Tweet
The problem here is not so much what is going on this year, but rather what took place in 2009. The AFC agreed to give KT additional consideration in his contract by agreeing to trade him for a 2nd round pick once the current contract expires. The AFC was obliged to report this agreement to the AFL for approval. The AFC knowing that the AFL would not approve such an arrangement decided not to report it in order to keep Tippett for another 3 years, fearing he would leave if not for such an arrangement.The AFC defrauded the AFL by entering in such an arrangement and Tippett may be complicit if he conspired with the AFC to do so, but this is far from clear.
It is fair to assume that some sanctions will be made against the AFC due to this arrangement. Tippett's penalty will depend on how complicit he was in the deception. It would seem that the responsibility for reporting contract information falls upon the club, not the player, so Tippett may fairly assume that he the AFC would follow all the rules and it was not his responsibility to do so. On the other hand, if he knew that Adelaide would not report this arrangement, he too could face sanctions.
"Commercial value" can take into account many factors, not just what's fair in a straight up deal under ideal conditions. For example, your house may be worth a million dollars, but if everyone on the street is selling their house at the same time, 500 k may be commercial value under those circumstances. I don't think it's the pick 23 plus White for KT that is under scrutiny here and I think this would be commercial value under the circumstances, regardless of Tippett's contract, written or otherwise.
The waters are very muddy indeed. The AFL acts in mysterious ways and it would be anyone's guess what will transpire from here.
From our point of view, we have White and TDL looking for new homes with only a couple of days left in the trade period. We have an opportunity to upgrade our draft position as well. The Tippett deal has diverted our focus away from these matters. I think we should be looking to complete these trades, if possible, with whatever parties wishing to participate, and let the chips fall as they may with the Tippett deal. I think it's best to assume it's not going to happen, rather than be paralyzed with the possibility that it might.
It is fair to assume that some sanctions will be made against the AFC due to this arrangement. Tippett's penalty will depend on how complicit he was in the deception. It would seem that the responsibility for reporting contract information falls upon the club, not the player, so Tippett may fairly assume that he the AFC would follow all the rules and it was not his responsibility to do so. On the other hand, if he knew that Adelaide would not report this arrangement, he too could face sanctions.
"Commercial value" can take into account many factors, not just what's fair in a straight up deal under ideal conditions. For example, your house may be worth a million dollars, but if everyone on the street is selling their house at the same time, 500 k may be commercial value under those circumstances. I don't think it's the pick 23 plus White for KT that is under scrutiny here and I think this would be commercial value under the circumstances, regardless of Tippett's contract, written or otherwise.
The waters are very muddy indeed. The AFL acts in mysterious ways and it would be anyone's guess what will transpire from here.
From our point of view, we have White and TDL looking for new homes with only a couple of days left in the trade period. We have an opportunity to upgrade our draft position as well. The Tippett deal has diverted our focus away from these matters. I think we should be looking to complete these trades, if possible, with whatever parties wishing to participate, and let the chips fall as they may with the Tippett deal. I think it's best to assume it's not going to happen, rather than be paralyzed with the possibility that it might.
Comment