For me, it certainly didn't look like he was trying to avoid to collision and even leaned into it. Did he pick the lad up, say sorry and dust him off afterwards?

Looked to me like he was crouched down with his weight going forward after seeing the ref at the last second, could have easily been off balance. And by the way I have no connection with Salford or Hock and would be thinking the same if was any player.

You'll get nowhere on here trying to argue that there might be some element of doubt - the lynch mob have had their hanging now, there's no room for reasonableness.

I was at the match and like most others saw nothing untoward at the time, on seeing the video it does look bad, though how anyone can judge intent from it beats me.

FWIW though I think the officials have to be protected as far as is humanly possible, so a punishment was inevitable and sadly for Mr Hock his past sins will haunt him for the rest of his career.

Not forgetting the players are conditioned for the impact, the refs are not, Bentham and his leg break case in point.

These Wigan fans make me laugh regarding Hock.

When he behaved like a k*obhead while at the Piedome and got punished for it they defended him and branded it a witch hunt against their club.

Now he's still acting like pr*ck whilst playing for another club they can't give him enough stick.

I haven't seen any lynch mob, and the disciplinary seem to have taken pretty much exactly the same view of what they saw as most posters on here.

As no case has yet occurred where an in-brain flight recorder is available to record what a player's intentions are, the disciplinary have to view the video, listen to the evidence, and make a decision. In saying what you are, you've done the same thing! You're saying on what there is, YOU don't feel able to conclude his intention was to collide with the ref. You are doing what the disciplinary and everyone else is, but just coming to a different result. As it is plainly impossible to ever KNOW what anyone's actual intentions actually ever were, it can only be done by making an evidence-based judgement.


Sadly but rightly, yes. Like Suarez's teeth, when you have form for doing it before, excuses for doing it again wear inevitably thinner.

I remember a member of staff/minder at Wigan describing GH, during his long lay off, as a level one learner. Teachers would describe him as having special needs. My mate who works as a prison officer likes to think of him as a future client. As he is 30 his self destructive behaviour is not likely to go away and I fear for him when he loses the disciplined structure of the sport.

With his IQ Gareth hock would probably be classed as borderline mentally retarded.

I think when he retires he'll end up as a homeless drug addict.

With regard to the length of the ban I think it has more to do with the fact that this is the third offence of a similar nature and the ban is increased with each one that takes place. Last year he received four matches for a similar thing at Widnes.

With regard to the intent... If I'm about to run into someone accidentally and notice at the last minute I tend to put my hands out in front of me to try and stop the collision. Seems almost a natural reaction to everyone this. I certainly don't drop the shoulder. Odd odd behaviour if you do.

Just to add on this... in no way should he be driven out of the game if that's what some are suggesting. Rightly so there should be appropriate penalties for behaviour of this nature and 7-8 games seems about right.

If Salford did sack him there would be plenty of other clubs queueing up to sign him.

Wouldnt touch him with a barge pole.

To counter this point, it seems some on here are also conveniently forgetting his ability to put big hits in opposition players. If he had decided to deliberately 'do' the ref then a bad injury would have occurred.

He still deserved a ban however some of the over the top reactions are remarkable.

Only if he's on a pay-as-you-play deal

.

It's very clear that he unnecessarily accelerates after the ball is out of his reach. Cannot be defended even by the most one eyed supporter.

The ban is about right.

If he does it again ban him for 15 games. If he does it again after that it's bye bye.

As mentioned the refs need protecting and they're not conditioned to take such hits.

Such a waste of talent.

www.therfl.co.uk/the-rfl/disciplinary/item?5578 Disciplinary notes if anyone wants to read them.

www.therfl.co.uk/the-rfl/disciplinary/item?5578 Disciplinary notes if anyone wants to read them.

My wife's opinion of the video, (she has no interest in RL or who the teams are)

She watched the first video from distance and I asked her what she saw. For the first 5 showings she missed Hock taking out the ref and kept talking about the blue player with the ball.

I think this demonstrates why people missed it first time round, a non-RL watcher is still watching the ball and the play and misses the player.

When I pointed out it was the player in red she needed to watch her conclusion was that the player runs into the guy in yellow.

I then show the enhanced clip close up and she said he shoulder barges the man in yellow. (at this point she is not sure who the man in yellow is. lol)

So I asked in her judgement what would she do and she said send him off.

So there you go a non-biased opinion and she still has no idea who it was and that the guy in yellow was not a player.

I tend to think that we will continue to read about Gareth Hock in the newspapers long after he is finally banned from rugby league. Just a look at his face alone suggests an unhappy future awaits him. But add his on-field behaviour to his face, in particular his recidivism, and you can see why a life ban from the game is a good bet.

I genuinely worry for him when it's over, I just hope he doesn't follow the Terry Newton route.

He's crying on social media '7 game ban just because it's me', stop doing stupid things then you bloody idiot!

Seen that. There's pictures going round of 'things you can blame Gaz Hock for' with one saying it's his fault that the tower of Piza has a lean and so on.

He's again taking no responsibility for his actions! He moaned that his drugs ban was too long, he seriously thinks he was harshly treated by McNamara and couldn't work out why he and not others had been sent home and now he's taking no blame for dropping his shoulder in to a referee.

Whilst he carries on with this victim complex he'll never feel the need to change.

I would be more worried about him taking the John Hopoate route -- bouncer for nightclubs owned by "identities" known to the police.

Who is the Manchester or Leeds equivalent of Sydney's Ibrahim brothers?

Spot on.

I also thought it was embarrassing how Terry O'Connor defended him on Boots n All yesterday. I know Terry is mates with him but firstly if Terry is pretending to be a Sky commentator/pundit/whatever he needs to stop letting who he's friends with and which teams he likes affect his judgement (he won't criticise Widnes for instance). And secondly just blindly backing Hock up and pretending he didn't do anything isn't helping his friend at all. He needs to be helping his friend realise what he's doing is wrong and needs to change for both a better career and a better life.

I like Terry (as a player, think he's god awful & cringmakingly bad on Sky) but that wasn't what was needed either professionally or personally.