S Demon wrote:They put a 7th placed Div 4 side who were actually playing quite good towards the end of the season down to Division 5 because of on field issues (and will no doubt go very well in D5) so don't hold your breath
Yeah but West Croydon are a side that's undefeated in this division apart from a draw, and have won easily across most games - another year down here would see another lopsided division.. and the league don't want that..
Dolphin Treasure wrote:Your an attention seeking embarsement..
If you do go down to D7 next year, and PH are in D7 - do you think that would help or hinder your chances to retain the PH lads from this year?
I don't think we will be keeping any of them to be honest. They have their own footy club they're trying to revive. Plus the connection was mostly through Tom - who resigned and Troy Elbourne - likely heading back to help.
Not to say we wouldn't love them all to be at MPFC! Gawd we would do just about anything. They were absolutely fantastic for us this year, taught us so much but we always knew it was a one season only type deal.
As much as it would likely mean it hurts us, we do hope Para Hills get back up and running for their sake. If we do end up playing each-other then so be it. Hope for a hard fought game with no injuries.
LaughingKookaburra wrote:Are any clubs involved with this weeks games on any sort of watch list/ good behaviour bond from the league?
Didn't WC get 5 red cards? That would have to put them under some sort of scrutiny
Well if that's the case and they are under some sort of league watch that pretty much gives you a good reason why the final is at Edwardstown. It puts out Woody South by 7 minutes. Why is there a problem?
Can you bring a man to his feet when defeat is on repeat?
Arch44 wrote:Pooraka were already on a warning weren't they? Don't think WC were.
Don't think HV were either
"At the start of season 2016, clubs endorsed a 3 strikes methodology where once a club had incurred 3 reports, the given club was in turn subject to ongoing performance management indicators" - JK email 19/08/2016 How many reports have HV, Pooraka and WC had this year?
Arch44 wrote:Pooraka were already on a warning weren't they? Don't think WC were.
Don't think HV were either
"At the start of season 2016, clubs endorsed a 3 strikes methodology where once a club had incurred 3 reports, the given club was in turn subject to ongoing performance management indicators" - JK email 19/08/2016 How many reports have HV, Pooraka and WC had this year?
3 for HV, not sure about the others. So if WC hit 3 reports (not sure if they have or not) then their could be a possibility of them being kept down due to on field behaviour? The same as Pooraka and HV (HV were destined to go down anyway after finishing 8th, but once Pooraka go the boot there was a slim chance of staying up but the reports sent us packing too)
Last edited by S Demon on Tue Aug 30, 2016 12:28 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Arch44 wrote:Pooraka were already on a warning weren't they? Don't think WC were.
Don't think HV were either
"At the start of season 2016, clubs endorsed a 3 strikes methodology where once a club had incurred 3 reports, the given club was in turn subject to ongoing performance management indicators" - JK email 19/08/2016 How many reports have HV, Pooraka and WC had this year?
3 for HV, not sure about the others. So if WC hit 3 reports (not sure if they have or not) then their could be a possibility of them being kept down due to on field behaviour? The same as Pooraka and HV (HV were destined to go down anyway after finishing 8th, but once Pooraka go the boot there was a slim chance of staying up but the reports sent us packing too)
WC had 2 from the cgrade the other week that got suspended unsure about during the year.
