Malthouse claims Trigg admits Adelaide had Betts 'stitched up' with 18 months to go on his contract

[Magma]

much ado about nothing

which means a senior member of the coaching staff will be suspended and/or sacked.

 

[Bacon8]

why? because the club denied it? it just makes me wonder what other stains he has left at then club. i dont get why trigg would tell mm in the first place (i doubt mm is making this up) but nothing surprises us when it comes to triggy.

Because the club denied it.
Because Trigg denied saying it.
Because the AFL had already been through our books for the period MM is discussing.
Because a signed contract is sent to the AFL for checking, before they give Carlton the chance to match the offer.
Because Eddie's manager states we never spoke to him in 2012.

Plenty of actual reasons to think Mick wasn't entirely honest.

 

[Vader]

why? because the club denied it? it just makes me wonder what other stains he has left at then club. i dont get why trigg would tell mm in the first place (i doubt mm is making this up) but nothing surprises us when it comes to triggy.

Because there's no way it could possibly have happened. Betts was a Restricted Free Agent. Carlton had the right to match our offer. He couldn't sign a contract until they formally refused to do so.

I'm sure Adelaide were talking to Betts and his manager and probably even made him an offer. Betts may have even agreed in principle to accept the offer, effectively "stitched up". However, that's all completely legal. He couldn't have signed an actual contract, which is where the legal issues lie.

 

[Cap]

surely we can sue for defamation! (this is a joke post)

 

[Cleric]

Dave Hughes should stick to what he does best, being unfunny.

Hes actually correct. One of my Melbourne work mates is a massive blues person and knows Eddie. He spoke to Eddie when he was last back in Melbourne and Eddie told him his blood bleeds blue and he would have stayed if they tried to keep him. He would have stayed at the Blues for 50k more than their last offer.

 

[Slippery Pete]

Adelaide will say of course not and that will be the end of the matter.

Or we might say, come in and go through all our records, we've got nothing to hide.

Wait...

 

[Campbell's Chunky]

"Crows also under investigation for draft tampering last year after it can now be revealed Jake Lever probably should've gone top three."

 

[NikkiNoo]

Bickley just saying that he thinks that there will be nothing more than a phone call from the AFL to Adelaide asking if we have anything to say on the Eddie Betts, not an investigation as some are trying to make us believe. Bicks is saying this is direct from the AFL itself.

Adelaide will say of course not and that will be the end of the matter.

As Bicks said it is impossible for the Crows to have had Eddie stitched up 18 months before he left as that would have been before the free agent process. Eddie was a restricted free agent and as such Carlton could have matched the offer and Eddie would have had to stay at Carlton. On top of that North Melbourne ended up making an offer identical to Adelaide's which made the club fear they might not get Eddie and were very relieved when he chose Adelaide.

A storm in a teacup.

The melbourne media really have had a hand in this as they all want to be the first to have that interview with Mick, so they've run with his 'story'. Then people on here have jumped on it without taking the step back and looking at the bigger picture.

 

[GROTTO]

"Crows also under investigation for draft tampering last year after it can now be revealed Jake Lever probably should've gone top three."

That will take place when he receives his Rising Star nomination.

 

[NikkiNoo]

Or we might say, come in and go through all our records, we've got nothing to hide.

Wait...

We know they have been through those records for that period. They didn't find anything about Eddie then! Seriously some of you look need to get your Trigg hatred blinkers off and actually think logically.

 

[hippyhippy]

Anyone noticed bay13 has been renamed lol

 

[GROTTO]

Blues supporters posting in here probably quietly hoping the AFL says we have to give them back Eddie. lol.

 

[Miss Vanessa]

As Bicks just pointed out too, at the 11th hour North came in with an offer that made Adelaide very nervous as they thought Betts might choose them. Why would the club be nervous if anything had already been signed? We'll be fine... Hopefully.

 

[Pugsley]

Hes actually correct. One of my Melbourne work mates is a massive blues person and knows Eddie. He spoke to Eddie when he was last back in Melbourne and Eddie told him his blood bleeds blue and he would have stayed if they tried to keep him. He would have stayed at the Blues for 50k more than their last offer.

Well that's nice.

 

[Slippery Pete]

We know they have been through those records for that period. They didn't find anything about Eddie then! Seriously some of you look need to get your Trigg hatred blinkers off and actually think logically.

It was tongue-in-cheek. Nobody seriously expects that the Betts deal was done outside the rules.

