by spell_check » Fri Jan 30, 2009 5:19 pm
by locky801 » Fri Jan 30, 2009 5:42 pm
by Thiele » Fri Jan 30, 2009 6:04 pm
by rod_rooster » Sat Jan 31, 2009 12:45 pm
wycbloods wrote:yes it will probably be replaced with could later in the day.
by wycbloods » Sat Jan 31, 2009 12:57 pm
rod_rooster wrote:wycbloods wrote:yes it will probably be replaced with could later in the day.
Nah, should've is the word. Vic made 400
by rod_rooster » Sat Jan 31, 2009 12:58 pm
wycbloods wrote:rod_rooster wrote:wycbloods wrote:yes it will probably be replaced with could later in the day.
Nah, should've is the word. Vic made 400
Typical of our lads get to a decent position and stuff it up. Is that all out?
by rod_rooster » Sat Jan 31, 2009 1:23 pm
by locky801 » Sat Jan 31, 2009 2:09 pm
rod_rooster wrote:SA 0/30 (4)
by locky801 » Sat Jan 31, 2009 2:57 pm
by NFC » Sat Jan 31, 2009 3:02 pm
by Thiele » Sat Jan 31, 2009 3:18 pm
by Thiele » Sat Jan 31, 2009 4:06 pm
by wycbloods » Sat Jan 31, 2009 4:36 pm
by locky801 » Sat Jan 31, 2009 5:22 pm
by GWW » Sat Jan 31, 2009 5:25 pm
by locky801 » Sat Jan 31, 2009 5:56 pm
by spell_check » Sat Jan 31, 2009 9:30 pm
by wycbloods » Sun Feb 01, 2009 11:59 am
spell_check wrote:Are we heading for another "lets declare behind to make a game of it" scenarios again...
by wycbloods » Sun Feb 01, 2009 12:02 pm
by Footy Smart » Sun Feb 01, 2009 12:44 pm
Competitions SANFL Official Site | Country Footy SA | Southern Football League | VFL Footy
Club Forums Snouts Louts | The Roost | Redlegs Forum |