Trialist
0
·
1
·
about 12 years

Combination of both really... A very very good lower hutt side which included quite a few 1st team players!!!! Wind didnt help in 1st half, made it impossible to play the ball in the air. Then in 2nd half wind died right down.... Early in 2nd half our captain got sent off for violent conduct, which didnt help!! Also ref didnt show up so one of lower hutt guys refereed.

Didnt help that most of squad were hungover or still drunk as they came straight from town after being at a 21st the night before.

First Team Squad
17
·
1.2K
·
about 17 years
GB18__kcu wrote:

Combination of both really... A very very good lower hutt side which included quite a few 1st team players!!!! Wind didnt help in 1st half, made it impossible to play the ball in the air. Then in 2nd half wind died right down.... Early in 2nd half our captain got sent off for violent conduct, which didnt help!! Also ref didnt show up so one of lower hutt guys refereed.

Didnt help that most of squad were hungover or still drunk as they came straight from town after being at a 21st the night before.

Ouch. I thought there had to be some reason as you guys aren't a bad side. A bit poor that the ref didn't turn up though

Remember they are only allowed to drop a maximum of 3 players down from a higher team  so I'd double check that with Cap football to see if they stuck to the rules if I was you guys (not saying they didn't as they were straight up with us when we played them on a Sunday but always worth checking) :).

We promise no wind at Alex Moore when we play you lot later in the season, however do feel free to go out on the lash just before the game :).

 

Legend
2.1K
·
16K
·
over 17 years

Check they weren't playing underage players as they just lost their points from the Seatoun game. 

If the TAB took bets on this league there would be some controversy with payouts.

First Team Squad
17
·
1.2K
·
about 17 years
Feverish wrote:

Check they weren't playing underage players as they just lost their points from the Seatoun game. 

If the TAB took bets on this league there would be some controversy with payouts.



Top half of the league is tighter than a nats chuff.

Just goes to show it pays to follow the rules.

Cap Football do have to look at Sunday games next season because it is to much of a temptation for clubs with teams in higher leagues to game the rules (and of course it is only those teams that request Sunday games).

Legend
2.1K
·
16K
·
over 17 years

Guess so.

Doubt they wools make the same mistake again though

First Team Squad
17
·
1.2K
·
about 17 years
Feverish wrote:

Guess so.

Doubt they wools make the same mistake again though


Maybe not.  I hear on the grapevine there's another protest floating around.  
Interesting if confirmed. 
Legend
2.1K
·
16K
·
over 17 years
Teza wrote:
Feverish wrote:

Guess so.

Doubt they wools make the same mistake again though


Maybe not.  I hear on the grapevine there's another protest floating around.  

Interesting if confirmed. 

Is that because Seatoun and KCU are using your lawyer?
Trialist
19
·
100
·
almost 11 years
Feverish wrote:

Check they weren't playing underage players as they just lost their points from the Seatoun game. 

If the TAB took bets on this league there would be some controversy with payouts.


 
To be fair I wouldn't want to question if they played under age players when they beat you 9-1........ What does that say!. 
All these clubs getting upset because teams play 1 or 2 young players and get beaten. I agree its a rule! but a stupid one if the teams fielding them are going out and beating others, who in turn can only win the points by complaints etc.
I also find it interesting that they are taking points off club/fines etc for under age players, yet in the U17 league Eastbourne can have 7-8 overage players ie 18 yrs old and not get penalized. They in fact have been moved up a grade and CF is kosher with this? I have heard they are only being allowed to have 3 overage players on the field at one time? But no other club is allowed to do this. 
They should be in the u21 league. 
How is it CF will enforce one rule but not another?
They appear to be a law unto themselves

First Team Squad
17
·
1.2K
·
about 17 years
Feverish wrote:
Teza wrote:
Feverish wrote:

Guess so.

Doubt they wools make the same mistake again though


Maybe not.  I hear on the grapevine there's another protest floating around.  

Interesting if confirmed. 

Is that because Seatoun and KCU are using your lawyer?



No we just get together over a beer and plot the downfall of the bigger clubs.....once thats done we are then moving on to take over the world....maahaha
First Team Squad
17
·
1.2K
·
about 17 years
Mossimo wrote:
Feverish wrote:

Check they weren't playing underage players as they just lost their points from the Seatoun game. 

If the TAB took bets on this league there would be some controversy with payouts.


 

To be fair I wouldn't want to question if they played under age players when they beat you 9-1........ What does that say!. 

All these clubs getting upset because teams play 1 or 2 young players and get beaten. I agree its a rule! but a stupid one if the teams fielding them are going out and beating others, who in turn can only win the points by complaints etc.

