TOPIC:

swan42 wrote:

mikeh wrote:

swan42 wrote:

mikeh wrote:

swan42 wrote:

BC wrote: you're just lucky I guess so you have 3 opportunities in a season to see all the cream we've cherry picked from all the other WAFL clubs.

Another puerile response that was totally expected. How long do we have to wait before your conjoined twin, Freezin, to add his inane response?

Perhaps mikeh will be able to provide a reasonable response to my query.

Yep Taylor is wrong again. We obviously play Perth 3 times as our traditional rivals and by what he said we should have had the extra game against West Perth or East Perth. I really take very little notice of what he says. However it is what it is and looking at it positively we might be able to put in a better performance against them next time if the players can learn some lessons about what happened last weekend.

Given that only 2 teams play the UNDEFEATED Subiaco three times it will potentially have a significant impact on whether a cub makes the finals particularly if it comes down to percentages.

Totally agree and it is likely that percentage will play a major role in determining finals spots considering there is only 1 game difference between 4th and 8th position at the moment. Do you know who the other team is that plays Subiaco 3 times?

West Perth I believe.

Maybe they are regarded as traditional rivals becuase they didn't finish in the same 3rd as Subiaco either?

MarkOlsen wrote: why wouldnt they play SF and Peel 3 times based on last years ladder ?

An excellent question.

MarkOlsen wrote: why wouldnt they play SF and Peel 3 times based on last years ladder ?

Very good question MO and or Peelmantle or WCEP....at least they rival them for money!!

But to try and answer maybe all the ex Subiaco staff at the WAFC-board feel obliged to help them even more on top of the restrictions placed on Peelmantle & WCEP now?!

We played Subi 3 times last year also.Only Peel and the Ferals should play Subi 3 times.

gtrxuone wrote: We played Subi 3 times last year also.Only Peel and the Ferals should play Subi 3 times.

ditto in 2016.

swan42 wrote:

gtrxuone wrote: We played Subi 3 times last year also.Only Peel and the Ferals should play Subi 3 times.

ditto in 2016.

42 that's unacceptable by the Commission to play Subi 9 times in 3 years.Next time we play them just stack the defence. To stop an 80+ defeat.

gtrxuone wrote:

swan42 wrote:

gtrxuone wrote: We played Subi 3 times last year also.Only Peel and the Ferals should play Subi 3 times.

ditto in 2016.

42 that's unacceptable by the Commission to play Subi 9 times in 3 years.Next time we play them just stack the defence. To stop an 80+ defeat.

Some questions have to be asked of Messrs Sanders & Randall why perennial top of the table Subiaco have had a leg up by playing a lowly SD 3 times in a year for the last 3 seasons?!

You would think after so many games SD would have a better idea how to play Subi then gtx?....Definitely should be rotated more for sure....but then again that is the price you pay for having the biggest Facebook and fan base in the comp......take it as a compliment I say.......

Maybe it's to maximise $ubis crowds and gate and provide them some revenue, because remember like BC reminds us so often how running the Subi oval seating ticketing deal has been so financially tough on them in recent years!

correct ToOl….Subi only broke even the last couple of years and in fact, had to hand seats back last year coz they couldn't sell them...but don't get too distraught at our misfortune, they did make a few bucks prior to that.