Keep him.

You know whats going to happen if we dont ? St Helens or Wire will sign him in 2 years and he will come back to haunt us.

Maybe he could be a sniffer dog?

Well looking at those poll results, a few of you (or possibly the saints and wire trolls) are going to be disappointed...

There all pray wigan sack him so in 2 years time they can try sign him

does anyone really think that he will be seen within pro RL ever again, he will go further of the rails as he is a tool of the highest order, he will get more involved with the world that seems to gravetate towards and we will be seeing more and more Dale Laughton style storys in the papers, he is a lost cause let him go.

Best news i've heard in regards to Hock in weeks.

Wigan would be stupid to let him go and not have any sort of document which says we either get A-first refusal on him or B-we get compo if he signs for someone else.

People can moan all they want about how he’s a drug cheat etc but at the end of the day other clubs won’t think twice about picking him up in two years time and with the considerable on field talents he posses it only means it’s us who lose out in the long run.

If we stick by him and in two years time he’s washed up so be it let him go then but we’d be stupid not to take that first look at him.

Exactly my feelings also

Mine as well.

Now, im no employment expert, but I very much doubt you could sack someone with conditions such as a first option should he return to rugby league in 2 years.

It's a simple issue of holding a registration.

You can end someone’s contract but still hold their registration to play RL –look at Pryce and Harris for examples of this. We should at the minimum hold his registration meaning we get first refusal or a compo.

Why can't we also sign a pre contract agreement with him 2?

We could state in the pre contract that we can terminate that he gets regular drug test and that we can terminate the contract at any time should he fail those drug test or should he return after his two year ban in a unfit state to play RL.

Again, I cant see it. The poster I quoted said they would be silly to let him go with out something in place so that they have first option. By letting go, I thought he meant sacked which again, you wouldnt have his registration because he is sacked. I think a way around this, is keeping him employed. In what capacity I dont know, but if you sack someone, there is no way you can keep their registration.

Pryce and Harris is different. They werent sacked. If Hock agrees to being sacked, but signing a pre contract agreement, I would imagine this is possible yes. But by just sacking him, there is no way you will hold his registration, or at least if you tried and it was challenged I would imagine the challenge would be successful.

Ok instead of sacking him why doesn't Hock just sign a 'contract' of employment with someone else for two years and we simply let him go that way? Thus it would be the same situation as Harris or Pryce as they left the sport to work somewhere different?

Hock is going to have to get a new job either way so we may as well do it that way rather than just sack him out of the blue.

He should be sacked we dont need drugs in rugby league or any sports, We need to send a message that it will not be tolerated at Wigan or any other club.