The Sleeping Giant wrote:Long live SAnFL wrote:Both involve conflict?
![]()
You mean one involved violence, and the other a disagreement. You are drawing a long bow. Get over your Norwood shit and move on.
No both involved conflict.

by Long live SAnFL » Sun May 19, 2013 1:48 pm
The Sleeping Giant wrote:Long live SAnFL wrote:Both involve conflict?
![]()
You mean one involved violence, and the other a disagreement. You are drawing a long bow. Get over your Norwood shit and move on.
by therisingblues » Sun May 19, 2013 2:18 pm
CENTURION wrote:kickinit wrote:the funny thing about this is people think because chris davies has said the sign can be at games that weslo or the police have no right in taking it down. Weslo are employed to ensure crowd management, at any stage if they believe it's in the best interest to remove the sign then they will do so and have every right to do so.
Maybe instead of trying to get on your high horse and giving eric bad publicity you should try to workout the communication breakdown between Weslo, SANFL and yourself.
I am, that's why I liaise with Chris every week, that's why I just emailed WESLO & that's why I just rang the Operations Manager at WESLO. He told me that, up to now, they have received NO FORMAL INSTRUCTION from Chris Davies saying that the banner is approved!
I will sort this out tomorrow morning & I will carry the formal approval with Eric at all times from now on.
I will also email the letter to all SANFL clubs.
by RB » Sun May 19, 2013 2:26 pm
by wild dog » Sun May 19, 2013 2:36 pm
kickinit wrote:the funny thing about this is people think because chris davies has said the sign can be at games that weslo or the police have no right in taking it down. Weslo are employed to ensure crowd management, at any stage if they believe it's in the best interest to remove the sign then they will do so and have every right to do so.
Maybe instead of trying to get on your high horse and giving eric bad publicity you should try to workout the communication breakdown between Weslo, SANFL and yourself.
by The Sleeping Giant » Sun May 19, 2013 2:46 pm
by kickinit » Sun May 19, 2013 2:54 pm
wild dog wrote:kickinit wrote:the funny thing about this is people think because chris davies has said the sign can be at games that weslo or the police have no right in taking it down. Weslo are employed to ensure crowd management, at any stage if they believe it's in the best interest to remove the sign then they will do so and have every right to do so.
Maybe instead of trying to get on your high horse and giving eric bad publicity you should try to workout the communication breakdown between Weslo, SANFL and yourself.
Given the circumstances a bit of grand standing is understandable. Also I don't think it is bad publicity.
by The Sleeping Giant » Sun May 19, 2013 3:03 pm
kickinit wrote:The Sleeping Giant wrote:No such thing as bad publicity.
![]()
so apparently i'm slow because i'm a body builder (even though it takes a heap of knowledge to succeed) so what's your excuse? reading your comments makes it pretty clear your not too bright.
kickinit wrote:Maybe instead of trying to get on your high horse and giving eric bad publicity you should try to workout the communication breakdown between Weslo, SANFL and yourself.
by wild dog » Sun May 19, 2013 3:06 pm
kickinit wrote:wild dog wrote:kickinit wrote:the funny thing about this is people think because chris davies has said the sign can be at games that weslo or the police have no right in taking it down. Weslo are employed to ensure crowd management, at any stage if they believe it's in the best interest to remove the sign then they will do so and have every right to do so.
Maybe instead of trying to get on your high horse and giving eric bad publicity you should try to workout the communication breakdown between Weslo, SANFL and yourself.
Given the circumstances a bit of grand standing is understandable. Also I don't think it is bad publicity.
not a good look when the owner of the sign is being escorted from the oval by police.
by whufc » Sun May 19, 2013 3:08 pm
kickinit wrote:wild dog wrote:kickinit wrote:the funny thing about this is people think because chris davies has said the sign can be at games that weslo or the police have no right in taking it down. Weslo are employed to ensure crowd management, at any stage if they believe it's in the best interest to remove the sign then they will do so and have every right to do so.
Maybe instead of trying to get on your high horse and giving eric bad publicity you should try to workout the communication breakdown between Weslo, SANFL and yourself.
Given the circumstances a bit of grand standing is understandable. Also I don't think it is bad publicity.
not a good look when the owner of the sign is being escorted from the oval by police.
by kickinit » Sun May 19, 2013 3:25 pm
The Sleeping Giant wrote:
Maybe you should have read a few more posts before making this post.
