Pultney OS did a bad bad thing...

[Footy Chick]

Only you lot could turn a thread about Pulteney into a thread about Portland and North Haven

Take it to your own thread please, that's why we made it

[Felch]

i like karma...but please elaborate

I think he is referring to the fact that Pultney managed to get someone(might have even happened twice) suspended by reporting to the amateur league in dubious circumstances.

I dont think he is referring to that - that had nothing to do with us. That was against Haven.

[The Big Shrek]

Were they both against Haven?

I thought they were two incidents, on were Pultney sent a video in and another were a bloke was suspended after evidence from spectators.

[Felch]

Were they both against Haven?

I thought they were two incidents, on were Pultney sent a video in and another were a bloke was suspended after evidence from spectators.

You could be right. There was at least one against Haven - a guy got 8 games this year.

[amber_fluid]

Were they both against Haven?

I thought they were two incidents, on were Pultney sent a video in and another were a bloke was suspended after evidence from spectators.

They were both against us.............one this year and one last year.............video report last year and spectator report this year!! Both Crap reports!!

[LMA]

Were they both against Haven?

I thought they were two incidents, on were Pultney sent a video in and another were a bloke was suspended after evidence from spectators.

They were both against us.............one this year and one last year.............video report last year and spectator report this year!! Both Crap reports!!

Yes both players got 8 games.

I believe the following players were not cleared from their respective clubs, is why "Pulteney did a bad bad thing"

Francou- Power
Aish - Norwood
Lehman - Redbacks

[BenchedEagle]

I believe the following players were not cleared from their respective clubs, is why "Pulteney did a bad bad thing"

Francou- Power
Aish - Norwood
Lehman - Redbacks

Intresting! hmmm, Wonder if Riccuito or Modra were cleared to play in their Riverland game.

[amber_fluid]

I believe the following players were not cleared from their respective clubs, is why "Pulteney did a bad bad thing"

Francou- Power
Aish - Norwood
Lehman - Redbacks

Intresting! hmmm, Wonder if Riccuito or Modra were cleared to play in their Riverland game.

I think you'll find they were given permits to play.

[Dogwatcher]

They were but it would seem the process that allowed Modra to play has been questioned by other leagues.

[SATCHEL]

so with pulteney loosing the chance of playing in the finals does taht mean they loose all their points? How does it all work?

[SATCHEL]

would be nice to hear from someone at Pulteney on the issue?

[Punk Rooster]

so with pulteney loosing the chance of playing in the finals does taht mean they loose all their points? How does it all work?

Pultney have been penalised 2 demerit points, taking their total Premiership points for the year (in C4) rom 16 down to 14.
Portland were also on 14 points, so with Portland having a superior percentage, they are now 5th, Pultney 6th.

Had Pultney had 18 pts, & been taken dwon to 16 pts, they'd still be 5th.

[amber_fluid]

so with pulteney loosing the chance of playing in the finals does taht mean they loose all their points? How does it all work?

Pultney have been penalised 2 demerit points, taking their total Premiership points for the year (in C4) rom 16 down to 14.
Portland were also on 14 points, so with Portland having a superior percentage, they are now 5th, Pultney 6th.

Had Pultney had 18 pts, & been taken dwon to 16 pts, they'd still be 5th.

We know they were penalised but why were they penalised??

[Felch]

so with pulteney loosing the chance of playing in the finals does taht mean they loose all their points? How does it all work?

Pultney have been penalised 2 demerit points, taking their total Premiership points for the year (in C4) rom 16 down to 14.
Portland were also on 14 points, so with Portland having a superior percentage, they are now 5th, Pultney 6th.

Had Pultney had 18 pts, & been taken dwon to 16 pts, they'd still be 5th.

We know they were penalised but why were they penalised??

I believe the official reason is 'playing of un-registered players'.

[LMA]

so with pulteney loosing the chance of playing in the finals does taht mean they loose all their points? How does it all work?

Pultney have been penalised 2 demerit points, taking their total Premiership points for the year (in C4) rom 16 down to 14.
Portland were also on 14 points, so with Portland having a superior percentage, they are now 5th, Pultney 6th.

Had Pultney had 18 pts, & been taken dwon to 16 pts, they'd still be 5th.

So Marbles I guess you can thank Nth Haven C grade for giving Pulteney a pasting a week before they beat you blokes.
Any type of Beer will suffice

[SATCHEL]

so with pulteney loosing the chance of playing in the finals does taht mean they loose all their points? How does it all work?

Pultney have been penalised 2 demerit points, taking their total Premiership points for the year (in C4) rom 16 down to 14.
Portland were also on 14 points, so with Portland having a superior percentage, they are now 5th, Pultney 6th.

Had Pultney had 18 pts, & been taken dwon to 16 pts, they'd still be 5th.

So Marbles I guess you can thank Nth Haven C grade for giving Pulteney a pasting a week before they beat you blokes.
Any type of Beer will suffice

I am very appreciative LMA. Come down to the club and I'll buy you one.