Tippett's Gone - READ RULES BEFORE POSTING

[SpeciousArgument]

Why do you guys keep making the connection of what we were willing to offer must be because we knew of the clause?

because its the most likely explanation.

 

[whatboutbob]

How much do we think will fall on Trigg/Reid vs the Club?

I struggle to envisage the AFL allowing the bulk of the punishment to be borne by individuals while allowing the club to walk away relatively free. That would only encourage future shenanigans.

 

[Heeney2Franklin]

because its the most likely explanation.

Even if we valued him at 23 + White given the circumstances?

Ireland said no Premiership players would be traded and he held firm on that i honestly think we got to learn of the agreement a few days before it all blew up.

 

[juzzo]

"Throughout the past three years and the recent trading period it was always the Club’s intention to comply fully with all AFL rules on the draft and player payments."
Can't believe they're still running with this. Man up and take responsibility!

 

[SpeciousArgument]

Unless it's written down somewhere or someone from Sydney is willing to come out and admit it, it's circumstantial at best (quite sure that's the word).

Or Blucher comes forward with the email trail to try to get leniency.

 

[jenny61_99]

Even if we valued him at 23 + White given the circumstances?

Ireland said no Premiership players would be traded and he held firm on that i honestly think we got to learn of the agreement a few days before it all blew up.

I've got some fabulous land for sale up here in Brisbane!

 

[BigLefty]

Can you tell me what defines Market Value of a player? its subjective per club not written in stone of what a club should offer

whatever the definition of market value is....

.....we planned to get him cheaply....

suggests your club weren't offering it.

 

[SpeciousArgument]

Even if we valued him at 23 + White given the circumstances?

Ireland said no Premiership players would be traded and he held firm on that i honestly think we got to learn of the agreement a few days before it all blew up.

Sounds like something you would say when you know something the public doesnt know. idont see why you think that strengthens your case.

I dont get how you think its reasonable to value him at 23+white (who our club didnt need and your club didnt want) and offer him $4mil.

by all reports Tippett knew he was going to sydney in august.

 

[mick_foley]

Even if we valued him at 23 + White given the circumstances?

Ireland said no Premiership players would be traded and he held firm on that i honestly think we got to learn of the agreement a few days before it all blew up.

You're not that naive to believe that? are you?

Even if Sydney, Brisbane or Gold Coast knew about the deal, the didn't do anything wrong. They are under no obligation to offer a fair deal.

 

[xchadders]

Even if Sydney, Brisbane or Gold Coast knew about the deal, the didn't do anything wrong. They are under no obligation to offer a fair deal.

this.
who cares what sydney offered, sure they were being stupid in their offers, but the fact of the matter is we tried to cheat.

 

[SpeciousArgument]

Can you tell me what defines Market Value of a player? its subjective per club not written in stone of what a club should offer

According to Emma Quayle the AFL were already suspicious of the white/23 deal. The AFL didnt believe it was market value. Apparently the only people who do believe it was market value are sydney supporters who flip between that and 'yeah well we could get him cheaply because he nominated us'

 

[BigLefty]

interestingly, the list of possible sanctions against the club didn't include the inability to trade the player. yet we weren't allowed to. seems like double dipping now if we get any further draft picks taken away.

the other thing is, now we know the charges, but we have no idea of the severity. we could still walk out of this with a minor punshment. (as unlikely as that is)

 

[Malifice]

Rule 17 it is.

