P*ssed off !

[jod23]

Originally posted by mantis


So are you saying that the Eagles slump is beccause of outside factors & no blame at all on the Eagles heirarchy over recruiting.

I hope the Club doesn't feel that way, because if they do you are in for a bad time, you had problems in your club like all clubs, you have to look at administration, recruiting & even team selections, you can't blame the woes of your club on someone else.

The Bombers went through a bad slump from 1986, got rid of too many people at once & we suffered, the club was to blame pure & simple.

I want you guys to start doing well again so we can have the rivalry back from the 90's.

I think its a bit of both...

 

[kuepper]

Originally posted by Geonet
Kuepper, sophistry is the game of people with great intelectual skills and your talking about statistics doesn't make you smart.

I never once mentioned statistics, I merely asked you to substantiate your arguement, no more ... no less. WHich, you still dodge, this time by hammering the old thesauraus eh?

o don't prove you are right when you demand others to elaborate and they don't follow your conditions. You don't make the rules and the mentioning of words like "ridiculous" and "impossible" leads me to believe about your limited discernment over matters that seemed to be carefully analysed by the patrons of your club outside WA.

No, Ill happily explain the fact it isnt the case, as soon as you explain HOW it is - Im not the one that got allk worked up and started bleating about the introduction of Freo champ, and the massive conspiracy aimed at your side to nobble your premiership winning ways, which is, well crap.

You may have noticed that your fellow supporters have been conspicous by their absnce in supporting your theories, wondered why?

So don't expect a mathematics symposium to define the probabilities of success of one or two teams. But if you're so keen to prove that I am wrong please be my guest. Give me the numbers, the statistics that is! And don't be afraid to spell the numbers in detail that prove me wrong because I'm not bad at maths. In conclusion not only you don't impress me but I also concede nothing to you. Any other adjectives you use to prop up your cause will be treated as trivial babble.

ok, let me help you here.

In a national competition, with an AFL draft based on season end rankings, the location of a side is irrelevant - the higher you finish, the later you pick.

Now, if all sides are in the same state ... or even in different countires, this is irrelevant - you will still pick relative to your finishing postion.

I in fact place the counter arguement, that since Freo have been your whipping boys, we have in fact helped gift you 2 wins most years, thus helping you in your endevours in the AFL - far from hindering them ... perhaps you'd care to pull the dictionary out and talk your way around that one?

 

[Portia]

Fremantle weakens the Eagles in a draft & recruiting situation because there are now two clubs that are intimately familiar with their local competition instead of one. Every club knows more about their local competition's players than clubs from other states. Now there's more competition for smokeys.

When Fremantle came into the league, they r*ped the WAFL....for a couple of years, the Eagles were pretty much forced to look interstate for their recruits, with little success. They could have dealt with this better.

The improvement in the WA juniors system brought the WA players to national attention, making it even harder for West Coast to squirrel away a good local player or two for a late draft pick. In SA, its pretty clear that some good players can still be around pretty late because we bomb out in the teal cup every year.

Many factors came into the decline of the Eagles. Freo's entry was certainly one of them - how many 25-26 year olds (players 18 in 1995) are there at the Eagles?

 

[kuepper]

Originally posted by Porthos
Fremantle weakens the Eagles in a draft & recruiting situation because there are now two clubs that are intimately familiar with their local competition instead of one. Every club knows more about their local competition's players than clubs from other states. Now there's more competition for smokeys.

That is simply not true.

Every club, has tape on every single draftee who nominates, and decent footgae of it - the top 100 or so, they would have seen them live a multitude of times, and have footage of every game they had played that year ... it is far too professional today to draft on hunches and smokeys, it simply doesnt exist.

They may be familair because more of the recruiting staff see their local league, and there may be slight bias and preference to 'local' players - but there is no way in the modern era clubs are so unprepared as you may think.

When Fremantle came into the league, they r*ped the WAFL....for a couple of years, the Eagles were pretty much forced to look interstate for their recruits, with little success. They could have dealt with this better.

Ryubbish - what knowledge do you have of the WAFL my friend?
by 1995, the WAFL had been r*ped ... Freo was left with the scraps to form a squad, and their results showed this ... nothing to do with their introduction, I can assure you - yes, once again more players went out the firtst year, but the quality was average a t best.

The improvement in the WA juniors system brought the WA players to national attention, making it even harder for West Coast to squirrel away a good local player or two for a late draft pick. In SA, its pretty clear that some good players can still be around pretty late because we bomb out in the teal cup every year.