I also find it interesting that they are taking points off club/fines etc for under age players, yet in the U17 league Eastbourne can have 7-8 overage players ie 18 yrs old and not get penalized. They in fact have been moved up a grade and CF is kosher with this? I have heard they are only being allowed to have 3 overage players on the field at one time? But no other club is allowed to do this. 

They should be in the u21 league. 

How is it CF will enforce one rule but not another?

They appear to be a law unto themselves




To be fair I don't even know what club is protesting it's just a bit of gossip I heard.

In regards to younger players, there is the opportunity to apply for dispensation, all clubs knew this going into the season so just need to get their house in order to start with.

The other rule that seems to be broken every so often is playing more than the allowed number of first team players down the grades i.e. only 3 in your clubs next team down and 1 in the clubs next team below that . 

If Eastbourne are doing that then get your club to put in a protest instead of complaining online. Of course the players could have been under 17 on the 1st of Jan which means they can be 18 and still qualify for U17s

PS there is no U21 league this season as most clubs weren't interested.
Trialist
19
·
100
·
almost 11 years

Eastbourne players were 18 before 1st Jan. Complaint was lodged and CF answer they can only have 3 on field at one time!

Change of rules for some..

a.k.a AJ13
520
·
1.5K
·
over 14 years

I guess they dont really care about U17? Theyre probably just pleased they have a league in the first place. Cap 1 a little more serious though, clubs invest a fair bit of time, resources and cash in these teams...

Trialist
6
·
83
·
almost 11 years


From what ive heard Seatoun never put in a formal complaint towards an underage player... CF picked up on it due to the match report/red card issue during the match?

First Team Squad
17
·
1.2K
·
about 17 years
Teza wrote:
Feverish wrote:

Guess so.

Doubt they wools make the same mistake again though


Maybe not.  I hear on the grapevine there's another protest floating around.  

Interesting if confirmed. 



The grapevine has now added one more team, so apparently 2 protests against 2 different clubs underway.

There's more drama in Cap 1 this season than in an end of year Shortland Street episode.


First Team Squad
17
·
1.2K
·
about 17 years
kakky wrote:


From what ive heard Seatoun never put in a formal complaint towards an underage player... CF picked up on it due to the match report/red card issue during the match?



So finally Cap Football doing their job :)
Marquee
0
·
5.8K
·
almost 17 years
Mossimo wrote:

Eastbourne players were 18 before 1st Jan. Complaint was lodged and CF answer they can only have 3 on field at one time!

Change of rules for some..


Probably should be its own thread given the mess this all is but to clear it up.
7 Eastbourne players were over age, this was out down to the fact that someone (not naming) "misinterpreted" the rules when Eastbourne asked about eligibility of players.
The rules stated that they had to be Under 17 as of 1st Jan 2013. This was interpreted (for some mental reason as) players can be 17, turning 18 this season.
So it was down to an individual mistake at Capital football and to remedy it (Save themselves embarrassment) and not make the whole team unable to field a team, capital football gave them dispensation.....
Because of this mistake the first appeal sent in by a club in the B's was dismissed. So it was the second complaint (over a month, and a promotion later)

Mental.
Trialist
0
·
26
·
about 13 years

Guess so, CF didn't advise the clubs of the 'event's' until the 28th June.....AFTER they had granted dispensation and promoted the team to Div A. (If a club had been beaten by them in div B they they may well feel agreeved)  In hindsight (a wonderful thing) would have been better to ask the other clubs before they did this.  Some other clubs may find it it rather annoying if they had asked for dispensation and been refused by the same  - outfit under or overage.  Food for the M.W.G to work through when they next meet.

Trialist
19
·
100
·
almost 11 years

How hard is it to read the rules.Every other club has managed!

 So now they can play with 18 yr olds, and everyone else has to abide by the rules.

 In every other club these boys would have to play in mens teams.Hows this fair to all the other teams!

Marquee
0
·
5.8K
·
almost 17 years

They did ask and I opposed it myself (U17A North Wellington Coach).

Maybe start a new thread about U17's or take it to the cap footy complaint thread... Given that this is the Cap 1 thread. Ive got opinions about it too but trying to keep this thread on track..

Marquee
1.1K
·
7.6K
·
almost 13 years
WeeNix
27
·
500
·
about 17 years

Good to see the boys smack North Wellington up.

Not Boyd
420
·
3.7K
·
over 16 years

Cap 1 is pretty tight....could go anyway

First Team Squad
17
·
1.2K
·
about 17 years
steelo wrote:

Good to see the boys smack North Wellington up.




