Lexton plains under 17s thread Part 2

Remove this Banner Ad

Log in to remove this ad.

chokewood1 said:
haha yeah mate your sources are correct
there seniors must be struggling badly for numbers for him to be even close to selection
Click to expand...

Not struggling mate, just know they probably won't make finals so they're giving a few blokes from the 17's a go to try and get them to stay around the club for the next couple of years instead of moving to other clubs to continue to play juniors
 
Snoopy Style said:
Not struggling mate, just know they probably won't make finals so they're giving a few blokes from the 17's a go to try and get them to stay around the club for the next couple of years instead of moving to other clubs to continue to play juniors
Click to expand...
Exactly right. But i really don't see the point in bringing some of the younger ones up if the seniors don't have a finals chance, it just puts their fitness in jeopardy for the 17's finals series in which they are valuable players.

Coming from today's game, Illabarook downed C/L, 36-9 in appalling conditions. During the last quarter, the ball was basically on the ground the entire time, with the exceptions of free kicks.

From the previous 2 times we played them, it's starting to look Nick O'Brien IS C/L.

Also, i extend my thanks to the C/L football club for agreeing to wear the armbands today, and also to Justin O'brien for his condolences.
 
Yeah i suppose i see your point, and he played well today , better then i have seen him. Didn't see the seniors game. It probably gives them good incentive to hang around the next couple of years instead of going elsewhere. And good experience which could hold the players in good stead come finals. But your point on Nick isn't probably right. Once we come to grips with your game plan in the second half we coped well. Maybe your blokes dropped off i don't know.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

chokewood1 said:
Yeah i suppose i see your point, and he played well today , better then i have seen him. Didn't see the seniors game. It probably gives them good incentive to hang around the next couple of years instead of going elsewhere. And good experience which could hold the players in good stead come finals. But your point on Nick isn't probably right. Once we come to grips with your game plan in the second half we coped well. Maybe your blokes dropped off i don't know.
Click to expand...

zac copped a corky in the ruck very early in the game and couldn't come back on to play.

after the first time we played carnham i sent a post saying the only difference in the game was nick o'brien, which seems true based on the facts that now we've played carnham without him and we've killed it.

Carnhams only good quarter was there last where the ball probably spent as much time in there 50 as it did ours, was just very hard to convert seeing as no1 could really kick the ball more than about 25-30 meters.
 
goalski 101 said:
zac copped a corky in the ruck very early in the game and couldn't come back on to play.

after the first time we played carnham i sent a post saying the only difference in the game was nick o'brien, which seems true based on the facts that now we've played carnham without him and we've killed it.

Carnhams only good quarter was there last where the ball probably spent as much time in there 50 as it did ours, was just very hard to convert seeing as no1 could really kick the ball more than about 25-30 meters.
Click to expand...
Our defense won us the game. C/L had the ball in their forward half for a lot of the game, they just couldn't convert due to our backline pressure.
If nick was in the team, would Justin have moved to the forward line instead of on ball? That would have gave them a couple of big strong forwards to aim for
 
it was a very good game yesterday. i would say that the inside50 count would have been very close, but C/L struggled to convert.

illarbrooks use of the footy was far beta than C/l.

if people are going to say to say that Nick O'brien is C/L. if he played for any club in the region he would be the team he is a freak u idiots!!

i was very surprised that for once illarbrook wernt a pack of w***ers. lets hope they stay that way. footy is about footy not tryin 2 prove your a man by punchin sum1
 
demon2saint said:
i was very surprised that for once illarbrook wernt a pack of w***ers. lets hope they stay that way. footy is about footy not tryin 2 prove your a man by punchin sum1
Click to expand...
idiot. Ur a sore loser. illabrook have kicked ur ass 2 times in a row now, and from both games u only managed to score 10 points against them.
admit that the dogs r a betta team this yr, and quit making exscuses of being undermanned or the opposition being dirty!!
 
gaysuperstar said:
idiot. Ur a sore loser. illabrook have kicked ur ass 2 times in a row now, and from both games u only managed to score 10 points against them.
admit that the dogs r a betta team this yr, and quit making exscuses of being undermanned or the opposition being dirty!!
Click to expand...

The difference is, the first game we had 8 players out 4 of them top age, so i think everyone agrees that is a very fair excuse. And yesterday it is true they bet us but the scoreboard didn't so much show how the game went as Carngham played well but couldn't convert. Illabrook are definately the dirtiest team in the U17s competition this year.
 
Don of Linton said:
The difference is, the first game we had 8 players out 4 of them top age, so i think everyone agrees that is a very fair excuse. And yesterday it is true they bet us but the scoreboard didn't so much show how the game went as Carngham played well but couldn't convert. Illabrook are definately the dirtiest team in the U17s competition this year.
Click to expand...
Wheres ur proof that illabrook r the dirtiest team? How many reports hav they had this yr? pretty sure its NONE!
They even had professional umpires for a few games, and still didnt get in any trouble. Ur just sore losers that hate being beat.

but on saturday, illabrook were literally dirtier than carnham, because they went in harder and wanted it more, the conditions didnt matter 2 them
 
gaysuperstar said:
Wheres ur proof that illabrook r the dirtiest team? How many reports hav they had this yr? pretty sure its NONE!
They even had professional umpires for a few games, and still didnt get in any trouble. Ur just sore losers that hate being beat.

but on saturday, illabrook were literally dirtier than carnham, because they went in harder and wanted it more, the conditions didnt matter 2 them
Click to expand...
it takes a fair bit to get reported in country leagues, even in seniors you have to do something pretty bad to get reported so this doesn't mean use arn't a dirty team
 
gaysuperstar said:
idiot. Ur a sore loser. illabrook have kicked ur ass 2 times in a row now, and from both games u only managed to score 10 points against them.
admit that the dogs r a betta team this yr, and quit making exscuses of being undermanned or the opposition being dirty!!
Click to expand...
Not Dirty?????????

Colin HT mooned tim obrien, after he hit connor nunn from behind after he kicked the ball
 
Don of Linton said:
The difference is, the first game we had 8 players out 4 of them top age, so i think everyone agrees that is a very fair excuse. And yesterday it is true they bet us but the scoreboard didn't so much show how the game went as Carngham played well but couldn't convert. Illabrook are definately the dirtiest team in the U17s competition this year.
Click to expand...
fu.ck off dic.k we are the best team so shut up use c/l cun.ts cant stand .loseing name one dirty player fuc.k wit just shut up use got flogged again .go cry bit.ch
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Lexton plains under 17s thread Part 2

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top