WiganWarriorsFans.com

medlocke wrote:not surprised,the fact is he did wrong, whether he was goaded into it is irrelivent, he shouldn't be so stupid to be drawn into it, i mean it's not rocket science, he's numb, he has a short fuse, he should know by now that others will take the piss trying for the penalty, he should be happy ith what he got as he could have got more

He could not have got more as that was the maximum penalty for the offence he was charged with.

They could not have charged him with a different offence either because he did what he did not something else if you see what I mean.

I agree he is being targeted and that he reacts but that doesn't mean the club wasn't right to appeal the ban given he was sent off in the game and based on how other players who have done as he did have been punished.

There is a glaring inconstancy here and the RFL would be far better adopting fixed penalties for offences and none of this taking good or bad records into account.

If you lamp someone you get a ban of X matches and so on. Get three such bans in a season then you cop five matches or something like that to punish persistent offenders.

Would Hock be such a persistent offender and cop a longer ban under rules like that? Maybe but at least the system would be transparent and fair and at the moment it looks anything but.

medlocke wrote:not surprised,the fact is he did wrong, whether he was goaded into it is irrelivent, he shouldn't be so stupid to be drawn into it, i mean it's not rocket science, he's numb, he has a short fuse, he should know by now that others will take the piss trying for the penalty, he should be happy ith what he got as he could have got more

One word comes to mind after reading that post, no it's not 'fool' but 'punctuation'.

medlocke wrote:not surprised,the fact is he did wrong, whether he was goaded into it is irrelivent, he shouldn't be so stupid to be drawn into it, i mean it's not rocket science, he's numb, he has a short fuse, he should know by now that others will take the piss trying for the penalty, he should be happy ith what he got as he could have got more

Nor am I surprised to see you have risen your ugly head to once again slate Hock.Yes he does have a suspect temperament but it would not matter if he was a saint in your eyes would it.I question that you are a supporter of Wigan at all but rather a toxic stain with a toxic view regarding Gareth.Would you be man enough to step away from your keyboard and tell Hock he's numb.Somehow I suspect not.

KOOCH wrote:

medlocke wrote:not surprised,the fact is he did wrong, whether he was goaded into it is irrelivent, he shouldn't be so stupid to be drawn into it, i mean it's not rocket science, he's numb, he has a short fuse, he should know by now that others will take the piss trying for the penalty, he should be happy ith what he got as he could have got more

Nor am I surprised to see you have risen your ugly head to once again slate Hock.Yes he does have a suspect temperament but it would not matter if he was a saint in your eyes would it.I question that you are a supporter of Wigan at all but rather a toxic stain with a toxic view regarding Gareth.Would you be man enough to step away from your keyboard and tell Hock he's numb.Somehow I suspect not.

Are you related to Hock, Kooch you keep rising to the bait.

platt-warrior wrote:Are you related to Hock, Kooch you keep rising to the bait.

Wish I was platt-warrior then I would have something to talk about.Just think he needs a break regardless of what others may think.

medlocke wrote:not surprised,the fact is he did wrong, whether he was goaded into it is irrelivent, he shouldn't be so stupid to be drawn into it, i mean it's not rocket science, he's numb, he has a short fuse, he should know by now that others will take the piss trying for the penalty, he should be happy ith what he got as he could have got more

Is this a case of two illiterate peas from the same pod?
The rugby player has an excuse, his brain could get a battering, what's the sausage maker's?

He's a cock, medcocke

Think we should withhold all of our players from the Exile game.

The next time there is a brawl, I expect all of the players to be sent off and banned - and we all know the odds of that...

DaveO wrote:

medlocke wrote:not surprised,the fact is he did wrong, whether he was goaded into it is irrelivent, he shouldn't be so stupid to be drawn into it, i mean it's not rocket science, he's numb, he has a short fuse, he should know by now that others will take the piss trying for the penalty, he should be happy ith what he got as he could have got more

He could not have got more as that was the maximum penalty for the offence he was charged with.

They could not have charged him with a different offence either because he did what he did not something else if you see what I mean.

I agree he is being targeted and that he reacts but that doesn't mean the club wasn't right to appeal the ban given he was sent off in the game and based on how other players who have done as he did have been punished.

There is a glaring inconstancy here and the RFL would be far better adopting fixed penalties for offences and none of this taking good or bad records into account.

If you lamp someone you get a ban of X matches and so on. Get three such bans in a season then you cop five matches or something like that to punish persistent offenders.

Would Hock be such a persistent offender and cop a longer ban under rules like that? Maybe but at least the system would be transparent and fair and at the moment it looks anything but.

Dave, the worst offence I've seen recently was that committed by Rangi Chase.
Charged with a offence that got 3 match ban. The guy he clobbered will probably be out for the Season - if he ever plays again.
I have no confidence in the Disciplinary Panel whatsoever.