Nick Cotric takes early plea, suspended three weeks

[Northern Raider]

Nick claimed it was one of the worst tackles he'd seen in all his years watching the game. He asked me to name 10 worse tackles. GE and I linked a handful of YouTube clips with tackles equally bad or worse. Of course 'equally bad or worse' is open to interpretation.

So I found 8 grade 3 tackles, plus 2 which were referred straight to judiciary - from a 4 year period.



Sent from my SM-G570F using Tapatalk

So you're arguing to prove a throwaway line that somebody said about a tackle being subjectively one of the worst they'd seen by going back over years of old footage to find examples where said poster is wrong?

Wow... when did you become this, man??

Haha. Nick challenged me to provide evidence and I have.

Sent from my SM-G570F using Tapatalk

Come on Gerg. A challenge from Pigman is up there with this.

[Botman]

Ofahengaue grade 3
Paulo grade 3
Fifita grade 3
Heighnington grade 3
Bird (8 week suspension referred straight to judiciary)
Bird grade 3
Laumope grade 3
Tagataese grade 3
Wright grade 3

After dinner tonight, ill respond to this
A few of these incidents I have memory of, others none at all, so I’ll do some googling

I’ve eliminated all except grade 3 because if it ain’t grade 3, im gonna assume it’s not in scope.

You provided me the list, so I owe you a response

[The Nickman]

Hahaha this is one of the more pointless discussions I've ever seen considering how subjective the term "one of the worst tackles I've ever seen" is, but tute on, Pig and gerg… tute on!!

[Botman]

Hahaha this is one of the more pointless discussions I've ever seen considering how subjective the term "one of the worst tackles I've ever seen" is, but tute on, Pig and gerg… tute on!!

Haha he’s hung up on a turn of phrase and thinks he has an “I gotcha” moment

It’s really insane because as said, even if he found 30 tackles worse than Cotric’s, the phrase “one of the worst I’ve seen” would still be an accurate description of the event!
Christ even the 101st worst tackle would put make it worse than 99.999% of tackles
And again the phrase “one of the worst I’ve seen” would actually, in the context of a 2.8m tackle sample size, be accurate!! Hahaha

But he thinks he’s finally got me, and I can’t have that.

[greeneyed]

Why not just admit you were wrong?

[gerg]

So, just checking... you're removing the throws graded as 2 or below?

* checks notes * including the Peachey grade 2 and the Thaiday grade 1 that only last night you agreed were in the spectrum. It's okay if you want to contradict yourself by now excluding those two, I just wanted to double check.

And lets not forget the challenge was 10. Not this goalposts shift to 30 that you're building into the narrative. And lets not forget that you did say .. in the time you've watched the game ... which you haven't defined. I've given you 10 grade 3 and above in a 4 year period.

Sent from my SM-G570F using Tapatalk

[The Nickman]

Why not just admit you were wrong?

Shhhh… I want to see where they go with this.

[gerg]

Why not just admit you were wrong?

It's much easier to ridicule posters like Gangers for not providing the 'howlers' evidence, and opposing your Unconscious bias topics without any of their evidence... But now I have gone and found a little evidence to challenge an expressed opinion I am ridiculed for a 'Gotcha moment'.... sad times.

Sent from my SM-G570F using Tapatalk

[gerg]

Why not just admit you were wrong?

Shhhh… I want to see where they go with this.

At least Lucy was entertaining.

Sent from my SM-G570F using Tapatalk

[Botman]

So, just checking... you're removing the throws graded as 2 or below?

* checks notes * including the Peachey grade 2 and the Thaiday grade 1 that only last night you agreed were in the spectrum. It's okay if you want to contradict yourself by now excluding those two, I just wanted to double check.

And lets not forget the challenge was 10. Not this goalposts shift to 30 that you're building into the narrative. And lets not forget that you did say .. in the time you've watched the game ... which you haven't defined. I've given you 10 grade 3 and above in a 4 year period.

Sent from my SM-G570F using Tapatalk

The list was long, I didn’t pay any attention to anything but the grades
Anything not grade 3 was removed

May I ask, Gerg... of the 10 incidents you’ve given me, which ones in particular do you think are more dangerous than Cotric’s and why?

