Pseudo wrote:Dogwatcher wrote:Sadly, vice versa. It's the one big scalp we're missing (sorry South).
The reason you're missing that particular scalp is because it's not a big one. Not now.
WHY NOT?
by CENTURION » Wed Jun 27, 2012 10:43 pm
Pseudo wrote:Dogwatcher wrote:Sadly, vice versa. It's the one big scalp we're missing (sorry South).
The reason you're missing that particular scalp is because it's not a big one. Not now.
by Dogwatcher » Thu Jun 28, 2012 9:56 am
Pseudo wrote:Dogwatcher wrote:Sadly, vice versa. It's the one big scalp we're missing (sorry South).
The reason you're missing that particular scalp is because it's not a big one. Not now.
by Booney » Thu Jun 28, 2012 9:58 am
CENTURION wrote:Pseudo wrote:Dogwatcher wrote:Sadly, vice versa. It's the one big scalp we're missing (sorry South).
The reason you're missing that particular scalp is because it's not a big one. Not now.
WHY NOT?
by FOURTH ESTATE » Thu Jun 28, 2012 12:06 pm
by smac » Thu Jun 28, 2012 12:59 pm
by CENTURION » Thu Jun 28, 2012 7:50 pm
smac wrote:So prior to the current run by the Dogs, the bays had an equally impressive run?
Competitions SANFL Official Site | Country Footy SA | Southern Football League | VFL Footy
Club Forums Snouts Louts | The Roost | Redlegs Forum |