New rules for FISTF...

View previous topic View next topic Go down

New rules for FISTF...

Post  Marcus Tilgner on Fri May 20, 2011 1:54 pm

FISTF has not only a new communication director, FISTF also got new playing rules. The 'book of cases'... to be honest some of these 'cases' and their clarification made me laugh, because they were CLEAR MISINTERPRETATIONS of the existing rules...

for example case 107:
107) The attacking playing figure A1 is in line with the penultimate defending playing figure D1.
Is A1 in offside position?
NO, because the Rule 13.1.1.1 says that an attacking playing figure is in offside position when it is NEARER to the defender’s goal line than the penultimate defending playing figure if the goalkeeper is in use or NEARER to the defender’s goal line than the last defending playing figure if the goalkeeper has been removed.

BUT rule 13.1.1.1 says
13.1.1.1. An attacking playing figure may not be positioned:
a. within the defender's shooting-area; and
b. nearer to the defender's goal-line than the ball; and
c. if the goalkeeper has been removed, when one or no defending playing figure is
nearer to the defender’s goal-line than the attacking playing figure; or
d. if the goalkeeper is in use, when no defending playing figure is nearer to the
defender’s goal-line than the attacking playing figure.

CORRECT (no interpretation needed, just READ the rule):
A1 is in offside position, because NO DEFENDING player is NEARER to the defender's goal-line, no matter whether the goalkeeper is in use or not...!

Case 107 is not even a 'case' but the 'experts' created one by just inverting the words of the rules...


'Case 107' will be deleted from the German 'book of cases' - this is official, because I'm the German Sports Director and I decided it... king
avatar
Marcus Tilgner
Major winner
Major winner

Posts : 224
Join date : 2010-04-22

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: New rules for FISTF...

Post  Admin on Fri May 20, 2011 2:23 pm

As I said to Mr Gazzoldi (I e-mailed him this morning):
- it's a huge work
- but the english is really bad
- if it's an official document, it must be published in french, too
- some cases look very strange to me (the way to put a figure right for instance is against all historic interpretations of the rule)

I stop the reading after a few cases because sometimes I didn't even understand what was meant...

About the "experts" of the "commission", it's better that I don't make comments... Very Happy
avatar
Admin
Admin

Posts : 1330
Join date : 2010-04-21
Age : 43
Location : Somewhere in Belgium

View user profile http://templeuveunited.blogspot.com/

Back to top Go down

Re: New rules for FISTF...

Post  von K. on Fri May 20, 2011 7:34 pm

Correct Marcus. But still you weren't asked to be an expert...

However the rule should be corrected. As you position the figures they are level, but not considered offside. So the problem exists in the rules. And then the rules should be corrected, not just an interpretation against them made...

This kind of mistakes (irregularities between the rule and the interpretation) take the credibility away from the whole work. Unfortunately, because it has been a lot of work. And from the little that I know about Gazzoldi I think he really is nice guy who has "obsession" for rules interpretation. It also seems he has sacrificed a lot of time even though he has family.

But I have to say, from the point of view from Finland, that it seems a lot of unnecessary work for obvious things that have never been a problem and are clearly stated in the rules. Some of those are surely welcomed explanations, but there is so much unnecessary text, that I really have to wonder how many players (of those who haven't understood for example the offside) are going to read it properly.

I would have liked it more if it was a simple case study of rules that have different interpretations in different countries. And that it would have included those different opinions, and then discussion could be started based on those. Now there is too many cases which in reality are not problematic in the rules.

An example that is wrong in this book of cases is this:

120) If the stationary attacking playing figure A1 is in offside position and it stops the ball
before the ball enters in the shooting area (for example the attacking playing figure is 1 or 2 mm
inside the shooting area in offside position), then A1 is in offside even if the ball doesn’t enter in
the shooting area?
YES, because, even if the ball doesn’t enter in the shooting area as the Rule 13.1.2.1, A1, that is in
offside, is “active” in the action.


NO!

The rules clearly say the whole ball has to in the area for offside to be called (and there is no mention of being active in the rule 13.1.2.1):

12.1.2. Offside Declaration
13.1.2.1. An attacking playing figure in offside position shall be declared offside when
the slightest part of the ball has passed the penultimate defending playing figure's
base and the ball is positioned completely in the defender's shooting-area.


