So here's what we know.

Parramata had a bid for Hock rejected, by IL as their offer wasn't enough.
Hock openly stated on national tv that he would like to go to Australia.

Hock and his agent have met with IL face to face.

Hock has subsequently joined Widnes on loan.

The "rumour" of a big fallout between Hock and Wane.

Wouldn't IL listened to both parties?
As IL reads these message boards would he not have also asked the opinions of

1) His coaching and management team
2) Some of the players, particularly the ones who were on England duty with him? Let's not forget that some of those would be his mates.

To suggest that IL doesn't know the full story and that this is some kind of Watergate cover up would implicate a lot of people at the club.

Fredelaunt slip

39 pages of bull i've just read.

zzzzzzzzz

Did you not think at any point of giving up reading it?
Page 23/30 maybe?

What if everything you've read, and everything you haven't read is true? What is Gareth Hock is beelzebub, and SW is the Messiah, but SW's shagged GH's wife, and GH took out a hit on SW, but SW killed the assasins with his lazy eye (which is actually a laser), and GH can't pay the money, so some big blokes around town are after him, and he's had a fall-out in training, and he wanted to move to Parramatta because it's his boyhood town, and he's actually earning £16.20 a year, but Widnes threw a line of coke into the deal.

I'll stick this on a PM if it makes it any more official??

tbh if shaun wane did something outrageous like kick a boot at hocks head and split his eye open i'd claim that was still coaches prerogative. even if there has been a fall out i'd struggle to think what wane could do to hock that it wouldnt just be hocks job to dust himself down and get on with it, albeit there may be blow ups but you still act professionally and remember the pecking order. rolls down hill. im not after speculation, just a thought.

I have also read all 39 pages of this thread and have been holding back from getting involved but I feel I can't any longer. What is really frustrating about this thread and the "Hock still a warrior" thread is not only the amount of nagativity towards hock but the complete refusal by most to accept any other possibitiies leading to his exit. I understand that people have their own opinion and may have heard things that has prompted their opinion but the simple fact is not many know 100% what has gone on. What I have heard on the matter leaves me under no illusion what side of the fence I sit on, I'm not going to get into what I have been told or who by but I will say I have no reason whatsoever not to believe it. I won't be putting any of it on here as its not message board material and I'm not fussed if people choose to dismiss my comments.


First and foremost we have lost a hugely talented player and given the amount of talent we lost at the end of the season we can't afford to lose anymore. Yes, the believers of the Lenegan statement will say that the club had no choice and that no player is bigger than the club but is it not possible to accept that its not as simple as the club have made out? I agree with Last son of Wigan that to some extent you have to read between the lines. Lets look at the facts. Hock has been at wigan all of his career and up to his ban hadn't had any major problems (apart from his off field antics, but lets not kid ourselves into thinking its not widespread in our sport). He gets a 2yr ban which during he makes no secret of the fact the he intends to keep himself fit and return to playing with wigan. At the end of his ban he signs a long term contract thanking Wigan for their support and the opportunity to repay the faith stating that he only ever intended to return to Wigan. Only for 18 months later on the back of his best ever season playing RL to leave the club amidst suggestions of a lack of respect, refusal to train etc to get himself sacked?? Does that sit right with people??


Clearly he wanted to go to Parramatta but lets face it who wouldn't given the chance to move to Australia and play in the best league in the world on far more money?? This just puts him in the same category as Joel, Hoff, Tomy, Lima etc in my book. As a result of his decision to leave he lost his 12 squad number. So then its easy to suggest that given the move fell through he spat out his dummy refused to train and refused to play for the club to get himself sacked. so his options are get his head down, prove why he should be the number 12 and continue to play for the club he has devoted most of his life to on a decent wage (albeit less than many of the big earners at the club) or leave on loan to play for the bottom club on even less money..............Its a no brainer!"


What I have been told has left me severely downhearted about the club I am passionate about and that I have spent thousands of pounds supporting over the years, It has left me questioning my support for the club. There is something wrong at the heart of the club. Things are happening that shouldn't be happening at a proffessional sporting club, players are leaving that shouldn't be leaving, players are being mistreated and believe it or not (thats up to you) the truth is being kept silent..........

You see that's the issue.

There are two sides to every story.

One side has been put out there for all to see from IL.

The other side well has just kept quiet and said honest gov it's all down to big bad Wane. ps beleive us but we won't give you anything to beleive in.


I could quite easily come on here and say that everything Wigan have said is lies and that actually the reason for the move is the disgraceful way Tomkins has behaved to Hock.
If only you guys knew what had gone on between Tomkins and Hock you would be changing your tune pretty quick.
I'm not going to disclose what has gone on between Tomkins and Hock but in my opinion Tomkins should be the one leaving.


Now where is the difference? I've told you nothing and said but you have to beleive it.

I'm not suggesting that you should believe me, I've not even given any information for you to believe, I'm clearly stating what I believe and questioning why a lot of people don't seem to want to accept other possibilities.


I'm not sure if you are using Tomkins and Hock as a rumour or using it as an example though??

Forgot to add Is it also not possible that the story that has been put out is not the truth but the people that have put it out are in a better, safer position to do so??

there is one person that can put a different side to this story and that is Gareth Hock. He hasn't done so as yet so the only factual info we have comes from the club. Until this is disputed by another party actually involved in the situation let's treat heresay as just that.

The most important thing is no matter what we are short of another world class player on top those we have already lost.

Do you honestly believe that it is as simple as Hock coming out and saying "this has happened"? the legal implications, damage to his career and peoples reputations etc are huge

legal implications to whom, his career is tarnished by the club statement anyway and who's reputation will be harmed...only the party in the wrong and at the moment that is Gareth

So Hock is the innocent party in all this. but coming out and saying what happened would have serious implications to his rugby career .

how does that work for a innocent person?

If you don't want to believe or take on board what others are saying then don't. But what is you're trying to say? From all I can gather it's 'I don't believe it cos it sounds like BS' from you. If you think that ok, further enough, but why go on about it?

Things aren't black and while, do you honestly think these matters are straight forward?
If you don't believe it or whatever, then why keep going on about it?

it's only in answer to all the others who keep going on about the fact he is innocent........if they can keep spouting their views then surely others can answer them......

at the moment Gareth has taken the 5th............staying silent so he does not incriminate himself...... in the UK though we have an opposite stance "‘You do not have to say anything. But it may harm your defence if you do not mention when questioned"

if you don't like opposing views don't post then you won't get replies

Explain to me how an innocent person coming out to defend himself from awful lies would have serious implications for his career..im trying very hard to get my head around that one.

And this is my 3rd post in 40 odd pages..so me keeping on about it is way over the top.

What is your problem here? You're asking a fellow poster to justify someone's actions with regard to the legal system! If you don't believe it then don't, I'm clearly not d.

If you are not d what people think, your words, why do you keep telling people that they should believe you... i'm tempted to say "Put up or shut up", but i'll be accused of being aggressive again, or childish.

"cleary not d" with over 50 posts on the thread it looks the total opposite