Once again, how do you think players like Luke Pchparlin, drfated top 10 by Hawthorn, without ever playing a WAFL game get drafted? Ill tell you - because EVERY club has footage of him, playing school and colts games - and probably had a scout on the ground watching as well. The days of hiding a player from prying eyes have long long gone - it is simply impossible to do - you severely underestimate the time and planning that goes into drating, if you believe that can occur.

Many factors came into the decline of the Eagles. Freo's entry was certainly one of them - how many 25-26 year olds (players 18 in 1995) are there at the Eagles?

Yes, bugger all, and why? because their drafting sucked the big one.

Any year after Freo's admittance, choose one (watches Porthos run to afl.com.au stats to pick best result year for his arguement! ), I can show you many, many quality WA (and national) players drafted AFTER the toaster's has their picks - it is plainly and simply bad recruiting on their part, yuou can make up conspiracy theories til the cows come home, or you can simply disagree with me, because you can bring yourself to agree, my arrogant port scum friend, but the facts tell the story

 

[Portia]

Originally posted by kuepper
They may be familair because more of the recruiting staff see their local league, and there may be slight bias and preference to 'local' players - but there is no way in the modern era clubs are so unprepared as you may think.

I never said they were unprepared. I said that local sides are better prepared.

Ryubbish - what knowledge do you have of the WAFL my friend?
by 1995, the WAFL had been r*ped ... Freo was left with the scraps to form a squad, and their results showed this ... nothing to do with their introduction, I can assure you - yes, once again more players went out the firtst year, but the quality was average a t best.

The WAFL had been r*ped? By who? Were there no junior players? And I thought you could show lists of junior players drafted by other clubs that West Coast overlooked - surely you (Freo) must also have?

The days of hiding a player from prying eyes have long long gone - it is simply impossible to do - you severely underestimate the time and planning that goes into drating, if you believe that can occur.

I really don't. Yet I'm aware that clubs can get to know their local players - they can see how they stack up against players already in their squad in the WAFL. Luke McPharlin was an example of a player that went a lot earlier in the draft than expected - unsurprisingly to the unofficial 3rd WA team in Hawthorn - again, the higher profile of the WA juniors that I mentioned previously would impact here.

In reference to lack of 25-26 year olds on Eagles list
Yes, bugger all, and why? because their drafting sucked the big one.

I never said it didn't. It was certainly impacted on by Fremantle's entry. Winning a premiership and having local talent sucked out for a couple of years does no good to your drafting, even with a competent recruiter.

Any year after Freo's admittance, choose one (watches Porthos run to afl.com.au stats to pick best result year for his arguement! ), I can show you many, many quality WA (and national) players drafted AFTER the toaster's has their picks

Why would I run to get stats that you said you were going to show me? I choose the 1995 national draft, thanks, if its -after- Freo's admittance (which is rather pointless, because the whole thing was Freo's admittance raping the WAFL).

- it is plainly and simply bad recruiting on their part, yuou can make up conspiracy theories til the cows come home, or you can simply disagree with me, because you can bring yourself to agree, my arrogant port scum friend, but the facts tell the story

So fact me, kuepper.

 

[Frodo]

Originally posted by mantis
I know I will get my head bitten off for this, but don't you think that maybe during the Malthouse era, he was only caring about success at the time & wasn't planning for the future, so your recruiting for a number of years was almost non existent.

I believe this is why the Eagles are in a slump now, but hopefully the young players you have recruited in the last couple of years will start paying off.

Think it is a bit mean to blame outside influences for your Clubs bad recruiting for a number of years.

OK I have donned my flame proof suit & am in the bunker, let rip.

I guess the same can be levelled at most clubs, notably Essendon where despite recent dominance they only have one flag to show and their youngsters were shown to be way below the ability of the Eagles youngsters last Saturday.
But rather than blame the club/coach then look at the system. Whilst the bombers have been getting pick 15 and 16 in the draft and having to offlead players due to the salary cap WCE has had good picks and priority picks. The poor recruiting argument only applies to the 10 years in the finals when we were 'shafted' by the system in a similar way to how Essendon is now (although we didn't resort to cap cheating). And through that trading we still picked up the likes of Cousins, Gardiner and Wirrpunda.

 

[kuepper]

Originally posted by Porthos
So fact me, kuepper.

Id love to tell you to get facted, but bad puns arent my style.

