NO-MERCY wrote:Its a wonderfull word that "IF"
so is the word 'surily'
by the star » Sat Jun 27, 2009 10:16 am
NO-MERCY wrote:Its a wonderfull word that "IF"
by Sturtman » Sat Jun 27, 2009 6:19 pm
by S Demon » Sat Jun 27, 2009 6:39 pm
by SATCHEL » Sun Jun 28, 2009 1:57 am
the star wrote:NO-MERCY wrote:Its a wonderfull word that "IF"
so is the word 'surily'
by Jimmy_041 » Sun Jun 28, 2009 9:41 am
by chram88 » Sun Jun 28, 2009 12:09 pm
by SATCHEL » Sun Jun 28, 2009 6:02 pm
Jimmy_041 wrote:You @#@#$$% at Portland let me down: 4/5
by Purple Cobra's » Sun Jun 28, 2009 6:09 pm
by Fricky » Sun Jun 28, 2009 6:49 pm
by NO-MERCY » Sun Jun 28, 2009 10:53 pm
by schimma » Mon Jun 29, 2009 8:49 am
NO-MERCY wrote:SMOSH had a bloke play by the name of Tomeo an ex Seaton Rambler who apparently dominated.
Is that true?
by SATCHEL » Mon Jun 29, 2009 10:39 am
schimma wrote:NO-MERCY wrote:SMOSH had a bloke play by the name of Tomeo an ex Seaton Rambler who apparently dominated.
Is that true?
dominated maybe, but yes tomeo has come back to play with us. coached the grass hoppers and we have enticed him out. well be very handy for our young team. It was a good game of footy on Saturday. we got over the line with a good brand of footy. para hills had there chances after half time but just did not convert.
by Browny25 » Mon Jun 29, 2009 10:40 am
by schimma » Mon Jun 29, 2009 10:46 am
marbles wrote:schimma wrote:NO-MERCY wrote:SMOSH had a bloke play by the name of Tomeo an ex Seaton Rambler who apparently dominated.
Is that true?
dominated maybe, but yes tomeo has come back to play with us. coached the grass hoppers and we have enticed him out. well be very handy for our young team. It was a good game of footy on Saturday. we got over the line with a good brand of footy. para hills had there chances after half time but just did not convert.
So it looks like it will be a difficult one on the weekend for us then.![]()
by The Grail » Mon Jun 29, 2009 1:11 pm
by Slots It Through » Mon Jun 29, 2009 2:22 pm
The Grail wrote:What did the Portland blokes think of their A grade trying to play 'keepy offs' for the last five or so minutes? It takes a lot of skill and even AFL clubs struggle to maintain possession when they implement 'tempo footy' for long periods.
by Purple Cobra's » Mon Jun 29, 2009 2:26 pm
by piccachu » Mon Jun 29, 2009 2:39 pm
It wasnt the last 5 minutes, it was the last 90 seconds, but i did disagree with it. You are correct AFL footballers cant do it, so its a big ask for Div 3 footballers to do it.
Very unlucky to lose, but they need to get over it quickly and look at SMOSH this week. They need to win one of these games to have a crack at staying in Div 3.
They are good enough to stay in that grade.
by Slots It Through » Mon Jun 29, 2009 3:37 pm
piccachu wrote:It wasnt the last 5 minutes, it was the last 90 seconds, but i did disagree with it. You are correct AFL footballers cant do it, so its a big ask for Div 3 footballers to do it.
Very unlucky to lose, but they need to get over it quickly and look at SMOSH this week. They need to win one of these games to have a crack at staying in Div 3.
They are good enough to stay in that grade.
to be honest i dont know what the idea was with the keepys off, its something we havent practised at all this year so i am unsure how it came about that we did it. it definatly is something that has to be practised to be performed effectively.
by piccachu » Mon Jun 29, 2009 3:41 pm
dont think it was a directive from the coach, i think the word came out that there was 90 seconds to go and the players just tried to maintian possession.
Competitions SANFL Official Site | Country Footy SA | Southern Football League | VFL Footy
Club Forums Snouts Louts | The Roost | Redlegs Forum |