Main Menu

Crows 'tamper' affair

Started by Jay, October 24, 2012, 08:50:19 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

Capper

Welcome to Tippett gate. Interestingly enough Andrew Ireland (CEO of the Swans) has just gone on holidays and isnt avaliable to talk.

The Crows rejected the Lions pick 8 last year for Tippett, and now the Swans are offering 23.

Mailman the 2nd

Swans are at no liability to this at all btw seeing as they aren't being investigated.

Adelaide are the ones who could lose out big here if they did breach the rules

Antsey

Not sure if they could penalise picks this year. 

We've already traded one away for Graham late last week.  Trigg went to the AFL late last week... hmmmm

OR maybe they could take pick 40 away and we give back Graham and pick 50 ;)

Whatever happens, the AFL will need to make a call fast or reserve any decision making that clear it can't affect this year or it will wreck any deals we're involved in.

Chopps

Ok sorry I should have worded my question better also I m not all that familiar with judds visy contract

I understand the rule clearer thanks but why is this a problem? It's not like it benefits the crows and out of principle would of tried to make his move smooth regardless

Is this more its a breach and that's that? Regardless of impact?

Sorry all for my lack of understanding

Mailman the 2nd

Quote from: Chopps on October 24, 2012, 04:32:45 PM
Ok sorry I should have worded my question better also I m not all that familiar with judds visy contract

I understand the rule clearer thanks but why is this a problem? It's not like it benefits the crows and out of principle would of tried to make his move smooth regardless

Is this more its a breach and that's that? Regardless of impact?

Sorry all for my lack of understanding

The fact that it could (probably is) unfairly benefiting one club makes  it an automatic draft breach seeing as they didn't confer with the AFL, hence the term "Gentlemens agreement"

AFL seems to be highly influenced by the media on this Tippett saga.

First Jeff kennett complains about Sydney's salary cap and now this

valkorum

Quote from: Chopps on October 24, 2012, 04:32:45 PM
Ok sorry I should have worded my question better also I m not all that familiar with judds visy contract

I understand the rule clearer thanks but why is this a problem? It's not like it benefits the crows and out of principle would of tried to make his move smooth regardless

Is this more its a breach and that's that? Regardless of impact?

Sorry all for my lack of understanding

Yes and no - yes its a breach but the impact is draft tampering.  They have agreed (in principle) to a market price for a player 3 years (contract in 2009) before the market was available. 

It's different than at trade time a player nominating another club - the deal to make the trade still needs to be agreed upon between both clubs.  These are normally worked out as the club the player has nominated knows that want to come and play for them - so they do what they can to get the deal done.

The agreement made between the Crows and Tippett is that he can choose the club of his choice and Adelaide will get a round 2 pick.  The big difference here is that the 2nd club hasn't been involved in this deal and may not want to part with its 2nd round pick.  Hence, why it can be considered draft tampering.


Antsey

It's one of those let's get it done now and deal with the consequences in 3 years (which seems so far away) moments.

Capper

Quote from: valkorum on October 24, 2012, 04:41:40 PM
Quote from: Chopps on October 24, 2012, 04:32:45 PM
Ok sorry I should have worded my question better also I m not all that familiar with judds visy contract

I understand the rule clearer thanks but why is this a problem? It's not like it benefits the crows and out of principle would of tried to make his move smooth regardless

Is this more its a breach and that's that? Regardless of impact?

Sorry all for my lack of understanding

Yes and no - yes its a breach but the impact is draft tampering.  They have agreed (in principle) to a market price for a player 3 years (contract in 2009) before the market was available. 

It's different than at trade time a player nominating another club - the deal to make the trade still needs to be agreed upon between both clubs.  These are normally worked out as the club the player has nominated knows that want to come and play for them - so they do what they can to get the deal done.

The agreement made between the Crows and Tippett is that he can choose the club of his choice and Adelaide will get a round 2 pick.  The big difference here is that the 2nd club hasn't been involved in this deal and may not want to part with its 2nd round pick.  Hence, why it can be considered draft tampering.
Why are the Swasn offering a first round pick and a player then??

Antsey

Nice tabs!  23 seems like second but it isn't!

Jay

SEN reporting that if the Crows are found guilty they will be fined $800k, Tippett will be deregistered and the Crows will lose their first round draft pick.

tbagrocks

When this blows over, hopefully the person/people responsable for dobbing or reporting to the AFL get their sanction! Mountains out of mole hills

valkorum

Quote from: tabs on October 24, 2012, 05:35:33 PM
Quote from: valkorum on October 24, 2012, 04:41:40 PM
Quote from: Chopps on October 24, 2012, 04:32:45 PM
Ok sorry I should have worded my question better also I m not all that familiar with judds visy contract

I understand the rule clearer thanks but why is this a problem? It's not like it benefits the crows and out of principle would of tried to make his move smooth regardless

Is this more its a breach and that's that? Regardless of impact?

Sorry all for my lack of understanding

Yes and no - yes its a breach but the impact is draft tampering.  They have agreed (in principle) to a market price for a player 3 years (contract in 2009) before the market was available. 

It's different than at trade time a player nominating another club - the deal to make the trade still needs to be agreed upon between both clubs.  These are normally worked out as the club the player has nominated knows that want to come and play for them - so they do what they can to get the deal done.

The agreement made between the Crows and Tippett is that he can choose the club of his choice and Adelaide will get a round 2 pick.  The big difference here is that the 2nd club hasn't been involved in this deal and may not want to part with its 2nd round pick.  Hence, why it can be considered draft tampering.
Why are the Swasn offering a first round pick and a player then??

Not sure.  Also, need to keep in mind that the Lions offered pick #8 last season for Tippett and it was turned down.

kilbluff1985

Quote from: tbagrocks on October 24, 2012, 05:57:47 PM
When this blows over, hopefully the person/people responsable for dobbing or reporting to the AFL get their sanction! Mountains out of mole hills

Crows went to the AFL themselves

tbagrocks

Quote from: kilbluff1995 on October 24, 2012, 06:03:36 PM
Quote from: tbagrocks on October 24, 2012, 05:57:47 PM
When this blows over, hopefully the person/people responsable for dobbing or reporting to the AFL get their sanction! Mountains out of mole hills

Crows went to the AFL themselves
Seems like it was written in the paper before the AFL probed, somebody, some reporter has stirred the pot.

elephants