Tippett's Gone - READ RULES BEFORE POSTING

[Wright Away]

Here is a Tippo Tip

Aggressive narcissism

This is Factor 1 in the Hare Psychopathy Checklist, which includes the following traits:

• Glibness/superficial
• Grandiose sense of self-worth
• Pathological lying
• Cunning/manipulative

• Lack of remorse or guilt
• Callous/lack of empathy
• Failure to accept responsibility for own actions

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narcissism#Aggressive_narcissism

 

[boffo]

Is every renewal or new membership now being spun as an endorsement of the CEO and the club's decision to keep him on?

Could the number of members signing now have anything to do with the club's own membership campaign and the looming deadline?

http://www.afc.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/4417/newsid/151909/default.aspx

"Adelaide’s 2013 membership campaign is in full gear, with the Club’s Reserved Seat renewal deadline fast approaching.

The closing date for existing Reserved Seat members is Friday 14 December.

Reserved Seat members who commit prior to December’s deadline will gain priority access to Adelaide Oval seat allocation.

Crows GM Supporter Services David Couch said eligible members will soon receive details on how to anchor their seat at Adelaide Oval.

“At this stage, simply renew your membership before December’s deadline to ensure you access the first round of allocations.”

The Club has also received enthusiastic interest from first time members."

Wasn't AO meant to get us an increase in members? Perhaps next year we can have a show of incompetence and a big AFL penalty to really boost membership even higher.

 

[jenny61_99]

Interesting post PJ, you could well be right, the Board meeting to reaffirm Trigg's tenure was held the day after wasn't it? Pretty quick to weigh up such a big decision.

Also, on his 5AA interview Triggy pretty much pointed the finger at JR several times (ignoring the fact Reidy was under his management - or should have been).

PJ: Do you know what prompted the club to suddenly go from fighting the charges to pleading guilty to all charges?
(My theory is the AFL confronted them with the paper trail of deliberate deception and the killer was they had signed false statutory declarations).

Just on the 'day in court' though, Triggy did have the day in court, but it was a closed court and because all parties had pleaded guilty the Commission didn't actually have to decide whose version of the facts was true.

It's pretty safe to say we haven't been told the full story (and never will be unless Trigg or JR write a book......now there's an idea!)

Reid was a rogue, an entity unto himself. He had pissed off most people he worked with. It doesn't surprise me one bit that he would have done this off his own bat. The way Triggy handled it was poor (not getting the rescission in writing) no doubt, but he is no cheat. I understand with the underwriting of TPPs, should they have had to pay any shortfall, it would have been included on reports to the afl.

 

[headache1]

So you're saying that as a CEO, Trigg was unable to properly manage the people below him? Or is this just an attempt to lump the blame on the guy who no longer works at the club?

 

[JP Sauce]

Interesting perspective from Chapman;
http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/sport...r-record-numbers/story-e6freck3-1226529992735

"There has been overwhelming support for Steven in the past five weeks," Chapman said.
"People who know Triggy and are able to put a personality to the face are understanding of the situation. They know Steven made a mistake but that it was an isolated one.
"He is a very good chief executive who should not be hung for one offence.
"People who don't know him are asking a lot of questions."

What nonsense. In other words:
"People who have a relationship with Trigg like him and naturally want him to keep his job. They're happy to overlook this huge mistake and others in the past because they think Trigg is a nice bloke. People who don't know him and therefore have no bias towards him are asking questions and being big stupid meanies!"

When did wanting to know the truth about things become so horrible?

 

[jenny61_99]

So you're saying that as a CEO, Trigg was unable to properly manage the people below him? Or is this just an attempt to lump the blame on the guy who no longer works at the club?

Reid was a rogue, but an icon of the club. He was very difficult to remove.

 

[Sanders]

but he is no cheat..

The facts are in now, and they disagree

Cheat is the nicest thing you might say about his recent public displays.

 

[headache1]

Reid was a rogue, but an icon of the club. He was very difficult to remove.

So you are trying to blame the guy who no longer works at the club then?

Your defence of Trigg has become as pathetic as he has in the last couple of days.

 

[skoobydoo]

Here is a Tippo Tip

Aggressive narcissism

This is Factor 1 in the Hare Psychopathy Checklist, which includes the following traits:

• Glibness/superficial
• Grandiose sense of self-worth
• Pathological lying
• Cunning/manipulative

• Lack of remorse or guilt
• Callous/lack of empathy
• Failure to accept responsibility for own actions

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narcissism#Aggressive_narcissism

Hmmmm........almost sounds like someone else.