[gangrenous]

If someone has NO record at the judiciary, I really can't see why you need to give someone 5 weeks for an accident. It doesn't take them 5 weeks to realise their error and fix it.
Hit the repeat offenders.

How would Nic Cotric missing 5 weeks help anyone or anything? It just dilutes game quality for fans.

Because it’s not just about Nick Cotric. Him getting a long suspension even as a clean skin acts as a deterrent for others.

If the worst you get is 3 weeks first time then you start moving to the point where maybe it’s worth risking it a bit more in the tackles until it goes wrong once and then pulling back. Giving everyone a chance at risking killing/disabling an opponent is not a great strategy.

[raiderskater]

I found this video from a google search.

https://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/sport ... bc8897046d

MInichello on Dugan was a ripper. Had 2 goes at him. LOL

Oh, I remember this. He got off at the judiciary because the Roosters' brown paper bags and "but he's a good guy!" made the judiciary say "oh yeah he didn't mean to do it" even though he clearly had two goes. That was one of the biggest judiciary jokes of all time.

EDIT: Jesus I forgot how angry I was about the Shillington one too - Woods was ****-stirring all game and Shillo didn't even get him with it.

[Botman]

First off, im giving you one of the Fa'aosa tackles (i think it was the second?) and the LOD tackle. Those IMO, were as or more dangerous than Cotric's. And im going to give you the peachy one as being as bad if not worse.
The Thiaday one, the player is dumped on his shoulder, not his head. Which is not to say it's not a horrendous tackle, but not IMO worse than Cotric's

So you get 3 off the bat.

Ofahengaue grade 3
Link: https://www.nrl.com/news/2017/08/05/rd- ... oncos-hls/
Comment: The player is tipped and is basically on the ground before Ofahengaue comes in over the top in the driving motion. It's pretty bad, i dont think it's worse than Nic's but it's close enough. I'll give it to you. You got 4.

Paulo grade 3
Link: https://www.parraeels.com.au/news/2015/ ... ea-eagles/
Comment: This was more a body slam than anything else. Definitely dangerous but he only goes beyond the horizontal point about 1 foot from the ground as he's being slung down. Not way thats more dangerous than Nic's

Fifita grade 3
Comment: He was successful in getting this charge downgraded to Grade 2. Out of scope.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-04-15/ ... o-/6396010

Heighnington grade 3
Link: I cant find any video of this.
Comment: Have zero memory of this incident. The still shots look VERY ugly though, and if you remember it better than i and you think it was. Ill be give you it, because im feeling generous. You're on 5 now.

Bird (8 week suspension referred straight to judiciary)
Link: Not required
Comment: This one i do remember, dont need a link, Bird flipped him but he didnt land on his head. Not through any good will or work by Bird mind you, there was two other aussie players involved in the tackle, i think Corey Parker was one, and he basically controlled the tackle once it got dangerous and the player landed on his back thanks to Parker. Could have been worse if not for him (and i could be wrong about which aussie player it was). You couldnt honestly say that player was ever in more dangerous position than Lafai was.

Bird grade 3
Comment: He was successful in getting this charge downgraded to Grade 2. Out of scope.
https://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/sport ... 35d6e0604a

Laumope grade 3
Link: I cant find any video of this.
Comment: Have zero memory of this incident.

Tagataese grade 3
Link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y-pc44Uec80
Comment: This one is pretty bad, just because the driving aspect of it is significant. Again, there is lifting, beyond the horizontal but from the same height as Nic's. Also some mitigating factors for Tagataese in that the other Cronulla player pulling him down contributes to the tackle, Nic has no such defence. IMO, Nic's was objectively more dangerous than this.

Wright grade 3
Link:https://www.nrl.com/news/2014/08/24/rd- ... iders-hls/
Comment: I didnt really need the video, because it was against us and i remember it fairly well. And that only gives you the breifest of brief looks at it, Definitely dangerous, but again i dont think you could say hand on heart that's worse than Nic's

---
I said at the time it was one of the worst i've seen, and since when prompted said i dont think i've seen 10 worse tackles than Nic's
So guys, we're now 3 days away from the incident, it's been charged, and dealt with. And you've exhausted youtube, you've dug up the judicary charges and we still arent at 10.