The current sports director and Gazzoldi had different views on about this last autumn in the italian forum (if I remember correctly), so it surely would need more discussion internationally. Should the rule be changed, because now the interpretation of Gazzoldi is against the rules?

That kind of cases are those what I would have been interested in. Now I almost didn't find it because of the amount of cases that have no problems according to the rules. A "guide" to the rules is maybe useful, but now the really problematic international cases get mixed up with cases that exist only because people don't read the rules properly, or don't get help when asking. Two different needs and matters are put into one.

And wouldn't it have been a good idea to check the need or idea of some rules at the same time? Not just interpret the existing ones, which can be stupid (like a penalty for hands, when ball is going away from goal after post or save, another rule which is interpreted differently in some countries) or otherwise problematic.

von K.
Major winner
Major winner

Posts : 854
Join date : 2010-04-21
Location : Finland

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: New rules for FISTF...

Post  von K. on Fri May 20, 2011 8:04 pm

I saw the names:

- Bolognino Massimo (ITA)
- Mike Burns (UK)
- Massimo Ciano (ITA)
- Galeazzi Gianluca (ITA)
- Garnier Laurent (FRA)
- Triantafyllou Kostas (GRE)
- Licheri Emanuele (ITA)
- Loureiro Sergio (POR)
- Hansel Mallia (MAL)
- Arturo Martinez (ESP)
So the Book of Cases is not an Italian work, but it is an international work.

The final line is from Gazzoldi. Well, 5 italians (Gazzoldi included), 6 others, and only one from outside the south. And more importantly only Loureiro outside the official FISTF offices...

When most differences seem to be between the northern interpretation and the southern interpretation (different culture with regard to rules in general), it's amazing that this was the group and it was even made official without asking others' opinions.

And when we can see clear irregularities (I haven't read it through, but a couple have been mentioned already) in this book, and lots of cases which have never been a problem here, i can only wonder why we, and all the others who were not asked to join and help, are so much worse than the guys from these nations.

Gazzoldi is not a politician, and I'm quite sure he didn't choose the group completely. But to say this is work to find international consensus when interpreting the rules, I don't know if he is kidding himself or serious. Maybe naivity is the word, and the utopistic comment (after this snub of others' opinions) is based on inexperience (I'm not the only one maybe...) of international relations.

A naive idealist maybe, but a game enthusiast Gazzoldi definitely is. That's why it's sad that the negativity is (probably) the result of others' actions.

von K.
Major winner
Major winner

Posts : 854
Join date : 2010-04-21
Location : Finland

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: New rules for FISTF...

Post  Thossa on Sat May 21, 2011 11:13 am

Well, could be interesting to ask all these poeople how deep they were involved in the Book of Gazzoldi. I didn´t read it, but if the english is that bad as Vincent wrote, I wonder why not Mike Burns par example invested the time to correct the grammar, etc.

Let´s hope the most of the names are not just alibis. In case of Mr. Tour de France I am really sceptical Laughing Rolling Eyes

von K. wrote:I saw the names:

- Bolognino Massimo (ITA)
- Mike Burns (UK)
- Massimo Ciano (ITA)
- Galeazzi Gianluca (ITA)
- Garnier Laurent (FRA)
- Triantafyllou Kostas (GRE)
- Licheri Emanuele (ITA)
- Loureiro Sergio (POR)
- Hansel Mallia (MAL)
- Arturo Martinez (ESP)
So the Book of Cases is not an Italian work, but it is an international work.

avatar
Thossa
Major winner
Major winner

Posts : 627
Join date : 2010-04-21
Age : 55
Location : Far beyond

View user profile http://www.dstfb.de

Back to top Go down

Re: New rules for FISTF...

Post  von K. on Sat May 21, 2011 1:39 pm

I saw some comments regarding Olivier's sports commission in the SN.

As I was part of it, I know that he wanted us to make lists of things that have to be discussed. Rules were one of these things. We never got to that before Olivier, and the rest of us, was forced to resign.

I can say that I contacted Gazzoldi by pm through the italian forum. It was unofficial at that point, as agreed with Olivier. I knew Gazzoldi from the italian forum and knew of his expertise and interest in rules. And I thought that the italian view would be very important to consider, especially when the italians had declined to take part in the commission.

