by Brett » Wed Mar 13, 2019 6:42 pm
by amber_fluid » Wed Mar 13, 2019 7:04 pm
by UK Fan » Thu Mar 14, 2019 2:49 pm
fester69 wrote: I'm full of "pish and wind" !!You can call me weak !!
MW wrote: Well call me a special asshole!.
Booney wrote: I'm a happy clapper **** stick.
by rd » Thu Mar 14, 2019 2:55 pm
by JK » Thu Mar 14, 2019 4:20 pm
by Brett » Thu Mar 14, 2019 4:57 pm
JK wrote:If WWT get compensated for potential loss of Premiership revenue then Norwood could have the same claim, as ludicrous as that sounds. Surely it’s gone on long enough now that they could just accept responsibility for blowing such a commanding lead and were beaten by a better team (as were Norwood) and channel all their focus into season 2019?
by JK » Thu Mar 14, 2019 5:42 pm
Brett wrote:JK wrote:If WWT get compensated for potential loss of Premiership revenue then Norwood could have the same claim, as ludicrous as that sounds. Surely it’s gone on long enough now that they could just accept responsibility for blowing such a commanding lead and were beaten by a better team (as were Norwood) and channel all their focus into season 2019?
How so ? Are you assuming Norwood would have beaten the Eagles ?
by FlyingHigh » Thu Mar 14, 2019 5:44 pm
JK wrote:If WWT get compensated for potential loss of Premiership revenue then Norwood could have the same claim, as ludicrous as that sounds. Surely it’s gone on long enough now that they could just accept responsibility for blowing such a commanding lead and were beaten by a better team (as were Norwood) and channel all their focus into season 2019?
by JK » Thu Mar 14, 2019 6:00 pm
FlyingHigh wrote:JK wrote:If WWT get compensated for potential loss of Premiership revenue then Norwood could have the same claim, as ludicrous as that sounds. Surely it’s gone on long enough now that they could just accept responsibility for blowing such a commanding lead and were beaten by a better team (as were Norwood) and channel all their focus into season 2019?
Are you referring to the Scott Hodges free kick?
by UK Fan » Thu Mar 14, 2019 6:01 pm
JK wrote:Brett wrote:JK wrote:If WWT get compensated for potential loss of Premiership revenue then Norwood could have the same claim, as ludicrous as that sounds. Surely it’s gone on long enough now that they could just accept responsibility for blowing such a commanding lead and were beaten by a better team (as were Norwood) and channel all their focus into season 2019?
How so ? Are you assuming Norwood would have beaten the Eagles ?
If Eagles progress, they either win the GF and possibly profit from it, or lose and most likely cop a loss for it. Identical set of circumstances would have applied to Norwood.
fester69 wrote: I'm full of "pish and wind" !!You can call me weak !!
MW wrote: Well call me a special asshole!.
Booney wrote: I'm a happy clapper **** stick.
by Grenville » Thu Mar 14, 2019 6:23 pm
Brett wrote:JK wrote:If WWT get compensated for potential loss of Premiership revenue then Norwood could have the same claim, as ludicrous as that sounds. Surely it’s gone on long enough now that they could just accept responsibility for blowing such a commanding lead and were beaten by a better team (as were Norwood) and channel all their focus into season 2019?
How so ? Are you assuming Norwood would have beaten the Eagles ?
by JK » Thu Mar 14, 2019 6:51 pm
UK Fan wrote:The GF result is irrelevant. It’s about “potential revenue” lost.
Considering north were found guilty of “gross negligence” in causing the 19th man scenario this should of been a no brainer.
If it goes to court eagles would win easily imho
It’s not like we are talking about millions of dollars in compensation.
by Jimmy_041 » Thu Mar 14, 2019 7:17 pm
by Brett » Thu Mar 14, 2019 8:12 pm
by UK Fan » Thu Mar 14, 2019 8:21 pm
JK wrote:UK Fan wrote:The GF result is irrelevant. It’s about “potential revenue” lost.
Considering north were found guilty of “gross negligence” in causing the 19th man scenario this should of been a no brainer.
If it goes to court eagles would win easily imho
It’s not like we are talking about millions of dollars in compensation.
But wouldn’t that same “potential revenue” be equally valid for their GF opponent?
Regardless, I’m not sure how they could seek compensation for an unquantifiable amount?
fester69 wrote: I'm full of "pish and wind" !!You can call me weak !!
MW wrote: Well call me a special asshole!.
Booney wrote: I'm a happy clapper **** stick.
by Spargo » Thu Mar 14, 2019 8:27 pm
Brett wrote:So why then have North copped a penalty ?
Anyway who cares , maybe the SANFL could also sue for a loss . We all know there would have been 10000 less people attend.
by JK » Thu Mar 14, 2019 8:39 pm
UK Fan wrote:JK wrote:UK Fan wrote:The GF result is irrelevant. It’s about “potential revenue” lost.
Considering north were found guilty of “gross negligence” in causing the 19th man scenario this should of been a no brainer.
If it goes to court eagles would win easily imho
It’s not like we are talking about millions of dollars in compensation.
But wouldn’t that same “potential revenue” be equally valid for their GF opponent?
Regardless, I’m not sure how they could seek compensation for an unquantifiable amount?
No due to norwood didn’t lose an opportunity.
Love your work JK but that’s a long bow I can’t agree with
by goddy11 » Thu Mar 14, 2019 8:46 pm
Spargo wrote:Brett wrote:So why then have North copped a penalty ?
Anyway who cares , maybe the SANFL could also sue for a loss . We all know there would have been 10000 less people attend.
What if it was Glenelg, Sturt or even Port in the Eagles place?
The crowd figure reasoning is irrelevant.
by DOC » Thu Mar 14, 2019 9:47 pm
Brett wrote:So why then have North copped a penalty ?
Anyway who cares , maybe the SANFL could also sue for a loss . We all know there would have been 10000 less people attend.
by UK Fan » Fri Mar 15, 2019 8:44 am
JK wrote:UK Fan wrote:JK wrote:UK Fan wrote:The GF result is irrelevant. It’s about “potential revenue” lost.
Considering north were found guilty of “gross negligence” in causing the 19th man scenario this should of been a no brainer.
If it goes to court eagles would win easily imho
It’s not like we are talking about millions of dollars in compensation.
But wouldn’t that same “potential revenue” be equally valid for their GF opponent?
Regardless, I’m not sure how they could seek compensation for an unquantifiable amount?
No due to norwood didn’t lose an opportunity.
Love your work JK but that’s a long bow I can’t agree with
No longer than the one being drawn bud, Norwood lost the opportunity to play the Eagles in a GF (which could have gone either way, but if it’s hypothetical for one it has to be for the other too).
To clarify I’m not looking for compo for Norwood, just using it as an example
To highlight how Grey the issue is.
fester69 wrote: I'm full of "pish and wind" !!You can call me weak !!
MW wrote: Well call me a special asshole!.
Booney wrote: I'm a happy clapper **** stick.
Competitions SANFL Official Site | Country Footy SA | Southern Football League | VFL Footy
Club Forums Snouts Louts | The Roost | Redlegs Forum |