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.
just adding to this, this is what was said on Blucher:

Blucher has worn hit after hit and in recent weeks and those close to him have been concerned for his health. Poor baby. I'm sure Tippett, Trigg, Harper and the AFC aren't feeling all that hot either.
There were some odd remarks in that article. I don't think I have seen anything in the media that has been overtly critical of Blucher. Most of the vitriol has been focused on the Crows, and only more recently on Tippett and the AFL for making a meal of things.
Blucher will argue he was not aware that he could agree to Adelaide's offer to trade Tippett to the club of his choice and for a set trade.
This makes NO sense what so ever. WTF?

WTF is right. Taking it at face value, does that mean no offer was agreed on? Think it it must be a case of poor editing.
 
I think many clubs are cursing Tip$ right now for the can of worms he opened. Selfish little......

That's dawing a long bow, the AFL notified Carlton about Judd's deal on the 22nd, Oct. Which is about the same time this whole Tippett saga raised it's ugly head, so I think it has nothing to do with Tippett, IMO it's Eddie everyone should blame.
 
just adding to this, this is what was said on Blucher:

Blucher has worn hit after hit and in recent weeks and those close to him have been concerned for his health. Poor baby. I'm sure Tippett, Trigg, Harper and the AFC aren't feeling all that hot either.

Blucher's player -- Tippett -- has been charged with draft tampering and signing agreements separate to the the total player payments. In other words, knowing the money was being paid outside the cap. Money wasn't paid outside the cap!

Blucher will argue he was not aware that he could agree to Adelaide's offer to trade Tippett to the club of his choice and for a set trade. This makes NO sense what so ever. WTF?

Tippett was charged because he signed the contract. That his Manager and Father arranged.

Blucher will also argue that every third-party agreement made with Tippett -- believed to be four -- was ticked off by the AFL. This is correct.

He will have trouble, however, explaining other aspects of what the AFL has uncovered. Such as?

He knows he has made errors and will be disciplined by the AFL Players' Association.[/COLOR]

But he wants everyone to know he did not knowingly cheat the cap. He's an ignoramus. But he's not a cheating ignoramus. Does blackmailing come under cheating?[/
quote]

I don't see anything good there for Blucher.

No I didn't cheat the rules, yes I am an idiot.

Either way his new client list will be written on a stamp.
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

There were some odd remarks in that article. I don't think I have seen anything in the media that has been overtly critical of Blucher. Most of the vitriol has been focused on the Crows, and only more recently on Tippett and the AFL for making a meal of things.

WTF is right. Taking it at face value, does that mean no offer was agreed on? Think it it must be a case of poor editing.
I think part of it is that the wider AFL interested public probably doesnt care about blucher. The AFC is a target that interests a lot more people, Tippett less so, but Blucher is a bit of a non-entity when it comes to selling papers
 
All that's needed for what?

You said that we didn't pay him any money but we agreed to IF he didn't get enough from third parties.
I don't think the AFL will take into account that Tippett got enough from third parties and that the AFC didn't have to pay him after all.
So isn't the AFC underwriting any possible shortfall all that's needed for the AFL?
 
so we should be charged with conspiring
 
We should be charged with being ****ing awesome. Go Crows!



Rule 17.4 Bringinging the game into disrepute by being ****ing awesome.

Any club that tries to circumvent the draft process by using exteme ****ing awesomeness may be subject to a fine and/or loss of draft picks and/or reputation for being ****ing awesome. Any club found guilty of being ****ing awesome will have sunglass wearing privliges revoked, will be banned from uttering words like "gnarly" and "shizzle" and will be excluded from all facebook game promotions

I'd rather we face draft tampering to be honest, I'd hate for Tex to be banned from uttering " this shizzle is Gnarly"
 

Remove this Banner Ad

You said that we didn't pay him any money but we agreed to IF he didn't get enough from third parties.
I don't think the AFL will take into account that Tippett got enough from third parties and that the AFC didn't have to pay him after all.
So isn't the AFC underwriting any possible shortfall all that's needed for the AFL?

Quite possibly. I think it was agreed to because Tippett was hot property at the time - everyone wanted a piece of him. We knew we'd never have to pony up. As someone says above - comes under the conspiring to... pay money if we have to, but we didn't rule.
 
They were very confident he was staying. They actually thought he was ready to sign just before finals this year. Up until then every indication was that he would sign a long term contract.

