www.sportinglife.com/rugby-leagu ... -match-ban second time he has manhandled a ref. He seems to have really hit the self destruct button. After this i am not sure he has an international future

www.sportinglife.com/rugby-leagu ... -match-ban second time he has manhandled a ref. He seems to have really hit the self destruct button. After this i am not sure he has an international future

Of course he has an International future, England are much stronger with Gareth Hock involved. He may have a few (nut case) moments but he's a joy to watch.

Can England afford a few nut case moments against Australia? No.

We have many world class forwards, why risk playing Hock.

You forget he could potentially win england the game, i didn't see Morley ever dropped for England.

Did he actually manhandle the ref? The ref said it was an accident, no one else in the ground seen the incident. Be interesting to see if Widnes appeal.

He did not manhandle the referee in the slightest. The incident he's been banned for appears to be when he and the ref got tangled up when Hock was chasing back to make a tackle. The referee took no action at the time, no penalty, no talking to, not put on report, no cards shown. He later said in his match report that he considered the collision to have been accidental.

It was Steve Ganson who referred the matter to the disciplinary despite Stokes saying it was an accident. Nobody at the game (and I was one) saw anything untoward and the incident wasn't even mentioned in any match reports that's how innocuous it was.

I think Hock's reputation has preceded him in this case and I think he has been very harshly treated.

Sounds like a similar incident last season with Brent Webb and IIRC Richard Silverwood.
Both Webb & Hock can do stupid things at times amongst superb play.

And don't forget the minor detail that in his first banning all that he actually did was to touch / pull the ref's arm to gain his attention. In no way was he approaching the ref in an agressive or argumentative way - there's plenty more in the league that have done that.

Hock is a victim of Sky's bad boy propaganda more than anything. Yes he has his moments but he's not the demon many make out.

No, what he did the first time was aggressive and I've not seen anyone above amateur level do that.

Wouldn't say it's the end of his international future. He has too much talent, but it is a gamble.

To be fair Hocks discipline has improved. Liam Farrell & Ben Westwood have conceded more.

England don't need Gareth Hock. Thats something we should be proud of. He is a very dangerous player and would likely in previous years be picked because of that.

But England dont need a very dangerous but ill-disciplined player. Because we have very dangerous but not ill-disciplined players who can play instead.

I think we will appeal this one. I was at the game and like stated previously, by both sets of fans, nobody seen anything.

He is un controllable at times and a real hot head but I think they've really targeted the player and not the decision here.

He's a class act, full of surprises, both good and bad but he Definately has that game changing ability that can help England beat Australia. His ability to offload a ball is second to none, Definately up there with the best in superleague, if not the best.

He last ban swearing at the referee was stupid on hocks behalf but this ban shouldn't even be considered. Absolute joke which has left his team mates fuming by all accounts.

Name these 'dangerous but disciplined' players. I can't think of another SL player who runs with anywhere near Hock's aggression and impact on form.

IMO we need him because people always underestimate just how physically hard Australia are in the pack. Every year we hear about how Peacock et al are 'better' than their opposition, and yet when push comes to shove our pack are almost as far off the pace as the backs.

Hock provides an x-factor, albeit with risk attached. Given that our pack for once might just be physically stronger than Australia, I personally would go all out to maximise that potential edge - and that's why I'd go for Hock. If it backfires sobeit, but we'll never beat Australia even with parity in the forwards, because our backs - particularly halfbacks - are so much weaker.

I do think with

Hock
Burgess
Burgess
Ellis
Graham
Roby
Westwood

Etc our pack is looking stronger than its best in years

i think hocks biggest problem is he likes to dominate in every tackle and he's lateral movement isn't good enough and a lot of the time it's out stretched arms instead of heavy contact with the shoulder and then he will get agitated and try to dominate the attacker 9 times out of 10 giving away stupid penalties...

Some of the bans he has received are stupid and wouldn't happen to most players, very similar to Morley with NRL.

But if i am honest i would rather go with a hard solid but effective grafter than an explosive x factor type player,,, as with Australia you have to compete in the arm wrestle and they wont tire before us.

Sorry that is incorrect, but either way you are not allowed to do it and no one grabs the ref.

I have no problem with Hock being aggressive and letting off his steam on the pitch, but there's no excuse for sheer cowardly acts like elbows into faces and eye gouging.

Australia will likely have Gallen and watmough "mixing it up". Won't hurt to have a mongrel in the pack!

Hock has been a penalty machine in his last few internationals and he's also capable of "crazy" plays which, if they come off everyone sings his praises but, when they don't work, it costs his team and I think we have better options.
Benny Westwood will be more than happy mixing it with anyone

If you have a spare afternoon, search "Hock" on the RFL disciplinary site. His record is poor, and that's despite being out of the game for a long spell.

Secondly, you are one of those that has seemingly completely missed the point of the 2008 ban. The clear policy was and is YOU DO NOT TOUCH THE REFEREE. That is a simple enough thing for anyone to understand. Nobody is saying he laid the ref out, the ban was for what he did do. The 2008 report states:


Your whinge that it was basically minimal contact is thus entirely beside the point, and I think you know it.

What is ironic though is you whingeing away about it when, in the cold light of day, both Hock and his coach entirely disagree with you!



Further the charge was:

... and the plea was "GUILTY".

Anyway, the Panel closed the 2008 case by saying:



Hock is such a hothead that only 2 or 3 weeks after the RFL letter, which of course will have been notified by clubs to all players, he still lost the plot in that way. You need to understand that he only got away with 5 games BECAUSE he didn't actually do any more than he did. If it had been any more, he'd have been banned for longer. And quite right too.

The Panel also had to consider that apart from Hock's awful record generally, and his previous for making contact with a ref (which clearly taught him little) he had only been up before the beaks in March following his foul language to an official. (Charged under Rule: 15.1(f) Detail: Foul or Abusive Language towards a Match Official and again pleaded GUILTY).

Moving on, if he is fit and not banned, Hock must be in the England squad. I suspect that he'd make a bigger effort to control himself in an international than he does at Widnes, and I agree with those who say that an in-form Hock playing alongside the likes of the Burgesses looks like a formidable pack. Better with him than without.

Is the guy that broke Benthams leg last year now sharing a cell with Peter Sutcliffe?

I'm not so worried about Hock's aggression 'problem'. I'm more concerned about his ball-retention and propensity to give silly off-loads.

IMO he's the perfect game-changing player to bring impact from the bench, provided he's used correctly.

Nothing more than Ganson flexing his new found muscles. Given that he wasn't there, and everyone who was (including the ref) didn't think anything of it, it seems obvious to me.

Yeah, we need to be careful picking Hock for England. Next thing you know he'll be banned for something unbelievable like biting someone's ear. Oh wait...

Hock is one of the best back rowers in the world and should be a dead cert for a first choice England 17 if fit and available.