Bookmarked.

Don't see what the point is, by the time its proved wrong "it" will have changed to a new account.

He's served his time and, if reports are to be belived, worked hard in the community to make up for his error. Fair play he should be allowed to start over.

The length of the contract suprises me, perhaps wigan have used the support they've shown him to press for a modest salary and want to make the most of it.

If you mean desperate as in joint top of the league with a game in hand plus still in the cc and still champions then yeah your right

rlKnock yourself out.rl

Unpaid for 6 months. Then learning various skills to carry out youth work, including speaking at schools, young offenders' and jails, and also going to college to learn plumbing skills and work for a local plumbing firm, from the sounds of it. All the time being coached mentally and physically by an ex-army Sergeant.

Yep, definitely deserves hanging out to dry.

Our crowds aren't reported on the BBC website and in the national press for all to see.

Like I said, my non-RL supporting friends thought this was a farce - this has really shown RL up to them, and that is what I am concerned about.. Obviously your views are going to be biased towards Hock.

What evidence do you have to suggest "the drug is rife within the game"?

Clown.

I presume, therefore, they also think any sportsperson caught with drug traces in their bloodstream resuming their career having served their punishment as deemed appropriate by the governing authorities is 'a farce'. Or is it just RL?

Do their views differ on performance-enhancing drugs as opposed to social drugs? Or didn't you get that far?

The only farce here is you. Chump.

Wow, well done for missing the point.

They believed that a 5 year contract is generally a reward for excellent service, not snorting cocaine and then being a good boy while you are sat on the sidelines.

Aaah...clarification. So it's not the drugs, or being permitted to return to his sport that they find to be 'a farce'? Did they deem his suspension sufficient? If so, why should the length of contract be a concern - after all, he's done his time.

But let's see...how long should the contract be?

Would 1 year be too little? 3 years too much? Just what did you knowledgable "non-RL friends" decide was the appropriate contract length for a returning sportsperson?

And what about, for example, athletes, tennis players, runners...sportspeople who aren't tied to club contracts. What should happen with them?

I think we need to know. We need to avoid be labelled as 'a farce' by those important non-RL friends of yours.

I'm going to tell my friends they are idiots because Cronus said so, and they aren't allowed opinions in future.

Can't answer the questions then.

Good job Lister.

Tell them if they're going to condemn RL for offering a returning player a 5-year contract, they should consider their perspectives on similar and related situations and decide whether they would reach the same conclusions.

Call them idiots if you like. You (and your friends) seem to like ill-informed snap judgements.

Welcome to the glorious world of WireWonder.

Cronus exemplifies the type of behaviour that is so commonplace in Rugby League circles - absolutely no idea of how the sport is percieved by the outsider.