Misleading title for those working on filling their Dream Team backlines.
| TalkingCarlton http://www.talkingcarlton.com/phpBB3/ |
|
| AJ 93.7 Pts http://www.talkingcarlton.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=27600 |
Page 1 of 1 |
| Author: | SHHH! [ Mon Mar 15, 2010 7:18 pm ] |
| Post subject: | AJ 93.7 Pts |
Cited received a reprimand and 93.7 pts. at least he's available Rnd 1 |
|
| Author: | Drewgirl [ Mon Mar 15, 2010 7:25 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: AJ 93.7 Pts |
yeh, and kennedy breaks colin sylvia's jaw and gets nothing. fantastic AFL you rock !!!!!!!!!!! |
|
| Author: | Kaptain Kouta [ Mon Mar 15, 2010 7:47 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: AJ 93.7 Pts |
Cited for what? Was it reasonable? |
|
| Author: | Jez1966 [ Mon Mar 15, 2010 7:56 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: AJ 93.7 Pts |
Kaptain Kouta wrote: Cited for what? Was it reasonable? IIRC he wasn't reported at the time, just gave away a free kick and I don't think the AFL had cameras at the game so how did he get cited? |
|
| Author: | Stefchook [ Mon Mar 15, 2010 8:02 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: AJ 93.7 Pts |
Kaptain Kouta wrote: Cited for what? Was it reasonable? Perhaps Nick Suban is still feeling nauseous from last pre-season, and Stevo is no longer around to blame. |
|
| Author: | Keith Urban [ Mon Mar 15, 2010 8:31 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: AJ 93.7 Pts |
Misleading title for those working on filling their Dream Team backlines.
|
|
| Author: | kingkerna [ Mon Mar 15, 2010 8:48 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: AJ 93.7 Pts |
should have given him a week purely based on THAT tatoo |
|
| Author: | Wild Blue Yonder [ Tue Mar 16, 2010 8:56 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: AJ 93.7 Pts |
93.7? FFS. what was the degree of difficulty? |
|
| Author: | get rid of the hacks [ Sat Mar 20, 2010 10:07 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: AJ 93.7 Pts |
Drewgirl wrote: yeh, and kennedy breaks colin sylvia's jaw and gets nothing. fantastic AFL you rock !!!!!!!!!!! If Sylvia had the ball JK would have had the option to tackle, and would therefore have got a month for the bump, but b'coz Sylvia didn't have the ball JK didn't have the option to tackle, so he can bump and break his jaw and all is ok. So basically its much safer to bump a guy that doesn't have the ball bcoz u dont have the option to tackle him. This rule stinks when decisions are made at the spur of the moment....we are gonna lose the bump if it isnt changed |
|
| Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC + 10 hours |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|