Ok, lets look at the recruting for that year shall we?

1995:

#3 Brendon Fewster West Coast West Perth

#14 Luke Trew West Coast Murray (U18)

#30 Craig Smoker West Coast West Perth

#43 Jonson Clifton West Coast Swan Districts

#56 Paul Whitelaw West Coast West Perth

#65 Neil Marshall West Coast Claremont

The first thing you will notice is that none are still at the club for one, and in fact only one is still in the AFL now (and sadly for Freo, the lumberjack himself, Buzz Fewster) and all bar one were WA guys.

Now, that alone speaks volumes about the recruiting that year really - that is total rubbish.

As an example, of only WA based players: Daniel Chick went at #25, Ronnie Burns at #48, and even Mathew Carr at #63 - all quality AFL players, all from the WAFL (and yes, all not recruited by Freo either, but that isnt the point of this dscussion) - as an aside Brent Harvey went at #46, and Kane Johnson at #28, to name but 2 other options.

That, pure and simply, is rubbish recruiting - conspiracy or no conspiracy, r*ped WAFL or not.

Now do you get the picture my good man?

Frodo - re: your selections below, yes Trading #1 for GArdiner was a good call, Benny was a father/son recruitment, and Wirrapunda a 16yo pre draft concession for losing an uncontracted player - so not really 'draftees' per se.

 

[Geonet]

Kuepper the fact that you repeat the same demands doesn't make me concede anything. Read again what I said previously in several threads and if you repeat yourself like a parrot I will have no choice but ask you to read again and again the same stuff until you get lost in an endless loop. But what's worse is that you deny that you mentioned statistics when you clearly said (quote) "...realise that it is factually, and statistically, completely ridiculous and impossible..."

What a grandiose statement is the one above! So you clearly said "statistically impossible" Therefore I am waiting for your statistics. Not that I need them. It's just you that decided to mathmatize the discussion. And if you wish you can also explain a few things about your 1.8 million dollars deficit and after that how could your club afford to buy so many players at premium prices.

Now about my fellow supporters absence you are once again wrong. I have in fact received supporting emails to my posts and two public ones and one of them isn't even an Eagles supporter. But if my fellow supporters don't post about this issue I can understand them because this matter has been considered taboo in footy circles. People just talk about the matter in private. What I said in my first post has been discussed to "ad nauseaum" privatelly and if you haven't heard anything it's probably because you have been distracted by less important issues.

 

[Captain Random]

Originally posted by kuepper
Frodo - re: your selections below, yes Trading #1 for GArdiner was a good call, Benny was a father/son recruitment, and Wirrapunda a 16yo pre draft concession for losing an uncontracted player - so not really 'draftees' per se.

You've made this distinction before. How are the above picks not 'draftees' for the purpose of the argument? Did the AFL order the Eagles to take Gardiner?

You can still waste the No 1 pick - nobody remembers the likes of Anthony Banik or Steven Hooper

 

[Portia]

Clement, Koops, Carroll, and Gavin Mitchell were removed from the draft - picked by Freo as zone picks before the draft began.

They missed Daniel Chick in a period at which Ken Judge had his hooks in his old club East Fremantle. Its not quite like he was left until pick #79, is it. Matthew Carr changed clubs twice before he got good, so I don't think he really counts as an oversight, while Ronnie Burns is the odd one out.

They drafted Brendon Fewster as the #3 pick - a player that is in his 7th season this year. There have been early picks that have done much worse.

Yes, they drafted poorly - the reason they drafted poorly is because they relied on their previous wonderful drafting ground WA. The problem was that it was a poor WA crop, and had already been pulled apart by Fremantle with zone selections.

Now they had to share that ground with Fremantle, which obviously took some adjustment - they had to get used to national drafting, which at that time was only pretty minor from any non-Vic clubs.

The introduction of Fremantle saw West Coast's prime recruiting ground that had won them two premierships halved, and saw an evolution into a national outlook when drafting. They're recovering now.

To deny that Fremantle coming in and also liking to take WA players (with higher priority zone picks), as well as having plenty to trade for returning players (uncontracted player selections) had a substantial impact on West Coast is naive.

 

[Portia]

Originally posted by carneagles
You've made this distinction before. How are the above picks not 'draftees' for the purpose of the argument? Did the AFL order the Eagles to take Gardiner?

