Kurt Tippett

In the end we'll probably still hand over the cash because we just love our footy.

It will be tough this year though, very tough. If Trigg walks, then I might find it a bit easier.

Gingernuts wrote:In the end we'll probably still hand over the cash because we just love our footy.

It will be tough this year though, very tough. If Trigg walks, then I might find it a bit easier.

I think that's probably what you should do. I've supported Hawthorn for more years than I care to remember, going back to the Peter Hudson days. I love that club and have many wonderful memories. I could never see myself not supporting the Hawks, they are too much part of my life.

However, I despise the competition my club has found itself in. I hate what the AFL have done to the game I used to love.

So, I pay my membership, but hardly ever watch the matches. I live for the day the football public wakes up to that den of thieves, otherwise known as the AFL, and realise they are being taken for one enormous ride.

Their handling of these latest events have been so unbelievably unprofessional it's laughable .... but only if you support a club not currently in the spotlight. If those clowns were running soccer, that sport would have gone under years ago.

Dead quiet about this issue in the paper this week. A few speculation pieces about Tippett's future, but I've been very surprised to see zero quotes from 'AFL insiders' regarding the penalty to be dished out to Adelaide this Friday.

The AFL must've fixed the leaky sieve.

Fair call there GN, there must have been a leak at AFL house.

For those feeling disenchanted by the whole AFL structure, remember one thing - regardless of who you support, they need you now more than ever.

If you want to fly high when your team has ( if lucky enough ) the ultimate success then you need to be part of every dark day, side by side with each other.

Yep, well said Booney. They'll be getting my dosh again (bugger it!).

You do have an option GN.....you do have an option when supporting an AFL club in Adelaide....

No.

No I don't.

I see in the paper today that Adelaide is planning to plead guilty to all charges. This sentence interested me:

It is regarded as too risky to plead not guilty to any of the charges - even if the club feels it could make a case for a not-guilty plea.

So the AFL are waving their big stick again.

The speculation the Adelaide will be smacked with similar penalties to Carlton's of a decade ago makes me pretty angry.

I don't think Carlton's and Adelaide's breaches are comparable at all. Carlton were 'paper bagging' half a dozen players over several years knowing full well they were rorting the system. Adelaide have stepped outside of the rules in one player's negotiations, and arguably out of stupidity rather than with the deliberate aim of dodging the cap & draft.

Smack us with a fine, force Trigg and co out of their roles for their stupidity in this process, but please don't give us hefty on field penalties.We've lost Tippett for nicks, and stood out of this years draft. That should be enough of a penalty to fit this crime.

I will stand by my comment that the process is "farcical".
It seems the AFL, Crows and media can have a defacto hearing in the public eye (prior to the actual one) to determine how each sits with the situation.

Now we are into the public "penalty" phase.

It is a joke and just so mickey mouse.
The afl should go away and order themselves 1000 lashes.

It takes 2 to tango, so how is Tippett himself going to go?

Maybe the fact that he goes to the bottom team and not the top team is his penalty.

Tippett will, IMO, be suspended for several weeks.

Adelaide should, IMO, be fined and simply held out of next years draft in lieu of forgoing picks this draft just gone.

If Adelaide are penalised any harder than that in regards to player movements/trading etc I think it might be too harsh.

They wont kick them out of the comp, so I best start wishing for something else.

I think whatever penalties are ultimately handed down, you have to concentrate on the football side and not bringing an organisation to its knees or its ability to fulfill legal obligations.

One penalty I heard on radio this morning was suspending Trigg and Harper for some months from their jobs. That is ludicrous and would certainly not allow the club to function correctly as a business and certainly could compomise its legal obligations.

If it is the draft and or salary cap that they have breached, then impose draft and salary cap restrictions. That is enough. Both of those are going to hurt well enough.

Bringing a club to the verge of ruin, is nonsensical.

And this goes for the sanfl too!

I don't agree with you actually Chambo.

I would argue that it's unfair to penalise the football department, players & fans for errors in the administration of the club.

