Hock hasn't spoken directly to IL, that all conversation has been through his agent and also that contrary to any statement from the club Hock hasn't missed training or rehabilitation. I'm not claiming that everything I have been told is gospel, just that I believe most of it to be true, there are bound to be differences of opinion when information is coming from various sources but what I would class as the important information is pretty credible to me.

I'm not spreading rumours about the club or any individuals I'm merely giving my opinion based on information I have. (information that I have kept entirely to myself)

Joseph Goebbels - "If you repeat a lie often enough, it becomes the truth. "

It does not require the person making up the story to push it, just for others to beleive him and push it on their behalf.

Did Lenagan state in that press release that he had spoke "face to face" with Hock?

That's not interpretation, that is published in black and white.

Wigan chairman Ian Lenagan stood by Hock during his drugs ban, but added: "Gareth Hock has made it clear in face-to-face discussions with me and via his agent that he has no intention of playing for the Wigan club.

I'm not disputing what IL said, its there for all to see

"I'm not claiming that everything I have been told is gospel, just that I believe most of it to be true, there are bound to be differences of opinion when information is coming from various sources but what I would class as the important information is pretty credible to me."

Answer your question?

Is it not time this was locked, as it's just going round in ever decreasing circles now?

No what your saying is that you believe IL isn't telling the truth, aren't you?

I think Pie Eyed summed it up perfectly, we're going round in circles with rumour and innuendo that potentially could get some people into a lot of trouble. The main subject matter about Hock himself hasn't really been discussed for some time now, so it's probably best if we leave this thread alone for now.

Representation has been made to the site about some of the subject matter in this thread and "[ipeople from within the club are aware of the false comments....... and if it persists then they will persue the matter further.[/i"

I would suggest people don't repeat any of the rumours or even imply what they are, even by PM. Closing this thread doesn't mean people can start the same conversations on the Wane thread, thanks.