For those still struggling: Cudd-Cubbygate

Evidently some are still struggling over some blatant facts, so this if for you. So far all my attempts to teach them have been in vain.

I'll start by saying that I am in no way stating that Nic Cudd should get called up this season, as we're very blessed with open-side flankers in Wales, even at the Dregs.

So long story short, I've long been an advocator of Cudd and in recent seasons have stated that he deserves more recognition for playing consistently well over a longer period than some others. Last season and the season before he was particularly good and back then I believed he was overdue a call-up when we had front line 7's missing a fair bit of rugby that season through injury. The argument from the detractors was that he's "too small" - something I disagree with but something I can accept. What puzzled me was that some of these detractors are big advocates of James Cubby Davies - and whilst I agree he's a good player he is very overhyped. I pointed out that seeing as they're around the same size that this was a daft and incorrect argument and have long stood by that - I've also stated that if you spectate then it should be blatantly obvious that they're around the same size - but apparently some folk are either dull or blind (or both). Now then, when I actually looked it up it turned out that Cudd was packing more muscle mass. Of course this blatant fact keeps passing some folk by, well that's turks for you. Let's take a look:

The following source has Cubby at 1.87m and 93kg: http://www.scarlets.co.uk/eng/teams/first-team-Players.php?PlayId=98390 - so that would put him on a level with his older and well-documented bigger brother. The only other source matching this info is Wikipedia which should tell you all that you need to know about turk info.
More reliable sources: http://www.wru.co.uk/eng/matchcentre/squads_wales_sevens.php?player=115882&includeref=dynamic - has him at 1.83m and 94kg whilst: http://en.espn.co.uk/wales/rugby/player/205129.html has him down as the same. 6'2 is quite a significant jump from 1.83m and if you aren't blind then you can see Cubby is not 6'2.

The following has Cudd at 1.80/5'11 and 96kg: http://www.newportgwentdragons.com/Teams/Player/Dragons/137882/nic-cudd/ - so by just one source so far it appears that Cudd is not smaller.
The following has Cudd at 1.78m and 95kg: http://en.espn.co.uk/wales/rugby/player/122786.html
Even the turk's own source has Cudd at 95 kg: http://www.scarlets.co.uk/eng/games/player_archive.php?player=94613&includeref=dynamic

A consistency can be found here, and that consistency is that Cudd is not smaller than Cubby - he carries more muscle mass at every single source compared to every available source for Cubby. The height thing is probably about right for Cudd, but it's clearly exaggerated at the Scarlets source for Cubby. From what we can gather Cudd is between 5'10-11 (which is what I could gather through watching rugby) and heavier than Cubby - now bear in mind we were told that Cubby was also the heavier player. We were never ever told at any point that Cubby is a better fit through being taller, which would be just as daft if not more daft than the former argument these people have put forward. From spectating I would never have Cubby down as over 6'0, certainly not 6'2 which makes him taller than his much bigger brother. Again, every single source for Cudd compared with Cubby has Cudd as the one who is bigger, IE muscle mass - when I was even told that Cudd was lighter. Bonkers.
So there we have it - it appears I was correct in saying that the 'fans' proposing Cudd is too small for international rugby and simultaneously saying that Cubby is the best 7 in Wales despite being actually being the lighter of the two are full of it. It's nice to be able to teach people but I doubt this will be taken on board (again). It's a shame they could not argue that they believed Cubby to be in better form - they had to resort to making things up like Cudd was too small yet Cubby wasn't.

Regarding 7's in Wales - this is how I now see the pecking order and some of which I've rated a lot better than Cubby for a couple seasons now:
Ellis Jenkins,
Josh Navidi,
Sam Warburton,
Justin Tipuric,
James Davies,
Nic Cudd/Ollie Griffiths.

