Tippett's Gone - READ RULES BEFORE POSTING

[Crowbots are dead]

What a joke. Can't really see the benefits of this. Makes it much easier for them to keep us out of two drafts now as well. Those in charge at the club have got me confused, would have much rathered we picked up best available and then with a strong list going forward take the punishment. Not like we have a heap who will be retiring anytime soon.

I disagree. The AFC would have a good idea of what the penalty will be if they are in ongoing discussions. They have probably been told that the penaties will be at least one draft. On that basis if we voluntarily take our medicine now it is likely we will be 'rewarded' with only one draft. We should them be back in the game next year.

 

[Moonwatcher]

This whole "in good faith" thing does not sit well with me. The AFL would still be well within it's rights to ban us from the next two drafts anyway.

Let's just hope it ends up alright.

I don't think any club has lost a single draft pick without going over TPP? Our penalty is already quite excessive.

 

[Bluesince62]

Remember, the min/max draft pick and the underwriting of 3rd party deals had guilty pleas from day 1 so some bargaining is not surprising. Smart move to bring on the punishment whilst you are still on the up. Seems the Friday meeting will be discussing what to do with Reid, Trigg and Tippett. The fiasco on 3rd party deal rules will probably mean Harper walks away and some deals may come under a marketing cap like Judds and many others.

 

[jenny61_99]

Wasn't everyone saying they'd prefer us to take the hit this year? Now we're unhappy?

 

[Crowbots are dead]

This whole "in good faith" thing does not sit well with me. The AFL would still be well within it's rights to ban us from the next two drafts anyway.

Let's just hope it ends up alright.

are you so niave to think they would do this without some indication from the AFL on how this will be viewed. Sure they could change their minds on it but it must be rememeber that the AFL want to put this whole sorry mess away and avoid the lawyers. I think this almost certainly means this will be the extend of our trade penalties (fines is another matter )

 

[crowman_23]

I disagree. The AFC would have a good idea of what the penalty will be if they are in ongoing discussions. They have probably been told that the penaties will be at least one draft. On that basis if we voluntarily take our medicine now it is likely we will be 'rewarded' with only one draft. We should them be back in the game next year.

Sadly I don't see the big guys at the AFL working like that. Sure it looks like we are saying that will be our punishment, 'goodwill' and all. But the AFL like to control these things, and when we had the chance to use pick 20, we should have just taken our chances at the AFL hearing and picked up another quality youngster while we had the chance.

 

[jenny61_99]

Remember, the min/max draft pick and the underwriting of 3rd party deals had guilty pleas from day 1 so some bargaining is not surprising. Smart move to bring on the punishment whilst you are still on the up. Seems the Friday meeting will be discussing what to do with Reid, Trigg and Tippett. The fiasco on 3rd party deal rules will probably mean Harper walks away and some deals may come under a marketing cap like Judds and many others.

We only have two deals outside of Tippett. One to vb and one to Dangerfield. Neither worth very much in the overall scheme of things, and certainly less than the $200,000 Carlton now have to account for under theirs.

 

[Moonwatcher]

Wasn't everyone saying they'd prefer us to take the hit this year? Now we're unhappy?

Definately happy to take the hit this year. Was just hoping that there would be no need for a loss of picks.

 

[Crowbots are dead]

What a joke. Can't really see the benefits of this. Makes it much easier for them to keep us out of two drafts now as well. Those in charge at the club have got me confused, would have much rathered we picked up best available and then with a strong list going forward take the punishment. Not like we have a heap who will be retiring anytime soon.

so you would rather 2 drafts than 1?? That is almost certaintly the choice we faced. This way can move on without it hanging over our heads.

 

[Wood_Duck]

The club are clearly looking to tidy this mess up prior to the Nov 30 commission hearing. They have already begun submitting evidence to the AFL to try and get several of the charges dropped. Im tipping we have agreed to plead guilty to some technical breaches and incur a slap on the wrist in an effort by both the AFL and the Crows to avoid a protracted legal stoush.

 

[Geoffa32]

Not fussed.

Especially if it is part of our sanction and the rest be a financial one?

 

[crowman_23]

Wasn't everyone saying they'd prefer us to take the hit this year? Now we're unhappy?

Quite possibly prior to thinking the hearing was on the 20th, and thatthe penalties were bad. Once everyone thought we could use our first round selection the thought of giving it up would not really have been thought of. If we are only taken out of one years draft, I'm all for it, if it's another year, I think we will have made a mistake by not using this pick.

 

[jenny61_99]

Definately happy to take the hit this year. Was just hoping that there would be no need for a loss of picks.

Don't see how there can't be, even with the misunderstanding as to the agreement being in play or not, it was still made. it's definitely a clever move by the AFC.

 

[Crowbots are dead]

Sadly I don't see the big guys at the AFL working like that. Sure it looks like we are saying that will be our punishment, 'goodwill' and all. But the AFL like to control these things, and when we had the chance to use pick 20, we should have just taken our chances at the AFL hearing and picked up another quality youngster while we had the chance.

The AFL will want a quick and clean resolution. The landscape has changed now that lawyers are sniffing around and pointing out all of the loopholes and ambiguity in their 'house of cards' rules. They will want this to go away but recognise that we have to be punished. This is a win win for us and AFL.

