EP Football - PLFL, GFFL, MWFL, FWFL, EEFL

[bluestheboy]

The way we palyed on Saturday it was embarresing to be a tiger supporter. I hope we make a statement and refuse to play at mallee park oval.

I spoke with Richard Horgan after the game and he said they are certainties to win the flag

Embarassed to be a Tiger supporter is a bit harsh, dissapointed would be more appropriate.

To be honest whilst not scoring in the second term and at half time four goal down it wasn't beyond us to stay with Redlegs and mount some sort of challenge in the second half. However a 5 goal blitz in 5 minutes by Waybacks showed the quality of players WFC have and we were simply outclassed.

The dissappointing factor was after the 5 minute blitz the body language of our players changed and the heads dropped. Marti would have felt like doin a Blighty and leaving the oval for sure, suddenly no numbers at ball, no second efforts and many un manned opponents allowed Waybacks to dominate and give us a thrashin that brought back memories from years ago.

Whilst we need to make statement, i think we need change like a safety net for the League & Tribunal as in set penalties (pretty simple) when finding a player guilty to take away the burden of deciding penalties and any repercussions. It's easy to critisize the representatives at present but if we have set guide lines for them to follow it would avoid the situation we now have.

The statement BFC need to make is win a god damn game.

Well said, couldn't agree more.
Personally think that the BFC needs to stand up and make a statement that they will not be intimidated by the MPFC...by showing up to play.
Video tape the game for all it's worth, but unless it is an official PLFL organised video then it is inadmissable for tribunal hearing I think you will find. OK for civil action tho..........
After the last incident, there will be that many official observers (incl Police) at the ground that nothing will happen. Probably 3 umpires will also send a message.
The BFC cannot and should not hold the PLFL to ransom over this matter.

[overloaded]

[
The statement BFC need to make is win a god damn game.

If you aint got the cattle there's not much you can do.

[demonball]

I think the SANFL don't want to be seen as racists, so they won't touch the issue. Therefore Bostons will not be going to MP Oval this weekend to make a point.....

I applaud this stance. They get away with too much. Clubs need to make a stand.

[tiger08]

I think the SANFL don't want to be seen as racists, so they won't touch the issue. Therefore Bostons will not be going to MP Oval this weekend to make a point.....

I applaud this stance. They get away with too much. Clubs need to make a stand.

then why do BFC appear to be alone on this matter? Is your club in agreeance with making a stand and forfeiting their next encounter with MPFC, i think not.

taking a stand and not playing one game will do jack ****, you have to look at the bigger picture less emotions and rectify what the cause of the issue is in preventing a repeat performance, had Miller & Dudley been sufficiently suspended we wouldn't be having this discussion.

if one is not happy with our current Represetatives which are voluntary, then please apply for a position.

[Media Park]

if one is not happy with our current Represetatives which are voluntary, then please apply for a position.

[eags]

what happened in the ramblers v cougars clash

cougars 18 8 116 to ramblers 10 3 63 good win, our first at kapinnie in 5 years. ramblers without bruiser pedler and jim holman and matt wauchope.

So ramblers are still the team to beat then?

[bantamweight]

I think the SANFL don't want to be seen as racists, so they won't touch the issue. Therefore Bostons will not be going to MP Oval this weekend to make a point.....

I applaud this stance. They get away with too much. Clubs need to make a stand.

bugga bostys, peckerz are guna get yaz

[demonball]

I think the SANFL don't want to be seen as racists, so they won't touch the issue. Therefore Bostons will not be going to MP Oval this weekend to make a point.....

I applaud this stance. They get away with too much. Clubs need to make a stand.

then why do BFC appear to be alone on this matter? Is your club in agreeance with making a stand and forfeiting their next encounter with MPFC, i think not.

taking a stand and not playing one game will do jack ****, you have to look at the bigger picture less emotions and rectify what the cause of the issue is in preventing a repeat performance, had Miller & Dudley been sufficiently suspended we wouldn't be having this discussion.

if one is not happy with our current Represetatives which are voluntary, then please apply for a position.

