Tippett's Gone - READ RULES BEFORE POSTING

[Donkey Magoo]

We haven't done media very well of late. During the trade period it was terrible, and we have not put any pressure on Tippett or Bulcher since the revelations.
We seem to be playing a straight bat, which makes me think that we either A) think we don't have much to hide or B) think if we behave we will get off lighter.

I think that we should be leaking on Tippett, any weird stories any greedy stuff.
I also think we should reserve judgement on Trigg, let's just watch the cards hit the deck on Monday.

 

[RonSon]

Oh dear.

The problem now is that it could turn out that Quayle had this story completely wrong, and it wouldn't matter. The mud would still stick because we've eroded our good name away with the Tippett deal. People no longer give the Crows the benefit of the doubt because we simply don't deserve it anymore.

If there is some kind of breach for van Berlo I can't imagine it was deliberately done. It would have been completely unnecessary, almost ridiculously so.

I hope that all of this turns out to be a bit of overzealous reporting, but at this point I can't say I'm very confident. The AFC would want to have one hell of a showing on monday.

After one transgression with TPP you could argue it wasn't deliberate, but twice?

 

[BACCS]

of course trigg would say that. theres no way back from this other than to deny deny deny

So our club isn't allowed to defend itself? Get ****ed and leave this thread. Just like the media were always right with what went on with the Saints ay?

 

[BACCS]

We have not been found guilty of anything. We have been charged and we are being given an opportunity to resoond to those charges. The concept of due process is pretty basic.

I think it's pretty clear that doesn't matter on BF.

 

[BACCS]

After one transgression with TPP you could argue it wasn't deliberate, but twice?

You don't even know what the investigation is exactly for, or if charges will even be laid!! Seriously, get ****ed!

 

[RonSon]

You don't even know what the investigation is exactly for, or if charges will even be laid!! Seriously, get screwed!

That hasn't stopped your board posting 21,000 replies of speculation?

I didn't think it was an unreasonable post.

 

[scottwade]

We haven't done media very well of late. During the trade period it was terrible, and we have not put any pressure on Tippett or Bulcher since the revelations.

This is one thing I find curious.
All the leaks have essentially been detrimental to AFC, so if the information being published is inaccurate, or worse false, why the heck haven't AFC done some backgrounding/leaking of its own?

Now admittedly one of the problems is that the SA media (Cornes, Rowe, Rucci) lack credibility, but surely AFC have, if they wish, the capability to leak info to the Hun, which I'm sure would gladly publish information disputing The Age's version of events.

 

[juzzo]

Well those wanting AFL to investigate all 3rd party deals(I'm one of them) should be happy with this.
http://www.news.com.au/sport/afl/af...y-deal-with-visy/story-fnelctok-1226517693271

 

[Donkey Magoo]

This is one thing I find curious.
All the leaks have essentially been detrimental to AFC, so if the information being published is inaccurate, or worse false, why the heck haven't AFC done some backgrounding/leaking of its own?

Now admittedly one of the problems is that the SA media (Cornes, Rowe, Rucci) lack credibility, but surely AFC have, if they wish, the capability to leak info to the Hun, which I'm sure would gladly publish information disputing The Age's version of events.

Big time, but even the adelaide journos would run it. If you leave a media vacuum then something will fill it. In a crisis you have to combat, I am sure that Rucci would of liked not being scooped daily. Also a good leak doesn't have to come from the top just a "frustrated" employee.

 

[SpeciousArgument]

That hasn't stopped your board posting 21,000 replies of speculation?

I didn't think it was an unreasonable post.

now were guilty of having an active board...

 

[Donkey Magoo]

They should do a Luxury Tax system like the one that's come into the NBA, you can go over if you can afford to pay gazillions more than the wage!

 

[dazz69au]

Im losing respect for the way Emma Quayle is going about things. Shes moving further away from facts and into her opinion. "Fairfax media can also reveal.." "may"...

Well I can reveal that I may be paying Patrick Dangerfield a million dollars a year... Doesn't mean I am.

OK just dont put it in writing, oh wait!.........nothing to see here move along

 

[RonSon]

now were guilty of having an active board...

Uh, where did I say that?

I was just pointing out that a lack of facts hasn't stopped anyone else speculating in this thread.

