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.
Just read EQ's article closely.

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-ne...w-it-went-wrong-for-crows-20121128-2aefe.html

Her main source has to be the Tippett camp, probably Blucher. She has all the details of Tippett's 2009 contract including the secret side-deal, and portrays it all as Adelaide's initiative.

She also seems to have a source in the AFL, as she quotes Harper's emails.

It's all a bit academic now though, since we are apparently back to plan A.....plead guilty and throw ourselves on the mercy of the AFL.

Looking forward to your free tube of lube with next year's membership renewal?
 
BrissyCrow said:
Lets say that Sydney dont even get a mention after Friday hearing. As I agree that Sydney are up to their neck in it what can be done to have them held accountable. Or is it simply a fact that us supports get absuolutely no say in the game. How can we make Sydney accountable?
Click to expand...

Sydney wasn't silly enough, or amateur enough, to put anything in writing, making it much harder to prove they did anything wrong. That's how a professional club bends the rules to breaking point without getting caught.

Our club, on the other hand, has operated as cleverly as those bank robbers who left behind their photo IDs at the scene of the crime. The rest of the league will be laughing behind closed doors that any club could have employees in such senior positions capable of such stupidity and incompetence. The board must sack those responsible on a point of principle. Mistakes are one thing, gross incompetence is entirely another. Trigg and Harper should be walking into the Commission hearing offering their unconditional resignations to the AFL in the hope that it mitigates any penalties that would effect the club on field. I sincerely hope the club isn't trying to protect them at the expense of losing an additional draft pick or two.
 
jenny61_99 said:
No, my loyalty is ALWAYS to the Club. But I think it is truly poor form to be celebrating someone's misfortune - particularly someone that has done so much positive for this Club over the years.
Click to expand...


Jenny I can understand your loyalty for your friend and commend you on sticking up for him through all this adversity.

All I can do is give an example from my club via John Elliot ... for years we as Carlton supporters thought the sun shone out of his rear end ... sadly his legacy will always be what happened at the end .... he almost single handedly destroyed the club through financial mismanagement and brown paper bags.

Is it as bad as what Trigg has done ... No ... but if what EQ says is spot on and the penalties you receive are severe then there will be no rock that Trigg will be able to crawl under to get away from the venom of AFC supporters.

He could have been Jesus before but that will all be washed away and he will be remembered as the devil.

Right or wrong this I can guarantee you is what will happen.

So good luck, I tip my hat at your defence of the man but geez, looks like a tsunami is coming your way.
 
boffo said:
Just read EQ's article closely.

Looking forward to your free tube of lube with next year's membership renewal?
Click to expand...

Ah this is the stuff!

41MRS8HdZ1L._SL500_SS500_.jpg
 

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

Posting this knowing that as a Swans fan i am probaly (almost certainly) biased, but...

Sydney did offer what they had. We offered our first round pick. We also delisted a bunch of guys, and i'm sure that we would have given you that list to see if you were interested. One problem was that Adelaide had very little list space to work with. Jesse White had requested a trade to get more opportunity, and we were doing our best to make that happen, i suppose. That said, 23+ white was massive unders for Kurt, but what else did we have to work with? We couldn't force a player to accept a trade if they didn't want to go, and it's not really great to get rid of premiership players or father/son picks, so we didn't really have much currancy.

The case can be made we shouldn't have tried to recruit Kurt in the first place, if we didn't have the goods to offer. But from a Swans point of view, our club is obliged to do the best it can for our club, not the AFC, so i can understand them trying.

My personal thought is that it all went wrong when you guys traded for Angus Graham. Before that, you had room on the list for one player. If you had said yes to White, then Sydney, AFC and Kurt all could have been on the same page saying that AFC wanted a replacement ruck/fwd for Kurt, and although it was unders it got both players where they wanted to be and got Adelaide a first round pick. AFL might have been suspicious, but it had a chance of going through. But once you got Angus, if you took White you were getting a second ruck/fwd replacment, and would have to delist a player to accept White, so it looked really dodgy.

