Anyone know when the hearing will take place?

Its not a matter of whether i am neutral or not , the evidence is there to be seen , i will come back on and appologise if he is found not guilty .

I'll agree 100% that he's been very well behaved this season and proved a lot of people wrong so far. However I can't agree that we wouldn't be talking about it if it was another player. Even if it had been Rob Burrow we would still be talking about it as its such a shocking image. Every one who has seen it will have their own opinion and are entitled to express it if done properly. The more I watch it the more I think it was deliberate but on the other hand the more I watch it I don't know why he did it. Put it down to a brain fart or whatever but he's been charged and will have to accept the consequences and I think deep down Gaz will know this.

Depends on who the player was.
Most would've been given the benefit of the doubt

The only video I've seen of the incident is the one linked to in this thread, and the more I watch it, the more I think it's accidental. He's chasing a ball that has been kicked along the ground, so, presumably, his eyes are on the ball. The Hull player retrieves the ball, and Hock changes course, presumably to avoid contact with that player or maybe under the assumption (not unreasonably) that the defender had dived over the ball. At this point, he now finds himself on a collision course with the referee, who is travelling in a path that crosses the one he is now on (let's not forget, the ref is running towards the scene of the collision throughout the duration of that video). For this to have been deliberate, he'd have to have been targetting the referee while the ball was still loose, because I just can't see how he could have changed from looking down and following a loose ball to targetting the ref and positioning himself accordingly in a fraction of a second.

It's all about opinions, I suppose. Ours don't really matter (particularly those of the people who have decided he's guilty because of who he is). The only ones that matter are those of the disciplinary committee, and we'll just have to wait and see.

Of course it matters if you want people to read what you're saying and agree with you. You're providing an opinion from the point of view of the lynch mob, not an impartial observer.

That just about sums it up. Without trawling back I don't know if any one else has mentioned that he seems to accelerate in the last 2 strides before collision. Any way as you say the panel will decide. Whats the odds of some in depth discussion on Backchat tonight.

7 game ban. Disappointing. Be interesting to read the submissions when they put them on the RFL website.

Hopefully we pull off the improbable and his first game back is in the playoffs!

7 game ban!

So, how long is Dixon out for?

For me, the thing that shows it's not a deliberate act is the fact that he's motoring to get on the end of a kick. A kick he actually gets a hand to. Which means his eyes and brain are focused on the balls retrieval. For it to be a deliberate act there has to be premeditation because he doesn't have long enough to make a conscious decision between handling the ball and trying to get out of the way. He makes a decision to try and move left to avoid impact but the Official is travelling in that direction. If he'd have opted to go right, he'd have probably missed him. What's telling for me, is that at the time nobody in the ground. Both sets of fans, both sets of players, and all the Officials thought anything was untoward.

The whole incident is being judged on the fact that it's Hock, which is wrong, well after the event.

Heard him telling someone 'another 4 weeks' at the Huddersfield game

Feel free to have a go back at me but personally I don't think the Doc constantly criticising the RFL publicly helps in these matters.

Stiched up by THE RFL.

If the ref on the day thought there was any thing in it he wud of

1 had a word with him there and then.

2 put it on report/

3 sinbinned him.

4 sent him off.

But the ref did nothing at all, it stinks to me.

The RFL dont like SALFORD and they dont like THE DR.

The sooner the RFL is got rid of and rugby league is run by the clubs the better.

Any way the decisions been made but I'd be interested to know if the panel had any more camera angles of the incident available to them. I've seen it some where that there was a clip taken from directly behind that made it look worse. The clip that's on here is obviously inconclusive as so many people see it differently. I suppose we'll have to wait for Mr. Hocks biography to discover the truth. That would be some book and I wonder what the title would be ?

Expect the Doc too get himself in hot water as he's bound to explode over this.

Cop it and don't kick up too much of a fuss.

The problem is you have businessmen putting a lot of money in and administrators running the game and taking a nice salary. Talk about biting the hand that feeds them. How many club proprietors have they fined this season for challenging them? The RFL think they are beyond criticism because they make the rules up as they go along to protect themselves.

We have to have rules were the ref is treated as if royalty. Players can't touch them. Whether Hock intended the outcome for me is irrelevant. 7 games seems harsh however when players guilty of dangerous tackles such as last years attack on Theo is treated so lightly

Wakey idiot????

How on earth is the a video from behind the sticks, ?????

not on sky, so only one camera at the ground , grow up and sod of back to your own web site.

Wow, just wow.

I'd hazard a guess that the Ref didn't do anything as he assumed an accidental collision, he wasn't watching hock as the hull player picked it up, and then bam. Video evidence later shows it appears deliberate (the only thing I can think of in any kind of defence is he mistook the ref for the hull player and went for the tackle to win a drop out? At least that's my interpretation watching the video)

Accidental collisions happen from time to time, they're not sin bin or red card worthy, or even mention worthy. Only upon reflection does it look deliberate, hence the rfl disciplinary step in, and they have done.

Fair deal for me, but you know, keep crying conspiracy

Sky Sports News - 7 match ban and a £300 fine.

Well that settled that debate.

The betting odd are on what brain fart Hock will do next.

I'm opting for something along the lines of a punch up. Something nice and normal. But you can get good odds on him picking up a further ban in the off-season too.

He's a right numpty, but as was said on the VT, he is the gift that just keeps giving. Looking forward to his next daft episode. Stay tuned.

You'd hope that someone at the club does all they can to reign in the Doc on this as he could not only get the ban extended but lose some of the backing he has.

Didn't look entirely deliberate as he was heading towards the ref, but it does look like he tries too flatten the ref so while 7 games might be harsh (and oddly that's the exact number of games we have left) there is no chance of getting it reduced.

Who's it going to be next week?

We're probably going to be appealing the decision, apparently.

Better off just accepting it. Move on and concentrate on the KR game. Just end up wasting more of Marwan's money on further hearing costs.