TOPIC:

Interestingly our second bye is due to the state games - so the club formerly known as East Perth won't be playing either.

I believe the convention for an AFL player to play in the reserves was that they would play in the bottom team of the reserves. If he were to play for the league team for the club formerly known as East Perth then the seven legitimate clubs should refuse to play either Peel or the club formerly known as East Perth for the rest of the 2013 at any level.

If the devils incarnate want to make a mockery of the competition we should do exactly that to the nth degree.

Under no circumstances should Naitanui play for the club formerly known as East Perth's league team in 2013.

As for Hackdorn words almost fail me in attempting to describe that all WAFL supporters should have for the poor excuse for a journalist that he is.

Simple solution to this.

How about East Spoon and Peel play each other EVERY week from now on.

That way the 7 non-aligned clubs can protect the integrity of the WAFL as a COMPETITION because come 2014 with these two fraudsters in the WAFL making the rules up as they go it won't be a competition at all, it'll just be an EXHIBITION for the sole benefit of the two AFL clubs.

Rules are rules so let them abide by what they have agreed to. Nic can play ressies for whoever this week and as Mike said let the traitors organise a scratchie the week of the state game, problem solved, everyone gets a game and no rules are broken.

Just on principal and to prevent a dangerous precident, the WAFC should stand it's ground and make the rules stand.

Nic Nat in a reserves jumper - ridiculous twisting of the rules to suit the AFL. At least let this year end with some sort of fairness before full travesty starts next year.

If this rubbish is allowed it will be a further nail in the once mighty WAFL! R.I.P

My understanding is the current rules allow the AFL clubs to play a player in the bottom reserves side if the club he is aligned to has a bye.

Why should it be any different for Nic Natanui?

Demons Forever wrote: My understanding is the current rules allow the AFL clubs to play a player in the bottom reserves side if the club he is aligned to has a bye.

Why should it be any different for Nic Natanui?

They are talking about playing him in the league side DF not ressies!!!

Read my post again Swandog.

The rules are the rules why should they change for Nic?

Woosha sounded pretty confident he would be playing with WC straight up.

Its all hypothetical and wont happen.. So whats the fuss.
If it does well they we can have a few words to say