Tippett's Gone - READ RULES BEFORE POSTING

[relapse]

Should probably wait until after the investigation concludes and all facts are out in the open before sacking!.......wait, what.............Matt Rendell........Who?

Not saying that he should be sacked .... yet, but the club should at least be suspending Trigg pending the AFL investigation and the shouldn't be getting Trigg to send out emails to members thanking them for their patience and understanding during a scandal in which he is deeply embroiled in.

 

[dazz69au]

Not saying that he should be sacked .... yet, but the club should at least be suspending Trigg pending the AFL investigation and the shouldn't be getting Trigg to send out emails to members thanking them for their patience and understanding during a scandal in which he is deeply embroiled in.

Agreed!

 

[relapse]

So if we promised him $200,000, have we payed him that yet?

We didn't actually promise to pay him $200,000, we underwrote 200k should Tippett not be able to generate it in 3rd party endorsements. As long as Tippett was earning more than 200k in endorsements each year the club didnt have to pay him anything.

 

[Mattrox]

Not saying that he should be sacked .... yet, but the club should at least be suspending Trigg pending the AFL investigation and the shouldn't be getting Trigg to send out emails to members thanking them for their patience and understanding during a scandal in which he is deeply embroiled in.

Trigg didn't even have the decency to do that with Rendell, why should the board now show him more leniency when his actions or inaction has now brought the club to its knees.

 

[jenny61_99]

I am not going off half cocked, I am just not sure how anyone could argue that the club hasn't erred by allowing Trigg to sign off on that email. I personally found it insulting to read it considering it was signed off by Trigg considering the allegations. The email that went out to memebers last night regarding the scandall should have unquestionably been signed off by Chapman.

The standard course of action in situations like this is that the parties are suspended pending an investigation, but it seems that despite all of this that Trigg is still being allowed to publicly be active in his role as CEO. I am slightly concerned as to why this is the case as under no circumstances should it be business as usual especially when the CEO is under allegations of being enbroiled into a scandal which could see the club severely reprimanded by the league.

It's called innocent until proved guilty.

 

[Flynn White]

We didn't actually promise to pay him $200,000, we underwrote 200k should Tippett not be able to generate it in 3rd party endorsements. As long as Tippett was earning more than 200k in endorsements each year the club didnt have to pay him anything.

Wonder how many Balfours Pies Tony Tippett had to sell in the Gold Coast?

 

[jt_mcleod]

It's called innocent until proved guilty.

well done

 

[Cap]

It's called innocent until proved guilty.

I don't think that fits in this instance.

more like, cleared until otherwise implicated.

clearly, the club are nervous about some parts of the Tippet contract, I'm happy to assume innocent mistakes until the AFL actually gives us the details.

but I'm sorry, if Rendell is sacked from some dodgy quotes, Triggy still has to go for simply implicating the Crows in this mess - if you live by the sword you die by the sword it is the only honourable way to go for Triggy (basically I'm saying he in reality was probably doing the right thing by the club but the fact he got caught means he needs to move on)

 

[dazz69au]

It's called innocent until proved guilty.

Apparently that only applies to some in the AFC, just ask Mr Rendell

 

[Crow About It]

So if we promised him $200,000, have we payed him that yet?

it's an interesting point I was thinking about last night. If we supposedly have promised a 'leaving payment' if we haven't and/or don't pay it, is there technically no breaking of the rules as has been speculated? If this is what the AFL are worried about the most? My thoughts are there would be legal grey area that we could argue as the money never changed hands.

Of course this is if the rumour of this is true......

 

[Draft Bored]

A deal will be done today (with any club) because Tippett wont want to go to the PSD where he can't pressure his chosen club into third party deals, money for his brother, money for his father, petrol money, lunch money, steak knives and a free helium balloon.

 

[The_Answer3]

lol, we can't even cheat right.

Guys, it's time to get third party payments involved! We need to keep people!

Yeash good idea.

But don't tell the AFL, we'll be sneeky devils about it muahahaha

But we actually have cap room and not telling the AFL won't do anything.

Yes, yes, but lets be devils!


Reid and Trigg, are you blokes serious? If this was really kept from the board and the club, it's the biggest joke.

 

[AusTerran]

How about you wait until all the FACTS are revealed before going off half cocked? He is presently still the CEO of the Crows

Half cocked?
Facts?
you mean what Trigg did to Rendell?
Ahhh the world of double standards....

 

[DJ75]

A question - lets say that we agreed to underwrite these deals should they not eventuate or be allowed by the AFL. Then we could argue that at this stage no deal had been forthcoming, hence no 3rd party approval was sought by the AFL. We could also argue that as we could fit this in the cap, we were still to do so, just hadn't happened yet.
Of course this relies on us not having already made the payments and not having in writing a statement like 'don't tell the AFL about it'! - we aren't that dumb are we?

 

[The_Answer3]

Crazy Vossy, SAVE US!

We'll give you Tippett and our 2nd rounder for Polec,

SAVE US VOSSY!

 

[CROUCH #2]

any chance tip will get traded today

 

[DJ75]

I doubt there will be a trade for Tippett - I don't think the AFL will allow it no matter what is offered!
We are about to cop one of the biggest smashings ever dished out.

 

[AusTerran]

Not saying that he should be sacked .... yet, but the club should at least be suspending Trigg pending the AFL investigation

Totally agree!
Now if only Rendell got the same chance, he'll still be here and could move on to another club when he wanted to and not kick out and left in the gutter with a knife in the back...

 

[jt_mcleod]

I doubt there will be a trade for Tippett - I don't think the AFL will allow it no matter what is offered!
We are about to cop one of the biggest smashings ever dished out.

you dont even know yet

 

[BUTTON 92]

Just quietly what the F#ck were Tony Tippetts parents thinking when they named him? I mean "Tony Tippett". Sounds like a bloody cartoon character...

 

[relapse]

It's called innocent until proved guilty.

Suspending someone pending an investigation is standard practice in business. The decision about their future within the club is then made at the conclusion of the investigation, the club suspending Trigg is not an admission of guilt.

 

[AusTerran]

It's called innocent until proved guilty.

I call Double Standards!

 

[spexau]

I think the fact that we colluded to pay Tippett outside the player contract is bad enough regardless of us actually paying him any money. Make no mistake, we're going to be hit up for a nice fine and some draft picks. I just hope it can be contained to this year so at least next year is business as usual.

 

[Flynn White]

any chance tip will get traded today

Are Cash Converters open? Maybe we'll trade him for a couple of Tamagotchi's.

 

[Emperoar]

So maybe Malem spoke a little truth......this was from last Monday...how his words take on a different meaning in a few days...

I was away for most of yesterday but now that you mention it..