Tippett's Gone - READ RULES BEFORE POSTING

[SpeciousArgument]

Go back and read my previous post on the subject. You will find, I've said numerous times that he have to wait until we find everything out before passing judgement, and it works both ways. Lets gain all the information on Kurt Tippett as well before making that call.

Oh what!!!! yes, you don't what to know that.

less has been reported on triggs behaviour and involvement than tippetts, and yet youre holding judgement on tippett and ready to sack trigg. consistency isnt your strong suit...

oh wait, you dont want to know that.

 

[alex_is_on_fire]

less has been reported on triggs behaviour and involvement than tippetts, and yet youre holding judgement on tippett and ready to sack trigg. consistency isnt your strong suit...

oh wait, you dont want to know that.

Trigg is a CEO looking after a football club, Tippett is a football player looking after his own interest. You really are a stupid **** if you can not see the difference.

We have to wait until both sides of the story are public knowledge until we sack anyone. Saying that, one is already gone and isn't coming back, the other is still the CEO of the football club. You do the maths.

 

[SpeciousArgument]

You stupid prick.

Trigg is a CEO looking after a football club, Tippett is a football player looking after his own interest. You really are a stupid **** if you can not see the difference.

We have to wait until both sides of the story are public knowledge until we sack anyone. Saying that, one is already gone and isn't coming back, the other is still the CEO of the football club. You do the maths.

I take it you arent a maths teacher then.

One has left and isnt coming back and the other hasnt and therefore we should sack the one thats still here so its even or something?

resorting to personal insults wouldnt be necessary if you had an argument with any merit. i guess tahts the one area you are consistent, losing your shit when people dont agree with you.

 

[alex_is_on_fire]

less has been reported on triggs behaviour and involvement than tippetts, and yet youre holding judgement on tippett and ready to sack trigg. consistency isnt your strong suit...

Went back and read this...

You're accusing me of not having an argument? well champ, you are now resorting to things that can not be measured as a form of defence.

I've never said Trigg should be sacked right now. Others have, but I guess you're not going to argue with them are you?

My opinion has always been about waiting and seeing before acting. Same as Kurt Tippett. Lets wait and see what all the facts are and then pass judgement. However, since I'm not caring if who Kurt Tippett plays for and not willing to call him a childish name, I'm some king of evil person.

Lets wait and see what the outcome is. The board are at least 50% to blame for this mess but you're only willing to apply 100% of it to Kurt Tippett.

 

[Mismatched]

Is this a fact?

If it is and we didn't pull the trigger on the trade. We deserve everything we get.

Certainly seems our hierarchy have been operating with an arrogant sense of entitlement or bulletproof-ness. Whilst its good at times to back yourself in, however you have to know when to cut your losses and run. Our club seems to believe it is above this, it shouldn't need to cut its losses. This is what gets clubs into trouble.

We have never struggled as a club, we've got a strong supporter/commercial base and entered the league at a time when we had a strong pool of players to draw upon and were able to make the most of early concessions. To a certain extent we lucked our way to 2 premierships and since then have taken an attitude of "she'll be right". Whilst this is probably the first time it's truly bitten us in the arse, I think it's also much of the reason we've failed to win a premiership in 14 years.

Our administration has never really had to make any tough decisions, they've always been extremely reactive. Many here believe Craig was pushed, personally I don't believe Trigg had the balls to do it. Similar to this Kurt issue, whilst I can understand doing our absolute upmost to keep Kurt 3 years ago, the writing was clearly on the wall last year. This was our perfect chance to make a statement with Sando coming in, "if your not 100% committed, then we don't want you". It is clear Kurt wasn't and retaining him was purely an act of sticking our head in the sand.

Trigg would have made a lot of friends last year if he'd come out and said "Kurt has always struggled adapting to life in Adelaide, 2 years ago we threw everything into keeping him and rectifying this, it has become apparent that he is still not 100% committed to this club long term and thus we've decided to part company and search for players who are". Instead we've been quite happy to make the immediate popular decisions, whilst at the same time deceiving the supporters and sponsors with spin, instead of truly looking out for the long term future of our club.

Last year was our chance to get out of this mess with dignity, instead we ignored the truth of the situation hoping that all would be okay...

 

[SpeciousArgument]

Went back and read this...

You're accusing me of not having an argument? well champ, you are now resorting to things that can not be measured as a form of defence.

I've never said Trigg should be sacked right now. Others have, but I guess you're not going to argue with them are you?

