Tippett's Gone - READ RULES BEFORE POSTING

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

Really struggling with why people are sticking up for Harper. Can't blame him for the Tippett trade deal, but he's been presented as a buffoon for his sponsorship dealings.

He's nothing to do with it.

He carried out the deed (admittedly poorly) but the buck doesn't stop at the middle. The decision making which led to the mess was made higher up.

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

further evidence that you clearly dont understand my point. thanks for playing, better luck next time.

Oh, I understood perfectly.

Try quoting Rowey again to show that everything will be ok.

 

[jenny61_99]

and he was right. Its time for you to end this ridiculous attack on other posters who have been completely vindicated.

"Completely Vindicated" - by a newspaper article.

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

I'll give you one thing - you certainly live up to your name. The club, Trigg, Harper and Reid have said they will plead guilty to all charges. The jig is up. The only thing we don't know are the penalties.

It was a bad jig to begin with

 

[SpeciousArgument]

If there is anything at all mitigating, that paints us in a better light, why haven't we heard it?

What is to be gained by keeping it quiet?

Instead it is just 'we have a history of compliance, unblemished record' etc.

We have heard it, remember the affidavits from sponsors stating they instigated all ASAs?

Whats being reported isnt coming via official statements by anyone, its being leaked. you're great at playing the assumption game, why dont you make some about where those leaks might be coming from and why they might have a vested interest in not presenting the AFC's exculpatory evidence

(just to be clear because you seem to miss my point a lot, the 5 parties may be guilty however your questions can be answered in either the affirmative or the negative and so arent proof of anything)

 

[Harris Pilton]

According to that item in the Advertiser:

"A club fine of $400,000 and ban from the first two rounds of the next two national drafts is expected."

Forgive my ignorance - I am not knowledgable about recruiting matters - but what exactly are the "next two national drafts." Does this relate to all drafts for the next two years, or only for the next two draft processes e.g. pre-season, rookie, national?

 

[SpeciousArgument]

Oh, I understood perfectly.

Try quoting Rowey again to show that everything will be ok.

when did i 'quote Rowey'?

as a side note hang shit on him all you like but he did know about all of this before you did.

 

[SpeciousArgument]

According to that item in the Advertiser:

"A club fine of $400,000 and ban from the first two rounds of the next two national drafts is expected."

Forgive my ignorance - I am not knowledgable about recruiting matters - but what exactly are the "next two national drafts." Does this relate to all drafts for the next two years, or only for the next two draft processes e.g. pre-season, rookie, national?

National draft is a seperate draft to the rookie and pre season drafts.

So exclusion specifically from the national draft would still allow us to pick players in the pre season and rookie drafts

 

[Wood_Duck]

He's nothing to do with it.

He carried out the deed (admittedly poorly) but the buck doesn't stop at the middle. The decision masking which led to the mess was made higher up.

It was Harper that met with Balfours and put that deal in writing Carl. Not sure Im following you.

 

[Emperoar]

According to that item in the Advertiser:

"A club fine of $400,000 and ban from the first two rounds of the next two national drafts is expected."

Forgive my ignorance - I am not knowledgable about recruiting matters - but what exactly are the "next two national drafts." Does this relate to all drafts for the next two years, or only for the next two draft processes e.g. pre-season, rookie, national?

If that has any truth to it then we're getting off pretty lightly. Is this a glimmer of hope or is the Advertiser trolling us?

 

[Wood_Duck]

If there is anything at all mitigating, that paints us in a better light, why haven't we heard it?

I guess that coz the commission hearing is tomorrow.

What is to be gained by keeping it quiet?

Does going public with your evidence reduce your penalty

Instead it is just 'we have a history of compliance, unblemished record' etc

I am hopeful we have something else. Wonder how SP is going obtaining those photos of AA and AD with the underage transvestite?

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

We have heard it, remember the affidavits from sponsors stating they instigated all ASAs?

Whats being reported isnt coming via official statements by anyone, its being leaked. you're great at playing the assumption game, why dont you make some about where those leaks might be coming from and why they might have a vested interest in not presenting the AFC's exculpatory evidence

(just to be clear because you seem to miss my point a lot, the 5 parties may be guilty however your questions can be answered in either the affirmative or the negative and so arent proof of anything)

Yes we're clean on van Berlo. That's the ace up the sleeve. There won't be MORE penalties on top of what we get for Tippett. Goody gumdrops. AFC on three guys.

Who cares where the leak has come from? How has that changed the facts? It hasn't. Why aren't we publicizing all the facts that show we are innocent? Wouldn't it be good to balance all of EQ's lies with some truth?

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

I guess that coz the commission hearing is tomorrow.



Does going public with your evidence reduce your penalty



I am hopeful we have something else. Wonder how SP is going obtaining those photos of AA and AD with the underage transvestite?

Our reputation is in tatters.

We haven't hired a PR firm for nothing.

Copping an absolute kicking in the press day after day with nothing to support our 'side' of the story isn't doing wonders.

 

[Cap]

Our reputation is in tatters.

We haven't hired a PR firm for nothing.

Copping an absolute kicking in the press day after day with nothing to support our 'side' of the story isn't doing wonders.

I know, it is like they hope to wow us with fire crackers at the end of the hearing.

meanwhile, in the land of oz......

 

[Wood_Duck]

Our reputation is in tatters.

We haven't hired a PR firm for nothing.

Copping an absolute kicking in the press day after day with nothing to support our 'side' of the story isn't doing wonders.

