Tippett's Gone - READ RULES BEFORE POSTING

[mattymac]

The Cornes scenario is pretty much the best possible outcome.

According to that scenario we lose Tippet for nothing, lose our draft picks and lose quarter to half a mill

So in effect, thanks to the Trigg clause we lose a KPF/ruck, plus market value compensation of 2 first round picks or a player etc (for arguments sake we'll say 2 picks), plus we lose our own first rounder, plus we lose the rest of our draft picks, plus we lose quarter of a mill at the bare minimum.

How the **** can Cornes say Trigg should keep his job after presiding over that disaster?

If Trigg keeps his job after effectively losing us our KPF/ruck, 3 first rounders and a quarter mill, plus causing untold instability at the club while this soap opera has unfolded, then we are a massive joke and deserve no success

 

[Elite Crow]

The Cornes scenario is pretty much the best possible outcome.

According to that scenario we lose Tippet for nothing, lose our draft picks and lose quarter to half a mill

So in effect, thanks to the Trigg clause we lose a KPF/ruck, plus market value compensation of 2 first round picks or a player etc (for arguments sake we'll say 2 picks), plus we lose our own first rounder, plus we lose the rest of our draft picks, plus we lose quarter of a mill at the bare minimum.

How the **** can Cornes say Trigg should keep his job after presiding over that disaster?

If Trigg keeps his job after effectively losing us our KPF/ruck, 3 first rounders and a quarter mill, plus causing untold instability at the club while this soap opera has unfolded, then we are a massive joke and deserve no success

You should send this post to him

 

[SpeciousArgument]

The Cornes scenario is pretty much the best possible outcome.

According to that scenario we lose Tippet for nothing, lose our draft picks and lose quarter to half a mill

So in effect, thanks to the Trigg clause we lose a KPF/ruck, plus market value compensation of 2 first round picks or a player etc (for arguments sake we'll say 2 picks), plus we lose our own first rounder, plus we lose the rest of our draft picks, plus we lose quarter of a mill at the bare minimum.

How the **** can Cornes say Trigg should keep his job after presiding over that disaster?

If Trigg keeps his job after effectively losing us our KPF/ruck, 3 first rounders and a quarter mill, plus causing untold instability at the club while this soap opera has unfolded, then we are a massive joke and deserve no success

Did i miss when it became the 'trigg clause' and not the 'reid clause'

My understanding from whats been reported is that in 2009 Tippett et al wanted a written copy of a grey area, probably outside the rules handshake, so reid replied and confirmed it, which trigg became aware of and after 3 weeks told the tippett camp the deal was off and at some point brought it to the attention of the board and the afl.

If ive missed something that has been published that says otherwise please point me to it, but that sequence of events doesnt make trigg worse than hitler

 

[SpeciousArgument]

now for a conspiracy theory, anyone think that the AFL will make a show of banning us from this years draft, knowing it wont hurt us anywhere near how it hurt carlton. sounds like a harsh penalty but really isnt. unless pavlich's younger more talented long lost brother slips to pick 20

 

[alex_is_on_fire]

Did i miss when it became the 'trigg clause' and not the 'reid clause'

My understanding from whats been reported is that in 2009 Tippett et al wanted a written copy of a grey area, probably outside the rules handshake, so reid replied and confirmed it, which trigg became aware of and after 3 weeks told the tippett camp the deal was off and at some point brought it to the attention of the board and the afl.

If ive missed something that has been published that says otherwise please point me to it, but that sequence of events doesnt make trigg worse than hitler

The fact Steven Trigg is the CEO - he would have had to approve that contract. John Reid would not have had the authority to approve contracts, he would ahve just been able to arrange them and then have them approved by the CEO.

Every organization would have a level of hierarchy and John Reid as the football operational manager (just as Phil Harper would now) have to answer to the CEO. Then the CEO would answer to the board.

Saying that, 2 questions: if the deal was reneged on 3 weeks latter by Steven Trigg, how come the $200,000 was paid (if it wasn't how come it's a big deal now) and why didn't Kurt Tippett walk out of the club at the end of the 2010 season and ask for a trade? It would have nothing to do with the deal actually standing and trigg knew about it all along.

 

[bjn1960]

I wonder if we'll very know or be told the unadulterated truth regarding this soul destroying affair?

 

[SpeciousArgument]

I wonder if we'll very know or be told the unadulterated truth regarding this soul destroying affair?

AFL not known for their transparency

 

[bjn1960]

nor the AFC!