 

[Allefgib]

To be fair to jen, her comments on reid are nothing new - shes been sharing that for years.

My understanding is that when reid was managed out, harper had less power granted him when he took the job.

one of my biggest worries was always if reid was going to be in a position, contracting to someone like the lions, to use his knowledge of tips agreement to screw adelaide over.

 

[dazz69au]

FWIW Andrew Demetriou thinks we are cheats

http://www.fiveaa.com.au/audio_andrew-demetriou-talks-penalties-to-cornesy-and-rowey_105973

 

[spenze]

Giants pass on signing Tippett



Tippett missing another set shot from 10 metres


The Greater Western Sydney Giants have announced they will not be trying to draft controversial AFL forward Kurt Tippett.
Giant's CEO David Matthews says the club will not select Tippett in next week's AFL preseason draft.
GWS's withdrawal means the Sydney Swans are in pole position to sign Tippett on December 13.
Matthews says the Giants wanted Tippett , but the club is simply not in a position to pay him what he wants.
"Internally we established a value for Kurt Tippett, which was about 550k based on his capabilities and his concussions and whilst we were hopeful, his terms submitted this week confirmed that we are simply not in a position to pay what he wants, particularly for a player who will miss most of the year through suspension," Matthews said in a statement.
"We are committed to developing a strong culture and playing list and also retaining that talent as we have done by signing several players to long term agreements.
"In players like Jon Patton and Jeremy Cameron we believe we have the nucleus of an exciting forward line in 2013 and beyond.
"We will continue to look closely at talented and mature players who become available and have an opportunity to add to our list at next week's preseason and rookie drafts."
Kurt Tippett was given a $50,000 fine and will miss the first half of the 2013 season for his part in the Adelaide Crows salary cap scandal.

 

[Geoffa32]

Did anyone think he was going to end up anywhere other than the Swans .

AFL dont want their draft tested in the courts.

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

Have people still been getting responses from Chapman this week?

Nothing yet.

He's obviously got a bit on but I'm happy to wait.

 

[JP Sauce]

Have people still been getting responses from Chapman this week?

Nothing yet.

He's obviously got a bit on but I'm happy to wait.

Care to post your e-mail? Or would you rather wait to see if you get a response?

 

[Wood_Duck]

Have people still been getting responses from Chapman this week?

Nothing yet.

He's obviously got a bit on but I'm happy to wait.

I think the questions have been getting harder.

 

[Wood_Duck]

Did anyone think he was going to end up anywhere other than the Swans .

AFL dont want their draft tested in the courts.

There were plenty of people that not only believed it, but guaranteed it. You know who you are.

 

[beartoo]

I'm torn between wanting him to go to the Swans so that they get a second-rate neverwas that will cost them mucho dinero, screw their 'culture' and unsettle their team, and wanting a Melbourne club to pick him up so that he doesn't get what he wants. Win/Win situation for me.

 

[ftmch]

So am I right I assuming that most of you have also lost faith in our Board, and therefore want them removed also? Because as I see it, it's almost a package deal now. If any of you feel they have made the decision to retain Trigg for any reason other than the good of the club, they have clearly been negligent in their duties, just like Trigg.

Is that it? Are most of you proposing that we move forward with a completely new CEO and Board?

 

[Elite Crow]

Have people still been getting responses from Chapman this week?

Nothing yet.

He's obviously got a bit on but I'm happy to wait.

You didn't sign off Carl Spackler did you?

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

Care to post your e-mail? Or would you rather wait to see if you get a response?

It's just all the stuff from this thread people have been asking. In hindsight I asked too many questions. Should have kept it to 2-3 key ones.

Hi Rob,

I have heard that you are currently answering questions from Crows fans regarding the Tippett saga so thought I would take the opportunity to send some through. I’m having trouble reconciling the club’s actions with what it is reported we have done.

I have been a member since 1992.

Thanks,

Carl


Question 1
If you believe what Trigg did was so innocuous that he should keep his job, why did you not defend the honour of the club vigorously rather than plead guilty to all charges and cop such heavy penalties?

Conversely, if you believe what Trigg did WAS deserving of the penalties and we were guilty, then why does he still have a job?

It seems like you are trying to have it both ways – we admit that we did something bad but no one is being held to account.

Question 1a
Why did you intimate to members that we were looking forward to the hearing so that we could tell our side of the story and that not everything the media was reporting was accurate… then just a couple of weeks later plead guilty to all charges and offer minimal explanation with no detail?

