I've done loads wrong mate and taken responsibility for it all, fact is, if Gaz had not been caught he would still be doing it, theres too many gullible people out there that beleive what he has said in the paper, for the good of the club we should wipe our hands clean of him, no matter how talented he is, he has broken the law, if you get found out in a works drug test 97% of the time you will bne fired no matter how good at your job you are

No you said you didn't think they club could do it. You then changed your tune to indulge in one of your increasingly common little digs at me when you had no reason to do so. All I did was point out why your opinion the club could not do it was likely to be correct.



If the club has got any sense they won't present any parent with that dilemma.

As others have pointed just because Hock has been banned should not mean he is in a position to work on junior development as if this is some sort of rehabilitation in itself. Once he has been rehabilitated and proved himself clean he can set himself up as someone who has beaten the evils of drug use and be used in some sort of ant-doping role by the club or even the RFL if they want. He will be proved clean in two years having gone through the testing regime he must subject himself to and once he has got back playing.

I would be very surprised if the club would even try it never mind get it past the RFL and/or WADA as a an authorised rehabilitation program.

The idea that before the two years has passed he can be used in junior development and this is rehabilitation is IMO naive but if it happens then IMO it makes a mockery of the rules as they are written.

Dave

and that is the only reason why everyone is on the "Help save Gareth Hock Bandwagon", not because they genuinely care about him, they're just scared Leeds or Saints may sign him.

I think this is the key, Hock is elite, he is the top of the tree. No company in there right mind sacks there top man for such an offence if found out, you do not cut off your nose to spite your face. They may sack someone on the shop floor for the same offence, but not there top sales director who brings in the revenue to keep the business going, and is almost impossible to replace. Is it right? No, but we do not live in such an ethical world sadly.

Personally were it Fielden for example i am sure they would be gone, as its Hock, i understand the reason to stand by him even if it is perhaps not morally correct.

Okay, so you've taken responsibility for your wrong-doings. But Hock shouldn't even get the chance to take responsibility for his own?

There are people all over this country who've bounced back from far more serious offences and are holding down jobs and living decent lives.

Stop talking like the master of some Dickensian workhouse.

The guy's career is ruined, his name is mud - and you want him tarred and feathered as well.

if Gaz Hock wasnt a great playermost on here would want him sacked and dumped in the bin.......i for one think he wonty learn a dam thing if he is kept on at the club and others will think ...if hock is given a cushy number for 2 years its worth the risk.the club should show the world we mean it when we say we will NOT tollerate drugs in our sport

DaveO has taken a fair bit of stick from people because he uses the official wording of rules to illustrate why rumours about Hock being employed are not likely to be true. Although it may mean me getting some of that stick I have to agree with him.

The rules in this type of situation are what govern what can and can't be done and are the only thing that must be adhered to regardless of what people think should be done.

The situation is quite clear, for the duration of any ban (likely to be 2 years) Gareth Hock (or any other banned player) can not be employed in any capacity by any club or organisation that is affiliated to the RFL nor can he undertake any activity organised by any such organisation. He can not do any job for Wigan RLFC whether it be mowing the pitch, selling tickets, community programmes or whatever people suggest regardless of whether or not he is suitable (he couldn't even do so without pay). He can't be involved with the Club at all - simple as.

The only thing that Wigan or any other organisation affiliated to the RFL are able to do during the ban period is to organise for Hock to go through a rehabilitation or educational programme as the recipient.

My exact wordsI'm not sure if they can legally make that work - I mean within the RFL's terms of legality - but if they're allowed to, then I'm all for it

Both sentiments, which you seem to think are at odds with each other, are included in that original sentence. Now for Heavens' sake, stop rewriting what people have said to try and strengthen your position.

The rest of it - i.e. regarding the rights and wrongs of trying to keep Hock affiliated to the club in some way, and therefore prevent him toppling into the abyss, is a matter of opinion. Yours and mine differ, so let's leave it at that.

As for the parents of Scholarship kids etc. If, by their actions, the club in effect choose to disagree with your view, that doesn't mean they "lack sense" (which is what you quite clearly implied in your last post). It means they've weighed up the pros and cons - from a position of better understanding than you have - and are making an informed decision. If they're not allowed to do this by the RFL, they're not allowed to - it's as simple as that and will not be an issue. If however, they are allowed to keep Hock on the books in some capacity, it's doesn't mean they've found a way to "get round the rules", it means the RFL don't see it as a major problem either.

Why don't you stop putting a negative slant on everything the club does, and accept that looking into the possibility of assisting Gareth Hock through a very difficult time is actually an honourable thing to do. And the fact that other employers wouldn't do it doesn't make any difference to that at all.

Out of almost three pages of DaveO and Cruncher going back an two at each other that is the most sensible post on here.

If i had kids i would not have a problem with them learning from a bloke who has 99.9% ruined a fantastic career. Good post mate !!

I wasn't given second chances Cruncher, i had to Man up and sort myself out, because the guy is talented he is going to be put into a position where he can let everyone down again, he isn't going to learn this way, he has damaged the name of this ONCE great club and should not be allowed to enter through the doors again.

So your only answer is to be judgemental from a position of ignorance. Well done.

No mine from a position of experience, nobskin

That response says it all. I don't need to add anything else.