I would think that when Gareth Hock comes back he will do work with kids on the dangers of using drugs and educate them that this is not the way to go.

If a banned player is still a registered player, the governing body has a right to look after them. I'm sure two years without being able to earn the wage Newton was earning at Wakefield was a great punishment to him and that, with the international shame of being labelled a 'drug cheat' - even in death - is a pretty damn strong message that this isn't a smart thing to do.

Gareth Hock is slightly different because he wasn't straightforward cheating in the way Newton was, but regardless of what a player has done, they still deserve the basic support as a human being that the RFL can provide.

Personally I think players know the rules. They know if they cheat by taking drugs and they are caught they will be banned for two years. They know the consequences of what they are doing BEFORE they do it. If they choose to cheat they should be banned. I do not see why they should recieve any help. They wouldn't be in that situation if they hadn't cheated.

Where I do think there should be a bit of give is when the substance taken is not performance enhancing. They have not gained anything from doing so, and risk being prosecuted. Where this does fall down is they are in a proffession where kids look up to the, and any sport wants a clean image. Maybe a year ban would be fairer in these circumstances if they are prepared to educate etc.

I have read a lot of things about wether or not , or how much , help should have been given/offered to Terry Newton .

I keep coming back to the same thing . If I was sacked under similar circumstances would my boss or my union or whatever do that for me ?

Answer is no .

With all due respect . If you get the boot from work for gross misconduct then you are no longer your employers responsibility .

When did the RFL employ Terry Newton?