I was wondering why Gardiner was considered to be a real pick if Wirrpunda wasn't. The #1 West Coast got him for was also a compensation pick...as much as Wirrpunda.

Ah well.

 

[kuepper]

Originally posted by Porthos
Clement, Koops, Carroll, and Gavin Mitchell were removed from the draft - picked by Freo as zone picks before the draft began.

The first 2 are decent AFL players, the other 2 hacks - they have Carroll back now, so all is forgiven there

They missed Daniel Chick in a period at which Ken Judge had his hooks in his old club East Fremantle. Its not quite like he was left until pick #79, is it. Matthew Carr changed clubs twice before he got good, so I don't think he really counts as an oversight, while Ronnie Burns is the odd one out.

The point is, the missed on all bar one (and the #3 pick to boot) completely - I have just shown you factually how poor those sleections were - from memory, i dont think ANY of them even played ONE game with the club - I am not denying the cmmencement of Freo had an impact, of course it did - what I am denying that the short term impact a new club's admittance has (lets say 2-3 years MAX) was a conspiracy to nobble the eagles.

They drafted Brendon Fewster as the #3 pick - a player that is in his 7th season this year. There have been early picks that have done much worse.

I agree, but a #3 pick for him, is really laughable at the end of the day - would you be happy if Port picked upa 'Fewster Calibre' player at #3?

Yes, they drafted poorly - the reason they drafted poorly is because they relied on their previous wonderful drafting ground WA. The problem was that it was a poor WA crop, and had already been pulled apart by Fremantle with zone selections.

Then in that case, that is shoicking planning on their behalf, they knew at least 2 years ahead a new liscence from WA would be granted, so it is surely in their best interest then to expand their net, and start working to that point - to claim that it is Freo's fault that they have no foresight, is laughable ... when does the blame actually lie with the coasters?

Now they had to share that ground with Fremantle, which obviously took some adjustment - they had to get used to national drafting, which at that time was only pretty minor from any non-Vic clubs.

Ok, so once again - they had ample time, why not do it - if you add in any of the 4 priority picks that Freo took, lets say Clement for one, thier draft overall still bites ... its a crutch used to justify poor recruiting, simple as that.

The introduction of Fremantle saw West Coast's prime recruiting ground that had won them two premierships halved, and saw an evolution into a national outlook when drafting. They're recovering now.

Rubbish, the recuirting ground of WA was, and still is, a national pool - there are no zones, there are no concessions - PLENTY of WA born players were doing very well in the AFL at a multitude of other clubs ... that really is a tad ridiculous.

To deny that Fremantle coming in and also liking to take WA players (with higher priority zone picks), as well as having plenty to trade for returning players (uncontracted player selections) had a substantial impact on West Coast is naive.

I dont do that in any way shape or form.

This whole thread commenced as Geonet claimed that Freo were a master plan to stop West Coast winning flags.

That is rubbish.

You asked for facts, I gace them to you - what more can I do?

 

[kuepper]

Originally posted by carneagles
You've made this distinction before. How are the above picks not 'draftees' for the purpose of the argument? Did the AFL order the Eagles to take Gardiner?

Allow me to quote the best source I know, me :

yes Trading #1 for GArdiner was a good call

So I was saying, that getting Gardiner for the #1 pick, was a GOOD call, not a bad one.

Ill say it again: GOOD.

So sorry for te misunderstanding, but I think he was a selection of note ... got it

You can still waste the No 1 pick - nobody remembers the likes of Anthony Banik or Steven Hooper

Nobody? you do

 

[kuepper]

Originally posted by Porthos
I was wondering why Gardiner was considered to be a real pick if Wirrpunda wasn't. The #1 West Coast got him for was also a compensation pick...as much as Wirrpunda.

Nope, I think you will find, that West Coast traded for him - in fact maybe even to your good selves, the power - what did you swap for Brayden Lyle and Shane Bond? They definately 'traded up' to that pick, as it was #1 pick in the draft proper, where as Wirrapunda was a 16yo concession pick, for wait for it ... the loss of the dynamo tony Godden to Freo.

Damn that uncontracted player rule, damn it to hell

 

[Captain Random]

From your earlier post ...

so not really 'draftees' per se.

You're arguing about the Eagles being crap recruiters, and then you're drawing a distinction between these guys and other draftees. Why? They're just as relevant in this context

It just looks like an arbitrary distinction to remove three guys who don't support the argument

And I only remember Hooper because I found it so amusing that a guy whose only achievement was poleaxing Basil Zempilas was picked at No 1

 

[Portia]

Originally posted by kuepper
I am not denying the cmmencement of Freo had an impact, of course it did - what I am denying that the short term impact a new club's admittance has (lets say 2-3 years MAX) was a conspiracy to nobble the eagles.