Trialist
6
·
83
·
almost 11 years


Dont slip up LH :)
VERY TIGHT AT THE TOP (and bottom)

First Team Squad
130
·
1.4K
·
over 15 years

Wheels starting to fall off for north wellington teza?? Some might call that karma ;)

First Team Squad
17
·
1.2K
·
about 17 years
[quote=horseshead21]

Wheels starting to fall off for north wellington teza?? Some might call that karma ;)

[/q
Trialist
2
·
52
·
about 11 years
Teza wrote:
[quote=horseshead21]

Wheels starting to fall off for north wellington teza?? Some might call that karma ;)

[/q

Two responses. Two ex post facto deletions. Sounds like two of the results NW burgled this season.

First Team Squad
17
·
1.2K
·
about 17 years
Carefree wrote:
Teza wrote:
[quote=horseshead21]

Wheels starting to fall off for north wellington teza?? Some might call that karma ;)

[/q

Two responses. Two ex post facto deletions. Sounds like two of the results NW burgled this season.

No, I just thought it was better not to rise to the bait and reply to an immature child (in this case I'll break my own rule).



 

Marquee
880
·
7.3K
·
about 17 years
Blew.2 wrote:

2013 Table

 

Wharfies and Tawa seem like entertaining teams - both played 12 games and scored 17 and 11 goals respectively.

Trialist
6
·
83
·
almost 11 years
Legend
2.1K
·
16K
·
over 17 years

Surely any team with Dunbar, Peewee and Templeton is entertaining.

A bit of talk on Sarurday about seatoun having some average banter on the pitch 

Marquee
880
·
7.3K
·
about 17 years
Feverish wrote:

Surely any team with Dunbar, Peewee and Templeton is entertaining.

Guess you have to blame the coach then - who is in charge?

First Team Squad
170
·
1.1K
·
almost 17 years

How ridiculously tight is it at the bottom? 3 points separating places 6 to 10. It's a crazy grade and who knows how things will pan out over the next few weeks.

First Team Squad
17
·
1.2K
·
about 17 years
kakky wrote:


Another topsy turvey weekend by the looks of it and the league tighter than ever.

Our game against Island Bay was a good match to watch. IB having the better of the first half (and should have had a couple of goals to be honest). We scored after some nice passing play, then they scored a screamer from a free kick.  We came back into it in the 2nd and really should have put another one away. We had a number of chances, one hitting the upright and another forcing a fantastic save out of the IB keeper. IB had their own chances though and did score a sweet goal in the 2nd but were pulled back (without to much protest) by young Pedro for being offside (thank goodness).

A draw was probably a good reflection of the game overall.

Not sure what happened with BNU against Miramar but they got a good thrashing by 5 goals in Sunday, anyone who was there care to comment?

Legend
2.1K
·
16K
·
over 17 years
Frankie Mac wrote:
Feverish wrote:

Surely any team with Dunbar, Peewee and Templeton is entertaining.

Guess you have to blame the coach then - who is in charge?

Someone who works at a laundrette judging by the number of clean sheets 
First Team Squad
130
·
1.4K
·
over 15 years

Hahah Teza  too easy pal...

You must admit though the wheels are getting a bit loose...

I just can't help myself ;)

First Team Squad
130
·
1.4K
·
over 15 years

That said any team in the top 5 are a good chance to win the league/ get promoted, very tight league and season hasn't been too many easy games

First Team Squad
17
·
1.2K
·
about 17 years
horseshead21 wrote:

Hahah Teza  too easy pal...

You must admit though the wheels are getting a bit loose...

I just can't help myself ;)



To be honest before Saturdays game I may have agreed with you, we were abysmal against Seatorn and Uni (although to be fair they did stack the team with a few 1st team players, even so they deserved to win).

The boys showed some grit against what is a pretty good Island Bay team at the weekend so that's a plus.

 We do appear to have a good run in (although in this league any team can beat any other on their day) and our injured players are back so I'm ever hopeful  :). 

I'm focused more on our potential, we basically have had to rebuild the entire squad from scratch this season so based on that are doing ok, next season will really be the one  to judge us by I think.

 We definitely need to recruit 2 or 3 experienced players in certain positions but for a bunch of youngsters (and a pensioner in Matty C :) ) we are not that bad.

Recruiting for next season already I am :)

Oh and we have the best lawyers in the league.............
First Team Squad
17
·
1.2K
·
about 17 years
horseshead21 wrote:

That said any team in the top 5 are a good chance to win the league/ get promoted, very tight league and season hasn't been too many easy games



It's probably been the most interesting (and contentious) league in Wellington this year IMHO. From the games I've been involved with and seen there are some very good up and coming youngsters in most squads and there is also a lot of nice football being played by all teams.
First Team Squad
130
·
1.4K
·
over 15 years

Fair chat, matt c still got some genuine class!

You’ll need an account to join the conversation!

Sign in Sign up