Morley article on front page

[Inept]

Is Warrick Nicolson a member of these forums or did he just lift a load of information off them in that article about morley? Cause i'm sure someone said some of those paragraphs in here.

"Go out next weekend in your game (if you play league/union) and carry the ball on the angle towards the outside of your defender, hold onto it too long, see if you run into the bloke and see if the momentum you and the defender are carrying doesn't result in a significant body clash."

I hope i'm not going crazy but i'm positive i read this like a week ago.

 

[Balmain_Boy]

Herehttp://forums.leagueunlimited.com/showthread.php?p=2206575&highlight=%22significant+body+clash%22#post2206575

I'm guessing prodigiousman is Warrick Nicholson - I doubt it has been lifted.

 

[TooheysNew]

Yep. One and the same.

 

[taxidriver]

the article should be identified as a propoganda or at the very least an opinion piece.

I wasted a few minutes reading that tripe.

 

[Bring Back the Spliff]

Hah! I was coming in here to comment on JUST this very article after just reading it!

What a great, steaming LOAD OF!!!

I agree Morley was a tad unlucky to be suspended - I don't agree with this new rule at all...but still - bottom line remains that it is a rule....To me - a penalty to Souths would have been FAR more valuable and appropriate for this 'crime' of Morley's however.

But to dare even compare that incident to the Simmonds/Marshall one - is truly laughable! Now bearing in mind I am NO Saints fan...at ALL - but it was perfectly Simmonds knew what he was doing at all times - he knew where he was going and the head and/or shoulder clash was PURELY accidental - to anyone with eyes - just 'one of those things'.

WHEREAS - Morley turned his head a good half a second before impact...and shut his eyes. Thus exposing himself to ANYthing happening..which duly - then did.

To draw the same correlation as this NSC writer did that "You go out and play a game of footy this weekend and see what happens blah blah blah" - Hell...you talk to anyone that has ever played footy that even remotely knows what theyre talking about...and they will tell you - even the most thick-headed front-rower knows - you close your eyes, turn your head and launch your body into a tackle...then you are just ASKING for trouble! You just....don't ...do it. Unless you are prepared to wear the consequences when this approach inevitibly goes pear-shaped!

Intentional? No WAY! Reckless...No. But careless - Yes indeed!...Morley knew the new rules - he MUST have...so what he did was very risky indeed. And now he's paid the penalty.

So - tough...Cry me a river Ricky...Whoops, sorry - allow me to speak your language for a second - Whinge me a Wiver Wicky!

 

[Raider_69]

as dilly said, prod man is warrick nicholson
have been trying to get him aboard the raiders forum 7's team for 2 years now :lol:

 

[Bring Back the Spliff]

as dilly said, prod man is warrick nicholson
have been trying to get him aboard the raiders forum 7's team for 2 years now :lol:

based on the article of which this thread is about....Why???

 

[TooheysNew]

Controversial, it scores well in F7s.

 

[Bring Back the Spliff]

Wow. Ok.

What about bollocks, then?...How do they score???

 

[DJ1]

Is this a good example of the quality of work completed by the Warrick Nicholson Sports Consultancy?

LOL

 

[Steel Dragon]

Youre all full of sh!t. (anyone who thinks morley is guilty that is)

1stly - im neither a souths or easts fan.

secondly - get someone morley's height to reinact a tackle on someone walkers height. I did it and from the same angle morley and walker are running at there is no where else for my body to go but in contact with the smaller guy's head. Not coz im targetting it, but because in that movement thats where bodies go.

very few angles of the tackle show it properly, but the one with the shot of morley's back shows he was attempting to make a proper tackle.

*Steel Dragon then retired back to his steel cave, to await the onslaught of derogatory comments and the barrage of morley bashing, he knew was inevitable after a posting such as this....*

 

[Raider_69]

based on the article of which this thread is about....Why???

weather you agree with the topic or not, its well written, is an original take on a major topic in league and as dilly said, controversial, it would score very well in F7's

 

[Bring Back the Spliff]

Well - Fair enough....One can't really argue with that, eh?

But this is never about Forum 7's - if this is the kind of tosh that gets posted in that compettion...Then it really should stay there!

It really is clutching at straws, comparing the 2 incidents which seemed to be the entire crux of the 'argument' put forth by this bloke.....And the point I was trying to make, I guess - I'd just expect FAR better vetting of articles that make the front page on this website.

