Notice: Undefined variable: ub in /home/dh_ingvwb/ozfooty.net/templates/hot_cars/js/browser.php on line 53

Notice: Undefined variable: ub in /home/dh_ingvwb/ozfooty.net/templates/hot_cars/js/browser.php on line 65

Deprecated: strripos(): Non-string needles will be interpreted as strings in the future. Use an explicit chr() call to preserve the current behavior in /home/dh_ingvwb/ozfooty.net/templates/hot_cars/js/browser.php on line 65
Welcome, Member
Username: Password: Remember me
Forgot your password? Forgot your username? Create an account
WAFL
WAFL General Chat
Sutcliffe report

TOPIC:

Sutcliffe report 7 years 6 months ago #136070

  • Demons Forever
  • Demons Forever's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Platinum Member
  • Platinum Member
  • Posts: 5093
  • Thank you received: 267

R U Serious wrote: Sutcliffe just found guilty and given a reprimand. Says a lot about the WAFC.


There you go, never tell me they are not treated differently.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
It's not the size of the dog in the fight. It's the size of the fight in the dog.
Winning isn't everything. It's the ONLY THING !!!!!!
I shot the fukin sherriff!!!!

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Sutcliffe report 7 years 6 months ago #136080

  • swan42
  • Visitor
  • Visitor

Demons Forever wrote:

R U Serious wrote: Sutcliffe just found guilty and given a reprimand. Says a lot about the WAFC.


There you go, never tell me they are not treated differently.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


Surely that would be a DOUBLE reprimand given the potential 100% loading for a GF.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Sutcliffe report 7 years 6 months ago #136135

  • Beasley Hutton
  • Beasley Hutton's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Platinum Member
  • Platinum Member
  • Posts: 9653
  • Thank you received: 2912

swan42 wrote:

Demons Forever wrote:

R U Serious wrote: Sutcliffe just found guilty and given a reprimand. Says a lot about the WAFC.


There you go, never tell me they are not treated differently.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


Surely that would be a DOUBLE reprimand given the potential 100% loading for a GF.

Would that be a double lashing with a feather duster for Sutcliffe 42?!

Also do you think Riggs should ask the biased WAFL tribunal for a please explain considering his inexplicable 3>2 weeks suspension just before the Finals for a tackle he actually received a free kick for?!
The following user(s) said Thank You: Dwert

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Last edit: by Beasley Hutton.

Sutcliffe report 7 years 6 months ago #136138

  • Dwert
  • Offline
  • Banned
  • Banned
  • Posts: 1219
  • Thank you received: 280

Beasley Hutton wrote:

swan42 wrote:

Demons Forever wrote:

R U Serious wrote: Sutcliffe just found guilty and given a reprimand. Says a lot about the WAFC.


There you go, never tell me they are not treated differently.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


Surely that would be a DOUBLE reprimand given the potential 100% loading for a GF.

Would that be a double lashing with a feather duster for Sutcliffe 42?!

Also do you think Riggs should ask the biased WAFL tribunal for a please explain considering his inexplicable 3>2 weeks suspension just before the Finals for a tackle he actually received a free kick for?!


Best of luck getting an explanation from Daryl or Luke:huh:

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Sutcliffe report 7 years 6 months ago #136761

  • Dwert
  • Offline
  • Banned
  • Banned
  • Posts: 1219
  • Thank you received: 280
Looks as though the WAFL Tribunal is not an orphan when it comes to bizarre decisions

www.facebook.com/ntfootball/posts/1237573143013233

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Sutcliffe report 7 years 6 months ago #136768

  • Dwert
  • Offline
  • Banned
  • Banned
  • Posts: 1219
  • Thank you received: 280

Dwert wrote: Looks as though the WAFL Tribunal is not an orphan when it comes to bizarre decisions

www.facebook.com/ntfootball/posts/1237573143013233



Further developments on this story...I suppose the NTFL are at least admitting that the integrity of the NTFL Tribunal needs to sustained.. The WAFL/WAFC obviously do not see an issue with the WAFL Tribunal

www.facebook.com/NTFootballLeague/videos/1817475911613789/

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Sutcliffe report 7 years 6 months ago #136781

  • Senior Seagull
  • Topic Author
  • Offline
  • Platinum Member
  • Platinum Member
  • Posts: 5447
  • Thank you received: 872
Would have been very interesting if it had been the Subi player hitting Suttcliffe behind play. A very different outcome I think.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
WAFL
WAFL General Chat
Sutcliffe report

Search

Keyword

Who's Online?

We have 711 guests and 2 members online

  • Time For a Flag
  • Sugarkane

Newest Footy Recruits

  • Basil
  • morky12
  • Bassoswan
  • pato
  • Rockwell