The Scarlets line up for Racing last year. Cubby is fifth from the left. If Cubby is 6'2 like the pork pie salesmen have claimed, then he would be significantly taller than Gareth Owen to his left but one, and Ken Owens at the opposite end. We can clearly see that he isn't.

http://www.scarlets.co.uk/eng/games/10883.php

Is he smaller. Or just further away?

mikey_dragon wrote:

The Scarlets line up for Racing last year. Cubby is fifth from the left. If Cubby is 6'2 like the pork pie salesmen have claimed, then he would be significantly taller than Gareth Owen to his left but one, and Ken Owens at the opposite end. We can clearly see that he isn't.

http://www.scarlets.co.uk/eng/games/10883.php

Mikey, the nearest player to Cubby in that photograph is Gareth Davies and that is who you should be comparing Cubby to, Owens is way to the side and nearer the camera so he should look taller. Now if you compare Cawdor to Cubby I would contend that Cubby is slightly taller (very little in it but taller) but if you look at Cubby's left leg you can see it is bent behind him, so if he straightened that leg it would add about an inch IMO, so personally I would say that Cubby is 1"-2" taller than Cawdor and ( I know you don't like it) Wikipedia has Cawdor at 5' 10". So that to me puts Cubby anything between 5' 11" to 6'.
I have no idea what Cudd is, so enjoy yourself.

Yes Wayne I agree that is Cubby's height, not 6'2 like I was told. And for goodness sake he's practically next to Owen in a straight line. I always figured that Cawdor was shorter and lighter but that isn't the argument.

no offence but you call people dull and then say Ellis Jenkins is the best 7 in wales

mikey_dragon wrote:Yes Wayne I agree that is Cubby's height, not 6'2 like I was told. And for goodness sake he's practically next to Owen in a straight line. I always figured that Cawdor was shorter and lighter but that isn't the argument.

No Mikey because Owen is further away, and also both Cawdor and Owen have their heads bent slightly forward you have to take the nearest person to the one you want to measure, so either Cawdor or the bloke the other side, who is a few inches taller (so ignore him). I'm only trying to get to Cubbys height which appears to be the bane of contention in your argument. I'm agreeing with you he is not 6'2" at the most 6'.

True Raven wrote:no offence but you call people dull and then say Ellis Jenkins is the best 7 in wales

What so refusing to accept blatant facts is not dull? Having an opinion about an open-side makes somebody dull???

True Raven wrote:no offence but you call people dull and then say Ellis Jenkins is the best 7 in wales

TR from his previous existence on here he has had a very poor regard for Justin, it won't change whatever evidence is given to the contrary.

wayne wrote:

mikey_dragon wrote:Yes Wayne I agree that is Cubby's height, not 6'2 like I was told. And for goodness sake he's practically next to Owen in a straight line. I always figured that Cawdor was shorter and lighter but that isn't the argument.

No Mikey because Owen is further away, and also both Cawdor and Owen have their heads bent slightly forward you have to take the nearest person to the one you want to measure, so either Cawdor or the bloke the other side, who is a few inches taller (so ignore him). I'm only trying to get to Cubbys height which appears to be the bane of contention in your argument. I'm agreeing with you he is not 6'2" at the most 6'.

I knew he wasn't 6'2 but now I've gone and proven it. My argument put simple, is how is one of the 7's too small for international rugby and the other not? Cubby is lighter at all sources and no trustworthy source has him at 6'2. Brussouw, now there was a good open-side - I wonder how he measures up .

Yeah but some people just don't like facts getting in the way of their point Mikey as their point is always right.

I cannot believe that somebody has dedicated a whole thread to this type of cr@p. No wonder this forum is losing members. Why instigate a bitchfest ? We all know how this will end up. This is typical of the attitude that people are always trying to win the internet on this forum.

Nick Cudd and James Davies are both good players with a lot of potential, but are nowhere near getting into the Welsh squad ahead of Warburton or Tuperic, so let's just leave it at that.

bedfordwelsh wrote:Yeah but some people just don't like facts getting in the way of their point Mikey as their point is always right.  

Yeah for some reason people can't handle facts. And as it turns out Bedford, Mikey is the one who's always right . What do you think of Nic Cudd in recent seasons?



