TOPIC:

DD wrote: From a Perth supporters point of view I really couldn't give a shit because as soon as we look like building something the rug gets pulled from under us. It has been an uneven playing field since Subiaco gained a huge financial advantage from Subiaco Oval seating deal and they show no shame in reveling in the glory of an embarrassing collection of premierships in the past 15 years.

Until I start seeing a fair system and we see Subiaco spend a significant amount of time down the bottom of the ladder while Perth enjoys a period of success I really couldn't give a rats arse if Peel loaded with a team full of Fremantle players takes the premiership.

I cant see how you can blame any of the above for Perth's lack of success over 30 plus years, teams outside the two you mentioned have still done a great deal better than Perth in that time, Perth's problems begin and end at Lathlain Park, besides that fact that it was Perths casting vote that got the cluster that is Peel into the comp, maybe its Karma afterall.

Grassroots wrote: Then you have to listen to Nisbett on TABradio saying the WAFL was dying and the AFL was its saviour.

What a load of crapola.

Yeah the lowest crowd numbers since 1941 this season coming off poor attendances in 2015 no thanks to Twevors mob ...gee what a saviour!

gtrxuone wrote: If anything where having a good build up for the 1st semi.Have a feeling this game might pull a decent crowd,6000+.

GTR the Peel clowns were confident of breaking their all time record crowd at Royalty For Regions Park set in their 1st ever game in 1997 of 5700+ on Sunday and they didnt even get to half of that (2800) and most of those would have been old EP supporters!

I was going to have a break over the summer to recover from 2016 and to be fully rejuvenated for the 2017 season and the state election in March. However, there comes a time when one has to stand up and reply to the nonsense that purports to celebrate Peel's first win in a WAFL final. How can any sane person suggest that a team of 17 AFL aligned players out of a total of 22 can be a Peel team? It is ridiculous in the extreme. It is nothing more nor less than a complete and utter farce.

According to the WAFL site a grand total of 2,834 attended the match at Rushton Park. Just how much proof does the WAFC require that the host club alignment is killing the WAFL competition? Ignoring the Swans, East Freo and Subiaco supporters from the 2,834 there were two clubs playing in the league that are aligned with the two WA domiciled AFL clubs. Two clubs that would have over 100,000 members combined and the crowd was under 3,000.

Once again I call on the WAFC to resign en masse or grow a backbone and start making decisions that support the WAFL competition. The only conclusion to be drawn from the actions of the WAFC is that they are actively trying to destroy the WAFL competition and clubs.

I also note and I am no supporter of what used to be East Perth that the WAFC have scheduled a colts' game featuring East Perth at 9.55 am at Leederville and a reserves' game featuring East Perth at 11.30 am at Joondalup. Why doesn't the WAFC complete their disgrace and disdain for the WAFL competition by informing the Eagles they play whomever they like in the Reserves' final.

Is it possible to have more contempt for the WAFC than for the Liberal Party?

Grassy wrote: Swan,I agree with you up to the Fixturing for next Weekend.

South have 3 teams left,East Perth 2.Makes more sense to keep South together don't you think?

As much it pains me,I'm heading up to Arena for Perth's Colts 2nd Semi Final,when I originally expected us to be at Leederville.

The solution is pretty simple: schedule the colts match on the previous day (i.e. on the Saturday).

Foe example, if Grump wanted to watch both the clots and the reserves it is physically impossible.

Can anyone remember what the rules were when the alignments were drawn up? I seem to recall there was to be a maximum of 12 AFL listed players playing in their aligned clubs league side?

DD wrote: Can anyone remember what the rules were when the alignments were drawn up? I seem to recall there was to be a maximum of 12 AFL listed players playing in their aligned clubs league side?

DD without being too sarcastic the rules are in essence what the Eagles and the Dockers want.

The real Peel played against Swan Districts and got thrashed by a team that won only one other game. That was the REAL PEEL not the farce that occurred last week end.

That doesn't answer my question 42, surely there are rules in place that prevents these AFL teams fielding anymore than a certain number of AFL players in the WAFL side? Otherwise it undermines the integrity of the WAFL competition. This needs a follow up. The WAFC needs to be held to account.

DD: pretty sure they can play as many as they like provided they have appwarred in a certain number of games. In other words, the rule is the same one which has applied since 1987.

DD wrote: That doesn't answer my question 42, surely there are rules in place that prevents these AFL teams fielding anymore than a certain number of AFL players in the WAFL side? Otherwise it undermines the integrity of the WAFL competition. This needs a follow up. The WAFC needs to be held to account.

Yeah but who is going to follow it up , surely not the CEOs or the Presidents who took the hush money, might have to send Grassy as a representative of Ozfooy as a spokesman for the WAFL , havnt heard a whisper from the clubs must be okay by them.