As I said I dont' agree with Cotch keeping number 9 and not taking number 17 as I have always been a supporter of the concept of the captain wearing number 17 since its introduction
As I said I don't expect people to agree with me and I will admit I have I have changed my mind a couple of times about it over the last few days. Simply thinking about the the idea that we get drummed into us from a very when we play sport about the clubs being bigger than any individual and how it fits in this scenario? And funnily enough you can use it to fit both sides of this very argument
Anyway this is my take 
It is a massive honour to be named captain of your club. When you accept the honour you have a responsibility to take on everything that goes with it, everything. At the RFC part of that honour means (since 2004) you wear number 17. It was a point of difference at our Club.
I posted the other day that to have a tradition it has to start somewhere for the RFC this "tradition" started in 2004. And I for one backed the club on it because ALL the reasonings behind it were right. With that in mind I think Cotch should be wearing number 17
Other traditions in other sports had to start somewhere but are now viewed as traditions. Just watching the test cricket is the perfect example Australia started the "tradition" of players shirts carrying the number that represents what number test player they are. This is a relatively new concept that now all countires follow (even Sth Africa has it despite the farcical numbering system). Australian players wearing the "Baggy Green" during the first session when they field of every test match is now a tradition, that is only recent as it was started by Mark Taylor BTW not Steve Waugh who seems to get credit for it
Whether people agree with the number 17 concept or not it is what is in place at our Club and my view is it should be at the very least be respected.
Having said that I was impressed with Cotch's reasonings as to why he wants to keep number 9, he articulated them extremely well which is just another reason why this young man deserves to be our captain. I respect his views and his willingness to standby them and make the choice he has. But it doesn't mean I have to agree with him just like I don't expect people to agree with me
Just my take 
Agree on what you've said WP, its hard to disagree or argue against what you've said.
Wearing a certain number in footy has been made out to be a big deal. Whether its the number 1 guernsey, whether its number 12 Richos old number or number 9 Campbells old number; its a big deal, which seems silly but thats the way it is.
The part I don't like about the whole Captain wears 17 thing, is the number jumping seems contradictive to its purpose. The captaincy, for arguments sake lets say went to Matt Dea who has worn 2 numbers at the club, 40 something and now 7, now he's captain (hypothetically) he's now 17. Every number has its history and every player is given a number to respect and adhere to, yet we jump numbers around 2-3 times in players career which depletes the argument of having a certain number for the captain and respecting numbers of past players etc.
I'm all for the purpose of recognising a jumper the captain wears, however I think reshuffling the numbers to suit 1 is contradictive. Put a 'JD' under the sponsor on the captains chest or on the back of the neck line I think would be more appropriate.
I also like the fact Cotchin enjoys seeing kids wearing his number and has a sense of pride and almost guilt for leaving those kids behind and changing numbers. As fans it'd annoy me if I bought a $120 jumper and the number I had was now obsolete.
As for Cotchins decision and the 'knockers' against saying he should adhere to everything the club says, I think we can take positive out of Cotchins loyalty to his own jumper and his own history and how proud of it he is. I think that's been missed somewhat and is far more important than the mickey mouse, pointless, musical chairs of numbers on the back.