17.1 Definitions

In this Rule 17, unless the contrary intention appears:-
“conduct prejudicial to the Draft”

means conduct which has the purpose or has or is likely to have the effect of hindering, prejudicing, interfering with or preventing the natural operation of the Draft as provided for by these Rules and without limiting the foregoing, includes entering into, making or being a party to any agreement, arrangement, understanding, promise or undertaking, whether express or implied and whether or not enforceable or intended to be enforceable, or entering into or carrying out any scheme, plan, proposal, action, course of action or course of conduct:-

(a) whereby any Player or Associate of a Player is offered or is intended or likely to receive benefits in cash or kind other than in accordance with these Rules;

(b) which has the purpose or which would have or would be likely to have the effect of preventing, hindering or discouraging a Player from accepting employment with another Club if drafted by that Club under these Rules or with any Club which would have been entitled under these Rules to consider drafting that Player;

(c) whereby any Player who has nominated and contracted in accordance with Rule 4.5.2 or 5.2 is offered or is intended or likely to receive benefits in cash or kind of a lesser amount or value than those specified in the Nomination Form and the Contract of Service referred to in Rule 4.5.2 or 5.2 as the case may be;

(d) whereby a Player or Players or Club shall become bound or obligated whether directly or indirectly to an exchange pursuant to Rule 4.3 or whereby a right is conferred on any Player pursuant to any contract, agreement, arrangement or understanding, to be exchanged to a Club or Clubs of his choice, at any time prior to the 15th day of October immediately preceding the date of the National Draft Selection Meeting, at which such exchange becomes or is intended to become effective.

“conduct in breach of Total Player Payments provisions”means conduct:

Which has the purpose or has or is likely to have the effect of contravening,circumventing or evading the operation of the Total Player Payments provisions in these Rules and, without limiting the foregoing, includes:-
(a) conduct in contravention of Rule 10;
(b) entering into, making or being a party to any agreement, arrangement, understanding, promise or undertaking, whether express or implied and whether or not enforceable or intended to be enforceable, or entering into or carrying out any scheme, plan, proposal, action, course of action or course of conduct which has the purpose or which would have or would be likely to have the effect of:-
(i) contravening, circumventing or evading the operation of the Total Player Payments provisions in these Rules;
(ii) offering or paying to a Player or an Associate of a Player benefits in cash or kind which would result or would be likely to result in the Total Player Payments limit of a Club being exceeded.

“the natural operation of the Draft provided for by these Rules” includes the operation of the Draft provided for in these Rules in accordance with:-

(a) the objectives set out at the commencement of these Rules;
(b) the spirit and intention of the Rules governing the Draft
(c) the object of ensuring that Clubs will not be hindered in exercising to the full any of their rights under Rules 4, 5 and/or 6; or
(d) the object of ensuring that Players will not be hindered in exercising to the full any of their rights under Rules 4, 5 and/or 6.

Lucky not to be charged with contravention of a few others.

For the record the process now is:

• All charged are presumed 'guilty' unless they can persuade the AFL that 'on the balance of probabilities' they did not engage in the conduct they are charged with (see above).
• The evidentiary and legal burden is on the accused; not on the AFL.
• Absent any representations that dispell them, the charges are considered 'proved'
• The accused parties should have been provided with a report detailing the charges and evidence that will be used to 'convict' them
• The hearing is informal, and there are no laws of evidence that apply.
• The actions of club personel are deemed to be the actions of the Club (i.e. if a club officieal is done, the club gets done)

Penalties:

17.19 Conduct Prejudicial to Draft –Sanctions

The following sanctions shall apply in every case where a charge of conduct prejudicial to the Draft is sustained, subject to the discretion of the Commission provided for in Rule 16.1.

17.19.1 Club

Where a charge is sustained against a Club, the sanction shall be:-
(a) a sanction of up to 100 Units;
(b) forfeiture for a period of 3 years of the right to employ or register as a Player of the Club the Player or any of the Players
to whom the conduct relates; and
(c) exclusion from any right to participate in up to all or part of four Draft Selection Meetings.

17.19.2 Player
Where a charge is sustained against a Player, the sanction shall be:-

(a) a sanction of up to 50 Units;
(b) where the conduct was intended or likely to have the effect of enabling the Player to play with a particular Club, forfeiture for a period of three years of the Player's right to play for or be a registered Player of that Club; and
(c) exclusion from any right to participate in the Draft for a period of twelve months from the date such charge is sustained.

