You see that's the issue.

There are two sides to every story.

One side has been put out there for all to see from IL.

The other side well has just kept quiet and said honest gov it's all down to big bad Wane. ps beleive us but we won't give you anything to beleive in.


I could quite easily come on here and say that everything Wigan have said is lies and that actually the reason for the move is the disgraceful way Tomkins has behaved to Hock.
If only you guys knew what had gone on between Tomkins and Hock you would be changing your tune pretty quick.
I'm not going to disclose what has gone on between Tomkins and Hock but in my opinion Tomkins should be the one leaving.


Now where is the difference? I've told you nothing and said but you have to beleive it.

I'm not suggesting that you should believe me, I've not even given any information for you to believe, I'm clearly stating what I believe and questioning why a lot of people don't seem to want to accept other possibilities.


I'm not sure if you are using Tomkins and Hock as a rumour or using it as an example though??

Forgot to add Is it also not possible that the story that has been put out is not the truth but the people that have put it out are in a better, safer position to do so??

there is one person that can put a different side to this story and that is Gareth Hock. He hasn't done so as yet so the only factual info we have comes from the club. Until this is disputed by another party actually involved in the situation let's treat heresay as just that.

The most important thing is no matter what we are short of another world class player on top those we have already lost.

Do you honestly believe that it is as simple as Hock coming out and saying "this has happened"? the legal implications, damage to his career and peoples reputations etc are huge

legal implications to whom, his career is tarnished by the club statement anyway and who's reputation will be harmed...only the party in the wrong and at the moment that is Gareth

So Hock is the innocent party in all this. but coming out and saying what happened would have serious implications to his rugby career .

how does that work for a innocent person?

If you don't want to believe or take on board what others are saying then don't. But what is you're trying to say? From all I can gather it's 'I don't believe it cos it sounds like BS' from you. If you think that ok, further enough, but why go on about it?

Things aren't black and while, do you honestly think these matters are straight forward?
If you don't believe it or whatever, then why keep going on about it?

it's only in answer to all the others who keep going on about the fact he is innocent........if they can keep spouting their views then surely others can answer them......

at the moment Gareth has taken the 5th............staying silent so he does not incriminate himself...... in the UK though we have an opposite stance "‘You do not have to say anything. But it may harm your defence if you do not mention when questioned"

if you don't like opposing views don't post then you won't get replies

Explain to me how an innocent person coming out to defend himself from awful lies would have serious implications for his career..im trying very hard to get my head around that one.

And this is my 3rd post in 40 odd pages..so me keeping on about it is way over the top.

What is your problem here? You're asking a fellow poster to justify someone's actions with regard to the legal system! If you don't believe it then don't, I'm clearly not d.

If you are not d what people think, your words, why do you keep telling people that they should believe you... i'm tempted to say "Put up or shut up", but i'll be accused of being aggressive again, or childish.

"cleary not d" with over 50 posts on the thread it looks the total opposite