Also looking at the picture of the Scarlets lineup, I think that's Hadleigh Parkes in between Owen and Cubby? He's registered as 6'2 on all sources I can find and we can see he is significantly taller than both - what more proof do you need?

LordDowlais wrote:I cannot believe that somebody has dedicated a whole thread to this type of cr@p. No wonder this forum is losing members. Why instigate a bitchfest ? We all know how this will end up. This is typical of the attitude that people are always trying to win the internet on this forum.

Nick Cudd and James Davies are both good players with a lot of potential, but are nowhere near getting into the Welsh squad ahead of Warburton or Tuperic, so let's just leave it at that.

I've been attacked several times by a certain someone over my stance - which I've made clear in the post. This certain someone can't accept the most obvious of facts - so now I've put it out there for EVERYONE to see. If someone wants to cause a bitchfest over factual information then I think they have a problem.

Yes I can agree with neither of them getting into the Wales team ahead of Warburton or Tips.

mikey_dragon wrote:What do you think of Nic Cudd in recent seasons?

The poor sod does not have a prayer, because apparently Ollie Griffiths is the second coming. If Nic Cudd wants any game time he will have to move teams.

And before you say anything mikey, this is what was being said on Sky Sports prior to the Munster game last Saturday, not the moving clubs bit, that was me being sarcastic. When they asked Kingsley Jones what is so special about Ollie Griffiths, he said "everything". So over hyping does not just come from Ospreylia.

mikey_dragon wrote:I've been attacked several times by a certain someone over my stance - which I've made clear in the post. This certain someone can't accept the most obvious of facts - so now I've put it out there for EVERYONE to see. If someone wants to cause a bitchfest over factual information then I think they have a problem.

mikey, do you honestly believe anybody cares about the height difference of two players, all two inches of it ?

If I wanted to argue about the difference of two inches I wouldn't have left the house....

A debate happening among some fans actually is who starts, Cudd or Griffiths. From what I have seen of Griffiths at all levels of rugby he looks like he could be a very good player. I didn't catch it via Sky as I watched it at RP where a good evening was had despite the result, but honestly are you surprised that a coach rates his player? He's hardly being overhyped - he's got quite some way to go before the FB brigade and Scrum V love-ins start happening. Until then I don't believe he's overhyped in the slightest. IMO Dragons fans don't overhype any of their players, neither do Cardiffians hype theirs.

LordDowlais wrote:

mikey_dragon wrote:I've been attacked several times by a certain someone over my stance - which I've made clear in the post. This certain someone can't accept the most obvious of facts - so now I've put it out there for EVERYONE to see. If someone wants to cause a bitchfest over factual information then I think they have a problem.

mikey, do you honestly believe anybody cares about the height difference of two players, all two inches of it ?

Well someone cares about it enough to have been pushing their failed argument for a year - hopefully some facts teach him/her what's what.

munkian wrote:If I wanted to argue about the difference of two inches I wouldn't have left the house....

As Oberyn Martell once said "Size doesn't matter when you're flat on your back."

To which Tyrion Lanister replied "..thank the gods!"

mikey_dragon wrote:

bedfordwelsh wrote:Yeah but some people just don't like facts getting in the way of their point Mikey as their point is always right.  

Yeah for some reason people can't handle facts. And as it turns out Bedford, Mikey is the one who's always right . What do you think of Nic Cudd in recent seasons?



Also looking at the picture of the Scarlets lineup, I think that's Hadleigh Parkes in between Owen and Cubby? He's registered as 6'2 on all sources I can find and we can see he is significantly taller than both - what more proof do you need?

I've always rated him mate and think he's very underrated but that is what I expect because of where he plays. I also think if Griffiths regains his best form then he's better again.

The only gate here is the one you'll have to slam shut mikey after everyone else has left 606.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_cS5aCozhcA

Having actually read the OP, this is just embarrassing. I'm sorry I've shaken something up in you by pointing out the fact you invest too much time, effort, and energy on these boards, but this is something else.

Go outside mikey. Go watch rugby with your friends. Go and play it, even. Do something, anything, that just sat inside all alone, typing furiously words you don't even believe yourself.