17.19.3 Directors, Officers etc
Where a charge is sustained against a director, Officer, servant or agent of a Club, the sanction shall be a fine of up to 50 Units. No Club shall for such period as the Commission may determine permit or allow any such director, Officer, servant or agent against whom a charge is sustained to occupy any office or perform any functions (including without limitation attendance at matches and training sessions) for or on behalf of the Club.

In a nutshell, for draft tampering

• The club is looking at (worst case) a big fine, being barred from retaining Tippett for three years, and total exclusion from the draft for up to 4 years.
• Tippett is facing a fine and sitting out the game for 12 months.
• All agents and officials involved are facing a fine and being excluded from working with any AFL club or player for an arbitrary period.

It gets more interesting with breach of TPP. The penalty depends on whether the AFL view the club as having ‘voluntarily disclosed’ the deal:

17.20 Conduct in Breach of Total Player Payments Provisions - Sanctions

The following sanctions shall apply in every case where a charge of conduct in breach of the Total Player Payments provisions is sustained, subject to the discretion of the Commission provided for in Rule 16.1.

17.20.1 Club - Voluntary Disclosure
Where the breach of the Total Player Payments provisions was voluntarily disclosed by the Club to the Commission… and the amount by which the Total Player Payments was exceeded was greater than $100,000.00, the sanction shall be:-
(i) an amount equivalent to twice the excess;
(ii) exclusion from the right to participate in up to all or part of three Draft Selection Meetings; and/or
(iii) loss of or ineligibility to receive Premiership Points for past or future Matches.

17.20.2 Club - Non-Disclosure
Where the breach of the Total Player Payments provisions was not disclosed voluntarily by the Club to the Commission, the sanction shall be:-
(a) up to 150 Units or an amount equivalent to three times the excess, if that is greater;
(b) exclusion from any right to participate in up to all or part of four Draft Selection Meetings; and/or
(c) loss of or ineligibility to receive Premiership Points for past or future Matches.

In a nutshell

• Voluntary disclosure - $300,000 fine, exclusion from up to three Drafts and premiership points
• Non-Disclosure – The greater of a $400,000 fine (or 150 units) exclusion from up to four Drafts and loss of premiership points

17.20.3 Player
Where a charge is sustained against a Player, the sanction shall be maximum 50 Units.

17.20.4 Directors, Officers etc
Where a charge is sustained against a director, officer, servant or agent of a Club, the sanction shall be up to 50 Units. No Club shall for such period as the Commission may determine permit or allow any such director, Officer, servant or agent against whom a charge is sustained to occupy any office or perform any functions (including without limitation attendance at matches and training sessions) for or on behalf of the Club.

17.21 No Exchanges for Excluded Clubs
Any Club which is excluded from the right to participate in any National Draft shall not in the period prior to such National Draft Selection Meeting referred to in Rule 4.3.1 or otherwise be entitled to exchange any Player or Players on its Primary List for a Player or Players of another Club.

17.23 Sanctions Additional
To the extent that any other Player Rule provides for sanctions to be imposed for conduct for which a sanction is provided for under Rule 17, the sanction provided for under Rule 17 shall be in addition to the other sanctions.

Also the club will be prohibited from trade ‘week’.

Kurt is facing a further fine for breach of TPP. The officials and agents involved are facing a fine and sitting out the game for an arbitrary period.

The final clause (17.23) allows the AFL to also sting people involved with additional penalties for other breaches of the rules (such as Tippetts lying on his Statutory declaration and so forth).

 

[spenze]

Or Blucher comes forward with the email trail to try to get leniency.

That is where it'll get interesting.

 

[Huntercrow]

You're not that naive to believe that? are you?

Even if Sydney, Brisbane or Gold Coast knew about the deal, the didn't do anything wrong. They are under no obligation to offer a fair deal.