I asked him if he could list some of the rules that have created problems in Italy with different interpretations. He asked me who was part of the commission, and I told him the names and said which italians have been asked to join. He agreed to come back to me on this, but already answered positively to the idea.

But he didn't mention he had this under work. If he had, Olivier's commission would surely have wanted to help him finalise it and present it to fistf. However I didn't hear from him after the couple of initial messages. I knew his child was born then, and didn't want to bother him if he had no time.

I'm just left to wonder, now, why was this work not brought to the attention of Olivier, especially as it was known that his commission was interested in the rules issues. And I don't understand why Gazzoldi didn't get back to me or contact Olivier.

Strange days.

von K.
Major winner
Major winner

Posts : 854
Join date : 2010-04-21
Location : Finland

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: New rules for FISTF...

Post  kechris on Sun May 22, 2011 9:46 am

Marcus and Vesa i disagree with you.
The offencive figure must be closer to goal-line for offside position.
A figure in offside position which touch the ball is offside. DE FACTO.
MY ENGLISH CANN'T HELP TO DECRIBE MY OPINION IN FORUM. THE NEXT TIME ON PITCH !
avatar
kechris
Major winner
Major winner

Posts : 582
Join date : 2010-04-22
Location : Greece

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: New rules for FISTF...

Post  kechris on Sun May 22, 2011 9:48 am


'Case 107' will be deleted from the German 'book of cases' - this is official, because I'm the German Sports Director and I decided it... king


I LOVE IT YOUR COMMENT MARCUS Laughing
avatar
kechris
Major winner
Major winner

Posts : 582
Join date : 2010-04-22
Location : Greece

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: New rules for FISTF...

Post  von K. on Sun May 22, 2011 3:17 pm

kechris wrote:Marcus and Vesa i disagree with you.
The offencive figure must be closer to goal-line for offside position.
A figure in offside position which touch the ball is offside. DE FACTO.
MY ENGLISH CANN'T HELP TO DECRIBE MY OPINION IN FORUM. THE NEXT TIME ON PITCH !

I think I understand what you mean, Kostas.

This underlines the difference between regions and countries when it comes to reading the rules. For example in Finland and in Germany we (the culture) don't interpret the rules, we read them and follow them literally. In southern european culture it is more usual to interpret and not follow rules literally if someone thinks they are not working. I don't take sides here. It's just a cultural difference and a BIG reason to have international discussion involving more countries.

The rules say clearly, Kostas, that Marcus is right. The rule can be wrong, but it is written clearly. On the same line is offside according to the rules. So maybe the rule has to be changed, if it is not good for the game. Interpreting and leaving it as it is written, just creates problems.

Same for my example. The ball has to be in shooting area, if offside is even possible. It is NOT possible to judge offside if the ball is not over the line. According to the rules written. It can be stupid or against the normal practice, but it is clear.

Same as the handball penalty when ball is moving away from goal. I know from Georgy that in Greece you don't like it or don't give a penalty. But in Finland, Denmark, Norway, England etc there is no choice. It is written that it is always a penalty. The movement of the ball does not matter. Maybe the rule has to be discussed, but it can not be ignored or changed without international consensus and discussion.

I understand your views on these cases very well. And I agree especially in the 1st and 3rd example I gave. The 2nd I have no clear opinion of how it would be better.

Just based on your, Marcus' and my comments it is clear that the book of cases can not be official until an international discussion about them is taken. The differences of interpretation are so big, and the problematic rules have to discussed and changed according to what is internationally considered as best for the game, not based on who is right.

von K.
Major winner
Major winner

Posts : 854
Join date : 2010-04-21
Location : Finland

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: New rules for FISTF...

Post  Heinz Eder on Mon May 23, 2011 2:46 pm

The perfect start of that could have been the following.
As far as I remember (i didn't have had a look on it right now) he explained different situations and asked some questions and wrote the answer below them.
To start a really constructive discussion he should only send a version of rules with his examples and the questions to the associations and they should reply.
Having done that you would see which countries interprete the rules differently and which associations have the same views on the rules.
That result would help a lot and then a real process could start.

