Tippett's Gone - READ RULES BEFORE POSTING

[CROUCH #2]

should find out today

 

[The Sloane Ranger]

should find out today

What gives you confidence ??

 

[Geoffa32]

I just had a quick read through the last CBA.

http://www.afl.com.au/portals/0/afl...collective_bargaining_agreement_2007_2011.pdf


Under section 16, I cant see what we have done wrong in regards to the $200k. Unless of courese our additional payments went over the clause 16.2 amounts. Stated in clause 16.3 that if they dont we dont have to inform the AFL. I can not see anywhere that it is against the rules for a club to underwrite additional payments.

16.8 suggests Tippet needed to tell the AFL of the details of the agreements.



Section 17 talks about additional clauses, again there is no suggestion that it is against the rules that a club and player agree on a "price" to be traded at.


We probably did something wrong, bending the rules, but I cant see exaclty how what we did can be deemed wrong according to the set rules.

 

[headache1]

Dreamin' buddy, a once in a decade warning is coming

Big fine (half suspended as many have suggested)
Loss of 1st and 2nd round picks in 2013 and 2014 - it is too late for this years draft
Reid and Trigg banned from any AFL club positions for 2 years
Blucher 2 years de-registration
Velocity Sports to show cause why they should not be de-registrered
Tippett 10 weeks de-registration including pre-season so probably 6 real games
Sydney small fine for not dobbing

Very harsh but won't come back and hurt you for a few years yet

Nobody even knows exactly what it is that we've done yet. If it's only what is being reported, that is incredibly over the top. It's harsher than Carlton's penalty, and that came with a far more severe breach, and was one of a string of instances of exceeding the salary cap (which we haven't even done in this case). We've already lost one of our most valuable assets for nothing. I think you should stop taking everything Rucci writes as gospel.

 

[dazz69au]

Its the AFL mate they will find something to screw us with

 

[headache1]

Its the AFL mate they will find something to screw us with

They're already dealing with one basket case in SA. I highly doubt they'd want to be dealing with two in the future.

 

[dazz69au]

Nobody even knows exactly what it is that we've done yet. If it's only what is being reported, that is incredibly over the top. It's harsher than Carlton's penalty, and that came with a far more severe breach, and was one of a string of instances of exceeding the salary cap (which we haven't even done in this case). We've already lost one of our most valuable assets for nothing. I think you should stop taking everything Rucci writes as gospel.

I read an article quoting Jeff Kennett saying what we did should be in the same basket as the punishment Melbourne should get, he also thinks it should be somewhere around Carltons punishment

 

[dazz69au]

They're already dealing with one basket case in SA. I highly doubt they'd want to be dealing with two in the future.

We can only hope

 

[headache1]

I read an article quoting Jeff Kennett saying what we did should be in the same basket as the punishment Melbourne should get, he also thinks it should be somewhere around Carltons punishment

Jeff Kennett is just a w***er of the highest order though. Would be really interesting to see what the AFL found if they decided to examine Hawthorn's records with a fine tooth comb. I'm not sure they even have a salary cap.

 

[WhiskeyTangoFoxtrot]

I read an article quoting Jeff Kennett saying what we did should be in the same basket as the punishment Melbourne should get, he also thinks it should be somewhere around Carltons punishment

You paid attention to something that Jeff 'look at me, I'm still relevant' Kennett had to say. There's your problem right there.

 

[Gary17]

18000+ posts and you still have no idea inregards to Kurntly's persona - allow me to spell it out

IT'S ALL ABOUT KURNT

he would be absolutely shattered if he doesn't get what he wanted and misses Sydney and goes "inland". GWS is not yet in the "cool" social circles, they are the poor cousins in many regards and Kurnt will not be happy about that, sure he will pocket the cash but GWS will not currently fit into his plans, rest assured right now he will be sulking!

And with Folau gone he will become one of the big names used to promote GWS. If he hated the fishbowl of Adelaide...

