In which case Wigan have no hold over Hock.

Dave

Every bit of this is true i got told a month or 2 ago everything there

I know its true king warrior but you always get a few on here who are doom and gloom merchants ha

plus the coke over there is soo expensive! lol !

sorry had to be said

Not accusing you of being a liar or anything, because that could be true. But why on earth would Wigan employ an ex-royal marine to train him, unless he is an ex-royal marine who happens to be a Rugby coach? And only 3 days a week?

If Lenegan is so confident that they are going to be retaining his services, I'm sure that they would be giving a player who is going to miss two years more than military strength and conditioning three days a week. It would seem pointless for an athlete who has been training for over fifteen years in the sport and knows exactly what he is doing with his conditioning routines, even more so when that time and money could be used to send a skills/wrestling coach to give him something of benefit.

Whether its true or a load of blocks I just hope your closer to the truth than the OP. If G H can rejoin us next year half the player he left us then I for one will be a very happy bunny. Bigger than when he took his sabatical he is gonna be a monster,bring on the Hockster.

He trains with an ex royal marine for fitness only three days a week !!!!!! Dont know dont care what other training he does aslong as he makes it back on the field in a warriors shirt

it's the 5 year contract part that stinks imo, why would a banned drug user out of the game for 2 year be awarded with a 5 year contract, world class players rarely get that amount and lets face it Hock certainly isn't world class

Quote ="Saint Simon"no banned player can sign for any team, preliminary or not so this is pointless. He has undoubtedly had discussions with lots of clubs, and he should, he was, and i presume still will be top class. The fact remains he cant sign for anyone until his ban expires. I'm unclear about the issue of registration, but it WAS my understanding that a banned player cannot be registered.'" Yes he could. See Matt Stevens case in RU, who was also banned for cocaine. www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/rugbyu ... s-ban.html

Quote ="Saint Simon"no banned player can sign for any team, preliminary or not so this is pointless. He has undoubtedly had discussions with lots of clubs, and he should, he was, and i presume still will be top class. The fact remains he cant sign for anyone until his ban expires. I'm unclear about the issue of registration, but it WAS my understanding that a banned player cannot be registered.'" Yes he could. See Matt Stevens case in RU, who was also banned for cocaine. www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/rugbyu ... s-ban.html

Because although 5 years sounds like a reward, it may not be.

Imagine if he got a 2 year contract on an average squad player wage, after those 2 years (assuming he got back to the form he displayed beforehand) he could then command top dollar again from us, or any other club.

In a structured 5 year contract, his wage could be slowly built up year on year until after the 5 years it reaches a point at where he was before.

Obviously there would be clauses and stuff written into the contract, but he'd have to work harder and longer to get the top wage back.

Given IL and the way he structures deals, id be stunned if this 5yr deal didnt totally cover Wigan in every way.

actually heard all that around 4 months back

Gaz Hock will be on a 5 year deal, not as a reward but as a punishment.

The common sense option is to give him a contract on a vastly reduced terms. However this is pointless if it just for 2 or even 3 years. If he performs at the level we know he can, he'll be off for far more at the end of that period. 5 years makes complete sense.

Fingers crossed it will also be subject to regular drug testing, and similar conditions.

I'd love for Hock to come back to Wigan and in all honesty I think he probably will but if he doesn't it's no big deal tbh. We're not the same club that the lad left and if any player doesn't want to be part of this new set up then so be it. The club isn't in a position anymore where it is desperate for any good players it can get it's hands on. We can afford to pick and choose to an extent in the knowledge that not only do we have options to bring in quality but we also have the option of promoting real quality from within our own set up. We have some fantastic lads in the u20's and the good thing for them nowadays is that when they do come into this Wigan side they know they have quality all around them that now play as a team.

As I said i'd love to see Hock back but I won't be crying into my beer if he decides(or we do) not to.

Have you all forgotten strict Visa rules in Australia?

A convicted "Drug cheat" (I disagree with that as cocaine isn't performance enhancing but thats for another debate) would never get a visa to play professional sport over there. Im pretty sure Mark Bosnich had trouble going back there during his and he's from Australia!

of course its performance enhancing, its also a narcotic and horribly addictive

It's been said before but the word "convicted" should apply to Hock's case as he was never convicted of any criminal offense following his failed drug test. Therefore unless he has any previous convictions that I don't know about he will have a clean criminal record. Whether the NRL will let him play following a failed drug test is another matter, although they don't seem to mind letting Greg Bird play following his assault case

Yes but you have to be able to "offer something to Australia" and I think that a ban for drug use in sport will mean he fails this. I know my auntie wanted to go over and she was accepted as a high level nurse but her husband was rejected because they "dont need accountants" so I think if thats the case then I think he will struggle but ah well if they would allow it then fine.

it isn't performance enhancing, it reduces coordination.

I have a friend who got addicted to it a couple years ago. Trust me it ISNT performance enhancing. It gave him bi-polar disorder and made him incredibly lethargic. It is most certainly not performance enhancing. But as I said that wasnt the debate I was trying to have so save that for somewhere else. The point was that he would struggle to get a visa when they took the ban into account (assuming they can)

Wendell Sailor played RL in Australia again after his ban for cocaine use.

I would get in touch with the experts at WADA then, they have it classified as performance enhancing.

Anyway, he was found guilty of having Benzoylecgonine in his system (not cocaine), which according to the interweb is a "solution used for the relief of muscle pain." Therefore it would clearly have a performance enhancing impact if it was allowing him to unnaturally relieve muscle pain.

The cocaine "parent drug" is probably not performance enhancing in itself when taken, but the side effects of the Benzoylecgonine are.

Pretty much how I feel too.

I would like him back, but I also think some people have selective memories when it comes to Hock. On his day he could be outstanding, but those days were few and far between for me and the performances in between littered with brain farts and daft offloads.

He has always had the physical potential to be something very special but I still feel he was far from the finished object when he was banned.

In the new systems i think he will have to work very hard on the thinking part of his game and his game awareness or he will struggle to get a place in the side. If he does improve in this area to the levels others have improved under MM then we will have one hell of a player on our hands.

I fully expect he will return to Wigan, but if he does not its not the end of the world, we improved significantly after he was banned, and while I do think he will be an asset if he returns we have shown we can comfortably cope without him.

Does it force users to offload rugby balls regardless of field position or even a suitable recipient?

Fair point, but IMO he wasn't backed up enough under previous coaches.

Knowing that he's an offloading forward, which is an effective tactic when used properly (see Solomona or Lauititi, for example), there should always have been people backing up his runs ready for an offload. I feel that will be better structured under MM, and I can easily see Sam and/or McIlorum benefiting from following him around!