Sturts 3 on report from last week
Posted: Wed Sep 06, 2006 12:24 pm2 got off and 1 with a rep from db.org
Page 1 of 1
Posted: Wed Sep 06, 2006 12:24 pmPosted: Wed Sep 06, 2006 12:33 pmthats crap, if hargraves gets off then surely the sturt lads would have and should have got games!!!
Re: Sturts 3 on report from last week
Posted: Wed Sep 06, 2006 12:35 pmJimmy wrote:2 got off and 1 with a rep from db.org
*
Re: Sturts 3 on report from last week
Posted: Wed Sep 06, 2006 12:38 pm*
What the hell does that mean!!!
What the hell does that mean!!!
Posted: Wed Sep 06, 2006 12:43 pmWhat sort of punishment are the three circus clowns, I mean umpires, in line for given the time and resources wasted on a tribunal hearing??
Shane Harris was at the game and surely would have been embarrassed by the performance of the three 'men' in white. Or would he?
I am personally tired of Umpires having a bearing on the pattern of games. The amount of guessing and over-officiating that occured on Friday night was beyond laughable. I had Norwood supporters apologising to me at half-time.......
Wake up Shane. Our competition desrves better than some of the crap we're getting at the minute.
Shane Harris was at the game and surely would have been embarrassed by the performance of the three 'men' in white. Or would he?
I am personally tired of Umpires having a bearing on the pattern of games. The amount of guessing and over-officiating that occured on Friday night was beyond laughable. I had Norwood supporters apologising to me at half-time.......
Wake up Shane. Our competition desrves better than some of the crap we're getting at the minute.
for the meaning of *
Posted: Wed Sep 06, 2006 1:00 pmsee footysa.com
Example
Posted: Wed Sep 06, 2006 1:11 pmJimmy Gowans was pulled off * 26 min mark of the third quarter....
Posted: Wed Sep 06, 2006 1:39 pmMST wrote:What sort of punishment are the three circus clowns, I mean umpires, in line for given the time and resources wasted on a tribunal hearing??
Shane Harris was at the game and surely would have been embarrassed by the performance of the three 'men' in white. Or would he?
I am personally tired of Umpires having a bearing on the pattern of games. The amount of guessing and over-officiating that occured on Friday night was beyong laughable. I had Norwood supporters apologising to me at half-time.......
Wake up Shane. Our competition desrves better than some of the crap we're getting at the minute.
Hard to disagree with that ... Most of the fellow Legs fans I was near couldn't work out what the reports were for either ... Certainly nothing obvious which used to be the case for copping a report in the SANFL ...
Re: for the meaning of *
Posted: Wed Sep 06, 2006 4:46 pmLunchcutter wrote:see footysa.com
See footysa.com? Hahaha, I'd rather not read that shite.
Re: for the meaning of *
Posted: Wed Sep 06, 2006 4:55 pmpafc1870 wrote:Lunchcutter wrote:see footysa.com
See footysa.com? Hahaha, I'd rather not read that shite.
ah ok each to their own.. you did however ask the question.. i just gave an answer... personally I like to keep a balanced view of issues....
Re: for the meaning of *
Posted: Wed Sep 06, 2006 4:58 pmLunchcutter wrote:pafc1870 wrote:Lunchcutter wrote:see footysa.com
See footysa.com? Hahaha, I'd rather not read that shite.
ah ok each to their own.. you did however ask the question.. i just gave an answer... personally I like to keep a balanced view of issues....
Wasn't saying anything against you Lunchy, just there are a couple of people there who seem to dominate every forum thread who make me angry reading their posts, so I avoid the site, but you answered my question, and cheers for that.
Re: for the meaning of *
Posted: Wed Sep 06, 2006 5:00 pmpafc1870 wrote:Lunchcutter wrote:pafc1870 wrote:Lunchcutter wrote:see footysa.com
See footysa.com? Hahaha, I'd rather not read that shite.
ah ok each to their own.. you did however ask the question.. i just gave an answer... personally I like to keep a balanced view of issues....
Wasn't saying anything against you Lunchy, just there are a couple of people there who seem to dominate every forum thread who make me angry reading their posts, so I avoid the site, but you answered my question, and cheers for that.
my pleasure pafc1870
without knowing
Posted: Wed Sep 06, 2006 6:01 pmwould the umpire who made the report(s) be an afl listed umpire ? as that comp has 'different rules/interpretations' to the sanfl
Posted: Wed Sep 06, 2006 6:37 pmI saw all 3 of them get reported but didnt see what they did wrong. 
Posted: Wed Sep 06, 2006 6:47 pmMST wrote:What sort of punishment are the three circus clowns, I mean umpires, in line for given the time and resources wasted on a tribunal hearing??
Good point and the time of the players and clubs involved.
The Hargraves report was downright laughable.