Tippett's Gone - READ RULES BEFORE POSTING

[Elder van Berlo]

I think Caro is more or less on the money actually Jenny. I'm pretty sure the four silks would be acting for the four parties separately - ie AFC, Trigg, Harper and Reid.

I also know almost for a fact that shortly before the adjournment was announced, all four were not separately represented, but neither were they all jointly represented.

I can only conclude from that, that somebody realised there was a conflict of interest and so barrister X couldn't act for more than one party, which led to new counsel being engaged for one or more of the AFC related parties, which led to the adjournment as the new counsel didn't have time to prepare before Monday, having only been briefed late last week.

 

[boffo]

Oh man, [if we got a light penalty the Main Board] would actually implode.

One d1ickhead Freo supporter said if he was running the AFL he would strip us of premiership points next year but the number of points deducted should be determined late in the season so that we just miss out on the finals!

 

[Schulzycrow]

Anyone who can see that a club will benefit significantly from losing an extra game can predict what the outcome will be, I remember changing my tip in a match between Carlton and Melbourne when I found out that a priority pick was at stake, I can't remember the year but in the end I was proven correct. Now the AFL have egg on their faces for all the times they asserted that tanking didn't exist.

BTW, did you really mean Good Morning Vietnam or Rocky?

EDIT: The Carlton vs Melbourne game might have been round 21 2009, Melbourne had beaten Fremantle by more than ten goals the previous week so I tipped them for an upset against Carlton. Found out later that Melbourne were on four wins and another would cost them the priority pick, so changed it to Carlton at the last minute.

GMV. Sorry I didn't reply sooner...went out to get some tea and three pages had gone past..

 

[boffo]

It has shown what a mess of things the ASA (additional service agreements) the AFL is trying to say we've been tightening this since Feb...

Something's changed, but I think they've tightened up enforcement of the ASAs rather than the rules themselves (which were part of the Collective Bargaining Agreement.)

 

[boffo]

Not necessarily, he might be de-registered.

The only down-side to us getting off lightly is that Yippett would too....although his side did instigate the side-deal.

 

[headache1]

Yes actually he is.

Because anybody who has a different view of events to him, or you, is automatically a w***er? Have I gone and called you an idiot or a w***er because we have a different opinion about this particular matter?

We know the club had a side deal with Tippett regarding trading him elsewhere, because they admitted as much. We know that we took this to the AFL, and have subsequently been investigated, and charged with various offences. We also know that this investigation caused us to lose Tippett for nothing. I don't think it's absurd to hold the CEO responsible for such things, seeing as being responsible for the actions of a company, or club in this case, is a burden attached to the role of CEO.

Was there a value attached to the trade agreement, or not? I guess we'll find that out on November 30th, but if there wasn't an artificially low value attached to the agreement, it would seem strange that the AFL would not allow us to make a trade that was deemed as adhering to said agreement.

Then there's the matter of whether or not he signed off on the deal. If he did, that doesn't bode well for him. If he didn't, then he's got no idea what the people below him are actually doing, which also doesn't bode well for him as a CEO.

 

[Wright Away]

Mooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo mooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

 

[boffo]

In September 2009 the Adelaide Crows lost a close Semi Final to the 'Pies by 5 points to finish their season.


AFL staff writer Ben Collins wrote at the end of his assessment of Adelaide in the AFL Record Season Guide 2010 just before the 2010 season started:

" Few would be shocked if the Crows won their third flag this season. Their premiership window is wide open".

Funny how our judegement goes out the window when we think the premiership window is wide open. I'm thinking of the Carey trade, the final piece in our path to the flag.

That's the romance of sport I guess.

 

[boffo]

The agreement was kept quiet because it subverted the AFL's rules. However, why would we have gone to the AFL with it if it was not being held over our head as leverage by the Tippet camp to accomplish what they wanted?

Because we thought we would get away with doing a (let's just say) private deal with the Tippetts. We thought we could trust them. WRONG.

 

[Moonwatcher]

So can Tippett be delisted if he doesn't turn up to training?

 

[Vigawla]

Came across this:

Cross between an Elizabeth/American/Swedish accent.

 

[moogerfooger]

KT still needs to go somewhere though.

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/tippett-legal-demand-to-be-set-free-20121119-29m9g.html

this development tells us KT is genuinely fearful of ending up at GWS. maybe Jude Bolton agreeing to play on means the Swans no longer have the cash to outbid everyone else?

Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/tippett-legal-demand-to-be-set-free-20121119-29m9g.html#ixzz2Cgs7CKPr​

 

[Vigawla]

Chapman on AA tonight said something about insurance in place for these sorts of matters will cover it.

Lucky they're with AAMI.

 

[Tex200]

That seems to be in short supply around here so its no wonder

Given this new air of triumph can you share with me what has changed?

Seriously I'm not sure what these new developments are that everyone is celebrating

It is indeed an unpalatable turn of events for you isnt it?

 

[Sanders]

It is indeed an unpalatable turn of events for you isnt it?

You don't know either?

 

[FR0GGY]

To many Balfour pies!

Not quite, it looks as if the balfours pies haven't even been consumed yet.

 

[ManInTheArena]

Good thing Tippett went home and escaped all of the fishbowl media attention

 

[jenny61_99]

I think Caro is more or less on the money actually Jenny. I'm pretty sure the four silks would be acting for the four parties separately - ie AFC, Trigg, Harper and Reid.

I also know almost for a fact that shortly before the adjournment was announced, all four were not separately represented, but neither were they all jointly represented.

I can only conclude from that, that somebody realised there was a conflict of interest and so barrister X couldn't act for more than one party, which led to new counsel being engaged for one or more of the AFC related parties, which led to the adjournment as the new counsel didn't have time to prepare before Monday, having only been briefed late last week.

My mail is that that is not the case, rather as I suggested.

 

[FR0GGY]

Good thing Tippett went home and escaped all of the fishbowl media attention

Which home would that be?

 

[jt_mcleod]

well i hope we dont lose draft picks so i can laugh at eveyones face at work most of them are port supporters

 

[jt_mcleod]

well i hope we dont lose draft picks so i can laugh at eveyones face at work most of them are port supporters

 

[jt_mcleod]

damn this thread isnt going to stop

 

[Stripple]

But if Trigg had had the discussion with blucher saying this was no longer an option and blucher agreed, why would he have even had to worry about it? You all criticize him for going overseas for his 50th birthday when "he knew this was going to go down" when he actually didn't even think it was in play.

But we don't know that Jenny you are assuming a version of events that is favorable towards trigg with out any evidence. And that's fine except when you criticize others for doing the same only when they latch on to a version that is against the one you want.

 

[Stripple]

Wouldnt that be the AFL's doing though? Not Triggs?

If the deal didn't exsist it wouldn't of happened. Plain and simple.

 

[jenny61_99]

But we don't know that Jenny you are assuming a version of events that is favorable towards trigg with out any evidence. And that's fine except when you criticize others for doing the same only when they latch on to a version that is against the one you want.

You are making assumptions.