Round 3: Centrals v Norwood. Saturday 13 April @ Playford Alive Oval

AH no more or less than any other game or club, gee there have been some howlers standing in front of the SFC Members stand in the last few years.

People are passionate about their club and the performance of their team.

You take it with a pinch of salt and move on, or better still I have had plenty of good conversations with opposition supporters about the game before during and after matches and I remember them more than the very few hot headed moments that dissipate as soon as they start least security come along to evict you.

For me, I gladly go to the Ponderosa anytime and I welcome Centrals one and all to the Parade Friday nights as well.

I did think that the Oval is too close to the Parade for supporters not to have a meal and a few beers before going to the game and then having a few more at the ground on a Friday night was some of the problem for both club supporters, but hey everyone has to get home so drinking till you have a skin full is not a good decision particularly when you have to drive a distance.

So Centrals vs Norwood at the Parade Friday Night Bring It On.

nice old tale doing the rounds that the league's head honcho asked for a banner about NO AFL IN SANFL to be pulled down at the game.

woulda been a good story if it had happened. love how whispers get turned around so fast nowdays

It did happen. Juiceboxman might be better off explaining it, though.

you know for a fact that the head honcho asked for it to be taken down?

Going by your 2 posts Hatchet I am concluding it didn't happen ? Phil says it did ,we will wait for his reply to your question.

The Hatchet wrote:you know for a fact that the head honcho asked for it to be taken down?

That was what was said on the night. Like I said, JBM would be able to confirm it, either way...

waddyamean wrote:Going by your 2 posts Hatchet I am concluding it didn't happen ? Phil says it did ,we will wait for his reply to your question.

I said it did happen, based on what I heard and what was said on the night, by Kris Grant during his RPH interview. Again, JBM will be the man to clarify it. All that said, I am led to believe Chris Davies was privately impressed by the quality of the sign...

So he was impressd by the quality but asked for it to be taken down. ?

waddayamean wrote:So he was impressd by the quality but asked for it to be taken down. ?

Sorry, should have mentioned that I heard privately he was impressed. But I could be wrong, wouldn't be the first time, hey...

Big Phil wrote:

waddayamean wrote:So he was impressd by the quality but asked for it to be taken down. ?

Sorry, should have mentioned that I heard privately he was impressed. But I could be wrong, wouldn't be the first time, hey...

No it wouldn't.

I'm getting dizzy. Lets tell it how it is. Did Chris Davies demand the sign be removed and was it . ???? It's a simple question.

I hope it stayed up but if the TV media have not publicised it then it is potentially pointless.

waddayamean wrote:

Big Phil wrote:

waddayamean wrote:So he was impressd by the quality but asked for it to be taken down. ?

Sorry, should have mentioned that I heard privately he was impressed. But I could be wrong, wouldn't be the first time, hey...

No it wouldn't.

I'm getting dizzy. Lets tell it how it is. Did Chris Davies demand the sign be removed and was it . ???? It's a simple question.

I hope it stayed up but if the TV media have not publicised it then it is potentially pointless.

No, you are right. We all make mistakes, don't we. It's a part of life...

Like I said, I believe Chris asked for it to be removed, but JBM can confirm it. I'll try and get him on here to post his thoughts. I'd hate for you to not be able to get to sleep tonight not knowing whether it is in fact the truth

I know it was filmed and was going to be shown in 'The Recovery Session' highlights but was withdrew from that as to not get the editor in any potential trouble with the League...

Big Phil wrote:

waddayamean wrote:

Big Phil wrote:

waddayamean wrote:So he was impressd by the quality but asked for it to be taken down. ?

Sorry, should have mentioned that I heard privately he was impressed. But I could be wrong, wouldn't be the first time, hey...

No it wouldn't.

I'm getting dizzy. Lets tell it how it is. Did Chris Davies demand the sign be removed and was it . ???? It's a simple question.

I hope it stayed up but if the TV media have not publicised it then it is potentially pointless.

No, you are right. We all make mistakes, don't we. It's a part of life...

Like I said, I believe Chris asked for it to be removed, but JBM can confirm it. I'll try and get him on here to post his thoughts. I'd hate for you to not be able to get to sleep tonight not knowing whether it is in fact the truth

I know it was filmed and was going to be shown in 'The Recovery Session' highlights but was withdrew from that as to not get the editor in any potential trouble with the League...

I won't lose sleep over it , no need to be smart in your replies. Once again you seem to have an issue with my posts and I call it and I know what will happen.

