by oldbomber » Wed Apr 08, 2015 5:54 pm
by RAMS » Wed Apr 08, 2015 7:42 pm
oldbomber wrote:Wow so obviously birdwood couldnt match the coin on offer at nairne and now ladhams is going to play against his brother. Shouldnt surprise too many though hes probably had 7-8 different clubs in only last 5 seasons of football...must be bloody handy infront of goals still to get away with that sort of behaviour
by grasshopper22 » Wed Apr 08, 2015 7:44 pm
by RAMS » Wed Apr 08, 2015 7:55 pm
grasshopper22 wrote:Big Adam Morris clearance pending to Nairne from Meningie.
by Toto » Wed Apr 08, 2015 10:12 pm
by oldbomber » Wed Apr 08, 2015 11:01 pm
Chris Ladhams has been outstanding at Nairne so far and has already passed on much of his experience to our young list, and has even joined our fundraising team to help raise money for our junior program. He walk into our Club due to working for one of our Major Sponsors and living in the area, don't think he was shopping himself around like you are claiming.
by cracka » Fri Apr 10, 2015 7:45 am
Esteban Vihaio wrote:cracka wrote:Esteban Vihaio wrote:IMHO clubs should be de-regestered for on field and off field indiscretions only. De-regeresting a club for only fielding one side I don't agree with. I thought what the HFL attempted to do with Sedan-Cambrai was deplorable. I think the same with this situation. On the other hand, Wingfield obviously have a reputation. However, if that is the underlying reason for the deregeretration you should be open and honest about it to deter others in the future.
HFL weren't trying to de-register Sedan, they were trying to move them to a different & more suitable division so as to not F*** around the program for 8 other clubs. Big difference.
Don't agree cracka. HFL action would have impacted S/C's b-grade side the same as wingfield
by On The Pine » Fri Apr 10, 2015 6:40 pm
by Esteban Vihaio » Sat Apr 11, 2015 7:30 pm
cracka wrote:Esteban Vihaio wrote:cracka wrote:Esteban Vihaio wrote:IMHO clubs should be de-regestered for on field and off field indiscretions only. De-regeresting a club for only fielding one side I don't agree with. I thought what the HFL attempted to do with Sedan-Cambrai was deplorable. I think the same with this situation. On the other hand, Wingfield obviously have a reputation. However, if that is the underlying reason for the deregeretration you should be open and honest about it to deter others in the future.
HFL weren't trying to de-register Sedan, they were trying to move them to a different & more suitable division so as to not F*** around the program for 8 other clubs. Big difference.
Don't agree cracka. HFL action would have impacted S/C's b-grade side the same as wingfield
Thought I'd better move this to here from the SAAFL thread.
So you don't agree with the fact that HFL weren't de-registering Sedan. Sedan hadn't been able to fill a B grade side for a while.
by cracka » Sat Apr 11, 2015 8:45 pm
On The Pine wrote:Sedan have never forfeited B grade. Juniors on the other hand are the problem.
by cracka » Sat Apr 11, 2015 9:00 pm
cracka wrote:Esteban Vihaio wrote:cracka wrote:Esteban Vihaio wrote:IMHO clubs should be de-regestered for on field and off field indiscretions only. De-regeresting a club for only fielding one side I don't agree with. I thought what the HFL attempted to do with Sedan-Cambrai was deplorable. I think the same with this situation. On the other hand, Wingfield obviously have a reputation. However, if that is the underlying reason for the deregeretration you should be open and honest about it to deter others in the future.
HFL weren't trying to de-register Sedan, they were trying to move them to a different & more suitable division so as to not F*** around the program for 8 other clubs. Big difference.
Don't agree cracka. HFL action would have impacted S/C's b-grade side the same as wingfield
Thought I'd better move this to here from the SAAFL thread.
So you don't agree with the fact that HFL weren't de-registering Sedan. Sedan hadn't been able to fill a B grade side for a while.
Esteban Vihaio wrote:I think you have confused yourself with double negatives there cracka. Suggest you re-read or re-write the posts....
by Esteban Vihaio » Sat Apr 11, 2015 9:11 pm
cracka wrote:Nah, Only confused with what part you don't agree with.
by cracka » Sat Apr 11, 2015 9:26 pm
Esteban Vihaio wrote:cracka wrote:Nah, Only confused with what part you don't agree with.
