Tippett!!

[BillyRayCypress]

Quayle says:

Tippett could potentially be banned from playing for being party to such an agreement, while clubs found guilty of draft tampering or salary cap breaches can face draft penalties for up to four years.

Potentially means what? How is a trade arrangement draft tampering, when he does not go into the draft?

They would have to prove he was part of the arrangement and knew the consequences of what was put before him to sign.

I don't see how paying for Jesse will solve anything. Jolly was a draft pick at 15 in an uncompromised draft. Tippett will be pick 24.

It seems that rather than reporting the story, this is a typical example where media CREATE the story. Quayle was have a very quiet media trade period compared to previous years, so here we go she writes.

If they just trade him to the Swans for pick 24, it should be end of story. Just crap media reporting.

[R-1]

Tippett's manager must have known that the "gentlemans agreement" to trade him for a 2nd round choice existed in written form, yet when interviewed on trade radio over a week ago he said an agreement existed but it wasn't part of the contract. We all assumed that it was a worthless verbal agreement, but it certainly explains Team Tippett's confidence that a deal would be done.

Noble must also know about the "gentlemans agreement" and that explains why he was happy to do the deal for Jesse and a 1st round draft choice (still under-the-odds for Tippett, but much better than a 2nd round choice).

I suspect Sydney knew about it too, but offered better terms either because we are nice guys, or because the Swans knew Tippett for a 2nd round choice wouldn't get past the the AFL's manager of Total Player Payment Assurance & Advice.

At which point Trigg get's involved (he who I referred to as Mr Amatuer Hour) and decides he needs a better deal to silence the Adelaide fans who are frothing at the mouth over this deal, and protect his own position/reputation. Rucci's piece entitled "Crows fans should be happy Steven Trigg is playing hardball in Kurt Tippett deal" suggests this.

Incidentally it also demonstrates that Rucci is totally compromised as a sports journalist, he's functioning purely as a PR man.

Presumably Ireland etal have refused Trigg's demand, and having been thwarted Trigg has decided to take the MAD* option of telling the AFL (and the Adealide fans) about the "gentlemans agreement" in the hope of redirecting the Crows fans wrath towards Kurt (not for the first time either) and reducing magnitude of the AFL's response.

What happens next? The only real precedent for double contracts is of course Greg Williams, in which case Tippett will be de-registered for half a season, and Adelaiade will be penalised (perhaps with a fine, but more likely with a loss of draft picks)


RWOers over the age of 45 will recognise the acronym "MAD" ~ for those of you under that age read it as "mad" :-)

I cannot believe a club would be dumb enough to sabotage itself by confessing to the AFL to screw Tippett. If they've confessed it's because the admin has decided it's the least-bad option.

[Jeffers1984]

This almost certainly means that this thread will go to 200 pages.

[Ruck'n'Roll]

I cannot believe a club would be dumb enough to sabotage itself by confessing to the AFL to screw Tippett. If they've confessed it's because the admin has decided it's the least-bad option.

Hence . . . "and reducing (the) magnitude of the AFL's response"

[Primmy]

All I have to say at this point is

[Jewels]

I still think we'll get him and I don't see why others on here are saying it will tarnish our reputation if we do. Why? All we are is the players club of choice and from what I read into it, and lets be honest we're ALL (fans and media) flying blind here, have offered the Crows the best deal that we have to offer.

I hope the AFL comes down hard on the AFC, I can't decide if it's arrogance on their part or stupidity but whatever it was, they seemed so desperate to keep Tippett out of the reach of the GCS they have put themselves into this compromising position and Tippett's big crime and what seems to have upset AFC the most is that he named us instead of GCS as his destination.

Interesting times.....

[Big Al]

I still think we'll get him and I don't see why others on here are saying it will tarnish our reputation if we do. Why? All we are is the players club of choice and from what I read into it, and lets be honest we're ALL (fans and media) flying blind here, have offered the Crows the best deal that we have to offer.

I hope the AFL comes down hard on the AFC, I can't decide if it's arrogance on their part or stupidity but whatever it was, they seemed so desperate to keep Tippett out of the reach of the GCS they have put themselves into this compromising position and Tippett's big crime and what seems to have upset AFC the most is that he named us instead of GCS as his destination.

