Cotchin

[Ghostwriter]

Looks like Joran van der Sloot.

 

[Dazb86]

Pretty strange from Cotchin.

 

[Greggy]

I've seen cotch go the bump in the marking contest a few times, was a bit unlucky with the way Wright turned his body, was clearly trying to bump the ball out of his arms just judged it badly. The AFL are trying to stop any body contact that could detract from the game, thus allowing a more free flowing ballet style, so I suspect he'll get a week or two.

 

[taraba]

Geez, what the hell is our once great game coming to? Not much in it at all. Fellas, we're playing a contact sport here and sometimes you get hurt. I've seen the replays and it's not nearly half as bad as some are making this out to be.

Enjoy the win Roos supporters and don't be precious.

 

[Kings Army]

I've seen cotch go the bump in the marking contest a few times, was a bit unlucky with the way Wright turned his body, was clearly trying to bump the ball out of his arms just judged it badly. The AFL are trying to stop any body contact that could detract from the game, thus allowing a more free flowing ballet style, so I suspect he'll get a week or two.

So you would be happy for a the Tigers players to be hit like that every week? You cannot send blokes to hospital and then say the game is getting soft when you cop weeks for it. If that is allowed in the game then look out - teams will be finishing the game with 10 players.

It takes ZERO courage to hit a bloke from behind.

 

[Agetigers]

So you would be happy for a the Tigers players to be hit like that every week? You cannot send blokes to hospital and then say the game is getting soft when you cop weeks for it. If that is allowed in the game then look out - teams will be finishing the game with 10 players.

It takes ZERO courage to hit a bloke from behind.

I agree wasnt a good look from Cotch. But in saying that, there wasnt a hell of alot in it, didnt make head high contact which might save him. Thats not the way he plays footy very strange from him.

 

[Brad Roo]

Look. I saw it clear as day.

Cotch was running in with the intention to mark the ball, when Sammy backed back and made first position to mark.

Cotchin the turned side on and got Sammy with the shoulder.

I personally don't think he was intending to be malicious, but you must always make the ball your first objective.

This is where young Trent stuffed up, and he is going to have to pay a penalty for that.

2 weeks.

 

[Gak Attack]

Look. I saw it clear as day.

Cotch was running in with the intention to mark the ball, when Sammy backed back and made first position to mark.

Cotchin the turned side on and got Sammy with the shoulder.

I personally don't think he was intending to be malicious, but you must always make the ball your first objective.

This is where young Trent stuffed up, and he is going to have to pay a penalty for that.

2 weeks.

For once I agree with you, 2 weeks is a fair punishment. Pretty disappointed people calling Cotchin dirty and a dog though... hes done one dumb thing and been a good fair player the rest of the time. Like others will bring up though, its probably less contact wise than Hille's hit and he hit high too. Not good obviously with Wright getting hurt and hopefully the kid is OK.

 

[Agetigers]

Look. I saw it clear as day.

Cotch was running in with the intention to mark the ball, when Sammy backed back and made first position to mark.

Cotchin the turned side on and got Sammy with the shoulder.

I personally don't think he was intending to be malicious, but you must always make the ball your first objective.

This is where young Trent stuffed up, and he is going to have to pay a penalty for that.

2 weeks.

Agree with everything. But how many times have we seen this sort of indiscression not penalised. A precedent needs to be set for this sort of thing cant have blokes getting cited one week and not on other occassions.

At worst BTW 1 week. hes got a good record.

 

[Wells Train]

I agree wasnt a good look from Cotch. But in saying that, there wasnt a hell of alot in it, didnt make head high contact which might save him. Thats not the way he plays footy very strange from him.

Yeah I agree, i think he could have tried to spoil and still caused some pain with the knee in the back. If anything he was just careless when he could have either spoiled or stopped all together and guarded the mark. I think its worth looking at and maybe him getting a week tops. I hate how the MRP takes into account the injury when they hand out penalties. If it was more side on contact I don't think Wright would have ended up as hurt. He is very slight build for an AFL footballer which wouldn't have helped. The contact was deliberate but I don't believe Cotchin would have wanted to put him in hospital. 1 Week move on.......

