Adelaide free to participate in draft..

[royals1922]

You understand wrong then. Adelaide made no unauthorised payments. All of Tippets third party deals were registered with the AFL. The AFL are saying the crows had a "degree of involvement" in the 3rd party agreements thats why they are being investigated. Same with Selwood and Geelong. Farcical. Its the AFL's doing for leaving it up to interpretation.

They admitted to agreeing to trade him home at the end of his contract for market value (what they would have received if GC picked him up) . Thats it. Only a breach because its in writing (stupidly) and very minor one at that.

To be blunt, I'm getting a bit tired of some of the media (Adelaide and Vic) because their reporters are sometimes so lazy that they wouldn't check if their backside was on fire. Simple question, when the Crows went to the AFL prior to their computers being taken what did they report to the AFL that they thought was dodgy ( leave aside Van Berlo). My understanding was that there was 200 K extra that on the contract that had not been reported to the AFL in relation to Tippett as well as the trading condition ( about being a second round pick).

 

[royals1922]

Only a breach because its in writing (stupidly) and very minor one at that.

Actually it's probably not minor and possibly will fall under the category of draft tampering (see the definition of draft tampering in the rules).

 

[Paladin]

To be blunt, I'm getting a bit tired of some of the media (Adelaide and Vic) because their reporters are sometimes so lazy that they wouldn't check if their backside was on fire. Simple question, when the Crows went to the AFL prior to their computers being taken what did they report to the AFL that they thought was dodgy ( leave aside Van Berlo). My understanding was that there was 200 K extra that on the contract that had not been reported to the AFL in relation to Tippett as well as the trading condition ( about being a second round pick).

email apparently contained
-Tippett trading condition
-promise that Tippett would be able to get 200k worth of 3rd party deals if not the crows would cover the shortfall.

This was in 2009 remember and the 3rd party agreement rules were not as strict.
- All of Tippetts 3rd party agreements were lodged with the AFL and the crows didn't pay him anything outside his contract.

The crows say they didn't do anything that terrible because they declared all of Tippets deals and made no payments outside the salary cap. The AFL dont like this because the crows are being seen to be involved in the 3rd party deals.

I think the trading clause is a very minor breach. Only a case to answer because its in writing.

As for the 3rd party deals make up your own mind about what clubs are doing. All Tippets deals were declared with the AFL.

 

[Paladin]

Actually it's probably not minor and possibly will fall under the category of draft tampering (see the definition of draft tampering in the rules).

Disagree. What if there was no email and they just promised to do all they could to get him home at the end of his contract?

 

[royals1922]

Disagree. What if there was no email and they just promised to do all they could to get him home at the end of his contract?

Forget the if there wasn't, there was and look at the possible penalties for draft tampering on a club in the Draft Rules but I have no argument with the Crows. I was pointing to the very real possible consequences under the Draft rules.

 

[FlowersByIrene]

This is better news, when they lose draft picks over the next 2 years it will be worse for them than losing this year and enxt years as they'll undoubtedly have better draft picks next season than this one.

 

[Paladin]

Forget the if there wasn't, there was and look at the possible penalties for draft tampering on a club in the Draft Rules but I have no argument with the Crows. I was pointing to the very real possible consequences under the Draft rules.

Oh i agree the AFL could come up with a charge. In my opinion its a minor breach. He was our player surely we can trade him as we see fit as long as its a commercial trade and he agrees. The stupidity was having it in writing. The media knew of a gentlemans agreement for the last 2 years and nobody said it was against the rules.

 

[royals1922]

email apparently contained
-Tippett trading condition
-promise that Tippett would be able to get 200k worth of 3rd party deals if not the crows would cover the shortfall.

This was in 2009 remember and the 3rd party agreement rules were not as strict.
- All of Tippetts 3rd party agreements were lodged with the AFL and the crows didn't pay him anything outside his contract.

The crows say they didn't do anything that terrible because they declared all of Tippets deals and made no payments outside the salary cap. The AFL dont like this because the crows are being seen to be involved in the 3rd party deals.

Now I don't mean to be obtuse to your knowledge was the 200K inside the cap (ie an old man Scully type deal) or outside the cap ( ie a Judd like deal).

 

[Paladin]

Now I don't mean to be obtuse to your knowledge was the 200K inside the cap (ie an old man Scully type deal) or outside the cap ( ie a Judd like deal).

Every team has an allowance of around 600k for 3rd party deals. So part of that like Judd.

 

[royals1922]

If things were as you say, I suspect the crows might still have a problem(but on a matter of principle probably should not but Tippett is not Judd).

Have a read of Rule 17.19 of the draft rules, they are to put it nicely unpleasant.

