View Full Version : Sunraysia Football league
will be interesting to see how jarrod arrentz goes in the legends game tommorow night. hope he does the mallee proud and kicks some goals. I wonder if some of you stat buffs can find out how many senior goals he has kicked in his career. personally i would think he would of cracked the 1000 mark by now.
The question is, is he the best fullforward to come from northern victoria. and not go AFL. I understand he got his spot in the legends game via a comp, but as country footballers go, i dont think he will be too far out of place down there.
Hope you kick butt down there jarrad....even if you are from two headedville :p
His last 70 games have produced 510 goals (source VCFL website which has been updating stats since 2004), so you would think he would have well in excess of 1000. The answer to your question is most probably yes.
Good luck Jarrod:thumbsu:
His last 70 games have produced 510 goals (source VCFL website which has been updating stats since 2004), so you would think he would have well in excess of 1000. The answer to your question is most probably yes.
Good luck Jarrod:thumbsu:
Well u can add another 220 odd to that which he kicked for w/worth a while ago
Well u can add another 220 odd to that which he kicked for w/worth a while ago
In Sunday's Hearld Sun I think they quoted 1650 in 13 years, happy to be corrected, did anyone else read that, too?
godsofrichmond
1 Jul 2008, 22:43
well did jarrod do us proud :thumbsu::thumbsu::thumbsu::thumbsu::thumbsu:
5 goals, should of got man of the match.
looks like you were on the money rabbito...just 14 seasons instead of 13 though
i think it cements in my mind that he could of made the big time with no problems at all. i understand that this game isnt that serious, but jarrod isnt a 20yo anymore either.
great job mate :thumbsu:
Just looking on the Merbein football club website and suprised me by the number of seinor players leaving eg: Carlo Longeri to Meringur, Joey Wright to Bridgewater, Jeza Adams to Bambill and Brant Reid also to Bambill also a few rumors around the traps that Paul Jenkins and Col Keatch will follow Wright to Bridgewater... Jamie Roberts from Mildura also has been cleared to Bridgewater i wonder what ties them players have to that club??:D:D
Flawed Genius
1 Jul 2008, 23:22
G'day fellas, just wanted to say how impressed I was with Jarrod Arentz tonight.
Looked the dead-set goods, even passing off to Andy Lee - top effort.
I reckon he shoulda got the MOTM award, screw Darryl White.
Just looking on the Merbein football club website and suprised me by the number of seinor players leaving eg: Carlo Longeri to Meringur, Joey Wright to Bridgewater, Jeza Adams to Bambill and Brant Reid also to Bambill also a few rumors around the traps that Paul Jenkins and Col Keatch will follow Wright to Bridgewater... Jamie Roberts from Mildura also has been cleared to Bridgewater i wonder what ties them players have to that club??:D:D
Not sure if it's a reflection of the footy club or the bloke leaving?? Either way nice timing.
Add Mark East from Merbein back to Cardross.
Interested to know what the connection to Bridgewater>Joey Wright>Jamie Roberts is.
enforcer7
2 Jul 2008, 10:58
[/b]
Not sure if it's a reflection of the footy club or the bloke leaving?? Either way nice timing.
Add Mark East from Merbein back to Cardross.
Interested to know what the connection to Bridgewater>Joey Wright>Jamie Roberts is.
i think it might be luke gane rabbito
i think it might be luke gane rabbito
What role does he play in it?
Surely one bloke isn't bigger than a footy club.
Skeeterman
2 Jul 2008, 13:04
What role does he play in it?
Surely one bloke isn't bigger than a footy club.
He is just a mate.
Apparently Joey has a job over there and I am moving over for work in a few weeks.
Personally I have only played 2 games this year and i probably won't play any more, just in case i get the bug though and the body allows me i thought i would align myself with a club.
Mildura will make the four. Strong percentage.
They are a real chance to make the big one too.
I would say Imps vs Mildura GF. Richardson best on.
Irymple vs Imps in the reserves. Gribble best on.
Mildura vs Imps in the unders. Doering best on.
Atkinson/Curran - McLeod Medal
Gribble - Holcroft Medal
Fenton - Casey Medal
i think robinvale will be in the gf against mildura in the thirds
Well Ibis Seems as though you have your wish. The investigation has been called!!!! I can only hope justice is served and people dont make decision due to reputations.
A punch to the head = a punch to the head no matter whos fist it comes from. I have no doubt that this investigation will uncover a couple of other fists, will be very very intresting to see how this all pans out.
i think robinvale will be in the gf against mildura in the thirds
Reasons being?
they'll look at who hit Lee not who threw what first Delray does'nt matter apparently!!
they'll look at who hit Lee not who threw what first Delray does'nt matter apparently!!
Well you are getting information that differs from mine. I have been informed that an investigation will be completed via witnesses reports. Then the investigator makes a decision on weather any person invovled in the incident should front the tribunal. Now i would say Walder and Lee would have a massive involvment in the incident.
I hope my mail is correct if any1 knows otherwise please state!!!!
Reasons being?
robinvale thirds have easy been the 2nd best team off the season came close to beating mildura few weeks ago and the improve every game they play be good to see who wins 2nite considering imps are only team that have beaten mildura
mallee fella
2 Jul 2008, 19:09
well did jarrod do us proud :thumbsu::thumbsu::thumbsu::thumbsu::thumbsu:
5 goals, should of got man of the match.
looks like you were on the money rabbito...just 14 seasons instead of 13 though
i think it cements in my mind that he could of made the big time with no problems at all. i understand that this game isnt that serious, but jarrod isnt a 20yo anymore either.
great job mate :thumbsu:
dead rite m8 he was easily the best player on the ground!
white got 10 touches if that
arrentz best player on ground in my mind
I'm not sure that it was my wish for an investigation, I simply stated that there should be one if the League were going to take a stance on these things when they are rubbing people out for four weeks for abusing the umpires. My understanding is that the incident being investigated is the Ransom incident. What lead up to it will be discussed but I doubt you will find anything coming of that considering it was a push and shove involving two of the BEST and FAIREST winners of the past decade. If Walder and Lees actions are brought in to it, then surely your coach will also be looked at for the push to Walder's hooter which caused him to be sent off for the blood rule.
At the end of the day, the Red Cliffs football club made the call, NOT the League cause they want the $500 before they do anything, and I am sure they would have considered all the circumstances before asking for an investigation.
In any case, its the hit on Lee being investigated, not the lead up to it so I am guessing that is the only matter that will be brought to the attention of the League unless Irymple have a sook and pay another $500 which I am sure the League and Bobby Kerr would love. But I could be wrong and we will just have to wait and see what my old boss, Bobby Kerr comes up with.
Was interesting to note that a player got jail time for a King Hit during a game of footy today. Bad timing I would say and it will be interesting if the League will push for an outcome on this matter because of it.
Lets hope they treat it on its own merits, but it does put a bit of pressure on them to be seen to be doing something.
Ibis i cannot believe you could be so 1 eyed. You were not even at the game so dont tell me that the 2 incidents before hand were just abit of push and shove. Walder and chris lee both stood over eaton while he was on his back and punched him in the head twice each. Thats called STRIKING
But i suppose thats alright cus Walder has one a Mcleod. Get with it Ibis.