 

[dazz69au]

Never said I agreed with the clown

 

[The Sloane Ranger]

I can see the AFL releasing their findings of their investigation by mid next week however holding back the decision on any penalty until the commission meets just prior to the draft

 

[headache1]

And with Folau gone he will become one of the big names used to promote GWS. If he hated the fishbowl of Adelaide...

The difference is, that nobody in Western Sydney will care. Definitely not a fishbowl environment.

 

[Crowbots are dead]

I read an article quoting Jeff Kennett saying what we did should be in the same basket as the punishment Melbourne should get, he also thinks it should be somewhere around Carltons punishment

Its amazing how many ,so called, 'professional' high profile people like JK are playing judge and jury (and executioner) after reading articles which are low on detail (and maybe accuracy) and /or listening to the AFL rumour mill. The only ones with the detailed facts required to make a judgement are those conducting the investigation. How can anyone with a shred of credibility say whether the punishment should be more , the same or less than Carlton. You would think that as an ex politican he would know better. But hes always been a speak first and think later kinda guy.

 

[Crowbots are dead]

The difference is, that nobody in Western Sydney will care. Definitely not a fishbowl environment.

He might want to talk to Tex to get some tips on growing a mullet though

 

[headache1]

Its amazing how many ,so called, 'professional' high profile people like JK are playing judge and jury (and executioner) after reading articles which are low on detail (and maybe accuracy) and /or listening to the AFL rumour mill. The only ones with the detailed facts required to make a judgement are those conducting the investigation. How can anyone with a shred of credibility say whether the punishment should be more , the same or less than Carlton. You would think that as an ex politican he would know better. But hes always been a speak first and think later kinda guy.

He just wants to try and make sure that an opposition team is as disadvantaged as possible. He's been trying to use this whole saga to Hawthorn's advantage.

He might want to talk to Tex to get some tips on growing a mullet though

 

[dazz69au]

He just wants to try and make sure that an opposition team is as disadvantaged as possible. He's been trying to use this whole saga to Hawthorn's advantage.

We lose our first rounder and Hawthorns is upgraded by one spot

 

[Gary17]

He's playing for Port?

He said 3-4 years, not 30-40...

 

[Slippery Pete]

Jeff Kennett is just a Moo of the highest order though. Would be really interesting to see what the AFL found if they decided to examine Hawthorn's records with a fine tooth comb. I'm not sure they even have a salary cap.

If we was our president, let's face it, we'd probably love him.

 

[dazz69au]

If we was our president, let's face it, we'd probably love him.

We would need to find him a new jacket

 

[Draft Bored]

I'm starting to become really irritated by how long this is taking... which is fantastic because it must be 100x worse for Kurt.

 

[Thylacinus]

They're already dealing with one basket case in SA. I highly doubt they'd want to be dealing with two in the future.

So you are saying the AFL is corrupt and will bend things for pragmatic reasons? I guess there will always be that temptation but there are some things that will not live up to scruitiny.

 

[Geoffa32]

I'm starting to become really irritated by how long this is taking... which is fantastic because it must be 100x worse for Kurt.

It is taking so long because it seems to be quite ambiguous as to whether we broke a rule or not.

Chiefly, which rule states that a player can not have implied into a contract that the club will assist in moving a player on to their club of choice if they want to leave, when the AFL allows it during trade week. They other being have the AFC erred in not disclosing that they would underwrite a shortfall in expected Third Party Additional Payments, is there a requirement for such a disclosure if the payments fall under the prescribed allowable limits.

 

[Defacto]

It is taking so long because it seems to be quite ambiguous as to whether we broke a rule or not.

Chiefly, which rule states that a player can not have implied into a contract that the club will assist in moving a player on to their club of choice if they want to leave, when the AFL allows it during trade week. They other being have the AFC erred in not disclosing that they would underwrite a shortfall in expected Third Party Additional Payments, is there a requirement for such a disclosure if the payments fall under the prescribed allowable limits.

thats a very optimistic way of looking at it