Its time to go Trigg!!!!

[Kane McGoodwin]

Yes, he gambled and lost. I'm sure you've made similar mistakes in your professional career as well.

Don't get me wrong.. I completely agree with the list of "facts" that KM provided, which combine to build a solid case for Trigg's departure. I just don't think he should be hung out to dry for backing the club in, given the "Sando Spike" we were hoping to see.

I have no problem & in fact supported AFC gambling on keeping Tippett, rather than trading him last year ... but had I been aware of the illegal agreement & the likely consequences if the gamble failed, then I wouldn't have given it a second thought about trading Tippett to the Lions. Surely only prudent thing to do.

 

[cmndstab]

The thing is, it's not like the Lions were offering peanuts. Pick 8, or pick 12 + a player was not Kurt's true value, but it was close enough when you consider what we were risking. Best case scenario if he left was that we were going to get a pick in the 20s. Given that we'd just come off two terrible years and were really only living on hope that 2012 would be any different, let alone a premiership-contending season, it's ridiculous that we didn't just take the trade.

 

[dazz69au]

The thing is, it's not like the Lions were offering peanuts. Pick 8, or pick 12 + a player was not Kurt's true value, but it was close enough when you consider what we were risking. Best case scenario if he left was that we were going to get a pick in the 20s. Given that we'd just come off two terrible years and were really only living on hope that 2012 would be any different, let alone a premiership-contending season, it's ridiculous that we didn't just take the trade.

Idiotic

EDIT: I agree BTW

 

[Sanders]

The thing is, it's not like the Lions were offering peanuts. Pick 8, or pick 12 + a player was not Kurt's true value, but it was close enough when you consider what we were risking. Best case scenario if he left was that we were going to get a pick in the 20s. Given that we'd just come off two terrible years and were really only living on hope that 2012 would be any different, let alone a premiership-contending season, it's ridiculous that we didn't just take the trade.

The lions guy said they gave us 2 options:
Pick 8
Or
Pick 12 & their end of first round compo pick which i think was 23 at the time

A pretty good haul in either case

 

[jenny61_99]

So Trigg gambled and lost. That's not understandable but unforgivable given that he was aware of the illegal agreement that has blown up in our faces.

See this is the thing that pisses me off. You all base your opinions on the fact that Trigg believed the agreement to be in play. There is this belief that he has deliberately mislead the board, and us. As far as he is concerned the agreement was null and void, nothing to see here. He never once lied because he didnt believe the agreement was in play. The only mistake I can see is him failing to get the rescinded agreement in writing. In the end event, this may see him lose his job, not because he lied and cheated because he didn't, but because he took a man at his word.

 

[Cap]

The problem is Jenny, what was the agreement doing there in the first place.

That is the biggest issue and the one most likely to cause the club a problem.

I tend to agree with you that Trigg has essentially been hoodwinked by the Tippett camp, but the problem is he and JR put the club in this position.

I think there is nothing more certain in football than heads will roll post November 30, it is just how far they roll that is the question.

 

[Southerntakeover]

See this is the thing that pisses me off. You all base your opinions on the fact that Trigg believed the agreement to be in play. There is this belief that he has deliberately mislead the board, and us. As far as he is concerned the agreement was null and void, nothing to see here. He never once lied because he didnt believe the agreement was in play. The only mistake I can see is him failing to get the rescinded agreement in writing. In the end event, this may see him lose his job, not because he lied and cheated because he didn't, but because he took a man at his word.

Well, no. It would be a serious mistake if he had thought that a) the agreement was 'not in play', and b) that the risks were mitigated even if it weren't.

 

[Elite Crow]

Well, no. It would be a serious mistake if he had thought that a) the agreement was 'not in play', and b) that the risks were mitigated even if it weren't.

It's pretty clear isn't it?

 

[Elite Crow]

The thing is, it's not like the Lions were offering peanuts. Pick 8, or pick 12 + a player was not Kurt's true value, but it was close enough when you consider what we were risking. Best case scenario if he left was that we were going to get a pick in the 20s. Given that we'd just come off two terrible years and were really only living on hope that 2012 would be any different, let alone a premiership-contending season, it's ridiculous that we didn't just take the trade.

Yep.