You cant just pick and choose who gets rubbed out to suit your team all three players are guilty of striking and should be suspened accordingly.
As for Eaton if any witness says they saw him throw a punch they are lying unless they have some kind of x ray vision or could see something that i couldent see. And unlike some i wasnt looking through 1 eye.
And then dont say how did Walder come of with the blood rule obviosly he was hit but after Walder and Lee went to town a big pack formed and visibility from then on was lost apart from the other hit which you have already mentioned.
Ibis do i need to be any clearer surly you of all people who played the game hard could see there is a lot more to what happed then just sams hit.
Ibis i cannot believe you could be so 1 eyed. You were not even at the game so dont tell me that the 2 incidents before hand were just abit of push and shove. Walder and chris lee both stood over eaton while he was on his back and punched him in the head twice each. Thats called STRIKING
But i suppose thats alright cus Walder has one a Mcleod. Get with it Ibis.
You cant just pick and choose who gets rubbed out to suit your team all three players are guilty of striking and should be suspened accordingly.
As for Eaton if any witness says they saw him throw a punch they are lying unless they have some kind of x ray vision or could see something that i couldent see. And unlike some i wasnt looking through 1 eye.
And then dont say how did Walder come of with the blood rule obviosly he was hit but after Walder and Lee went to town a big pack formed and visibility from then on was lost apart from the other hit which you have already mentioned.
Ibis do i need to be any clearer surly you of all people who played the game hard could see there is a lot more to what happed then just sams hit.
I expect having seen everything except your coach giving Walder a blood nose you must have blinked at that point.
In any case, now you are the star Witness in the Incident it might be best you give your story to the investigator. Just make sure you leave out the bit about your coach and what he did, and try to come up with a reason Walder got a blood nose. Perhaps Lee miscued and got the wrong bloke. :D:D:D And I'm the one that is one eyed.
I wasn't there and nothing on here has any bearing on any investigation, so why get so upset and irate over the garbage I write. You have been sucked in Delray but you have added some spice to an otherwise very boring forum of late.
Im happy to be of assistance as this site is stuggeling at the moment. And not all u say is garbage ;) Every1 can say what they like i was just trying to clear up a fear facts as to why this whole investigation was called.
I will not lie in the investigation and yes some1 obviously wacked Walder. I didnt see who did so im not going to guess when asked.
Apart from all this what are your thoughts on this weekends games?????
My mail is 7 Imps blokes went down at training last night not sure if they are senior or reserve guys. 3 In a row could u confirm???
I was backing Imps. But now with the probability of some players missing and the home ground advantage it could be a close 1. But without the coach Imps should still come up trumps.
W/Worth will beat Maggies.
sounds like the only ones sooking ibis is R/C walder & lee started it ransome finished it !!!
I expect having seen everything except your coach giving Walder a blood nose you must have blinked at that point.
In any case, now you are the star Witness in the Incident it might be best you give your story to the investigator. Just make sure you leave out the bit about your coach and what he did, and try to come up with a reason Walder got a blood nose. Perhaps Lee miscued and got the wrong bloke. :D:D:D And I'm the one that is one eyed.
I wasn't there and nothing on here has any bearing on any investigation, so why get so upset and irate over the garbage I write. You have been sucked in Delray but you have added some spice to an otherwise very boring forum of late.
I don't understand why Red Cliffs would call for an investigation when they stand to lose just as much from it as Irymple. They are right in with a chance to finish in the 4, I'm sure they would be very disappointed if they lose 1 or 2 of them leading up to th finals. Would put a big dint in their chances.
Investigations usually are a waste of time and money any way. Nothing ever comes out of them. From a Wentworth perspective, look at the recent Alvey incident and Ough back in 2002. Serious facial injuries and nothing came from the investigations. I'm sure most clubs would think the same. Red Cliffs should have just left it.
I don't understand why Red Cliffs would call for an investigation when they stand to lose just as much from it as Irymple. They are right in with a chance to finish in the 4, I'm sure they would be very disappointed if they lose 1 or 2 of them leading up to th finals. Would put a big dint in their chances.
Investigations usually are a waste of time and money any way. Nothing ever comes out of them. From a Wentworth perspective, look at the recent Alvey incident and Ough back in 2002. Serious facial injuries and nothing came from the investigations. I'm sure most clubs would think the same. Red Cliffs should have just left it.
The alvey incident wasnt a punch it was hip/shoulder and accidental
The alvey incident wasnt a punch it was hip/shoulder and accidental
We've been over this before you idiot and whatever your opinion, it was a more serious injury than what Lee sustained and an investigation proved nothing.
We've been over this before you idiot and whatever your opinion, it was a more serious injury than what Lee sustained and an investigation proved nothing.
I didn't bring it up knucklehead
We've been over this before you idiot and whatever your opinion, it was a more serious injury than what Lee sustained and an investigation proved nothing.
As I said previously, Red Cliffs made the decision after a committee meeting and no doubt considering everything that occured. They would know more about it than I and made the decision to proceed.
With regard to the Alvey incident proving nothing you couldn't be further from the truth.
The investigation found that there was no case to answer. Just cause it didn't establish the outcome you thought it should have, doesn't mean it didn't find an outcome. The job of the investigator is to establish if an offence has occurred and if any further action on behalf of the League should be taken. If the evidence isn't there, then the outcome is that no action be taken for lack of evidence. If the evidence points to an offence and an offender then the investigator recommends further action. It is not up to the investigator to be Judge and Jury. He simply attempts to find all evidence and presents his finding and provides a recommendation to the League.
You have to remember, most witnesses to an event don't want to provide information or are people on the sidelines that names are never supplied to the investigator and prevent a thorough finding.
You may say they are a waste of time, but if he finds there is sufficient evidence, I am sure you will see action taken by the SFL. You need to know all the facts what is before the Investigator before you make comments that it found no outcome.
Simply, the Alvey outcome was either that no-one had anything to answer as all actions in the view of the investigator who has obtained all the available evidence did not require any further action, or, not enough evidence or too much conflicting evidence prevented any further action being taken.
There is always an outcome, just not to the liking of each party.
Mate I was simply trying to state that I can not remember any recent inquiry that has come up with any new findings and suspension.
They are waste of time.
dunkarob
7 Jul 2008, 09:07
ibis and wayne, we are sick of this shit.
HOW ABOUT SOME FOOTBALL NEWS.
Mate I was simply trying to state that I can not remember any recent inquiry that has come up with any new findings and suspension.
They are waste of time.
I have to agree to disagree with you here Wayne.
As I said, the investigation in to the Alvey incident FOUND that there was no case to answer. It didn't find lack of evidence or anything like that. I'm unsure if people know of the investigators credentials but here is a list of them.
Former Victorian Police Officer with about 15 or more (No doubt more but I am unsure of his exact number of years served) who was qualified as a Detective.
Spent time in the Police Ethical Standards department I believe as either a Sgt or S/Snr Sergeant, investigating Police Officers.
Has been in the Private Investigation Industry for near 7 or more years.
If there is a case to answer, Bob will find it and report it as he sees it.
