Loan him out until Wanes contract expires- IL playing a cute game

I think he is saying we cannot keep losing class players, and I agree. We have just lost a bunch and our half back partnership yet again.

Regarding 'no player is bigger than the club' and just prior to that, you mention Hanley in your group. I seem to recall it was Hanley who created havoc when we were strongly rumoured to be signing Wally Lewis. So some players are or were bigger than the club.

With all this uncertainty at Wigan, I am for the first time rather reticent about the new season.

You may also recall that, later on, in 1988, Hanley was frozen out of the Wigan team for half a season after a training-ground bust-up with Graham Lowe, and eventually came back with his tail between his legs.

So no, ultimately he wasn't bigger than the club.

This situation is clearly different anyway. Hock is nothing like the player Hanley was, and he most certainly is NOT bigger than the club.

As to the other point, about us losing star players. You're not the only one worried about the coming season, but that doesn't mean we should allow player power to take root in the team. That also has happened in the past and it caused all sorts of problems.

To be honest, it amazes me that any Wigan fan can be taking even an indirectly supportive position with Gareth Hock. We don't know the facts in this particular case, but we know what happened in the past, we also know that Hock is notoriously difficult to manage, and we know that Wigan would not be looking to get rid of him (assuming they are) without very good reason. We also know that they stood by him through very difficult times, for which this seems like an extremely poor return.

I don't understand how any fan can have a go at the club under these circs, and I certainly don't understand how any fan can adopt the position of 'we must turn a blind eye to whatever's going on, because we need him'.

perhaps wigan think that mick cassidy will sort him out, i will be ecstatic if he joins us but i still don't think it will happen........

We bought Gleeson from Wire didn't we. It's a matter of weighing up costs and benefits to the club.

Also if the source of a problem can be connected to the place or people around which a player lives then moving them away from them is often a way the new club uses to try to solve the issues. Similarly if a rule that is not being followed by the player is not in place at the prospective new club (or the person they aren't getting on with isn't there either) then the cause for the disruptive behaviour can disappear.

If he is no longer wanted here it does not mean that the problem is so big that nobody will want him.

If he were available someone would take a punt on him as he is such a good player but just as there was with Gleeson with us there would always be people even in his new club waiting for the problems to resurface.

In Hock's case any problems connected to where he lives won't be going away because Salford and Widnes aren't exactly light years away and he may not even move house anyway if he went o either place (would you move to either area?).

Anyway haven't Widnes got money troubles all of a sudden with their owner looking to offload? So unless Salford get a cashed up new owner or there is interest from an as yet unknown club I can't see him going anyway.

Gleeson turned up to training drunk. How is Hock's stance against Wane like that?

Whatever form your defiance of the club's rules takes, defiance is still defiance.

It's only going to have one outcome.

not knowing the legal side of things but with his drug ban or any other criminal record would he get a visa? is this may be why he is not in the nrl?

His sporting ban for drug use doesn't constitute a criminal offence so he doesn't have a criminal record in relation to it. If the NRL or Australian Border controlling authority had prevented his proposed move then there would not be talk of a possible future move from Parramatta so it is unlikely that it would have any bearing.

The club itself has set a bad precedent under IL, in letting players leave when they wanted, basically making our contracts even more pointless. It happened with Barrett, Riddell, Lima, Maguire, and J.Tomkins. But when Hock wanted to leave they demanded a huge fee. Surely if the player wanted to go to Paramatta, they should have let him go. We didnt 'demand' a fee for Barrett or Lima, so maybe that is why Hock is annoyed. Who knows. Either way, we have lost half a team, and we will still make the top 4, which proves how shocking SL really is

All very true. Suppose we had a right to demand a fee though when Hock has been trained up completely by Wigan and was taken back after his drugs ban.

We received a (reported) fee of 250k for Joel.

Going to Widnes on loan according to Phil Wilkinson on twitter. Must be true, because he is the clubs official fanboy and spokesman these days. Reckon he'll go to Aus the year after. He will gone down in history as a huge wasted talent with no winners medals