Tippett!!

[Ludwig]

There are so many unresolved legal matters regarding how the AFL operates that no one really wants to open this can of worms. If we consider all the various overlapping agreements and laws, it would take years to work it all out:

The player's contract with his club.
The player's contract with his manager.
The manager's contract with his management company.
The various licenses that allow the manager and his company to represent a given player.
The agreement between the clubs and the AFL.
The agreement between the players and the AFLPA.
The agreement between the AFL and the AFLPA.
Australian contract law.
Common Law.

These are just the ones that come to mind. You can only imagine how many conflicts in law there are lurking in all these agreements, rules and regulations.

The reason that this is such a serious matter is that the AFL does not want this to end up in the Australian legal system. Mostly all similar cases around the world have gone in favour of the player, free agency and against the leagues.

How this case is resolved could have very broad and lost lasting ramifications. I don't know if the AFL is brave enough to make a stand here, especially against the player.

[liz]

I am not sure that I fully understand what you mean here. How does a player effectively go to their club of choice now, if they are not a free agent, and the two clubs in question cannot reach a 'fair' deal? Lots of trades from past years have fallen through because the two teams could not agree on fair compensation - these failed deals would likely have negatively affected a player's earning potential in many instances. Isn't the whole point of free-agency that it gives a player the potential ability to maximise earnings?

I do agree that it would be hard to quantify a $ amount over the length of a deal (perhaps only Tippett, his manager and the Crows in this situation would be able to answer that question).

Because a player can stipulate his contract conditions. So even if Tippett lands up in the draft, he can guarantee himself the financial terms that the Swans have offered him. If another club chooses him, they have to match those terms.

I realise that going to your club of choice isn't all about the size of the contract. Other factors come into play too. It is just very hard to put a financial value on those.

If the main issue is one of disclosure to the AFL (ie an agreement like this isn't against AFL rules), if the Crows / Tippett had disclosed this agreement to the AFL, do you think they would have tried to assign it a monetary value for inclusion in the cap?

I'm just posing the question - I have no idea of the answer. I just think it would be incredibly hard (and subjective) to assign a monetary value to this agreement. And the salary cap is a purely monetary measure.

[Alan]

What is the record for the highest number of pages in a thread? By the time this is "all said and all done", it is bound to break it.

[Rod_]

I agree with previous reports that it appeared that someone wanted to shake the tree a little to push the trade along. AFC seems to have "come clean" (I would suggest a CEO or player manager will not have a job by the end..)

Agree years to get to the bottom and we have hours...

With the extra payment indications tweeted I guess a round table discussion may help, however I doubt it! Too many agenda's

Appoint a panel to resolve it from the talking heads in the Senior managements of the AFL and meet at 9:00 AM tomorrow.

Public position by 11:30, trade by 4:00 PM (and slap on the wrists over the next months..)

Rod_

PS good night and I look forward to tomorrows comments.. LOL

[Swansongster]

There are so many unresolved legal matters regarding how the AFL operates that no one really wants to open this can of worms. If we consider all the various overlapping agreements and laws, it would take years to work it all out:

The player's contract with his club.
The player's contract with his manager.
The manager's contract with his management company.
The various licenses that allow the manager and his company to represent a given player.
The agreement between the clubs and the AFL.
The agreement between the players and the AFLPA.
The agreement between the AFL and the AFLPA.
Australian contract law.
Common Law.

These are just the ones that come to mind. You can only imagine how many conflicts in law there are lurking in all these agreements, rules and regulations.

The reason that this is such a serious matter is that the AFL does not want this to end up in the Australian legal system. Mostly all similar cases around the world have gone in favour of the player, free agency and against the leagues.

How this case is resolved could have very broad and lost lasting ramifications. I don't know if the AFL is brave enough to make a stand here, especially against the player.

One way or another, this is a lawyer's picnic.

[DLBIA14]

I just feel sorry for Tippett i mean we have heard all the details that are out at the moment about his father and all the other details but i just can't help wondering how much he really had to do with it. I hope tomorrow or on Friday Sydney work out a way to still get him the AFL should be required to at least outline the results of the founding with enough time in the trade period for Sydney to take appropriate actions.

Just another day i am proud to be a Swans supporter.

This may be rude, but Kurt seems a little dim. I tend to think that most footy players like him are easily led and I'd argue that it is his manager who is in deep @@@@ ranging from agreeing or insisting upon certain clauses and payments, to then encouraging or advising Tippett to engage his lawyers.

Nevertheless while Tippett shouldn't necessarily draw the ire of people until we really know the facts, he's hardly a victim. At the end of the day he signed the papers, reaped the benefits and essentially his manager worked and negotiated on his behalf. Then again I was also of the opinion that the Storm players were complicit partners in Melbourne's salary cap saga and they got away scot free. It's likely that Adelaide itself will bare the brunt of most sanctions.