My clubs' stance doesnt reflect my feelings on the matter, in fact Im disappointed at the WFC response.
As ive stated before both players should have been rubbed out for the rest of the season at a minimum, as they would have in any other league. The fact this didnt happen is wrong and a statement needs to be made somewhere to give this issue some momentum.
Who is happy with the suspensions handed out by the current reps? no one.
And by the way the cause of the problems is the MPFC. No MPFC = No problems. The answer is a no-brainer.
We all know if those incidents were carried out by a player at any other club the penalties would have been much harsher.
I acknowledge Im not giving my time as a rep, however Im giving my time back to the game in another capacity.

[tiger08]

I think the SANFL don't want to be seen as racists, so they won't touch the issue. Therefore Bostons will not be going to MP Oval this weekend to make a point.....

I applaud this stance. They get away with too much. Clubs need to make a stand.

then why do BFC appear to be alone on this matter? Is your club in agreeance with making a stand and forfeiting their next encounter with MPFC, i think not.

taking a stand and not playing one game will do jack ****, you have to look at the bigger picture less emotions and rectify what the cause of the issue is in preventing a repeat performance, had Miller & Dudley been sufficiently suspended we wouldn't be having this discussion.

if one is not happy with our current Represetatives which are voluntary, then please apply for a position.

My clubs' stance doesnt reflect my feelings on the matter, in fact Im disappointed at the WFC response.
As ive stated before both players should have been rubbed out for the rest of the season at a minimum, as they would have in any other league. The fact this didnt happen is wrong and a statement needs to be made somewhere to give this issue some momentum.
Who is happy with the suspensions handed out by the current reps? no one.
And by the way the cause of the problems is the MPFC. No MPFC = No problems. The answer is a no-brainer.
We all know if those incidents were carried out by a player at any other club the penalties would have been much harsher.
I acknowledge Im not giving my time as a rep, however Im giving my time back to the game in another capacity.

Touche'.....u wont get an arguement from me in what u said, however there's no way MPFC will be dissolving back into other 5 teams. The statement needs to be made by a unanimous decision of clubs in changing how penalties are dished out, but the CLUBS have to push this move together.

set penalties will remove any contradiction of league handing out penalties both for and against your own club.

"giving my time back to the game in another capacity"

[Justquietly]

I think the SANFL don't want to be seen as racists, so they won't touch the issue. Therefore Bostons will not be going to MP Oval this weekend to make a point.....

I applaud this stance. They get away with too much. Clubs need to make a stand.

bugga bostys, peckerz are guna get yaz

Do you mean on the scoreboard or in the gutless way of the previous round?

[Media Park]

bugga bostys, peckerz are guna get yaz

Do you mean on the scoreboard or in the gutless way of the previous round?

Although MPFC are capable of both, I honestly think that all involved want to get out there, play the bloody game, prove it isn't going to turn into a bloodbath, and p!ss off home.

[fev_99]

cougars are definately the team to beat this year. mighty bomber who is this bloke from victoria whose supposed to be our new recruit?

[Media Park]

Tiger08.

You said that set penalties will prevent a "two sets of rules" type scenario.

In PLFL, we have a case where I believe the commissioners would be reluctant to find a player guilty with set penalties, BECAUSE of the implications.

For example, HM Junior's "striking" charge might elicit a "set" penalty of four games (which in fact he recieved).

To compare THAT strike to your average "jumper-punch-gone-wrong" (which in fact was the defence), which is still "striking," can you possibly accept the same penalty?

I mean, a full blown smash, and a jumper punch, should have two vastly different penalties, when in fact they would both be considered "striking."

The other thought I have is that the commissioners wouldn't be too keen to hand out hefty penalties, becuase they aren't prepared to do that, as members of the wider Port Lincoln community.