I think one of the conditions placed upon us by the AFL was that we didn't release anything to the press. It wouldn't surprise me if this will be one of the conditions placed on our 'lenient' penalty tomorrow.

 

[Godallblighty]

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?

Not one 'allegedly' in the article and I imagine it was pretty thoroughly perused by the Age's lawyers. The paper obviously believes the information stands up. Playing the man, as you are, with terms like 'hand-fed', 'making stuff up', and 'filler' is a pretty thin rebuttal. Clearly, she has a source (or more than one) that's pretty connected. Whether it's missing some nuances that put Adelaide officials in a better light remains to be seen (hopefully) but you would think that the substance of this is pretty damning regardless, ie that club officials knowingly and calculatingly circumvented the rules - not misinterpreted them, as has been claimed.

As for the leak not coming from within the AFC, I'm not so sure. Whilst I am fairly sure that AFGM is full of it, his suggestion that there are factions at the club seems to me quite plausible. The notion that someone inside the AFC wants all this stuff exposed is not without merit.

I agree, as others have said, that the guilty pleas are most likely part of a deal. If there's any rabbits to be pulled from hats, they would surely have been produced by now. Hoping that Adelaide is going to come up with something tomorrow that turns all of this into some minor misdemeanour looks pretty forlorn.

 

[SpeciousArgument]

Yes we're clean on van Berlo. That's the ace up the sleeve. There won't be MORE penalties on top of what we get for Tippett. Goody gumdrops. AFC on three guys.

Who cares where the leak has come from? How has that changed the facts? It hasn't. Why aren't we publicizing all the facts that show we are innocent? Wouldn't it be good to balance all of EQ's lies with some truth?

There are far fewer facts than youre claiming. Personally i would feel better about the club if they arent the ones leaking information. How is it in our interests to leak our defense to the Tippett camp and the AFL before we get a chance to present it to the commission? It wasnt long ago that we were deriding the Tippett camp for Galbally trying to make their case on radio.

There is still the possibility that a settlement will be reached whereby parties agree not to disclose what went on, and thats what im really afraid of, never actually knowing who did what and why.

There will be plenty of time for finger pointing after the commission hearing and penalties are delivered.

 

[DJ75]

I spoke to someone last night that had recently spoken with Trigg (int he last 2 days). The club are fully expecting to get smashed here. We are in some very deep trouble.
The fine as reported sounds about right. We will lose the first 2 round picks in the next two drafts (which makes it three drafts in total) - this is going to crush us in 6-10 years time. Some very lean years are ahead.
Trigg is expecting to be banned from any and all AFL positions for a lengthy period of time. He was hoping to argue it down to a 6 month ban, but it is most likely to be years. He won't be our CEO this time next week. Reid will cop a similar ban. Harper also although a smaller time frame.

Ultimately Trigg is gone, Reid punished, Harper gone. We lose the equivalent of 8 first round draft picks (the 6 from the National drafts plus the 2 we could have had from Brisbane for Tippett). Our ability to negotiate and keep our star players in the future will be massively hampered. Our premiership window that was just opening will close exceptionally quickly. We will need to become absolute masters of trading and free-agent trickery.
And all of this for a selfish egotistic nob-end who is an overpaid and overrated tosser. Management at its finest people.

 

[johnnypanther]

Which AFL regulation is this, and what procedural statute in the AFL guidelines does it refer to?

What can & cannot happen is very tightly & explicitly control in the AFL rules

Putting aside the current fiasco, did you realize how hilarious that bolded statement is?

 

[Godallblighty]

I think one of the conditions placed upon us by the AFL was that we didn't release anything to the press.

Surely the club would say, 'We won't if you won't.'

 

[Tex200]

Our reputation is in tatters.

We haven't hired a PR firm for nothing.

Copping an absolute kicking in the press day after day with nothing to support our 'side' of the story isn't doing wonders.

Our reputation is in tatters.


We haven't hired a PR firm for nothing.

Copping an absolute kicking in the press day after day with nothing to support our 'side' of the story isn't doing wonders.[/quo
te]

True. We have taken a pounding in the PR stakes, being led by the Age consistently.

its been made worse by firstly indicating we had defences then withdrawing draft picks with no explanations, and finally this. They shoukd have either said nothing at all or kept the public better appraised.

As it stands they now carry the burden of appearing to have misled the public. It's been handled very poorly imo.

However as always all parties should be allowed their say.

 

[beartoo]

Roll on tomorrow. I hope there are mitigating factors and that there is more to come from the AFC point of view. Not hopeful though. What are people planning to do with their lives once this is sorted out?
I just bit the bullet yesterday and renewed my membership. Whatever the aadministrative f***ups, it's the blokes on the field wearing the tricolours that I support.

 

[jenny61_99]

There are far fewer facts than youre claiming. Personally i would feel better about the club if they arent the ones leaking information. How is it in our interests to leak our defense to the Tippett camp and the AFL before we get a chance to present it to the commission? It wasnt long ago that we were deriding the Tippett camp for Galbally trying to make their case on radio.

There is still the possibility that a settlement will be reached whereby parties agree not to disclose what went on, and thats what im really afraid of, never actually knowing who did what and why.

There will be plenty of time for finger pointing after the commission hearing and penalties are delivered.

I agree with this.

 

[Harris Pilton]

National draft is a seperate draft to the rookie and pre season drafts.

So exclusion specifically from the national draft would still allow us to pick players in the pre season and rookie drafts

OK thanks. That doesn't seem quite so bad, if true.

 

[Tex200]

Technical question. Will a ban on us from early draft picks only apply to the picks we are issued with each year, or will it also include picks we trade in?