Of course I'm not the right one to talk about the topic, because in view of many people I missed it to start that work 3 years.
I knew the book of cases already 1 or 2 years ago, but i wasn't allowed to use it in public.

von K. wrote:Correct Marcus. But still you weren't asked to be an expert...

However the rule should be corrected. As you position the figures they are level, but not considered offside. So the problem exists in the rules. And then the rules should be corrected, not just an interpretation against them made...

This kind of mistakes (irregularities between the rule and the interpretation) take the credibility away from the whole work. Unfortunately, because it has been a lot of work. And from the little that I know about Gazzoldi I think he really is nice guy who has "obsession" for rules interpretation. It also seems he has sacrificed a lot of time even though he has family.

But I have to say, from the point of view from Finland, that it seems a lot of unnecessary work for obvious things that have never been a problem and are clearly stated in the rules. Some of those are surely welcomed explanations, but there is so much unnecessary text, that I really have to wonder how many players (of those who haven't understood for example the offside) are going to read it properly.

I would have liked it more if it was a simple case study of rules that have different interpretations in different countries. And that it would have included those different opinions, and then discussion could be started based on those. Now there is too many cases which in reality are not problematic in the rules.

An example that is wrong in this book of cases is this:

120) If the stationary attacking playing figure A1 is in offside position and it stops the ball
before the ball enters in the shooting area (for example the attacking playing figure is 1 or 2 mm
inside the shooting area in offside position), then A1 is in offside even if the ball doesn’t enter in
the shooting area?
YES, because, even if the ball doesn’t enter in the shooting area as the Rule 13.1.2.1, A1, that is in
offside, is “active” in the action.


NO!

The rules clearly say the whole ball has to in the area for offside to be called (and there is no mention of being active in the rule 13.1.2.1):

12.1.2. Offside Declaration
13.1.2.1. An attacking playing figure in offside position shall be declared offside when
the slightest part of the ball has passed the penultimate defending playing figure's
base and the ball is positioned completely in the defender's shooting-area.


The current sports director and Gazzoldi had different views on about this last autumn in the italian forum (if I remember correctly), so it surely would need more discussion internationally. Should the rule be changed, because now the interpretation of Gazzoldi is against the rules?

That kind of cases are those what I would have been interested in. Now I almost didn't find it because of the amount of cases that have no problems according to the rules. A "guide" to the rules is maybe useful, but now the really problematic international cases get mixed up with cases that exist only because people don't read the rules properly, or don't get help when asking. Two different needs and matters are put into one.

And wouldn't it have been a good idea to check the need or idea of some rules at the same time? Not just interpret the existing ones, which can be stupid (like a penalty for hands, when ball is going away from goal after post or save, another rule which is interpreted differently in some countries) or otherwise problematic.

Heinz Eder
Major winner
Major winner

Posts : 781
Join date : 2010-04-22

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: New rules for FISTF...

Post  Marcus Tilgner on Tue May 24, 2011 1:35 am

kechris wrote:Marcus and Vesa i disagree with you.
The offencive figure must be closer to goal-line for offside position.
Not only with Vesa and me but also with the rulebook Wink
Lucky you, you don't disagree with the now official interpretation Wink

Regardless of which way of refereeing should be correct in my opinion, I criticize the fact that even more confusion will be settled when one declares a set of interpretations to be official when they are in clear contrast to the rules.
I'd like to point out that I absolutely appreciate the work of Giuliano because he did a massive job with this book. But as Heinz said this should have been used as a basis for a wider discussion for those who are interested....

Out of interest @Kostas:
- why do you think the attacker needs to be closer to the goalline to be offside?
- in case one defender and one attacker are ON the goalline, is the attacker offside?

In my opinion the offside rule is a fantastic example where tablesoccer is different from real football and that it NEEDS to be different...
Almost every single attacker in our game in offside position would be called 'passive' offside in real football when shooting onto the opponent's goal. But I don't think we would like to have that...
But to raise confusion we also have a 'passive' offside rule which implements that a figure needs to be active in order to be in 'passive' offside.
Well, not too active, otherwise it would be offside again Very Happy

cheers
avatar
Marcus Tilgner
Major winner
Major winner

Posts : 224
Join date : 2010-04-22

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: New rules for FISTF...

