gaz hock thread

[cpwigan]

Oh well I daresay we will have to take it on the chin. Internationally? not a chance now.

[Kittwazzer]

If the panel accepted it was a gouge, he's got of lightly. Still, he missed out on Wembley and he can't make GF. That is probably the biggest punishment. Hope he learns from it!

[DaveO]

4 for Gouging and 1 for the punch.I think he's been very lucky.

I agree. Minimum ban for the gouging which probably takes account of the fact it was more dangerous play than a "Fletcher".

[Panchitta Marra]

Could have done without this especially with the injury to Moose.

[DaveO]

Reasons for Decision:
The Committee accept that the action was not a deliberate attempt to gouge the opponents eyes. However the committee feel that the the player had no justifiable reason to place his hands in his opponents face. The panel believe the player's actions were reckless and contact was certainly made with the eyes of the opponent. The committee are of the opinion that this had the potential to cause serious injury to the opponent. The panel add that you needlessly struck your opponent after the initial incident. Whilst the committee take into account the guilty plea, they believe that a 4 match suspension for reckless gouging and a 1 match suspension for striking is in order.

[pie eater and proud of it]

Bah.

Stupid stupid stupid Gareth.

Stupid stupid stupid Red Hall. Obviously have no concept of what constitutes an eye gouge.

Eh ? :conf:

[the winky one]

Reasons for Decision:
The Committee accept that the action was not a deliberate attempt to gouge the opponents eyes. However the committee feel that the the player had no justifiable reason to place his hands in his opponents face. The panel believe the player's actions were reckless and contact was certainly made with the eyes of the opponent. The committee are of the opinion that this had the potential to cause serious injury to the opponent. The panel add that you needlessly struck your opponent after the initial incident. Whilst the committee take into account the guilty plea, they believe that a 4 match suspension for reckless gouging and a 1 match suspension for striking is in order.

So we've been p****d on from a great height again eh?
I'm sorry, I don't condone this kind of thing at all
but other players seem to get away with worse on a
regular basis :eusa15: :eusa15: I'm fuming!!

[i'm spartacus]

5 match ban.... He really does have to learn some self control....4 for the gouge...1 for the following uppercut

[widdenoldboy]

I think that Harrison's mild response with a bit of a push indicates that he didn't think it too serious and Hock seemed suprised to be pushed and reacted badly with a punch perhaps indicates that he didn't know what he had done. TV indicates a reckless grapple tacklewith contact around the eyes, hence the 4 matches?

[Nezza Faz]

Bah.

Stupid stupid stupid Gareth.

Stupid stupid stupid Red Hall. Obviously have no concept of what constitutes an eye gouge.

Not sure what you mean to say - he pleaded GUILTY to both charges - and club not happy with him, reading Madge's thoughts.

Had been well looked after by the Club over last couple of years, so can't imagine Lenigan too happy at the way he's paid him back.

As others post - think a fairly lenient sentence.