My opinion has always been about waiting and seeing before acting. Same as Kurt Tippett. Lets wait and see what all the facts are and then pass judgement. However, since I'm not caring if who Kurt Tippett plays for and not willing to call him a childish name, I'm some king of evil person.

Lets wait and see what the outcome is. The board are at least 50% to blame for this mess but you're only willing to apply 100% of it to Kurt Tippett.

So youre now admitting to not reading posts before you rant about them and call people names?

remember this?

Well **** me.

It's time to go......Ben, Estelle, Layla or Steven Trigg?

Steven Trigg - you are the weakest link - Good buy

 

[alex_is_on_fire]

Certainly seems our hierarchy have been operating with an arrogant sense of entitlement or bulletproof-ness. Whilst its good at times to back yourself in, however you have to know when to cut your losses and run. Our club seems to believe it is above this, it shouldn't need to cut its losses. This is what gets clubs into trouble.

We have never struggled as a club, we've got a strong supporter/commercial base and entered the league at a time when we had a strong pool of players to draw upon and were able to make the most of early concessions. To a certain extent we lucked our way to 2 premierships and since then have taken an attitude of "she'll be right". Whilst this is probably the first time it's truly bitten us in the arse, I think it's also much of the reason we've failed to win a premiership in 14 years.

I feel the commercial and football market in Australia has finally caught up with the club. After 20 years, the other clubs have caught up and then gone past. Due to our membership base and strong financial position we have been able to be an innovative club on and off the field, shown we are a market leader and have strong influence on the competition away from the field. However, over the past 4 to 6 years - those things have changed and you are true, we have now been bitten on the arse with what we have done.

South Australia have fallen way down the pecking order in importance towards the AFL and I feel the club know this and have had to keep players like Tippett to keep a semblance of importance on a national scale. 15 years ago, I don't feel this was an issue, now it is.

Our administration has never really had to make any tough decisions, they've always been extremely reactive. Many here believe Craig was pushed, personally I don't believe Trigg had the balls to do it. Similar to this Kurt issue, whilst I can understand doing our absolute upmost to keep Kurt 3 years ago, the writing was clearly on the wall last year. This was our perfect chance to make a statement with Sando coming in, "if your not 100% committed, then we don't want you". It is clear Kurt wasn't and retaining him was purely an act of sticking our head in the sand.

Trigg would have made a lot of friends last year if he'd come out and said "Kurt has always struggled adapting to life in Adelaide, 2 years ago we threw everything into keeping him and rectifying this, it has become apparent that he is still not 100% committed to this club long term and thus we've decided to part company and search for players who are". Instead we've been quite happy to make the immediate popular decisions, whilst at the same time deceiving the supporters and sponsors with spin, instead of truly looking out for the long term future of our club.

Last year was our chance to get out of this mess with dignity, instead we ignored the truth of the situation hoping that all would be okay...

Yeah, I think you're right.

 

[alex_is_on_fire]

Gee's - we can hit 20,000 tonight.

Just keep talking the shit you are, and we can be there in 15 mins

 

[Geoffa32]

 

[FR0GGY]

I know right. Goon on a Wednesday night rules.



Some seem to take more serious than others.

This is serious business

You on the sauce?

 

[*PAF]

Gee's - we can hit 20,000 tonight.

Just keep talking the shit you are, and we can be there in 15 mins

 

[SpeciousArgument]

things a little quiet on the port board?

 

[Tex200]

Certainly seems our hierarchy have been operating with an arrogant sense of entitlement or bulletproof-ness. Whilst its good at times to back yourself in, however you have to know when to cut your losses and run. Our club seems to believe it is above this, it shouldn't need to cut its losses. This is what gets clubs into trouble.

We have never struggled as a club, we've got a strong supporter/commercial base and entered the league at a time when we had a strong pool of players to draw upon and were able to make the most of early concessions. To a certain extent we lucked our way to 2 premierships and since then have taken an attitude of "she'll be right". Whilst this is probably the first time it's truly bitten us in the arse, I think it's also much of the reason we've failed to win a premiership in 14 years.

Our administration has never really had to make any tough decisions, they've always been extremely reactive. Many here believe Craig was pushed, personally I don't believe Trigg had the balls to do it. Similar to this Kurt issue, whilst I can understand doing our absolute upmost to keep Kurt 3 years ago, the writing was clearly on the wall last year. This was our perfect chance to make a statement with Sando coming in, "if your not 100% committed, then we don't want you". It is clear Kurt wasn't and retaining him was purely an act of sticking our head in the sand.

