Remove this Banner Ad

Tippett's Gone - READ RULES BEFORE POSTING

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.

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

jenny61_99 said:
Read into whatever you want to. You will anyway.
Click to expand...
Are you Julia Gillard because it was a straight forward question. You stated what's happened as if they are the facts even though you've criticised others for jumping to conclusions without the facts. Stating Trigg wanted to come clean to stop the Tippetts using it against us is different to Chapmans version of events, isn't it?
 
Elite Crow said:
Are you Julia Gillard because it was a straight forward question. You stated what's happened as if they are the facts even though you've criticised others for jumping to conclusions without the facts. Stating Trigg wanted to come clean to stop the Tippetts using it against us is different to Chapmans version of events, isn't it?
Click to expand...

Are you Julie Bishop?
 
Vader said:
Funny.. it's the first time I've ever seen anyone write anything nice about Colin Young on BigFooty, particularly the Adelaide Board. This is the player manager who is infamous for conducting his player salary negotiations through the media, creating fake offers from other clubs in order to drive his players' salaries up. The guy is one of the lowest scum sucking bottom feeders.. yet because he makes one statement, vigorously defending one of our players, he's now someone we want for CEO.

I wouldn't want to see the club employ him as a janitor, far less CEO. Sorry, but one swallow does not make a summer. Colin Young is still close to being the lowest form of life on earth as far as I'm concerned.
Click to expand...

Vader, why are you being so ambivalent towards Mr C Young. :) Please be more forthright in the future. ;)
 
whatboutbob said:
Didn't Caro or Quayle (for what that's worth) make mention of the agreement's existence being confirmed in a board meeting?
Click to expand...
I missed that, but it is hard to believe that no one at the board knew more, given all the discussion in the press over the previous 18 months. Trigg & Co either covered everything up &/or he is being asked to take the wrap for a bigger cover-up. Would be good if everyone came clean after Friday, but I doubt it. Surely the members deserve to know what happened given we have been lied too since the rumours of the special clause 1st eventuated.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

SydCrow said:
I thought he said there was a risk Tiprat would go - but Blind Freddy knew this, he made a video saying as much
Click to expand...
Presumably our Board would have cottoned on, seeing as even Blind Freddy had his finger on the pulse.
 
Elite Crow said:
Are you Julia Gillard because it was a straight forward question. You stated what's happened as if they are the facts even though you've criticised others for jumping to conclusions without the facts. Stating Trigg wanted to come clean to stop the Tippetts using it against us is different to Chapmans version of events, isn't it?
Click to expand...

No. Chapman said Trigg came to him when it was apparent what was happening and they then went to the afl for clarification. That's my understanding of it.
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

jenny61_99 said:
No. Chapman said Trigg came to him when it was apparent what was happening and they then went to the afl for clarification. That's my understanding of it.
Click to expand...
The club has made a big song and dance that we went to the AFL, but what you are saying we didn't go to the AFL to come clean but seek clarification whether we were locked into the deal.
 
jenny61_99 said:
No. Chapman said Trigg came to him when it was apparent what was happening and they then went to the afl for clarification. That's my understanding of it.
Click to expand...
When Trigg was overseas?
 
jenny61_99 said:
This is incorrect. We didn't want White period, Sydney weren't going to do the deal without him. Trigg wasn't pushing deal through - he thought Sydney (Ireland) were being arseholes over something he thought no longer existed. He wanted to go to AFL to get clarification on whether Tippetts could force our hand.
Click to expand...

I just don't get this. Do you know this for sure or are you speculating? Why did White come for a medical if we categorically didn't want him? Why did we waste the entire trade period negotiating with Sydney before asking for the AFL's assistance?
 
Carl Spackler said:
I am absolutely being serious.

The whole club knew about the go home for a second rounder thing. Hence us guarding against it.

Fair enough, the 3rd party payments were kept on the downlow.
Click to expand...

Everyone in the country knew Tippett was a reasonable chance to leave. The club included. So we looked for players to fill that spot if it became necessary to do so. You're seriously trying to turn that obvious decision into a proof that the board knew about the deal?

I could have been hired as the list manager and the very first thing I would have done would have been speak to my recruitment staff and ask them to scout out replacements for Tippett in case they became necessary. I wouldn't have had to know about the contract before I thought that maybe it might be a good idea to look or second options for a key player that had already publicly expressed his desire to return home one day.
 
jenny61_99 said:
He doesn't want to take the fall for Reid. Nothing to do with Trigg.
Click to expand...

Hi Jen, have you asked Triggy that question yet?

None of this seems to make sense unless you know the whole story.

As previously stated, the two "breaches" that we have fessed up to are

1) We tried to get Tippett to sign at the end of 2009 by agreeing to an easy exit at the end of 2012. This will be seen as draft tampering and will attract a substantial punishment.

2) We tried to sweeten the deal by agreeing to "underwrite" Kurt's third party deal. This is also a major problem and will attract additional punishment. Even if we never paid a cent over Kurt's agreed contract and never breached the salary cap we will still be hit hard for this.

The grey area is whether we "directly arranged" some of the third party deals. We may get away with this because the rules were pretty vague and a thorough audit of all third party deals in the AFL will find all kinds of anomalies. I suspect that the AFL does not want to open this can of worms and so may provide some sort of amnesty for past crimes by all AFL clubs and really tighten the rules going forward.

The other problem is the evidence that we tried to cover up some of our sins. It hardly supports the common view of Jenny and the Space Travellers that we have always been whiter than white and we were just naive to cave in to the pressure from the Tippett clan.

The real problem is what "may" have occurred in the past. What if there is a smoking gun regarding third player agreements dating back to the early days of Triggy's tenure as CEO? If we are hit over the head with a brick on Friday and we lose our CEO then it is fair to assume that the AFL know the full story.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Similar threads

baldandbroke
Opinion 2025 rule interpretations watch
2 3
Replies
60
Views
2K
Crowked
Crowked
NTRabbit
  • Poll
List Mgmt. 2025 List Management Resource Compilation Thread with Key Post-Season Dates
Replies
5
Views
960
NTRabbit
NTRabbit
NTRabbit
  • Poll
List Mgmt. 2024 List Management Resource Compilation Thread with Key Post-Season Dates
Replies
13
Views
2K
NTRabbit
NTRabbit

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top