SA Footy

Q. wrote:

SATCHEL wrote:Big day in amateur footy this weekend. Having the TTG and PNU game called live. Should be good. With more clubs getting on board it should be a great start to the amateur footy getting some more noise out in the general public. Looking forward to hearing how the boys go.

HYOOOGE game!

What frequency do I tune into and will I pick it up from deep in the mountain where mountain men dwell?

I've attached a picture of the poster that was sent out. Looks good .

Anyone else seen the D1 ladder this morning?

is this due to the incident earlier this year?

SATCHEL wrote:is this due to the incident earlier this year?

I'd dare say so, that's crap.

Lightning McQueen wrote:

SATCHEL wrote:is this due to the incident earlier this year?

I'd dare say so, that's crap.

If true, i do agree with you. The club did the right thing and took care of the issue itself and from what i understand advised the league along the way. Although, as devils advocate. The probation was set and the conditions on this occasion were not met. Hence probably the deduction. Not good for the club two years in a row. Hopefully they can finish off stronger than they did last year after losing points. Div 1 is certainly stronger when Salisbury North are there and up and about.

SATCHEL wrote:

Lightning McQueen wrote:

SATCHEL wrote:is this due to the incident earlier this year?

I'd dare say so, that's crap.

If true, i do agree with you. The club did the right thing and took care of the issue itself and from what i understand advised the league along the way. Although, as devils advocate. The probation was set and the conditions on this occasion were not met. Hence probably the deduction. Not good for the club two years in a row. Hopefully they can finish off stronger than they did last year after losing points. Div 1 is certainly stronger when Salisbury North are there and up and about.

Harsher penalties for the individual, as a coach/administrator you can't control brain farts and you can'rt do a full psyche test with each new player.

It tarnishes clubs who are generally doing the right thing, they have a great junior program out there and being in div 1 is a great incentive to have your kids play out there.

Lightning McQueen wrote:

SATCHEL wrote:is this due to the incident earlier this year?

I'd dare say so, that's crap.

Harsh Penalty but how many chances do they deserve?

Cash 123 wrote:

Lightning McQueen wrote:

SATCHEL wrote:is this due to the incident earlier this year?

I'd dare say so, that's crap.

Harsh Penalty but how many chances do they deserve?

In this instance I'm led to believe that it was B Grade player calling the umpire a cheat or something along them lines.

It's hardly worth docking the A's 4 points.

There was another incident last week and that's why the points were removed.

After the GF incidents of a couple of years back, Salisbury North agreed to certain terms and conditions regarding their affiliation and they've been broken so they lost points.

Unfortunate but true. As Satchel said, much better comp when SN are up and about.

Salisbury North's C1 team have benefited shooting up to second on the ladder with -2 points

Footy Chick wrote:There was another incident last week and that's why the points were removed.

After the GF incidents of a couple of years back, Salisbury North agreed to certain terms and conditions regarding their affiliation and they've been broken so they lost points.

Unfortunate but true. As Satchel said, much better comp when SN are up and about.

Thanks for clearing that up Dixie Marshall. I thought it was from the ANZAC Day B Grade thingy.

Footy Chick wrote:There was another incident last week and that's why the points were removed.

After the GF incidents of a couple of years back, Salisbury North agreed to certain terms and conditions regarding their affiliation and they've been broken so they lost points.

Unfortunate but true. As Satchel said, much better comp when SN are up and about.

Like how you said "agreed"!

Did they have a choice?

The GF wasn't bad I was there.

I wouldn't be surprised if SN were seriously looking at the BLG comp after this. You swear at an umpire and a red/yellow is enough.

Well they did agree. If they wanted to continue SAAFL affiliation, they needed to agree to the terms and conditions.

So yes, they had a choice.

I'd dare say it's a tad more than swearing.

I've been informed it was just swearing on the last occasion.

On the previous occasion I know for a fact the umpire was called an f..ing cheat by a 5 foot 60kg uni student who can't even grow a beard.

I agree it isn't appropriate but no other club has been punished like that. I think prejudices are shining through at HQ.

yep and they've had 3 or 4 previous incidents from other players, spectators and even previous coaches.


Umpires are sacrosanct, the law is the law. Being an ambulance chaser, you should appreciate that.

Footy Chick wrote:yep and they've had 3 or 4 previous incidents from other players, spectators and even previous coaches.


Umpires are sacrosanct, the law is the law. Being an ambulance chaser, you should appreciate that.

And every other club would have had people say similar things to umpires many other times over the years. We just don't hear about it.

Some umpires are great, a few need to harden up though. Sticks and stones.

Did ROCS have to "agree" to these conditions aswell? Or only one team participate in the melee in the 2013 grand final? A bit harsh SN having to deal with that hanging over them for 3 years even though the players involved in said melee have all either retired or moved on to other clubs. To lose 4 points for 2 incidences in the reserves back chatting an umpire (which is done nearly every week, by either players or crowd, in any grade of football including AFL) is far too harsh.

Load of crap by SAAFL. They want Div 1 to be league full of College teams. Punish the player not the club. SAAFL is the worst run sporting organisation in Australia


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

footys the winner wrote:Did ROCS have to "agree" to these conditions aswell? Or only one team participate in the melee in the 2013 grand final? A bit harsh SN having to deal with that hanging over them for 3 years even though the players involved in said melee have all either retired or moved on to other clubs. To lose 4 points for 2 incidences in the reserves back chatting an umpire (which is done nearly every week, by either players or crowd, in any grade of football including AFL) is far too harsh.

Exactly.

I'll tell you why, Rocs haven't had 13 reports in the last couple of years for a total of 49 matches.

Even though most of the players might have moved on, there is still clearly a problem, which SN are doing their darndest best to squash but spuds keep spoiling it for them.

Players (and not just from SN) might be a bit more careful if they got the fine and not the club.

Hey, there's an idea