The Carlton saga is embarrassing for everyone, including a good friend of mine, former CEO of the Adelaide Crows and now the boss of the Blues, Steven Trigg.
I called football with Steven in the eighties and we did some comedy together for an ABC television show called Ballzup (an apt title for what has happened at the Blues in recent weeks).
Steven is an honourable man, a man of his word, and a man who is passionate.
Steven can also be hard, but he will need to be at Carlton if he’s going to resurrect this once mighty but now struggling club.
When the Crows were charged with draft tampering and salary-cap breaches over the Kurt Tippett deal, a number of staff members were fined and suspended. It cost Trigg $50,000 and a six-month suspension.
In 2014, a year after returning from suspension, he moved to Carlton.
After an explosive interview on SEN radio, in which he claimed that Trigg had revealed that the Crows had stitched up Eddie Betts 18 months before he quit the Blues, Mick Malthouse was sacked.
Yet the mud Mick slung is going to stick stronger than Araldite to Steven’s tailored suit. Steven has history, and he knows accusations of anything untoward will make people suspicious.
This simply isn’t fair. Steven has done his time, the fine and suspension causing humiliation and embarrassment to Trigg and his family, and then there’s the issue of his credibility taking a major dive.
Steven is an outstanding administrator, yes he can be aggressive, but that’s what’s needed in the street-fighting environment of the AFL in Melbourne.
The AFL have cleared Adelaide of any draft tampering involving Betts. Steven will be relieved, but he will be also fuming that his reputation, which was on the way back up, was unduly placed in jeopardy.
Malthouse has told Fox Footy’s Gerard Whateley that when he was asked by AFL investigators to explain his comments on Wednesday, he said Trigg was totally innocent of any mischief.
Possibly the most significant words muttered by Mick Malthouse in a long time.
New York Hawk
Guest
Boo-hoo, a guy that got busted for purposely breaking the rules is implicated again in a similar scenario by someone who frankly has about 1,000 times the credibility.... Carlton made a mistake in hiring Malthouse but made a much bigger mistake in hiring Trigg, who seems to have achieved nothing of any merit in his "career". The admin is arguably the most important part of a footy club and as long as Trigg is at Carlton, I don't see them challenging for the top four, let alone winning a flag.
Steven
Guest
Mark, I've also had a lot to do with Triggy and he has always operated in the most professional manner with me. It really annoys me that people can take parting shots, Malhouse In this instance and somehow there is not recourse on him because he is somehow a revered icon of the game! This doesn't give him the right to make accusations on matters he knows nothing about.
Pumping Dougie
Roar Guru
Mark, people make mistakes, but CEOs are paid and expected not to. You say Trigg is an honourable man, but his actions and culpability on the Tippett affair suggest otherwise. This was a calculated attempt to fraud the system - not a spontanneous, flippant, simple mistake. To me, an error in judgement like this from an intelligent man who is employed to make sensible decisions and act with integrity, speaks volumes about his character, his leadership and his decision-making skills. Also, when Matthew Rendell was thrown under a bus by Jason Mifsud for expressing some honest concerns, Trigg was all too happy to jump behind the wheel and put his foot on the accelerator. Trigg failed to defend his man over a complex issue, because it was easier to let him take a fall. I don't think his actions in either the Tippet or Rendell cases suggest he is an honourable man.
TomC
Roar Guru
He didn't exactly emerge from his role at Adelaide unblemished, did he? The Tippett penalties stand out for us neutral fans. Frankly, in a very tough role, he has been unimpressive. Perhaps he comes across better inside the beltway.
jax
Guest
It didn't take the AFL more than a couple days to conduct its investigation and exonerate Trigg, that seemed pretty quick to me (make a few calls, check the Betts contract and sweep it under the carpet asap). This is the same AFL that found the Dees not guilty of tanking but fined them anyway? I'm not an expert on all of the rules but if the rule is 'you can't sign a restricted free agent from another club while he is under contract to another club' then Trigg might be in the clear because they didn't put pen to paper. Reading between the lines and taking Mick's original comments on face value, did the Crows verbally agree to terms with Betts while he was contracted to the Blues? I'm not sure if that is against the rules or not but it might explain Mick's statement on Trigg and Betts. Is it against the rules to verbally agree to terms when the player is a restricted free agent at another club?