Tippett's Gone - READ RULES BEFORE POSTING

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

I thought when Franklin signed there were some pretty strict guidelines put on by the AFL? Basically locking them in to the cap commitment. They were still steaming that their GWS lovechild was being trumped and momentarily forgot that Sydney are also their lovechild.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

Increasing story here regarding Tipppetts retirement & impact of Free Agency

Can a club entice a player away from a club with a 10 year $1m per year Contract .... knowing the player will probably retire b4 the 10 years ... from old age or injury ?

If, as usual, the player and club negotiate a payout ..... that payout figure AP is put into the salary cap NOT the original contract figure per year

Lots of clubs contacting the AFL over Tippett ..... probably in anticipation of what Sydney may do re Franklin & escape TPP

Clubs believe if you entice a player from another club under RFA .... then that figure of $1m per year for 10 years MUST go into each years TPP irrespective of early retirement

I believe with the unusual length of the Buddy contract, the AFL (being pissed off that he didn't go to GWS) have said that it will all be included in the cap, regardless of whether he retires earlier.

 

[Smoooothy]

Increasing story here regarding Tipppetts retirement & impact of Free Agency

Can a club entice a player away from a club with a 10 year $1m per year Contract .... knowing the player will probably retire b4 the 10 years ... from old age or injury ?

If, as usual, the player and club negotiate a payout ..... that payout figure AP is put into the salary cap NOT the original contract figure per year

Lots of clubs contacting the AFL over Tippett ..... probably in anticipation of what Sydney may do re Franklin & escape TPP

Clubs believe if you entice a player from another club under RFA .... then that figure of $1m per year for 10 years MUST go into each years TPP irrespective of early retirement

Eddie McGuire went on a bit of a rant about this this morning. this is a good thing

 

[spenze]

Re point 1 - there may be no evidence (i.e. a document, a recording etc), however I personally have it on good authority that this was the case.

I actually think it doesn't matter who demanded it or not, we accepted it when we knew better, had years to come clean and chose not to. We even lied right unto the end, which if I remember rightly, was what got us a harsher penalty.

 

[BRL121]

I believe with the unusual length of the Buddy contract, the AFL (being pissed off that he didn't go to GWS) have said that it will all be included in the cap, regardless of whether he retires earlier.

They certainly implied that at the time. However, you know how they play! Look at what they allowed Geelong to get away with on the draft rules. If they "like" Sydney, they will find a "special circumstance" to allow them to get away with murder.

 

[WaynesWorld19]

I believe with the unusual length of the Buddy contract, the AFL (being pissed off that he didn't go to GWS) have said that it will all be included in the cap, regardless of whether he retires earlier.

Don't believe that's the rule currently .....if the club & player negotiate a payout figure, this is what goes into the Salary Cap .....this is not what the clubs are not happy about, as it's a ruse to use Free Agency to attract a player, then change the Contract conditions

 

[WaynesWorld19]

Eddie McGuire went on a bit of a rant about this this morning. this is a good thing

Yes, that's where i got the story from ......was quite upset & said a lot of clubs are talking about the Tippett scenario & by extension other players FA Contracts

 

[1970crow]

He’s your employee, tell him to stay home. Costs you less but buys brownie points with fans and players

If you’re giving him everything you’ve got lots of options without acceding to what he wants

Sure, but come the end of the year you want the list spot. If they wanted him gone from around the club, they'd still be better off negotiating a termination. He should accept less because of the extra value in present money. So over the course of the next 3 years they're better off. The question is how much better off.

The rumours might be rubbish and Kurt has retired without a push and foregone a good portion his contract value. Not sure that's in his nature though. I'm sure he'd have extracted every cent possible and the amount of cents is determined by who started the convo and how desperate they were to achieve their end game.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

Don't believe that's the rule currently .....if the club & player negotiate a payout figure, this is what goes into the Salary Cap .....this is not what the clubs are not happy about, as it's a ruse to use Free Agency to attract a player, then change the Contract conditions

I realise the current rule, but there is a special Buddy exception rule as the AFL were pissed at the time that Sydney made a 10 year offer. As it stands, the 10 year contract will be included in their salary cap regardless of what happens (including payment/retirement).

 

[GreyCrow]

On the poll. Not salty, life goes on and we get players in to the club

Though there were 2 that really annoyed. Gunston and the manner he left ie Trophy Night and Kurt going home close to home ok Sydney where he had an aunt or 4th cousin

 

[Jarman3]

Yes, that's where i got the story from ......was quite upset & said a lot of clubs are talking about the Tippett scenario & by extension other players FA Contracts

Does that really apply to the Tippett scenario, though? He went in the PSD, so it wasn't a trade or FA move.

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

On the poll. Not salty, life goes on and we get players in to the club

Though there were 2 that really annoyed. Gunston and the manner he left ie Trophy Night and Kurt going home close to home ok Sydney where he had an aunt or 4th cousin

Lever for me. He wasn't stuck out at Elizabeth while duds spudded it up and repeatedly lost matches.

He wasn't around when we were comedy capers off field - sacking recruiting gurus, copping draft sanctions, giving coaches life-long deals then sacking them, continuing to employ a CEO who'd been done for a series of rules breaches then tried to cover them up, playing before dwindling crowds at a shitty stadium. Leaving then would be understandable.

