Tippett's Gone - READ RULES BEFORE POSTING

[Elite Crow]

so youre here to troll?

Who are you referring to?

 

[SpeciousArgument]

Who are you referring to?

quote was broken, fixed now

 

[Tex200]

Edwardson. hahahahaha

Which means what exactly?

 

[bjn1960]

Which definition? The old one or the new one?

The new one implies all males are - when ever it suits!

 

[Tex200]

Am I alone in thinking what was said on radio tonight was reasonable.

There are 2 kinds of TP agreements. An ASA which is counted under the TPP . This is an agreement arranged by the club. Then there are TP agreements we don't arrange and they are not counted under TPP.

Tippett had one or more ASA's but, although registered with the AFL, were not counted in our TPP. That said, even if we had of correctly counted the ASA's in our TPP, we would not have exceeded the TTP anyway. So therein lies the technical breach, but there is no advantage gained from it.

Then the trade agreement. Trigg says he killed it. Tippett obviously disagrees. We will never know the truth because of the plea deal.

Trigg admits not trading him last year was a mistake.

And people are cancelling memberships....over this....really?

I'm not condoning this, mistakes were made. But there is no fraud here, no Melb Storm 2 sets of books. I really don't understand the hysteria.

 

[A FEW GOOD MEN]

I have waited until Chapman and Trigg provided their "full explanation" before posting my thoughts.

I have never been a Trigg hater and I wanted to give him the benefit of the doubt. The "explanation" has more holes in it than swiss cheese and I feel like we have been treated with contempt.

1) Did Trigg as CEO give John Reid carte blanche to offer Tippett whatever it would take to sign him and then did not follow up on the terms of the contract until well after it was signed?

If yes, he is incompetent, if no he is a liar

2) When Trigg became aware of the "entire" contract + side agreements he apparently met with Blucher et al and said the deal was off. Did he fail to put this in writing and didn't even make a file-note of the meeting?

If yes, he is incompetent, if no he is a liar.

3) When rumours started to become public in 2011 Trigg discussed the Tippett deal with the board. Did he really believe (as he stated to the Board) that he had "fixed up" the matter and the Board had nothing to worry about?

If yes, he is incompetent, if no he is a liar.

4) When Brisbane made an offer for Tippett twelve months ago was Trigg still trying to cover his tracks? Did he believe we would retain Tippett?

If yes, he is incompetent, if no he is a liar.

5) If Trigg had rescinded the "agreement" then why did he tell Harper to accept a second round pick for Tippett if push came to shove. Did he believe that was Tippett's real value?

If yes, he is incompetent, if no he is a liar.

The last three days have been classic spin. I look forward to John Reid telling us his side of the story (he did promise to do so). Has he been made the fall guy and should he expect something for his "loyalty"?

 

[bjn1960]

Why not send a email to Chapman and ask these exact question?

I have waited until Chapman and Trigg provided their "full explanation" before posting my thoughts.

I have never been a Trigg hater and I wanted to give him the benefit of the doubt. The "explanation" has more holes in it than swiss cheese and I feel like we have been treated with contempt.

1) Did Trigg as CEO give John Reid carte blanche to offer Tippett whatever it would take to sign him and then did not follow up on the terms of the contract until well after it was signed?

If yes, he is incompetent, if no he is a liar

2) When Trigg became aware of the "entire" contract + side agreements he apparently met with Blucher et al and said the deal was off. Did he fail to put this in writing and didn't even make a file-note of the meeting?

If yes, he is incompetent, if no he is a liar.

3) When rumours started to become public in 2011 Trigg discussed the Tippett deal with the board. Did he really believe (as he stated to the Board) that he had "fixed up" the matter and the Board had nothing to worry about?

If yes, he is incompetent, if no he is a liar.

4) When Brisbane made an offer for Tippett twelve months ago was Trigg still trying to cover his tracks? Did he believe we would retain Tippett?

If yes, he is incompetent, if no he is a liar.

5) If Trigg had rescinded the "agreement" then why did he tell Harper to accept a second round pick for Tippett if push came to shove. Did he believe that was Tippett's real value?

If yes, he is incompetent, if no he is a liar.

The last three days have been classic spin. I look forward to John Reid telling us his side of the story (he did promise to do so). Has he been made the fall guy and should he expect something for his "loyalty"?

 

[Elite Crow]

AFGM, on points 2-4, based on my convo with Chapman and assuming he is telling the truth, he claims it's yes to all 4 questions. My comeback was if thats the case, hasn't he shown poor judgement, and if so, should he really be our CEO?

On point 1, never worded a question like that, so don't have an answer. Interesting that there's been talk today that Craigy putting a lot of pressure on
On point 5, unfortunately I forgot to ask that one, I would love to have heard the answer.

Cornes asked Trigg if he lied, Chapman said if he believed he had lied he wouldn't still have a job. On this I believe Chapman, whether he's been fooled as well thats a different story.

I doubt Reid will throw Trigg under the bus, he would have done it by now.

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

Why are you so vigorously arguing this case?

Yes, it sucks when people ask valid questions

Can't they just accept that Trigg is the best and let things go?

 

[Elite Crow]

Yes, it sucks when people ask valid questions

Can't they just accept that Trigg is the best and let things go?

Be careful Carl, you are going to have Sleepy, Sneezy and Dopey on your case

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

I personally dont think what we've lost is that significant.

Given we are one of the only clubs in the AFL system that pay our own way financially i think the $300k while unpleasant isnt much of a hit.

That said, the fact we are in that position financially must in large part be due to the management of Trigg over the past 11 years (given that the sack Trigg faction claim that as the CEO he is ultimately responsible for all the actions of his subordinates)

As ive argued ad nauseum previously i think putting a precise value on 'the loss of our highest paid player for nothing' is problematic and a lot lower than a lot of others here seem to claim.

Had we traded Tippett to Brisbane we would have been benefiting from an illegal deal anyway given that we retained his contract by illegal means which would have resulted in a significantly harsher penalty IMO if found out.

The picks weve lost are fairly speculative at a time when we have a strong young list.

As for the brand being damaged, sure, other BF posters will be mean to us, but then they always were. when i hear about membership or crowds dropping despite good onfield performances, or sponsors pulling out, then i'll be concerned.

The way i look at it now is that his good performances for many years and relatively minor inconvenience of the penalties warrants Trigg being granted a second chance.

Probably the worst post on the internet

 

[Elite Crow]

Probably the worst post on the internet

I see you found Dopey

 

[scottwade]

Am I alone in thinking what was said on radio tonight was reasonable.

There are 2 kinds of TP agreements. An ASA which is counted under the TPP . This is an agreement arranged by the club. Then there are TP agreements we don't arrange and they are not counted under TPP.

Tippett had one or more ASA's but, although registered with the AFL, were not counted in our TPP. That said, even if we had of correctly counted the ASA's in our TPP, we would not have exceeded the TTP anyway. So therein lies the technical breach, but there is no advantage gained from it.

I didn't listen to 5AA, but the breach had nothing to do with the ASA.

The findings of the Commission stated;

"Secondly, there were side agreements, outside the operation of the TPP rules, for payments to player Tippett of $100,000 in both 2011 and 2012, in addition to his standard playing contract and an ASA contract with the club for promotional work. These side agreements were signed in 2009 and did not come to the attention of the AFL until the latter part of this year. As part of this, a number of inaccurate statutory declarations were lodged by the Adelaide Crows with the AFL.

"Thirdly, there was the facilitation by the Adelaide Crows Football Club of three separate side agreements, outside the operation of the TPP rules, for payments to player Tippett in 2011 and 2012, in addition to his standard playing contract and an ASA contract with the club for promotional work. The facilitation of these agreements occurred across the various years 2009, 2010 and 2011 and did not come to the attention of the AFL until the latter part of this year. As part of this, a number of inaccurate statutory declarations were lodged by the Adelaide Crows with the AFL."

http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/208/newsid/151973/default.aspx

 

[Crowbots are dead]

I just listened to the 5AA interview myself. It is hilarious how precisely the legal shroud covers all of the areas I asked questions about earlier. It is almost like they're using the legal line as a cover for the holes in their story...

"We can't wait to tell you everything once proceedings are over."

Proceedings finish.

"Oh, yeah, sure we pleaded guilty to everything the AFL charged us with, but we're not really...we just can't say why *wink wink*. Oh, and I know we said we'd tell you everything, but we can't now, because the Tippetts have a different story...but you should totally believe us, because Sloane and Dangerfield like us."

It'll be interesting to see if Blucher/Tippett have similar concerns about putting their version of events out there.

For what it is worth, in the Lions' case both our Chairman and CEO ended up 'resigning' about a year later, once untold damage was done. Their replacements are still picking up the pieces. Chapman has clearly hitched his horse to Trigg's wagon. I hope for your sakes they're not steering you towards the cliff's edge.


How does replacing your CEO count as ripping down your club? Is there seriously no-one else qualified to run the club? And sure, it all eventually comes down to the team, but who hires (or fires) the guy who picks that team? Personally, I just have fundamental concerns about anyone who feels compelled to lie to keep their job. Then again, how many wives go back to cheating husbands? Clearly trust isn't as big an issue for some.

I dont think the CEO picks the team. That would be the recruiting staff and coach. I was actually talking to CROWS supporters and am basically saying no matter what you think 'whats done is done' and the Board have made their call. It is time for us to move on as a club and focus on ripping it up on the field next year. That is what really matters.

 

[Tex200]

I didn't listen to 5AA, but the breach had nothing to do with the ASA.

The findings of the Commission stated;

http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/208/newsid/151973/default.aspx

Thanks for the reference Scottwade.

I'm not sure what they said is necessarily inconsistent with those particulars other that they were very clear in stating all these deals were registered with the AFL. That is of course inconsistent those particulars.

In any event I'm satisfied that even if those agreements had been properly accounted for in the TPP there would not have been an exceeding of the TPP.

 

[SpeciousArgument]

Probably the worst post on the internet

nah not worst, i can think of 12609 of yours that are worse, but thanks for caring. its very obvious how deeply under your skin i am. i take that as a compliment that you care so much about me.

 

[SpeciousArgument]

I see you found Dopey

awwww i have groupies, how nice

 

[whatboutbob]

I dont think the CEO picks the team. That would be the recruiting staff and coach.

That was my point. The CEO has ultimate responsibility in hiring (and firing) the people who pick the team.

Anyway, I'm clearly fraying a few nerves, so I'll unsubscribe from this thread now. So unless someone replies to me or tags me in I won't be participating further. All the best guys and gals.

 

[FR0GGY]

nah not worst, i can think of 12609 of yours that are worse, but thanks for caring. its very obvious how deeply under your skin i am. i take that as a compliment that you care so much about me.

No matter if you support trigg or not, no one can argue that this episode hasn't cost the club alot, financially, on field (draft picks) and members.

 

[Tex200]

No matter if you support trigg or not, no one can argue that this episode hasn't cost the club alot, financially, on field (draft picks) and members.

Absolutely agree its been costly. I think all thats being said is that we are currentky is a good position to absorb the penalties without the club going freefall as some seem to be worried about.

 

[FR0GGY]

Absolutely agree its been costly. I think all thats being said is that we are currentky is a good position to absorb the penalties without the club going freefall as some seem to be worried about.

Agree, ironically the biggest impact on the club out of all this will be the hole in the 22 that kurt leaves, love him or hate him.

 

[A FEW GOOD MEN]

Absolutely agree its been costly. I think all thats being said is that we are currentky is a good position to absorb the penalties without the club going freefall as some seem to be worried about.

Unless there is a separate "gentleman's agreement" the fine will not be a net cost to the club. Triggy would be on say $500K and Harper $200K. I doubt that Rob Chapman will be paid as the interim CEO and Noble might get a slightly bigger bonus. The savings from salary payments will add up to almost $300K.

The impact of the lost draft picks should be relatively moderate. We lost pick 20 this year but the second pick was quite low and as mentioned by others may have been used on Siggins. Hopefully the two picks next year will be around 16+ and in the mid 30's.

The big loss relates to Tippett. We should have been able to get a early first round draft pick for him (say pick 5 - 10) or a good player. Even worse, we have $850K unspent in our TPP. Yes, we can pay more upfront to some of the players to free up space in future years but if we had planned for Tippett's departure we could have targeted two good players and offered them more than their current club could afford.

 

[FR0GGY]

Unless there is a separate "gentleman's agreement" the fine will not be a net cost to the club. Triggy would be on say $500K and Harper $200K. I doubt that Rob Chapman will be paid as the interim CEO and Noble might get a slightly bigger bonus. The savings from salary payments will add up to almost $300K.

Would there be anything from the afl to stop us paying them double for next year to cover there 2 and 6 month Vanuatu trips?

 

[SpeciousArgument]

No matter if you support trigg or not, no one can argue that this episode hasn't cost the club alot, financially, on field (draft picks) and members.

as PJ said, its cost (you could buy a house with 300k) but i dont think it will significantly impact our future.

 

[SpeciousArgument]

Would there be anything from the afl to stop us paying them double for next year to cover there 2 and 6 month Vanuatu trips?

trigg prefers europe from what ive heard

clubs arent allowed to pay players fines so i doubt they would be allowed to pay administrators.