Imagine being The Man (especially if we go down to one commissioner) who gives Average-Joe-Sunday a set penalty of four-games which sees him miss out on a grand final, when all he did was grab a jumper, and accidently slip and strike his opponent.

Just a collection of thoughts I've got, tell me if you think I have no idea.

[Media Park]

Who needs three guesses as to which club didn't turn up to the meeting about BFC/MPFC last night...?

[Ken Whelan Fan]

MP my understanding was that reps from both clubs were to attend plus the PLFL
is that correct?

[bluestheboy]

Tiger08.

You said that set penalties will prevent a "two sets of rules" type scenario.

In PLFL, we have a case where I believe the commissioners would be reluctant to find a player guilty with set penalties, BECAUSE of the implications.

For example, HM Junior's "striking" charge might elicit a "set" penalty of four games (which in fact he recieved).

To compare THAT strike to your average "jumper-punch-gone-wrong" (which in fact was the defence), which is still "striking," can you possibly accept the same penalty?

I mean, a full blown smash, and a jumper punch, should have two vastly different penalties, when in fact they would both be considered "striking."

The other thought I have is that the commissioners wouldn't be too keen to hand out hefty penalties, becuase they aren't prepared to do that, as members of the wider Port Lincoln community.

Imagine being The Man (especially if we go down to one commissioner) who gives Average-Joe-Sunday a set penalty of four-games which sees him miss out on a grand final, when all he did was grab a jumper, and accidently slip and strike his opponent.
Just a collection of thoughts I've got, tell me if you think I have no idea.

Then average Joe Sunday and his club can elect to go to tribunal for a fair hearing. In all my time involved with the PLFL I cannot recall an innocent person being suspended. Have seen plenty of guilty ones get off or receive 'slap on the wrist' penalties.
The PLFL needs to step out of the dark ages and bring on set penalties....will solve a lot of problems guaranteed.

[Ken Whelan Fan]

BTB thats exactly where the PLFL are heading I also like the 12 matches and your out policy as per the Amateur League
Guess which Club didnt like that idea ?

[tiger08]

Tiger08.

You said that set penalties will prevent a "two sets of rules" type scenario.

In PLFL, we have a case where I believe the commissioners would be reluctant to find a player guilty with set penalties, BECAUSE of the implications.

For example, HM Junior's "striking" charge might elicit a "set" penalty of four games (which in fact he recieved).

To compare THAT strike to your average "jumper-punch-gone-wrong" (which in fact was the defence), which is still "striking," can you possibly accept the same penalty?

I mean, a full blown smash, and a jumper punch, should have two vastly different penalties, when in fact they would both be considered "striking."

The other thought I have is that the commissioners wouldn't be too keen to hand out hefty penalties, becuase they aren't prepared to do that, as members of the wider Port Lincoln community.

Imagine being The Man (especially if we go down to one commissioner) who gives Average-Joe-Sunday a set penalty of four-games which sees him miss out on a grand final, when all he did was grab a jumper, and accidently slip and strike his opponent.

Just a collection of thoughts I've got, tell me if you think I have no idea.

All reasonable thoughts and sure the odd person may think they hard done by, don't want 4 games for jumper punch-simple dont jumper punch.

i will post after a model of penalties i believe most could live with which isn't gospel and open to debate later. Contributions welcome, trolls & downers **** off

[Media Park]

My thought is not saying that a jumper punch shouldn't result in suspension, if it turns into a strike.

My thought is that there should be different "degrees" of striking, because you wouldn't feel it was very fair for a jumperpunch slip-up and a kinghit to attract the same penalty.

[tiger08]

My thought is not saying that a jumper punch shouldn't result in suspension, if it turns into a strike.

My thought is that there should be different "degrees" of striking, because you wouldn't feel it was very fair for a jumperpunch slip-up and a kinghit to attract the same penalty.

wait for my suspension model, you are correct and of course the suspension would reflect the crime.

At the end of the day we all want to PREVENT striking and suspensions and the only way is to have appropriate penalties which deter those who do and **** off those who continue to do.