I do believe there is a problem with people supplying correct evidence, it goes back to not wanting to put other blokes in etc etc etc.
My question is, Is there a requirment for Players and Officials to supply information to the investigator. I have never been involved in an investigation so I don't know if there is penalties for refusing to assist or not. At the end of the day if you don't want to get involved you can just tell them you saw nothing. Simply, if there isn't a requirement to assist, how many players are really going to give any evidence against another player or give up their time to speak to the investigator. NOT many I would say.
Secondly, how many supporters who see the event (Which are probably more so than other players who are concentrating on the game) are spoken to by the investigator or even try to find the investigator to give eveidence. My answer to that would be Nil.
Perhaps Delray, seeing you saw what occurred and are so passionate about putting these blokes in (Except your coach of course cause you blinked at that point), you could tell us if you have been contacted by the investigator or have you approached him to supply your version of events?
If so, how did it come about. Was your name supplied to the investigator or did you just volunteer yourself to give the information? I am not having a go at you here, just trying to put a point across about how many witnesses aren't interviewed due to various reasons and that that can have a huge effect on the overall outcome of any investigation.
Always happy to assist where possible Ibis. I too was very intrested in the whole process. What i have been told by our team manager is that he gave Bob 3 Names of people who witnessed the event and bob Has/Will be in contact with them in due time.
Although i did witness it and offered my statement i was informed that he already had given bob the names and i didnt make the cut.
So the clubs give the names to the investigator and the investigator follows it up.
Findings should be out soon and the tribunal will no doubt be called in.
Didn't make the cut???????
Sounds like the team manager is filtering the evidence that the investigator has access to. The manager is assuming a huge role in attempting to achieve a particular outcome, must be a lawyer or a copper I reckon. What happened to the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth.
Perhaps your version will not assist in reaching the outcome he desires or perhaps he thinks you are such a poor witness that your credibility may adversely affect the manner in which he thinks the case should be presented.
If I were you or one of the huge number of similar volunteers who stepped up and was knocked back, I would be wondering what the manager's opinion of me was.....not very high I imagine.
What do you think?
Always happy to assist where possible Ibis. I too was very intrested in the whole process. What i have been told by our team manager is that he gave Bob 3 Names of people who witnessed the event and bob Has/Will be in contact with them in due time.
Although i did witness it and offered my statement i was informed that he already had given bob the names and i didnt make the cut.
So the clubs give the names to the investigator and the investigator follows it up.
Findings should be out soon and the tribunal will no doubt be called in.
Well Gusty i never really looked into it that much the manager just told me that 4 witnesses was enough. I didnt ask any more questions. But from the Irymple side of things all the 4 would be very similar you would think. Will be very intresting to see if it lines up with what the redcliffs guys say.
Always happy to assist where possible Ibis. I too was very intrested in the whole process. What i have been told by our team manager is that he gave Bob 3 Names of people who witnessed the event and bob Has/Will be in contact with them in due time.
Although i did witness it and offered my statement i was informed that he already had given bob the names and i didnt make the cut.
So the clubs give the names to the investigator and the investigator follows it up.
Findings should be out soon and the tribunal will no doubt be called in.
You have only reinforced my point that an investigation is only as good as the information provided. How is it that a team manager of one of the clubs decides how many witnesses is enough. Isn't that up to the Investigator to decide. Surely you should contact the investigator yourself to offer ALL the available evidence to make a credible finding.
I understand that your evidence could be SIMILAR to that of the other Irymple witnesses, but in my experience and that of the Investigator is that every witness has a different view and a slightly different recollection of the events. The slightest detail could make the difference in any recommendation. If there were 20 witnesses, in order to make an unbias and correct recommendation, the investigator would need to interview all 20, not pick and choose which ones of the 20 he deems more appropriate for a particular outcome.
I believe if this is taken to the tribunal, you have just opened a can of worms and allowed Red Cliffs to Attack the whole investigation process. I have printed this particular post and will hand it to Red Cliffs if required to show that the Investigation process was floored and tampered with by your Team Manager. By withholding witnesses who are more than willing to come forward (Whether they assist the Irymple or Red Cliffs Case) which you have stated you are willing to do and even approached the committee to advise them, they have completely ruined any chance of a fair and transparent investigation.
It clearly gives the impression that Irymple are picking and choosing the witnesses they require to get the outcome they want even if that isn't thier intention.
It is also about time people understood that Irymple paid a further $500 to have a separate investigation in to the Red Cliffs Players. It was lodged some four days after the incident. It amazes me that the papers don't get hold of this information and report the full story.
discoduck
8 Jul 2008, 10:03
didn't this game happen a week and a half ago. anyone care to talk about the games from 3 days ago?
i'm interested in how eagles v imps went. i see imps won a close one - is this grand final preview? is alex douglas still playing ones?
Are u starting to panic or what Ibis. If you want my statement read my first post thats what i would be saying or better still hand it in to Bob Kerr if you are so happy printing my posts out.
Ibis how do you reckon he gets the numbers and the people Names he is ment to call. The investigator was not there whats he ment to do get the white pages and just start ringing people till he gets some1 that was at the match. That would have to be 1 of the stupidest things i have ever read.
Of course a club representive is gunna give him the names and numbers its not a lottery.
And as for the paper well the two Red Cliffs players in question are "pure ball players" There fists just accedentley sliped on to Eatos head certainly not news worthy.
And as for the four days we were just waiting on conformation that the investigation that red cliffs called could see Red Cliffs players brought to the tribunal. Once it became apparent that it couldnt we had to lodge our own.
I hope this clears it all up Ibis.
Are u starting to panic or what Ibis. If you want my statement read my first post thats what i would be saying or better still hand it in to Bob Kerr if you are so happy printing my posts out.
Ibis how do you reckon he gets the numbers and the people Names he is ment to call. The investigator was not there whats he ment to do get the white pages and just start ringing people till he gets some1 that was at the match. That would have to be 1 of the stupidest things i have ever read.
Of course a club representive is gunna give him the names and numbers its not a lottery.
And as for the paper well the two Red Cliffs players in question are "pure ball players" There fists just accedentley sliped on to Eatos head certainly not news worthy.
And as for the four days we were just waiting on conformation that the investigation that red cliffs called could see Red Cliffs players brought to the tribunal. Once it became apparent that it couldnt we had to lodge our own.
I hope this clears it all up Ibis.
This is great stuff Delray, a real good debate, lets keep it up.
I'm not sure why you are saying I am panicing. I'm not facing any investigation and aren't going to be cited to the tribunal. I have also asked if you are supplying your information and have condemned your club for failing to provide your details to the investigator. How is that panicing. I have clearly shown that your club is withholding witnesses. Your evidence goes toward their case, at a tribunal it could easily be argued that the club is also withholding witness details that could assist the Red Cliffs case. That would be the arguement (And a very strong arguement) that I would put to the tribunal to show the investigation was not fair and just and did not take in all the available evidence. It need not be shown that the evidence was for or against any party, simply that it was withheld by the club that requested the investigation. You would have to ask why, if your evidence was so damning, they would withhold that from the investigation. If the matter is referred for further action on the three supplied witnesses, if I was Red Cliffs (Which obviously I'm not) I would strongly argue that the investigation was hampered by the Irymple Football Club failing to provide details of witnesses that came forward and request the Investigation be dismissed.
