'slightly' ott

Not being soft at all! Prove your hardness on the field of play where it counts. It was pointless getting into a fight at the point of the game and has now cost us dearly for the next two games. As for Mossop, I thought he was standing up for Tuson after the Saint's players dirty play - that I have some sympathy with - the same with Tuson. Besides I don't watch rugby league for the fighting - there are plenty of pubs I can to for that.

for f**k sake it's rugby league not 11 a side puff ball. Props have always had a dig at each other, part nad parcel of the game..... The ref just wanted to make a name for himself.....

As regards being weaker for next 2 games tell that to the players who get a chance to step up, bet they put in 200% effort.

I know fully well that it is rugby league, and that props have goes at each other. But Hock has a track record of it, and it is costing the team. It is not me being soft by saying so, not over the top either. It is expecting a player to be more professional and use his head. If this was a one-off event for Hock, I would be supporting him. But it is not. That is just my opinion, and I will stand by it.

Was only a couple of years ago that everyone on here was saying how soft as a team we were, and that we needed a bit of aggression back in the pack.

Hock wins us more games than he loses, that simple for me.

Jesus christ are you lot still going on about this?
He's banned get over it.
It's not as if you'll need him anyway...play like you did Sunday and it'll be a Cricket score!

We are a broad church, with varying opinions.....

its a meaningless game anyway, only the play-off's matter.................

We have some aggressive players in the pack such as Lima. He has made a huge difference to the pack which is why I am so gutted he is leaving early. Micky Mac takes no prisoners either and Hansen is hard as nails. These players do not rise to the bait and so don't get sledged anything like Hock does and Hock does rise to the bait.

I think it is obvious this is the case. However I think a 2 match ban was well over the top. Other players with a reputation have been let off with less for similar offences and I think that is why the club appealed. Not because he wasn't guilty.

Ultimately I think the only player justified in doing what he did was Tuson for being blind sided and it is also clear Hock really needs to behave now because if he doesn't his bans will not be getting any shorter.

I wonder how big Jim Mills would get on in todays game ?

It was nothing but a cheap shot from Moose

Different game isn't it. Professional as opposed to semi-pro and now with a disciplinary committee that can seemingly have it in for a player but strangely not others with similar reputations. So I guess it would depend on which side of the fence Jim ended up on. One of the favoured few who can get away with it or a target if they step out line.

Even though Mills had an appalling disciplinary record AFAIK, he was never really hammered by the RFL.

It used to be fun watching teams 'wind him up' knowing full well that at any second, it often did result in him losing his temper and getting the red card. IIRC he has the worst disciplinary record for sendings off ever in the history of the RFL.

I take your point Dave and agree, that the RFL seem to have their own favourites and I am pretty sure that 'Gaz' Hock isn't one of them. Neither were Messrs Cowie and Skerrett before him.