Gareth Hock cops six-game ban
by: Aaron Bower, February 17, 2015, 7:17 pm

inShare
Salford Red Devils forward Gareth Hock has been hit with a six-match ban by the RFL, after pleading guilty on two charges of reckless use with the knees.
The two incidents, which took place during Salford’s 52-6 defeat to St Helens last Thursday, see him banned until the Devils’ Easter Monday showdown against former club Wigan Warriors.
Hock was banned for three matches for each offence, and was also fined £600.
Elsewhere, two Catalans players were also hit with bans by the RFL disciplinary panel. Hooker Eloi Pelissier was banned for two matches after pleading guilty to a Grade B charge of striking, whilst forward Olivier Elima was banned for one match after pleading guilty to a charge of Grade B repeated punching.

"Great player but a hothead"

"Needs help"

"If any coach can sort him out Iestyn Harris can"

"Becoming a liability now"

"No other players would receive such an unfair ban"

"Mose Masoe faked injury"

"RFL have always hated Salford"



Anything left to add?

Well if Gaz has got 6, what the hell have the Leigh and Bradford players got ?? Fighting into the crowd, they must be looking at double figures !!

Going in with the knees (especially to the head) was always a serious foul. I remember talking to Frank Barrow years ago when he said many of the most serious injuries he saw in his day were caused by the knees.

And he plead guilty. Twice.

I suppose it's harsh set against the context of other, smaller, bans for what seemed like serious offences, but viewed in isolation for what it is (twice) - it's hard to complain.

If it were one of our lads my frustration would be aimed at the player.

Is this correct? I thought the maximum he could get was 5.

The grading system is a recommendation system, as opposed to coast iron rules. That said, he probably got 5 for the original offences and an extra game for the fact he had 2 charges for 1 game

Seems harsh to me if it is 6. Yes he did it twice, and yes he has lots of previous, but both incidents were just silly rather than really dangerous imo. 3 games would have fair, 4 at the most.

I think "lots of previous" is a bit of an understatement, he has served 25 games of suspension since returning to the game in 2011.
If you don't think kneeing a player's head whilst he is on the ground is dangerous can I suggest you find your biggest friend and see how it feels if you lie down and ask him/her to drop on you head with their knees?

But that's stretching the truth a bit isn't it. He's given him (to quote Stevo) a facial with his knee. It's not WWE stuff. Also by biggest friend is about 10 stone heavier than Hock, so no thanks.



25 games? Jesus. I didn't realise it was as much as that. That must be nearly a quarter of games he's been unavailable due to suspension.

You know WWE is staged, right?

Hock's 25 games are only the one since he returned in 2011 too, the records of suspensions before this are not on the RFL website. However, I doubt he was angelic before his drugs ban.

Next you'll be telling me Father Christmas isn't real.

Wigan always had fun and games with him well before he made a SL appearance, rumours heard about him should have made any club think twice and players have been rumoured to have left because / club favoured Hock. He seems to be the spoiled child who think he has a right to whatever he wants and doesn't need to follow the rules.

Unfortunately his on pitch antics are making any of the positive on pitch skills become a rarer event. I don't see many bidders for him at the end of this contract. At his best at Wigan he was a lose cannon with skill and potential (while over looking his idiocy), now he's a liability to any team.

Hock is undoubtedly a liability and he does have previous.
He's guilty as charged.
A 6 game ban is ridiculous.
When I look at some of the potentially career ending challenges that occur and the soft suspensions given I begin to wonder
What he did is indefensible but 6 matches is daft. He's an easy target

It's 3 matches for each offence though. If he had only done it once, he would only have been banned for 3 games. As it was, he did it twice and has been banned for each offence.
However, I agree that some other incidents (ie Tomkins' blatant dangerous tackle on Crabtree) seem to be under-punished.

I was going to say the same, it's not a 6 game ban. It's a 3 game ban twice. If that does not say it all. There are more dangerous tackles and they get treated as such.

Ferres got 5 matches for 1 spear tackle. He would have got more for 2 in the same game.

Flower got 13 matches for punching an unconscious player on the ground.

You can always debate it but in the end there is only one person foolish enough to do the same illegal challenge twice in a match.

Great.
Hocks average is available for 2 games in every 15, and those 2 we lost .
Hock damaged goods, Locke crocked , Sau knee knobled , Dobson, Paterson injured .

Yep,glass half empty at the moment

Yes we could line up like

Evalds
Bjb
Griffin
Sau
Johnson
Chase
Fages
Taylor
Lee
A walne
Hansen
Hauraki
J walne

Walton
Hood
Moz
Tasi

Still a decent team, with 4 homegrown players in the starting 13. Trust me Gaz Hock is not the way forward liability now lets cut our losses and go all out and bring in a top quality hooker!

There's plenty of people saying the club should cut him loose as he is without doubt a liability on the field, does his repeated infractions on the pith give grounds for the club to terminate his contract?

Time to cut our losses, misses considerable chunks of the season and wanted to leave the club all together before the new season.

How many more times is this balloon going to get away with it? Don't even get me started on his Twitter antics.

That could be another 5-8 game ban right there. So he will miss at the very least 11 games how many more chances can this guy have. Harris needs to stamp his authority and Koukash needs to stop being pally pally with certain players.

Having thought this through I think the club should just cut their losses and terminate Hock's contract with immediate effect. If this club is going to get anywhere it needs to be professional and do what is right for the business. I just can't see him ever changing and I could see it happening again and again.

How can the club possibly market him as a sporting icon and what kind of message does it give? Furthermore let's not forget Hock wanted away at the end of last year until he realised no other club wanted him or could afford his contract. There was no loyalty shown from the player so why should the club show him any?


To miss 25 games through suspension since 2011 is ridiculous and as far as I'm concerned enough is enough. It would be a shame for the lad but in business you sometimes need to show a ruthless streak and make some tough decisions to be successful. It would be interesting to know what Tim Sheen's thoughts are on the matter?

I sometimes wonder how many players would be available to play for their clubs had they'd been under the same scrutiny as Hock?
He has pleaded guilty and has received a strong ban and a £ 600 fine. The club now has a duty of care to help him through the 7 weeks he cannot play.
We have no shortage of forwards in the squad who should be looking to get their chance and make a positive impact if selected.

Is our resident immigration expert Cas fan not around and offering free unsolicited legal advice?

I wait with bated breath his take on this, then fully expect the opposite to transpire.

He wasn't was he?
Does he have a lisp too?