I think we can now put this to bed and say whilst you may scour the internet and game footage and find enough to get to 10, my comments that this tackle was one of the worst i had see has proven now to be fairly valid and accurate. And whilst the 10 worst maybe subject to some recency bias, we're here and still dont have 10 in the NRL era... so you can keep going if you like. But this really has served to confirm to me that my instincts on this were correct.

It was a terrible tackle, one of the worst we've seen and deserved a send off and a grade 3 charge.

[gerg]

How can you call some of them immediately out of scope simply because it's a grade 2 when the very first one (Peachey) is a grade 2.

Share your thoughts on the McLean tackle which was also a grade 2. A terrible accident no doubt but the most dangerous in the NRL era from an outcome perspective.

All that aside, and even through your own admission that is what ? 6 out of 4 years... out of a 20 year window. I know I don't need to explain statistics to you?

[Botman]

It's out of scope because im not spending my night tracking down highlight videos and news articles to get a bloody look at a bunch of grade 2 incidents, almost all of which will not sniff Nic.
If you want to do that, and post them, ill comment, as i did the Peachey one but im not doing that ****! haha.

Yeah im not really into outcome bias either. Outcomes are more or less random. I said it last night, if McLean did his tackle 100 times and Nic did his 100 times, i know which one is going to produce more catastrophic outcomes long term. And it's not McLean's.

[Northern Raider]

You guys are spending way too much time on this

[Botman]

All that aside, and even through your own admission that is what ? 6 out of 4 years... out of a 20 year window. I know I don't need to explain statistics to you?

No you dont, but someone prompts me to say "is this one of the 10 worst you've seen" and i think about it and say "yeah, i think it is" because im just thinking about things i remember. Im not sifting through youtube, cross referencing the judicary, checking old news articles before i say "yeah i think so".

I mean you've clung to this phrase and think it's some smoking gun... like i said, there is every chance you could find 10 tackles i'd agree that are worse. You haven't yet, but you could. AND IT WOULDNT MEAN ANYTHING other than to have a "haha, gotcha! Cotric's tackle was the 22nd worst tackle of the NRL era, not top 10! You clown!"

You're here arguing about whether it's the 5th or 10th or 15th or 20th in NRL history. In 20 years, 2,800,000 tackles and you're hung up on this like it's some amazing defence of Cotric's tackle. It's insane.

It was a terrible tackle. Extremely dangerous. It deserved to be sent off. It deserved a grade 3 charge. And it was one of the worst tackles i've ever seen.

[gerg]

You guys are spending way too much time on this

There really is no need to spend anymore time on it either. Any study would accept the results of a four year trial where the accepted figure of tackles in the spectrum is 5 or 6 (not sure which Nick settled on). But that works out to be over 1 per year - which over the NRL period works out to be well over 10.

Sent from my SM-G570F using Tapatalk

[gerg]

All that aside, and even through your own admission that is what ? 6 out of 4 years... out of a 20 year window. I know I don't need to explain statistics to you?

No you dont, but someone prompts me to say "is this one of the 10 worst you've seen" and i think about it and say "yeah, i think it is" because im just thinking about things i remember. Im not sifting through youtube, cross referencing the judicary, checking old news articles before i say "yeah i think so".

I mean you've clung to this phrase and think it's some smoking gun... like i said, there is every chance you could find 10 tackles i'd agree that are worse. You haven't yet, but you could. AND IT WOULDNT MEAN ANYTHING other than to have a "haha, gotcha! Cotric's tackle was the 22nd worst tackle of the NRL era, not top 10! You clown!"

You're here arguing about whether it's the 5th or 10th or 15th or 20th in NRL history. In 20 years, 2,800,000 tackles and you're hung up on this like it's some amazing defence of Cotric's tackle. It's insane.

It was a terrible tackle. Extremely dangerous. It deserved to be sent off. It deserved a grade 3 charge. And it was one of the worst tackles i've ever seen.

So let me get this right. You're criticising me now for proving you wrong?

Classic Pigman. Even when proven wrong you cannot simply say you got it wrong, but instead launch into your blathering idiot routine.