Simplist language. Let clubs field the sides they can fill. Only deregister for incidents, i.e serious on field violence or not paying registration fees. Not sure where you got confused?
by Esteban Vihaio » Sat Apr 11, 2015 9:38 pm
cracka wrote:Esteban Vihaio wrote:cracka wrote:Nah, Only confused with what part you don't agree with.
Simplist language. Let clubs field the sides they can fill. Only deregister for incidents, i.e serious on field violence or not paying registration fees. Not sure where you got confused?
I think you're confused with what you posted. Read it again. I said HFL WEREN'T trying to deregister Sedan (which they weren't) & you posted "don't agree Cracka". Are you saying they WERE trying to deregister Sedan.
Now you're saying let clubs field the sides they can fill. Well Sedan haven't been able to FILL A & B grades for a couple of years which means they should have been put in div 3. You've actually backed up what people were posting on here as to why that should have happened.
by cracka » Sat Apr 11, 2015 9:42 pm
Esteban Vihaio wrote:cracka wrote:Esteban Vihaio wrote:cracka wrote:Nah, Only confused with what part you don't agree with.
Simplist language. Let clubs field the sides they can fill. Only deregister for incidents, i.e serious on field violence or not paying registration fees. Not sure where you got confused?
I think you're confused with what you posted. Read it again. I said HFL WEREN'T trying to deregister Sedan (which they weren't) & you posted "don't agree Cracka". Are you saying they WERE trying to deregister Sedan.
Now you're saying let clubs field the sides they can fill. Well Sedan haven't been able to FILL A & B grades for a couple of years which means they should have been put in div 3. You've actually backed up what people were posting on here as to why that should have happened.
I didn't agree with your post and your opinion. Still don't. Nothing has changed. Can't see us ever being on the same page with this one. Don't agree with your most recent post either. A team runs out on the park it doen't matter to me if any players played in and earlier game. Many players, myself included, backed up with senior game after playing juniors. I'd be surprised if that aspect of the game ever disappears.
your whole thread seems a bit pointless? I think this ground has been covered?
by Esteban Vihaio » Sat Apr 11, 2015 9:50 pm
by cracka » Sat Apr 11, 2015 9:56 pm
Esteban Vihaio wrote:It was to support wing field who could have fielded one side. They were only allowed registration if they filled two sides. I see parallels. You moved it here looking for an argument.
Forfeiting is the line IMHO.. what is the line between once in a blue moon forfeit and consistent forfeiting is grey.
by Esteban Vihaio » Sat Apr 11, 2015 10:01 pm
cracka wrote:Esteban Vihaio wrote:It was to support wing field who could have fielded one side. They were only allowed registration if they filled two sides. I see parallels. You moved it here looking for an argument.
Forfeiting is the line IMHO.. what is the line between once in a blue moon forfeit and consistent forfeiting is grey.
Now I know you're confused. I moved it here so the SAAFL div 7 people didn't have to read this as I thought (correctly obviously) that we would BOTH continue to talk about it.
by cracka » Sat Apr 11, 2015 10:06 pm
Esteban Vihaio wrote:cracka wrote:Esteban Vihaio wrote:It was to support wing field who could have fielded one side. They were only allowed registration if they filled two sides. I see parallels. You moved it here looking for an argument.
Forfeiting is the line IMHO.. what is the line between once in a blue moon forfeit and consistent forfeiting is grey.
Now I know you're confused. I moved it here so the SAAFL div 7 people didn't have to read this as I thought (correctly obviously) that we would BOTH continue to talk about it.
We're never going to agree on this issue. I'm not going to engage you on this anymore. If you take that as you winning the discussion, more power to you. Seems a pointless conversation trying to convert each other to their point of view. Have a good night, hope your team won today.
by On The Pine » Sat Apr 11, 2015 10:18 pm
cracka wrote:On The Pine wrote:Sedan have never forfeited B grade. Juniors on the other hand are the problem.
But have needed players to play 2 games every week, therefore not enough players for 2 FULL sides.
Competitions SANFL Official Site | Country Footy SA | Southern Football League | VFL Footy
Club Forums Snouts Louts | The Roost | Redlegs Forum |