With regard to the clubs giving the names and number of witnesses, that has clearly not happened as you stated in your own words and by doing that, Irymple have made the selection of witnesses in to a lottery. You have only managed to reiterate that by saying you advised the club you wanted to provide a statement and they told you, "YOU DIDN'T MAKE THE CUT"
I understand how the investigator gets his information but a person can also approach the investigator without going through any football club.
And you can stop making Nesty out to be all innocent. Remember, one of the Red Cliffs Players left the field under the blood rule and you don't need to be einstein to know how he got it. (But I remember you must have blinked and missed that part of the altercation so we don't know exactly how that happened). I would call one of those players pure ball considering he has played the game for 30 years without ever being reported and has two League B&F's to his name. I also know he can't punch his way out of wet paper bag and if he did do anything it would have been in reaction to something that occurred to him. That comes from playing with him for 10 years, not cause we are related. You can ask any team mate or opposition player over that 30 years and they will tell you the same thing.
A simple phone call would have cleared up the question about the investigation, unless of course the SFL ar so busy they couldn't take 5 minutes to look up the rules and advise the club. It appears to me like a bit of tit for tat really. Your players didn't have anything wrong with them, yet two players from Red Cliffs end up off the ground, one unconscious, the other bleeding. Why would you bother unless you were just Getting them back so to speak.
JUST MY OPINION. (Sad that I have to keep writing that to avoid any criticism isn't it.)
malleeboy
8 Jul 2008, 12:09
On a positive note, young South Mildura footballer Luke Teasdale was best player for North Adelaide U/17's on Saturday in his first game. Great effort considering he is an underage player and wouldn't know any of the players.
Why would you bother unless you were just Getting them back so to speak.
Well what do u expect Ibis. I explained what happened. Then Redcliffs called the investigation, do u expect Irymple to just to hang Sam out to dry????
Certainly not condoning what Sam did but Walder and Lee need to be held accountable for there actions also.If the good people from redcliffs think otherwise then maybe they should not have gone ahead with the investigation.
I mean in its simpilest form 2 Red Cliffs blokes wacked 1 Irymple bloke. 1 Irymple bloke wacked 1 Red Cliffs Bloke. All guilty of striking the tribunal to work out weeks or reprimands.
Why would you bother unless you were just Getting them back so to speak.
Well what do u expect Ibis. I explained what happened. Then Redcliffs called the investigation, do u expect Irymple to just to hang Sam out to dry????
Certainly not condoning what Sam did but Walder and Lee need to be held accountable for there actions also.If the good people from redcliffs think otherwise then maybe they should not have gone ahead with the investigation.
I mean in its simpilest form 2 Red Cliffs blokes wacked 1 Irymple bloke. 1 Irymple bloke wacked 1 Red Cliffs Bloke. All guilty of striking the tribunal to work out weeks or reprimands.
Again Delray you leave out your coach from all this. I won't get in to the version I heard with regard to Eato and what sparked the ensuing incident but I assure you, Walders nose didnt bleed from Altitude sickness. You have to ask, was the blood nose before or after what you saw Walder do. You have said you didn't see anything so perhaps Walders reaction was a reaction to his nose being hit. Food for thought there Delray.
Sam isn't being HUNG OUT TO DRY by your club. I am sure they will do everything they can to defend him and any good club would.
But the way to NOT hang him out to dry would be to defend him vigourously at a tribunal, IF there even is one to be held. You would supply all the evidence you could to the Investigator, defending his actions putting enough doubt in the mind of the Investigator that he even did the action so no further action be taken. If it does go further you would do everything to ensure you got either a not guilty verdict or the minimum of sentence if he was found guilty.
You don't just call for an investigation in to the incident before hand to show you are flying the flag. In my view, by calling for the investigation you are trying to Justify his actions, not defend them.
The investigations are treated independantly of one another and by the sounds of it, or the inference I take from your last post is that Irymple have lodged the application solely to get back at Red Cliffs for them asking for an investigation in to the Lee incident. Had Red Cliffs not lodged their application, Irymple would not have lodged theirs which confirms what I had said.
Try this Delray, make Lee Sam Curran who gets knocked out by a King Hit whilst having a scuffle on the ground with another player. He may have thrown a punch at the other player and as a result a Red Cliffs Player king hits him, knocking him out cold.
The player Curran has had the altercation with gets up and runs off uninjured. Niether player is reported as a result.
Without doubt Irymple would ask for an investigation and it should be expected. Would you really expect Red Cliffs to then lodge an application to have Curran Investigated for a hit that didn't even leave a bump or bruise. You would find it a bit funny and farsicle surely.
Yes they may all have something to answer and I agree if you are caught and found guilty you do the time. But to call an investigation in to an incident for no reason other than "You did it to us, so we will do it to you" is ridiculous.
didn't this game happen a week and a half ago. anyone care to talk about the games from 3 days ago?
i'm interested in how eagles v imps went. i see imps won a close one - is this grand final preview? is alex douglas still playing ones?
If you want to talk about the games of 3 days ago, then talk about it. Dont just ask the question mate and get everyone else to do it for you. People get on here and winge about people talking about an incident but never make comments themselves.
Imps defeated Robinvale in a close one. Scores were level at some stage in the last but Imps pulled away at the end. Robinvale fought back from about 4 or 5 goals down at one stage but couldn't keep it going. (Not there myself but heard the radio call.)
It could be the GF preview considering Moncur to come back for Robinvale. He has certainly done well the guys and the loss wouldn't have hurt them I don't think.
blood green and whites, always up there, even when least expected.
Well findings should be out soon anyway Ibis i will be waiting with anticipation for the results.
If the shoe was on the other foot I would ask the player if he would want an investigation, making it quite clear that he too could miss weeks if the other club wished to take there matter further. (As the Rules State Ibis u are not allowed to punch people in the head) Then if the player said yes and the committee supported the actions the investigation would be called.
The only difference is the Red Cliffs player/s could shape the finals and would really not want to miss the next week.
Id loved to know if the Redcliffs players were actually asked????? As they too are at fault and could be found guilty of striking.
Only time will tell!!!!!!!!!!!!
discoduck
8 Jul 2008, 17:31
If you want to talk about the games of 3 days ago, then talk about it. Dont just ask the question mate and get everyone else to do it for you. People get on here and winge about people talking about an incident but never make comments themselves.
Imps defeated Robinvale in a close one. Scores were level at some stage in the last but Imps pulled away at the end. Robinvale fought back from about 4 or 5 goals down at one stage but couldn't keep it going. (Not there myself but heard the radio call.)
