RFL allow him to re-commence training with Wigan 2 months before his ban ends. Makes a bit of a mockery of the 2 year ban in my eyes. As soon as the ban ends Wigan will have an up to speed (icon_smile.gif) player ready for some game time.

Isn't a ban just against playing?

Thought they could do whatever they wanted other than that. If they are paying him I'd have him training.

Take a driving ban, you can't go practicing 2 months before the ban ends! It's a 2yr ban from involvement in the game, or should be.

They don't ban you from playing Gran Turismo or sitting on your driveway pressing the pedals though.

Not entirely true - I believe that if the keys are in the ignition, you are 'in charge' of the vehicle.

Either way, I agree with the OP - either he's banned or he's not; if he is banned, then he shouldn't start training until that ban is served.

he's got a really small mouth

I'll avoid being pedantic over the first line.

As for the topic and my tuppenceworth, it is the RFL who have the jurisdiction over the ban, they can do what they like. There is nothing stopping him training down the gym or wherever on his own, so he may as well be allowed to train properly with the team and be ready to play when his ban fully ends. Part of the rehabilitation process. Personally I'd like to think this reflects the authorities coming round to the view that an automatic two year for non-enhancing drug use isn't appropriate, but that is reopening an old can of worms.

I personally had no problem with the length of the ban, it needs to be that strict to stop others particularly youngsters following the path he took.

My opinion on him being allowed to train is that it is a sensible option, if the ban is to be fair and consistent under the terms of WADA, an athlete playing an individual sport could walk back into the action straight after his ban, so to be consistent either increase the length of individual sports players bans or allow team sports players to get a chance to prepare back for comp.

It is a sensible option and one which I applaud.

We have all seen the tragedy that can befall individuals who fall from grace and have little hope of return. Hock seems to have handled himself with great integrity during his ban, and personally for me I think it could be the best thing to happen to a career that despite a few eye catching displays never looked like reaching its potential.

What even if you are on private land, I think not, and the earlier post mentioned he was parked on his drive

so 2 years only means 2 years when it's a sport controlled by a decent governing body..unlike what we have controlling rugby league !!! ffs newton was crucified!!!

Not the best choice of words.

We'll never know with respect to Newton but he was guilty of using performance enhancing drugs rather than recreational. He may have been allowed to train before his ban ended if he were still alive and was still wanting to play the game.

Utter nonsense. The RFL, when it comes to drugs bans, are far more in-line with WADA and Olympic level bans than the joke ones given out by other sports. 4 months for a banned stimulant found in a player? That's a joke from a so-called 'decent' governing body!

While having sympathy for how the Newton situation ended, that cannot change how bans are given out in the future. (But you'd be foolish to think only one player in the history of rugby league used hGH.)

Does Hock training really cause that much of a problem? No. He hasn't played for two years, it'll take more than training for him to get near his prior level.

Mountain out of a molehill stuff.

Exactly - so let him do that, until the ban is served.

I don't feel strongly enough to argue vociferously, but for me, he was found guilty of conduct that *should* have been seen to bring both his employer and the game into disrepute so for my money, both Wigan and the RFL should uphold the ban.

If he played for Wakey, I'm pretty sure I'd feel the same way.

Can't see a problem with this at all. I'm actually surprised he hasn't been training with them throughout the entire ban.

It's been said for a long time that he would be starting to train a couple of months before he can play. He is barred from competing, not from getting closer to match fitness. All that's happened is what has been known for a while would happen.

And yes, you can be "in charge" if the keys are in the ignition. This would only relate to being drunk or drugged in charge, as for the moving road traffic offences you have to be moving, and for the construction offences, in the main, you have "use" of it if it is on the road, and certainly sitting in it would probably suffice if you have custody and control of the vehicle.

You are not automatically in charge if the keys are in the ignition, but it is a major factor. For instance, if you are outside your own home, drunk, listening to music in the car, then you would be able to rely on the statutory defence that you were not going to drive when over the limit, because you could just go inside. If, however, you were parked on a country lane three miles from home, then it would harder for you to prove (it is for you, as the driver, to prove that you were not going to drive it when over the limit, although only on the balance of probabilities). Everything is weighed. Was the engine turned on? Was your seat belt on? Lights on? Where were you? Where had you been? Were you going to go anywhere?

That's your legal advice for the day. That will be two thousand pounds please.

Did you get all that imfo when you were researching for your book? you should have been a solicitor instead.

Good luck to the guy. Being petty and over zelous regarding this does no one any credit. A man has ben deprived of his livelihood whilst accepting a deserved punishment. No whinging or whining from him in the press - just got on with doing his time. His time is nearly up and Im all for giving the guy a clean slate and wishing him luck. I dont know how the wording of the ban was framed but I see no problem with him coming back to training unless it breaches these terms and that all players in similar positions receive the same treatment.

give him a break and goo luck to him in all but his games against WTRLFC

Do players still get dope testers turning up while they are banned?

Excellent question. I would imagine that if they have been sacked and are without a club then probably not but in Hock's case who still has a club i am not sure.

They must get tested, otherwise you could get banned for 2 years and just spend that time on the 'roids. Come back 24 stone and be able to run 100 meters in 7 seconds!

He has served his punishment and rightly so. The ban from playing will be for 2 years. The RFL are not in a position to uphold the ban, the policies of WADA of which the RFL are members govern the ban.

I personally think Wigan have handled the situation very well, they have supported Hock throughout the time he has been off by monitoring his behaviour. The first 6 months of his ban he basically was undertaking hard labour in the community, since that point he has been offered support and assistance and also has been undergoing random drug test. He has also been involved in community projects and been given a mentor to guide him through his ban. I do not think I will shock anyone to say he is limited, I understand he has been diagnosed with learning difficulties in this period via the mentoring process.

I also understand he has been training the house down on his own, with the aid of a personal trainer and will be returning to the game significantly larger than when he started his ban.

Hopefully this will turn out to be a real positive in his life not just a negative and not just for his rugby.

I am a solicitor as well (a prosecutor), although you're not the first person to say that I should try something other than writing.

If he needs match fitness and can't get in the wigan team send him our way i say or if he does get in at someone else's expense then send them our way.

It could also unsettle a few of their players too which would work against them? perhaps?