Question 2
Is the section of the Board minutes from 2011 published in The Age correct:

“Kurt Tippett: clause does exist in contract to trade to club of choice at end of two-year contract as it was the only way of re-signing him at the end of 2009. Confident of retaining his services beyond next year, however recognize the challenge ahead.”

Question 2a
If Trigg rescinded the “trade for a second round pick” part of the side deal weeks after it was originally signed in 2009, why did he confirm in the Board meeting of 2011 that it exists?

Question 2b
If the Board had confirmation at the August 2011 Board meeting that the side deal existed, why did you claim that the Board were completely unaware of the side deal until the 2012 trade period?

Question 2c
If the section of the Board minutes published by The Age is NOT correct, will we be taking any action against them given that it paints our club as liars?

Question 3
Did Trigg instruct Harper to accept a second round pick for Tippett prior to going on holidays? If so, why? As he believed the side deal had been rescinded.

Question 4
Who was it that vetoed the Tippett/Brisbane trade at the end of 2011 when it has been reported that both Noble and Rendell as well as Brisbane were keen for it to go ahead? And why was it vetoed?

Question 5
From The Age: If the underwritten independent agreements were thought to be legitimate, why did the club point out in writing to Blucher that they couldn’t be mentioned in any AFL documents but that they were agreed to, then sign documents for the AFL stating his contract as lodged contained everything the parties had agreed upon?

Question 6
Are the emails referred to in The Age article correct or have they been fabricated?

There are more emails. In one, Harper discusses with Trigg and Adelaide finance manager Grant Rutherford whether the club had room in its salary cap to cover an anticipated shortfall in Tippett's additional $200,000, expressing doubt the club could absorb it. The same concern is broached in another email, sent earlier this year to Trigg, Rutherford, list manager David Noble and general manager of finance and administration Shane Smallacombe, with Harper explaining the Crows were around $50,000 short on the $200,000 and that if they couldn't find other companies to chip in, the money would have to go into the club's salary cap. Adelaide could not afford to not pay Tippett the money, he said, because otherwise the letter might resurface, leaving the Crows facing a hefty AFL fine. The football manager finished with an instruction: ''please delete this email''.

Again, will we be taking action against The Age if they have fabricated this information?

Question 6a
When did Trigg reveal the third party payment section of the side deal to the Board? The exchanges above shows that at least five key staff were well aware of the side deals and that they knew they were illegal. If Trigg kept you in the dark for three years about this why does he still have a job?

Question 6b
Why didn’t Trigg rescind the third party payment section of the side deal at the same time as he rescinded the trade for a second rounder section, given that both were against AFL rules? If Trigg thought the 3rd party deals were ok because we didn’t go over the cap, then the fact that the AFL have not uncovered further breaches is good luck rather than good management.

Question 7
If Trigg wasn’t party to the initial side deal with Tippett in 2009 and only found out about it later, why in his statement did he blame time pressure and pressure from the public to retain Tippett for his actions?

Question 8
I didn’t understand the member’s update on December 1 and the stuff about Trigg knowing the ins-and-outs of Adelaide Oval, the sub license and our push for a reserves team making him the best man to lead us forward. Surely repairing the club’s current reputation as a corrupt organization takes precedence over these issues and protecting the integrity of the club is paramount. It sounds as though it was simply more convenient to keep him as CEO.

If we weren’t moving to Adelaide Oval would he have been sacked?

Question 9
Is one of the reasons Trigg is being retained because the club believes that these 3rd party deals are commonplace throughout the league and we were simply unlucky enough to be caught?

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

So am I right I assuming that most of you have also lost faith in our Board, and therefore want them removed also? Because as I see it, it's almost a package deal now. If any of you feel they have made the decision to retain Trigg for any reason other than the good of the club, they have clearly been negligent in their duties, just like Trigg.

Is that it? Are most of you proposing that we move forward with a completely new CEO and Board?

Yes.

It's spread up the chain.

Initially it was Reid. Trigg could have taken action here. Blown the whistle, sacked Reid (I know he'd retired but you get it) and we moved on.

He didn't. Instead took over the management/cover up of the deal. At that point it became a reid-Trigg package deal.

Now the Board had the chance to cut out the cancer by removing Trigg. They didn't. So now it is a Board, Trigg, Reid package deal.

 

[Elite Crow]

Wow, you've obviously scared him Carl

 

[headache1]

Well, I'm certainly glad I don't have to respond to that e-mail Carl.

Good stuff!

 

[JP Sauce]

Hey may have spent this whole time writing out a reply.

Or he might have put it straight in the "too hard" pile.