Armytank wrote:Why? are you shopping around?
Looks like almost half a dozen from TV to Mt Barker. Are they juniors?
by Justquietly » Tue Jun 11, 2013 1:45 pm
Armytank wrote:Why? are you shopping around?
by Hear the roar » Tue Jun 11, 2013 9:42 pm
The Crumber wrote:Armytank wrote:The answer to you question can be given as a multiple choice:
a) People started talking about sensible topics and stopped talking rubbish, hence everyone got bored
b) Like the League, the topic got too hard and everyone just shoved their head in the sand hoping it would go away
c) C Grade started their own thread and no one is interested in the A grade
d) All of the above
I suspected all of the above. Great minds think alike.I would add an e) Not enough credibility given by "The League" to the clear thinkers on this site. And not enough publicity distributed to clubs re nominations for Board members at AGMs. Seems they all slide in unopposed from goodness knows where.
by 2old2slow » Wed Jun 12, 2013 6:20 am
by Champ » Wed Jun 12, 2013 4:54 pm
sweetlips wrote:yeah come on Champ I would like to hear what these "hard decisions" are aswell
Perhaps while your at it can you tell me how long a piece of string is ?
by sweetlips » Wed Jun 12, 2013 9:23 pm
Champ wrote:sweetlips wrote:yeah come on Champ I would like to hear what these "hard decisions" are aswell
Perhaps while your at it can you tell me how long a piece of string is ?
Scroll back mate, also refer to the older convos in the country comp.
Some of the hard decisions in my humble opinion involve the zoning and/or amalgamation of the kids comps. The introduction of a promotion/relegation system, the re-introduction of rep footy and the requirements placed on clubs when fielding teams in any of the proposed three tiers. (A previous discussion on merits of a 3 tiered comps has been had A LOT)
Above is some I suppose...
by cracka » Thu Jun 13, 2013 10:13 am
Champ wrote:sweetlips wrote:yeah come on Champ I would like to hear what these "hard decisions" are aswell
Perhaps while your at it can you tell me how long a piece of string is ?
Scroll back mate, also refer to the older convos in the country comp.
Some of the hard decisions in my humble opinion involve the zoning and/or amalgamation of the kids comps. The introduction of a promotion/relegation system, the re-introduction of rep footy and the requirements placed on clubs when fielding teams in any of the proposed three tiers. (A previous discussion on merits of a 3 tiered comps has been had A LOT)
Above is some I suppose...
by Champ » Thu Jun 13, 2013 11:12 am
sweetlips wrote:Champ wrote:sweetlips wrote:yeah come on Champ I would like to hear what these "hard decisions" are aswell
Perhaps while your at it can you tell me how long a piece of string is ?
Scroll back mate, also refer to the older convos in the country comp.
Some of the hard decisions in my humble opinion involve the zoning and/or amalgamation of the kids comps. The introduction of a promotion/relegation system, the re-introduction of rep footy and the requirements placed on clubs when fielding teams in any of the proposed three tiers. (A previous discussion on merits of a 3 tiered comps has been had A LOT)
Above is some I suppose...
My apologies Champ
When you said hard decisions I didn't realize you meant bad decisions
Scroll further back you might find the answer to your post
and then scroll further back it will keep you amused for awhile
by bailey39 » Fri Jun 14, 2013 12:24 am
Justquietly wrote:Armytank wrote:Why? are you shopping around?
Looks like almost half a dozen from TV to Mt Barker. Are they juniors?
by bailey39 » Sat Jun 15, 2013 6:48 pm
by StickyFingers » Sun Jun 16, 2013 1:30 am
by the_grinch » Tue Jun 18, 2013 2:14 pm
by FairDinkum » Thu Jun 20, 2013 10:04 am
by chopper7 » Thu Jun 20, 2013 5:17 pm
FairDinkum wrote:Yes Tigers, winning at Ironbank, very happy. But it appears some Ironbank supporters and sponsors werent happy with the Thunderers performance and gave them a send off leaving the field.
I had always give No. 5 the benefit of the doubt but last Saturday removed all of that, arguing with his own teammates, sledging opposition Under 17's, then his retort of "Do you know who I am?", I mean really.
by overthehill » Thu Jun 20, 2013 5:52 pm
by Mop Up » Fri Jun 21, 2013 12:16 pm
by FairDinkum » Sat Jun 22, 2013 10:58 pm
by has been » Sun Jun 23, 2013 11:05 am
by Gervais » Mon Jun 24, 2013 9:07 am
has been wrote:Was at mt barker yesterday. How can a team that good have an oval that is less than sub standard. The visitors rooms are a little better, but not much. It is an absolute disgrace. The help they get from the council is probably up their with lofty and miles ahead of most other clubs. They can obviously spend shit loads on BBQ sheds, fancy score boards, player payments, 2storey time keepers boxes and yet put up a crap surface like they have for the past 10 yrs. The HFL and Gus are gutless in not making them do anything about it and the club hides behind the mantra of the oval being council owned etc etc. IT is a blight on our competition. Was speaking to a lawyer associate who had a very interesting opinion on where the club mt barker itself would be positioned if a player was seriously injured and financially disadvantaged as a direct cause on the state of the oval.. You apparently cannot hide behind signing off on a satisfactory ground report signed off b4 a round as the HFL thinks u can. At least the ironbank oval is the best surface by a mile in the league behind cally even tho not big. The club is endevouring to improve visitor and general facilities all with minimal council help as they unlike most clubs own their oval.![]()
![]()
by Champ » Mon Jun 24, 2013 10:14 am
Gervais wrote:has been wrote:Was at mt barker yesterday. How can a team that good have an oval that is less than sub standard. The visitors rooms are a little better, but not much. It is an absolute disgrace. The help they get from the council is probably up their with lofty and miles ahead of most other clubs. They can obviously spend shit loads on BBQ sheds, fancy score boards, player payments, 2storey time keepers boxes and yet put up a crap surface like they have for the past 10 yrs. The HFL and Gus are gutless in not making them do anything about it and the club hides behind the mantra of the oval being council owned etc etc. IT is a blight on our competition. Was speaking to a lawyer associate who had a very interesting opinion on where the club mt barker itself would be positioned if a player was seriously injured and financially disadvantaged as a direct cause on the state of the oval.. You apparently cannot hide behind signing off on a satisfactory ground report signed off b4 a round as the HFL thinks u can. At least the ironbank oval is the best surface by a mile in the league behind cally even tho not big. The club is endevouring to improve visitor and general facilities all with minimal council help as they unlike most clubs own their oval.![]()
![]()
some good points in this post, right up to the sentence where you claim that ironbank oval is the best surface in the league - are you for real?
i know of two clubs who have who have had issues at ironbank this year due to the gravel and stones on the surface. to also have a crack at the mt barker away rooms, when ironbank have a cold tin shed and the worst away rooms in the hfl, just weakens the credibility of your argument.
by supercoach » Mon Jun 24, 2013 8:16 pm
Competitions SANFL Official Site | Country Footy SA | Southern Football League | VFL Footy
Club Forums Snouts Louts | The Roost | Redlegs Forum |