The bitterness is just sad. Stop it. Learn to love life.

For those still struggling, well the individual still struggling - you've been wrong for over a year. I suggest reading the post again and this time actually acknowledging the abundance of evidence which shows you that you're wrong. Then you can accept it and move on. If not then there is just no hope for you, sorry.

Imagine 100 words instead of 1,000,000. Well done

RiscaGame wrote:Imagine 100 words instead of 1,000,000. Well done

Not sure I follow?

mikey_dragon wrote:I've been attacked several times by a certain someone over my stance - which I've made clear in the post. This certain someone can't accept the most obvious of facts - so now I've put it out there for EVERYONE to see.

What does EVERYONE need to see it if there's only one person disagreeing?

Did you mean to ask WHY does EVERYONE need to see it?

This thread is a psychologists dream!

mikey_dragon wrote:Did you mean to ask WHY does EVERYONE need to see it?

Yes.

Griff wrote:This thread is a psychologists dream!

Pathetic, the thread wrecker is back to wreck threads

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:

mikey_dragon wrote:Did you mean to ask WHY does EVERYONE need to see it?

Yes.

No no, I've heard a few people band about the silliness that I've alluded to in the OP. However I've been repeatedly attacked by one poster over it, and I don't see why I should be when I was 100% correct with everything that I said. Therefore this post is to raise awareness - if he doesn't listen again then hopefully others will tell him. Btw if you don't like it then I find it odd that you'd contribute, and it certainly seems that way so by all means get lost .

mikey_dragon wrote:

Griff wrote:This thread is a psychologists dream!

Pathetic, the thread wrecker is back to wreck threads

That's my saying Mikey! Haven't you got any of your own material? Although they do say that imitation is the best form of flattery

Good thread though. Wish I could add something meaningful, like the weight of Cudd's eyebrows or the width of Cubby's kneecaps, but I'm completely stumped. Sorry

Griff wrote:

mikey_dragon wrote:

Griff wrote:This thread is a psychologists dream!

Pathetic, the thread wrecker is back to wreck threads

That's my saying Mikey! Haven't you got any of your own material? Although they do say that imitation is the best form of flattery

Good thread though. Wish I could add something meaningful, like the weight of Cudd's eyebrows or the width of Cubby's kneecaps, but I'm completely stumped. Sorry

Yeah you are rather admirable now that you've stopped crying, so fair play. I did steal your saying but it could be worse - for instance I could ignore blatant facts because I'm so pigheaded and end up looking like a fool . Imagine that eh.

Thanks, it wasn't much effort digging up the facts, however it turned out to be rather satisfying in the end.

Can we please just shoot this thread in the man sausage now mods ?

munkian wrote:Can we please just shoot this thread in the man sausage now mods ?

Why would they do that? It's a good thread, it's within the house rules, it's on topic for the rugby forum, it's educational. If you don't like it then get lost. Very odd that you'd keep contributing when blatant facts bother you this much .

mikey_dragon wrote:

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:

mikey_dragon wrote:Did you mean to ask WHY does EVERYONE need to see it?

Yes.

No no, I've heard a few people band about the silliness that I've alluded to in the OP. However I've been repeatedly attacked by one poster over it, and I don't see why I should be when I was 100% correct with everything that I said. Therefore this post is to raise awareness - if he doesn't listen again then hopefully others will tell him. Btw if you don't like it then I find it odd that you'd contribute, and it certainly seems that way so by all means get lost .

Can't you just be content in the knowledge that you're 100% correct?

mikey_dragon wrote:

munkian wrote:Can we please just shoot this thread in the man sausage now mods ?

Why would they do that? It's a good thread, it's within the house rules, it's on topic for the rugby forum, it's educational. If you don't like it then get lost. Very odd that you'd keep contributing when blatant facts bother you this much .

It's not educational! I haven't learned a thing! You haven't proven a single thing here. All I see is conflicting and varying stats on two players.