They would be under obligation to report any breaches they came across in their dealings during the trading period. Certainly should not try to benefit from these breaches. AFL may find these clubs were derelict in their duty.

 

[headache1]

Why do you guys keep making the connection of what we were willing to offer must be because we knew of the clause?

Because it's a ****ing obvious connection to make. Had no such agreement existed (I doubt the Swans would have bothered with Tippett), or the Swans just didn't know about it, how were they expecting to get a trade done with what they were offering up? Stop being so naive.

 

[headache1]

You're not that naive to believe that? are you?

Even if Sydney, Brisbane or Gold Coast knew about the deal, the didn't do anything wrong. They are under no obligation to offer a fair deal.

I'm not so sure about this. Whilst I'm not trying to say it in any way absolves the AFC of any guilt, if a team knows of a deal that is tantamount to draft tampering, and tries to take exploit that deal to their advantage, they're conspiring to draft tamper. The difficult part is proving it.

 

[Sanders]

That was to send a strong message to other clubs and our players that we won't be bent over but in the end we've bent ourselves over

Exactly

Giving money to charity on your terms is very different to being mugged on someone else's

In the first case you lose 20 bucks, in the second you lose 100, a few teeth, crack some ribs, pride, dignity, respect etc

 

[mick_foley]

They would be under obligation to report any breaches they came across in their dealings during the trading period. Certainly should not try to benefit from these breaches. AFL may find these clubs were derelict in their duty.

Under the letter of the law maybe they would have that obligation but I'd be very disappointed in my club if they actually did that.

If we knew about the deal and didn't use it to our advantage, I would be asking questions about my football department. That's applying that competitive advantage every club wants.

I understand this is a very stressful time for your club but I'd hope you would do the same. If the Crows were trying to trade for Ryan Griffen and knew about a deal to get him to Adelaide on the cheap, wouldn't you use that to your advantage?

BTW, I know how you feel as the Swans stole Lockett and Hall from us. Almost 1800 goals.

 

[Sanders]

Why do you guys keep making the connection of what we were willing to offer must be because we knew of the clause?

Um... Basic reasoning skills?

Look at the precedent of trades for major salaried players - the only model precedent his salary vs trade offer resembles is a free agent

 

[Tex200]

Even if we valued him at 23 + White given the circumstances?

Ireland said no Premiership players would be traded and he held firm on that i honestly think we got to learn of the agreement a few days before it all blew up.

Come on john, don't talk about the 23 white combination like it was an asset. I think we can all join the dots now. We wanted 23 alone but you would not trade. You woukd only give us 23 if we took white and his salary.

You were offering a second round pick IAW the agreement..we pushed for 23. You woukdnt deal. You weren't prepared to trade 23. In what world does that rationale belong in?

Once it came out you would not trade 23 alone its clear you knew of the agreement.

 

[Draft Bored]

I fear I'm going to miss the 20,000th post. Heading to bed.

 

[SydCrow]

thanks Malifice for the summary

17.19.2 Player
Where a charge is sustained against a Player, the sanction shall be:-

(a) a sanction of up to 50 Units;
(b) where the conduct was intended or likely to have the effect of enabling the Player to play with a particular Club, forfeiture for a period of three years of the Player's right to play for or be a registered Player of that Club; and
(c) exclusion from any right to participate in the Draft for a period of twelve months from the date such charge is sustained.

Was Kurt's particular club Brisbane, GC, Sydney or any/all clubs?

 

[Elite Crow]

thanks Malifice for the summary



Was Kurt's particular club Brisbane, GC, Sydney or any/all clubs?

Our club, the breach relates to him signing with us. If he wanted to stay and this came out he wouldn't be allowed to. One things for certain, Kurt isn't entering the National Draft. Would Sydney keep a spot available in the PSD in case he makes it? Irrespective, when we get whacked he will as well. I wouldn't be surprised if he misses 2013.

 

[pjcrows]

Haha. Haven't visited this thread for a few weeks. This is beyond mental.