Kurt Tippett

Apparently another Crows Trade is done.

Sydney press conference hey. Time to roll out the star recruit in the Swans kit?

I still find it difficult to comprehend how this has happened. How the reigning premier can poach a player on a 1M$ deal is just ridiculous. Both Tippett & The Swans have worked the system beautifully.

Talk is of Angus Graham coming from Richmond to Adelaide, something big is brewing I reckon, something that's been beautifully kept under the radar.

Gingernuts wrote:Sydney press conference hey. Time to roll out the star recruit in the Swans kit?

I still find it difficult to comprehend how this has happened. How the reigning premier can poach a player on a 1M$ deal is just ridiculous. Both Tippett & The Swans have worked the system beautifully.

Dont Sydney get more money due to the expenses in Sydney

Thiele wrote:Dont Sydney get more money due to the expenses in Sydney

Correct Thiele

Gingernuts wrote:Talk is of Angus Graham coming from Richmond to Adelaide, something big is brewing I reckon, something that's been beautifully kept under the radar.

Confirmed - Pick 40 and 59 go to Richmond for Graham and pick 50.

Does this sweeten (or at least colour) the plot with the Tippett deal.
Why would they want 2 ruckman types if this White is to purportedly come to the Crows.

Yes I think there is something in the pot that is still swilling around.

If the deal were done as apparently Tippett is purveying around the traps (according to Ricciuto) why hasn't it been made official yet?

It isn't on the AFL trade tracker yet.

I haven't seen the Graham deal confirmed yet. Something is definitely cooking!

[quote="Gingernuts"]I haven't seen the Graham deal confirmed yet. Something is definitely cooking![/quoteI have seen on Facebook its been confirrned

Yep confirmed. Makes the Tippett situation even more interesting.

Not sure if true, but somebody said that this White fella didn't pass the fitness test by the Crows.

What the hell would that mean?

I can't understand those advocating the Crows don't deal with Sydney on this.

They're not in a bargaining position at all and why get nothing? Pick 22 isn't what Tippett's worth, but it's a tough game now and they'll get a good propsect at 22 instead of nothing. Being 'tough' has no future benefits at all, everyone just moves on.

As a sidenote, White and Graham will be attractive prospects for some sides in the mini-draft.

Yep another Ruckman for us won't hurt at all.

R&B, it's a bit like in business.
Sometimes making a stand hurts your bottom line.
So most suck it up and get on with the job.

perhaps this could end up like it did with Nick Stevens & that didn't hurt Port in the long run & it would also let the Football World know that they (Adelaide) wont be dictated too or will never be bent over & just take it

I have to say that I am a little surprised at how much people rate Tippett? It wasnt all that long ago that he could not get a kick at the Crows and spent his time running around in the SANFL and his problems with recurring concussion are well known. Maybe the AFC would do well to take whatever they can get?

It's a long time since he played SANFL and even then it was only for a game or two.

I think he's a seriously good player.

I think he's a very good player. I don't think he's worth anywhere near a million dollars a season.

And the waters just get muddier:

Crows may be in trouble over draft tampering

This is just getting ridiculous. After such a successful year I am so unbelievably dissapointed that 2012 is ending with this saga.

My thoughts on the issue are that Adelaide are tampering with the system no more than Tippett is by nominating a club and setting a wage that no other club can pay. If it was just a verbal discussion about facilitating a future move and nothing was put in writing, then it's play on as far as I'm concerned. I'm pretty sure the AFL investigated it only a few weeks ago and declared that there was nothing untoward.

Anyway, as I said, I'm beyond the point of caring anymore. The bottom line is that this Tippett saga is now tainting what has been a wonderful season, and I hope Adelaide does a deal, any deal, today to put an end to it.

Just reading up on the latest issue, I think Adelaide might be getting on the front foot here.

I'm just speculating here, but I reckon Adelaide are sick of Tippett/Tippett's Manager/Sydney bending them over in negotiations by trying to play this 'other agreement' card and so have taken it to the AFL.

My bet would be that Adelaide has legal advice suggesting that there is no such agreement, or if there was that it is not valid, and are therefore calling Tippett's management and Sydney out on it.

Will be very interesting to see how this develops. I reckon it's Tippett &/or his management that are actually in trouble here, not Adelaide.

Will be interesting to see - hope you're right GN.

Caroline Wilson argued this out with Rowe and Cornes on the AA footy show stating that the above clause was in fact written into the contract to which they did not believe and argued against, it appears she was in fact correct. Its my understanding from Caro that such an agreement does exist, although its not clear how specific the terms are.

It could be that Adelaide may find themselves in some trouble over this depending on what the actual rules of trading are and if what they are doing disadvantages a club such as GWS that may want the lad.

My early suspicion at this stage is that the AFC have had jack of the Tippett saga also and if there is investigation into draft tampering they probably figure they may only get a warning out of it at the worst and at the same time they can dispense with Tippetts conditions that he wants met and deal with whatever club they choose. Malthouse openly wants him at Carlton, if the AFC want to deal directly with Carlton then they should be able to IMO irrespective of what the traitor wants to do.

I reckon there's still some consternation over the validity of this 'contract clause'.

I don't think Adelaide would come forward if they weren't in a strong position to defend themselves.

I tend to agree with you, GN.

Whatever problems Adelaide might have with it, Tippett would have at least as much, if not more, as he would be seen to be the one asking for such a clause.

Only 48 hours to do a deal.

Adelaide's statement suggests as much, saying they have 'approached the AFL with their concerns'.

The other thing that contributes to this view is that Tippett's manager seems to be, shall we say, an 'interesting character'.

Further statements from the Club Chairman that seem to back up this view (via adelaidenow):

Chapman did not detail the specifics of Tippett's out-of-contract exit clauses that were written in 2009 when the Queenslander signed a three-year extension. He also did not answer why Adelaide had asked for an AFL investigation during the trade period despite the questions on Tippett's contract being in the public domain for more than a year.

"They are good questions," said Chapman. "And I would love to be a position to disclose more fully my answer to those questions - and I look forward to the day I do. Because the club's members and the football public deserve to know what is going on.

"Remember, we asked the AFL to investigate this. In the past week it has been clear we have to remove every shade of grey from this debate. There must be full disclosure.

"Once I took this to the board, every director without hesitation, agreed this needs to be clarified and there needs to be disclosure to the AFL. The AFL acknowledges we have done the right thing to bring to this them.

"Everyone deserves answers."

Chapman would not reveal the legal advice his club has received.

"I've consulted far and wide - and put in place methods to look at this with due diligence," he said. "We're asking all the questions. We are still in the process of getting the answers."