Remove this Banner Ad

Crows Chat That 'Doesnt Deserve Its Own Thread' Thread part 2

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Not sure where to put this, but something the southern football league want to bring in for u13s to u17s.
I have not seen such trash before
View attachment 2328831
No one wants lopsided games but that seems silly.

Far better would be to re-jig the draw for the second half of the season.

Bottom four teams only play each other. Top six teams only play each other.
 
Been waiting for footage of this to surface for a long time to confirm my thoughts at the time as a kid. Been maintaining for 26 years Brett Burton was totally robbed of the 1999 Mark of the Year with this, especially considering what Modra got away with with his MOTY literally 2 years earlier.

View attachment 2327960

Doesn’t use his hands to get up like the dickhead John Russo states, still pisses me off that it just ends up being a non-mark instead of an all-time great grab.

Side-note, not exactly new information but John Russo was an utter c**t as an umpire and ‘special’ comments pundit.

Listen to Russo’s commentary in the last quarter of the 1997 GF. Bloody one-sided - one of Jarman’s free where you see the pulling of the jumper and he didn’t think it was worthwhile - if a free is there it is there. End of story.
 
No one wants lopsided games but that seems silly.

Far better would be to re-jig the draw for the second half of the season.

Bottom four teams only play each other. Top six teams only play each other.
When my kid was in u11's there were regularly 100 point blowouts.

They got cleaned up by 100 points themselves, and also did it to other teams in the same league. It's very strange the levels of disparity in size and competitiveness between teams at that age. Some kids are hardcore, others just want to play on the grass. They are all in it together.

For my daughter, club netball has a regrading system where they shuffle which teams are in which divisions after the first 4 games of the season. This works pretty well, however has led to some dodginess. We have a team that had an average winning margin of 40 points or so over those first 4 games stay in the same league with us. Those girls are... uniformly very tall for their age.

Anyway, the point of this is: I doubt you can ever handle this perfectly (or even well?) at the Ammos level. However I'd think there should be a reasonable attempt to actually try.
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

On this day 10 years ago


That was such an awesome time to be a Crows supporter. Eddie lighting up the oval every other week. I've seen this clip so often that it's just normal now but it's easy to forget the insanity of deciding against a banana or dribbler, and instead attempting a left foot torp from the boundary, on the wrong side, in the wet, and just having it come off absolutely perfectly.

He's the closest we've come to Modra in terms of just weaving magic that shouldn't be possible.
 
Can someone please explain what exactly we did wrong with the tippet breach and how it differs from what Geelong seem to have mastered now in terms of third part deals . Not wanting to open a can of worms but would love to understand the difference. Is it that a tippet deal would actually be ok now ?
 
That was such an awesome time to be a Crows supporter. Eddie lighting up the oval every other week. I've seen this clip so often that it's just normal now but it's easy to forget the insanity of deciding against a banana or dribbler, and instead attempting a left foot torp from the boundary, on the wrong side, in the wet, and just having it come off absolutely perfectly.

He's the closest we've come to Modra in terms of just weaving magic that shouldn't be possible.
That was also the game where Danger and Fyfe went head to head for a combined 78 disposals, 2 goals 2, 14 tackles, 16 i50, 23 clearances, 297 fantasy and 346 supercoach points. Sandilands also monstered Sauce in the ruck with 69 hitouts to 22. Good game for a loss.
 
Can someone please explain what exactly we did wrong with the tippet breach and how it differs from what Geelong seem to have mastered now in terms of third part deals . Not wanting to open a can of worms but would love to understand the difference. Is it that a tippet deal would actually be ok now ?
3rd party deals -> In essence the club "promised" Tippett he'd earn x amount of $ from 3rd party deals. The problem was that Tippett couldn't be bothered turning up for some of the opportunities that the club helped organise. In the end the club paid Tippett the shortfall directly

Draft / trade tampering -> The club had a record of agreeing to trade Tippett (at some point in the future) for a second round pick
 
3rd party deals -> In essence the club "promised" Tippett he'd earn x amount of $ from 3rd party deals. The problem was that Tippett couldn't be bothered turning up for some of the opportunities that the club helped organise. In the end the club paid Tippett the shortfall directly

Draft / trade tampering -> The club had a record of agreeing to trade Tippett (at some point in the future) for a second round pick
I still don't understand how penalising yourself in a trade is tampering.
Stupid? yes. Should everyone involved have been sacked? yes.
But deserving a hefty sanction? Why?
 