Interesting times.....

Yep' it doesn't tarnish our reputation one little bit. Adelaide are the ones that are looking foolish in this whole sorry saga while we look respectful and professional.

[Bloodlines]

One thing seems certain here: swannies are innocent here and crap about us having to take a hit which mostly comes from afc pr man rucci are just that crap. Ps I think we will get Tippett for nothing. I expect crow fans to be preparing the guillotine in rundle mall over the weekend. What a bunch of nongs running that club.

[sharp9]

Interesting that the apparent verbal 'gentlemens' agreement' seemed to raise no issue in this regard (though it was denied by AFC) - but it's in writing - so it blows up.

If Kurt went to the Suns for a second round then would this deal have been investigated by the AFL?

Yes...trades have to be approved by AFL

[Cpt. Kirk]

Can we get him for our second round draft pick now

[sharp9]

One thing seems certain here: swannies are innocent here and crap about us having to take a hit which mostly comes from afc pr man rucci are just that crap. Ps I think we will get Tippett for nothing. I expect crow fans to be preparing the guillotine in rundle mall over the weekend. What a bunch of nongs running that club.

We're not totally innocent if we knew of the deal and were using that knowledge to NOT offer our 1st round pick......consider why Noble said after talks broke down "strange things happen at the end of trade week, like clubs suddenly offering a first round draft pick."

If we were not offering our first round draft pick we could easily be accused of deliberately NOT entering into a commercially viable trade arrangement....based upon a premise in an M.O.U. made OUTSIDE the legal player's contract.

[Nico]

I cannot believe a club would be dumb enough to sabotage itself by confessing to the AFL to screw Tippett. If they've confessed it's because the admin has decided it's the least-bad option.

Indeed, Trigg comes back from overseas and cuts the trade off at the pass thinking he knows best by asking for clarification on an agreement left out of a contract. It appears this clause would have been vetoed by the AFL if included in the contract. (clearly you can't say I'll stay if you clear me to XYZ Club in 3 years). Another case of a club either not knowing the rules or blatantly flaunting them. We saw Evans from the Dawks claiming ignorance on the free agent compensation rules earlier in the week. I love the way we have kept our mouths shut. Unfortunately Trigg intervened, because it appears up until then we had played the pefect hand. Another point is; Tippett's manager mentioned this gentleman's agreement at the start of the trade period and the AFL did not intervene at the time. Why not?

[Swansongster]

Quayle says:

Tippett could potentially be banned from playing for being party to such an agreement, while clubs found guilty of draft tampering or salary cap breaches can face draft penalties for up to four years.

Potentially means what? How is a trade arrangement draft tampering, when he does not go into the draft?

They would have to prove he was part of the arrangement and knew the consequences of what was put before him to sign.

I don't see how paying for Jesse will solve anything. Jolly was a draft pick at 15 in an uncompromised draft. Tippett will be pick 24.

It seems that rather than reporting the story, this is a typical example where media CREATE the story. Quayle was have a very quiet media trade period compared to previous years, so here we go she writes.

If they just trade him to the Swans for pick 24, it should be end of story. Just crap media reporting.

As one time hack, I say well done Emma. It's the first peice of decent media reporting on this whole sorry saga for mine. Sure, someone probably handed (read: leaked) her the tip but she has run with it really well. Most other articles about the Tippett trade have been merely speculative or downright vindictive and parochial (I'm looking at you Michelangelo).

Until now, no-one has been able to put their finger on what the delay was. Emma had the better sources to get that scoop. Good on her.

Also, I don't think the Swans are tarnished by this and not too badly affected even if Tippett becomes unavailable. What the Melbourne fans and press will say/think is a different matter. No matter what happens, we are still looking strong for back-to-back flags. Tippett will be a bonus.

[CJK]

/popcorn

[erica]

11.04am Patrick Keane ?@AFL_PKeane

"AFL has recently become aware of a matter regarding contracting of Kurt Tippett to Adelaide Crows in 2009, to cover the 2010 ? 2012 seasons."

How quaint. We all read it on the Age's website hours ago.