: Tue Jun 30, 2009 4:16 pm  

Dave T wrote:

Didn't Cunningham have something that may have been affected by this?

yep. Cunnigham, Senior and Bailey have all used this when prescribed something they took innocently..

I guess if Hock could prove that he somehow unwittingly took the cocaine he could use it as his defence, but I find it doubtful.

: Tue Jun 30, 2009 4:25 pm  

saints35 bulls0 wrote:

I guess if Hock could prove that he somehow unwittingly took the cocaine he could use it as his defence, but I find it doubtful.

Especially after Kev Brown has already given the game up

I've not even given the B sample a thought. He's done for 2 years, he knows it, Wigan know it and everybody knows it.

: Tue Jun 30, 2009 4:26 pm  

Perhaps he could blame it on mathers.

: Tue Jun 30, 2009 4:31 pm  

NickyKiss wrote:

Especially after Kev Brown has already given the game up

I've not even given the B sample a thought. He's done for 2 years, he knows it, Wigan know it and everybody knows it.

Yeah, people seem to be talking about it quite openly about the fact that he is gutted and that he has made a mistake. It seems pretty clear that he will not be preparing a defence.

: Tue Jun 30, 2009 4:38 pm  

Loving all these transparent fans who think wigan should sack him.

For one simple reason

They want him in there colours in 2 years time

: Tue Jun 30, 2009 4:43 pm  

wigan_knight wrote:

Loving all these transparent fans who think wigan should sack him.

For one simple reason

They want him in there colours in 2 years time

Nah, you are wrong. If you were to terminate his contract after a positive B Test, what is to stop you signing him again in 2 years anway?

It is nothing to do with that.

How many on here thought Saints did the right thing when retaining Leon Pryce?

Some of us do have morals.

: Tue Jun 30, 2009 4:48 pm  

Dave T wrote:

Nah, you are wrong. If you were to terminate his contract after a positive B Test, what is to stop you signing him again in 2 years anway?

It is nothing to do with that.

How many on here thought Saints did the right thing when retaining Leon Pryce?

Some of us do have morals.

If this is a moral stance, its a skewed one. Hock is already being punished by being banned from the game for two years.

As you said earlier, Wigan are also being punished - this is a lad they've invested lots of time and money in, and haven't yet reaped the reward for. But taking action to prevent them getting first call on him in two years time is punishing them twice.

: Tue Jun 30, 2009 4:52 pm  

Cruncher wrote:

If this is a moral stance, its a skewed one. Hock is already being punished by being banned from the game for two years.

As you said earlier, Wigan are also being punished - this is a lad they've invested lots of time and money in, and haven't yet reaped the reward for. But taking action to prevent them getting first call on him in two years time is punishing them twice.

I have already said to offer him a conditional contract for 2 years time if you really want him back.

I have never ever seen an instance of a player being guilty of drug use and being retained by their club. As mentioned, Bath Rugby have recently parted company with 5 high profile players, including an England player and a co-captain.

Just done a search and found an old article from 2005 where a Union player had been banned for Cocaine, and he was banned from:

"playing, training with or being a member of a club, coaching, administering or acting in any official capacity within the sport".

: Tue Jun 30, 2009 5:12 pm  

Dave T wrote:

I have already said to offer him a conditional contract for 2 years time if you really want him back.

I have never ever seen an instance of a player being guilty of drug use and being retained by their club. As mentioned, Bath Rugby have recently parted company with 5 high profile players, including an England player and a co-captain.

Just done a search and found an old article from 2005 where a Union player had been banned for Cocaine, and he was banned from:

"playing, training with or being a member of a club, coaching, administering or acting in any official capacity within the sport".

I made the same point yesterday. It's pointless for Wigan not to sack otherwise they would be paying him to be say at home.

: Tue Jun 30, 2009 5:46 pm  

wigan_knight wrote:

Loving all these transparent fans who think wigan should sack him.

For one simple reason

They want him in there colours in 2 years time

If he test's positive I don't want him in Wigan colours in 2years time after his ban. I couldn't care where he ended up TBH.