Never heard the "No such thing as bad publicity" saying before kickinit? I thought it was quite common.
by kickinit » Sun May 19, 2013 3:27 pm
whufc wrote:if anything i think its a great look and nearly everyone at the ground knew it was Weslo and SAPOL being heavy handed.
i was right next to Centurian as he was escorted out and he had plenty of people coming up saying they agree with the banner and his removal was a joke etc etc, plenty of people caught it on phone cameras as well to show how heavy handed it was.
if anything all this 'bad publicity' is doing is uniting more people to the cause.
by wild dog » Sun May 19, 2013 3:28 pm
whufc wrote:i was right next to Centurian as he was escorted out and he had plenty of people coming up saying they agree with the banner and his removal was a joke etc etc, plenty of people caught it on phone cameras as well to show how heavy handed it was.
if anything all this 'bad publicity' is doing is uniting more people to the cause.
by therisingblues » Sun May 19, 2013 3:31 pm
by therisingblues » Sun May 19, 2013 3:33 pm
kickinit wrote:whufc wrote:if anything i think its a great look and nearly everyone at the ground knew it was Weslo and SAPOL being heavy handed.
i was right next to Centurian as he was escorted out and he had plenty of people coming up saying they agree with the banner and his removal was a joke etc etc, plenty of people caught it on phone cameras as well to show how heavy handed it was.
if anything all this 'bad publicity' is doing is uniting more people to the cause.
so your saying weslo or sapol have no right to evict someone from a stadium?
by kickinit » Sun May 19, 2013 3:36 pm
therisingblues wrote:I don't think Centurion is planning on selling any metwurst,
You obviously don't understand the correct application of "no such thing as bad publicity".
by kickinit » Sun May 19, 2013 3:38 pm
therisingblues wrote:You know, we could explain it to you, but that would just open the door for you not to understand something else.
by whufc » Sun May 19, 2013 3:39 pm
kickinit wrote:whufc wrote:if anything i think its a great look and nearly everyone at the ground knew it was Weslo and SAPOL being heavy handed.
i was right next to Centurian as he was escorted out and he had plenty of people coming up saying they agree with the banner and his removal was a joke etc etc, plenty of people caught it on phone cameras as well to show how heavy handed it was.
if anything all this 'bad publicity' is doing is uniting more people to the cause.
so your saying weslo or sapol have no right to evict someone from a stadium?
by therisingblues » Sun May 19, 2013 3:40 pm
kickinit wrote:therisingblues wrote:I don't think Centurion is planning on selling any metwurst,
You obviously don't understand the correct application of "no such thing as bad publicity".
never said centurion was going to sell metwurst, it was purely a example of bad publicity. ask any business owner and they will tell the "no such thing as bad publicity" is a joke.
by kickinit » Sun May 19, 2013 4:21 pm
whufc wrote:kickinit wrote:whufc wrote:if anything i think its a great look and nearly everyone at the ground knew it was Weslo and SAPOL being heavy handed.
i was right next to Centurian as he was escorted out and he had plenty of people coming up saying they agree with the banner and his removal was a joke etc etc, plenty of people caught it on phone cameras as well to show how heavy handed it was.
if anything all this 'bad publicity' is doing is uniting more people to the cause.
so your saying weslo or sapol have no right to evict someone from a stadium?
man you jump to conclusions, what part of my post suggests they are not allowed to evict anyone.
i think most would consider four people manhandling a non violent, non threathning average size gentleman 150 metres out of the ground to be 'heavy handed'.
escpecially considering his only offence was trying to explain that he had permission to have the banner.
is that simple enough for you to understand.
by The Sleeping Giant » Sun May 19, 2013 4:22 pm
kickinit wrote:The Sleeping Giant wrote:
Maybe you should have read a few more posts before making this post.
Never heard the "No such thing as bad publicity" saying before kickinit? I thought it was quite common.
I did read and all centurion had done was email weslo and speak to chris. obvisously the communication between chris and weslo isn't happening and thats what he should be looking at. No point getting the ok from chris if weslo have been told different. I will also add that centrion follow up post to mine makes me think he has realised this and will look to get this sorted out this week.
I have heard the "no such thing as bad publicity". seeing as don't think any publicity can be bad how would you think Garibaldi metwurst would go if it came back on the market. There is always the chance for bad publicity.
Competitions SANFL Official Site | Country Footy SA | Southern Football League | VFL Footy
Club Forums Snouts Louts | The Roost | Redlegs Forum |