LuvsFooty wrote:rock wrote:LuvsFooty wrote:Guitinik played 8 A's, 7 b's in the minor round but played 4 of the last 5 in the b's. Most leagues take the last 5 in to consideration for qualification (majority in the last 5 counts). Think of it this way. You play the first 12 in the a's then get dropped because of form. Would be pretty rough to be ubable to play finals because of the total. Not many clubs use this as a tool to qualify good players because they have enough integrity to put their best players in the main game
I see what your saying LF but that doesn't appear to be a written rule or law. If you go to the HFL website on sportingpulse it says a permit may be considered through injury or illness. However if you've played 15 games (only missed 3) and played the last 5 games surely this rule cannot be considered. The rule could be bent to suit though by saying the player played up to cover other players injury or illness. I'm pretty sure it's not meant for this purpose, I'd say it's meant for the player in question returning from long term injury or illness. This rule needs some clarity or it will continue to be abused as it has in this case.
Fair call. Its certainly open to dodgey behaviour. Why you would do it I will never know? B Grade flags are good if your A Grade gets one too
Too many 'what ifs' that we could put a spin on any way we like. FWIW, what I don't like about permits is that if your team/grade has ENOUGH players to field a full team you can still bring in a 'ring-in' for the finals on some lame excuse but this is at the expense of another player. IMHO permits should not be given to any player to play in finals when his team already has enough players to field a full team.
For any team to give thought to who they can bring up on permits for finals is to me shonky in itself and says more about the club than the individual.
Didn't IB's twos have a game taken off them in last year's finals for a permit breach? I'm not 100% sure of the facts so will stand corrected if I'm wrong.