I agree, but it probably was a hoped for side effect. How much demand was there for a Fremantle football club previously?

As for how it continues to affect the competition....

Jeff Farmer wants to return to WA. Peter Bell wants to return to WA. Daniel Chick wants to return to WA. Jonathan Hay wants to return to WA. Des Headland wants to return to WA. Without a Fremantle, the Eagles are the only team in town to talk to....and if the player is threatening to leave, there's only one club they can talk turkey with. No West Coast and Fremantle bidding for his services....just one bidder. Much more likely to get a better trade, and to not have to pay the player so much if they want to go home - "Its our club or no club"

They're certainly not in that kind of position now. They have to bid, because there are now other options for both clubs and players.

I agree, but a #3 pick for him, is really laughable at the end of the day - would you be happy if Port picked upa 'Fewster Calibre' player at #3?

We've already done the equivalent...Ian Downsborough for the #1 (Gardiner). Michael Stevens at #5 in 1998 isn't setting the world on fire yet either. No, I wasn't happy, but it does happen....Fewster has achieved more for them than either of those players have for us - who did they trade him for again?

Then in that case, that is shoicking planning on their behalf, they knew at least 2 years ahead a new liscence from WA would be granted, so it is surely in their best interest then to expand their net, and start working to that point - to claim that it is Freo's fault that they have no foresight, is laughable ... when does the blame actually lie with the coasters?

They recruited stupidly. This has been said. But they recruited stupidly because they thought WA was something it isn't.

Rubbish, the recuirting ground of WA was, and still is, a national pool - there are no zones, there are no concessions - PLENTY of WA born players were doing very well in the AFL at a multitude of other clubs ... that really is a tad ridiculous.

Yes, it was a national pool. And West Coast primarily recruited from it. And then it was reduced for two years by another club getting first dibs.

I don't see why you're having trouble accepting that West Coast recruiters saw WA as its own private sanctuary.

 

[Portia]

Originally posted by kuepper

Nope, I think you will find, that West Coast traded for him - in fact maybe even to your good selves, the power - what did you swap for Brayden Lyle and Shane Bond? They definately 'traded up' to that pick, as it was #1 pick in the draft proper, where as Wirrapunda was a 16yo concession pick, for wait for it ... the loss of the dynamo tony Godden to Freo.

Damn that uncontracted player rule, damn it to hell

Trent Cummings for Lyle and Bond.

 

[kuepper]

Originally posted by carneagles
You're arguing about the Eagles being crap recruiters, and then you're drawing a distinction between these guys and other draftees. Why? They're just as relevant in this context.

Why? because in a draft, you must operate in the context of the system, ie: picking from the order you have been placed.

In the Father/son Rule, benny chose you, not the other way around - he could of gone to Freo, Or Geelong - he CHOSE west coast - so not exactly a pick there now is it?

In regards to wirrapunda, any club, with access to it, could pick a 16yo BEFORE the draft and do well - Essendon chose Mathew Lloyd with theirs - i mean it is literally saying ' ok we'll grab one of the best say 5 16yo in the country' hardly rocket science is it?

It just looks like an arbitrary distinction to remove three guys who don't support the argument

How so? We are talking about the draft, so I used National Draft figures - Both Cousins and Wirrapunda were not part of the national draft in this context - you do understand what I mean here yeah?

And I only remember Hooper because I found it so amusing that a guy whose only achievement was poleaxing Basil Zempilas was picked at No 1

Then Mr Hooper deserves more, i'll happily contribute $10 personally to anyone who irons out that tosser.

 

[kuepper]

Originally posted by Porthos
I don't see why you're having trouble accepting that West Coast recruiters saw WA as its own private sanctuary.

I seddenly realised that we were basically arguing the same side, so ill say this to you - I have no problem admitting or accepting the above, and that supports my arguement - naive and short sighted recruiting policies, not the introduction of a new side caused the downfall.

Also, you make valid points re: return of players to a home state - that is the only possible benefit they lost ... but at the end of the day you cannot survive on recruiting homesick players.

So, we are on the same page basically here, should we take screenshots for prosperity?

