Rd 22 2007 Norwood v Central

[JK]

PATHETIC NORWOOD FANS !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

dont want to say i predicted you frontrunners wouldnt rock up. But that crowd was unacceptable.

Some serious questions need to be asked of the Norwood FC. Is Trev Hill the right man to take the club forward. Because judging by the people sitting in the terraces yesterday alot have giving up. Alot of very frustrated footballers playing at the NFC atm.

What I find sad, and no offence to JMO, but a post like this derides Norwood fans and their club, and none of the Norwood posters defend their club because they feel its true.

In fact, even sadder, not only do they not ignore the post, they feel compelled to agree with most of it. Tragic for the Redlegs that the situation has got to this point.

At least in the years when I was younger and Centrals were inconsistent rabble, I felt there was hope for the future. I truly hope I never, in the long term, see my club in this position.

See DW, that post is %100 on the money ... There's only so long you can bleed for without change.

I know we're certainly not the longest suffers in the competition but thats not the point, the point is about the "hope" factor ... You can live with setback when you can see positive actions and changes being implemented that at least help you to feel as though there is something to look forward to one day ... But blind diatribe, worthless promises and lack of vision from an upper order that won't accept having their status or decisions challenged doesn't provide any of that.

To my mind, Port Adelaide and now Central have both been the leaders in embracing their own community, and the reward for that is in attendances at matches and club events ... Even South I believe are heading in the right direction on this front.

LOL .. Anyway I've had my bitch, to run further with it would be to completely lose the focus of this topic which doesn't do the Dogs due justice.

[Dogwatcher]

You mean to tell me you watched that???

[fester69]

Well I BELIEVE that Norwood are only a couple of key players away from regular finals participation! A ruckman who CAN ruck and a pacy midfielder! The situation seems bleak at the moment but I for one refuse to believe that we cannot get to a position where we are THE PREMIER CLUB!!!
Call me tragic but I firmly believe this!
And I will go week in, week out while we aren't performing and I WILL enjoy the succesful years with a little smirk on my face!
I LOVE MY CLUB and REFUSE to turn my back on it!

[Grahaml]

That Obst incident was strange. I thought the guy who was beaten in the contest actually had a sook and wandered off while the next closest guy headed to the pocket to make sure Obst took the shot. Unfortunately for him the shot was duly taken, but 15m close than it should have been!

Also, anyone know why McGuinness was given another kick when he kicked it into Lawry? larwy seemed to be there watching his opponent, and never saw the ball coming until it smacked him in the side of the head! I would have thought if Lawry wasn't allowed to be there it was a 25m penalty, and if he was allowed to be there then it was play on. Seemed strange and reminded me of the rule that you can't get out first ball in cricket when you're 8 years old.

[HeartBeatsTrue]

Also, anyone know why McGuinness was given another kick when he kicked it into Lawry? larwy seemed to be there watching his opponent, and never saw the ball coming until it smacked him in the side of the head! I would have thought if Lawry wasn't allowed to be there it was a 25m penalty, and if he was allowed to be there then it was play on. Seemed strange and reminded me of the rule that you can't get out first ball in cricket when you're 8 years old.

Yeah it was a strange one, but my take on it is that Lawry was in an illegal position, but as he didnt have time to move before it hit him the kick was re-taken, without a penalty. Had he moved to purposely block the ball, then it would have been a 25m penalty.
I would have called it 'play on' but I'm no umpire.

[topsywaldron]

What was the deal with Borlace getting reported? Anyone see it?

[smac]

What was the deal with Borlace getting reported? Anyone see it?

Another "nothing" report. Surprised it hasn't been dropped yet.

[Grahaml]

It's hard to tell whether there was anything in the Borlace report. Both players were wrestling for a while, and then I guess the ump thought Borlace threw one. I suspect this one might get a guilty result simply because the umpuire was close enough and had a good enough look to know exactly what happened. Doubt he'd get more than a reprimand though. Having said that, would Borlace be upset at missing the South game?

[Grahaml]

Oh, and back on Lawry, I think he's allowed to be there if his opponent is there as well. I didn't see which Norwood players were around but seeing as he wasn't looking at the ball I assume he was with his opponent and therefore there shouldn't be any problem with him being that close to the man with the ball. Anyway, like you I'm no umpire so I don't know the exact ruling but it certainly seemed very odd.

[smac]

I was getting a beer at the time of the Lawry one, so can't comment. Missed one of the few bits of excitement for the whole day!

But the Borlace one, to me, looked like he had hold of the guernsey and gave a shove without letting go - maybe looked worse from the umpires angle, but I laughed when the notebook came out.