Remove this Banner Ad

Tippett's Gone - READ RULES BEFORE POSTING

  • Thread starter Thread starter doodle48
  • Start date Start date
  • Tagged users Tagged users None

Which AFC deserter were/are you most salty towards?

  • Total voters
    33
  • Poll closed .

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Status
Not open for further replies.
My concern is that we are in unchartered territory and it could all go **** up. We need a negotiated outcome - not protracted litigation - that allows both parties to save face. Vlad gets to protect the integrity* of the AFL system and we get to move on with 2013 without serious penalty.


* not to be confused with actual integrity
 
This has had everything and really has swung from the hysteria of the initial findings, to doom and gloom, to steeling ourselves to be smacked, now to some hope that the middle ground might actually be the truth or even on the low end of the scale. I still don't think we will get off scott free, but being banned from the draft for 4 years, premiership points deducted, massive fines are now not so likely as everyone thought.

I think the perception on the board has changed a bit too that we aint going to bend over and take it. We have weathered the storm of hysteria, wild accusations and some pretty shoddy articles written by equally shoddy journos who think they know what's going on, but maybe don't have much of a clue. The AFC are starting to respond with some shots of their own...at least here, don't know how much of it is landing over the border.

It has shown what a mess of things the ASA (additional service agreements) the AFL is trying to say we've been tightening this since Feb...bullshizen Adrian, someone has had a word in your ear and said what a mess this is and that the AFL could be taken to the cleaners.

Tippett still isn't gone after 880 pages and nearly 22k of posts, but in the end I'm glad he's gone and good luck to the club that gets him and all of his mental baggage.
 
Donkey Magoo said:
I panicked for a second then.


I know that everyone has slammed Triggy for a lot of this, but I actually think his handling, of the situation, once he got back, has been pretty good.
  1. Firstly we complied with the AFL when they did there fact finding,
  2. the AFC has kept members in the loop as much as they can, those emails made me feel better,
  3. we don't have Jesse White, Tippo didn't get a free ride to Sydney,
  4. We have consistently denied the most serious allegations,
  5. We Lawyerd up, and we Lawyered up properly
I also don't begrudge the club for making the gentleman's agreement, 2 years ago I would of been pretty sad if we lost Tipps, he looked like he was going to improve leaps and bounds and we only had a kid called Tex who wasn't getting a game then.

Since then we have several targets up front, our attack is spearheaded by Tex who had a breakout year, we have Jenkins, Johnson, Lynch and Smack who could all take his spot and Tippo himself hasn't really improved that much in the last couple years.
If we had kept him I would of been happy with that, but I am not distraught that he is gone, we have an exciting squad that plays selfless footy. Bring on 2013 hOO hA
Click to expand...

The only thing I disagree with, or should I possibly disagree with, is the bolded bit. For me it will depend on what was actually agreed to that will sway my opinion. If we said that we would accept at minimum a second round pick in the event that he wanted to go home, his real home, with the intention of getting better possibly through an auction-like scenario with GC and Brisbane, then I will have no problem with it. On the other hand if the agreement was to get him anywhere he wanted with us having to settle for the second round pick then I will certainly begrudge them for having made the deal. Hopefully for us it was the latter, and that it was Tippett's management that were trying to take advantage of it by forcing us to negotiate with one club alone that had nothing of note they were willing to offer.
 
SydCrow said:
My concern is that we are in unchartered territory and it could all go **** up. We need a negotiated outcome - not protracted litigation - that allows both parties to save face. Vlad gets to protect the integrity* of the AFL system and we get to move on with 2013 without serious penalty.


* not to be confused with actual integrity
Click to expand...

Spot on the money :thumbsu:
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

Schulzycrow said:
Tippett still isn't gone after 880 pages and nearly 22k of posts, but in the end I'm glad he's gone and good luck to the club that gets him and all of his mental baggage.
Click to expand...

My understanding is he didn't turn up for the first day of preseason... methinks he might be in trouble with the group.
 
Schulzycrow said:
I still don't think we will get off scott free, but being banned from the draft for 4 years, premiership points deducted, massive fines are now not so likely as everyone thought.
Click to expand...

Woah there, settle, those were all suggestions made by the media, who love worst case scenarios.:p

Schulzycrow said:
It has shown what a mess of things the ASA (additional service agreements) the AFL is trying to say we've been tightening this since Feb...bullshizen Adrian, someone has had a word in your ear and said what a mess this is and that the AFL could be taken to the cleaners.
Click to expand...

Does it really matter, to us at least, that they started early this year? I mean if we did make a mistake wouldn't we be judged based on the rules of 2009?
 
Peter J said:
I think the appointment of Counsel signalled a couple things....for me at least

1. It signalled strong intent on our part, that we were not going to lay down and be bullied or made a scapegoat.
2. It also says to me that we have a side of the story to tell and that we dont accept we deserve to be hung drawn and quartered. If we had been caught red handed and knew we were at fault, I dont believe we would be spending upwards of $14,000 per day on Counsel.

Its also coincided with some more favourable media coverage which is starting to set the framework for our submissions.

In the early stages we were being led by the nose thank to Fairfax and I think that as much as you try and wait out for the facts, there is a tendency to accept everything is as the media suggests it is.

Add to all that the general psychotic nature of this thread and you probably have your answer:)
Click to expand...

I think also the slow pace of developments, coupled with the 'official' silence from the parties involved leaves a big vacuum where anything resembling news gets significantly magnified.

Im happy to admit that the AFC hiring Edwardson and the stories told about him on here (mostly by you) have made me feel better, but i find it interesting how radically the mood has changed in the last week
 
Realslimshady2 said:
I think many clubs are cursing Tip$ right now for the can of worms he opened. Selfish little......
Click to expand...


