Adelaide free to participate in draft..

[royals1922]

The postponement is good news for AFC, gives us time to mount a proper defence (and keep our picks in this year's draft).

A penalty for next year's draft may or may not happen, less likely to happen now there are lawyers involved to keep the AFL accountable for its processes, verdict and penalties.

You are all going to be disappointed when it turns out this is a storm in a tea-cup, fuelled by media stories leaked (by AFL or Tippett camp) to CW and EQ.

You don't know the FACTS, and you don't know our DEFENCE.

Sensible people will be reserving judgement.

Can't see it because Adelaide have allready admitted guilt and took it voluntarily to the AFL because they knew it.. They have no defence except that Trigg was at the heart of it. All the lawyers will do is to ensure the AFL bullet proof the process from appeal. and it won't be a nicer penalty.

 

[Grave Danger]

One thing is clear - if you want to be kept up to date in the tippett saga you turn to the Age. Dominated the coverage of this storyline

Yeah, well The Advertiser/adelaidenow.com.au are the media wing of the AFC, so they aren't going to break any bad news about Their Boys.

 

[NTRabbit]

Agreed. Adelaide only planned to take a single player in this draft so it's not like a win to delay this unless the club thinks it can achieve a better outcome than losing it's first round pick next year.

Crouch and Callinan elevations count as 2 ND picks

Incorrect. Callinan counts, but Crouch does not. We intended on making two selections at this draft.

 

[moses]

Andrew Demitriou to be the next FIFA president.

Next World Cup to be played in Blacktown

 

[SwampRat]

Haha, cheaters?

I guess even if someone is innocent in a murder, but is questioned heavily and so the public think they did it, they are all of a sudden murderers regardless of innocence? Hasn't this type of scenario just occurred during a case in Melbourne currently going?

Probably should wait until the case is heard and the public knows exactly what has gone down before labeling the club cheaters.

Unfortunately, it seems a lot of people couldn't give a **** about the actual commission hearing and will continue to slag the club based off reports by the media. Aren't the media always wrong in Port's case, why the sudden change of tune now it is the Crows?

Innocent until proven guilty is a notion of the criminal justice system. The Crows are not being charged with a crime.

The club has ADMITTED paying Tippett under the table. They only came clean because it was going to become public very soon. They had to make a major mea culpa, yet they STILL didn't admit to the Van Berlo payments.

The Crows administration cheated. And so did at least two of your players. At the very least those players acted stupidly. I don't hold the same generosity for your administrators.

Your anger is misguided. Be angry at your club's administration. They are the ones screwing you over. Ask any Port supporter what it's like hurting because your administration has made mistakes. It sucks balls, but putting your head in the sand won't make it better.

 

[scarecrow2k1]

hilarious and hysterical post mate

In what regard? You think that they would be rapt that a team just convicted (if convicted) of salary cap offences playing off in the Grand Final?

Yes sure other teams have played and won premierships with cost of living allowances, but since the league has got serious on salary cap infringements only one team has been penalised for serious infractions, and they weren't a chance of playing in a grand final soon.

If the crows are found guilty of breaching the salary cap, the AFL would be a laughing stock if they went on to play in a Grand Final the next year. This is why they won't let it happen.

 

[Gough]

This post may have been different if Adelaide had won the prelim.

Not at all mate, I view footy as a magnificent pastime and something that shouldn't be taken as seriously as some do, Adelaide have the right to due process.

 

[royals1922]

In what regard? You think that they would be rapt that a team just convicted (if convicted) of salary cap offences playing off in the Grand Final?

Yes sure other teams have played and won premierships with cost of living allowances, but since the league has got serious on salary cap infringements only one team has been penalised for serious infractions, and they weren't a chance of playing in a grand final soon.

If the crows are found guilty of breaching the salary cap, the AFL would be a laughing stock if they went on to play in a Grand Final the next year. This is why they won't let it happen.

They have already admitted it. And remember if the AFL find them guilty besides taking draft picks they can impose a sufficient enough loss of premiership points that Adelaide will be lucky to avoid the spoon, let alone play in finals next year.

 

[Boxhead_31]

Haha, cheaters?

I guess even if someone is innocent in a murder, but is questioned heavily and so the public think they did it, they are all of a sudden murderers regardless of innocence? Hasn't this type of scenario just occurred during a case in Melbourne currently going?

Probably should wait until the case is heard and the public knows exactly what has gone down before labeling the club cheaters.

Unfortunately, it seems a lot of people couldn't give a **** about the actual commission hearing and will continue to slag the club based off reports by the media. Aren't the media always wrong in Port's case, why the sudden change of tune now it is the Crows?

