by the joker » Wed Aug 22, 2012 5:31 pm
by Big Phil » Wed Aug 22, 2012 5:32 pm
by Barto » Wed Aug 22, 2012 5:47 pm
by sjt » Wed Aug 22, 2012 5:50 pm
Big Phil wrote:Will be interesting to see if this eventuates...
by JK » Wed Aug 22, 2012 5:59 pm
sjt wrote:Big Phil wrote:Will be interesting to see if this eventuates...
It had better not, if, the Crows player has an SANFL game (league or reserves) that week. If the Crows player has no game then fine - but I can't imagine there would be too many of them.
Depending on the detail of the "request", I'd say get stuffed Norwood if I were any of the other SANFL clubs.
by sjt » Wed Aug 22, 2012 6:53 pm
JK wrote:sjt wrote:Big Phil wrote:Will be interesting to see if this eventuates...
It had better not, if, the Crows player has an SANFL game (league or reserves) that week. If the Crows player has no game then fine - but I can't imagine there would be too many of them.
Depending on the detail of the "request", I'd say get stuffed Norwood if I were any of the other SANFL clubs.
If the above is correct then we've put a request to the Crows, so the SANFL clubs would be saying get stuffed to the Crows, not us .. I can't see that the AFC would keep back any of their fit players from playing SANFL finals, what would be the point?
by PhilH » Wed Aug 22, 2012 6:55 pm
by sjt » Wed Aug 22, 2012 6:59 pm
PhilH wrote:Both the Norwood, League & Reserves sides are minor premiers
So if you make it an internal trial
AND
top up the Norwood reserves with
suprlus Crows players from SANFL clubs NOT in the finals
then there is no issue from my perspective.
BUT if
Crows players with West, Central, and the other two finalists
are pulled from their SANFL club
to play this game
then I have a major issue.
I can't see that happening
From a Crows perspective surely they would want their surplus players to participate in the pressure of an SANFL Final
more than an internal trial (wouldn't they ??).
by JK » Wed Aug 22, 2012 7:12 pm
sjt wrote:JK wrote:sjt wrote:Big Phil wrote:Will be interesting to see if this eventuates...
It had better not, if, the Crows player has an SANFL game (league or reserves) that week. If the Crows player has no game then fine - but I can't imagine there would be too many of them.
Depending on the detail of the "request", I'd say get stuffed Norwood if I were any of the other SANFL clubs.
If the above is correct then we've put a request to the Crows, so the SANFL clubs would be saying get stuffed to the Crows, not us .. I can't see that the AFC would keep back any of their fit players from playing SANFL finals, what would be the point?
It sounds like they're asking for those that aren't playing that week. A bit strange there wouldn't be many.
Reference the above scenario. If westies had finished top,and sent a request to port power to play their reserves including Pfeiffer, Jonas, rodan and Phillips, what would Norwood think? Get stuffed port for receiving a request?
Anyway doesn't sound like this is the situation, and I'd like to think Norwood wouldn't attempt to shaft the other sanfl clubs.
by whufc » Wed Aug 22, 2012 7:18 pm
by Strawb » Wed Aug 22, 2012 7:21 pm
by JK » Wed Aug 22, 2012 7:29 pm
whufc wrote:Big risk of injury for little reward imho. I hope they do this!!!!
by whufc » Wed Aug 22, 2012 8:12 pm
JK wrote:whufc wrote:Big risk of injury for little reward imho. I hope they do this!!!!
Yep thats a concern for sure .. So is 1 game of footy in 3 weeks coming into a match against finals hardened opponent, bit of a rock and hard place decision.
by CENTURION » Wed Aug 22, 2012 8:12 pm
JK wrote:whufc wrote:Big risk of injury for little reward imho. I hope they do this!!!!
Yep thats a concern for sure .. So is 1 game of footy in 3 weeks coming into a match against finals hardened opponent, bit of a rock and hard place decision.
by whufc » Wed Aug 22, 2012 8:15 pm
by on the rails » Wed Aug 22, 2012 8:15 pm
whufc wrote:Is it a sign Bassett feels Norwood arent as ready for finals football as they should be!
by JK » Wed Aug 22, 2012 8:19 pm
CENTURION wrote:JK wrote:whufc wrote:Big risk of injury for little reward imho. I hope they do this!!!!
Yep thats a concern for sure .. So is 1 game of footy in 3 weeks coming into a match against finals hardened opponent, bit of a rock and hard place decision.
stiff shit, We've done it a few times, that's the programme, everyone knew what it was at the start of the season. IF Norwood had morals, they would say no thanks, it's unfair.
by JK » Wed Aug 22, 2012 8:21 pm
on the rails wrote:whufc wrote:Is it a sign Bassett feels Norwood arent as ready for finals football as they should be!
No it's another sign of his ego and arrogance!
by on the rails » Wed Aug 22, 2012 8:32 pm
by JK » Wed Aug 22, 2012 8:36 pm
on the rails wrote:I understand JK the other clubs are not happy with the request because apparently Norwood (and by that I assume Bassett?) has asked for all non AFL required players to be made available for the Crows "Reserves" so from a North point of view that would mean Johnston would play in a trial as opposed to playing in a more meaningful game e.g. one that might have finals implications for his "home club". Surely you can see how that reads?
Competitions SANFL Official Site | Country Footy SA | Southern Football League | VFL Footy
Club Forums Snouts Louts | The Roost | Redlegs Forum |