Tippett's Gone - READ RULES BEFORE POSTING

[crowman_23]

Yes it was reported that the guarantee was in writing and the afl were in position of it.

If that is the case then don't worry about draft tampering. This is the one that will hurt. Because for it to have happened it would have almost certainly been deliberate.

I thought it was the other way around. But yeah, if the AFL have written ecidence of the fact we we're trying to hide this from them, the draft is definitely shot.

Who wrote the article in regards to them having written evidence of the agreement to pay? Do you know where I could find it? I've read most but must have missed/misread where they reported that.

 

[Tex200]

At last the tippett thread has competition. Crickinfo. Thank goodness for that.

 

[Dr B]

At last the tippett thread has competition. Crickinfo. Thank goodness for that.

Now if we could only get a few wickets.

 

[SydCrow]

At last the tippett thread has competition. Crickinfo. Thank goodness for that.

time to re-sign Nathan Lyon before he wants to go home.

 

[Tex200]

Ah..love the cricket. It's gonna be a long summer though i fear.

And I did suggest to the swans board we try and include mitch Starc as part of tippett trade!

 

[Tex200]

Ah..love the cricket. It's gonna be a long summer though i fear.

And I did suggest to the swans board we try and include mitch Starc as part of tippett trade!

 

[cmndstab]

Oh and a few pages of AIOF getting mad.

He said the last 1000 posts, not the last 1000 threads

 

[Cleric]

The AFL said they would not allow any trade forTippett. GWS could have offered pick 1 and 2 and it wouldnt have gone through. However Melb officials have admitted they tanked and people's jobs were threatened if they didn't, yet they were allowed to trade to their hearts contents. This would have been so because the investigation was not completed. The one into the AFC also hasn't yet been completed yet a penalty was given been the loss of our highest payed player for no return.
Don't get me wrong, I think they should have sent him to the PSD rather than accept the rubbish and insulting offer from Sydney. However, the AFL has already penalized us.
I think the AFL will want to make an example out of us and Tippett. And I also think they need to so other players don't think they can also act like Kurt did. The AFL will see Crouch coming on our list as a super first round pick, so they can take our pick 20 off us without hurting us and a fine which will have to be counted in the salery cap for next year, and as we have lost Tippetts wage that also won't hurt. Tippett won't be allowed to go to Sydney and he will cop a few weeks on the sidelines and Bloucher will be sanctioned as well.

Because we admitted to wrong doing. Far out some people are so biased it's not even funny. We had an effective injunction to prevent us doing MORE wrong, if we had traded Tippett for below market value we would be in even deeper shit, the AFL have done us a favour stopping it.

As it is our breaches are serious in nature but minor in consequence. We will be punished for the seriousness but not trading Tippett saved us from the consequence aspect. A fine and loss of 1st draft pick would be about right. If we had traded Tippett and paid out, I reckon the trade deal and picks in two drafts would have been the kicker.

As for those trying to deflect onto Tippett! Jeez, he only has one priority in life as is his perogative. Those running the club should have known better and are FAR more culpable.

 

[Mego Red]

Yes it was reported that the guarantee was in writing and the afl were in position of it.

If that is the case then don't worry about draft tampering. This is the one that will hurt. Because for it to have happened it would have almost certainly been deliberate.

Context is going to be a factor in this. Unless you've read the "smoking gun" email, we're just dealing in third-hand reports.

"Mate, stay in SA, you'll do well with the sponsorships."

"You reckon? $200k?"

"Yeah, sure. There's always gigs for Crows players. Look, if it doesn't, we'll pay it to you, but it's just not going to happen"

 

[alex_is_on_fire]

And you have all the information on Trigg to pass judgement that he must resign???

Unlike some, I've never called for his immediate resignation.

When all the information is available and the AFL hand down their findings, I feel he will have no other option but to tender his resignation as I don't see how he can recover.

Allegedly along with John Reid, he was the only person to know this extra part of the contract existed and the smoking gun was not agreeing to trade Kurt Tippett last year.

I don't mind Steven Trigg (please find where I've bagged him like many others) but feel the contract and not trading him won't be enough to keep him employed at the club. If we discover there is more to this and he isn't to blame, I'm happy for him to keep his job.

