by Shirtfront » Fri Apr 17, 2009 12:57 pm
by Footy Chick » Fri Apr 17, 2009 1:03 pm
by aceman » Fri Apr 17, 2009 1:23 pm
Footy Chick wrote:Yeah, I was wondering whether they'd moved the SAAFL show to 8am for a sec there.![]()
Even better was the well planned attack on the Executive by the Executive in the Jumper clash interview - Sorry, but someones position on the Executive simply CANNOT be abused by allowing his own clubs personal agendas be aired on the radio or any other media outlet.
Simple as that.
by sprinttospace » Fri Apr 17, 2009 1:31 pm
Footy Chick wrote:Yeah, I was wondering whether they'd moved the SAAFL show to 8am for a sec there.![]()
Even better was the well planned attack on the Executive by the Executive in the Jumper clash interview - Sorry, but someones position on the Executive simply CANNOT be abused by allowing his own clubs personal agendas be aired on the radio or any other media outlet.
Simple as that.
by Footy Chick » Fri Apr 17, 2009 1:45 pm
sprinttospace wrote:Footy Chick wrote:Yeah, I was wondering whether they'd moved the SAAFL show to 8am for a sec there.![]()
Even better was the well planned attack on the Executive by the Executive in the Jumper clash interview - Sorry, but someones position on the Executive simply CANNOT be abused by allowing his own clubs personal agendas be aired on the radio or any other media outlet.
Simple as that.
it was very poor. i just flicked on before the interview started.
is maddern on executive or just the media guy now??
it was a member club that put up the proposed rule change mid last year if i remember correctly, it was then put on the table around august and voted on recently. it's been coming for a fair while, so it wasn't a shadiac decision from where i stand.
the vote result was not close on the night as was inferred in the interview.
i still did not understand why the guy from uni felt that it was a change the saafl wanted as it served there purposes? maybe i'm not up to speed with all the dealings on this one.
by carey18 » Fri Apr 17, 2009 1:50 pm
by Footy Chick » Fri Apr 17, 2009 1:52 pm
carey18 wrote:. Move with the times i say.
by Lads » Fri Apr 17, 2009 2:01 pm
Footy Chick wrote:carey18 wrote:. Move with the times i say.
Well said.
by Rotter » Fri Apr 17, 2009 2:04 pm
I think that's the issue, there's no transparency in what is motivating the SAAFL to do the things they're doing.sprinttospace wrote:i still did not understand why the guy from uni felt that it was a change the saafl wanted as it served there purposes? maybe i'm not up to speed with all the dealings on this one.
by Footy Chick » Fri Apr 17, 2009 2:08 pm
Lads wrote:Footy Chick wrote:carey18 wrote:. Move with the times i say.
Well said.
Im no Uni fan or Collingwood for that matter but if its not about the jumper and your mates wearing it what are football clubs about ..So they clash every now and then big deal Geez people now days are getting soft
by District Boy 09 » Fri Apr 17, 2009 4:55 pm
Rotter wrote:I think that's the issue, there's no transparency in what is motivating the SAAFL to do the things they're doing.sprinttospace wrote:i still did not understand why the guy from uni felt that it was a change the saafl wanted as it served there purposes? maybe i'm not up to speed with all the dealings on this one.
by Pag » Fri Apr 17, 2009 5:01 pm
by Jimmy_041 » Fri Apr 17, 2009 6:10 pm
Lads wrote:Footy Chick wrote:carey18 wrote:. Move with the times i say.
Well said.
Im no Uni fan or Collingwood for that matter but if its not about the jumper and your mates wearing it what are football clubs about ..So they clash every now and then big deal Geez people now days are getting soft
by NO-MERCY » Fri Apr 17, 2009 6:14 pm
Shirtfront wrote:If i wanted to hear about Nathan Bock's discretion and how Andrew Symonds is going in his rehab, i will listen to 5AA or SEN. I expect to hear about our competition and a reasonable review for each game. Read the Footy Budget review to us if you don't have anything insightful to say.
End of Rant.
by Rotter » Fri Apr 17, 2009 6:44 pm
Well you win, if you've been in the SAAFL for 125 years you shouldn't have to wear a clash strip. I was under the impression Uni were the oldest SAAFL club.Pag wrote:Some jumper clashes are just stupid. I read the handbook yesterday and aparantly we (black and white) clash with Adelaide Lutheran (blue, red and white), but they don't clash with Rosewater (who are also blue, red and white). We also clash with Kenilworth aparantly (blue, brown and white). Figure that out.
And why are Uni so much better than everyone else that they shouldn't have to wear clash strips? We've been around for over 125 years and we still had to wear the SAAFL's baby blue gear last year against Kilburn, and the year before against North Haven. Stiff s***t.
by Jimmy_041 » Fri Apr 17, 2009 6:54 pm
Rotter wrote:Well you win, if you've been in the SAAFL for 125 years you shouldn't have to wear a clash strip. I was under the impression Uni were the oldest SAAFL club.Pag wrote:Some jumper clashes are just stupid. I read the handbook yesterday and aparantly we (black and white) clash with Adelaide Lutheran (blue, red and white), but they don't clash with Rosewater (who are also blue, red and white). We also clash with Kenilworth aparantly (blue, brown and white). Figure that out.