Anyway...................back to the topic

It is a concern that it was edited from the highlights which speaks volumes in itself. It's a democracy we live in . I think I read Bayman using the word Dictator recently, I thought he was referring to the AFL . If that was his poinnt then I agree . The SANFL seem scared of this dictator. If a supporter puts a sign up and it is filmed as part of footy vision then so be it .

waddayamean wrote:I won't lose sleep over it , no need to be smart in your replies. Once again you seem to have an issue with my posts and I call it and I know what will happen..

I wasn't being smart, it was a tounge in cheek comment, hence the Perhaps in future, I'll preface my comments that are meant to be light hearted to you as to avoid any confusion as to the tone of my responses...

It wasn't edited from the highlights as such, just requested / advised not to be shown...

Big Phil wrote:

waddayamean wrote:I won't lose sleep over it , no need to be smart in your replies. Once again you seem to have an issue with my posts and I call it and I know what will happen..

I wasn't being smart, it was a tounge in cheek comment, hence the Perhaps in future, I'll preface my comments that are meant to be light hearted to you as to avoid any confusion as to the tone of my responses...

It wasn't edited from the highlights as such, just requested / advised not to be shown...

Move on. I'm not precious about it at all , I think your posts to me usually have an underlyinng meaning yet I respond and get questionned. Seems strange.

waddayamean wrote:I think your posts to me usually have an underlying meaning

I could probably say the same thing about your posts, sometimes...

waddayamean wrote:Move on.

Couldn't agree more...

I'm sure the other posters on here don't want to scour through our waffle...

now you finish just when i was going to suggest that you guys get a room

bayman wrote:now you finish just when i was going to suggest that you guys get a room

Ha ha !!! I've suggested, on more than one occasion, to meet up with waddyamean in person - even offering to buy him a beer - to put all this to bed, pardon the pun

Often, meeting in person can change the outlook of how one perceives someone online. I've found that out in person, first hand...

Anyway, back on topic - it was quite a scrappy win in the end, but good sides know how to win ugly and that is what Norwood did...

i just read your last sentence & thought for a minute a comeback was made by our own Scrappy

bayman wrote:i just read your last sentence & thought for a minute a comeback was made by our own Scrappy

Ha ha !!! Just edited it accordingly as to avoid the confusion

So, was Chris Davies at the game and personally asked JBM to take his sign down?

There's been no evidence of that at all and unless there's proof to the contrary, I think we can safely presume CD had nothing to do with it.

OK, here's the story, I asked The Club If I could erect my banner on the last unsold sponsors' signage points behind the northern goals, The Club replied that it should be ok, so I ordered the manufacturing of the offending banner. Then, a few days later, The Club informed myself that there would be discussion at an upcoming board meeting about the banner, so hold off on erecting* it. Then, Wednesday last week, I was told that The Club was still cool with the banner, just don't make it a permanent feature, ir, don't attach it to the fence or one of the sponsors' signage points. So I took it to the game & at 1/4 time, took it onto the oval &, with the assistance of Fester, Saber & my mate The Mad Monk, we displayed the banner. Then I took it to the car, behind the grandstand, where I was apprached by 2 WESLO types, who informed myself that I was not to take it onto the oval again, as it contravened some sort of SANFL law, they told me that someone from the "match day committee?" told them to tell me. Then when I was in The Club at 1/2 time, Chris Davies was in there having a pie & a drink & I was told by club officials that it was HIM that instructed WESLO to stop me from erecting the banner again. Further clarification was sought from The Club today & the official response is that it is illegal to take any banner/sign/promotional paraphernalia onto the oval, unless it directly relates to a player & isn't deemed to be offensive or derogatory, such as "THOMMO IS GOD" OR SOMETHING SIMILAR. i AM STILL ALLOWED TO DISPLAY IT AROUND THE GROUND OR IN THE CARPARK, SO LONG AS IT IS OF A MOBILE NATURE. oops, I hit caps lock, sorry.

thanks FOR THE clarification OF the whole THING there, JBM...

The plot thickens......

Someone instructed WESLO to approach JBM in the carpark.???

Who is in control of WESLO Security is it the Club or the SANFL, therein lies the answer.

the WESLO guys apologised to me, they said they are on my side!

Go Legs wrote:Who is in control of WESLO Security is it the Club or the SANFL, therein lies the answer.

I'm pretty sure it is the SANFL, isn't it?

I have the answer, WESLO are contracted to the SANFL, under a full set of SANFL operational guidelines and are given instructions by the SANFL as to which grounds get what quantity of security numbers.

The CDFC already knew the sign was to be displayed and agreed under some guidelines.

Observation of the SANFL boss was at the ground.

From that you can form an opinion/s.