That's all beside the actual beef that people have with Trigg: His track record at our club, and the fact that he is full of s**t, something you'd be able to come to terms with if you weren't doing Jenny's dirty work for her.

 

[LiquidCrow]

Bickley just saying that he thinks that there will be nothing more than a phone call from the AFL to Adelaide asking if we have anything to say on the Eddie Betts, not an investigation as some are trying to make us believe. Bicks is saying this is direct from the AFL itself.

Adelaide will say of course not and that will be the end of the matter.

As Bicks said it is impossible for the Crows to have had Eddie stitched up 18 months before he left as that would have been before the free agent process. Eddie was a restricted free agent and as such Carlton could have matched the offer and Eddie would have had to stay at Carlton. On top of that North Melbourne ended up making an offer identical to Adelaide's which made the club fear they might not get Eddie and were very relieved when he chose Adelaide.

A storm in a teacup.

I agree, and this is in keeping with the article on AFL.com which suggests that an inquiry would occur first before any investigation. "We would make an inquiry to see if we need to do anything that would require us to investigate further," an AFL spokesman told AFL.com.au

I would still like to see Fagan come out, dismiss the allegations and smash Carlton for dragging us into their mess with all the class and professionalism he has demonstrated thus far.

 

[JP Sauce]

We know they have been through those records for that period. They didn't find anything about Eddie then! Seriously some of you look need to get your Trigg hatred blinkers off and actually think logically.

I'll never pass up an opportunity to call Trigg an incompetent *******! Whether it's a valid criticism in this instance or not.

 

[GROTTO]

I agree, and this is in keeping with the article on AFL.com which suggests that an inquiry would occur first before any investigation. "We would make an inquiry to see if we need to do anything that would require us to investigate further," an AFL spokesman told AFL.com.au

I would still like to see Fagan come out, dismiss the allegations and smash Carlton for dragging us into their mess with all the class and professionalism he has demonstrated thus far.

Lets hope that Fagan does come out and make a strong statement both about himself and about the AFC in the one shot.

 

[Wright Away]

Makes sense, that means we won him over half way through 2012 when we were on top of the ladder with Kurt Tippett still a contracted crow. Bet Eddie wondered if he had made the right decision a few times over that 18 months.

No that timeline does not make sense. It is 18 months prior to Trigg joining Carlton, so that makes it mid 2013.

 

[NikkiNoo]

It was tongue-in-cheek. Nobody seriously expects that the Betts deal was done outside the rules.

That's all beside the actual beef that people have with Trigg: His track record at our club, and the fact that he is full of s**t, something you'd be able to come to terms with if you weren't doing Jenny's dirty work for her.

Sorry Pete, but I make my own decisions and have my own opinions, just like Jenny has hers and she can do her own work perfectly fine. His track record at our club includes some good things as well, but you just want to stick your fingers in your ears and go la la la la la la.

 

[Wright Away]

Mick said triggy said it to him in the context of don't take it personally, eddie leaving, as adelaide had him stitched up 18 months previously.

It'd be Eddie left not Eddie leaving as Trigg joined them last year.

 

[Jeffcrowe]

Hes actually correct. One of my Melbourne work mates is a massive blues person and knows Eddie. He spoke to Eddie when he was last back in Melbourne and Eddie told him his blood bleeds blue and he would have stayed if they tried to keep him. He would have stayed at the Blues for 50k more than their last offer.

That would have been a good career move

 

[Jcpdragonx]

Because there's no way it could possibly have happened. Betts was a Restricted Free Agent. Carlton had the right to match our offer. He couldn't sign a contract until they formally refused to do so.

I'm sure Adelaide were talking to Betts and his manager and probably even made him an offer. Betts may have even agreed in principle to accept the offer, effectively "stitched up". However, that's all completely legal. He couldn't have signed an actual contract, which is where the legal issues lie.

the afl anti poaching rules are far too week if they go as far as signing a contract whilst under another contract. id rather see a window of time where management can be approached (say 3-4 months prior to end of contract) regarding contract negotiations outside their own club. dont like how potential contracts can be put forward when the player has 18 months left on his current contract.

 

[NikkiNoo]

It'd be Eddie left not Eddie leaving as Trigg joined them last year.

Grammar from the big fella is correct in the context of it being what Malthouse was saying Trigg was saying what it was in reference to, Eddie leaving the Blues.

 

[Jeffcrowe]

Stitched up is different than contract signed if I'm hearing things correctly

Bit of trigg big noting himself to malthouse and that's about it

Nothing will come if it