The guarantee is the breach, its straight out cheating. you have to wonder how we intended to make good on that guarantee if there wasn't room in the cap.
If the guarantee wasn't declared, we sure as **** weren't declaring the under the table payments if we were over.
If we were confident we'd not have needed the guarantee, we could have just paid him straight up
I think you're misunderstanding what we were confident about - not needing the guarantee is not the same as paying it. But we SHOULD have declared it, especially as we never needed it.
Maybe I'm misremembering, as I don't remember the part DABM mentioned about reassigning existing sponsorships - but the conversation was "you can make another $200k in being a brand ambassador for Adelaide businesses." "But what if I don't?" "mate, you will. Have you seen this town? But look - in some fantasy world where you don't, we'll make it up."
Doesn't matter if you were RIGHT and he did make the cash, offering the safety net was the problem.
Of course - the fact that we discuss this level of regrettable incompetence as if it is the same as a program of secret human experimentation is laughable.
Ours is the equivalent of driving 85 in a 60 zone. Essendon is the equivalent of driving at .15.