Trigg would have made a lot of friends last year if he'd come out and said "Kurt has always struggled adapting to life in Adelaide, 2 years ago we threw everything into keeping him and rectifying this, it has become apparent that he is still not 100% committed to this club long term and thus we've decided to part company and search for players who are". Instead we've been quite happy to make the immediate popular decisions, whilst at the same time deceiving the supporters and sponsors with spin, instead of truly looking out for the long term future of our club.

Last year was our chance to get out of this mess with dignity, instead we ignored the truth of the situation hoping that all would be okay...

Nice post James

In some respects i think this was the most negligent act of all. Lions would have taken him lock stock and this is in our rear view mirror.

Monumental stupidity given what they knew. I dont even want to think who pick 12 could have netted for us.

 

[Stiffy_18]

things a little quiet on the port board?

*PAF is a closet crows man!

 

[*PAF]

*PAF is a closet crows man!

Careful there young Stiffmeister, every time someone says that the mods lock the thread.

 

[Elite Crow]

Would Brisbane have taken over his dodgy contract? I'm still thinking that the reason we baulked at the Brisbane trade was that the only chance of burying the soul-selling contract was to re-sign him.

The contract wasn't dodgy, the extra deal was. If Triggy was in fact the only one who knew about it I believe he said no to the trade to cover his arse. Otherwise he would have to explain why he was trading away a contracted player. Then he hoped like hell he would sign this year and he wouldn't be busted. In the meantime his arse covering has cost us two good picks last year and potentially picks this year.

And Alex do you have to derail every thread?

 

[Geoffa32]

The contract wasn't dodgy, the extra deal was. If Triggy was in fact the only one who knew about it I believe he said no to the trade to cover his arse. Otherwise he would have to explain why he was trading away a contracted player. Then he hoped like hell he would sign this year and he wouldn't be busted. In the meantime his arse covering has cost us two good picks last year and potentially picks this year.

In hindsight this is what I am thinking happened. The trade with Brisbane was quashed in fear of the side deals being blown open.

This year there was no choice.

 

[SpeciousArgument]

The contract wasn't dodgy, the extra deal was. If Triggy was in fact the only one who knew about it I believe he said no to the trade to cover his arse. Otherwise he would have to explain why he was trading away a contracted player. Then he hoped like hell he would sign this year and he wouldn't be busted. In the meantime his arse covering has cost us two good picks last year and potentially picks this year.

And Alex do you have to derail every thread?

I dont like the theory that trigg and reid were the only ones who knew, but even if they were, surely if trigg was the one to kill the deal when all other parties wanted it he would have had to provide a reason.

 

[SpeciousArgument]

In hindsight this is what I am thinking happened. The trade with Brisbane was quashed in fear of the side deals being blown open.

This year there was no choice.

Granted i have no knowledge other than what has been reported or speculated on here, but it seems to me like 2 first round picks for tippett wouldve been fine, he wanted to go there and brisbane wanted him, the only part of this i can see being potentially exposed is if he was also insisting on the underwritten third party deals.

 

[Geoffa32]

I dont like the theory that trigg and reid were the only ones who knew, but even if they were, surely if trigg was the one to kill the deal when all other parties wanted it he would have had to provide a reason.

As CEO demand Brisbane offer up a decent player with their first round pick, knowing they wouldn't, justify that by suggesting last years draft was not deemed as strong as other years.

 

[SpeciousArgument]

As CEO demand Brisbane offer up a decent player with their first round pick, knowing they wouldn't, justify that by suggesting last years draft was not deemed as strong as other years.

yeah given whats pseudo-known about the events that took place i guess i cant really think of a better explaination.

Edit: could have simply been greed. wanting more than brisbane were prepared to offer

 

[Elite Crow]

I dont like the theory that trigg and reid were the only ones who knew, but even if they were, surely if trigg was the one to kill the deal when all other parties wanted it he would have had to provide a reason.

I think you've got that the wrong way around, if Trigg was the only one to know the others more than likely wouldn't have wanted to do the deal. If he said yes then he would have to justify it.Caro said Rendell wanted to do it but he thought Tippett would leave, apparently Harper and Trigg said no.

 

[Geoffa32]

I remember being stoked we were looking to get some at least one quality pick for Tip last year.


Since 2009 I have been disappointed in him, and was getting sick of defending him in the Bay.


I then it was taken away from me.............

 

[Tex200]

Whats the consensus here...did we tell brissy about agreement? Did they know from reid anyway. Maybe they said trade him now we forget the agreement. Don't trade him now we will use it next year.

Could we have hidden from them? Huge risk if they found out abouy it after.

I'm just speculating.

 

[jt_mcleod]

is aiof