Luke Ball - Who was at fault?

[arsene wenger1]

Re: Luke Ball - Who was at fault? Neutral fans only pls!

in the end you cant get quility players and offer crap for them. when nick stevens wanted to go to collingwood he was at his peak and collingwood still offered crap. did collingwood offer what they thought he was worth at the time, or did they just want a quality player for virtually free. they seem to be getting a bit of reputation of being a club not worth trading with. cant believe players keep requesting to be traded there, chances are it's not going to happen, barring jolly. surprised that actually happened

 

[Play by Numbers]

Re: Luke Ball - Who was at fault? Neutral fans only pls!

I guess Collingwood were not that committed to the idea in terms of offering up a decent player.

One of the rumoured trade attempts was Wellingham to WC for 22, 22 to Bulldogs for Everitt, on traded to St Kilda and Ball to Collingwood.

If true, according to the same rumour Collingwood had to work their way up to offering Wellingham, which WC gave a flat "no" to anyway.

Collingwood have a history of being difficult to deal with especially in relation to player trades and over valuing their players.

Still I think this should have been taken into account by Ball and his manager.

It seemed so rushed and the way they went about things so poorly thought out.

 

[magicpants]

Re: Luke Ball - Who was at fault? Neutral fans only pls!

Why does anyone have to be at fault?

A price was set, the buyer didn't want to pay it - both walk away.

My gut feel is that should it happen to have been say North or Richmond - the saints may have softened their stance - however given the opposition was a team that made the preliminary final - why would you take unders to only bolster your already strong oposition

I don't see the difference between an average draft pick or letting Melbourne have him in terms of the Saints winning a flag in the next year or so

what pick did James hird get selected with??

 

[The Falcon Strike]

Re: Luke Ball - Who was at fault? Neutral fans only pls!

[/b]

what pick did James hird get selected with??

very few players outside of the top 20 - come on and have a dominant season and help a team to a flag in the first 2 years - which by my summation is why the saints were after players and not picks !

so the chances of that happening are ridiculously light - when the chances of a seasoned on-baller helping a team to a flag is quite high

 

[Bay Pie]

Re: Luke Ball - Who was at fault? Neutral fans only pls!

in the end you cant get quility players and offer crap for them. when nick stevens wanted to go to collingwood he was at his peak and collingwood still offered crap. did collingwood offer what they thought he was worth at the time, or did they just want a quality player for virtually free. they seem to be getting a bit of reputation of being a club not worth trading with. cant believe players keep requesting to be traded there, chances are it's not going to happen, barring jolly. surprised that actually happened

We offered 1st round pick (17 overall?) & Heath Scotland-he turned out OK.

Port wanted 1st pick & Didak.

We did the right thing. So did they. Why would they help strengthen a team that just pumped them in the PF?

 

[SaintsPremiers08]

Re: Luke Ball - Who was at fault? Neutral fans only pls!

Why does anyone have to be at fault?

A price was set, the buyer didn't want to pay it - both walk away.

My gut feel is that should it happen to have been say North or Richmond - the saints may have softened their stance - however given the opposition was a team that made the preliminary final - why would you take unders to only bolster your already strong oposition

I don't see the difference between an average draft pick or letting Melbourne have him in terms of the Saints winning a flag in the next year or so

BOOM! Finally a poster with a bit of common sense!

 

[Lexus Rose Oval]

Re: Luke Ball - Who was at fault? Neutral fans only pls!

BOOM! Finally a poster with a bit of common sense!

I second that

 

[Nardz]

Re: Luke Ball - Who was at fault? Neutral fans only pls!

clearly collingwood

pick 25 and a pick the saints wouldn't even use for Ball was a joke - especially since you consider the saints are looking at hopefully winning a flag over the next season or two

If they were serious - they should of been putting either Medhurst, Davis or N.Brown on the table - something St.kilda would actually be interested in.

Don't even think the saints lose in this - history clearly shows that any side that takes this stance will never have a player or club **** them over again

The Buger deal was sensational

two players who have been all australian in the past 2 seasons for a player who has clearly become surplus to requirements at his club?

or a player who will be the full back for the next 10 years?

get your ****ing hand off it.

people say collingwood overrate our players, when in this case it is clearly the opposite. if we were to trade any of those players stkilda would have to throw in sweeteners.

and in the end of the day the saints have definitely lost. they could have had pick 30. now they have nothing. i know what i'd prefer.

and that crap about history showing that clubs that take this stance dont have players leave again is bullshit. port adelaide had stevens, carr, burgoyne, just to name a few.

 

[scomac]

Re: Luke Ball - Who was at fault? Neutral fans only pls!

Ball has struggled with OP cant kick cant run , had a fair GF stay at the Sainters.

 

[puskas]

Re: Luke Ball - Who was at fault? Neutral fans only pls!

I think St.Kilda if Collingwood offered a 2nd round pick. Ball is not good enough to get into the St.Kilda team yet he's worth a 1st round pick according to Lyon....are the whole St.Kilda team worth 1st rounder Ross? If so it's a shame you didn't win the flag by 100 points

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

 

[Nardz]

Re: Luke Ball - Who was at fault? Neutral fans only pls!

Collingwood have a history of being difficult to deal with especially in relation to player trades and over valuing their players.

but why? we struck a good deal for jolly... we gave brisbane a first pick for wood a couple of years ago...

when players want to leave us we let them go for a reasonable price.. nick davis got us no more than a 2nd round pick and he practically won the swans a flag...
heath scotland has been servicable for carlton over the years and they got him pretty cheap from us..

rhyce shaw went to the swans for a 3rd round pick and finished 2nd in their b&f

all these have been off the top of my head so some of the picks might be off from reality but the point is we don't hold clubs to ransom when our players want to move, yet we seem to be held to ransom when somebody wants to come to collingwood.