 

[Elite Crow]

See this is the thing that pisses me off. You all base your opinions on the fact that Trigg believed the agreement to be in play. There is this belief that he has deliberately mislead the board, and us. As far as he is concerned the agreement was null and void, nothing to see here. He never once lied because he didnt believe the agreement was in play. The only mistake I can see is him failing to get the rescinded agreement in writing. In the end event, this may see him lose his job, not because he lied and cheated because he didn't, but because he took a man at his word.

Jenny what should be pissing you off is your mate thought a verbal backflip cancelled a written agreement. How can you defend a CEO that is that naive and incompetent? Every time we miss a draft pick for the next couple of years or you see O'Brien carving it up for the Hawks, I hope you think of Triggy.

 

[Sanders]

Jenny what should be pissing you off is your mate thought a verbal backflip cancelled a written agreement. How can you defend a CEO that is that naive and incompetent? Every time we miss a draft pick for the next couple of years or you see O'Brien carving it up for the Hawks, I hope you think of Triggy.

Yup

Again I say what were the competent reasons for thinking he had rescinded the deal

It originated in writing and was rescinded how?

 

[Team DJ]

The thing is, it's not like the Lions were offering peanuts. Pick 8, or pick 12 + a player was not Kurt's true value, but it was close enough when you consider what we were risking. Best case scenario if he left was that we were going to get a pick in the 20s. Given that we'd just come off two terrible years and were really only living on hope that 2012 would be any different, let alone a premiership-contending season, it's ridiculous that we didn't just take the trade.

Surely no one on here still thinks that Tippett is worth pick 8. Or 12 +

 

[Vader]

Surely no one on here still thinks that Tippett is worth pick 8. Or 12 +

Just because you're pig ignorant and close minded about how good a footballer Tippett is, doesn't mean that the rest of us are that stupid as well.

Like him or loathe him (and I'm in the 2nd category, like all Crows fans right now), only an idiot would argue that Tippett is not a very good player who is worth pick 8 (and more) every single day of the week. Most independent judges going into trade week said that his value was 2x 1st round picks - one of which needed to be inside the top-10.

I really wish you'd stop repeating this drivel. It was boring a long time ago.

 

[Team DJ]

Just because you're pig ignorant and close minded about how good a footballer Tippett is, doesn't mean that the rest of us are that stupid as well.

Like him or loathe him (and I'm in the 2nd category, like all Crows fans right now), only an idiot would argue that Tippett is not a very good player who is worth pick 8 (and more) every single day of the week. Most independent judges going into trade week said that his value was 2x 1st round picks - one of which needed to be inside the top-10.

I really wish you'd stop repeating this drivel. It was boring a long time ago.

So im ignorant for disagreeing with you.
Or is it you that is pig ignorant for watching him with tri coloured glasses the past 3 years?

 

[DJ75]

Can anyone answer me a simple question;
We agreed to trade Tippett should he wish to leave for a minimum 2nd round pick. How exactly is this draft tampering? There is no draft involved. It is a trade agreement. It does not in any way damage the integrity of any draft.
If anything it is perhaps not in the spirit of trade week (a very minor issue), but there is NO draft tampering.

Am I wrong here?

 

[Team DJ]

Can anyone answer me a simple question;
We agreed to trade Tippett should he wish to leave for a minimum 2nd round pick. How exactly is this draft tampering? There is no draft involved. It is a trade agreement. It does not in any way damage the integrity of any draft.
If anything it is perhaps not in the spirit of trade week (a very minor issue), but there is NO draft tampering.

Am I wrong here?

My thoughts too
Luke Ball said he only wanted to go to the Pies. Thats tampering

 

[DJ75]

My thoughts too
Luke Ball said he only wanted to go to the Pies. Thats tampering

Exactly players do it all the time (Tippett Sydney only - he is NOT a free agent!!)
How is being willing to assist someone move a bad thing? This is a Non-issue.

 

[Vader]

Can anyone answer me a simple question;
We agreed to trade Tippett should he wish to leave for a minimum 2nd round pick. How exactly is this draft tampering? There is no draft involved. It is a trade agreement. It does not in any way damage the integrity of any draft.
If anything it is perhaps not in the spirit of trade week (a very minor issue), but there is NO draft tampering.

Am I wrong here?

Because trade week is one of the ways in which the draft is implemented.

So im ignorant for disagreeing with you.
Or is it you that is pig ignorant for watching him with tri coloured glasses the past 3 years?

