Cotchin

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
You understand what concussion is right ??? Clearly not. As someone whos footy career was ended by his Neurosurgeon I can tell you clearly you do not need to be hit in the head to suffer from mild head trauma.

Concussion is regularly caused by the brain bouncing inside the head. You can take a clean hip and shoulder to the chest and if your moving fast enough your brain keeps moving while your body stops - its called inertia. Whiplash can cause exactly the same affect. The footage is pretty clear there is no high contact there... It's a contact sport, it deserved weeks but 4 lets be serious .. meanwhile firito openly belts the littlest guy on the field and doesn't even get a week.

exactly great post
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Top of his shoulder hits the bottom of his head = head high = 4 weeks = coward!
Glenn Archer board. Made a career out of knocking blokes and is held up on a pedastal by North fans.
 
There is a lesson for Trent Cotchin in this.

Next time you are about to go for a mark/spoil, instead of bracing and bumping, try and look like you are punching the ball and knock Wright square in the temple, so that way he is out for a good month. At least that way, like Cloke the week before, you get only 2 weeks instead of 4.
 
Glenn Archer board. Made a career out of knocking blokes and is held up on a pedastal by North fans.
Made a career out of being the hardest bloke at the football, and never showing any fear. That's why he's held on a pedestal.

Also a dual premiership player, something you blokes haven't seen since Hungry retired.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Show me where he did not touch his head.

Just as I thought, you have nothing. You

:eek::eek::eek: now you're just embarrassing yourself. You.

I don't need to bc I'm simply asking for proof of your assumption that he hit him in the head with a shoulder. I am not stating he didn't do it, just want confirmation/PROOF otherwise how can you assume he did it and itwasnt a result of whiplash? I thought our legal systems mantra was innocent til proven guilty ie prove ones guilt, therefore put up or shutup sunshine, where is the vision?
 
Made a career out of being the hardest bloke at the football, and never showing any fear. That's why he's held on a pedestal.

Also a dual premiership player, something you blokes haven't seen since Hungry retired.
Kane Johnson:D
 
Yeah exactly the same Dr Feelgood.:rolleyes:

My apologies I deserved that , It's a mistake I make regularly. I write a sentence with punctuation and content that may require you to actually understand what your commenting about. It's cool I won't assume you can read nor understand what it is your talking about again.
 
God North supporters are insular! THIS IS NOT ABOUT YOU! Does anyone seriously believe that is worth 4 weeks? Disgusting!
Even your players don't agree with the MRP..
 
Hey it looks like I am not the only one that thinks it was a cowards act. Wright may miss 2 - happy with Cotchin missing double that.

You know full well that he only went to hospital for observation because the North doctor had better things to do than watch over him. Won't be the least bit surprised to see him play this week. He's probably got Boris to keep him company anyway.

Since you're the genius - how is this different from Enright barrelling Adam Selwood after he'd disposed of the ball, putting Selwood out for 3 weeks and having no case to answer? I'm not arguing that Cotchin did not deserve a penalty, but there isn't a skerrick of consistency to these rulings.

This system is so bad, it's mad.
 
God North supporters are insular! THIS IS NOT ABOUT YOU! Does anyone seriously believe that is worth 4 weeks? Disgusting!
Even your players don't agree with the MRP..

Aww, come on....leave them alone. They're just trying to make themselves relevant in the latest news story. They know no one cares about them and never will.
 
My apologies I deserved that , It's a mistake I make regularly. I write a sentence with punctuation and content that may require you to actually understand what your commenting about. It's cool I won't assume you can read nor understand what it is your talking about again.

Don't sweat it-simple rookie error.

Some dipshits around here still have trouble with simple spelling of hard words like "your' & "you're", let alone comprehension of a structured sentence.
 
:eek::eek::eek: now you're just embarrassing yourself. You.

I don't need to bc I'm simply asking for proof of your assumption that he hit him in the head with a shoulder. I am not stating he didn't do it, just want confirmation/PROOF otherwise how can you assume he did it and itwasnt a result of whiplash? I thought our legal systems mantra was innocent til proven guilty ie prove ones guilt, therefore put up or shutup sunshine, where is the vision?

I will post it when I get it back from the appeals tribunal. They had every angle, every piece of footage and all agreed he was hit in the head.

He is inncoent until proven guilty - tonight the verdict was guilty. He had his case heard - Tigers put the best possible case forward and he was found guilty. Game over - suck it up princess.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top