His first year is about a 3rd of what he was on and thats before he was going to get his raise at the end of that season so its quite close.

You're an idiot

I was under the impression he could not sign for any club until his ban was up.



As to the length of any deal he may sign rumours four or five year deals are way OTT IMO because as others have posted we have no idea what sort of form he will have when he returns and for that matter we don't know how well whoever else is in the team at that time will be playing.



It's not beyond the realms of possibility he will be surplus to requirements and so for Wigan to commit to a four or five year deal [inow[/i is IMO completely stupid.



If he comes back at all for me it would be on a "pay as you play" deal for a season to see how he went. At best I'd give him a 12 month deal with options in the clubs favour for longer. But a straight four or five year deal? I can't believe IL would take such risky action.



Dave

Definatly at least 4 years if my memory serves me right on less than a 3rd he was on.

I can understand the club putting a long term deal on the table for Hock if they think it means they'll get him for peanuts. To have a player of his ability back on much reduced terms will be superb.



He just needs to keep behaving himself and keep proving to the club that he's doing that.



I hope everything works out.

But you are assuming he will still have the ability and ignoring what else may have happened to the side by then. As I said he may be surplus to requirements.



What happens if he isn't the player he once was and we end up stuck with him for four of five years? We have had enough of that sort of thing already IMO.



Dave

I said the club can have a long term deal on the table but that doesn't mean it will or can be signed until is ban is finished anyway. If come July next year we don't need him then it's the clubs right to pull that deal and leave him to find a new club.



Something drastic will have to happen in our playing staff for us not to want to sign up a player of Hocks abilities for a minimul salary though. If things don't work out because he's not the player he once was then fair enough but I very much doubt that will be the case. He should be wiser and by all accounts is fitter then ever and you don't lose natural abilty. He'll still only be 27 when his ban's finished aswell so he'll have time on his side.

exactaly my thoughts too

Id have give Flanagan a 5 year deal over Hock.

Flanagan wouldn't get near the present Wigan side.

He would be behind Bailey, O'Loughlin, Hansen, Mossop and Joel Tomkins.

Then there is Liam Farrell



I can see Hock coming back as a prop forward.

Bailey will have gone and we will still have O'Loughlin, Hansen, Mossop ,Joel Tomkins and Liam Farrell.



No doubt at least one more talented back row forward will also emerge from the junior sides.

he is already contracted in aus for 2 years dont think he will be in any big rush to come back

Flanagan's on the bench for Wests this weekend. I hope he really comes on there.



Re Hock, I hope he keeps as fit as he can and comes back desperate to play again, as physically he's a tremendous second rower.