 

[Paladin]

If things were as you say, I suspect the crows might still have a problem(but on a matter of principle probably should not but Tippett is not Judd).

Have a read of Rule 17.19 of the draft rules, they are to put it nicely unpleasant.

Agreed. Just not as big as some have been saying.

 

[royals1922]

On the issue of third party payments have a look at rule 10.4.1 of the Draft Rules at page 61 of the PDF I referred to where an understanding informal or formal, having legal force or otherwise had to be reported to the AFL.

 

[DeadlyAkkuret]

Just loving the fact that the only clubs represented here that are speaking utter shit are Port and Sydney. The PAPs I can understand ... but Sydney must still be reeling.

Nah, as much as you wish we were, we're not. KT would be a decent bonus, no doubt, but we'll move on unscathed with or without him. Meanwhile, we have this delicious offseason trainwreck to enjoy until footy starts again.

 

[Footypie32]

Funny to see the amount of posters in this thread that wouldn't seek out and take the advice of a Lawyer if they were to ever go to court.

 

[Crows4Eva]

I don't see why people are getting all bent out of shape, we still have to go to a trial and will still be punished if found guilty. Everyone is entitled to time to prepare their defense when accused of wrongdoing and everyone is innocent until proven guilty. Therefore there is no reason we shouldn't be allowed to participate in this years draft.

 

[Iskender Time]

Oh i agree the AFL could come up with a charge. In my opinion its a minor breach. He was our player surely we can trade him as we see fit as long as its a commercial trade and he agrees. The stupidity was having it in writing. The media knew of a gentlemans agreement for the last 2 years and nobody said it was against the rules.

Who actually did mention it back then? I am surprised they didn't speculate about its legitimacy. Perhaps they didn't because they lacked evidence other than a bit of chatter. That seems to have changed though. Anyway, a court/tribunal is the place to test if such things are against the rules and that's where its headed.

 

[slashin_velvet]

-promise that Tippett would be able to get 200k worth of 3rd party deals if not the crows would cover the shortfall.

This is the problem. You cant guarantee a TPA, otherwise it is included in the cap regardless of who pays it.

 

[Viceregal]

No comments on Kennett suggesting delaying the draft until after the legalese is over?

 

[Iskender Time]

No comments on Kennett suggesting delaying the draft until after the legalese is over?

Why inconvenience the clubs and potential draftees for the sake of one club? If Adelaide are deserving of draft penalties then they can wait. Or does he mean for Tippet's status alone? That would be even sillier.

 

[MRB37]

No comments on Kennett suggesting delaying the draft until after the legalese is over?

Silly. Crows can/will still lose draft picks if the AFL deem that's an appropriate punishment.

 

[Elite Crow]

Have you actually read the Draft rules- I set out how you can find them above. Read the Draft rules before spouting off like a shock jock.......

Mate you are the one acting like a shock jock, making claims of unauthorised match payments. That has nothing to do with draft rules what so ever. Same as Swampys claim that weve admitted to dodgy payments. Again nothing to do with draft rules. The Crows aren't fighting the charges made up by two Big Footy flogs.

 

[footy_noob]

The poster you spoke of was suffering from wishful thinking.

how is it wishful thinking when it was an essendon supporter?

 

[royals1922]

Mate you are the one acting like a shock jock, making claims of unauthorised match payments. That has nothing to do with draft rules what so ever. Same as Swampys claim that weve admitted to dodgy payments. Again nothing to do with draft rules. The Crows aren't fighting the charges made up by two Big Footy flogs.

Wrong look at the press releases by the AFL re the charges.

As for this " has nothing to do with draft rules" what do you think draft tampering is and where do you think the charge is based - on the pack of Weetbix Box.

The Draft rules I have referred you are closest thing to actual substance you will get in this debate. If the Adelaide people read them, they will get a better understanding than they will get from their local newspaper.

But if you think the charges, the rules of the Commission etc have no written basis, then you will be surprised.

 

[royals1922]

I don't see why people are getting all bent out of shape, we still have to go to a trial and will still be punished if found guilty. Everyone is entitled to time to prepare their defense when accused of wrongdoing and everyone is innocent until proven guilty. Therefore there is no reason we shouldn't be allowed to participate in this years draft.

You'll be surprised -Adelaide may not be innocent until proven guilty.....

 

[kirky]

Sometimes I think I've been transported back to the days of the Spanish Inquisition!

Let due process occur and then comment.

Fair dinkum, it is like being in a tankful of sharks.

The media are next to useless - just one sensationalist story after another. Ah the days of journalists the likes of Geoff Kingston and Lawrie Jervis - journalism was a profession to be proud of 20 or so years ago - not so today - it's in the gutter now!