He was in Ibiza during the week off, and was asking what has been said a few posts previous. This has relayed back to me by someone who is over there at the moment.

Ibiza



Its a good job thats not the sort of place that lends itself recreational drug use

That is ridiculous management by the club if thats true. By all means allow him to get away somewhere quiet to get away from the media attention.

But IBIZA?!?!?!

Seriously, send him to the south for a bit. Won't hear a word about it there.

Why send him down here?

he came out the night after the gb game and went home the next weekend

as a punishment

Ahh didn't know that, I suppose that means we can't really pay him a small wage to keep him here either then? If that's the case it's up to him what he does and we should assess the situation in two years. At least it's a position that we can cover for (with Hansen, Tomkins, O'Loughlin, Mossop, Farrell and Flanagan all fairly young back rowers with bright futures, or a bright present in some cases). Nevertheless he will be missed as he's a quality player, shame about his lack of a brain.

The club can employ him in the community development team whilst he is suspended according to the editorial in LE this week.

Good idea that, kind of like community service. Dunno whether Hock would agree to it though, at the end of the day he'll know that a decent super league club will sign him after his ban so why bother trying to make it up to Wigan?

True, if he truely is as repentant as is alleged, then you would hope he would stay, assuming the club stands by him.

At first, I wanted him sacked and nowhere near the club, but the more I think about it, if the club doesnt retain his regristration and bring him bac in two years, then another club will only sign him up, so from a purely playing perspective, perhaps we should keep him.

But I hope he goes through the right channels and uses any community education opportunity to ensure others dont follow his lead. That and bin off his current selection of pals.

as I said on another board - use the 2 years to take loads of roids and come back as pacey 19 stone powerhouse prop and rip up SL in 2011

You may well laugh but although not away for a 2 year stint some of the things i have heard regarding young prospects going to Australia for a season about 10-15 years ago suggest incidents like this may not be that far fetched in the not too distant past.

He will be doing community work also a spot of rehab and hopefully come back a better player on and off the field and he seems determind to do so.

Out of interest (not trolling) can anybody recolect any other player at any club being banned for drugs but being kept on employed by their club?

Genuine question, and I wonder whether people would still want him to stay even if he was an overseas player or a poor second teamer?

Like I say, not trolling, just interested as to why people think he should be kept on at the club, when surely he would be sacked for gross misconduct (assuming they have a clause in the contract relating to drugs)?

Because hes the best S/R in SL and after his 2 year ban every club in SL will be knocking on his door.

Why give our best player to one of our rivals

I suppose Ryan Hudson was the last high profile player to get banned. He wasn't kept on by Bradford. It's a whole different argument but cocaine isn't really cheating like performance enhancing drugs are so maybe different circumstances can be applied to Hock.

There would be nothing worse than for him to come back in 2 years time, sign for Saints/Warrington and run us ragged for the remainder of his career. Hocks a great talent and it really would be a sad loss to the game if he were to disappear as a hod carrier on some building site. If Wigan can help him and at the same time keep an eye on him then why not get him involved at the club. It could be as a grounds man, an office worker even IL's personal assistant. If this is the case and he does get an arm put around him, then it must be made crystal clear, in no uncertain terms at all, that this is his last chance and if anything even remotely similar happens again then he'll be hung out to dry.

Because he may have taken drugs and be guitly of gross misconduct?

Surely we aren't going to have one rule for good players and another for crap players? If this is Wigan's stance with all offenders, that they will support them and assist with rehab, then fine, that may be commendable, but it just seems a little strange to me.

And before anybody asks, I wanted Reardon sacked from Wire and was made up when he was, even though he hadn;t actually broken any Rugby or doping rules.

Like I say, in principle I have no major issues, it just disappoints me that the main reason people don't want to sack him is becasue he is a good player.

Your point about recreational v performance enhancing is a valid one, however I do believe other recreational takers have been sacked from their clubs.

It's an interesting one tbh, as there aren't many high profile players who have been caught. Maybe Wendall Sailor, and he was sacked IIRC.

Thats the way of the game though, some players are easily replaceable and aren't as important to the club so the club - regardless of the club - the "big" names are rightly or wrongly going to be more important to the clubs to protect.

My intital view was he should be hung out to dry, but when someone else will almost certainly sign him at the end of his ban, why dont we try the "arm around" approach. It wouldnt be my choice, but sadly given the cut throat nature of professional sport, it seems to be the sensible one.

One last point, Bath didn't take the use of Recreational drugs in Union lightly.

See my comments regarding Bath.

Clubs pride themselves on their community work with kids.

And rightly so. But in a way isn't it good that clubs are showing that even if you make a mistake if you work hard you can build things up again and not be "on the scrap heap"

Tbh I would like to see that being the policy across the board for the first time a player -of any calibre - is banned for recreational drug use. They serve their 2 year ban and then they are given the chance to come back and prove they have turned things around, but being subjected to strict testing to make sure they have turned things around.

drugs cheats have to pass drugs tests before they are allowed to compete again following a ban.

I don;t understand your point. They can, and do come back after 2 years.