Talking Footy

Is cricket and AFL played at the same time of the year? Of course not. That is where the argument falls over. RU and RL are played at the same time so the primary resident is relevant and you should care about it because your precious six clubs don't have a home they can rightly call their own. From April to September, the MCG is an AFL ground. It is a cricket ground from October to March.

And would you care to explain this statue?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Tom_wills_statue.jpg

Topper wrote:

Is cricket and AFL played at the same time of the year? Of course not. That is where the argument falls over. RU and RL are played at the same time so the primary resident is relevant and you should care about it because your precious six clubs don't have a home they can rightly call their own. From April to September, the MCG is an AFL ground. It is a cricket ground from October to March.

And would you care to explain this statue?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Tom_wills_statue.jpg

Do they play RL there dumbo, if so they play on RL field, no matter who is the primary club. Generally, a Council own the land anyway. So your stupid arguement is floored. As I mentioned last time, last time I checked a RL game is never played with soccer goal posts and v's versa.

An RU field is almost identical to an RL field so you have to go deeper than that. The primary club does matter because as has previously been pointed out to you by not only me but by others as well; they have the first chance at usage of the venue and the right to reject usage by other groups due to their own needs. This forms part of the agreement with the owners of the venue, which you have rightly identified as the local council usually. At both the venues where you claim RL is the primary resident, I have proven in both cases that it is in fact an RU ground that the RL clubs are forced to share and play second fiddle to. That is what makes them NOT RL fields.

Topper wrote:

An RU field is almost identical to an RL field so you have to go deeper than that. The primary club does matter because as has previously been pointed out to you by not only me but by others as well; they have the first chance at usage of the venue and the right to reject usage by other groups due to their own needs. This forms part of the agreement with the owners of the venue, which you have rightly identified as the local council usually. At both the venues where you claim RL is the primary resident, I have proven in both cases that it is in fact an RU ground that the RL clubs are forced to share and play second fiddle to. That is what makes them NOT RL fields.

So in thead British MPs pay tribute to Arthur Beetson, the crap you just posted, do AFL own the fields, make up your mind dumbo.

The AFL are the primary resident at all the fields they play on in the recognised AFL states and many venues in the rest of Australia. I do not know the status of the venues elsewhere. You are attempting to confuse yourself, which is an interesting tactic to cover for the fact that you clearly don't know what you are talking about.

I looked at the AFL Great Britain website and found the venue of their preliminary finals;

Sir Joseph Hood Memorial Recreation Ground

It would appear that the league have the venue to themselves during their season, so that qualifies as an AFL field in London, England.

http://www.sportingpulse.com/assoc_page ... sID=129832

I shall look at the other venues. The aforementioned venue is the home of the Wimbledon Hawks.

Honor Oak Park Recreation Ground is also an AFL field as nothing else is played on it. Apparently in fact the local council want to use the land for a new cemetery and the locals are up in arms over it. No word on the latest on this one (council closed objections at the end of September). It is the home of the Dulwich Dragons.

Topper wrote:

http://www.sportingpulse.com/assoc_page ... sID=129832

I shall look at the other venues. The aforementioned venue is the home of the Wimbledon Hawks.

Argh, sportingpulse, the website you chose to ignore when I posted it for the RL clubs/fields in SA, so now it is gospel. Better open the thread back up beaussie, toppers on to something. Well done topper =D>

Sorry 'www.dulwichdragons.com ' does not exist or is not available
http://www.theswans.org.uk Internet Explorer cannot display the webpage
http://www.aussierules.co./ - Try that one yourself
Sorry 'www.putneymagpies.c ' does not exist or is not available.
Sorry 'www.readingroos.co. ' does not exist or is not available.
Sorry 'www.wandsworthdemon ' does not exist or is not available
http://www.pitchero.com/clubs/westlondonwildcats/ - Hey we got one 1 out of 7 ain't bad

Sporting Pulse only proves that the clubs play. One has to look at the venues more closely to decipher the identity of the venue, which I have done in both cases.

I suggest that you scroll further down.

London Swans play at Ply Park, and it appears that this is a cricket ground as Google Maps clearly shows a turf pitch square (as well as fading AFL oval markings).

Topper wrote:

I suggest that you scroll further down.

London Swans play at Ply Park, and it appears that this is a cricket ground as Google Maps clearly shows a turf pitch square (as well as fading AFL oval markings).

SO NOW GOOGLEMAPS IS A RELIABLE SOURCE, LETS GO BACK TO PREVIOUS THREADS, Topper, your no controdicting yourself agian are you?

No, you are refusing to acknowledge the different between clubs playing and venue identity.

Topper wrote:

No, you are refusing to acknowledge the different between clubs playing and venue identity.

No you are doing your usual twist on what suits you here, now that is clear

I struggled to find much information on the Albert Road Recreation Ground, the home of the North London Lions. From what I could gather in general though it hosts cricket also so it would be a cricket ground.

Please note that the AFL season in London is during their summer.

I am not twisting anything, Dogs. You refuse to understand your own claims.