 

[alex_is_on_fire]

I wonder if we'll very know or be told the unadulterated truth regarding this soul destroying affair?

Depending on the outcome of the investigation.

I imagine if penalties are not that harsh, we will get a watered down version and key people involved will keep there job.

If the penalties are scathing, I feel we may have a few casualties and then the club will go on 5AA, MMM and other media outlet and sell a version of events that will allow the club to keep some focus on the future. That way, the entire truth will never been needed to be revealed and supporters will need to read between the lines on whom to blame.

 

[SpeciousArgument]

The fact Steven Trigg is the CEO - he would have had to approve that contract. John Reid would not have had the authority to approve contracts, he would ahve just been able to arrange them and then have them approved by the CEO.

The contract isnt what the AFL have issue with, at least as far as has been reported, its the fact that in a deal undisclosed to the AFL we agreed to influence a future draft and trading period which is in itself a big no no, and also that we guaranteed tippett would get TPP in the order of $200k. Trigg may have been aware that this was talked about behind closed doors but it is entirely plausible that he had no knowledge of reid confirming it via email and IMO his 3 week later renegging on the deal supports that

Every organization would have a level of hierarchy and John Reid as the football operational manager (just as Phil Harper would now) have to answer to the CEO. Then the CEO would answer to the board.

I dont get approval from my boss every time i reply to an email. given the stakes reid probably should have but its entirely possible that he was on his laptop at home after a couple of wines and replied to blucher 'yeah thats what was discussed' or something to that effect

Saying that, 2 questions: if the deal was reneged on 3 weeks latter by Steven Trigg, how come the $200,000 was paid (if it wasn't how come it's a big deal now) and why didn't Kurt Tippett walk out of the club at the end of the 2010 season and ask for a trade? It would have nothing to do with the deal actually standing and trigg knew about it all along.

1. Because Trigg and afc werent renegging on Tippett having access to third party deals, just that they wouldnt make up the shortfall. again, the issue isnt Tippett getting third party deals, it was the AFC gauranteeing he would and not disclosing it as consideration in his contract.
2. He was contracted, and he got his tpp, so the only issue was what happened when he left the club.

 

[xchadders]

If Trigg keeps his job after effectively losing us our KPF/ruck, 3 first rounders and a quarter mill, plus causing untold instability at the club while this soap opera has unfolded, then we are a massive joke and deserve no success

not that it makes it any better, but we didnt really lose our KPF/ruck AND 3 first rounders and money. it was that we lost our KPF OR 2 first rounds, plus 1 first rounder and money. we never had KT and 2 potential first rounders for him, it was simply one or the other.

but as i said, not that it matters. due to some spud at the club, we have well and truly lost out.

 

[jenny61_99]

The fact Steven Trigg is the CEO - he would have had to approve that contract. John Reid would not have had the authority to approve contracts, he would ahve just been able to arrange them and then have them approved by the CEO.

Every organization would have a level of hierarchy and John Reid as the football operational manager (just as Phil Harper would now) have to answer to the CEO. Then the CEO would answer to the board.

Saying that, 2 questions: if the deal was reneged on 3 weeks latter by Steven Trigg, how come the $200,000 was paid (if it wasn't how come it's a big deal now) and why didn't Kurt Tippett walk out of the club at the end of the 2010 season and ask for a trade? It would have nothing to do with the deal actually standing and trigg knew about it all along.

What $200,000????

 

[alex_is_on_fire]

What $200,000????

The $100,000 for 2010 and the $100,000 for 2011 - that extra money that was negotiated and the primary reason for the investigation. The Balfours commercial - Tippett Tips.

 

[jenny61_99]

The $100,000 for 2010 and the $100,000 for 2011 - that extra money that was negotiated and the primary reason for the investigation. The Balfours commercial - Tippett Tips.

Wasn't it an underwriting? It hasn't yet been disclosed if actual payments were made. Unless you know something more than the rest of us.

 

[alex_is_on_fire]

Wasn't it an underwriting? It hasn't yet been disclosed if actual payments were made. Unless you know something more than the rest of us.

I never said the club did pay it?

I simply said it was paid - by whom is a very different story.

However, saying that we know he has an extra contract with Balfour's for his Tippett Tips adverts.

The question would be, would that be worth $100,000 a year? if yes, that club can hold it head up knowing they didn't do anything wrong. If not, where did the rest come from? what other extra promotional contracts did he sign and with whom?

can you help us out or did he say, close enough is good enough and don't worry about the rest or did the club pay it? and that's why the AFL are investigating and its taking so long.