It could be the GF preview considering Moncur to come back for Robinvale. He has certainly done well the guys and the loss wouldn't have hurt them I don't think.
blood green and whites, always up there, even when least expected.
bit hard to comment ibis when i live in melbourne and am just genuinely interested in how the game played out.
some might think i'm doing the right thing by not commenting when i wasn't there, by the sounds of it. :D
seriously, i'm ex-robinvale and keen to know how they're travelling, but also interested in how young alex is faring, if somebody can give some info.
fishalenko
8 Jul 2008, 17:46
Dont worry about robinvale, its probably good that they drop one sooner rather than later... despite the efforts on saturday against a genuine side i think will regroup and fight our way back to the top and finish were we deserve to be. I believe this years grand finals will be played out by:
Seniors: Robinvale v Imperials (no other team will challenge)
Reserves: Imperials v Robinvale / Irymple
Thirds: Mildura v Robinvale / Imperials
but lets get through the final few rounds first....
Seniors: Imps V Mildura - for me. Just got a feeling Ant Matthews will kick some good bags from this week onwards.
Top 4
Imps, R/Vale, W/Worth and Mild
Draftboard
9 Jul 2008, 01:06
Mate I was simply trying to state that I can not remember any recent inquiry that has come up with any new findings and suspension.
They are waste of time.
Last I can remember was the Chris Bounis / Chris Alderton one, I think he got 2.
On another note for those out of town still keen on the odd match story, Max still covers a game or two on his website.
Draftboard
9 Jul 2008, 01:41
seriously, i'm ex-robinvale and keen to know how they're travelling, but also interested in how young alex is faring, if somebody can give some info.
Can't help you with his form, but I think how Robinvale is travelling is interesting. Now second on the ladder, they have sneaked home in a few and of course Moncur now injured. I thought Shannon was a great coach and player but a Moncur (or Paul Evans) type to me is a better fit for what they are missing. So without having seen a tremendous amount of them I'd put their good season down to a better structure with Moncur and some terrific form from Ritchie Handrek down back.
Eaton, Ransome, Walder & Lee to face the tribunal on friday night. And who said investigations prove nothing
Nakriel
10 Jul 2008, 00:31
Eaton, Ransome, Walder & Lee to face the tribunal on friday night. And who said investigations prove nothing
Wish the pair of you would just build a bridge and get over it.
Let Natural justice take its course, of course one would hope the chairman excuses himself from the hearing
Ibis100
10 Jul 2008, 08:45
Eaton, Ransome, Walder & Lee to face the tribunal on friday night. And who said investigations prove nothing
The investigation hasn't PROVEN anything yet Delray. It has recommended further action and that is what has happened. It is now up to the tribunal to PROVE what happened.
Walder and Eaton charged for wrestling (A joke if ever I heard one). Both if found guilty will face a reprimand at worse. Both never been reported in their entire careers and both with a League Best and Fairest to their names which goes a long way when sentencing is considered. I believe both will get off the charge anyway.
Ransome and Lee for striking and I would imagine Red Cliffs will fight Lee pretty hard. Ransome will probably get a few and I believe he will plead guilty to the charge.
Why would the League hold this hearing on the night before a game? It leaves both teams unsure about thier sides for the game and particularly when both coaches are involved. Surely they could have put it off until next week as they did for Deckert due to his unavailability. You really have to wonder about the League sometimes.
Hey Nakkers, hope you got all the items on your list the other night. Was good to see you and say g'day mate. I agree with you about the chairman. He should not be involved seeing the family link and team link.
fishalenko
10 Jul 2008, 11:13
i think the players had a better relationship with shannon whom i believe was a great coach but the relationship between the players and moncur is different his got a more professional approach and although i havent had much to do with him i think his been a great asset to the club. playing with shan in his first year missing his 2nd and then coming back to the club i think its a better place to be this time around with the club heading in a new direction with some good young blood in the like of neyland, smythe and zaffina.
fishalenko
10 Jul 2008, 11:14
Seniors: Imps V Mildura - for me. Just got a feeling Ant Matthews will kick some good bags from this week onwards.
Top 4
Imps, R/Vale, W/Worth and Mild
As good as a player he is, i think they'll need more than a ant matthews.
Yeah i was really amazed that they would even bother with the wrestling charge.
Well the one thing we have learnt is that an investigation covers all actions invovled as my imformant told me. Wish that had have been known prior would have saved me 500 bucks.
Lee Could not possible get off the striking charge its like saying sam could get off his there is no chance.
Hear is my tips
Walder & Eaton - Reprimand
Lee - 1 to 3
Sam - 2 to 4
Nakriel
10 Jul 2008, 14:49
The investigation hasn't PROVEN anything yet Delray. It has recommended further action and that is what has happened. It is now up to the tribunal to PROVE what happened.
Walder and Eaton charged for wrestling (A joke if ever I heard one). Both if found guilty will face a reprimand at worse. Both never been reported in their entire careers and both with a League Best and Fairest to their names which goes a long way when sentencing is considered. I believe both will get off the charge anyway.
Ransome and Lee for striking and I would imagine Red Cliffs will fight Lee pretty hard. Ransome will probably get a few and I believe he will plead guilty to the charge.
Why would the League hold this hearing on the night before a game? It leaves both teams unsure about thier sides for the game and particularly when both coaches are involved. Surely they could have put it off until next week as they did for Deckert due to his unavailability. You really have to wonder about the League sometimes.
Hey Nakkers, hope you got all the items on your list the other night. Was good to see you and say g'day mate. I agree with you about the chairman. He should not be involved seeing the family link and team link.
Good to catch up mate, need notes these days got the memory retention of a gold fish unless I'm the bottle shop
usedtobethin
10 Jul 2008, 21:41
last five rounds and a good battle for fourth spot. Red Cliffs play mildura at home, (loss), merbein at home (win), rob away (loss), imps at home (loss) and w/w away (loss). mildura have r/c away (win) iry at home (win) merbein away (win) rob at home (? possible win) and imps (?). I see mildura getting in. good percentage and a full list. just my opinion of course. any thoughts?
Yeah i was really amazed that they would even bother with the wrestling charge.
Well the one thing we have learnt is that an investigation covers all actions invovled as my imformant told me. Wish that had have been known prior would have saved me 500 bucks.
Lee Could not possible get off the striking charge its like saying sam could get off his there is no chance.
Hear is my tips
Walder & Eaton - Reprimand
Lee - 1 to 3
Sam - 2 to 4
Surely considering the timing the suspensions (if any) would come into affect next week?
Ibis100
11 Jul 2008, 19:14
Surely considering the timing the suspensions (if any) would come into affect next week?
Paper stated that Peter Demetriou Congress wanted it dealt with before tomorrow. Why? Well god only knows.
Perhaps he could explain why the League will also have Eaton and Walder found guilty of Bringing the game in to disripute if found guilty of wrestling just because they were charged as a result of investigation.
If wrestling brings the game in to disrepute, surely more serious charges would result in Life Long bans to players. If that is truly a rule within the SFL, they need to have a good look and perhaps repeal that rule. How does wrestling compare to the Ben Cousins matter. Surely big bad Barry Hall has done worse and had a profoundly more detrimental effect on the game that Walder and Eaton having a bit of a push and shove on Henshilwood Oval. He wasn't found guilty of Bringing the game in to disripute by knocking out Staker in the fashion he did. I am hoping it was JOKE that Congo was having with the Sunny Daily, SURELY it was, cause I laughed my tits off when I read it.
