Norwood vs Port Trial
Posted: Fri Mar 09, 2007 8:32 pmPort 7.2
Norwood 1.4
Norwood 1.4
Page 1 of 2
Posted: Fri Mar 09, 2007 8:32 pmPosted: Fri Mar 09, 2007 8:35 pmTime for Norwood to start again and regroup for 2008.
Posted: Fri Mar 09, 2007 9:05 pmPort 10.6
Norwood 3.6 at half time scores
from 5aa
Norwood 3.6 at half time scores
from 5aa
Posted: Fri Mar 09, 2007 9:56 pmInto the final quater
Norwood 10.13
Port 12.7
Norwood 10.13
Port 12.7
Posted: Fri Mar 09, 2007 9:57 pmPort have brought the ressies on.
Posted: Fri Mar 09, 2007 10:23 pmSpewing! I had to leave early!!!
Here come the Legs!
Here come the Legs!
Posted: Fri Mar 09, 2007 10:24 pmWedgie wrote:Port have brought the ressies on.
Part of their re-grouping for 2008 programme?
Posted: Fri Mar 09, 2007 10:27 pmare you sure you didnt leave early cos you could see a floggin' coming on?
Posted: Fri Mar 09, 2007 10:30 pmstampy wrote:are you sure you didnt leave early cos you could see a floggin' coming on?
I left at 3/4 time, and Norwood were improving. 1st quarter was garbage, next two very competitive. We were getting better as the game wore on.
Posted: Fri Mar 09, 2007 10:35 pmFinal Scores
Norwood 11 14
Port 14 9
Norwood 11 14
Port 14 9
Posted: Fri Mar 09, 2007 10:35 pmPort 14. 9 (93)
Norwood 11. 14 (80)
We'll get 'em when it matters!
Norwood 11. 14 (80)
We'll get 'em when it matters!
Posted: Fri Mar 09, 2007 11:33 pmkeep dreaming.
Good to start the year off well.
Good to start the year off well.
Posted: Sat Mar 10, 2007 6:18 amIt did seem like port were going to win by alot more after the start they had, still it was a good win to win at the parade
Posted: Sat Mar 10, 2007 8:14 amIn no way did it affect the resuly of the game but the new "hands in the back" rule is a farce! Both sides benefited and a new tactic would be to lead, stop, get touched and gain a free! Footy as we know and love it is getting too technical IMHO!
Posted: Sat Mar 10, 2007 8:34 amWhy does the SANFL have to bow to every thing the GayFL does?
Posted: Sat Mar 10, 2007 8:46 amIan wrote:Why does the SANFL have to bow to every thing the GayFL does?
KG & Cornsey had the head of SANFL umpires on a few weeks ago and he said that the SANFL was free to follow or not. However he felt strongly that the new interpretation was a good move in the long run. On other rule changes such as the 20m mimimum kick (trialled in the NAB cup), he said the SANFL had no intention of even looking at.
Posted: Sat Mar 10, 2007 2:11 pmIan wrote:Why does the SANFL have to bow to every thing the GayFL does?
Unfortunately yes, EVERY football league has to bow to the thousand year reich these days
Posted: Sat Mar 10, 2007 4:25 pmOh dear... I was hoping the SANFL wouldn't bring in this new rule, it is a disgrace.
Posted: Sat Mar 10, 2007 11:49 pmNFC wrote:Port 14. 9 (93)
Norwood 11. 14 (80)
We'll get 'em when it matters!
Look at that improvement from the first match we played. Go the Legs!
regards,
REB
Posted: Sun Mar 11, 2007 12:42 amfester69 wrote:In no way did it affect the resuly of the game but the new "hands in the back" rule is a farce! Both sides benefited and a new tactic would be to lead, stop, get touched and gain a free! Footy as we know and love it is getting too technical IMHO!
Won't be long before Auzzie Rules is a non contact sport. Please god, never let it get as boring as English soccer