 

[Vigawla]

Re the article saying Trigg should keep his job. I have a funny feeling there is STILL more to this whole fiasco.

 

[jenny61_99]

I never said the club did pay it?

I simply said it was paid - by whom is a very different story.

However, saying that we know he has an extra contract with Balfour's for his Tippett Tips adverts.

The question would be, would that be worth $100,000 a year? if yes, that club can hold it head up knowing they didn't do anything wrong. If not, where did the rest come from? what other extra promotional contracts did he sign and with whom?

can you help us out or did he say, close enough is good enough and don't worry about the rest or did the club pay it? and that's why the AFL are investigating and its taking so long.

I'm sorry, I really don't understand what you've written. Except for the last paragraph. (I'm not being dicky, I need a translation! )

The reason "it's taken so long" is that we opened ALL our contracts and books to the AFL. They weren't just investigating the Tippett contract, but all of them.

 

[jenny61_99]

Re the article saying Trigg should keep his job. I have a funny feeling there is STILL more to this whole fiasco.

Like?

 

[SpeciousArgument]

Re the article saying Trigg should keep his job. I have a funny feeling there is STILL more to this whole fiasco.

4 weeks after the AFL was officially notified of the offending side deal, given the fact that Trigg is still working as the CEO of the AFC and hasnt even been suspended pending investigation tells me hes either covered his arse very well or isnt actually as guilty/responsible as some on here make out. IMO hes not losing his job over this.

 

[alex_is_on_fire]

I'm sorry, I really don't understand what you've written. Except for the last paragraph. (I'm not being dicky, I need a translation! )

The reason "it's taken so long" is that we opened ALL our contracts and books to the AFL. They weren't just investigating the Tippett contract, but all of them.

Jenny,

my stance on this subject has not changed since day one. Let's wait and see what happens after the investigation. Therefore, lets wait and see.

However, I've never accused the club of paying it under the table. I don't know. I simply said (tonight) that someone "paid it" but whom?

He needed to receive $100,000 for 2010. He made a Balfour commercial (well in Adelaide he did) called "Tippett Tips" with gourmet pies. The question that needs to be asked - how much would this be worth? $200,000 over 2 years, $100,000 over 2 years? I don't know. If it wasn't worth the entire $200,000 needed to meet the entire contract demands - where did the rest come from?

The club? other promotions? sponsors? donations?

I'm guessing the AFL will be asking those questions.

Also, the investigators would be looking for a trend and patterns. They would have looked at a number of random contracts over a number of years and would have been looking for a few different trends the club would have been following. I doubt they would have gone through every players contracts from Scott Thompson to the last rookie listed player. I imagine they would have looked at Scott Thompson contract over the past 5 or 6 years. Andrew McLeod, Mark Ricciuto, Wayne Carey's contract to get him to the Crows and a few other contract where trends could be found. Then they would be looking at how Kurt Tippett got the money and whom paid him.

If they looked at every single contract, it would have taken them months. It's about being strategic and looking for the right things.

 

[Crowbots are dead]

I saw my brother in law today. He was talking to a couple of prominent crows players a few weeks ago and they said:

• All players were absolutely filthy with Muppet and he has basically lost all friends
• Whilst generally liked he didn't have that many close friends on this list. He was always a bit aloof.
• His closest friend was probably the captain
• He was well known to be mentally soft.
• They all think no matter where he ends up he will pull out of games against Adelaide in Adelaide because he wont have the guts to face the music.

 

[The Sloane Ranger]

Mentally soft is a heavy criticism especially coming from team mates, if I was paying $1m per season for a player I would want him to be able to lead into a hostile battle time and time again

 

[SpeciousArgument]

I saw my brother in law today. He was talking to a couple of prominent crows players a few weeks ago and they said:

• All players were absolutely filthy with Muppet and he has basically lost all friends
• Whilst generally liked he didn't have that many close friends on this list. He was always a bit aloof.
• His closest friend was probably the captain
• He was well known to be mentally soft.
• They all think no matter where he ends up he will pull out of games against Adelaide in Adelaide because he wont have the guts to face the music.

I was about to like your post but it felt wrong. i appreciate hearing the report but it leaves a bad taste in my mouth

 

[Sanders]

Why should he?

Because the fix is in

 

[Crowbots are dead]

I was about to like your post but it felt wrong. i appreciate hearing the report but it leaves a bad taste in my mouth

why? You have a picture of Kurt with the words dumbass underneath. What is worse??