No.. carrying on as if Tippett were a hack (a word you've used repeatedly)... when multiple clubs have offered him deals upwards of $600k per season (putting him in the top 10% of AFL earners no matter where he ends up), when there is near universal agreement (ignoring the occasional idiotic Sydney supporter) regarding his trade value. That's what makes you pig ignorant and flat out wrong.. but you do have a long history of being flat out wrong in most of your posts.

 

[BundyJack]

Yup

Again I say what were the competent reasons for thinking he had rescinded the deal

It originated in writing and was rescinded how?

Let me get this straight

clause is written, 3 weeks later rescinded via email - not much to hang people on!

 

[cmndstab]

jen - Did Trigg ever get confirmation from the Tippett camp that the deal was off? Simply saying it's off doesn't mean anything unless he did. And presumably he would have received it in writing, if so. (You don't change the fundamental terms of a written, signed contract just by having a phone call)

If that is the case, then it should dramatically reduce our punishment (perhaps to only losing a couple of average draft picks and nothing more?). It wouldn't remove our guilt since we did sign the illegal deal originally, but it would allow us to pin the blame squarely on Reid and indicate that our CEO nullified the deal at the earliest possible convenience.

If it's not the case, however, and you still maintain that Trigg believed the deal was history, then he is very much guilty of negligence. It's his job to be on top of these things. Not having stamped it out properly has now placed the club in the position to get whacked, and as our CEO that falls onto his shoulders.

If he has something in writing (or even a email reply, if it can be verified) from Blucher et al indicating that the deal was off, then he might just survive. The club will still receive a punishment (hopefully little more than we've already incurred) but Trigg won't take the lion's share of the blame. Anything else looks very bad for Trigg.

Surely no one on here still thinks that Tippett is worth pick 8. Or 12 +

I'm not sure at which point you expected me to have changed my mind. He hasn't played any footy since this whole saga came up. Should Tippett requesting a trade to Sydney lower his draft pick value?

In terms of what he brings on the field, Tippett was and is worth more than pick 8 in my opinion, yes.

 

[Thylacinus]

We have effectively lost our first five draft picks from this year. Two first round picks for Tippett, our first round and second round picks that we handed back, and the pre season draft pick. And that's before the hearing even begins. Good on you Trigg and his defenders/supporters.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

See this is the thing that pisses me off. You all base your opinions on the fact that Trigg believed the agreement to be in play. There is this belief that he has deliberately mislead the board, and us. As far as he is concerned the agreement was null and void, nothing to see here. He never once lied because he didnt believe the agreement was in play. The only mistake I can see is him failing to get the rescinded agreement in writing. In the end event, this may see him lose his job, not because he lied and cheated because he didn't, but because he took a man at his word.

Fact - Trigg knew about the original contract.
Fact - Trigg's job to rescind it/clean-up the mess, even if he was not the original creator. If he failed to do so - in writing, this is extremely incompetent. How many years has he had to fix this.
Fact - the buck stops with the CEO, particularly when he tried covered up this problem, rather than fixing it properly! Which could have been done relatively easily when he over-ruled Rendell's proposed trade with the Lions.

This whole mess is undefendable & someone(s) must be made accountable as this is not a small stuff up, but one of massive proportions.

 

[boffo]

The problem with one side pulling out of a written deal is that the other side could still enforce the original written agreement by taking it to court. This seems to be what happened......when we didn't do the Sydney trade the Tippett camp threatened to sue us, we THEN took it to the AFL. (This is yet to be confirmed of course).

With hindsight, we could have had it officially annuled at the time by taking it to the AFL then, when Trigg allegedly withdrew. 'Sorry Vlad, we just made an agreement with Tippett but having double checked the rules we might have stuffed up, so I've told them we can't do this, just wanted to let you know for transparency's sake.' Minor slap on the wrist I would have thought, for stupidity.

Three years later we look complicit in deception.

One thing confuses me though. When Noble was interviewed on 5AA during the trade period this year and asked if there was a secret agreement his equivocal answer indicated he believed there was still a secret agreement. He could have said a flat 'no' if he believed there was no secret agreement in play.

 

[boffo]

Fact - the buck stops with the CEO, particularly when he tried covered up this problem, rather than fixing it properly!

The Watergate scenario.....it's always the cover-up that really gets you in the end.

 

[Vader]

My thoughts too
Luke Ball said he only wanted to go to the Pies. Thats tampering

For once, we are in agreement. I cannot, for the life of me, understand how Ball got away with what he did, without getting done for Draft Tampering. One of the most blatant cases in years.