Naive??? Dunno
Maybe this relates to the decision making problems that Noble alluded to with Tippett. It seems he vacillated wildly over staying or going at different points over the journey. But the club knew full well that he wanted/was willing to leave at the end of at least two different seasons, yet arrogantly believed that eventually he'd realise the error of his ways and buy in to this imaginary, impossible to leave culture that the powers that be have deluded themselves into believing exists at the club. It's just staggering that we wouldn't accept 8 alone, or 12 and Brisbane's compo pick, knowing Kurt's uncertainty about staying with the club. And this is before we even get to whether there was any chance the 2nd round trade agreement may have been in place.
 
Risk and reward people, risk and reward.

Would you take an unknown over the chance to keep a contested marking machine. Whether they are ultimately proved right or wrong, I can understand why the club took the chance they did and in saying that, I am glad he is out of the club and don't give two shits if it is for nothing.

What if we traded him for pick 8 and got a Salopek or a Lachie Hansen or a Gumbleton, everyone would have been up in arms about it. Sure we could have got Toby Green but that's the luck of the draw. It is the easiest thing in the world to go on about what ifs in hindsight but much harder to come up with what should be done here and now...and that is what we do have to deal with.
 
Risk and reward people, risk and reward.

Would you take an unknown over the chance to keep a contested marking machine. Whether they are ultimately proved right or wrong, I can understand why the club took the chance they did and in saying that, I am glad he is out of the club and don't give two shits if it is for nothing.

What if we traded him for pick 8 and got a Salopek or a Lachie Hansen or a Gumbleton, everyone would have been up in arms about it. Sure we could have got Toby Green but that's the luck of the draw. It is the easiest thing in the world to go on about what ifs in hindsight but much harder to come up with what should be done here and now...and that is what we do have to deal with.
We would have been up in arms because our recruiters made a poor choice at pick 8, not because we had traded Tippett for it.
We gambled and we lost, how bad we are still to find out.
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

That's the thing about gambling, sometimes you lose.

Was the reward worth the risk?
No it wasn't. Kurt had an average year and 2 poor finals, partly due to concussions and partly because he continued his form from 2010 and 2011. And when you gamble and you know the odds are stacked against you with the consequences of the gamble blowing up in your face then it's not worth the risk.

So when a club cheats the salary cap, that's also a gamble, do you do it? No you don't because you know what the consequences are.
 
Just like Boak and Cloke were no chance to stay at their clubs either. Maybe we should have traded Danger this year as well as there is obviously no chance that he will sign again next time. Just love you guys who can play a situation perfectly a year after it has happened.

I bet you would be great at telling us who will be good in last years draft as well.
How much evidence do you need that the club was well aware that Tippett was an enormous flight risk? There's the desperate extent we had to go to to keep him away from joining GC's first squad (instantly and unjustly making him our highest paid player on a massive salary that even the guy who re-signed him has since admitted regret to, plus the suspect trade home agreement and third party deals), then there's his willingness to go to Brisbane last year if we could agree on a trade deal, plus to a lesser extent his unusual "beach boy at heart" video. When do you think the club started thinking about the possibility of getting Joel down here to help Kurt's "homesickness"? And this is only what we know publically; it's safe to say that a lot more would have played out behind closed doors. They absolutely knew last year, that there were massive doubts about Kurt staying with the club long term. Now, can you please detail what you must know about the players you've used as comparisons wanting to leave their clubs? Boak received a huge salary increase to stay at Port, and seemingly only would have left for genuine, family related reasons. Cloke has done very well out of staying at Collingwood and who knows if he ever really wanted to leave. Danger re-signed prior to round 7 and has never displayed anything other than a total passion for the club.

Really surprised that you managed to illicit likes from some quality posters with this. You should know if you're liking a post that both jenny and BACCS do, that something isn't quite right :)
 
. And when you gamble and you know the odds are stacked against you with the consequences of the gamble blowing up in your face then it's not worth the risk.

There is always a risk with gambling. I could have a full house which is a pretty damn good hand but the risk is that those three clubs on the table may mean someone else has a straight...do I call his bluff?

Risk and reward

So when a club cheats the salary cap, that's also a gamble, do you do it? No you don't because you know what the consequences are.

We didn't cheat the salary cap.

EC I know what you are saying but some perspective has to be put in here, I'm not saying that people should keep their jobs no matter what but I do understand why they took the gamble because the reward was so big
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top Bottom