That was also the game where Danger and Fyfe went head to head for a combined 78 disposals, 2 goals 2, 14 tackles, 16 i50, 23 clearances, 297 fantasy and 346 supercoach points. Sandilands also monstered Sauce in the ruck with 69 hitouts to 22. Good game for a loss.
Didn't realise that was the same game. I remember Walshy afterwards in the presser was questioned why we let that go and didn't tag Fyfe, and his response was something along the lines of "It's good for footy. We should be appreciating seeing two greats go at it."

The footy world lost such a great footy brain with him.
 
I still don't understand how penalising yourself in a trade is tampering.
Stupid? yes. Should everyone involved have been sacked? yes.
But deserving a hefty sanction? Why?
There were a few things going there:

The club "thought" Tippett would seek a trade home - specifically to GCS. They added in that detail after he initially looked at a move there

Doesn't matter if the trade option favoured Adelaide or not. It was introducing a predetermined outcome in what should've been an open negotiation at the time of the trade

The trade wouldn't be fair to Adelaide sure. Wouldn't have been fair to 16 other teams either

And Adelaide used that as bait in order to convince him to sign a contract and stay. Adelaide basically said, sign and stay for a few more years and if you want to go home at the end of it we'll make it a bit easier for you.

That was partly why it all unravelled. No one "in the know" or the AFL genuinely believed that Tippett at the time moving to Sydney on a $800K contract was worth the same as Jessie White and some other draft pick. There was quite a bit of pointing and "WTF is going on there"

Ultimately Trigg bulldozed the deal and it all turned into a steaming pile
 
Last edited:

Remove this Banner Ad

Didn't realise that was the same game. I remember Walshy afterwards in the presser was questioned why we let that go and didn't tag Fyfe, and his response was something along the lines of "It's good for footy. We should be appreciating seeing two greats go at it."

The footy world lost such a great footy brain with him.

And yet we then have our current coach ☹️☹️☹️☹️.

Chalk and cheese.
 
3rd party deals -> In essence the club "promised" Tippett he'd earn x amount of $ from 3rd party deals. The problem was that Tippett couldn't be bothered turning up for some of the opportunities that the club helped organise. In the end the club paid Tippett the shortfall directly

Draft / trade tampering -> The club had a record of agreeing to trade Tippett (at some point in the future) for a second round pick
What makes me about this is now AFL created shoes like ‘gettable’ are suggesting that clauses like this should be added to get players traced in prior to free agency.
 
No one wants lopsided games but that seems silly.

Far better would be to re-jig the draw for the second half of the season.

Bottom four teams only play each other. Top six teams only play each other.
Part of the problem I see is in the SFL is some clubs field 3-5 teams in the one comp while others struggle to field 1.
Who wants to go to a struggling club?
 
That was such an awesome time to be a Crows supporter. Eddie lighting up the oval every other week. I've seen this clip so often that it's just normal now but it's easy to forget the insanity of deciding against a banana or dribbler, and instead attempting a left foot torp from the boundary, on the wrong side, in the wet, and just having it come off absolutely perfectly.

He's the closest we've come to Modra in terms of just weaving magic that shouldn't be possible.
Hopefully we get to see plenty of regular Rankine moments in the future...
 
I still don't understand how penalising yourself in a trade is tampering.
Stupid? yes. Should everyone involved have been sacked? yes.
But deserving a hefty sanction? Why?
Because the club offered up penalties to protect Trigg, rather than protecting the club.

Compared to the Essendon doping scandal...
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

When my kid was in u11's there were regularly 100 point blowouts.

They got cleaned up by 100 points themselves, and also did it to other teams in the same league. It's very strange the levels of disparity in size and competitiveness between teams at that age. Some kids are hardcore, others just want to play on the grass. They are all in it together.