 

[theyellowsash]

Look. I saw it clear as day.

Cotch was running in with the intention to mark the ball, when Sammy backed back and made first position to mark.

Cotchin the turned side on and got Sammy with the shoulder.

I personally don't think he was intending to be malicious, but you must always make the ball your first objective.

This is where young Trent stuffed up, and he is going to have to pay a penalty for that.

2 weeks.

thats exactly how i saw it and why i reckon he shouldnt go for it. he was going to the contest and was just late. the mrp are trying to protect players but they still need to be allowed to brace themselves for contact. cotchin realized that he wouldnt make it but was already too committed (you cant just stop instantly on the spot) and braced himself for the contact. it wouldnt been much more dangerous if he hadve gone in with arms flaining, possible coat-hangering the bloke or dislocating a shoulder or something.

 

[Ghostwriter]

The tribunal need to invoke the 'reverse courage' rule and automatically double the penalty whenever a player is reported doing an act which is deemed cowardly when compared to the act which the victim is in the process of doing, ie Sammy Wright, going back with the flight, deemed by all good judges as one of the most courageous acts in football, compared to what Cotchin did which was very low on the courage scale, the penalty automatically doubles this would quickly send a message to cowardly acts on a football field.

 

[Tas]

My impression was that he was caught in two minds about what to do and in the heat of the moment made contact a bit late.

Unfortunately for him Wright ended up pretty crook and had to go to hospital, because it was late and did some damage it is unlikely he will do well with the MRP Wheel of Misfortune.

 

[Gak Attack]

The tribunal need to invoke the 'reverse courage' rule and automatically double the penalty whenever a player is reported doing an act which is deemed cowardly when compared to the act which the victim is in the process of doing, ie Sammy Wright, going back with the flight, deemed by all good judges as one of the most courageous acts in football, compared to what Cotchin did which was very low on the courage scale, the penalty automatically doubles this would quickly send a message to cowardly acts on a football field.

Turn it up Sir! There have been far more 'cowardly' acts this year than what Cotchin did. Hell David Hille has done worse and didn't even get weeks.. It sucks the kid got hurt but come on now... I think you are forgetting how your boys used to play footy... I remember one of your heroes down there laying plenty of late bumps! For the record I didn't think he was a coward... like I don't think Cotchin is.

 

[Brad Roo]

For once I agree with you, 2 weeks is a fair punishment. Pretty disappointed people calling Cotchin dirty and a dog though... hes done one dumb thing and been a good fair player the rest of the time. Like others will bring up though, its probably less contact wise than Hille's hit and he hit high too. Not good obviously with Wright getting hurt and hopefully the kid is OK.

I realise that Cotchin is usually a fair footballer, but what pissed off the North supporters was, even though Wright made first position, Cotchin still could have gone for the mark or attempted a spoil instead of turning his shoulder and having intent to make that collision.

It was dumb footy on Trents behalf, and it didn't look good from the stands.

He'll get a couple and most likely will never do something that silly again.

Sammy Wright will be alright. I'd expect him to play next week.

 

[Rustof]

He went for the contest and had to make a split second decision to either back out or make a contest, unfortunately his decision turned out wrong. Calling it a weak or dog act is pretty low, after the incident some of the frees North recieved were pretty piss weak.

 

[Barnzy]

A weak dog skunk act.

3 weeks.

Reported.

Shoulder Charge

Head High Contact.

Wright in hospital with concussion.




He could even get 4 weeks.

Look. I saw it clear as day.

Cotch was running in with the intention to mark the ball, when Sammy backed back and made first position to mark.

Cotchin the turned side on and got Sammy with the shoulder.

I personally don't think he was intending to be malicious, but you must always make the ball your first objective.

This is where young Trent stuffed up, and he is going to have to pay a penalty for that.

2 weeks.

No wonder people don't take you seriously and think you're an idiot, even your own fans. In your first post it was a "weak dog skunk act" and he will go for 3 weeks, your next post you state "he could even get 4 weeks" then your last post you say you don't think he was intending to be malicious and will only get 2 weeks. Why don't you stick to one story.