He'd been backed in heavily by the club, had become part of our first 22 very quickly, we had been in finals every year he's been here including a grand final, have a well regarded off-field structure and play in front of full houses every week at a great stadium.

 

[Bay62]

Hey Kurt
It's spelt

KARMA
-
And pronounced
**** you !

You are my favourite poster

 

[Bay62]

I believe with the unusual length of the Buddy contract, the AFL (being pissed off that he didn't go to GWS) have said that it will all be included in the cap, regardless of whether he retires earlier.

I recall reading at the time that the AFL went to each Sydney director in turn and had them sign a document saying that they clearly understood that Buddy’s salary would count against the cap for the duration of the contract

I certainly hope that is true

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

Lever for me. He wasn't stuck out at Elizabeth while duds spudded it up and repeatedly lost matches.

He wasn't around when we were comedy capers off field - sacking recruiting gurus, copping draft sanctions, giving coaches life-long deals then sacking them, continuing to employ a CEO who'd been done for a series of rules breaches then tried to cover them up, playing before dwindling crowds at a shitty stadium. Leaving then would be understandable.

He'd been backed in heavily by the club, had become part of our first 22 very quickly, we had been in finals every year he's been here including a grand final, have a well regarded off-field structure and play in front of full houses every week at a great stadium.

Makes me think that now we have our own sanfl team under our direction, has this improved the development our players? On the surface it certainly appears to he the case, compared to the days when interstate recruits had to head off to Elizabeth or Noarlunga to play with a 2nd set of teammates with a different coaching group.

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

Makes me think that now we have our own sanfl team under our direction, has this improved the development our players? On the surface it certainly appears to he the case, compared to the days when interstate recruits had to head off to Elizabeth or Noarlunga to play with a 2nd set of teammates with a different coaching group.

It would have to I think.

I was initially against the idea. Thought it would be too much trouble and organisation than it was worth but our development and off-field structure seems to be working fine.

Apart from occasionally having to field too many talls it seems to be a good system and the standard has been enough to test us - roughly even number of wins/losses overall which is perfect. Don't want to be too dominant regularly or getting clobbered regularly. Learn nothing from those games.

 

[Crowstar]

I thought coconut water had rejuvenating powers. Clearly not. Eat shit campaigner

 

[Sanders]

I choose to believe it because of the authority of the person that told me. You are welcome not to believe me - but you will never see any evidence.

Whoooosh

****ing John Reid could have told you, but it doesn’t mean it’s true

The other side say it was us

Pretending to know or have it on good authority is just parochialism

 

[Sanders]

It seems odd to me that the AFL apparently never published a final, detailed account of what went on? I mean they had the investigation and the tribunal hearings and handed out penalties, so presumably they were able to get to the bottom of it and know exactly who said and did what and who was in the wrong and to what degree.

But I've never actually seen a clear, final, official account of exactly what people did to attract the penalties that they copped. Just all the standard speculation and rumour-mongering and varying accounts depending on who you listen to, and regardless of who you listen to chances are that either (a) they don't actually know or (b) they were one of the parties involved so they may well be trying to downplay their own involvement. I certainly wouldn't trust any account provided by anybody in the Tippett camp or in our own club's administration at the time.

Exactly

 

[WaynesWorld19]

I realise the current rule, but there is a special Buddy exception rule as the AFL were pissed at the time that Sydney made a 10 year offer. As it stands, the 10 year contract will be included in their salary cap regardless of what happens (including payment/retirement).

Kane, the AFL can publicly spruik what they like .....but the AFL rules ultimately are what's applied .....can you imagine the outrage if clubs saw "tailored" rules for certain clubs

 

[WaynesWorld19]

Does that really apply to the Tippett scenario, though? He went in the PSD, so it wasn't a trade or FA move.

With Tippett, it was more SYD trying to water down what goes into their salary cap .....thus allowing AGAIN to use a big money contract to another player, from the money they save from Tippett

 

[Jbudds]

I actually think it doesn't matter who demanded it or not, we accepted it when we knew better, had years to come clean and chose not to. We even lied right unto the end, which if I remember rightly, was what got us a harsher penalty.

I agree.

 

[Jbudds]

Whoooosh

******* John Reid could have told you, but it doesn’t mean it’s true

The other side say it was us

Pretending to know or have it on good authority is just parochialism

Good Grief. Are you bored and looking for an argument. You must be.

All I have said is that someone of authority has told me a story that confirmed point 1 of that particular conversation I responded to. I have no reason to doubt what I was told.

I really don't care if you accept what I have relayed or not. I also don't care if you think I am pretending or being narrow minded (I like simple words I actually understand).

And I don't know John Reid.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

Good Grief. Are you bored and looking for an argument. You must be.

All I have said is that someone of authority has told me a story that confirmed point 1 of that particular conversation I responded to. I have no reason to doubt what I was told.

I really don't care if you accept what I have relayed or not. I also don't care if you think I am pretending or being narrow minded (I like simple words I actually understand).

And I don't know John Reid.

You must be new/infrequent around here... because yes, Sanders loves to argue, particularly with newer posters.

Don't take it personally.

 

[Jbudds]

You must be new/infrequent around here... because yes, Sanders loves to argue, particularly with newer posters.

Don't take it personally.

Infrequent Your signature says it best.