Re: Gareth Hock : Wed Jul 10, 2013 9:53 pm  

HARDMAN wrote:

welsh wizard wrote:

Hardman what makes you think that the rfl will cut 4 teams to let a championship team and toulouse in?
None of the championship sides meet the franchise criteria so really none of the current SL side should be cut

With regards to toulouse never say never but how can you let a side that doesnt get decent crowds,ok they have a backer but admitting them to SL will be another gamble like letting in paris,gateshead and crusaders

Just the noises coming out of Toulouse that they think they will be in. Sounds as if though a championship club won't be promoted that potentially means 3 clubs could be relegated. Looks like it may be us, Cas and London to lose out.

Yes ive seen the liverpool echo report but it goes nowhere to say they will definitely get in for the 2015 season,hes just making big noises stating the reasons they should be in the comp,for me i truly believe,unless we finish in the bottom 2 for this and next season ,we WILL be in Sooper dooper league for the 2015 season,cmon everyone believe

Re: Gareth Hock : Thu Jul 11, 2013 6:22 pm  

I think if we can come to some arrangement with Hock to sever his contract it would probably be for the best for both parties.

What are we really getting by having him here for the rest of the season? An undoubtedly talented player who for whatever reason isn't performing at not only to the level expected of him but also of other players in the team of a lower standing and maybe more importantly on a lower wage.

What's he getting? To be the go to guy when the game's lost in a team that struggle hugely away from home but at home have some pretty decent games against bigger clubs. At this stage of his career even with the drugs ban it's probably not where he saw himself given his own talents.

Next year we'll have Tickle and be much better for it provided he stays clear of injury. Whilst Hock may be the better player given the players around him he looks a bit of a show pony, put him in a good team and he'll be a very good player. Tickle fits us better, every team needs a player like him, I don't mean that to denigrate him I think he's a great player I just think he's more solid than flashy which given our low position in the table might be better for us.

Re: Gareth Hock : Fri Jul 12, 2013 8:16 am  

Jesus Christ even if he's not playing world class he's easily one of our most dangerous players on the park!!! He was getting slated around me at Bradford despite him having a direct / indirect role in the majority of our scores!!!

Would you lot rather a second row of Leuluai and Lawton??? Give me strength. Demand top players get them and criticise their every nice and want them released... Can't win!!!

Re: Gareth Hock : Fri Jul 12, 2013 9:02 am  

J20 wrote:

Jesus Christ even if he's not playing world class he's easily one of our most dangerous players on the park!!! He was getting slated around me at Bradford despite him having a direct / indirect role in the majority of our scores!!!

Would you lot rather a second row of Leuluai and Lawton??? Give me strength. Demand top players get them and criticise their every nice and want them released... Can't win!!!

He may be world class but a widnes he has been poop apart from the odd moment in certain games.....the guy has been a liability in more ways than one.........but from your posting record on here and tiw i expect nothing
but blinkered opinions from you!

Re: Gareth Hock : Fri Jul 12, 2013 9:32 am  

How cute...

He's won us more than he's lost us IMO. And I'd much rather see Hock knocking on trying to offload in attack than Leuluai dropping a dolly trying to clear our lines.

You also can't really moan about the length of ban he got post Workington yet then call him a liability for it. I'd still rather have him than not by FAR!

The Hock or Tickle debate could be one but in really it's not as we have Hock for 2013 and Tickle from 2014.

Brown was the one getting pelters from earlier losses. When you look at it it's actually players like Phelps and Allen who have missed 'simple' tackles in games that have cost us points!

Blaming Hock is easy an fine if that's what you want to do but suggesting we should pay him off is one of the most ludicrous things I've ever read, simple as that!

Re: Gareth Hock : Fri Jul 12, 2013 3:24 pm  

J20 wrote:

How cute...

He's won us more than he's lost us IMO. And I'd much rather see Hock knocking on trying to offload in attack than Leuluai dropping a dolly trying to clear our lines.

You also can't really moan about the length of ban he got post Workington yet then call him a liability for it. I'd still rather have him than not by FAR!

The Hock or Tickle debate could be one but in really it's not as we have Hock for 2013 and Tickle from 2014.

Brown was the one getting pelters from earlier losses. When you look at it it's actually players like Phelps and Allen who have missed 'simple' tackles in games that have cost us points!

Blaming Hock is easy an fine if that's what you want to do but suggesting we should pay him off is one of the most ludicrous things I've ever read, simple as that!

He's won us more than he's lost us IMO..............That comment is laughable,he has played well for ten minutes here and there in certain games and had a stormer against dire but he has'nt been a big enough influence in any games to say he's actually won us games.

Re: Gareth Hock : Fri Jul 12, 2013 3:33 pm  

It's easy to forget who would be replacing him in the side in most games.

Maybe winning games alone is stretching but major point is people acting like he's costing points I.e. losing us games! Which is far harde a statement to attach anything too! You don't get many back rowers involved in as many scores as Hock is. Passing wise haven't seen any better.