Finding another CEO and/or Football Manager is dead easy compared to trying to make pick 83 comparable in value to pick 13 in the draft.

As a fan and member I would prefer that the individuals responsible be held to account for their stupidity regarding this matter. Trigg in particular - he's the man at the top calling the shots, so he should cop the lion's share of the penalties IMO.

You can't tell a club to sack someone as a penalty.
I can't see how one organisation can actually suspend an employee of another organisation from their job either, but that may be within AFL rules. I doubt that the Fair Work Act would cop that.

The argument on the penalties be it fines or draft/salary cap restrictions may be moot, as it is one club and the footy dept / admin is probably indistinguishible. The club suffers in any event.

But the premise is the punishment fitting the crime. We have often heard that saying. In what has been bandied about as a penalty, I can't see that natural justice in maintaining this philosophy is considered.

It is always, we need to make an example of them. The AFL is a more punitive organisation than our courts in this manner.

They will certainly impose draft restrictions and that does hurt the footy department and I think is fitting of the crime. Huge fines (that make an example of them), do not address the issue where the breach was made in my view.

What if this was Port Adelaide (Power variety)? How would they pay a fine?
Would the AFL just deduct $400,000 from the money they give them each season? What would a fine in that context really mean? Stuff all to Port, who don't have the money in the first place.

If the club has been found guilty and suffers a penalty through it, then sure
if the club sacks admin staff or requests their resignation for breaches of their duties, so be it. But I struggle with the AFL imposing this.

All fair points Chambo. My views are no doubt bias given that I'm a fan don't want our on field performance affected too much out of this.

That said, I do think the AFL has grounds to request resignations within club administrations. The AFL works like a franchise really, with the clubs being the franchisees. If a franchisee stuffs up then it affects the whole brand.

Back to penalties, I guess the answer is a balance of both on field and off field penalties. Enough to hurt without permanently maiming.

I still think this issue has been blown out of all proportion though.

Chambo Off To Work We Go wrote:You can't tell a club to sack someone as a penalty.
I can't see how one organisation can actually suspend an employee of another organisation from their job either, but that may be within AFL rules. I doubt that the Fair Work Act would cop that.

Matt Rendell sends his regards.

Booney wrote:

Chambo Off To Work We Go wrote:You can't tell a club to sack someone as a penalty.
I can't see how one organisation can actually suspend an employee of another organisation from their job either, but that may be within AFL rules. I doubt that the Fair Work Act would cop that.

Matt Rendell sends his regards.

Yes but the Crows via Trigg were the one that bent over for Demetriou and pulled the trigger (pun?).
Sherriff Andy didn't fire him and the Crows could have been strong and said bugger off.

Yeah right, I hear you say, but I take your point Sherriff Andy can be very persuasive and run you out of Laredo if he's not happy.

Booney wrote:

Chambo Off To Work We Go wrote:You can't tell a club to sack someone as a penalty.
I can't see how one organisation can actually suspend an employee of another organisation from their job either, but that may be within AFL rules. I doubt that the Fair Work Act would cop that.

Matt Rendell sends his regards.

I'm spewing about that move now more than ever. His skill for finding diamonds in the rough would be absolutely priceless now that we are facing a couple of tough draft periods.

Chambo Off To Work We Go wrote:Now we are into the public "penalty" phase.

It takes 2 to tango, so how is Tippett himself going to go?

Maybe the fact that he goes to the bottom team and not the top team is his penalty.

Was on radio this morning that a half season suspension / deregistration for Tippett is speculated coming out of AFL house.

I guess we'll see today.

if i remember correctly while watching the news at work tonight the penalties are as follows

AFC $300,000.00 & misses the first 2 rounnds of the next draft

S. Trigg $50,000.00 & 'penalised' (can't work in the AFL system for 1 year although 6 months of that is suspended)

K. Tippet suspended from playing for 11 or 12 games

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


feel free to adjust any that i mis heard on the news, thank you

http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/sport/afl/crows-to-present-united-front-at-afl-commission/story-e6freck3-1226526986690

Would you even want to pick Tippett up knowing that he can't play half the season?