 

[P.A.F.C]

But wait there's more to come!

For those familiar with the early works of David Williamson, do not be surprised if Emma Quayle breaks a story regarding a limbless sister.

Only the AFC would consider being in any way involved in "arranging" third party agreements. The number of Collingwood and Kangaroo footballers on The Footy Show is purely coincidental.

Players wouldn't get paid for appearing on The Footy Show, it's a media commitment, like being interviewed on 5AA... Nice publicity for their clubs but nothing illegal

 

[boffo]

Damn it, that's right, Brian Martin was the judge. Must have used the old " what colour tie am I wearing today" trick on him.

forget the lawyers, get Brian Martin on the Commission before Monday.

 

[BACCS]

This is one thing I find curious.
All the leaks have essentially been detrimental to AFC, so if the information being published is inaccurate, or worse false, why the heck haven't AFC done some backgrounding/leaking of its own?

Now admittedly one of the problems is that the SA media (Cornes, Rowe, Rucci) lack credibility, but surely AFC have, if they wish, the capability to leak info to the Hun, which I'm sure would gladly publish information disputing The Age's version of events.

What's the point? We get to explain everything in a proper forum next Monday. Once the media are on a crusade, they usually don't stop until there is 100% evidence disputing what they have claimed. Even then, they'll never admit they are wrong. AFC don't gain much by leaking to the media so close to the investigation coming to an end, the media will probably spin it to try and make us look more guilty anyway.

 

[SpeciousArgument]

What's the point? We get to explain everything in a proper forum next Monday. Once the media are on a crusade, they usually don't stop until there is 100% evidence disputing what they have claimed. Even then, they'll never admit they are wrong. AFC don't gain much by leaking to the media so close to the investigation coming to an end, the media will probably spin it to try and make us look more guilty anyway.

knowing us we'd probably leave a paper trail...

 

[dazz69au]

im rooted.

chin up only 5 days till we know the out come of the commission.................yeah nah your rooted

 

[Donkey Magoo]

What's the point? We get to explain everything in a proper forum next Monday. Once the media are on a crusade, they usually don't stop until there is 100% evidence disputing what they have claimed. Even then, they'll never admit they are wrong. AFC don't gain much by leaking to the media so close to the investigation coming to an end, the media will probably spin it to try and make us look more guilty anyway.

Public opinion has knock on effects, and when you have a organization that is very sensitive to public opinion it could effect the outcome of its decision.

 

[BrissyCrow]

Re 3rd Party deals

Surely a club needs to get involved at some point in the process, the player is a club asset and represents the club and it's brand, if not we risk players doing commercials for British American Tabacco without the clubs involvement

Absolutely. The club must get involved to protect their brand. They couldnt have a player promoting anything that does not reflect well on the club. It is no different in business. The brand owner must approve and sign off.

 

[BACCS]

Public opinion has knock on effects, and when you have a organization that is very sensitive to public opinion it could effect the outcome of its decision.

I realise that, but the publics opinion on this aint gonna change at all until the hearing next Monday, no matter what the club says. I mean, the club sent us that members email defending itself, and other supporters have criticised us because apparently 'there is nothing else they could say anyway'.

Once late December/January hits I expect this will blow over and everyone will be talking about season 2013. I'd rather a scandal like this than the Saints for the past couple of years!

 

[fabs33]

now were guilty of having an active board...

The AFC has many passionate supporters willing to share their thoughts, they're just not used to that sort of thing.

 

[fabs33]

Well those wanting AFL to investigate all 3rd party deals(I'm one of them) should be happy with this.
http://www.news.com.au/sport/afl/af...y-deal-with-visy/story-fnelctok-1226517693271

Better late than never I guess.

 

[BrissyCrow]

We have not been found guilty of anything. We have been charged and we are being given an opportunity to resoond to those charges. The concept of due process is pretty basic.

According to the reports in the paper we have already admitted that we did break the rules even if it was inadvertantly

 

[cmndstab]

After one transgression with TPP you could argue it wasn't deliberate, but twice?

This is exactly what I was talking about before. The concept that this might have been an error would have been pretty reasonable before, but after the Tippett thing? People will laugh at us if we try to run that line now, unless it can be definitively proven in court. Even then there will be doubters.

We only have ourselves to blame for it, too.