Time to kick Victoria out of football, maybe?

whatever makes you feel more comfortable bitch!!!

I'm gonna do that every time you post in the wrong forum, then we will see who is who's bitch.

JoFFA

Story is clearly directed at the FFA and you drop it to state league

what does that make you?




Edited by chris: 19/9/2013 10:58:25 PM

How's that claim to kick the Victory & Heart youth teams out of your stadium going?

good

Legal Update to be announced shortly Bitches



Edited by chris: 19/9/2013 10:57:45 PM

What happened to within the hour?

I saw it before you changed it. Your story is clearly related to State League Football.

just wait and see

Edited by Heineken: 19/9/2013 11:06:30 PM

Have you considered for just one second Chris,that the 'rebel clubs' may have made a huge mistake....not saying you have, just asking if you'd considered it?

Chris, which A-League club do you follow, just out of interest?

My guess is they threaten a rebel breakaway league...good luck with that.

Has it happened yet?

I monitor the Heart as I am very interested in direction - but I follow noone - never been to a game

rebel league LOL

This is the suckiest call to arms that ever sucked.

Even Basar Al Assad's call to arms have more appeal.

I love this Gif.

And Rohan will answer!

^^^^I lolled at that gif also...comic timing.

Ride!!!!

Your call to arms is bad and you should feel bad.

Booooooorrrrrriiiiinnnngggg!

[youtube]EXGUNvIFTQw&hl[/youtube]

Edited by Eastern Glory: 19/9/2013 11:36:06 PM

So it's been an hour...

and nothing.

CLUB UPDATE LEGAL ACTION 19 SEPTEMBER 2013 - ALL CLUBS, FFV, FFA, MEDIA‏

As you are all aware, the legal action brought by two of the FFV Zone Representatives, Pave Jusup and Ezel Hikmet, on behalf of the Clubs proceeded to Mediation yesterday. Unfortunately, the Mediation was unsuccessful.



The Co-Signatory Clubs are disappointed at the outcome of yesterday’s Mediation conducted at CAS (Melbourne) by the Honourable Jerrold Cripps, as agreement for an acceptable NPLV to the Clubs commencing in 2014 couldn’t be reached with FFV.



The main concerns of the Co-Signatory group were the FFV’s conditions that the proposed NPLV requires the Clubs to be in and operate from zones, restricts the number of teams which can be fielded and splits many of the players and members who currently follow their Clubs.



These three conditions sought to be imposed by FFV are not mandatory requirements of the NPL pursuant to the recommendations of the National Competition Review (NCR) conducted by FFA.



Notwithstanding the present impasse, the Co-Signatory group and Plaintiffs support the implementation of a NPL based upon the aims of the FFA’s NCR recommendations but without the previously mentioned conditions which are imposed on the prospective applicants and the broader football community by the FFV.



The Co-Signatory group continues to call upon the FFV to implement a revised version to the current NPLV, which is in its discretion to do, and follow models implemented in other States.



The Co-signatory group are supporting the proceedings by the Plaintiffs and is hopeful that the matter will be transferred to the Supreme Court on 23 September 2013.



Finally, and on a separate note, in an earlier update we advised that we would be providing a detailed response and analysis to the statement circulated by the FFV on 12 September 2013 relating to the FFV’s position on those aspects of its proposed NPL which are in dispute. Given that the matter is presently before the Courts and is expected to be transferred to the Supreme Court, the Plaintiffs have been advised by their lawyers to ask us not to circulate our response at this time.




Nicholas Tsiaras - Vice President, Box Hill United SC

Tom Kalas - Director, South Melbourne FC