F7s TEAM LIST FOR 2004

[Anonymous]

BP is busy of other more important issues at the moment and I know people are keen to know the teams so here it is.

The following teams are invited to participate in the 2004 Forum 7s:

Easts Roosters
Newtown Bluebags
Penrith Panthers
Souths Rabbitohs
Cronulla Sharks
Parramatta Eels
East Coast Rhinos
Coos Bay Pirates
Sydney Lions

Thats 9 teams in total.

Thanks to all teams who trialed and made attempts at forming teams. Players signed with those teams are now free agents.
We are planning on having a separate competition during the year so that emerging teams can have a go at showing us what they've got. We envisage that this separate competion will be open to all players.

In other news, the 2004 draw has been completed with the first round kicking off on the weekend of the 14th March.
The draw will be posted soon along with details of the new F7s website.

Congrats to all teams and good luck for season 2004.

Cheers.

 

[half]

woohoooooo

ps. it's coos bay pirates

 

[Big Mick]

thanks, we accept the invitation. lol.

 

[Anonymous]

The Bluebags also gratefully accept the invitation.

 

[Anonymous]

woohoooooo

ps. it's coos bay pirates

Coos Bay Pirates?
Is that the correct spelling?

 

[The Engineers Room]

Brisbane missed out? Is this to create the bye? Because I simply don't agree with the bye, you have 15 players in a team so everyone will get a break anyway.

 

[[furrycat]]

Hooray.... free agent again...

 

[The Backpacker]

It was not done to create a bye.

 

[Anonymous]

Brisbane missed out? Is this to create the bye? Because I simply don't agree with the bye, you have 15 players in a team so everyone will get a break anyway.

Brisbane were not excluded to create a bye.

There is no confirmation that we are lifting to cap to 15 players, its a proposal only made this afternoon.

 

[Evilgrowler]

Thanks for giving us the opportunity guys. Sorry we couldn't meet the criteria.

 

[half]

Coos Bay Pirates?
Is that the correct spelling?

yeah

and oh the pirates accept the invitation fo sho

can't wait til kickoff!

 

[The Engineers Room]

So who judged that Brisbane was not viable? They may not have been but it seemed as though the talk was to leave them out a week ago to make way for the draw. A concept that was welcomed by Big Mick and I think from memory Willow liked it too, but don't quote me. It's not my battle but it just seems as though uneven numbers was always on the agenda and Brisbane may as well have not even tried.

 

[The Engineers Room]

There is no confirmation that we are lifting to cap to 15 players, its a proposal only made this afternoon.

Even with 13 there is enough space for rest.

 

[Anonymous]

... it seemed as though the talk was to leave them out a week ago to make way for the draw...
...it just seems as though uneven numbers was always on the agenda and Brisbane may as well have not even tried.

I'll say it again. The exclusion of any team wasnt done to create a bye.

You may recall that we actually extended the deadline until after the trial.

 

[The Engineers Room]

So getting 5 posters and pushing us didn't impress? Not that I don't agree that they would struggle but how was the decision made, was it a simple feeling judgement or was there criteria?

 

[[furrycat]]

Can I be [furryteam] and post 5 essays by myself? That would be quite fun... for a week.

 

[Anonymous]

Criteria? Its not the UN mate.
BP and I worked in consultation with other people and after having a good look, we decided it was for the best. We didnt lay down any road map... we just looked at it.

Getting 5 posters wasnt the acid test. Although all participants can take a bow for having a go. If there was any criteria, it was that there should be 9 or 10 players at least ready to play before the draw is announced. But we try to make a measured decision taking all aspects of the team's situation into account.

Again, if you recall Dave, we actually extended the deadline until after the trial. This seemed like the prudent thing to do and would give Brisbane a better chance.

I'm not going to point the finger at any individual becuase imo, its really no one's fault. But we did feel things were shaky. The extra 5 or 6 days we waited saw events take place which made it look shakier again. After looking at the personnel, we figured there were 6 players (7 at best) in the Broncos who looked like they were ready to play - and that simply wasnt enough to sustain the team. I know what its like to have a team with limited numbers and how hard it is to write every week.

I think the idea of having a separate competition will happen and will be a postive outcome from all this. Teams like Knights, Broncos, Dragons, Raiders etc (ie all the teams that tried to start up) will get a chance to show us their stuff in 2004 and will make the comp stronger again in 2005.

 

[Evilgrowler]

The way I understand it DVD is we could only field 6 - 7 players. Plus I wouldn't be available for a couple of months after April. I'm not disappointed. We just didn't have the consistent numbers. At least we got a go.

 

[The Engineers Room]

I just wanted to know why the management team didn't get more of a say in who was in and out.

 

[[furrycat]]

I do understand the decision of why we were not included in this years competition. Although it is a bit disappointing, it is a good decision in the fact that we may have had to practically drop out of the season half way through, which would not have been too good for the competition. I'll try and get signed with another team, with a degree of hope that my third team will stay running.