 

[Paladin]

The club are clearly looking to tidy this mess up prior to the Nov 30 commission hearing. They have already begun submitting evidence to the AFL to try and get several of the charges dropped. Im tipping we have agreed to plead guilty to some technical breaches and incur a slap on the wrist in an effort by both the AFL and the Crows to avoid a protracted legal stoush.

Missing out on the first 3 rounds of a draft, compensation for our highest paid player and a huge fine is hardly a slap on the wrist. We must of really ****ed up. Trigg must go.

 

[crowman_23]

so you would rather 2 drafts than 1?? That is almost certaintly the choice we faced. This way can move on without it hanging over our heads.

? Of course not. My only hope is that this means that we are only 'kept out' of one, the one we chose to sit out of. If we are ineligible to go in to next years draft as well, I would have rathered to use the pick this year, and play the strategy in FA knowing we have no picks.

 

[jenny61_99]

Quite possibly prior to thinking the hearing was on the 20th, and thatthe penalties were bad. Once everyone thought we could use our first round selection the thought of giving it up would not really have been thought of. If we are only taken out of one years draft, I'm all for it, if it's another year, I think we will have made a mistake by not using this pick.

So you'd rather lose the next two years picks? at least this year, we know what we are giving up. The next two years picks are unknowns.

 

[jenny61_99]

Missing out on the first 3 rounds of a draft, compensation for our highest paid player and a huge fine is hardly a slap on the wrist. We must of really screwed up. Trigg must go.

Again, wait until you hear all the facts before you decide whether Trigg must go or not.

 

[crowman_23]

So you'd rather lose the next two years picks? at least this year, we know what we are giving up. The next two years picks are unknowns.

If they were to penalise us for two years, I would rather use the pick this year, and go in to the next two FA periods knowing we don't have picks, and thus using other mediums to strengthen our list.

If we sit out this years draft, and we are only penalised one draft, I think it is better we sit out this year.

Too many are assuming this means we will only sit out one draft.

 

[Elder van Berlo]

So as it stands we've lost our highest paid player, the two first round picks compensation we effectively should've received for trading him and our first two picks in the draft BEFORE our official punishment is even handed down.

What a **** up. Someone needs to be held accountable for this, proactive move or not it's now officially become a massive whack rather than a gentle slap around.

Exactly. We have now, as a result of this whole shambles (of which we had full knowledge all along), lost Tippett for nothing, we have lost whatever compensation we would have been given by the AFL if he'd signed for GC as an uncontracted player if we hadn't used these underhanded means of keeping him, we've lost Bock as an uncontracted player who GC would not have had access to if Tippett had gone, we didn't get Brisbane's 2011 pick 8 which was on the table for him, we didn't get Sydney's 2012 pick 23 or anything else in trade week for him, which was massively unders anyway, now we have lost pick 20 and pick 54.

And for what? A record season-opening losing streak which ensured 2010 was over before it started. Our worst season ever in 2011. And a gallant 2012 campaign which still didn't break our now decade and a half long Grand Final drought which is only matched by competition heavyweights Richmond, Fremantle and the Bulldogs.

Even if we are handed no further sanction by the AFL (which I severely doubt) and there is a compelling explanation which shows that the AFC were really just innocent bystanders in all of this (which is even less likely), any administration and football department which lets happen what has already happened must be held accountable.

If there are not some serious changes in personnel and club structure which show that the club is serious about accountability, transparency and most importantly giving the blokes on the field the best possible chance of finally lifting some silverware, I will not bother renewing my membership next year. I never thought it would get to this point.

 

[Moonwatcher]

Again, wait until you hear all the facts before you decide whether Trigg must go or not.

Not that I want Trigg gone but surely the knowledge that our penalty will be no less than losing Tippett and Joyce for nothing along with our first and third round draft picks enough to draw a conclusion?

 

[Paladin]

Again, wait until you hear all the facts before you decide whether Trigg must go or not.

Facts are we are guilty and already have massive sanctions with the possibility of more! What other facts would you like?

 

[Rave Slave]

Wasn't everyone saying they'd prefer us to take the hit this year? Now we're unhappy?

Jen, you can't exactly argue that this is a positive outcome. I was unhappy that the club had lost Tippett for nothing but optimistic that if we could get away without a loss of draft picks and just a fine then we'd be doing very well for ourselves. I doubt you'll get an argument from anyone that IF we were to lose picks then this year is the year to do it. The issue everyone has is that the club should never have put itself in this position in the first place.

Not aiming this one solely at Trigg but would you agree that anyone found to be involved with this fiasco now is in an untenable position within the football club considering the assets we've lost?

 

[jenny61_99]

Facts are we are guilty and already have massive sanctions with the possibility of more! What other facts would you like?

The who what and why.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

So as it stands we've lost our highest paid player, the two first round picks compensation we effectively should've received for trading him and our first two picks in the draft BEFORE our official punishment is even handed down.

What a **** up. Someone needs to be held accountable for this, proactive move or not it's now officially become a massive whack rather than a gentle slap around.

You would hope that AFC knew this was going to be the minimum punishment, so they got in 1st. Basically it is an admission of guilt, which I have no problem with if it was undefendable ... but isn't that why we brough in top lawyers who could have got us of/reduced penalty on technicalities?? Given the admission of guilt/loss of picks/loss of Tippett for nothing/loss of Joyce, someone must be held accountable at AFC.