TOPIC:

I wonder if Peel put Pav on their playing list on Saturday, against Perth, so that he can qualify for the WAFL finals.

Why not......they do it with other players.... why stop!

Hey Jimmy
Nothing would surprise me with Peel this year with there carry on.I recon Pav would tell them where to go.

Grassy wrote: Like your work Jimmy.

But I think even this one is a bit of a stretch.

If u check yesterday's budget apparently Fyfe needs to play 5 matches to qualify to play for "Peel" in the finals. What a joke.

No different to the injured Logue walking out for the SD colts game and then walking off without dirtying his boots, all in aid for SD colts qualification for the finals.......christ it is only colts footy.......desperate times require desperate measures I guess

Freezin wrote: No different to the injured Logue walking out for the SD colts game and then walking off without dirtying his boots, all in aid for SD colts qualification for the finals.......christ it is only colts footy.......desperate times require desperate measures I guess

Freezin pleas explain what Logue did during the colts' game and why wasn't he playing league yesterday?

Read The West mate.....Logue was listed in the SD colts starting 22 apparently.....walked on the oval and then walked straight off....qualified him for SD colts finals campaign....no different to Balic at Peel.......hopefully not true but quite surprised SD would do it...especially with their record of development......lost the game to EF inthe latter part of the game....playing one short on purpose is not showing the opposition and the comp much respect I reckon........but hey can understand why Peel and SD are doing it though

Freezin wrote: Read The West mate.....Logue was listed in the SD colts starting 22 apparently.....walked on the oval and then walked straight off....qualified him for SD colts finals campaign....no different to Balic at Peel.......hopefully not true but quite surprised SD would do it...especially with their record of development......lost the game to EF inthe latter part of the game....playing one short on purpose is not showing the opposition and the comp much respect I reckon........but hey can understand why Peel and SD are doing it though

To put it mildly Freezin what a load of crap to try to compare what supposedly happened with Logue and the Peel situation. You have absolutely no idea why Logue did not play in our league team on Saturday.

Griffen Logue should be playing (and has earned every fragment of that right to do such) Colts footy purely given his age - that he has been promoted to league speaks volumes of the work he has undertaken

Swans have every right to allow the lad a chance of some silverware to send him off the VFL abattoir

That Fremantle fraud has no right & has earnt nothing in this WANFL competition

Got no probs with Logue getting qualified.....just ironic and funny that 3 SD fans are on here moaning on what Peel are doing, yet their own club has played a game intentionally one short to get a player qualified.....

more than happy to be proved wrong, but unless you 42 or anyone else in the know at SDFC can put a clearer slant on it...one has to assume what SD did... surely is no different in principle to what Peel has done with Balic?......

There is a huge difference in this case - Logue had already played 4 previous Colts fixtures before being promoted to senior footy , and is still by his age naturally able to help Swans win the colts flag

This VFL ring-in is another dirty trick