For my daughter, club netball has a regrading system where they shuffle which teams are in which divisions after the first 4 games of the season. This works pretty well, however has led to some dodginess. We have a team that had an average winning margin of 40 points or so over those first 4 games stay in the same league with us. Those girls are... uniformly very tall for their age.

Anyway, the point of this is: I doubt you can ever handle this perfectly (or even well?) at the Ammos level. However I'd think there should be a reasonable attempt to actually try.

I agree, you’d have to see that idea actually be executed before making a call. However, it’s not about “everyone gets a prize” which is what people will get upset about. Sport at that age is about having fun and letting kids learn the game. For the team that’s getting belted by 200 points and half the kids can’t get a touch no one is having fun or learning any skills/tactics. I doubt the team that’s doing the belting is improving that much either.

Basketball has had systems like that for years so the weaker team gets a chance to actually dribble, pass and shoot, so the idea makes sense, even if the execution isn’t perfect the first time.
 
No one wants lopsided games but that seems silly.

Far better would be to re-jig the draw for the second half of the season.

Bottom four teams only play each other. Top six teams only play each other.

What happens if the best bottom 4 side wins every game and makes finals.

I’ve got a better solution, realise there’s not actually a problem that needs solving.
 
Can someone please explain what exactly we did wrong with the tippet breach and how it differs from what Geelong seem to have mastered now in terms of third part deals . Not wanting to open a can of worms but would love to understand the difference. Is it that a tippet deal would actually be ok now ?

Do we yet know what Cats have done? Something about W player and a car, but haven’t heard anything else yet. In terms of us, I never understood the issue with handicapping ourselves and locking in a low trade value. A clear breach though is that when contracts are lodged with AFL there’s a declaration that the contract includes all the terms of the deal. This wasn’t true and it formed part of our and Tippett’s punishments.

The big one for us was actively redirecting Balfours sponsorship money from us to Kurt. That’s a massive breach and deserving of strong draft sanctions.
 
I still don't understand how penalising yourself in a trade is tampering.
Stupid? yes. Should everyone involved have been sacked? yes.
But deserving a hefty sanction? Why?

That wasn’t everything though. Plus the original penalty offered was only 1 year of draft sanctions plus sackings. We refused to sack Trigg in favour of the extra draft penalties.
 
There were a few things going there:

The club "thought" Tippett would seek a trade home - specifically to GCS. They added in that detail after he initially looked at a move there

Doesn't matter if the trade option favoured Adelaide or not. It was introducing a predetermined outcome in what should've been an open negotiation at the time of the trade

The trade wouldn't be fair to Adelaide sure. Wouldn't have been fair to 16 other teams either

And Adelaide used that as bait in order to convince him to sign a contract and stay. Adelaide basically said, sign and stay for a few more years and if you want to go home at the end of it we'll make it a bit easier for you.

That was partly why it all unravelled. No one "in the know" or the AFL genuinely believed that Tippett at the time moving to Sydney on a $800K contract was worth the same as Jessie White and some other draft pick. There was quite a bit of pointing and "WTF is going on there"

Ultimately Trigg bulldozed the deal and it all turned into a steaming pile

Last bit isn’t correct. We tried accepting the deal and the AFL blocked it.
 
Do we yet know what Cats have done? Something about W player and a car, but haven’t heard anything else yet. In terms of us, I never understood the issue with handicapping ourselves and locking in a low trade value. A clear breach though is that when contracts are lodged with AFL there’s a declaration that the contract includes all the terms of the deal. This wasn’t true and it formed part of our and Tippett’s punishments.

The big one for us was actively redirecting Balfours sponsorship money from us to Kurt. That’s a massive breach and deserving of strong draft sanctions.
Interesting listening to Adam Simpson the other day and Gerard suggested something about a team doing something and Simpson made a quip, “probably Geelong” can’t remember what exactly it was but it seems the industry seem to think Geelong are pretty shady.
If you’ve can get away with it all power to you.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Crows Chat That 'Doesnt Deserve Its Own Thread' Thread part 2


Write your reply...

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top