OzFooty.Net Sign In

Who's Online?

We have 261 guests and 5 members online

  • 30plusyeardrought
  • Dazzler
  • Freezin
  • Royals78

Newest Footy Recruits

  • Chook
  • CanningTiges2018
  • West Coast AFC
  • Swans29
  • Cougars01
Welcome, Guest
Username: Password: Remember me
28 Jun 2017
Memories from Yesteryear..... Rod Alderton
Read More...

TOPIC: Sutcliffe report

Re:Sutcliffe report 3 weeks 5 days ago #136070

  • Demons Forever
  • Demons Forever's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Veteran
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 2369
  • Thank you received: 51

R U Serious wrote: Sutcliffe just found guilty and given a reprimand. Says a lot about the WAFC.


There you go, never tell me they are not treated differently.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

It's not the size of the dog in the fight. It's the size of the fight in the dog.
Winning isn't everything. It's the ONLY THING !!!!!!
I shot the fukin sherriff!!!!

Re:Sutcliffe report 3 weeks 5 days ago #136080

  • swan42
  • swan42's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Veteran
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 4996
  • Thank you received: 495

Demons Forever wrote:

R U Serious wrote: Sutcliffe just found guilty and given a reprimand. Says a lot about the WAFC.


There you go, never tell me they are not treated differently.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


Surely that would be a DOUBLE reprimand given the potential 100% loading for a GF.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Re:Sutcliffe report 3 weeks 5 days ago #136135

  • Beasley Hutton
  • Beasley Hutton's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Veteran
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 5138
  • Thank you received: 928

swan42 wrote:

Demons Forever wrote:

R U Serious wrote: Sutcliffe just found guilty and given a reprimand. Says a lot about the WAFC.


There you go, never tell me they are not treated differently.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


Surely that would be a DOUBLE reprimand given the potential 100% loading for a GF.

Would that be a double lashing with a feather duster for Sutcliffe 42?!

Also do you think Riggs should ask the biased WAFL tribunal for a please explain considering his inexplicable 3>2 weeks suspension just before the Finals for a tackle he actually received a free kick for?!
The following user(s) said Thank You: Dwert

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Last Edit: by Beasley Hutton.

Re:Sutcliffe report 3 weeks 5 days ago #136138

  • Dwert
  • Dwert's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Weekly Starter
  • Weekly Starter
  • Posts: 928
  • Thank you received: 220

Beasley Hutton wrote:

swan42 wrote:

Demons Forever wrote:

R U Serious wrote: Sutcliffe just found guilty and given a reprimand. Says a lot about the WAFC.


There you go, never tell me they are not treated differently.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


Surely that would be a DOUBLE reprimand given the potential 100% loading for a GF.

Would that be a double lashing with a feather duster for Sutcliffe 42?!

Also do you think Riggs should ask the biased WAFL tribunal for a please explain considering his inexplicable 3>2 weeks suspension just before the Finals for a tackle he actually received a free kick for?!


Best of luck getting an explanation from Daryl or Luke:huh:

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Sutcliffe report 1 week 5 days ago #136761

  • Dwert
  • Dwert's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Weekly Starter
  • Weekly Starter
  • Posts: 928
  • Thank you received: 220
Looks as though the WAFL Tribunal is not an orphan when it comes to bizarre decisions

www.facebook.com/ntfootball/posts/1237573143013233

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Sutcliffe report 1 week 5 days ago #136768

  • Dwert
  • Dwert's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Weekly Starter
  • Weekly Starter
  • Posts: 928
  • Thank you received: 220

Dwert wrote: Looks as though the WAFL Tribunal is not an orphan when it comes to bizarre decisions

www.facebook.com/ntfootball/posts/1237573143013233



Further developments on this story...I suppose the NTFL are at least admitting that the integrity of the NTFL Tribunal needs to sustained.. The WAFL/WAFC obviously do not see an issue with the WAFL Tribunal

www.facebook.com/NTFootballLeague/videos/1817475911613789/

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Sutcliffe report 1 week 5 days ago #136781

  • Senior Seagull
  • Senior Seagull's Avatar Topic Author
  • Offline
  • Veteran
  • Veteran
  • Posts: 1954
  • Thank you received: 260
Would have been very interesting if it had been the Subi player hitting Suttcliffe behind play. A very different outcome I think.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Time to create page: 0.062 seconds
Tweets by @Ozfootynet
promotional tote bags