He was going to contest the ball and had to make a split second decision and probably made the wrong one. Cotchin is a ball player, even your own coach said that, he's no sniper. There wasn't much in it, no head high contact. He will probably get 1-2 weeks, 5-10 years ago though this sort of thing wouldn't even be looked at though.

 

[Ron The Bear]

The AAP report says the incident is "sure to earn the Tiger a suspension".

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/roos-lead-tigers-in-the-wet/story-e6frf9if-1225893583743

Either it's a lot worse than I thought, or the report was written by a Collingwood supporter.

 

[Brad Roo]

No wonder people don't take you seriously and think you're an idiot, even your own fans. In your first post it was a "weak dog skunk act" and he will go for 3 weeks, your next post you state "he could even get 4 weeks" then your last post you say you don't think he was intending to be malicious and will only get 2 weeks. Why don't you stick to one story.

He was going to contest the ball and had to make a split second decision and probably made the wrong one. Cotchin is a ball player, even your own coach said that, he's no sniper. There wasn't much in it, no head high contact. He will probably get 1-2 weeks, 5-10 years ago though this sort of thing wouldn't even be looked at though.

1) It was a weak act. I take nothing back in relation to that. Cotchin could have gone for the ball.

2) I first thought 3 weeks, then stated he "could" even get 4 weeks.

3) A Richmond supporter bought up the fact of Cotchins clean record and I then revised his penalty to 2 weeks. Fairly simple series of events to deduce if you use your brains.

4) I honestly don't give 2 stuffs about what a bunch of faceless strangers on the internet think about me. It means nothing. The worms in my garden have more effect on my life.

 

[Barnzy]

1) It was a weak act. I take nothing back in relation to that. Cotchin could have gone for the ball.

2) I first thought 3 weeks, then stated he "could" even get 4 weeks.

3) A Richmond supporter bought up the fact of Cotchins clean record and I then revised his penalty to 2 weeks. Fairly simple series of events to deduce if you use your brains.

4) I honestly don't give 2 stuffs about what a bunch of faceless strangers on the internet think about me. It means nothing. The worms in my garden have more effect on my life.

You said it was a "weak dog skunk act" then said you "personally don't think he was intending to be malicious". Those 2 posts contradict each other.

 

[Brad Roo]

You said it was a "weak dog skunk act" then said you "personally don't think he was intending to be malicious". Those 2 posts contradict each other.

"A weak dog skunk act" is an act of cowardice in my book.

Cotchin could have been a man and left himself open by going for the ball, but he squibbed it and turned his shoulder to protect himself and take out the North player.

 

[Ron The Bear]

Have seen the replay and it doesn't look great. Clearly cocked the shoulder beforehand. 1-2 weeks.

 

[Kings Army]

He went for the contest and had to make a split second decision to either back out or make a contest, unfortunately his decision turned out wrong. Calling it a weak or dog act is pretty low, after the incident some of the frees North recieved were pretty piss weak.[/quote]


The tiger flogs and the frees.

1) your novice ruckmen have to learn not to run past the ball at bounces and make contact. It is a free every single time. Dumb football!

2) Your fowards had as done cold a few times for holding the ball - they have to learn to roll or turn the players instead of carry them forward and end up in their back. Dumb football!

Roos had more frees because we were harder at the ball and did not do stupid things like 1 and 2 above.

It is so much easier to blame the umps then your coach and players for todays poor performance.

 

[Z_K]

Ordinary effort.

He didn't "brace" himself or contest the footy. He clearly tucked up and went in to do some damage. I don't care if he gets weeks or not, makes no difference to North, but the bloke marking the footy is completely unprotected and should reasonably expect not to be sent to hospital by a bloke who was 3 yards off being in the contest.

 

[Ron The Bear]

2) Your fowards had as done cold a few times for holding the ball - they have to learn to roll or turn the players instead of carry them forward and end up in their back. Dumb football!

Tough when North players' knees fold like a house of cards. Dishonest football.