TOPIC:

Dwert wrote:

Unholytugboat wrote: Given today's chatter in the news, sounds like fyfe to saints might be the worst kept secret in football

Lookout Tugboat, Anchor and his mates will be coming gor you.

At least they got the earlier scoop from me yesterday, they have had 24hours to process it.

anchorman wrote: Well done to the Toasters last night.Just too good.Too experienced and skillful.
We played dumb football early. We went in almost as much as they did early, but constantly kicked the ball high to where McGovern, Barrass and Yeo were able to just drift in and take uncontested marks.
I just hope that the club ask for explanations from the umpiring fraternity as to how it is legal to actually throw the ball out from a contest, directly in front of a certain umpire.Also how again directly in front of that same certain umpire,in the white square Docker forward line,early in the game, a player can be tackled, spun 360, not dispose of the ball correctly , yet play on is called!!!
Also I think they should be asking how come the "Leeches"can hang off Fyfe at contests and not be penalised!
A Toasters supporter said to me last week, they played like dogs, Pekinese he said.Well he may well say this week they played like Border Collies,apologies to all BC owners, but the fact remains, a dog is a dog is a dog.
Oh and by the way, it is amazing just how hard it was to find a Yella supporter all week, yet all of a sudden they come out of the wood work like white ants spruiking. Maybe they think beating the Dockers,an almost bottom side from last year, is like winning the GF.As they accuse us of.
I would think that rather than spruik, they should buy the players who didn't, and can't perform away from home, a few mirrors to have a good look and see whattheir problem is.

Perhaps the first question they should ask is why Fyfe didn't get a free kick when Yeo was clearly holding him and Fyfe was not in possession of the ball.

anchorman wrote: Well done to the Toasters last night.Just too good.Too experienced and skillful.
We played dumb football early. We went in almost as much as they did early, but constantly kicked the ball high to where McGovern, Barrass and Yeo were able to just drift in and take uncontested marks.
I just hope that the club ask for explanations from the umpiring fraternity as to how it is legal to actually throw the ball out from a contest, directly in front of a certain umpire.Also how again directly in front of that same certain umpire,in the white square Docker forward line,early in the game, a player can be tackled, spun 360, not dispose of the ball correctly , yet play on is called!!!
Also I think they should be asking how come the "Leeches"can hang off Fyfe at contests and not be penalised!
A Toasters supporter said to me last week, they played like dogs, Pekinese he said.Well he may well say this week they played like Border Collies,apologies to all BC owners, but the fact remains, a dog is a dog is a dog.
Oh and by the way, it is amazing just how hard it was to find a Yella supporter all week, yet all of a sudden they come out of the wood work like white ants spruiking. Maybe they think beating the Dockers,an almost bottom side from last year, is like winning the GF.As they accuse us of.
I would think that rather than spruik, they should buy the players who didn't, and can't perform away from home, a few mirrors to have a good look and see whattheir problem is.

Care to name the ump A/man??

anchorman wrote: Well done to the Toasters last night.Just too good.Too experienced and skillful.
We played dumb football early. We went in almost as much as they did early, but constantly kicked the ball high to where McGovern, Barrass and Yeo were able to just drift in and take uncontested marks.
I just hope that the club ask for explanations from the umpiring fraternity as to how it is legal to actually throw the ball out from a contest, directly in front of a certain umpire.Also how again directly in front of that same certain umpire,in the white square Docker forward line,early in the game, a player can be tackled, spun 360, not dispose of the ball correctly , yet play on is called!!!
Also I think they should be asking how come the "Leeches"can hang off Fyfe at contests and not be penalised!
A Toasters supporter said to me last week, they played like dogs, Pekinese he said.Well he may well say this week they played like Border Collies,apologies to all BC owners, but the fact remains, a dog is a dog is a dog.
Oh and by the way, it is amazing just how hard it was to find a Yella supporter all week, yet all of a sudden they come out of the wood work like white ants spruiking. Maybe they think beating the Dockers,an almost bottom side from last year, is like winning the GF.As they accuse us of.
I would think that rather than spruik, they should buy the players who didn't, and can't perform away from home, a few mirrors to have a good look and see whattheir problem is.

Gee anchor, you and swanny have got more excuses for losing than a kid caught with his hand in the biscuit barrel!

anchorman wrote: I wouldn't think it necessary Unka.We all know who it was.It could very well be the same umpire who saw Fyfe snotter Yeo,Obviously he did, because he also asked the reserve umpire to make note.But IF that same umpire saw that, why didn't he see Yeo holding Fye like a leech would,Why wouldn't he pay a free kickto Fyfe!!!!

I missed the match so i dont know. I have reservations about Dagliesh when umpiring WC matches, hence my query

58shark wrote:

anchorman wrote: Well done to the Toasters last night.Just too good.Too experienced and skillful.
We played dumb football early. We went in almost as much as they did early, but constantly kicked the ball high to where McGovern, Barrass and Yeo were able to just drift in and take uncontested marks.
I just hope that the club ask for explanations from the umpiring fraternity as to how it is legal to actually throw the ball out from a contest, directly in front of a certain umpire.Also how again directly in front of that same certain umpire,in the white square Docker forward line,early in the game, a player can be tackled, spun 360, not dispose of the ball correctly , yet play on is called!!!
Also I think they should be asking how come the "Leeches"can hang off Fyfe at contests and not be penalised!
A Toasters supporter said to me last week, they played like dogs, Pekinese he said.Well he may well say this week they played like Border Collies,apologies to all BC owners, but the fact remains, a dog is a dog is a dog.
Oh and by the way, it is amazing just how hard it was to find a Yella supporter all week, yet all of a sudden they come out of the wood work like white ants spruiking. Maybe they think beating the Dockers,an almost bottom side from last year, is like winning the GF.As they accuse us of.
I would think that rather than spruik, they should buy the players who didn't, and can't perform away from home, a few mirrors to have a good look and see whattheir problem is.

Gee anchor, you and swanny have got more excuses for losing than a kid caught with his hand in the biscuit barrel!

Fyfe was clearly being held without the ball. That used to be a free kick for holding the man.

Grassy wrote: What kind of Buscuits,Shark?

l

Nothing but the finest....the biscuit we grew up on, Granita!!!

Grassy wrote: What kind of Buscuits,Shark?

Do you get them in NZ?

swan42 wrote:

Grassy wrote: What kind of Buscuits,Shark?

Do you get them in NZ?

Que???

anchorman wrote: Sharky not making excuses.We were well and truly beaten by the Toasters.Just looking to see that the umpires , or alleged umpires, do the right thing.
The free that should have been against was early, before the torrent of Toasters goals.Not saying it would have made us win, but gives some momentum early.
As for the Fyfe incident, I remember the Toaster yelling and squealing like mongrel dogs with rabies when ever Cousins or Judd and co were getting mauled.Short memories .

And.......? This means that the end result would have been different? WCE are the only team that target Fyffe? I'm sure St K won't target him