 

[Cockadoodledoo]

but it was perfectly Simmonds knew what he was doing at all times - he knew where he was going and the head and/or shoulder clash was PURELY accidental - to anyone with eyes - just 'one of those things'.

As far as the rule is concerned, whether the contact is accidental or not is irrelevant. If his should hits the head of Marshall then it is illegal. To add to this, I have no problems with the 2 weeks Morley copped but you can bet the same thing will happen all season to other players and nothing will happen because they don't have Morley's profile.

There are several 'repeat' offenders who get away with murder but always get off and many others who would put on high tackles every few weeks but nothing happens to them because they do not carry Morley's reputation as 'hard men'.

You also useless media hacks like Warren Smith and Ray Hadley and their support cast of 'yes men' get on their soap boxes about Morley just because they like to create controversy and have their own agendas, despite the fact they haven't got the faintest idea about the sport they are commenting on. Unfortunately a sizeable portion of the population who aren't intelligent enough to form their own opinons on matters just rehash what those pond scum in the media have espoused.

 

[TooheysNew]

Well - Fair enough....One can't really argue with that, eh?

But this is never about Forum 7's - if this is the kind of tosh that gets posted in that compettion...Then it really should stay there!

It really is clutching at straws, comparing the 2 incidents which seemed to be the entire crux of the 'argument' put forth by this bloke.....And the point I was trying to make, I guess - I'd just expect FAR better vetting of articles that make the front page on this website.

It's an opinion piece. Aimed to provoke controversy. It's done exactly what it's there for.

 

[Bring Back the Spliff]

As far as the rule is concerned, whether the contact is accidental or not is irrelevant. If his should hits the head of Marshall then it is illegal. To add to this, I have no problems with the 2 weeks Morley copped but you can bet the same thing will happen all season to other players and nothing will happen because they don't have Morley's profile.

There are several 'repeat' offenders who get away with murder but always get off and many others who would put on high tackles every few weeks but nothing happens to them because they do not carry Morley's reputation as 'hard men'.

You also useless media hacks like Warren Smith and Ray Hadley and their support cast of 'yes men' get on their soap boxes about Morley just because they like to create controversy and have their own agendas, despite the fact they haven't got the faintest idea about the sport they are commenting on. Unfortunately a sizeable portion of the population who aren't intelligent enough to form their own opinons on matters just rehash what those pond scum in the media have espoused.

Excellent.

Apply that rule to the letter and we'll QUITE literally - end up with 3 a side left at the end iof 80 minutes of each game.

There is STILL an element of 'Common Sense' to be run over the application of these rules, however - fortunately!...And last week it was aplied 100% correctly to the Marshall incident - and to the Morley one...IMO.

Besides which - I am still FAR from convinced - that it was Simmonds' SHOULDER that did the damage to Marshall, or made ANY kind of meaningful contact whatsoever in that tackle...that is still a matter for quite some conjecture indeed, in my mind!!!...I will stop just short of calling it complete and utter gibberish bollocks however...Just.

 

[Bring Back the Spliff]

It's an opinion piece. Aimed to provoke controversy. It's done exactly what it's there for.

Surely...you're not THAT desperaste for comment & debate round here though??

What, does Ray hadley ghostwrite for this site? What next - Rebecca Wilson with her own LeagueUnlimited column???

Come on - you're better than that.

 

[TooheysNew]

Surely...you're not THAT desperaste for comment & debate round here though??

What, does Ray hadley ghostwrite for this site? What next - Rebecca Wilson with her own LeagueUnlimited column???

Come on - you're better than that.

Desperate? It's not desperation at all.

It has provoked conversation, and debate... in no way is that a sign of desperation.

If you don't like it, don't read it. There are plenty of other articles there for your reading pleasure.

And no, Wilson isn't going anywhere near this site. Ever.

 

[DJ1]

It's an opinion piece. Aimed to provoke controversy. It's done exactly what it's there for.

My apologies. I thought it was written and published as an official article and representation of the Nicholson Sport Consultancy as opposed to an opinion piece aimed to provoke controversy.


The article was great as an opinion piece aimed at provoking contoversy. As an official article from a supposed sport consultancy it was crap.

The Almanac should be good! LOL

DJ1 Sport Consultancy DSC

 

[Renowned League Expert]

I think it's going to become very clear very quickly that the NRL will have to introduce a rule forbidding taller players from tackling shorter players above the waist.

Like I said in another post, let's just play tip football and be done with it.