DOUGHNUTS
11 Jul 2008, 21:33
Paper stated that Peter Demetriou Congress wanted it dealt with before tomorrow. Why? Well god only knows.
Perhaps he could explain why the League will also have Eaton and Walder found guilty of Bringing the game in to disripute if found guilty of wrestling just because they were charged as a result of investigation.
If wrestling brings the game in to disrepute, surely more serious charges would result in Life Long bans to players. If that is truly a rule within the SFL, they need to have a good look and perhaps repeal that rule. How does wrestling compare to the Ben Cousins matter. Surely big bad Barry Hall has done worse and had a profoundly more detrimental effect on the game that Walder and Eaton having a bit of a push and shove on Henshilwood Oval. He wasn't found guilty of Bringing the game in to disripute by knocking out Staker in the fashion he did. I am hoping it was JOKE that Congo was having with the Sunny Daily, SURELY it was, cause I laughed my tits off when I read it.
Ibis, its pretty easy to take pot shots at blokes who give countless hours of their time so thousands of people get the opportunity to play footy every week in our area. They are constantly bagged week in week out by people, like you, with no idea how much time and effort is involved in running a football league. If you don't like the way they do things either put up or shut up. But then again, when people question what your doing or disagree with you opinons, you just quit !!
usedtobethin
11 Jul 2008, 23:06
any tribunal news nakkers? i see your not to interested in the blues/saints on tv
His the news boys:
Walder Eaton = Guilty both Reprimands
Sam / devil/ thug = Guitly - Striking 10 weeks - 4 out 6 suspended
Lee / Innocent/ 100% ball player/ Angel - Not guilty of striking.
who would have thought :rolleyes:
think mildura are back they played team footy see how they fair up the next few weeks
Bigfoot48
14 Jul 2008, 15:58
Well here goes.
Mildura
The big dissapointment of 2008. They lost very few of the all dominating team of 2007 and recruited well to cover where they believe they lacked last year. Struggled to get a win on the board early and have been inconsistent of late. Can only see them winning 3 of their last 7 rounds so won't have enough wins to even scrape in. They will need to turn things around very quickly to make it in to the top four and from here it wouldn't seem possible.
Finish 6 7w 11L
So IBIS with 4 games to go, and having notched up 7 wins already do you still think Mildura won't win a game from now? Surely not!
I don't know why you bother with your opinons IBIS they are generally shit
Any rumours on where D. O'Bree will be next year. Shops on the market!!
Hillite
17 Jul 2008, 16:44
Just a thought.
Who do you reckon would make a good SFL coach from the current playing ranks? Someone that hasn't coached in Sunraysia previously. Not after one, just curious as to who may have what it takes.
Best Coach in the Player Ranks...
Petrie from Imps
Outside the SFL
Jade Sheedy if ever came home would be a lock
Simon Peucker would also be a decent candiate did coach a team that got relegated in Adelaide but is a great recruiter and eye for talent
Ibis100
20 Jul 2008, 21:33
Ibis, its pretty easy to take pot shots at blokes who give countless hours of their time so thousands of people get the opportunity to play footy every week in our area. They are constantly bagged week in week out by people, like you, with no idea how much time and effort is involved in running a football league. If you don't like the way they do things either put up or shut up. But then again, when people question what your doing or disagree with you opinons, you just quit !!
I'm unsure what potshots you are talking about. Is it that I referred to Congo as Demetriou. It was because he is the president of the League as Demetriou is of the AFL or did you not realise the correlation.
I questioned the League and thier rules and stated if it was a rule that a player be found guilty of Bringing the game in to disrepute simply for the reason that it was a result of an investigation, then they need to look at it. Read the post for what it is and not as a personal attack on anyone. Secondly, I quit for reasons you have no idea about and if you care to know the full story you are more than welcome to Private Message me so I can give you the full reasons why I quit coaching. They didn't simply disagree with my opinions or what I was doing, there were things behind the scenes that once I inform you of, you will probably agree with my decision to leave.
Ibis100
20 Jul 2008, 21:38
So IBIS with 4 games to go, and having notched up 7 wins already do you still think Mildura won't win a game from now? Surely not!
I don't know why you bother with your opinons IBIS they are generally shit
At the stage I wrote that post Bigmouth, sorry bigfoot, they had four wins and didn't look to be travelling very well. In three weeks they have turned it around and if you read the post it stated, They need to turn things around quickly. It would appear that things have now turned around and we are seeing a different side to what we did earlier in the year. they have worked their way back in to the four on percentage and looking at the draw they have probably snuck ahead of Red Cliffs for favourtism in fourth spot.
They had want to hope they don't slip up against merbein who have probably had their measure a couple of times over the last couple of years with shock wins.
Red Cliffs will need to defeat Robinvale this week and again I think it will be if Red Cliffs can defeat Wenty in the last round that will decide if they or Mildura will finish in fourth. Very tight finish. But if you think my opinions are shit, just don't read em or ignore em. EASY Answer for you.
Nakriel
21 Jul 2008, 00:55
At the stage I wrote that post Bigmouth, sorry bigfoot, they had four wins and didn't look to be travelling very well. In three weeks they have turned it around and if you read the post it stated, They need to turn things around quickly. It would appear that things have now turned around and we are seeing a different side to what we did earlier in the year. they have worked their way back in to the four on percentage and looking at the draw they have probably snuck ahead of Red Cliffs for favourtism in fourth spot.
They had want to hope they don't slip up against merbein who have probably had their measure a couple of times over the last couple of years with shock wins.
Red Cliffs will need to defeat Robinvale this week and again I think it will be if Red Cliffs can defeat Wenty in the last round that will decide if they or Mildura will finish in fourth. Very tight finish. But if you think my opinions are shit, just don't read em or ignore em. EASY Answer for you.
Traveling well and just keeping a lid on it (sounds familiar) I'm tipping a few sides in the four don't want us there
Ibis100
21 Jul 2008, 14:49
Traveling well and just keeping a lid on it (sounds familiar) I'm tipping a few sides in the four don't want us there
Yes Nakkers, If you make the finals you will be difficult to beat. You have the experience that is for sure. Good win by Wenty, but looking at the score board they didn't have it thier own way. The green and whites will no doubt be spending some quality time in front of goal this week.
TAJAMANIA
21 Jul 2008, 17:52
Just a thought.
Who do you reckon would make a good SFL coach from the current playing ranks? Someone that hasn't coached in Sunraysia previously. Not after one, just curious as to who may have what it takes.
Nath Gowers from redcliffs
Leigh Riordan from Merbein
Sam Curran from Irymple
Col Keatch from Merbein
Austin Rigby from Wenty
Brett Oldham from Redcliffs...
Just a few that have great leadership skills on and off the field that could coach...
wayne23
22 Jul 2008, 07:51
Yes Nakkers, If you make the finals you will be difficult to beat. You have the experience that is for sure. Good win by Wenty, but looking at the score board they didn't have it thier own way. The green and whites will no doubt be spending some quality time in front of goal this week.
Wenty deserved to win and were the better team on the day.
After the last week or 2 of footy I think its possible for any of the top 4 to win the flag. No real clear cut favourite, maybe Imps just. Red Cliffs won't make finals, you are kidding yourself Ibis.