 

[cmndstab]

The AFL said they would not allow any trade forTippett. GWS could have offered pick 1 and 2 and it wouldnt have gone through. However Melb officials have admitted they tanked and people's jobs were threatened if they didn't, yet they were allowed to trade to their hearts contents. This would have been so because the investigation was not completed. The one into the AFC also hasn't yet been completed yet a penalty was given been the loss of our highest payed player for no return.
Don't get me wrong, I think they should have sent him to the PSD rather than accept the rubbish and insulting offer from Sydney. However, the AFL has already penalized us.
I think the AFL will want to make an example out of us and Tippett. And I also think they need to so other players don't think they can also act like Kurt did. The AFL will see Crouch coming on our list as a super first round pick, so they can take our pick 20 off us without hurting us and a fine which will have to be counted in the salery cap for next year, and as we have lost Tippetts wage that also won't hurt. Tippett won't be allowed to go to Sydney and he will cop a few weeks on the sidelines and Bloucher will be sanctioned as well.

To be fair, we admitted guilt to putting in place an agreement without the AFL's consent. There is no investigation required if the aim is simply to determine whether we've broken the rules - we have. The investigation is to determine to what extent we have broken the rules, and whether there were any other illegal activities going on.

In Melbourne's case, even though we all know they tanked, it's not "official" until the investigation has proven it so.

 

[alex_is_on_fire]

He said the last 1000 posts, not the last 1000 threads

 

[alex_is_on_fire]

Oh and a few pages of AIOF getting mad.

 

[icrow32]

Unlike some, I've never called for his immediate resignation.

When all the information is available and the AFL hand down their findings, I feel he will have no other option but to tender his resignation as I don't see how he can recover.

Allegedly along with John Reid, he was the only person to know this extra part of the contract existed and the smoking gun was not agreeing to trade Kurt Tippett last year.

I don't mind Steven Trigg (please find where I've bagged him like many others) but feel the contract and not trading him won't be enough to keep him employed at the club. If we discover there is more to this and he isn't to blame, I'm happy for him to keep his job.

Below is the reason Trigg should go regardless of the outcome of the investigation..absolute arrogance at its finest to knock back this offer from Brisbane in 2011. Why on earth did Trigg think he could convince Tippett to stay considering the lengths he went to to get the get out clause in his contract/email.

"Kerr said Tippett and his management had agreed on a move to Brisbane in 2011 if a trade could be completed with Adelaide.

With a year still to run on his contract though, the Crows knocked back the offer of a first round pick (number 12) and an end of first round compensation pick."

 

[alex_is_on_fire]

"Kerr said Tippett and his management had agreed on a move to Brisbane in 2011 if a trade could be completed with Adelaide.

With a year still to run on his contract though, the Crows knocked back the offer of a first round pick (number 12) and an end of first round compensation pick."

So, is anyone willing to argue this point with icrow32?

Or would the arguing only occur if I said it?

Or does the arguing only occur because I have the audacity to stick up for Kurt Tippett? somehow, I suspect that's it.

 

[Dr B]

Context is going to be a factor in this. Unless you've read the "smoking gun" email, we're just dealing in third-hand reports.

"Mate, stay in SA, you'll do well with the sponsorships."

"You reckon? $200k?"

"Yeah, sure. There's always gigs for Crows players. Look, if it doesn't, we'll pay it to you, but it's just not going to happen"

If it was something that Tippett could hold us to then we are in trouble. If the document is not legally binding (you can only hope) then we could mount an argument. Something tells me if the tippets were to get something in writing it would not be good for us.

 

[SpeciousArgument]

Dr b the word is (not sure how accurate though) that we guaranteed payment if his third party deals didn't reach a particular value. There was no word though if we actually paid anything. So again, it's an intent rather than an act if we didn't actually pay him anything.

Im with Dr B on this one, the fact that we guaranteed that he would get that extra money makes it consideration not disclosed to the AFL, the paying or not paying isnt the issue as much as the fact that we said 'if you sign you will get paid this much by sponsors and if not by us' makes it declarable and both the club and tippet/his management signed off on the fact that this consideration didnt exist.

 

[SpeciousArgument]

So what happens if someone signs a 5 year deal, like has happened with many players this season, then companies want to jump on them in year three? They can't have third party deals because it wasn't in the initial contract?

From what I've been reading, the third party deals were shown to the AFL, whom unless have solid evidence where we have said we will pay him if we can't get those deals for him, how can it be proven that whomever paid the third party deals didn't decide to do that once they heard he re-signed?

As long have we have shown that to the AFL, third party deals, and other payments to players can spring up during a contract, as long as it's granted by the AFL and not as such like a Judd deal to just keep at the club (which the majority are anyway)

The issue here isnt whether or not a TPP deal existed, what has been alleged is that the crows guaranteed that he would get them and didnt disclose this to the afl. That makes it a part of his consideration that wasnt disclosed to the afl.

