SENSATION AT PARADE

[mighty_tiger_79]

Sorry wedgie, I must have just assumed.................. My apologies.

No worries mate, apology accepted. Many people on here make false assumptions about me all the time.

i admit i am one of those who make false assumptions, I falsely assumed that Wedgie would be a good politician

[SimonH]

Dude, can you even read?
1) Im fully supportive of Norwood's decision, dont get into me, I think it was a fantastic decison.

It wasn't Norwood's decision. If you can read the Tiser story, dude, you can see that.

2) Nothing in the paper despite being very selective contradicts anything already said (and if Im not mistaken there's nothing about it on Norwoods website so we can only assume the only official info that has been provided ie by North is correct),

1. It was the NAFC website that was 'very selective' in its version. The 'Tiser story is pretty straightforward.
2. Sorry, it does contradict the veiled/vague claims on the NAFC website that it was Norwood's decision to make, and directly contradicts the claims made here to that effect. It's amusing to say the least that BPBRB was running a 'are you calling the people who say this liars?' argument yesterday (don't question their authoritah; why would they lie?); and today is running a hysterical 'Doug Robertson is a liar! He's out to get us!' line.
3. Why on earth would Norwood have anything about it on its website? NAFC break a rule, for which they receive a punishment from a SANFL official. Norwood FC's involvement in that process is approximately zero.

the fact that if Norwood had said yes to the players going onto the field yet it would have been turned down by a SANFL official makes Norwood's decision even more baffling as it would have been a win/win situation if they had said yes as a) the 2 players still wouldn't have been allowed to play and b) Norwood would have looked very sporting and smelt of roses.

Now you're just getting silly/desperate. The 'Tiser story essentially says that the NAFC compounded its stuff-up by asking the wrong person, who had no power to do so, to forgive the stuff-up and waive the consequences. You're so stuck with your 'it was Norwood's call' version, that even when it is stated in black and white by the people who run the competition that it wasn't Norwood's call, you feel obliged to pretend that Norwood was asked to help out with hints and tips. Anyone witnessed a question asked by the SANFL official of any Norwood official, before deciding on the appropriate action-- time to lay it on the line. I note that the version on the NAFC website doesn't allege that any such conversation occurred.

The article quite clearly stated that the SANFL make the decision, it didn't say anything about in the confusion of the moment if Norwood were or were not asked if the players could take the field, mind you Dougy Robertson is a Norwood supporter and I think we all know who Glen Rosser played for. ;)

And we know who the people who are peddling the 'Sure, we might have got a teensy bit of paperwork wrong, but it's Norwood who have to have a long hard look at themselves' line barrack and work for. Two can play at that game!

It seems like it's actually time for NAFC to get over it. You won a game with 19 players. Having 19 players was entirely your own stuff up. But you overcame your own stuff-up to win anyway, thereby showing you were clearly the better team on the day. Good on you. Can't imagine that it's going to help you next week (except by having 2 fresh players!), or that your opponent is going to be so shattered by it that they'll be psychologically unable to handle playing any opponent with a 3-man bench again. We all move on to next week...

[matt]

Best safooty thread yet.

Back to the ol' footysa days.

V. entertaining.

[Wedgie]

Simon H, as I said to you once or twice before I actually agree with your point, I thought I made that clear?
Crikey, you really do want to keep rehashing the game don't yas? You're not over it are you?
I will address one of your new points though (if I addressed them all I'd have to write a 5 page essay and we're on the same side), I only suggested the Norwood FC put something on their website to clearly state their position as to whether someone from their club thought they were giving North permission or not as if noone from the NFC did make that decision (which in the end would have no result anyway - previously discussed) then the NFC has been falsely implicated as the official website would be a great avenue to clear their name if it should be cleared. Once again, Im on your side mate.
Some other good points have since been made, especially by nai.
BTW I'm well and truly over it mate, collected my $228 today from the game today!

Back to the topic of discussion since Ive already received 2 apologies and really don't require any more as Id be embarassed, lets talk footy!

What a fantastic result for North against the odds whilst already underdog going into the game, will it help set up their season with such a gutsy win?
And will it have the opposite impact on Norwood who must be shattered?

Im also interested on people's views on the point I brought up re injuries and less interchanging as I think its a very important and interesting point.

One last question I have for Norwood supporters is which North player was this new player K-Mac on?

Im getting the game on DVD on Thursday and am looking forward to seeing it again.

[goraw]

consirering norwood beat sturt,we probably only need say 15 players next week?

[topsywaldron]

Looks to sum it all up pretty comprehensively to me.

You should be a lawyer SimonH.

[Wedgie]

Good interview with Ben Hart in the game describing both the interchange stuff up and the game:

http://www.nafc.com.au/lib/audio/mf558.mp3

[BPBRB]

My final comment on this whilst I quit when behind is that after speaking to a very Senior SANFL Official today (who I happen to have known for 20 years), I as amazed to find out that the exact same thing happened in a SANFL league game last year and has happened on occasions at League level ever since the I/change rule was brought in.