Sent from my SM-G570F using Tapatalk

[Botman]

Im saying if Nick Cotric's tackle is the 31st worst tackle in NRL history, as opposed to the 8th worse, it equates to about a 0.00000004% difference in terms of the dataset we're talking about. Me saying it's one of the worst tackles we've seen is accurate.
It's immaterial!

If you're so god damn hung up specifically this top 10 thing, fine. I dont care that you haven't found 10, because this element of the debate is absolutely irrevelent.
So here you go.
It's probably not one of the worst 10 tackles in NRL history. I was wrong, by a maximum margin of about 0.000004%. And for that i humbly apologise! I will never recover from the shame.

Now your turn. Can you at least admit this tackle was terribly dangerous, worthy of punishment he's been given and one of the worst tackles we've seen in NRL (not top 10, but certainly worse than 99.9999% of tackles)?

[gerg]

Ok, let me explain.

It was a dangerous tackle and I don't believe I ever said it didn't deserve the punishment it received. We have a different perspective on how dangerous it is comparatively. I believe a lot of these flipping above the horizontal tackles - where the player can put his hand out and touch the ground are less dangerous than when a player is lifted higher and then tackled (whether it is on his shoulder, neck or on the flat of his back).

In martial arts it is a very common technique to have the hand as the first point of contact with the ground in breakfall techniques. To guide your body, to assess the danger to your neck and shift your head and gauge the timing and to attempt to minimise the impact or head injury risk. If you lift a player he does not have that extra sensory or comfort/reassurance of touch.

I've seen players penalised and reported for tackles where the player has his upper body already on the ground and his feet are lifted and they don't need to be lifted much to go beyond the horizontal because their shoulders are already on the ground.

Sent from my SM-G570F using Tapatalk

[The Nickman]

You guys are spending way too much time on this

Haha it’s amazing!

I... I can’t look away!

[Beejay]

If someone has NO record at the judiciary, I really can't see why you need to give someone 5 weeks for an accident. It doesn't take them 5 weeks to realise their error and fix it.
Hit the repeat offenders.

How would Nic Cotric missing 5 weeks help anyone or anything? It just dilutes game quality for fans.

Because it’s not just about Nick Cotric. Him getting a long suspension even as a clean skin acts as a deterrent for others.

If the worst you get is 3 weeks first time then you start moving to the point where maybe it’s worth risking it a bit more in the tackles until it goes wrong once and then pulling back. Giving everyone a chance at risking killing/disabling an opponent is not a great strategy.

Well he did get 3 weeks.
So by your logic there’s few blokes running around assured in their strategy to risk disabling other players.

Which is rubbish of coarse. As is your argument.

[Billy Walker]

You guys are spending way too much time on this

Haha it’s amazing!

I... I can’t look away!

I’ve got Gergreg slightly ahead on points at the moment but Piggy could make a comeback.

I’ve lost track of who is arguing what but I think Gergreg has provided better evidence and arguments to make whatever case he was making.

Piggy has twisted and turned and looks on the ropes here. Can he lift himself off the canvas.......??

[greeneyed]

Didn't we prove Nick wrong last night? He's still going?

[The Nickman]

Didn't we prove Nick wrong last night? He's still going?

Haha what’s this “we” business, white man?

[Botman]

Didn't we prove Nick wrong last night? He's still going?

The only one still going is you.
I realised last night what the end game here was... and now it all makes perfect sense. You guys genuinely think this is just another case where the poor raiders have been picked on. And you hone in on some throw away line in the midsts of a discussion because you think that distinction actually matters to the tackle.

And somehow in your minds by getting to point where Nic Cotric's tackle was the 15th worst tackle in NRL history, or the 21st, or what ever, and not top 10, it validates that feeling of being hard done by. That someone how if Nic Cotric's tackle was in the top 0.00001071% (30th) of dangerous tackles made since the establishment of the NRL, rather than the top 0.00000357% (10th) then it's a huge win and proves this was not a send off and was not a grade three and the poor raiders have copped the rough end again

And if that's where you're at, then there is nothing i or any else can do to help you.

[greeneyed]

I’ve stated clearly what I think about the send off and grading.