 

[SpeciousArgument]

So, is anyone willing to argue this point with icrow32?

Or would the arguing only occur if I said it?

Or does the arguing only occur because I have the audacity to stick up for Kurt Tippett? somehow, I suspect that's it.

icrow32 didnt argue for 30 pages that Tippett is the BEST PERSON EVARR!!!!!!

Whinging about it just makes you look childish

 

[alex_is_on_fire]

icrow32 didnt argue for 30 pages that Tippett is the BEST PERSON EVARR!!!!!!

Whinging about it just makes you look childish

Yeah, that's what I did.

You got me...guess what, I've been owned!!!!

As opposed to you whose been arguing Steven Trigg is the greatest CEO in the world and is the only person who can fix the USA $170 trillion dollar deficit.

 

[SpeciousArgument]

Yeah, that's what I did.

You got me...guess what, I've been owned!!!!

As opposed to you whose been arguing Steven Trigg is the greatest CEO in the world and is the only person who can fix the USA $170 trillion dollar deficit.

I doubt youll find a post of mine where ive supported trigg, i just think its unreasonable to call for the sacking of one person for being part of a monumental stuff up while supporting the other.

I imagine if people were calling for you to be sacked you would want to see due process before your employer terminated you.

 

[Stripple]

AIOF most people are not happy with the way Kurt went about it. The text message, the indesicion, the lack of empathy for his previous club in regards to trade position. He has come across as a selfish person and I think everyone has a right to feel thy way just as you have a right to see how he has gone about it as no big deal. But he is a public figure and gets paid to be a public figure and we as the public will form opinions on him. Some peole have more visceral reactions than others. And in your heart of hearts I'm sure you have had a negative opinion on a public figure before.

 

[alex_is_on_fire]

I doubt youll find a post of mine where ive supported trigg, i just think its unreasonable to call for the sacking of one person for being part of a monumental stuff up while supporting the other.

I imagine if people were calling for you to be sacked you would want to see due process before your employer terminated you.

Other than an opportunistic throw away quote based on the same night Big Bother ended, please find a quote from me where I've said he should be terminated immediately?

You won't as I haven't. What you will find is me continually stating he has the right to keep his job until the end of the investigation. I'v also said, the evidence isn't very supportive towards him but until the investigation is over, he should keep his job.

 

[alex_is_on_fire]

AIOF most people are not happy with the way Kurt went about it. The text message, the indesicion, the lack of empathy for his previous club in regards to trade position. He has come across as a selfish person and I think everyone has a right to feel thy way just as you have a right to see how he has gone about it as no big deal. But he is a public figure and gets paid to be a public figure and we as the public will form opinions on him. Some peole have more visceral reactions than others. And in your heart of hearts I'm sure you have had a negative opinion on a public figure before.

I care about tangible things - people I can touch, feel, see and talk to. Family, friends and in this case, my membership ticket and things that are involved with the club. He's gone, it's time to get over it.

I don't care about intangible things - such as public figures whom I've never met, such as Kurt Tippett. He has made his decision to move on, change clubs and seek more money elsewhere.

Yes I was pissed, but FFS it's time to just move on. Get over it. I don't see the point in holding onto that negative emotional baggage that won't change.

I don't know him, he's not a part of the club any more and he won't be playing for the Crows again. If Walker, Dangerfield or even Nick Joyce was to move clubs - my opinion would be the same as Kurt Tippett. I wouldn't care as I only care about the tangibility. Stuff I can touch, feel and control. You don't agree, I'm not really fussed but don't call me an idiot for having that point of view.

 

[Dr B]

Unless you've been living under a rock, or just returned from the moon - you would have realized this thread is in a major hiatus for the past 2 weeks. We are now jut waiting for the verdict to be handed down.

The cards are on the table, everyone has had their say and now we just waiting.

Well earlier today there was a discussion on 3rd party agreements, what makes them and the impact it will have on our punishment. I didn't see that as a hiatus. I came on here tonight to see what the discussion was about and where it had moved to. Sad I know. But it took me 20 minutes to get through the fighting on who can have an opinion.

I will say you have a right to both have an option and also to express it. But we also have a right to have a thread that stays relatively on topic. There are many of us who would like not to spend time reading people fighting before we get to the topic.

And that folks is my opinion.