Be sure to purchase BACCS new book in all good bookstores

 

[royals1922]

I would urge anyone who is interested to read the AFL draft rules.

The penalties are massive, future and past premiership points, being kept out of multiple drafts, being unable to trade players.

But without knowing the Crows situation, I suspect that they will go all out to shaft Trigg etc and in so doing try to firewall themselves.

It could get ugly all round.

 

[Monkey King]

Adelaide deserve time to prepare their defence. Every accused person or group deserves such a thing.

An interesting contrast to when the AFL rushed through a penalty the day before the draft that stripped the Blues of their two picks. I'd venture a guess if the Crows picks were earlier, they wouldn't have had this result. Suspect the AFL will be happy knowing they can enforce a "loss of first round pick" without the quantification of that actually being known. If ever there a better indication of how ****ed up the AFL are atm. Complete amateurs.

 

[KennyHunter9]

I wouldn't blame this administration solely for the allowance given to the Crows to go in the draft. The Oakley administration turned a blind eye to Carlton and Essendon's cheating to win 1993 and 1995 respectively and it wasn't until the Jackson era that the whopper punishment was handed out. Hopefully Adrian is using his good lawyer skills to allow natural justice to take place before implementing a penalty that could have ramifications for the AFL if found to be unmerited.

Facts mate.

Carlton was never identified as cheating in 1995.

This Adelaide decision works for the AFL. They will never hand out the sort of punishment that was dished out to Carlton. By deferring Melbourne and Adelaide decisions they are hoping the heat will go out of the situations - and that they can get away with far lesser penalties than handed to Carlton. Watch this space ... but not too earnestly and not for a long time.

 

[El_Scorcho]

Instead of losing pick 20 this season, the crows will almost certainly lose a higher pick in a subsequent draft.

 

[Monkey King]

Adelaide will be penalised fairly as will those who struck the deal. Carlton's cheating was far and above what Adelaide have done though.

So what? One club is denied fair process before guilt is proven on that basis?

What a ridiculous sentiment.

 

[tiggsy]

I do find it funny that the people on this board are so influenced by the media. Nobody actually knows exactly what Adelaide have done but already want them handed the most significant penalties the AFL has ever imposed. So far we have claims that Adelaide may have agreed to let Tippett go for less than market value in the draft, may have underwritten his 3rd party payments with no risk to the club as the sponsors were all over Tippett as a high profile player and may have agreed with Balfours to accept a smaller sponsorship of the showdown in return for $30k to Tippett. And people want them fined $1 million and banned for 4 drafts. So sucked in by media hype. Just pathetic. And you compare this to systematically deliberately losing matches by Melbourne, West Coast and Collingwood. What will the AFL do to Melbourne? Disband them?

 

[Mike Smyth]

People are right to be angry at cheaters.

Why, we weren't angry when you guys cheated. We sort of felt sorry for you.

 

[BigLefty]

so you go from this (4 paragraphs of assuming guilt and stating it as fact)

The adjournment is some ways pointless because, unlike Melbourne, they have gone to the AFL and said punish us we are guilty of paying Tippett under a secret agreement.

The question is therefore over penalty not guilt. Adelaide presumably will try to say naughty Trigg etc but this would not have absolved them from a penalty.

The penalty would, it seems have been harsh, a 6 figure fine and stripping of draft picks but Adelaide didn't have great draft picks to begin with.

Maybe they wanted to ensure that Callinan and Crouch got added to their list this year before taking a whack next year but all that would do is having Adelaide take the rope that the AFL is giving them and the AFL hanging them with that same rope.

The request for an adjournment seems to be a pointless delaying of the inevitable.

to this.....

But without knowing the Crows situation.......

unfortunately this seems to be the standard at the moment, on here and even worse, the media.

 

[royals1922]

so you go from this (4 paragraphs of assuming guilt and stating it as fact)



to this.....



unfortunately this seems to be the standard at the moment, on here and even worse, the media.

Well let's identify the facts:

1. The Crows went to the AFL and admitted the side deal;
2. The penalties are potentially massive; and
3. The individual persons at Adelaide have gone to different lawyers.

Now go to the draft rules( I have), the club it seems is automatically liable for breaching draft rules unless they can blame individuals , at which point it get's full of legalese. These rules also identify the penalties which were everything the AFL said and more.

Therefore club Adelaide has told Trigg etc to get separate legal advice and have appointed high powered QC to act for them.

You might want to read the Draft Rules, Big Lefty, before comment because they will tell you also that AFL does not have to give reasons, is not bound by the rules of evidence and lots of nasty other stuff as well.


It doesn't take much to join the dots.