Post  Heinz Eder on Tue May 24, 2011 9:57 am

I think especially for the offside rule the book of cases could be a good thing, if the right examples and questions are found for that rule.
Most important thing in such a discussion is to use the same source for the discussion. I'm always a bit scared if some people use a french version for their arguments and the other part uses the english version for an example. The third one maybe use an italian version, i think the result won't be a success. There should be one valid version and only what is written in that version should be discussed.

Marcus Tilgner wrote:
kechris wrote:Marcus and Vesa i disagree with you.
The offencive figure must be closer to goal-line for offside position.
Not only with Vesa and me but also with the rulebook Wink
Lucky you, you don't disagree with the now official interpretation Wink

Regardless of which way of refereeing should be correct in my opinion, I criticize the fact that even more confusion will be settled when one declares a set of interpretations to be official when they are in clear contrast to the rules.
I'd like to point out that I absolutely appreciate the work of Giuliano because he did a massive job with this book. But as Heinz said this should have been used as a basis for a wider discussion for those who are interested....

Out of interest @Kostas:
- why do you think the attacker needs to be closer to the goalline to be offside?
- in case one defender and one attacker are ON the goalline, is the attacker offside?

In my opinion the offside rule is a fantastic example where tablesoccer is different from real football and that it NEEDS to be different...
Almost every single attacker in our game in offside position would be called 'passive' offside in real football when shooting onto the opponent's goal. But I don't think we would like to have that...
But to raise confusion we also have a 'passive' offside rule which implements that a figure needs to be active in order to be in 'passive' offside.
Well, not too active, otherwise it would be offside again Very Happy

cheers

Heinz Eder
Major winner
Major winner

Posts : 781
Join date : 2010-04-22

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: New rules for FISTF...

Post  von K. on Thu May 26, 2011 12:38 am

Marcus Tilgner wrote:
Regardless of which way of refereeing should be correct in my opinion, I criticize the fact that even more confusion will be settled when one declares a set of interpretations to be official when they are in clear contrast to the rules.
I'd like to point out that I absolutely appreciate the work of Giuliano because he did a massive job with this book. But as Heinz said this should have been used as a basis for a wider discussion for those who are interested....

My thoughts exactly.

I don't see anyone complaining about the work, but instead about it being official. If it's just a starting point, then everyone is happy, I guess.

Marcus Tilgner wrote:Out of interest @Kostas:
- why do you think the attacker needs to be closer to the goalline to be offside?
- in case one defender and one attacker are ON the goalline, is the attacker offside?

Sorry, Marcus, I'm not Kostas, and still I comment. I have to say that positioning is to me the only real factor in this. Otherwise it's all cosmetics. And regarding positioning this can be used as an advantage or disadvantage to the attacker (who usually shoots and gets figures positioned). So it's a matter of philosophy or attitude of the game.

von K.
Major winner
Major winner

Posts : 854
Join date : 2010-04-21
Location : Finland

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: New rules for FISTF...

Post  Marcus Tilgner on Thu May 26, 2011 2:05 am

von K. wrote:Sorry, Marcus, I'm not Kostas, and still I comment. I have to say that positioning is to me the only real factor in this. Otherwise it's all cosmetics. And regarding positioning this can be used as an advantage or disadvantage to the attacker (who usually shoots and gets figures positioned). So it's a matter of philosophy or attitude of the game.

Spot on, it's all about figures which needed to be positioned. So in this case we have a different situation than what we have in real football.

From what I remember:
Years ago an attacker who is on line with the last defender used to be in offside in subbuteo and in real football.
Then FIFA had the idea to change the rule and from 1990 the attacker on line with the last defender was not offside anymore.
In first set of FISTF rules this was adapted for table soccer.
After playing a couple of seasons with this rule, it had been changed back in table soccer, obviously because of these 'positioned' figures.

Therefore, it does make sense in table soccer to keep the offside rule (as far as it concerns players on line) as it is in my opinion...

The whole 'passive' offside issue is another big issue... Wink
avatar
Marcus Tilgner
Major winner
Major winner

Posts : 224
Join date : 2010-04-22

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: New rules for FISTF...

