TOPIC:

Senior Seagull wrote: The WAFC wont promote the WAFL because the AFL doesn't want any other comp competing with them even though we are now a small state comp, you cant increase what doesn't exist. Might see a bit more in the papers but that wont be coming from the commish, they will be busy planning their trips to Brisbane for the finals and ensuring they get a re-entry exemption from the state government, "keep our snouts in the trough" is the WAFC's mission statement.

Sadly you are correct SS.

Also the AFL obsessed locals here will be glued to TV sets, with bloody AFL on almost 7 days a weeks in these wacko fixtures.

ss: correct
baz: perth did indeed
bc we need to be a bit careful as Subi supporters: we voted for Peel which we should not have done to protect the integrity of zones, particularly South of the river.

it was a bad idea and the stench gets stronger every weekend

stt: agreed; but the problem is that it could be construed as more 'stupid' than Subi's vote, simply because your beloved Perth was always going to be most affected, together with other clubs. They have not moved our zone in the north, stt

Stand the Test wrote:

ArkRoyal wrote: ss: correct
baz: perth did indeed
bc we need to be a bit careful as Subi supporters: we voted for Peel which we should not have done to protect the integrity of zones, particularly South of the river.

Baz, Ark someone will have to explain to me why pfc’s vote carried any more weight than the other ayes.

Because they had the last casting vote held off and all the other clubs had voted, it was evenly weighted and hung on them. Their committee held off and came back with the vote for Peel.

Bazza, incorrect.
The Board instructed Catalano to vote against it.
He was the culprit not PFC.

Demons Forever wrote: Bazza, incorrect.
The Board instructed Catalano to vote against it.
He was the culprit not PFC.

Wow that was treachery by Catalano DF!

If Catalono was the official representative of the PFC then thats how the PFC voted. If as you say he went against clear instructions I'm sure PFC could have withdrawn the vote due to their reps "unapproved" actions.

Peel have lead to problems such as the thinning of talent and the bye. The bye is a real problem.
But the decision wasnt irrational. More local players have probably played at wafl level. The ground is impressive. They have some local following. They add something to Mandurah and Rockingham.

The Dockers alignment has complicated matters. The premierships probably helped the club.

It's hard to reach a final conclusion.

Beasley Hutton wrote:

Demons Forever wrote: Bazza, incorrect.
The Board instructed Catalano to vote against it.
He was the culprit not PFC.

Wow that was treachery by Catalano DF!

Correct