This is a joke , this whole thing is a joke. The AFL are a joke. John Reid suspended for 6 months I think ? WTF ?

Honestly the man that should go is the man that has single handedly ruined the game. I mean seriouslyy lets get a grip .
DEMETRIOUU SHOULD HAVE GONE EARLIER, TOO LATE NOW IMO.

He thinks he is making a stand . HE IS THE ONE TAMMPERING WITH THE DRAFT WITH CONCESSIOND FOR HIS OBSESSION WITH TAKING OVER RUGBY.

This guy has every sucked in and it's all too late.

I laughed when I heard of the penality.

This is why I dont follow the AFL anymore and love my local SANFL.

What a farce!!!

I think the word "farce" encapsulates the AFL beautifully. Throughout this entire episode I've pondered the question as to who may assume responsibility to investigate the comings and goings of the AFL.

Can you imagine what may fall out should anyone dare to shake the AFL tree?

300k fine is not much of a penalty, although put with the QC's fees its probably reasonable.

Suspending John Reid is a joke he has been retired for how many years?

Not 100% happy with the punishment handed out to Phil Harper, think in his case a Reprimand would have been far more appropriate.

Think the Punishment given to Stephen Trigg is far too lenient. This is emphasized by Rob Chapman stating in the Advertiser that he actually wants him to keep his job as CEO after he has done this to the club and let down so many of its staff, players and supporters. There is absolutely no excuse for what was done, it was premeditated and it was deliberate and it was reported on the radio on 5AA that there were deliberate instructions given on how it was all to be done.

Plenty more to say but I wont bother, suffice to say that if Trigg remains at the club I will be moving back to supporting Geelong for good. If Cheating is the way of the Team for All South Australians and its actually going to be endorsed and defended at board level then count me out of it.

Interesting point about how the club stands behind Trigg but not Matt Rendell, which speaks volumes about the integrity of the management of the AFC, along with being caught cheating.

I was listening to Triple M yesterday and they asked people to ring in and say who they thought the guilty parties were. One interesting caller said she thought the members of the Adelaide Football Club were to blame.

At first I had a chuckle until they gave their reason, and it had me thinking. She went back to when Tiprat was talking of leaving the Crows a few years ago unless they paid him more.

I recall thinking then how ridiculous it was to make Tiprat the highest paid player at the Crows when there were far better players. I also recall the amount of pressure placed on Trigg and his cohorts to do "whatever was necessary" to keep Tiprat at the Crows.

One person on the panel reluctantly admitted that not only were the average supporters demanding they retain Tiprat, there was also pressure from "influential supporters".

So, basically, people were expecting Trigg to squeeze blood out of a stone. He has done what the club demanded of him and now he's paying the penalty.

I have no doubt that this style of deal have been getting done for years, it's just that in most cases the player wasn't an ungrateful tool like Tiprat and didn't hold the club to ransom. Strange way of showing appreciation. Warning, don't do Tiprat any favours.

I would think if Trigg had his time again he would have said to Tiprat, "Sorry mate, but you're just not worth that amount of money. Either accept our offer or go". He would have copped some flack at the time, but at least he'd still have his job.

I just can't belive how this snake oil salesman has managed to convince far more capable people than himself that he is worth top dollar, firstly at the Crows, and now at Sydney.

There are far better players than Tiprat playing AFL, and rumour is that a faction of Sydney players are not pleased with him coming on board. It defies my comprehension that a good ordinary player like Tiprat should be earning far in excess of a player like Adam Goodes.

A lot of people have been comparing the effect all this will have on the Crows, pointing out the 10 years of horror faced by Carlton. For a start, Carlton were already a basket case and just dug themselves deeper into an abyss.

This will be a case of short term pain for longer term gain at Adelaide. It will have minor effect but won't rip them apart as some as suggesting. At least they are not facing their future knowing what is ahead, and without Tiprat, which can only be a good thing. Who needs him?

The lesson to be learnt here is quite simply, "When a player comes to you asking an amount that excedes their abilty, tell them no. Nobody needs this type of player.