This trade period had nothing going on until 72 hours before the deadline when everything imploded. We sat around agonising over every little rumor that came out and now we can't keep up with all the revelations!

[Matty10]

If the main issue is one of disclosure to the AFL (ie an agreement like this isn't against AFL rules), if the Crows / Tippett had disclosed this agreement to the AFL, do you think they would have tried to assign it a monetary value for inclusion in the cap?

I really don't know. Did Adelaide have room in their cap? What were the negotiations like between Tippett, his manager and the AFC? Perhaps these parties assigned a value during these negotiations (e.g. Tippet wants $600k to stay, Adelaide can only offer $500k - but someone offers this agreement as compensation for the monetary disparity).

It has to have some value (even if subjectively applied), otherwise why offer the deal?

As I said before, only the three parties involved would know (I'm just glad that the Swans were not involved).

[Ludwig]

I just hope we can get out of this deal. I hope we don't have to honour our contingent contract with Tippett. I falls through. If he goes to the draft, someone else takes him. If he falls all the way to us, we don't take him either. I don't blame Kurt for this, but he's just too hot to handle. The distraction he could bring for years to come will be most unwelcome.

[Mug Punter]

There are so many unresolved legal matters regarding how the AFL operates that no one really wants to open this can of worms. If we consider all the various overlapping agreements and laws, it would take years to work it all out:

The player's contract with his club.
The player's contract with his manager.
The manager's contract with his management company.
The various licenses that allow the manager and his company to represent a given player.
The agreement between the clubs and the AFL.
The agreement between the players and the AFLPA.
The agreement between the AFL and the AFLPA.
Australian contract law.
Common Law.

These are just the ones that come to mind. You can only imagine how many conflicts in law there are lurking in all these agreements, rules and regulations.

The reason that this is such a serious matter is that the AFL does not want this to end up in the Australian legal system. Mostly all similar cases around the world have gone in favour of the player, free agency and against the leagues.

How this case is resolved could have very broad and lost lasting ramifications. I don't know if the AFL is brave enough to make a stand here, especially against the player.

There is no way the AFL will ban Tippett for 12 months and risk him taking then to court for restraint of trade. He'd win and he'd have a line a mile long of Australia's finest legal minds wanting the case because of its exposure.

My hunch is that any deal at trade week for him is off the table and he will be at the mercy of the draft. Adelaide will be penalised reasonably heavilly.

We may or may not get him. I'm starting the think he may not be worth it......

[Reggi]

Wow the Adelaide crows are very ordinary people. At Face value, they gave an undertaking to gain Tippet's signature, and reneged as soon as it didn't suite them,

Probably not massive draft issues as I imagine their are many implicit discussions not codified in a contract, but to blatantly renege is a dog act

Don't they have Crouch as a mini draft pick? Wave goodbye to that

[Bloody Hell]

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.....

I'm hoping that as part of the Crows punishment they are forced to honour the agreement and trade Tippett to the club of his choice for a second round pick!

The tarnish was my knee jerk reaction, but more information has come out since then. As long as the club says nothing, which is something I like about the club, we'll be fine.

[Bloody Hell]

This may be rude, but Kurt seems a little dim. I tend to think that most footy players like him are easily led and I'd argue that it is his manager who is in deep @@@@ ranging from agreeing or insisting upon certain clauses and payments, to then encouraging or advising Tippett to engage his lawyers.

Nevertheless while Tippett shouldn't necessarily draw the ire of people until we really know the facts, he's hardly a victim. At the end of the day he signed the papers, reaped the benefits and essentially his manager worked and negotiated on his behalf. Then again I was also of the opinion that the Storm players were complicit partners in Melbourne's salary cap saga and they got away scot free. It's likely that Adelaide itself will bare the brunt of most sanctions.

This trade period had nothing going on until 72 hours before the deadline when everything imploded. We sat around agonising over every little rumor that came out and now we can't keep up with all the revelations!

He made the agreement at 22. I'm not sure what you were doing at 22 (if you're 22), but few would be confident arguing the finer points of contracts and torts at that age.

[stellation]

He made the agreement at 22. I'm not sure what you were doing at 22 (if you're 22), but few would be confident arguing the finer points of contracts and torts at that age.

Regardless of how this all ends up playing out, I think that's a very good point- at 22 I was a kid, I thought I knew everything but I made dumb decisions constantly. In this case he has a manager and a football club that are older and (supposedly) wiser than him that he has entrusted to sort this out for him- these are pretty young kids that pay a lot of money to managers to resolve these sorts of things for them. If anyone gets deregistered over this it should be the manager and whomever at AFC who agreed to it.

[MadCanuck]

I don't get this "second round draft pick" bit. What party in the deal would be advantaged by this agreement (other than the receiving club)?

[annew]

I still don't understand why he is likely to go to Brisbane if he goes to the draft.