- Nov 23, 2008
- 12,452
- 293
- AFL Club
- Essendon
There is a massive difference.
-
AFLW 2024 - Round 10 - Chat, game threads, injury lists, team lineups and more.
Luke Ball nominates essendon and collingwood as his prefered destination
- Thread starter nickh32
- Start date
- Tagged users None
There is a massive difference.
telsor
Hall of Famer
If Ball goes before pick 30, in spite of playing hard to get, will Collingwood supporters concede that their club didn't offer fair value in their trade offer with St Kilda?
( Goldsack was meaningless, as the Saints didn't want him )
( Goldsack was meaningless, as the Saints didn't want him )
I'd like to hear what you think we should've offered?
O
Old Spice
Guest
Actually they did want him - they proposed pick 30 and Goldsack at the beginning of trade week and then changed their tune when we conceded at the 11th hour. They wanted to bring Ball to heal - rescinding the 3 year offer and then hoping he'd crawl back and take 1.
You clearly have no idea, but why would you - it's got nothing to do with your club.
rooers06
Debutant
heard from an extremely reliable source that a team who has 2 picks in the 20's who (besides melb) are in the box seat to get him....are making a hardcore late play for him......and its not essendon
DaSawx
Brownlow Medallist
How can you "make a play for him"? If he's there you pick him, if he's not you don't.
Should have looked at the picks closer. 4 even better.
The Royal Sampler
Floreat Pica, Bitch!
QFT.
The whole point of all this Ball-ND conjecture is that he has to go where he's selected, providing of course that the club can meet the contractual terms specified by Ball on nomination.
There is no "making of plays" any more.
You're right. He's manipulating the rules. It's against their spirit.
Quicky
Brownlow Medallist
- May 27, 2008
- 25,934
- 32,081
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
- Other Teams
- Socceroos, Melbourne Victory
So what. The rules are restrictive enough as it is. Are you suggesting we should start forcing players to undergo medicals and interviews with clubs?? That idea is ridiculous for so many reasons!!! I'm glad some people have found something to hang their argument on though. Against the spirit of the rules!!! What a laugh
I'd like to see that one stand up in court LOL 
- Banned
- #213
In what way? Has Ball told Melbourne he won't play for them? No. Has Ablett told Sydney he won't play for them? Yes.
It's draft tampering & the fact that he played for Sydney is completely irrelevant.
Quicky
Brownlow Medallist
- May 27, 2008
- 25,934
- 32,081
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
- Other Teams
- Socceroos, Melbourne Victory
It's good to know you don't think Luke Ball is not doing anything wrong according to the rules of the draft. Good to clear that one up
Honestly even though our premiership window is now, I'd still rather us take the punt with a kid than Ball, either Troy Taylor or someone else. Id rather get more games into the kids we have than have an injury prone, slow player who's kicking efficiancy is below par. I think Jolly's already going to make the big difference to our side next year that we need.
- Nov 24, 2007
- 13,156
- 950
- AFL Club
- Carlton
C'mon Muse, stop making me chuck up my dinner. Get real for god's sake.
paulcar
Debutant
Pure Ownage, excellent summary. Luke Ball plays in a competition subject to trading and draft rules. He enters the game knowing the nature of the beast. If he chooses to play the game then he chooses to abide by the rules of the beast, no argument. Sorry fellow pie supporters, we could have had Luke Ball on Day 1 of trade week when the saints asked for pick 30 and Tyson Goldsack. We said we wouldn't agree to the request until we had spoken to Tyson and he was in agreement. Unfortunately in the meantime they secured Lovett and no longer had a need for Goldsack. The pies are not wholly blameless in this affair. Please let's be objective. Eddie McGuire said as much on the hot breakfast show on MMM. And we will not get ball - too many picks before 30, though $500K p.a will frighten off a few clubs no doubt. Will be happy with Troy Taylor if he's available.
paulcar you cannot trade players who dont want to leave, Collingwood had no choice but to check with Goldsack. As you say though both clubs should've asked for mediation.
The problem is imo the saints didn't want Ball to go anyway, and that is why they sent players over to NY to change his mind.
Anyhow whatever happens in the draft happens, it will be very interesting to see Lukes reaction to getting drafted by Melbourne.
The problem is imo the saints didn't want Ball to go anyway, and that is why they sent players over to NY to change his mind.
Anyhow whatever happens in the draft happens, it will be very interesting to see Lukes reaction to getting drafted by Melbourne.
You are spot on. He wants to go to Collingwood. No one can blame him fo having a prefered option. His manager has said to him what he needs to do to give himself the best chance of that happening. His manager would have also said you might end up somewhere else but has given him the best possible chance of going to Collingwood. It is a slim chance but it is still a chance.
Unfortunately for Ball (and I think he knows it) he will be picked up before pick 30. Still who can blame the guy for trying to end up where he wants to go.
- Nov 23, 2008
- 12,452
- 293
- AFL Club
- Essendon
Pretty much answered your own question.
Btw, this thread isn't about draft tampering. It's about Luke Ball and Essendon.
That is what I hear too. I mentioned this earlier on (with a little bit of a go at Freo in there). Ball would hate to be at Port. That is the risk you take nominating for the national draft.
O
Old Spice
Guest
Re entering a system with set rules. The rules of today are different from the past in regard to zoning, salary caps, priority picks, rules etc., etc. They change because they don't fit. Some people think only the administrators should have a say about football direction: the AFLPA and many players have different ideas. Would you like to enter the telecommunications industry, for example, and then be shunted around by a bunch of employers without any say so?
Re we could have had Ball on day 1, Quicky has covered that off. A contracted player has to be consulted. The evidence is as clear as day that Lyon did not want to lose Ball, but teach him some kind of demented lesson - hence withdrawing the 3 year offer, then chasing him to NY and offering a 1 year contract. You can't seriously be telling me either that Lovett took up Goldsack's potential position!! St Kilda screwed Ball and he rightly gave them the bird.
In any case, if we don't get Ball, other teams are paying overs big time. Saints lose Ball for nothing, another team pays well over the odds -potentially squeezing out a talented young player, and we are one spot higher up the draft.
So Collingwood are going to be paying over if they get him or is that just the other clubs? Same price has been nominated for all clubs.
It's good to know you don't think Luke Ball is not doing anything wrong according to the rules of the draft. Good to clear that one up
Your whole argument rests on the unspoken assertion that the only standard by which the reasonableness of actions can be judged is whether they conform to the rules. Of course he's conforming with the rules. Of course the AFL can't compel him to take a medical examination. Of course there are reasons why it is undesireable that the AFL be able to compel him, even if they wanted to. None of this changes the fact that the way he's acting is designed to affect the outcome of the draft.
Some people would consider that unreasonable (NOT against the rules). I'm not necessarily one of those people. I just find it ridiculous the way you're trying rebut any criticisms by the self-evident fact that he's not breaking any rules.