As for the EQ statement that Sydney asked for late picks... You guys weren't going to use them (you oinly had 2 live picks). I have no evidence, but i bet AFC said they didn't want White's salary, and Sydney should pay some of it, and Sydney replied with "OK, but in return can we have your late picks you aren't going to use". Like i say, that is pure speculation, but it would make a kind of sense. (and paints my club in a better light, which is what i want to believe;))

So while i can see Sydney played hardball, they did offer more than the minimum in the agreement, so don't really see how the AFL can ping them for doing something wrong (unless there is an email trail which comes to light at some stage...).
 
On the face of it, it appeared Sydney held Adelaide over a barrel, and tried to take advantage of an illegal agreement. It was a mess of Adelaide's creation, but that doesn't make Sydney any less guilty of conspiring to tamper the draft. The problem is proving it, which is why I believe they have not been charged at this stage. The only way Sydney would cop any form of penalty is if somebody from within the club admitted it to the AFL.

And lets be honest here, saying that Sydney offered more than the minimum is nothing but semantics. Pick 23 was a first rounder by name only, and Jesse White being attached to it certainly didn't increase its value.
 
Just because Sydney knew about the clause, and looked to benefit from it - doesn't mean that they have to admit to knowing it was illegal.

They could say "Well we assumed it had been signed off like ALL deals are supposed to be signed off"

Sydney arent going to be in any trouble I don't reckon.

After a few hours sleep - I reckon fine / 2013 draft sanctions / Administrators Banned - are the expected outcomes.

Then we can move on.
 
OutofTownCrow said:
Just because Sydney knew about the clause, and looked to benefit from it - doesn't mean that they have to admit to knowing it was illegal.

They could say "Well we assumed it had been signed off like ALL deals are supposed to be signed off"

Sydney arent going to be in any trouble I don't reckon.

After a few hours sleep - I reckon fine / 2013 draft sanctions / Administrators Banned - are the expected outcomes.

Then we can move on.
Click to expand...

A few hours sleep mate you're bloody lucky have downed nearly half a case of lagers & still can't drown my sorrows.

If EQ story is true can't see Sydney being accused of anything in regards to breaking the AFL rules but morally corrupt they are guilty as hell, how the heck can Sydney offer us pick 23 + White + his bloody contract & asking in return for Tippett & two late draft picks man i'm so confused over all this shit.
 
OutofTownCrow said:
Just because Sydney knew about the clause, and looked to benefit from it - doesn't mean that they have to admit to knowing it was illegal.

They could say "Well we assumed it had been signed off like ALL deals are supposed to be signed off"

Sydney arent going to be in any trouble I don't reckon.

After a few hours sleep - I reckon fine / 2013 draft sanctions / Administrators Banned - are the expected outcomes.

Then we can move on.
Click to expand...

Except that such a clause is not able to be in any AFL endorsed contract, as clearly stated by Adrian Anderson many times before the trade period.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

whatboutbob said:
Does Chapman supposedly hearing about the Tippett exit clause in the board meeting make him culpable?

Or do y'all think he shouldn't be expected to know if that sort of thing is/isn't legit?
Click to expand...
It makes him culpable.

And also a liar as he claimed no knowledge until Black Friday.
 
jenny61_99 said:
Well I do. Particularly if she's running with only one side of the story?
Click to expand...
The side we're pleading guilty to?

Time to give it up. It's reached indefensible stage.
 
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/afl/mor...-draft-tampering/story-e6frf9jf-1226526128743

Champan said last night he was in the "final stages" of preparing his submission to save the club from "punishment which might not fit the crime".

i hope if we are hit a punishment which might not fit the crime we stand up demand a reduced penalty or take them to court.

But who can we believe from the club about this issue no one.
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Truck Rutten said:
What? Some of that info hasn't been reported before, as far as I know. Has BACCS hacked your account?

As supporters of the AFC, I reckon any possible leaks from within the AFL are the last thing we should be worried about at the moment.
Click to expand...

Could the leaks be coming from within?
 
Godallblighty said:
Come on, Jen. You don't know that. And you're trying to discredit the info in the article by suggesting it.
Click to expand...

I am trying to understand how she has access to all that information. Now either somebody has hand fed her it, or she's making stuff up. I wouldn't think she's got it from the AFC, so that leaves the AFL or Tippett. I suspect that she's pieced bits together from both camps and perhaps added some filler herself. Of course, if she's only got two sides of the story, so it's not truly complete - is it?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top