TOPIC:

MarkOlsen wrote: unofficially East Perth dont exist and next year they officially dont exist for the life of their alignment agreement..
when a competition's rules are changed to suit 2 clubs as they were this year then anything which takes place concerning those 2 clubs is irrelevant..

PLENTY OF SOUR GRAPES IN BOMBO VALLEY

Chaddy22 - last week you said i was wrong in relation to some information i posted and i asked you to provide the document the West and Dean Turner were talking about, as yet i have not seen that info provided..
am i still wrong or did i miss your post where you provided the info or posted that it was you and not me that was wrong ?

thanks..

ROYAL 2019 wrote: Wouldn't the quickest way back to a more fair system be for EP to become to powerful. At which point something will give and maybe this time the so called G7 will come to the table with their brains turned on.

I think that is harsh on the G7 Royal.
Like East Perth were they were all against the Eagles and Dockers having a reserves side in the WAFL. Now the Eagles and Dockers have a reserves side in the WAFL.

The funny thing is I am not against the alignment totally. But I am against how it is done.
Things I would of demanded from the G7.

1) East Perth and Peel only have 1/4 of the existing salary cap of other clubs.
2) East Perth and Peel cannot and never ever be able to use technology from the Eagles and Dockers. Any advantage they are perceived to be getting from the other clubs they must purchase for those clubs and provide full training.
3) East Perth and Peels Coach must not be allowed to paid by the Eagles and Dockers.
4)Eagles and Dockers listed players must play a minimum of 10 games to qualify for WAFL finals.

It is these basic things that will give East Perth and Peel a huge advantage and for the life of me how they have been allowed to get away with this is mind boggling.

whinge whinge whinge.....geez some folk here are just freakin soft old women.....kudos to EP for making the GF this year.....whatever happens next year will happen.....I will be more worried if the likes of Lee, Smith, Clutterbuck, Johnson, Moss, Seal etc are at EP next year, if they aren't, then the likes of Newman, Bennell, Brennan, Sheppard, Tunbridge, McInness etc aren't gonna do much damage are they?......

that should also include all coaching and sports science staff should not be able to be funded by the AFL clubs

I doubt East Perth will be as strong as what people think, also bar retirements I can't see any A graders leaving the club. I think a cap of 8 to 10 AFL players any one week and a qualification number of 15 games to play finals would be fair. This should make it very hard for EP to win the premiership. The sports science and coaching etc is open slather I can't see how this can be controlled at all. If and when this alignment issue comes up for review I hope the G7 come to the table with their brains engaged and willing to play ball. They AFL clubs should have been given their own teams any other system including the one we had is totally inequitable.

Royal2019 I find myself in agreement with you.

jardine wrote: some comments on here about craig wulff are just pathetic.
not worth responding too.
good luck to both WP and EP on sunday. should be a classic game .

i dont think percy will be correct, but time will tell. dont expect EP to keep all of their list next year, many will be spread out over the league. could be alot of ressies players playing league next year, filling up the gaps.
i expect CL to drop a rung or two and clubs like SF EF and P to be improvers.

loved craig wulff since his colts days. he is no shrinking violet. i dont pay money at the gate to watch shrinking violets. hope he gets his chance.
he deserves a grand final - dont care what others think.

Can't believe it, this thread was supposed to be about the Craig Wulff incident and it has been hijacked yet again by a debate about the alignment that has been going round and round in circles all year. I can really sympathise with yourself and other true East Perth supporters who have stated on many occasions that you are not comfortable with the alignment and while I can see it might give people some satisfaction to vent on this issue, its not going to help anyone if people keep throwing mud around.

Back to the issue of this thread, I too have no problem with Craig Wulff playing on Sunday, as you said he is a courageous player and deserves his chance. The only thing I would say as a neutral supporter who saw the game on TV( and the replay) is that if the football authorities make noises and are serious about protecting the players heads, they need to follow up with strong action and there cannot be one rule for Grand Final week and another for the rest of the season. If you can put your hand on your heart as an East Perth supporter and say that you would have been happy for Mark Hutchings to play in a Grand final if he had done what Wulff did, then fair enough. I just think the tribunal has set a precedent which will put them in a difficult situation when a similar scenario comes up next.

ROYAL 2019 wrote: If and when this alignment issue comes up for review I hope the G7 come to the table with their brains engaged and willing to play ball. They AFL clubs should have been given their own teams any other system including the one we had is totally inequitable.

There is nothing stopping the G7 doing that right now. The contract is not locked in for 5 years. It can be withdrawn with 12 months notice.

If the G7 went to West Coast right now and said we are willing to talk about giving you your own team they could have it for the 2015 season. We could do something similar to the SANFL, WCE have their own team and Fremantle get Peel. Strip Peel of its zone and go back to a 8 zone state. Ten teams, no byes.

mikeh wrote: Back to the issue of this thread, I too have no problem with Craig Wulff playing on Sunday, as you said he is a courageous player and deserves his chance. The only thing I would say as a neutral supporter who saw the game on TV( and the replay) is that if the football authorities make noises and are serious about protecting the players heads, they need to follow up with strong action and there cannot be one rule for Grand Final week and another for the rest of the season. If you can put your hand on your heart as an East Perth supporter and say that you would have been happy for Mark Hutchings to play in a Grand final if he had done what Wulff did, then fair enough. I just think the tribunal has set a precedent which will put them in a difficult situation when a similar scenario comes up next.

I think you are confusing the AFL stance on head high contact and the WAFL stance on head high contact. The WAFL tribunal has shown this year it couldn't care about head high contact. Giving a reprimand for rough conduct is very consistent with their stance this year.