And why are Uni so much better than everyone else that they shouldn't have to wear clash strips? We've been around for over 125 years and we still had to wear the SAAFL's baby blue gear last year against Kilburn, and the year before against North Haven. Stiff s***t.
by Lads » Sat Apr 18, 2009 2:47 am
Jimmy_041 wrote:Rotter wrote:Well you win, if you've been in the SAAFL for 125 years you shouldn't have to wear a clash strip. I was under the impression Uni were the oldest SAAFL club.Pag wrote:Some jumper clashes are just stupid. I read the handbook yesterday and aparantly we (black and white) clash with Adelaide Lutheran (blue, red and white), but they don't clash with Rosewater (who are also blue, red and white). We also clash with Kenilworth aparantly (blue, brown and white). Figure that out.
And why are Uni so much better than everyone else that they shouldn't have to wear clash strips? We've been around for over 125 years and we still had to wear the SAAFL's baby blue gear last year against Kilburn, and the year before against North Haven. Stiff s***t.
Load of bollocks - SAAFL hasn't been around for 125 years - First year was 1911
1911
The premiership table at the end of the minor round was as follows:
Team Gms W L Pts
University 12 12 0 24
St. Francis Xavier 12 8 4 16
St. Bartholomew 12 6 6 12
Glenferrie 12 3 9 6
Marlborough 12 1 11 2
Uni were the undefeated Premiers
Salisbury last joined in 1995 - you should wear the baby blue Pag
by Rotter » Sun Apr 19, 2009 12:09 am
Nice call LadsLads wrote:Jimmy_041 wrote:Rotter wrote:Well you win, if you've been in the SAAFL for 125 years you shouldn't have to wear a clash strip. I was under the impression Uni were the oldest SAAFL club.Pag wrote:Some jumper clashes are just stupid. I read the handbook yesterday and aparantly we (black and white) clash with Adelaide Lutheran (blue, red and white), but they don't clash with Rosewater (who are also blue, red and white). We also clash with Kenilworth aparantly (blue, brown and white). Figure that out.
And why are Uni so much better than everyone else that they shouldn't have to wear clash strips? We've been around for over 125 years and we still had to wear the SAAFL's baby blue gear last year against Kilburn, and the year before against North Haven. Stiff s***t.
Load of bollocks - SAAFL hasn't been around for 125 years - First year was 1911
1911
The premiership table at the end of the minor round was as follows:
Team Gms W L Pts
University 12 12 0 24
St. Francis Xavier 12 8 4 16
St. Bartholomew 12 6 6 12
Glenferrie 12 3 9 6
Marlborough 12 1 11 2
Uni were the undefeated Premiers
Salisbury last joined in 1995 - you should wear the baby blue Pag
Well jimmy im with you black on white or white on black does not matter how you say it they just charge you more
Pag thats a big Boo Boo for someone of your caliber
Maybe the WWE is your calling after all
by Pag » Sun Apr 19, 2009 10:10 pm
Mate, where did I say we'd been a part of the SAAFL for over 125 years? I said the club itself has been around that long. We have more tradition than almost every other metropolitan club still going today, even if it was in other competitions. My apologies for thinking the amateur league was the only worthy league that has been around over the last century.Lads wrote:Jimmy_041 wrote:Rotter wrote:Well you win, if you've been in the SAAFL for 125 years you shouldn't have to wear a clash strip. I was under the impression Uni were the oldest SAAFL club.Pag wrote:Some jumper clashes are just stupid. I read the handbook yesterday and aparantly we (black and white) clash with Adelaide Lutheran (blue, red and white), but they don't clash with Rosewater (who are also blue, red and white). We also clash with Kenilworth aparantly (blue, brown and white). Figure that out.
And why are Uni so much better than everyone else that they shouldn't have to wear clash strips? We've been around for over 125 years and we still had to wear the SAAFL's baby blue gear last year against Kilburn, and the year before against North Haven. Stiff s***t.
Load of bollocks - SAAFL hasn't been around for 125 years - First year was 1911
1911
The premiership table at the end of the minor round was as follows:
Team Gms W L Pts
University 12 12 0 24
St. Francis Xavier 12 8 4 16
St. Bartholomew 12 6 6 12
Glenferrie 12 3 9 6
Marlborough 12 1 11 2
Uni were the undefeated Premiers
Salisbury last joined in 1995 - you should wear the baby blue Pag
Well jimmy im with you black on white or white on black does not matter how you say it they just charge you more
Pag thats a big Boo Boo for someone of your caliber
Maybe the WWE is your calling after all
by Rotter » Sun Apr 19, 2009 10:26 pm
Where has anyone suggested the argument is based on who's better than another. If you have an inferiority complex that's your issue.Pag wrote:Mate, where did I say we'd been a part of the SAAFL for over 125 years? I said the club has been around that long. We have more tradition than almost every other metropolitan club still going today, even if it was in other competitions. My apologies for thinking the amateur league was the only worthy league that has been around over the last century.
My point was that the old rule was stupid, and so is Uni's argument. What makes them better than everyone else? Every other club has just as much right as them to wear their normal gurnseys at home 'clash' games, believe it or not Uni aren't the only club that pays their calls.
Competitions SANFL Official Site | Country Footy SA | Southern Football League | VFL Footy
Club Forums Snouts Louts | The Roost | Redlegs Forum |