TOPIC:

The flat track bullies will come back down to earth with a thud next weekend against Port when they have to leave the nest.

Grassy wrote: Jam Doghnuts at 10 paces.Gunfight at OK Tearooms(The Goodies).

Have you 2 quite finished?

I suspect not. Also, Freo could get the umpires' coaches to look at the first 5-10 minutes of the first quarter and ask why they didn't receive a holding the ball decision about 30 metres directly in front.

DD wrote: The flat track bullies will come back down to earth with a thud next weekend against Port when they have to leave the nest.

I think you may well be right DD, but it will never change Saturday night's result. Every dog has his day and Saturday was ours.

swan42 wrote:

Grassy wrote: Jam Doghnuts at 10 paces.Gunfight at OK Tearooms(The Goodies).

Have you 2 quite finished?

I suspect not. Also, Freo could get the umpires' coaches to look at the first 5-10 minutes of the first quarter and ask why they didn't receive a holding the ball decision about 30 metres directly in front.

There's a simple solution swan....sack every single one of the umps. Get rid of the lot, after all, what do they know?

58shark wrote:

swan42 wrote:

Grassy wrote: Jam Doghnuts at 10 paces.Gunfight at OK Tearooms(The Goodies).

Have you 2 quite finished?

I suspect not. Also, Freo could get the umpires' coaches to look at the first 5-10 minutes of the first quarter and ask why they didn't receive a holding the ball decision about 30 metres directly in front.

There's a simple solution swan....sack every single one of the umps. Get rid of the lot, after all, what do they know?

Prior to the allege elbow on Yeo by Fyfe was Fyfe being held by Yeo and did Fyfe have the ball contemporaneously with Yeo holding him?

swan42 wrote:

58shark wrote:

swan42 wrote:

Grassy wrote: Jam Doghnuts at 10 paces.Gunfight at OK Tearooms(The Goodies).

Have you 2 quite finished?

I suspect not. Also, Freo could get the umpires' coaches to look at the first 5-10 minutes of the first quarter and ask why they didn't receive a holding the ball decision about 30 metres directly in front.

There's a simple solution swan....sack every single one of the umps. Get rid of the lot, after all, what do they know?

Prior to the allege elbow on Yeo by Fyfe was Fyfe being held by Yeo and did Fyfe have the ball contemporaneously with Yeo holding him?

I'm not a thesaurus eater, so in English please? Btw, there was no "alleged elbow".

58shark wrote:

swan42 wrote:

58shark wrote:

swan42 wrote:

Grassy wrote: Jam Doghnuts at 10 paces.Gunfight at OK Tearooms(The Goodies).

Have you 2 quite finished?

I suspect not. Also, Freo could get the umpires' coaches to look at the first 5-10 minutes of the first quarter and ask why they didn't receive a holding the ball decision about 30 metres directly in front.

There's a simple solution swan....sack every single one of the umps. Get rid of the lot, after all, what do they know?

Prior to the allege elbow on Yeo by Fyfe was Fyfe being held by Yeo and did Fyfe have the ball contemporaneously with Yeo holding him?

I'm not a thesaurus eater, so in English please? Btw, there was no "alleged elbow".

Should Fyfe have received a free becauseYeo was holding him when he didn't have the ball?

If the "alleged" holding took place, then yes. Do you honestly think this would have changed the end result?

58shark wrote: If the "alleged" holding took place, then yes. Do you honestly think this would have changed the end result?

When did I say that it would change the result?

I never indicated that you said that. Answer the question without your usual red herring.... Do you think it would have changed the result?