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.
Allefgib said:
AFGM - I've been waiting new hints and tips from you, that's not the first time you've insinuated that last point...
Click to expand...
Did Trigg act as witness when Kurt signed the contract with the Suns??!!
 
Allefgib said:
AFGM - I've been waiting new hints and tips from you, that's not the first time you've insinuated that last point...
Click to expand...

I don't have the investigative skills of Woodward and Bernstein and if I know

1) When it happened

2) The players involved

3) The company involved

4) The Dollars involved (would make Kurt blush) then there must be plenty of others that know what happened.

For the future of our club I hope we can get through the "inquisition" on Friday without long term damage.

Doesn't anyone else think the rumoured punishment is totally out of whack with the current "evidence"? If the AFL is in the loop then I fear that we will cop another two or three years out of the top end of the draft. The full story may not be told and it will seem like the AFL will have hit us unbelievably hard for our sins. It will suit us to retain some semblence of honesty and it will scare the living daylights out of all the other teams.
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

cmndstab said:
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.
Click to expand...
Makes it even more Idiotic we didn't accept Brisbanes trade offer last year
 
A FEW GOOD MEN said:
I don't have the investigative skills of Woodward and Bernstein and if I know

1) When it happened

2) The players involved

3) The company involved

4) The Dollars involved (would make Kurt blush) then there must be plenty of others that know what happened.

For the future of our club I hope we can get through the "inquisition" on Friday without long term damage.

Doesn't anyone else think the rumoured punishment is totally out of whack with the current "evidence"? If the AFL is in the loop then I fear that we will cop another two or three years out of the top end of the draft. The full story may not be told and it will seem like the AFL will have hit us unbelievably hard for our sins. It will suit us to retain some semblence of honesty and it will scare the living daylights out of all the other teams.
Click to expand...
*sigh* Given I backed you in a long time back in this thread - I'm currently favoring your view here as a fairly accurate one. Which means we are in a world of pain.

Now - you've alluded to factions before; any chance of the 'other' faction getting some more control on the club after all this goes down??
 
Allefgib said:
*sigh* Given I backed you in a long time back in this thread - I'm currently favoring your view here as a fairly accurate one. Which means we are in a world of pain.

Now - you've alluded to factions before; any chance of the 'other' faction getting some more control on the club after all this goes down??
Click to expand...

It will be a whole new ball game after Friday and the preferred outcome by "the club" is for things to gradually change rather than a "big bang" approach with Trigg, Harper and a few others disappearing immediately. That may be taken out of our hands by the AFL.

There were never formal factions, rather a group of people at the club (including MR) who couldn't believe that we have kept chasing Tippett over the last 12 months. Only those "in the loop" knew why we seemed to be in a state of denial. (I had no idea of the "other issues" when I started posting in August)

If Rob Chapman can avoid a significant suspension to Triggs and Harper and maintain solidarity within the Boardroom then he will make Houdini look like a carnival magician.
 
jenny61_99 said:
We recruited Jenkins in the event of Tippett wanting to go home, it's called covering your bases.
Click to expand...

This certainly confirms that AFC new Tippett wanted out of the club last year. So why didnt they grab that no8 from Brisbane when they had the chance. It this not poor management.
 
cmndstab said:
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.
Click to expand...

According to our conversations last year you didnt know. You were extremely defensive of Tippett. Why would Randell take Jenkins as a fall back unless he knew that Tippett was wanting out. And as I said before knowing that Tippett wanted out why didnt we take No 8 last year.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

A FEW GOOD MEN said:
It will be a whole new ball game after Friday and the preferred outcome by "the club" is for things to gradually change rather than a "big bang" approach with Trigg, Harper and a few others disappearing immediately. That may be taken out of our hands by the AFL.

There were never formal factions, rather a group of people at the club (including MR) who couldn't believe that we have kept chasing Tippett over the last 12 months. Only those "in the loop" knew why we seemed to be in a state of denial. (I had no idea of the "other issues" when I started posting in August)

If Rob Chapman can avoid a significant suspension to Triggs and Harper and maintain solidarity within the Boardroom then he will make Houdini look like a carnival magician.
Click to expand...

I can't believe it either.
 
Allefgib said:
Just to be clear - can we do that with Tippett's consent?

My assumption, and I'm likely wrong, was that we couldn't trade him last year if he didn't want to go?
Click to expand...
Brisbane said they had talked to him last year and he agreed to go, but they would only offer picks and not 1st rounder + Polec/Redden like what the Crows wanted so no deal was done.
 
MRB37 said:
Brisbane said they had talked to him last year and he agreed to go, but they would only offer picks and not 1st rounder + Polec/Redden like what the Crows wanted so no deal was done.
Click to expand...
We should have taken their picks and tried not to bite their hand off in doing so :p
 
Thanks for the confirmation - esp some of the PMs.

I'm really at a loss to understand how some at the club saw it coming and others felt they could keep him.

Is it fair to say those that face charges were all in the camp of 'yeah we can keep him?'
 
Allefgib said:
Thanks for the confirmation - esp some of the PMs.

I'm really at a loss to understand how some at the club saw it coming and others felt they could keep him.

Is it fair to say those that face charges were all in the camp of 'yeah we can keep him?'
Click to expand...

Might it be supposed this separation of camps could have lead to weakened support for MR from the other side?
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Allefgib said:
Thanks for the confirmation - esp some of the PMs.

I'm really at a loss to understand how some at the club saw it coming and others felt they could keep him.

Is it fair to say those that face charges were all in the camp of 'yeah we can keep him?'
Click to expand...

Tippett was playing us bigfella. Telling those that made decisions and negotiated contracts that he wanted to stay. They had a media release ready announcing he'd signed on for five years. You don't do that if you think he's not staying.
 
A FEW GOOD MEN said:
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.
Click to expand...

So here's the thing with third party deals. The AFLs policy on them has more holes than a pound of Swiss cheese. One of the reasons clubs are nervous at the moment is because they probably have one or two indiscretions relating to TPPs in their own closets. If as you say Trigg organized one back in his early days, so what? The rules are so ****ing ambiguous they created the Visi Judd agreement FFS. He won't be crucified based on that - if indeed it happened at all!
 
Allefgib said:
Just to be clear - can we do that with Tippett's consent?

My assumption, and I'm likely wrong, was that we couldn't trade him last year if he didn't want to go?
Click to expand...
that is an interesting question, I have read somewhere that he did agree and the trade didn't happen for other reasons.

now I'm sure that is big footy innuendo, but one of the questions I would love chapman to answer (if indeed he does really answer any questions like he said he would) is, what happened with the Brisbane trade? did we turn it down? did Kurt turn it down or did we run out of time filling in the transfer docs?

the answer may have something to do with the angst caused by Tippet this year.
 
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