 

[Captain Random]

Originally posted by kuepper
Why? because in a draft, you must operate in the context of the system, ie: picking from the order you have been placed.

In the Father/son Rule, benny chose you, not the other way around - he could of gone to Freo, Or Geelong - he CHOSE west coast - so not exactly a pick there now is it?

Fair point. Mind you, you can't say the Eagles didn't played a hand in his personal selection process, but that's wandering off track a bit

In regards to wirrapunda, any club, with access to it, could pick a 16yo BEFORE the draft and do well - Essendon chose Mathew Lloyd with theirs - i mean it is literally saying ' ok we'll grab one of the best say 5 16yo in the country' hardly rocket science is it?

You'd think so, but I've given you two examples already where it was a bit too hard for the likes of Richmond and Geelong. And before the draft or otherwise - the Eagles still had to choose Wirrapunda. So he's just as relevant to the argument

How so? We are talking about the draft, so I used National Draft figures - Both Cousins and Wirrapunda were not part of the national draft in this context - you do understand what I mean here yeah?

Once again, that's really an artificial distinction, isn't it? You're hardly comparing apples and oranges. West Coast had to choose guys to play for them. They chose some duds and some champions. So Frodo's point stands - even with the restrictions, we chose some good blokes

The trouble is, there is plenty to bolster the argument that West Coast hasn't drafted well. You really don't need to exclude those guys

 

[Portia]

The introduced side caused the downfall happening when it happened. With no Freo, it probably would have been put off for a few years....more a gradual realization.

I don't think we differ on too much on this issue. I do think that Fremantle was seen as a way to weaken the Eagles' completely secure looking position. With only 1 team in WA, profits & facilities would likely be the best in the league.

The upside is that more WA players have a chance of staying in WA, which is probably good for WA football as a whole.

 

[Bigger]

Geonet's points seem to me to be:

1. H/she doesn't like the bickering between the supporters of the two WA clubs.
2. The Fremantle Football Club is an invention of Kevin Sheedy because Sheedy hated/feared West Coast so much he wanted to weaken them.
3. The best solution for West Coast's recent decline is for Fremantle to cease to exist.
4. This will also conveniently get rid of problem number 1.

No-one seriously thinks Kevin Sheedy came up with the FFC, do they?

After Freo beat the Essendon rookies in the recent preseason matches, Sheedy - when pestered to do so by the Western Australian media - said some good things about Freo. One West Coast supporter extrapolated that into some kind of link between Sheedy and the Fremantle Football Club, now Geonet has Sheedy coming up with the Fremantle Football Club.

Let's examine a few facts, shall we?

The AFL likes money. It loves the stuff. Money comes from - among other, mainly corporate, sources - footy supporters. The AFL are pretty weird in heaps of respects but they can see where there are supporters - that is, cash money.

The 1979 derby attracted the biggest crowd Subi oval has ever seen. 56,000 folk strolled up to see justice being dealt out by the Old Easts. Fremantle football supporters mean it. There are heaps of them and the hybrid WAFC/AFL-invented Fremantle Football Club was/is an attempt to cash in on them.

The Fremantle Football Club has been a failure footywise but it has been a pretty wise punt on behalf of the AFL in financial terms.

13,000 rocked up to see a PRACTICE MATCH, for God's sake. If the team could string a few wins together, the glory days of the Eagles in terms of support will look pathetic.

Quit the "Sheedy invented Freo" lie. It is wrong. Worse, it is complimentary to Sheeds. It is patronising and dismissive of the thousands of Freo football loving people out there and did I mention it is wrong?

 

[Geonet]

No-one seriously thinks Kevin Sheedy came up with the FFC, do they?

You're not seriously trying to dismiss something that is being talked about for several years are you ? It's amazing how you've never heard that the idea of creating the FFC didn't come from WA ! Though specific names were not cited, it was even mentioned last year in Basil's Footy Show ! Are you sure you follow football ?

 

[goal_umpire]

Keep the peace guys and gals. Both teams are really good and we all know that they will improve in time.

It's best if you don't fight about it!

 

[kuepper]

Originally posted by Geonet
You're not seriously trying to dismiss something that is being talked about for several years are you ? It's amazing how you've never heard that the idea of creating the FFC didn't come from WA ! Though specific names were not cited, it was even mentioned last year in Basil's Footy Show ! Are you sure you follow football ?

Sorry, I stand corrected, if it was on Basil's Footy show, it must be true.

I now realise you have as much credibility as Basil himself.