[The Nickman]

I’ve stated clearly what I think about the send off and grading.

I don't think what you've said previously contradicts anything PigRickNickPrick said in his last post, old friend.

[gerg]

Didn't we prove Nick wrong last night? He's still going?

The only one still going is you.
I realised last night what the end game here was... and now it all makes perfect sense. You guys genuinely think this is just another case where the poor raiders have been picked on. And you hone in on some throw away line in the midsts of a discussion because you think that distinction actually matters to the tackle.

And somehow in your minds by getting to point where Nic Cotric's tackle was the 15th worst tackle in NRL history, or the 21st, or what ever, and not top 10, it validates that feeling of being hard done by. That someone how if Nic Cotric's tackle was in the top 0.00001071% (30th) of dangerous tackles made since the establishment of the NRL, rather than the top 0.00000357% (10th) then it's a huge win and proves this was not a send off and was not a grade three and the poor raiders have copped the rough end again

And if that's where you're at, then there is nothing i or any else can do to help you.

No... no, that's not it at all. You keep stating 10 worse tackles was a throwaway line but you actually challenged me and GE to come up with 10 worse tackles (in the NRL era). We both linked a handful of tackles which were arguably as bad or worse and you ... YOU, were not going to be satisfied until 10 tackles were provided to you.

It's worth noting that you started laying the platform nice and early that 10 didn't really matter despite still insisting on being shown 10. Even when I gave you a list of 10 from a 4 year period, you whittled it down to 5 or 6 and meekly said it still wasn't 10 but had to concede that 5 from 4 years was easily going to convert to over 10 in the NRL.

You got it wrong but instead of just accepting you got it wrong you and your annoying sidekick are going to twist this into something.
Is it totally pathetic, **** oath it is, but you led us here.

Sent from my SM-G570F using Tapatalk

[The Nickman]

Haha don't keep dragging me into this Gerg, I just find it amusing watching BOTH OF YOU squabbling over a throwaway line about a subjective opinion that really doesn't mean anything!

You're both as bad as one another here.

[gerg]

Haha don't keep dragging me into this Gerg, I just find it amusing watching BOTH OF YOU squabbling over a throwaway line about a subjective opinion that really doesn't mean anything!

You're both as bad as one another here.

You don't want to be dragged into it but here you are...

Did you actually read what I wrote? You can insist that it was a throwaway line all you like but he asked me repeatedly to show him 10. I was just providing what he asked for.... if I didn't provide the 10 he (and you) would be carrying on like blathering idiots over how I couldn't come up with 10. On the flipside I provide evidence that there is no doubt that 10 could be provided and he shifts to some other nonsense and carries on like a blathering idiot.

The pair of you just can't accept being wrong...

Sent from my SM-G570F using Tapatalk

[The Nickman]

Haha don't keep dragging me into this Gerg, I just find it amusing watching BOTH OF YOU squabbling over a throwaway line about a subjective opinion that really doesn't mean anything!

You're both as bad as one another here.

You don't want to be dragged into it but here you are...

Did you actually read what I wrote? You can insist that it was a throwaway line all you like but he asked me repeatedly to show him 10. I was just providing what he asked for.... if I didn't provide the 10 he (and you) would be carrying on like blathering idiots over how I couldn't come up with 10. On the flipside I provide evidence that there is no doubt that 10 could be provided and he shifts to some other nonsense and carries on like a blathering idiot.

The pair of you just can't accept being wrong...

Sent from my SM-G570F using Tapatalk

Wait, wait... how am I wrong here?? Because you and Nocko are arguing over something as pointless as a throwaway line declaring "one of the worst tackles I've ever seen"? That's a strange line of attack gerg, you sure everything's alright at home? Here to chat if you need it.

[Botman]

Well congrats Gerg. You've successfully argued i was wrong, and that Nic Cotric's tackle probably wasn't in the top 0.00000357% of most dangerous performed in the NRL era. And instead it's somewhere between that figure and being in the top 0.00001821% of dangerous performed in the NRL era.

So i'll say it again. I was wrong.
Great job by you, Greg. You must be proud.

[The Nickman]

Good one Pigman. You admitting that you're wrong means that I'M now wrong too for whatever reason.