I last years incident (sorry can't name clubs for obvious reasons), The interchange steward told the offending team that the players could not take the field because the wrong I/Change players were marked on the team sheets. The only way to reverse the penalty is if the opposition club via their coach agrees to have the sheets changed before any I/change is made and both team sheets are adjusted. The opposition coach agreed, the Steward altered both sheets and everyone moved on before either team made an interchange and shortly after the game started. There was no fuss or media hype because other than the 2 Team Managers, The I/Change Steward and one coach - no one else was aware until well after the game. North's mistake according to my source is a regular occurence in all grades apparently and up until Friday night has been sorted in a sporting manner using the discretion the league has allowed.

I understand the I/Change Steward advised the Norwood Team Manager of this "discretion" but he rightly referred it to the Coach as the decision needed to come from a higher power.

Still it is North stupid fault they were ever put in that position.

[Aerie]

One last question I have for Norwood supporters is which North player was this new player K-Mac on?

North were lining up two players on the outer wing so I assume it was one of them. Perhaps Sporn? Can't remember exactly.

[Wedgie]

My final comment on this whilst I quit when behind is that after speaking to a very Senior SANFL Official today (who I happen to have known for 20 years), I as amazed to find out that the exact same thing happened in a SANFL league game last year and has happened on occasions at League level ever since the I/change rule was brought in.

I last years incident (sorry can't name clubs for obvious reasons), The interchange steward told the offending team that the players could not take the field because the wrong I/Change players were marked on the team sheets. The only way to reverse the penalty is if the opposition club via their coach agrees to have the sheets changed before any I/change is made and both team sheets are adjusted. The opposition coach agreed, the Steward altered both sheets and everyone moved on before either team made an interchange and shortly after the game started. There was no fuss or media hype because other than the 2 Team Managers, The I/Change Steward and one coach - no one else was aware until well after the game. North's mistake according to my source is a regular occurence in all grades apparently and up until Friday night has been sorted in a sporting manner using the discretion the league has allowed.

I understand the I/Change Steward advised the Norwood Team Manager of this "discretion" but he rightly referred it to the Coach as the decision needed to come from a higher power.

Still it is North stupid fault they were ever put in that position.

Yep, I made mention of it on my first post on this topic (2nd post for the topic):

Apparantley North named O'Hara and Martin on the bench on the official team sheet, players possies were changed after a late team meeting and the Norwood officials insisted that they couldn't come back onto the ground. Apparantley its happened in the past quite a bit with the players just going on as per normal but they weren't allowed to.

but noone wanted to acknowledge or discuss my point.

[Booney]

Is this still going on?

[topsywaldron]

Is this still going on?

Yep.

[The Real Number 3]

Timmy Martin is a great lad. Remember the days when i played underage at Centrals with him. You'd think proffesional clubs these days wouldnt make blunders like that

WHAT ?
do you not remember at eliz. oval you standing there at the fence say'n timmy martin your shit blah blah blah get a kick a martin blah blah blah bagging the shit out of him now your on here saying he is a great lad ?
well which one is it boxhead ???????????

No i dont remember saying it! i was blind! HAHAHA but i remember u geese telling me bout it the next day!

[SimonH]

Simon H, as I said to you once or twice before I actually agree with your point, I thought I made that clear?
...
Im getting the game on DVD on Thursday and am looking forward to seeing it again.

Seems like you furiously agree with me, and I furiously agree with you... and we both think the other one isn't over it. One other thing we can hopefully agree on: any chance of you slipping a DVD of the game my way? I can do an angry legal-sounding letter to the victim of your choice, as consideration! (Feel free to PM.)

Also totally agree with the dude who said that the rules under which the competition is run, should be freely available on the SANFL's website. The internet was built for that sort of thing. (The AFL is an appalling offender in this respect as well-- you can get all the NAB Nutri-Grain Toyota Bastardcorp promotions you want on their website, but try finding a copy of the competition rules...)

Cheers,
Simon.

[Jimmy]

Best safooty thread yet.

Back to the ol' footysa days.

V. entertaining.

yes, must agree....classic 24 carat!!!!

i esp like how some posters try and redirect other posters passions....ive read it a bout a thousand times...very funny. I think someone mentioned a broken record...this thread is pretty much that, but I love it, back to the ol FSA days as you say Matt!!!!

[doggies4eva]

I hope Roy is running "How to fill in the paperwork" sessions this week.

[HeartBeatsTrue]

OK lets agree on this then. Norwood by expressing a sporting gesture allow the 2 players on. North also express a sporting gesture and give up the 3 goals they got in the 1st 5 minutes as a result of their blunder

[mal]

BENCHmark decision

[BPBRB]

OK lets agree on this then. Norwood by expressing a sporting gesture allow the 2 players on. North also express a sporting gesture and give up the 3 goals they got in the 1st 5 minutes as a result of their blunder

Well if you only kicked straight in the middle quarters as well the result could have been different.

[-]

Two things from this thread come to the front of my mind.

1. The rule needs changing. 21 v 21 is allthat matters. What if a player named in the 18 gets a sudden bout of the trots?

2. The AFL has another reason to be criticised. Why wouldn't they have their rules on the website? They seem to me to be run in a very unproffesional manner with some of crap they dish up.