Ibis100
22 Jul 2008, 10:45
The Joel Bowden rushed behind issue has been discussed at length, but no-one has considered the following with regard to the second rushed behind where he handballed the ball through after being called to play on by the umpire.
According to the rules, in order to play on from a kick out, the kicker must first kick the ball to themself before the ball, or they run out of the square. The only other option is to kick the ball out of the square, you simply cannot handball the ball directly from a kick out or step across the line. (The rules do not stipulate the front, side or rear line that I know of.) The result of failing to kick the ball to yourself even after the umpire calls play on, or stepping over the line results in a ball up at the top of the square. This action makes any further actions outside the square nul and void.
I would say we all agree on this.
So how is it that this is different if rushing a behind. The rear line of the square isn't there just for good looks. The behind isn't registered until the entire ball has gone over the line, thus it must be either kicked through or the player must kick to himself prior to handballing it through or stepping through otherwise the above rule would take effect and the point would not count.
Joel Bowden handballed the ball through from a kick out without kicking to himself and therefore he should have been pulled up for failing to play on correctly and a bounce should have been called by the Umpire.
My take on this matter is that the Umpire had made an error.
Please, someone tell me if I am correct or if there is a specific rule that allows for handballing and playing on without kicking to yourself when rushing a behind from a kickout.
Ibis100
22 Jul 2008, 10:48
Wenty deserved to win and were the better team on the day.
After the last week or 2 of footy I think its possible for any of the top 4 to win the flag. No real clear cut favourite, maybe Imps just. Red Cliffs won't make finals, you are kidding yourself Ibis.
I don't think so. They have spent the best part of the year in the top four, only slipping out on two occasions. They are out only on percentage at the moment with very few games to go. They need only win one more game than Mildura and they make the finals. The season with the top 5 is very even and any one of them can win on a given day at the moment. I said in my last post that Mildura have firmed as favourite for fourth spot, but I am far from dismissing Red Cliffs until it is mathematically impossible.
I don't think so. They have spent the best part of the year in the top four, only slipping out on two occasions. They are out only on percentage at the moment with very few games to go. They need only win one more game than Mildura and they make the finals. The season with the top 5 is very even and any one of them can win on a given day at the moment. I said in my last post that Mildura have firmed as favourite for fourth spot, but I am far from dismissing Red Cliffs until it is mathematically impossible.
From what we witnessed of Redcliffs 2 weeks ago against Mildura, it would be a shame if they (Redcliffs) made it...
fishalenko
22 Jul 2008, 14:26
The Joel Bowden rushed behind issue has been discussed at length, but no-one has considered the following with regard to the second rushed behind where he handballed the ball through after being called to play on by the umpire.
According to the rules, in order to play on from a kick out, the kicker must first kick the ball to themself before the ball, or they run out of the square. The only other option is to kick the ball out of the square, you simply cannot handball the ball directly from a kick out or step across the line. (The rules do not stipulate the front, side or rear line that I know of.) The result of failing to kick the ball to yourself even after the umpire calls play on, or stepping over the line results in a ball up at the top of the square. This action makes any further actions outside the square nul and void.
I would say we all agree on this.
So how is it that this is different if rushing a behind. The rear line of the square isn't there just for good looks. The behind isn't registered until the entire ball has gone over the line, thus it must be either kicked through or the player must kick to himself prior to handballing it through or stepping through otherwise the above rule would take effect and the point would not count.
Joel Bowden handballed the ball through from a kick out without kicking to himself and therefore he should have been pulled up for failing to play on correctly and a bounce should have been called by the Umpire.
My take on this matter is that the Umpire had made an error.
Please, someone tell me if I am correct or if there is a specific rule that allows for handballing and playing on without kicking to yourself when rushing a behind from a kickout.
I think your right mate.... it should have been a ball up and from a good source im told that there gonna take it further as a club to get AN ANSWER????
Yaaablett
22 Jul 2008, 16:12
The Joel Bowden rushed behind issue has been discussed at length, but no-one has considered the following with regard to the second rushed behind where he handballed the ball through after being called to play on by the umpire.
According to the rules, in order to play on from a kick out, the kicker must first kick the ball to themself before the ball, or they run out of the square. The only other option is to kick the ball out of the square, you simply cannot handball the ball directly from a kick out or step across the line. (The rules do not stipulate the front, side or rear line that I know of.) The result of failing to kick the ball to yourself even after the umpire calls play on, or stepping over the line results in a ball up at the top of the square. This action makes any further actions outside the square nul and void.
I would say we all agree on this.
So how is it that this is different if rushing a behind. The rear line of the square isn't there just for good looks. The behind isn't registered until the entire ball has gone over the line, thus it must be either kicked through or the player must kick to himself prior to handballing it through or stepping through otherwise the above rule would take effect and the point would not count.
Joel Bowden handballed the ball through from a kick out without kicking to himself and therefore he should have been pulled up for failing to play on correctly and a bounce should have been called by the Umpire.
My take on this matter is that the Umpire had made an error.
Please, someone tell me if I am correct or if there is a specific rule that allows for handballing and playing on without kicking to yourself when rushing a behind from a kickout.
I would agree Jason but one small thing..........he did kick to himself before he handballed it through the second time.
mullethead
22 Jul 2008, 16:44
I would agree Jason but one small thing..........he did kick to himself before he handballed it through the second time.I agree Yab, it has been replayed 100 times IBIS, did you even watch it???????
Ibis100
22 Jul 2008, 19:15
I agree Yab, it has been replayed 100 times IBIS, did you even watch it???????
Yes, I watched the game as I am a keen Bomber supporter. I stand corrected if he kicked to himself but I can't recall seeing him do that. I only recall the hanball after he was rushed by the Bomber Player. It is possible I was watching the bomber player and missed the kick.
Bigfoot48
23 Jul 2008, 13:40
The Joel Bowden rushed behind issue has been discussed at length, but no-one has considered the following with regard to the second rushed behind where he handballed the ball through after being called to play on by the umpire.
According to the rules, in order to play on from a kick out, the kicker must first kick the ball to themself before the ball, or they run out of the square. The only other option is to kick the ball out of the square, you simply cannot handball the ball directly from a kick out or step across the line. (The rules do not stipulate the front, side or rear line that I know of.) The result of failing to kick the ball to yourself even after the umpire calls play on, or stepping over the line results in a ball up at the top of the square. This action makes any further actions outside the square nul and void.
I would say we all agree on this.
So how is it that this is different if rushing a behind. The rear line of the square isn't there just for good looks. The behind isn't registered until the entire ball has gone over the line, thus it must be either kicked through or the player must kick to himself prior to handballing it through or stepping through otherwise the above rule would take effect and the point would not count.
Joel Bowden handballed the ball through from a kick out without kicking to himself and therefore he should have been pulled up for failing to play on correctly and a bounce should have been called by the Umpire.
My take on this matter is that the Umpire had made an error.
Please, someone tell me if I am correct or if there is a specific rule that allows for handballing and playing on without kicking to yourself when rushing a behind from a kickout.
See your wrong again Ibis, I don't know why you bother....
