TOPIC:

mikeh wrote:

swan42 wrote:

mikeh wrote: It would depend on what West Perth are going to get in return for doing this. Im sure Raponi will not agree to this without some concessions from the other side. It may be that one of the options being discussed is to allow WP to retain the 9 logo on their jumpers if they agree to remove the signage from the oval during the finals. Not a satisfactory solution I know but time is now running out and nobody wants it to get to the stage where a grand final is not telecast.

Mikeh I understand the desire to have the GF televised and I don't want to be seen as shooting the messenger. However, it is my understanding that the sponsorship deal between West Perth and Channel 9 was signed something like 12 months before the agreement with the WAFC and Channel 7. If that is the case why should West Perth or Channel 9 have to be the ones giving up something? Exactly what would Channel 7 being doing in terms of compensation for West Perth and Channel 9. This situation has been brought about by the completely idiotic deal made be the WAFC. They are the ones who are responsible for this debacle and what are they doing to try to do to resolve this situation? I don't know whether you heard Corbin Midllemass's (hopefully that is the correct spelling of his surname) views about the situation. Why won't Messrs Walton, McHenry provide an interview so some questions can be asked of them to explain why we are paying Channel 7 (and spare me the semantics of which company is being paid) and we are being dictated to by Channel 7?

Couldn't disagree with anything you have said there swan42 but I think for the sake of the competition both sides may need to swallow their pride and come up with a solution based on some goodwill. Otherwise the situation will remain as it has all season and at least 2 and up to 4 finals wll not be telecast. After the season it is my hope that there will be a number of resignations and/or sackings of WAFC people who have been responsible for this farce.

The problem Mikeh is that it probably wouldn't make any difference unfortunately. The next lot would most likely make the decisions which the the WA domiciled AFL clubs want.

Here is a challenge for anyone including G Walton and the WAFC: what was the last decision the WAFC made which positively affected the WAFL to the detriment of the WA domiciled AFL clubs?

Southerner wrote:

Beasley Hutton wrote:

swan42 wrote:

mikeh wrote: It would depend on what West Perth are going to get in return for doing this. Im sure Raponi will not agree to this without some concessions from the other side. It may be that one of the options being discussed is to allow WP to retain the 9 logo on their jumpers if they agree to remove the signage from the oval during the finals. Not a satisfactory solution I know but time is now running out and nobody wants it to get to the stage where a grand final is not telecast.

Mikeh I understand the desire to have the GF televised and I don't want to be seen as shooting the messenger. However, it is my understanding that the sponsorship deal between West Perth and Channel 9 was signed something like 12 months before the agreement with the WAFC and Channel 7. If that is the case why should West Perth or Channel 9 have to be the ones giving up something? Exactly what would Channel 7 being doing in terms of compensation for West Perth and Channel 9. This situation has been brought about by the completely idiotic deal made be the WAFC. They are the ones who are responsible for this debacle and what are they doing to try to do to resolve this situation? I don't know whether you heard Corbin Midllemass's (hopefully that is the correct spelling of his surname) views about the situation. Why won't Messrs Walton, McHenry provide an interview so some questions can be asked of them to explain why we are paying Channel 7 (and spare me the semantics of which company is being paid) and we are being dictated to by Channel 7?

Brian Cook spoke highly of McHenry on Open Mike last night 42!

Yeah well that ex-West Coast cocksmoker would mate hahaha pair of absolute farkwits

Was tongue in cheek fellas as I got the impression he couldn't stand McHenry and was the sole reason he left the Wiggles for Geelong!

mikeh wrote:

swan42 wrote:

mikeh wrote: It would depend on what West Perth are going to get in return for doing this. Im sure Raponi will not agree to this without some concessions from the other side. It may be that one of the options being discussed is to allow WP to retain the 9 logo on their jumpers if they agree to remove the signage from the oval during the finals. Not a satisfactory solution I know but time is now running out and nobody wants it to get to the stage where a grand final is not telecast.

Mikeh I understand the desire to have the GF televised and I don't want to be seen as shooting the messenger. However, it is my understanding that the sponsorship deal between West Perth and Channel 9 was signed something like 12 months before the agreement with the WAFC and Channel 7. If that is the case why should West Perth or Channel 9 have to be the ones giving up something? Exactly what would Channel 7 being doing in terms of compensation for West Perth and Channel 9. This situation has been brought about by the completely idiotic deal made be the WAFC. They are the ones who are responsible for this debacle and what are they doing to try to do to resolve this situation? I don't know whether you heard Corbin Midllemass's (hopefully that is the correct spelling of his surname) views about the situation. Why won't Messrs Walton, McHenry provide an interview so some questions can be asked of them to explain why we are paying Channel 7 (and spare me the semantics of which company is being paid) and we are being dictated to by Channel 7?

Couldn't disagree with anything you have said there swan42 but I think for the sake of the competition both sides may need to swallow their pride and come up with a solution based on some goodwill. Otherwise the situation will remain as it has all season and at least 2 and up to 4 finals wll not be telecast. After the season it is my hope that there will be a number of resignations and/or sackings of WAFC people who have been responsible for this farce.

Personally,I could not careless if wpfc removed the ch 9 logo, if they got a compo package, then so be it. Ch 7 will not backdown, so that is the choice , no tv gf overage or no ch 9 stickers.

What about the farce that might occur at Joondy in the first week of the finals, if the stars align for Freo they may rest up to ten players for the Port game in rnd23, which could result in a very weak Peel team travelling to Joondy.

Peter North wrote: What about the farce that might occur at Joondy in the first week of the finals, if the stars align for Freo they may rest up to ten players for the Port game in rnd23, which could result in a very weak Peel team travelling to Joondy.

Couldn't give a rats sphincter Pete, this is actually where the alignment becomes even more of a farce, during Finals time.

Leedy wrote:

Peter North wrote: What about the farce that might occur at Joondy in the first week of the finals, if the stars align for Freo they may rest up to ten players for the Port game in rnd23, which could result in a very weak Peel team travelling to Joondy.

Couldn't give a rats sphincter Pete, this is actually where the alignment becomes even more of a farce, during Finals time.

Yep I'm with you Leedy can't believe 7 clubs voted this in.

Peter North wrote:

Leedy wrote:

Peter North wrote: What about the farce that might occur at Joondy in the first week of the finals, if the stars align for Freo they may rest up to ten players for the Port game in rnd23, which could result in a very weak Peel team travelling to Joondy.

Couldn't give a rats sphincter Pete, this is actually where the alignment becomes even more of a farce, during Finals time.

Yep I'm with you Leedy can't believe 7 clubs voted this in.

PN which 7 clubs voted what in?