 

[Iskender Time]

An interesting contrast to when the AFL rushed through a penalty the day before the draft that stripped the Blues of their two picks. I'd venture a guess if the Crows picks were earlier, they wouldn't have had this result. Suspect the AFL will be happy knowing they can enforce a "loss of first round pick" without the quantification of that actually being known. If ever there a better indication of how screwed up the AFL are atm. Complete amateurs.

Did Carlton officially request time to prepare as Adelaide has? If they did and were refused then fans have every right to feel hard done by. Then there is also a seeming culture change and the AFL getting their house in greater order as some posters have argued. Perhaps this is a sign of their increasing legal sophistication.

Amateur has been a good word to describe them though. The fact they have had to make an embarrassing and unfair about face on the Judd/Visy deal is evidence of that.

 

[nerRADIAN]

Not disclosing a third party deal to give Tippett an extra 200k (even though they had the salary cap space to pay him on top of his contract) is unprofessional, even if he didn't get any of it. The AFL needs to step in and burn the club down and de-register all the AFC players and officials for 3 years because justice must be served.

But in reality losing Tippett is more of a punishment than what this non-disclosure deserves. If the AFL were fair, they'd give Adelaide compensation for losing Tippett for nothing because they blocked the deal. Tippett is worth a top 5 pick, this breach is at worst a small fine and with good history, a stern warning. Calling it now, Adelaide to get a compensation pick in next years draft and BigFooty to melt down.

 

[BACCS]

The lynch mob in this thread really need to read this, pronto:
http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/crows...lary-cap-charges/story-e6frea6u-1226518423750

 

[Dogs Rule]

The Crows are employing a lawyer named Dick Whittington. Hilarious.

They'll get their whack as will Melbourne and I'll be delighted.

 

[royals1922]

Instead of listening to media reports about what the situation might, people should try to inform themselves.

So here's how you do it:

a- google search " AFL Draft Rules";

b- look for the PDF - Draft Rules - Players Association. You will come across a set of Draft Rules from March 2011, I don't believe them to have changed significantly;
c- open up the PDF and
then go rule 1.6 on page 22 of the PDF - this deals with prejudicial conduct
then go to rule 17.1 on page 87 of the PDF - this deals with what is conduct prejudicial to the draft
then go to rule 17.18 on page 91 of the PDF - this deals with the responsibility of the club and the its personnel
then go to rule 17.19 on pages 91 and following of the PDF which deals with the penalties for draft tampering;
then go to rule 17.20 on pages 93 following of the PDF where you will see there is a different penalty depending on the amount of undisclosed money and whether the information was supplied voluntarily or not.Also look at rule 17.21 on page 93 of the PDF.

The rules might have changed recently but I don't think so.

The more you are informed the less you have to rely on the the biased media be it the SA or Vic media.

 

[Elite Crow]

Innocent until proven guilty is a notion of the criminal justice system. The Crows are not being charged with a crime.

The club has ADMITTED paying Tippett under the table. They only came clean because it was going to become public very soon. They had to make a major mea culpa, yet they STILL didn't admit to the Van Berlo payments.

The Crows administration cheated. And so did at least two of your players. At the very least those players acted stupidly. I don't hold the same generosity for your administrators.

Your anger is misguided. Be angry at your club's administration. They are the ones screwing you over. Ask any Port supporter what it's like hurting because your administration has made mistakes. It sucks balls, but putting your head in the sand won't make it better.

Swampy when have the Crows admitted to paying Tippett under the table? We admitted we had an agreement to get Tippett to a club of his choice.

What payments to VB? Why hasn't VB been charged?

I understand as a Port supporter you haven't had much to cheer about but you might want to wait until the commission meeting before hanging us based on media reports.

 

[sworc36]

Not disclosing a third party deal to give Tippett an extra 200k (even though they had the salary cap space to pay him on top of his contract) is unprofessional, even if he didn't get any of it. The AFL needs to step in and burn the club down and de-register all the AFC players and officials for 3 years because justice must be served.

But in reality losing Tippett is more of a punishment than what this non-disclosure deserves. If the AFL were fair, they'd give Adelaide compensation for losing Tippett for nothing because they blocked the deal. Tippett is wortIh a top 5 pick, this breach is at worst a small fine and with good history, a stern warning. Calling it now, Adelaide to get a compensation pick in next years draft and BigFooty to melt down.

I think you will find out soon enough that they did in fact disclose the third party deal of Tippetts to the AFL...They have admitted to a few things but by all account absolutely nowhere near what has been reported...Good old media does it again..Which if thats the case, then the only thing they can be penalised for is the promise of getting Tippett home. So how is this different for players nominating which club they want to play for? This has been blown way out of proportion and I am looking forward to hearing the AFC's version....a lot of the opposition posters are unbelieveably hypocritical, as their clubs have been done for cheating in the past...