There is something about the Tippett penalty that smells of a back room deal. I think the Swans negotiated it and are happy about the outcome. It is hard to unravel the various benefits and detriments, and some have elements of both.
I think Tippett could have had some success in if he pleaded not guilty. Why did he choose to plead guilty and accept to move on? I believe him when he says he trusted Adelaide and he was innocently led down this path that brought upon his fine and suspension. Bob Chapman even came out and said some nice things about Tippett. I think he could have played hard ball and probably gotten a much lighter sanction, but that may have prolonged the process and prevented him from coming to the Swans.
His behaviour in this last part of the saga, a man following the instructions of his agents and elders, reinforces my belief that he acted similarly 3 years ago; he just took the advice of the experts.
The 11 game suspension could have been agreed upon by the AFL and the Swans as not so much Tippett's penalty, but a sort of penalty to the Swans for getting Tippett for no loss of draft picks or players. Surely Tippett would have been worth the picks where we got Towers and Membrey. We have done very well by how things came to pass.
Part of it is a bit of PR as well, for all parties concerned. It lessens Tippett's value in the eye's of the public and other suitors, like GSW, so the feeling that we have stolen something from the rest of league is somewhat diminished. Also less talk about COLA.
There is a general consensus that Adelaide got off lightly and Tippett took a heavy hit. This has taken a bit of the heat off of us. And there seems to be a general acceptance now that he will be a Swan next year, and that we didn't get such a great deal after all. And this suits us just fine.
I think Tippett could have had some success in if he pleaded not guilty. Why did he choose to plead guilty and accept to move on? I believe him when he says he trusted Adelaide and he was innocently led down this path that brought upon his fine and suspension. Bob Chapman even came out and said some nice things about Tippett. I think he could have played hard ball and probably gotten a much lighter sanction, but that may have prolonged the process and prevented him from coming to the Swans.
His behaviour in this last part of the saga, a man following the instructions of his agents and elders, reinforces my belief that he acted similarly 3 years ago; he just took the advice of the experts.
The 11 game suspension could have been agreed upon by the AFL and the Swans as not so much Tippett's penalty, but a sort of penalty to the Swans for getting Tippett for no loss of draft picks or players. Surely Tippett would have been worth the picks where we got Towers and Membrey. We have done very well by how things came to pass.
Part of it is a bit of PR as well, for all parties concerned. It lessens Tippett's value in the eye's of the public and other suitors, like GSW, so the feeling that we have stolen something from the rest of league is somewhat diminished. Also less talk about COLA.
There is a general consensus that Adelaide got off lightly and Tippett took a heavy hit. This has taken a bit of the heat off of us. And there seems to be a general acceptance now that he will be a Swan next year, and that we didn't get such a great deal after all. And this suits us just fine.


Comment