TOPIC:

Swandog wrote:

BC wrote:

Tiger Tales wrote:

Beasley Hutton wrote: I will update the local zone talent figures after this round is finished tonight but the percentages are already looking very very sad for one club (alignments aside).

Given your above comment and others on similar threads you've obviously got an issue with Subiacos %. My question is why as they've not been found to break any rules and there's no requirement to play a set % of local talent in your league side each week. You just need to play enough low point players to counteract your high point players and remain within the points cap.

Are you jealous that Subi have done this better than any other club and had a great deal of success as a result? I'd be happy if Claremont had a lower % but had won 2 or 3 extra flags over the last decade. Presume % wouldn't be an issue for you if SD were also winning more games and cemented in the top 5 each season?

hit, nail, head TT...another $wan$29m supporter whinging about something that is irrelevant.

How is it irrelevant when I here Schofield try and pull the wool over the casual WAFL fan by sqwarking how $ubi have developed and blooded their own, whilst in reality that is complete horseshit and everyone knows it!

*hear

Produced any Brownlow medalists recently?

Swandog wrote:

BC wrote:

Tiger Tales wrote:

Beasley Hutton wrote: I will update the local zone talent figures after this round is finished tonight but the percentages are already looking very very sad for one club (alignments aside).

Given your above comment and others on similar threads you've obviously got an issue with Subiacos %. My question is why as they've not been found to break any rules and there's no requirement to play a set % of local talent in your league side each week. You just need to play enough low point players to counteract your high point players and remain within the points cap.

Are you jealous that Subi have done this better than any other club and had a great deal of success as a result? I'd be happy if Claremont had a lower % but had won 2 or 3 extra flags over the last decade. Presume % wouldn't be an issue for you if SD were also winning more games and cemented in the top 5 each season?

hit, nail, head TT...another $wan$29m supporter whinging about something that is irrelevant.

How is it irrelevant when I here Schofield try and pull the wool over the casual WAFL fan by sqwarking how $ubi have developed and blooded their own, whilst in reality that is complete horseshit and everyone knows it!

it's irrelevant because last time I looked success is measured by the number of flags you win not how you got there. $wan$29m have more local than some because your mob was pretty much broke and didn't have a choice. now that you're salary cap breaking recidivists I hope the WAFC looks long and hard at how you can afford all your high profile recruits. it will be a great day when the bogans are again sanctioned for breaking the cap...it'll be right up there with your drug tainted flag of 2010...and the other good thing is that you can't moderate this thread and shut down anything that is remotely negative to your mullet wearing, chain smoking, wife beating, tattooed, VB drinking, toothless, crime riddled joke of a club....if the truth be known I don't mind $wan$29m...it's their supporters I can't stand.

Another legitimate ozfooty topic has been destroyed by a couple of rogue posters from the same club.

Beasley Hutton wrote: Another legitimate ozfooty topic has been destroyed by a couple of rogue posters from the same club.

Do you need a hug?

Good to get both sides of the story though BH....not everything is cut n dry mate....see how I refrained from using the "black n white" analogy....didn't want to be seen taking sides.

Obviously producing and playing quality locals is SD forte....whilst producing and playing premiership players is Subi forte....win win for both clubs I reckon...you SD fans love watching your locals play, whilst the Subi fans love winning flags....good topic...

Beasley Hutton wrote: Another legitimate ozfooty topic has been destroyed by a couple of rogue posters from the same club.

Posters with different opinions doesn't mean a topic has been destroyed.

If you want to have only SD supporters with the same ideas as yourself discussing only things you want to talk about then go set up your own private Facebook group and then you can talk to your hearts content about SD amazing supporters, your local talent and how the WAFL is nothing without SD.

This is an open thread on an open forum so suck it up BH

BC wrote:

Swandog wrote:

BC wrote:

Tiger Tales wrote:

Beasley Hutton wrote: I will update the local zone talent figures after this round is finished tonight but the percentages are already looking very very sad for one club (alignments aside).

Given your above comment and others on similar threads you've obviously got an issue with Subiacos %. My question is why as they've not been found to break any rules and there's no requirement to play a set % of local talent in your league side each week. You just need to play enough low point players to counteract your high point players and remain within the points cap.

Are you jealous that Subi have done this better than any other club and had a great deal of success as a result? I'd be happy if Claremont had a lower % but had won 2 or 3 extra flags over the last decade. Presume % wouldn't be an issue for you if SD were also winning more games and cemented in the top 5 each season?

hit, nail, head TT...another $wan$29m supporter whinging about something that is irrelevant.

How is it irrelevant when I here Schofield try and pull the wool over the casual WAFL fan by sqwarking how $ubi have developed and blooded their own, whilst in reality that is complete horseshit and everyone knows it!

it's irrelevant because last time I looked success is measured by the number of flags you win not how you got there. $wan$29m have more local than some because your mob was pretty much broke and didn't have a choice. now that you're salary cap breaking recidivists I hope the WAFC looks long and hard at how you can afford all your high profile recruits. it will be a great day when the bogans are again sanctioned for breaking the cap...it'll be right up there with your drug tainted flag of 2010...and the other good thing is that you can't moderate this thread and shut down anything that is remotely negative to your mullet wearing, chain smoking, wife beating, tattooed, VB drinking, toothless, crime riddled joke of a club....if the truth be known I don't mind $wan$29m...it's their supporters I can't stand.

Do you believe this above post is relevant to the topic do you TT?

Yes...success is measured by premiership flags!

Tiger Tales wrote: Yes...success is measured by premiership flags!

It just so happens we have won a fair few Colts flags of late...a real measure of great local zone development!

Beasley Hutton wrote:

Tiger Tales wrote: Yes...success is measured by premiership flags!

It just so happens we have won a fair few Colts flags of late...a real measure of great local zone development!

Claremont's junior zone has produced a Brownlow medalist
Subiaco's junior zone has produced a Brownlow medalist
East Freo's junior zone has produced a Brownlow medalist

Has Swan Districts?