Booney wrote:Ahhhh! That was the game that got away. Port had the use of the breeze in the first quarter and although Westies were not far behind Port certainly had the better of the first stanza.
West were sound for the secod and third quarters but who ever said they dont flood back wasn't at todays game, hey R&B? Fortunately for the spectators Port made several attempts to open the game up and it wasnt until the last 5 mintues did the game actually open up.
With 2 or 3 minutes to go Port hit the front by a goal ,West quickly replied and I thought a draw would be a fitting result, however a late snap proved to be the difference. Once again, very competitive without bringing home the chocolates.
Bravo to the lady in the Port Club who gave me a free pint or two. I think the Boon charm won her over....
Little bit drunk and I am about to cook chiekcn burgers for tea.

I'll bite, Booney. First, good to catch up.
I was at the game and given recent discussion, I took particular notice of any 'flooding'. West lined up with all forwards forward of the ball at stoppages and didn't tag anyone. Port the same, although they tagged Chris Schmidt all day.
There was no flooding, but both sides made sure they had plenty of numbers to the contest. that's the way footy is played now. I watched Sturt v Eagles yesterday and it was the same. Repeat, there was no flooding. When you sober up and read this, mate, I'll look forward to your reply
As for the poster who asked about the dodgy last-quarter decisions, there could have been a riot if Port had won. With a few minutes to go and the scores level, West attacked and Jason Davenport took a chest mark within range and his Port opponent then took the ball out of his hands. Umpire came in and paid the mark, thank goodness.
To the Port bloke
Down the other end for a goal to Port.
I think even the most one-eyed Maggie fan wouldn't have claimed that mark.
Fortunately justice prevailed
Seriously though, Port arren't far away and they're developing their young players well.