Quote sally cinnamon="sally cinnamon"The problem with Hock now is he has become a bit overrated.
Before his drugs ban he carried Wigan and was becoming close to the kind of influence that Farrell was when he was at Wigan - at that point he could have kicked on to becoming one of the best players in the world, possibly the best attacking forward in the world. But after his ban, he was noticeably less influential at Wigan and whilst he's still a good player so fans still rate him highly, he seems to have plateaued and declined.
When a player that everyone thinks is great, ends up at lower clubs in his late 20s its a sign that he's in a downward spiral from which he will not get out. It happened to Bobby Goulding going round Huddersfield, Wakefield, Salford and it happened in football to Gazza ending up at Middlesborough and Everton. Hock is not the player we thought he was going to be. He is good and has his moments, but he is not the calibre of player that could have taken hold of a game against the Aussies and turned it on his own, which say Sonny Bill Williams could for NZ. He's not good enough to justify turning a blind eye to his behaviour.
Hock still has his fans and I expect after we get beat by Australia, he will become seen as a martyr in the eyes of some England fans who will wonder if Hock had played we might have won, but thats nonsense he is not that good or influential and he is a potential liability as well.
Hock might well end up having a good world cup now, because he won't be playing. The criticism will be targeted at Sinfield - a true professional who would never have let his teammates down like Hock has, and Hock will be talked about as the potential saviour of English rugby if only he could get an international call up, but if that was true, he wouldn't be playing for clubs like Widnes and Salford.'"
Not often I agree with you Sali but that's a good post.