Whilst i agree with your description of Tips, i do think that the AFL itself is to blame for the farce that has happened and the whole thing is descending into the ridiculous.
 
johnnypanther said:
Whilst i agree with your description of Tips, i do think that the AFL itself is to blame for the farce that has happened and the whole thing is descending into the ridiculous.
Click to expand...
Agree. The AFL try to present to the world that they are a professional organisation, but each season things crop up to show you shouldn't have ex footballers running a mutli-million dollar league. The whole Dee tanking scenario was always going to happen when you reward teams winning less than 4 games. Blind Freddy could see that, everyone could see that, but not Vlad and Aaaaadrriaaan*. *think of Good Morning Vietnam
 
Schulzycrow said:
Agree. The AFL try to present to the world that they are a professional organisation, but each season things crop up to show you shouldn't have ex footballers running a mutli-million dollar league. The whole Dee tanking scenario was always going to happen when you reward teams winning less than 4 games. Blind Freddy could see that, everyone could see that, but not Vlad and Aaaaadrriaaan*. *think of Good Morning Vietnam
Click to expand...

Anyone who can see that a club will benefit significantly from losing an extra game can predict what the outcome will be, I remember changing my tip in a match between Carlton and Melbourne when I found out that a priority pick was at stake, I can't remember the year but in the end I was proven correct. Now the AFL have egg on their faces for all the times they asserted that tanking didn't exist.

BTW, did you really mean Good Morning Vietnam or Rocky?

EDIT: The Carlton vs Melbourne game might have been round 21 2009, Melbourne had beaten Fremantle by more than ten goals the previous week so I tipped them for an upset against Carlton. Found out later that Melbourne were on four wins and another would cost them the priority pick, so changed it to Carlton at the last minute.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Peter J said:
I think the appointment of Counsel signalled a couple things....for me at least

1. It signalled strong intent on our part, that we were not going to lay down and be bullied or made a scapegoat.
2. It also says to me that we have a side of the story to tell and that we dont accept we deserve to be hung drawn and quartered. If we had been caught red handed and knew we were at fault, I dont believe we would be spending upwards of $14,000 per day on Counsel.

Its also coincided with some more favourable media coverage which is starting to set the framework for our submissions.

In the early stages we were being led by the nose thank to Fairfax and I think that as much as you try and wait out for the facts, there is a tendency to accept everything is as the media suggests it is.

Add to all that the general psychotic nature of this thread and you probably have your answer:)
Click to expand...

I dont know what is the chicken or the egg here PJ, and I acknowledge your superior insight to legal ended happenings, but I would like to feel that Edwardson's appointment was the catalyst for a whole new front foot approach by the AFC. I suspect it was his initiative to put in place a positive framework to stand-up to this whole issue, of which getting some 'outside' people to offer defensive media statements is but one aspect. But maybe my assesment is a tad unkind to AFC management. Whatever it is, the Tippetts lawyering up with Galbally have done us a favour and we are no longer in servile mode.
 
Rowey has just said on 5aa that the delay in the hearing relates to the fact that the Crows have evidence that the AFC have signed affidavits from the relevant companies that proves that the 3rd party deals have all been arranged at the instigation of the companies, not the AFC.

Rowey is saying that all charges against Phil Harper will be dropped, with the 3rd party charges re Balfours etc against Trigg also to be dropped, leaving only the charges re draft tampering to be dealt with, which Rowey said are on the lighter side. No mention made of whether there are still charges re any guarantee of 3rd party deals being $100k per year for Tippett.

Rowey is now saying that due to the reduced charges and a relatively low level of offence, that the only punishment will be a fine, with no loss of draft picks and definitely no loss of premiership points.

Chapman is going to be on later tonight according to Rowey. Hasn't given any details on what will be discussed in the interview though.
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

fabs33 said:
I believe the hearing has been postponed until December, supposedly we requested it and the AFL agreed. There was an article on the club's website if you'd like to check.
Click to expand...

Surely they would be seperate hearings and not just one mega hearing?
 
fabs33 said:
I believe the hearing has been postponed until December, supposedly we requested it and the AFL agreed. There was an article on the club's website if you'd like to check.
Click to expand...

Oh so they were joined.

I knew the Crows, trigg et el postponed theirs but wasn't sure about Tippett as well. I guess since the evidence is connected, they have to postpone both.
 
macca23 said:
Rowey has just said on 5aa that the delay in the hearing relates to the fact that the Crows have evidence that the AFC have signed affidavits from the relevant companies that proves that the 3rd party deals have all been arranged at the instigation of the companies, not the AFC.

Rowey is saying that all charges against Phil Harper will be dropped, with the 3rd party charges re Balfours etc against Trigg also to be dropped, leaving only the charges re draft tampering to be dealt with, which Rowey said are on the lighter side. No mention made of whether there are still charges re any guarantee of 3rd party deals being $100k per year for Tippett.

Rowey is now saying that due to the reduced charges and a relatively low level of offence, that the only punishment will be a fine, with no loss of draft picks and definitely no loss of premiership points.

Chapman is going to be on later tonight according to Rowey. Hasn't given any details on what will be discussed in the interview though.
Click to expand...

YEAH BABY

GO YOU F....IN CROWS !!!!
 
alex_is_on_fire said:
Oh so they were joined.

I knew the Crows, trigg et el postponed theirs but wasn't sure about Tippett as well. I guess since the evidence is connected, they have to postpone both.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I think so. At least the link in my earlier post says so.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top Bottom