TOPIC:

swan42 wrote:

Peter North wrote:

gtrxuone wrote: Grassy don't stress.What Peel put out today won't come close to beating Subi.

You may well be right, but what would that say about the Wafl, if Subi win the flag the same sooks will be out in force.

PN two of the major problems with the WAFL are the host club alignment and subiaco's dominance.

I agree with you Swan, but I don't cry about it like Grassy, ffs Perth are nowhere near finals and here he is crying about it I couldn't care less who wins the flag my Wafl side are nowhere near it, imo the G7 presidents havn't done enough to change the situation.

gtrxuone wrote: Grassy don't stress.What Peel put out today won't come close to beating Subi.

One would think Peel will be better for the run today v SF....SF team has had all year to play together and gel.....dont think that Peel side have played too many games together.....one out of SF or Subi are gonna go out in straight sets.....

Peter North wrote:

swan42 wrote:

Peter North wrote:

gtrxuone wrote: Grassy don't stress.What Peel put out today won't come close to beating Subi.

You may well be right, but what would that say about the Wafl, if Subi win the flag the same sooks will be out in force.

PN two of the major problems with the WAFL are the host club alignment and subiaco's dominance.

I agree with you Swan, but I don't cry about it like Grassy, ffs Perth are nowhere near finals and here he is crying about it I couldn't care less who wins the flag my Wafl side are nowhere near it, imo the G7 presidents havn't done enough to change the situation.

PN I spoke to someone from the WAFC yesterday about the pricing for the finals. APPARENTLY, the prices were set by the clubs and the WAFC.

Grassy wrote: Your WAFL side?Who would that be?

I ain't crying about anything,Pal.

Just stating the bleeding obvious about the Negative Impact,the AFL Clubs' presence have on the WAFL.

Nothing has changed there,buddy!

No not crying dare I say having a meltdown:lol:

These bastards will trouble $ubi next weekend, make no mistake.

It is just a farkin rort and it has sabotaged our competition , these dicks should be forced to use their own products during finals, especially if the mother team is not even playing finals FFS!!!

oobisoobi wrote: How could they let it come to this?

The team that plays finals should be representative of the team that participated in the home and away season.

Botton line: if you average the year with 11 AFL players then that is the limit that play in your finals campaign.


Competition has become a farce.

And its not as if they WAFL was not warned.

Sorry for the South Freo boys today who were monstered and even the 8-10 Peel lads who got them to a Qualifying final and were dispensed with.

I was thinking the same thing as I watched the debacle unfold.
Maybe the average number of players per game used during the season should be used as a guide to the maximum number.
I also think that it is totally wrong for a player who has played more AFL games than WAFL games to be allowed to play.
I recall that before the alignment they withdrew permission for some of their players to play finals for the teams they were assigned to.

Freezin wrote:

gtrxuone wrote: Grassy don't stress.What Peel put out today won't come close to beating Subi.

One would think Peel will be better for the run today v SF....SF team has had all year to play together and gel.....dont think that Peel side have played too many games together.....one out of SF or Subi are gonna go out in straight sets.....

Freezin, SF won't go out in straight sets unless they lose to West Perth or Swans next week, which I think is fairly unlikely.

gtrxuone wrote: Grassy don't stress.What Peel put out today won't come close to beating Subi.

Not quite so sure about that.

Demons Forever wrote:

gtrxuone wrote: Grassy don't stress.What Peel put out today won't come close to beating Subi.

Not quite so sure about that.

Two more afl players to come in. I give Subi very little chance.