Bigfoot48
23 Jul 2008, 13:42
I'm unsure what potshots you are talking about. Is it that I referred to Congo as Demetriou. It was because he is the president of the League as Demetriou is of the AFL or did you not realise the correlation.
I questioned the League and thier rules and stated if it was a rule that a player be found guilty of Bringing the game in to disrepute simply for the reason that it was a result of an investigation, then they need to look at it. Read the post for what it is and not as a personal attack on anyone. Secondly, I quit for reasons you have no idea about and if you care to know the full story you are more than welcome to Private Message me so I can give you the full reasons why I quit coaching. They didn't simply disagree with my opinions or what I was doing, there were things behind the scenes that once I inform you of, you will probably agree with my decision to leave.
So why did you quit?? I just thought it was cause you were no good
JoondalupJ
26 Jul 2008, 20:47
G'Day north western Vic people. I remember Johnny James coaching Robinvale about three and four centurys ago.I just love hearing people talk about those clubs names that I remember when I was a kid ,and they're all still there. I hope the Murray Darling is all saved and the mallee life goes on forever. Good luck, all the best from the far west.
As the song goes "keep your eyes on the red and the blue":thumbsu:
Well now, are all those truth-sayers, the pelicans and the birds alike, willing to admit that Red Cliffs will not make the finals and Mildura are the real deal.
fishalenko
4 Aug 2008, 13:19
the dees looked good on saturday against a 80% full eagle outfit all excuses aside mildura played well and look good coming into the finals....
Who's looking like B&F winners at each club n mcleod n gallagher faves???
godsofrichmond
4 Aug 2008, 20:37
Originally Posted by Ibis100 http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/showthread.php?p=11796005#post11796005)
The Joel Bowden rushed behind issue has been discussed at length, but no-one has considered the following with regard to the second rushed behind where he handballed the ball through after being called to play on by the umpire.
just to finish off on this. your first sentanced not only asked the question but answered it the same time. he was told to play on, so therefore nothing about the playing on rules count. just thought that bit was funny.
I thought this whole situation was well over rated though. Joel has been given credit for being smart about the situation. but have you heard from Joel about it. You havent, and do you know why. The reason why he did what he did was because he simply had no one to kick it to. The bombers went one on one and formed a zone. just to try and turn the ball over. he wasnt running the clock down, he just didnt have a better option. if he was running the clock, why would he kick it to jordan mcmahon on the third kick. who inturned played on. why would he take that risk if he was running the clock.
for me it was just a big beat up.
Yaaablett
5 Aug 2008, 09:40
just to finish off on this. your first sentanced not only asked the question but answered it the same time. he was told to play on, so therefore nothing about the playing on rules count. just thought that bit was funny.
I thought this whole situation was well over rated though. Joel has been given credit for being smart about the situation. but have you heard from Joel about it. You havent, and do you know why. The reason why he did what he did was because he simply had no one to kick it to. The bombers went one on one and formed a zone. just to try and turn the ball over. he wasnt running the clock down, he just didnt have a better option. if he was running the clock, why would he kick it to jordan mcmahon on the third kick. who inturned played on. why would he take that risk if he was running the clock.
for me it was just a big beat up.
You're wrong. You still have to either kick it out of the square or kick to yourself then do what you like after being called to play on.
I was in a store in RCliffs the other day and overheard a few fellows talking about a stoush between Jbell & Mfaulkhead a f/n ago at Doms or a function.:eek: (Both can go abit so would be a good fight!!)
Said that they were trying to work out who was the better FF.:confused:
Apparently A Rigby & B Oldman had to step in to break it up.
Funny though that these 4 will line up against each other this weekend.
Anyone see or hear about this one??
TAJAMANIA
5 Aug 2008, 18:42
I was in a store in RCliffs the other day and overheard a few fellows talking about a stoush between Jbell & Mfaulkhead a f/n ago at Doms or a function.:eek: (Both can go abit so would be a good fight!!)
Said that they were trying to work out who was the better FF.:confused:
Apparently A Rigby & B Oldman had to step in to break it up.
Funny though that these 4 will line up against each other this weekend.
Anyone see or hear about this one??
Yes was there n seen the whole thing! not much in it, Bouncers got there b4 it really got going! will be very interesting to watch the game this wknd!!
Yes was there n seen the whole thing! not much in it, Bouncers got there b4 it really got going! will be very interesting to watch the game this wknd!!
Yeah not much in it at all, too much alcohol involved from what i saw. Curran would have to be favourite for the Mcleod, from what I've seen he's had a stand out season. Warrwick Brady from Wenty would be a rough outside chance to finish up the leader board.
deposit
13 Aug 2008, 08:56
Has the footy season finished down there boys? not much news coming through to keep the people out of town up to date with what is going on
fishalenko
13 Aug 2008, 12:25
all over
imps
rvale
wenty
mildura
redcliffs
irymple
sth
merbein
Prediction re tomorrow-
Mildura to get back on track on the road to back to back!
Hillite
17 Aug 2008, 09:40
Prediction re tomorrow-
Mildura to get back on track on the road to back to back!
Obviously the dees need a new street directory.
Rabbito
19 Aug 2008, 16:23
As the song goes "keep your eyes on the red and the blue":thumbsu:
Maybe "red white and blue, roo roo roo!!"
Very quite on the game over the weekend, did anyone on here go?
Mildura were out coached-outplayed, by Alves and a hand full of u/18's players.
Nakriel
19 Aug 2008, 18:24
Maybe "red white and blue, roo roo roo!!"
Very quite on the game over the weekend, did anyone on here go?
Mildura were out coached-outplayed, by Alves and a hand full of u/18's
players.
Thoroughly deserved win the Roo boys were a little bit hungrier I think, Alvey should be going for an oscar for the fall he took though:D
What do they reckon about Nick Giofre? Kid any good? Got a future at all?
Hillite
21 Aug 2008, 14:51
Very Quiet!!!
Imps Sen. to win Sat
Iry reserves to win
Mild. U18
Imps managing to win friends and influence people.
Wenty should have been a bit more observant and picked up on the u16s in the paper on Fridaay.
Did imps query the rule with the SFL?
I reckon imps would ahve won anyway. But without the u16 they would ahve been short and you never know what would have happened.
Mcleod medal .. maybe Curran .
Finishing the home and away games two weeks early.?? Any thoughts?
Weather not too good.
dunkarob
21 Aug 2008, 20:21
Very Quiet!!!
Imps Sen. to win Sat
Iry reserves to win
Mild. U18
Imps managing to win friends and influence people.
Wenty should have been a bit more observant and picked up on the u16s in the paper on Fridaay.
Did imps query the rule with the SFL?
I reckon imps would ahve won anyway. But without the u16 they would ahve been short and you never know what would have happened.
Mcleod medal .. maybe Curran .
Finishing the home and away games two weeks early.?? Any thoughts?
Weather not too good.
plrease explain what happened
imps would have won anyway but wenty were told they couldnt have no under 16s that didnt qualify! wenty queried the rule sat b4 the game when imps had named the u16 imps gave roos coach a copy of the 2005 rules which arent the same apparently..... dont think it matters much be hard 4 them to beat r/vale or mildura to get into the finals