Do you think that the club will discipline him as well?

bearing in mind that your coach said he thought hock did nothing wrong.

If they did tomkins for sticking the v's up... then surely they will also do hock for gouging.

I think Hocky can consider himself lucky that he only got the four matches for the gouging.

I'm struggling to understand, though, how his punch was worth one game while McGoldrick's assault on Obst was not worthy of a ban at all. Bonkers

Is this a blessing in disguise?

Hock can be a terrific player but he can be a frustrating one, for every bit of magic he can create he also comes up with silly off the cuff plays that can back fire on the team and that can cost us when the pressure is on.

Hopefully somebody else takes this opportunity.

But if Hock pleaded guilty with his record, seems strange he would only get the minimum ban, but hey ho not a big loss for Wigan.

I think the minimum ban is VERY lenient.
I always though previous record influenced the length of the ban.
27/04/08 - 1 match ban for punching.
05/07/08 - 5 match ban for manhandling referee.
So a player who has been banned for a total 6 matches since 2008, despite being banned from June 2009-June 2011, gets the minimum ban.
He's a VERY lucky boy.

eye gouging has no place in our game. it is a rugby onion thing. it should be stamped out . hock should have got the full eight matches .

My mistake. Thought I'd read he hadn't got a ban

How many matches for stamping?

I can only assume they viewed his ban for manhandling the referee as unrelated, in a similar way that having had bans for spear tackles might not count too much against a player charged with dangerous contact. It will probably become clear once they put the summary on the RFL website.

As long as he's out for the season i'm happy.

Yeah, we'll have to remember that and stop booing all the Leeds players whenever they turn out for England. Oh, hang on ...