What this thread is though is an intriguing insight into the mind of a person desperate to be proven correct on an internet forum. That strikes me as a little odd. The fact you have to seek to 'win the internet', and set up new threads in order to seek out a win that got lost in the ether of another thread, suggests you have some issues. I think you just need a hug

He obviously just needed a break from sexually satisfying the harem of ladies an intellectual giant such as himself obviously has..

And applying lotion for his thin skin.

Making friends as usual saint
Cudd/Cubby? Too many CUs for me..

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:

mikey_dragon wrote:

Luckless Pedestrian wrote:

mikey_dragon wrote:Did you mean to ask WHY does EVERYONE need to see it?

Yes.

No no, I've heard a few people band about the silliness that I've alluded to in the OP. However I've been repeatedly attacked by one poster over it, and I don't see why I should be when I was 100% correct with everything that I said. Therefore this post is to raise awareness - if he doesn't listen again then hopefully others will tell him. Btw if you don't like it then I find it odd that you'd contribute, and it certainly seems that way so by all means get lost .

Can't you just be content in the knowledge that you're 100% correct?

I'm content with that - I'm trying to convince others so that I may stop getting attacked.

Okay.

Griff wrote:

mikey_dragon wrote:

munkian wrote:Can we please just shoot this thread in the man sausage now mods ?

Why would they do that? It's a good thread, it's within the house rules, it's on topic for the rugby forum, it's educational. If you don't like it then get lost. Very odd that you'd keep contributing when blatant facts bother you this much .

It's not educational!  I haven't learned a thing!  You haven't proven a single thing here. All I see is conflicting and varying stats on two players.

What this thread is though is an intriguing insight into the mind of a person desperate to be proven correct on an internet forum.  That strikes me as a little odd.  The fact you have to seek to 'win the internet', and set up new threads in order to seek out a win that got lost in the ether of another thread, suggests you have some issues.  I think you just need a hug

The abundance of evidence makes it a fact. I'm not desperate to be proven correct - I know I'm correct, I'm always correct. I am showing to the forum the debate in which I was attacked over so that the forum may help this individual and anybody else who wants to throw accusations at me see sense. I hope that's cleared things up for you.

Just to add: a quick bit of Googling brings up James Davies' Rio Olympics athlete profile. So pretty recent and therefore you'd think quite up to date and accurate. They have him listed as 5'11 and 98kg. So heavier than Cudd and perhaps smaller in height? I know more weight per inch doesn't necessarily = more power, but still. Cudd does look the skinnier of the two to me. Not sure how you have been able to draw the conclusion that Cudd : "...carries more muscle mass at every single source compared to every available source for Cubby". There's no sources that state their muscle mass. You've need a DEXA scan or hydrostatic weighing to show that.

https://www.rio2016.com/en/athlete/james-davies

Just wait for Dragons v Turks at Judgement day - it will be childsplay to judge their exact height and weight from a distance, shewerley ?

Thanks Griff, I had difficulty in looking for his Olympic profile, although that doesn't seem like the official site (I'll add that I'm having difficulty loading the page in work and only half of it comes up) - I was searching 'Olympics' rather than Rio. The weight seems to be wholly inconsistent with all other sources. The height is consistent across the board, it's only the one-eyed Turk site that disagrees. I have to disagree, I've seen both live and Cudd looks very stocky with broader shoulders (or might just look that way as he is a little shorter than most others on the field). It certainly looks as if he carries more muscle around his legs though.

Of the two, I'd say James Davies looks the stockier.

He deffo looks fatter.

mikey_dragon wrote:Thanks Griff, I had difficulty in looking for his Olympic profile, although that doesn't seem like the official site (I'll add that I'm having difficulty loading the page in work and only half of it comes up) - I was searching 'Olympics' rather than Rio. The weight seems to be wholly inconsistent with all other sources. The height is consistent across the board, it's only the one-eyed Turk site that disagrees. I have to disagree, I've seen both live and Cudd looks very stocky with broader shoulders (or might just look that way as he is a little shorter than most others on the field). It certainly looks as if he carries more muscle around his legs though.

Helping tidy up at the end of nursery isn't classed as work Mikey.