Post  Marcus Tilgner on Thu May 26, 2011 2:13 am

Heinz Eder wrote:I think especially for the offside rule the book of cases could be a good thing, if the right examples and questions are found for that rule.
Most important thing in such a discussion is to use the same source for the discussion. I'm always a bit scared if some people use a french version for their arguments and the other part uses the english version for an example. The third one maybe use an italian version, i think the result won't be a success. There should be one valid version and only what is written in that version should be discussed.

Another very good point by Heinz.
This sort of discussion even happens when I talk about rules with Austrian (who literally speak the same language like I do) players (looking forward to the Traiskirchen IO btw) - the typical procedure is as follows:
By stating 'this is written clearly in the rules' in most cases I get questioned 'in which translation, German or Austian?'
Funny enough that I always refer to the English version Wink
avatar
Marcus Tilgner
Major winner
Major winner

Posts : 224
Join date : 2010-04-22

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: New rules for FISTF...

Post  Heinz Eder on Thu May 26, 2011 12:12 pm

Maybe we also should find an agreement which translator we use and which translation for the english word we use. Laughing
I think the bigger problem we have, is, that people come around with the argument, internationally everybody is refereeing that way. This argument is always a kind of shock for me. The next shock is that if you don't decide like all others, you are automatically wrong and the idiot in both player's eyes.
I don't have a problem if the rules are modified like "all referees" decide in some cases, if there is a common agreement on the interpretation, but as long as the rules are as they are now, we have to decide what is written there and not what brings the biggest advantage.
That's another argument, I often heard, that if we would decide according what is written in the rules our players/teams would have a disadvantage because the others don't decide according on the rules. "Funny" view on the things. We know it is wrong, but we don't want to have a disadvantage at the international tournaments, so we also decide against the rules. Shocked

Marcus Tilgner wrote:
Another very good point by Heinz.
This sort of discussion even happens when I talk about rules with Austrian (who literally speak the same language like I do) players (looking forward to the Traiskirchen IO btw) - the typical procedure is as follows:
By stating 'this is written clearly in the rules' in most cases I get questioned 'in which translation, German or Austian?'
Funny enough that I always refer to the English version Wink

Heinz Eder
Major winner
Major winner

Posts : 781
Join date : 2010-04-22

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: New rules for FISTF...

Post  Kaitsu on Tue May 31, 2011 10:00 pm

The BoD decided to expressly declare that the players that will participate to the activities (i.e. tournaments, active membership, etc.) of other Federations that:

- have the same goals of FISTF, are in conflict with FISTF or try to divide the Table Soccer movement.

will be disqualified for three years to all FISTF international competitions.


The FISTF President

Piero Capponi
Tbh, i was thinking positive about FISTF BoD because they informed decision about Greece status and the elections a week ago. The good feeling dissapeared few seconds later, when my eyes spotted next decision they made. I don't know if it's against statues or rules of FISTF, but it's so fucked in so many ways by default that it doesn't make any sense. When are we celebrating FISTF funerals and is WASPA invited? Who takes care for catering?
avatar
Kaitsu
Major winner
Major winner

Posts : 138
Join date : 2010-04-21
Location : Helsinki / Finland

View user profile http://www.subu.fi

Back to top Go down

Re: New rules for FISTF...

Post  Admin on Wed Jun 01, 2011 6:46 am

FISTF funerals? Very Happy
FISTF was dead already when Catania took the power... FISTF died a second time when Capponi was "elected"...
avatar
Admin
Admin

Posts : 1330
Join date : 2010-04-21
Age : 43
Location : Somewhere in Belgium

View user profile http://templeuveunited.blogspot.com/

Back to top Go down

Re: New rules for FISTF...

Post  von K. on Tue Aug 30, 2011 3:21 pm

Going back to the "book of cases"... affraid

I saw it was included in the fistf.info page without any comment of it being under discussion!

And I seem to remember the last information about it being, that it was only a proposal to start a discussion from, and that some sort of a work group would maybe be gathered.

But the version in fistf.info still has for example the absurd interpretation of the rule on how to lift a fallen figure. The example Marcus mentioned in this topic. I didn't check more, because I don't expect it to have been discussed or changed. No

Maybe I remember wrong and it was all official already.... Shocked

von K.
Major winner
Major winner

Posts : 854
Join date : 2010-04-21
Location : Finland

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: New rules for FISTF...

Post  Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

View previous topic View next topic Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum