Tippett's Gone - READ RULES BEFORE POSTING

[cmndstab]

Agree 100% with the first paragraph, but why do you say that we obtained Tippett's signature "at below cost value.."? We paid top dollar, probably way beyond his worth at the time.

You can make that adjudication, yes, but the reality is the coin we paid, alone, wouldn't have been enough to secure him. It was only with the additional clauses that he was willing to stay. So certainly we obtained him for a dollar value lower than he had set for us.

The fact that he had set a price well above his real worth is irrelevant.

 

[Big Gazoongas]

So let me just get your position straight - you are sitting on the fence, despite all the evidence, blindly defending Steven Triggs right to "think he hasn't done much wrong" and "in his mind feel he has nothing to apologise for"?

This discussion has nothing to do with my position on this, I am only pointing out that Trigg is in a no win situation. He is damed if he does and he is damed if he doesn't, that is the only point I am making here.

You have formed the opinion that he is guilty and should resign and what Im saying is no matter what he tells you you won't change your mind.

 

[Big Gazoongas]

He needs to apologies sincerely because he pleaded guilty to the charges. Even if he is the fall guy, the fall guy is suppose to accept responsibility and be the face of remorse.

Trigg has blamed the supporters, the AFL, and Reid.

He has not accepted responsibility, not truly.

Surely you jest, when did Trigg blame the supporters in this Tippett saga???

So he comes out and has a press conference, he sincerely apologises, he breaks down and cries, he says it was all his fault ( even if he is the fall guy) he apologises again and has trouble finishing his apology through his tears, exactly what will that change in the eyes of the people that want him gone???
As I said before there will be another 1000 pages on "Trigg admits wrongdoing and must go"

Are you seriously trying to argue that by an apology this would end and all will be rosy the next morning and peoples perception on Trigg will change???

 

[ftmch]

Qualified or conflicted?

Are their interests really aligned with ours?


You mean the sponsors who pre-dated trigg, and don't make emotional decisions therefore can be expected to continue with or without him?

Isn't that a bit of a crutch? Collingwood aren't struggling, the league isn't struggling?

League wide sponsorship doesn't appear to be declining.

If our guy is soooo good, where is the real, hard evidence of this?

Aren't we really just being fed spin and expected to swallow it without thinking about it?

At the end of the day there is no evidence that this is true,

This is just another "trust us" moment. Unquantified, anonymous, potentially fictional stakeholders "like" him?

Says who?

Not trying to be difficult, but I don't accept something Chapman and the club claim as a baseline. Not when it convenient absolves them of accountability

You’re reaching.

I'm not suggesting these things 'because the club says so'. I’m looking at the message coming from a range of sources from an objective point of view, and with my eyes wide open, and it is telling me that this guy is rated highly.

Players don't tweet to spread club propaganda (who the hell in the club would be driving some of Tex and MJ’s tweets?), yet they openly talk of their support for Trigg.

The media outside of South Australia sure don’t have an agenda to prop up the AFC, yet they have all expressed their shock at how a CEO who is otherwise rated and respected so highly, could have become involved in this.

Corporate sponsors who have a vested interest in the sporting bodies for whom they are branding themselves with as major sponsor, are not going to endorse a CEO of an organisation (and again, do you really feel Chapman would state this publicly if it did not 100% reflect their position) who has a track record or bad decision making and poor, ineffectual governance and leadership.

The AFC board – though admittedly with the most potential to misrepresent their true views on Trigg for the cause of the club – is still ultimately made up of respected, professional and savvy operators, whose own reputations are on the line by risking the retention of Trigg if he is indeed anything other than a very good CEO.

The AFL have long held Steven Trigg in very high regard – this has come from them directly – not the AFC – on many many occasions prior to the Tippett sage, and was even reiterated by them when handing down the penalties. I think we can all agree they have demonstrated they have no special love or favouritism for our club that would otherwise cause them to skew their view on this.

Now you can by all means go through each of these ‘fictional’ stakeholders one by one and come up with conspiracy theories as to why their position on Trigg is not actually what it appears at all, and that this is part of a grandiose plot engineered and coordinated by the AFC to support an ailing CEO, because he’s ‘one of the boys’.

Or you can accept that there is a consistent, underlying theme across stakeholders with varying agendas that commonly suggests that the guys is, just maybe, a very good CEO.

 

[Godallblighty]

Surely you jest, when did Trigg blame the supporters in this Tippett saga???

The club was keen to retain the services of Kurt Tippett because of the enormous value placed on him by our supporters...

 

[Slippery Pete]

This is certainly a fair point. But you would still expect they are probably better qualified to comment than the average Big Footy punter, particularly given that some of the "poor judgements" cited earlier in this thread either directly or indirectly involve the players (eg Bernie, Neil Craig, even Matt Rendell to an extent).

What about Bock....

 

[Big Gazoongas]

The club was keen to retain the services of Kurt Tippett because of the enormous value placed on him by our supporters...

So what part of that is incorrect?​

 

[Stripple]

Surely you jest, when did Trigg blame the supporters in this Tippett saga???

So he comes out and has a press conference, he sincerely apologises, he breaks down and cries, he says it was all his fault ( even if he is the fall guy) he apologises again and has trouble finishing his apology through his tears, exactly what will that change in the eyes of the people that want him gone???
As I said before there will be another 1000 pages on "Trigg admits wrongdoing and must go"

Are you seriously trying to argue that by an apology this would end and all will be rosy the next morning and peoples perception on Trigg will change???

It would be a step.

He literally pointed to the pressure to keep Tippett from the supporters as one of the main reasons the deal eventuated.

So they blame us for one desicion but thn say we have no idea when it comes to another.

 

[Deaneus!]

It would be a step.

He literally pointed to the pressure to keep Tippett from the supporters as one of the main reasons the deal eventuated.

So they blame us for one desicion but thn say we have no idea when it comes to another.

I guess we'd be terrible at running the club!

Luckily we've got them to do it for us

 

[Stripple]

The club was keen to retain the services of Kurt Tippett because of the enormous value placed on him by our supporters...

So what part of that is incorrect?​

It's a cop out. It's true but there is a lot of supporter pressure to sack trigg. There was a lot of supporter pressure to sack Neil.

They didn't listen then why listen about Tippett?

 

[Big Gazoongas]

It would be a step.

He literally pointed to the pressure to keep Tippett from the supporters as one of the main reasons the deal eventuated.

So they blame us for one desicion but thn say we have no idea when it comes to another.

No. He made a statement that was factually correct. There was great expectation from supporters that the club re-sign $kirt, was there not???
You have chosen to interpret that comment as blaming the supporters for the end result.

I'll say it again, Trigg is damed if he does and damed if he doesn't. These post do nothing other than provide further proof Trigg is in a no win situation.

 

[Big Gazoongas]

It's a cop out. It's true but there is a lot of supporter pressure to sack trigg. There was a lot of supporter pressure to sack Neil.

They didn't listen then why listen about Tippett?

What is really a cop out is manipulating statements to suit an argument.

 

[boffo]

how has Trigg - before the Tippett issue came to light - managed to retain such great a strong reputation amongst the Board, our sponsors, the players and the AFL community in general really, in spite of these "poor judgements".

Because he is a good networker and a charming guy, apparently.

10,000 posts ago savvy posters pointed out the familiarity bias, I know him, I like him, therefore my judgement of him will be sound.

As for why the AFL likes him, I thought that had been obvious for quite some time now.

 

[skoobydoo]

What is really a cop out is manipulating statements to suit an argument.

Yep..the world is full of it today.......Spin is everywhere!

 

[Brown_DOG68]

This discussion has nothing to do with my position on this, I am only pointing out that Trigg is in a no win situation. He is damed if he does and he is damed if he doesn't, that is the only point I am making here.

You have formed the opinion that he is guilty and should resign and what Im saying is no matter what he tells you you won't change your mind.

OMG - because the evidence shows him to be guilty!!

 

[boffo]

I cant speak for anyone else, but my current opinion of him would certainly change if he came out and said "I apologise to all Adelaide Members, Sponsors, supporters etc, etc. , In my efforts to do the best for the club at the time I made an/some error(s) in judgement that have now cost the club. I hereby resign from the position of CEO at the Adelaide Crows" - instead of arrogantly denying any wrong doing!

I am a very surprised the PR company hasn't advised him to say exactly this (the bold part).

We now know it'd take a tonne of dynamite and 10,000 members not renewing to get to resign. Even then, it would proably be spun as a flesh wound and a little ding in our support.

 

[Godallblighty]

The club was keen to retain the services of Kurt Tippett because of the enormous value placed on him by our supporters...​

​

So what part of that is incorrect?​

The context. This formed part of a statement justifying why the club broke the rules to re-sign the player. The implication is that the fans wanted him so badly, the club felt pressured to make the deal at any cost.

 

[boffo]

our bluechip sponsors - which are large, respected organsiations who make decisions not on emotion or personal feelings, but pure commercial grounds

Don't know about this f, by putting their company money into the club the heads of these businesses get admitted into the padded seat section of AAMI, a big feed before the game, out to the padded seats just before bounce down and then at half time back to the dining room for more schmoozing, eating and drinking. Don't underestimate the personal benefits to sponsors, it's a glamorous environment to buy your way into. There's a reason the club does all this and doesn't just give sponsors advertising and name recognitiion benefits.

At the end of the day, it is the consistent underlying sentiment across a broad cross section of stakeholders that seems to suggest that Trigg is actually very good at his job (again, Tippett debacle aside).

Well I think he only consulted the padded seat brigade. We now know who the club really values.

The 19th man? What a load of crap.

 

[boffo]

In answer to the last couple of pages, yes, I have made up my mind.

All the information is now in...... well all the info we're going to get unless Blucher talks.

This is what I think should have made Triggy's continuation untenable.

a. Lack of due care in ensuring the club does not break AFL Rules

b. Failing to fully inform the Board in a timely manner of an important potential risk

c. Failing to document an important and difficult meeting with a player manager and parent

d. Signing false statutory declarations

e. Mismanagement causing the club to lose

• 5-6 first and second round draft picks
• $300,000 in fines
• a substantial amount in legal bills
• payments to a PR company

f. Damaging the credibility and reputation of the Adelaide Football Club


As for facts, the two we can all agree on are:
- we pleaded guilty
- we have lost 5-6 first and second round draft picks, $300,000 in fines, a substantial amount in legal bills and payments to a PR company.

 

[Big Gazoongas]

OMG - because the evidence shows him to be guilty!!

Stop passing off media reports as evidence.

 

[craig crowing]

Stop passing off media reports as evidence.

Ok come in a different way then maybe you tell us why he and Crows etc got big fines and why lost key draft picks and gave Tippett away for nothing .
So tell us what he is not guilty of from those media reports and maybe we should have sent you to AFL instead of those costly lawyers.
But especially like now coming out now that it is us the supporters fault .

 

[Brown_DOG68]

Stop passing off media reports as evidence.

wow - do you even know what your argument is anymore?

Did Steven Trigg plead guilty to the charges brought against him?

 

[bjn1960]

wow - do you even know what your argument is anymore?

Did Steven Trigg plead guilty to the charges brought against him?

Perhaps, the Club's/Board's risk management position was to plead guilty and instructed Trigg (even if he didn't want) to plead guilty? Perhaps, they indicated that that was a requirement for Trigg to remain as CEO after the six months of exile?

 

[BundyJack]

Stop passing off media reports as evidence.

Troll

 

[headache1]

Stop passing off media reports as evidence.

Ok then, perhaps we should just use the charges leveled upon him that he pled guily to as evidence.