I have no doubt if ball had nominated the crows, who are also considered a possible contender, or even geelong for that matter, then the price would not have been as ridiculous as it was in the end.

 

[BABYBOMBERS2007]

Re: Luke Ball - Who was at fault? Neutral fans only pls!

I think Collingwood were at fault. Ball could have helped Saints win a flag if the coach was good enough. Probably late first rounder, early 2nd.

or 2nd and 3rd, or something like that

 

[doppleganger]

Re: Luke Ball - Who was at fault? Neutral fans only pls!

all these have been off the top of my head so some of the picks might be off from reality but the point is we don't hold clubs to ransom when our players want to move, yet we seem to be held to ransom when somebody wants to come to collingwood.

I have no doubt if ball had nominated the crows, who are also considered a possible contender, or even geelong for that matter, then the price would not have been as ridiculous as it was in the end.

Fair point I reckon Nardz.

Carlton came out and said they simply wouldn't trade Fev to us as they dont want us to be stronger and more chance of winning a flag!

The saints seem to be saying the same thing, we are a bit of a chance so they would rather get nothing and feck over a favourite son.

When a bloke wants out of Collingwood we seem to be always able to get them where they want to go....H.Scotland, N.Davis, C.Tarrant, R.Shaw etc

 

[favourites]

Re: Luke Ball - Who was at fault? Neutral fans only pls!

All I can say is bring on free agency. I don't feel for either club, just for Ball. Listened to what Lyon said and believed him when he said if you want out, go and we will make a deal for you. It was pretty clear that Lyon wanted an awesome deal or he was going to the draft.

Im not sure trade week would exsist if we all had this attitude, and that is why free agency should come in.

Well done to Paul Roos who is by far the best trader in the business. He knows you can't win em all but also opens the lines by accepting decent offers.

It's fair to say after today I can't see either of these clubs ever swapping players in the near future.

 

[Monocle]

Re: Luke Ball - Who was at fault? Neutral fans only pls!

for all things luke ball, i believe grant thomas is still at fault. has taken years of ball's career with his management of him during all the concussions and injuries. st kilda's new administration now thinks ball is back to being a normal footballer - the rest of the league thinks otherwise. collingwood put up a fair offer, st kilda didn't want to help a rival. if it'd been a club with poorer prospects for next year they would have accepted.

The OP asked for neutral supporters opinions. So far this thread has been dominated by StK & Coll supporters.

However this post by Durham Hawk sums the situation up very well every point he makes is valid..... repeat every point..... as I have no doubt that had Ball nominated .. lets say Richmond... then the Saints would have taken the offer that Coll had put on the table if Richmond has been the suitor...... so its just one of those shi- tty set of circumstances .... bottom line here no one wins its just a very unfortunate set of circumstances.

A side note Ball as a youngster bled black , white and red for the saints.. a little bit of me cant but help feel sorry for him..... Lyons is making a statement here....... Ball is in the wrong place at the wrong time.

To those Saints supporters who have paid out on Ball..... uncalled for. The kids a class act.

PS not bagging Lyon here he is entitled to make a stand.

 

[Peter Sidorkiewicz]

Re: Luke Ball - Who was at fault? Neutral fans only pls!

No one seems at fault to me. It was just one of those trades that didn't happen.

#25 wasn't that far away from his worth; nevetheless it is still fair enough if Saints didn't want to accept it.

looks like Melbourne PSD ftw.

I read some reports that pick 21 would of got the deal done. Given Collingwood had already had a trade lined up for North Melbourne's pick 25 (speculated as Sharrod Wellingham + Pick 30) surely they could of just added to the deal to get pick 21 from North Melbourne instead of 25. It wouldn't have taken much to go up 4 places.

Maybe Wellingham + Pick 30 + Pick 62 for Pick 21.

 

[greennick]

Re: Luke Ball - Who was at fault? Neutral fans only pls!

two players who have been all australian in the past 2 seasons

I love it how Pie supporters have been pulling out this line in regards to Leon Davis. Calling Leon Davis and AA is like calling Mooney one. He may have been given it, but everyone knew he didn't deserve it and shouldn't be called it.

 

[The Panther]

Re: Luke Ball - Who was at fault? Neutral fans only pls!

http://www.realfooty.com.au/news/rfnews/system-failed-ball/2009/10/09/1255019612838.html

''Players such as Luke Ball, who have given eight years quality service to his club and feels he is out of favour and wants a move … deserves better than the current system provides,'' Finnis said

 

[Nardz]

Re: Luke Ball - Who was at fault? Neutral fans only pls!

I love it how Pie supporters have been pulling out this line in regards to Leon Davis. Calling Leon Davis and AA is like calling Mooney one. He may have been given it, but everyone knew he didn't deserve it and shouldn't be called it.

that's rubbish. people are including leon davis' finals in their judgement on his season, when the all australian side does not include finals.

leon had a quite last couple of rounds, and before that he was ok.. his form in the middle of the season however was stellar. probably only 2 or 3 players had a better patch of form this year.

whether you like it or not, leon davis is a current all australian.

would you trade an all australian for a player who is not young and is not in his sides best 22?

 

[G.O.B]

Re: Luke Ball - Who was at fault? Neutral fans only pls!

Taken from an article in the Age titled "Saints star may walk for nothing"

Prior to the pick 25 arrangement Collingwood had pitched other scenarios to St Kilda. The last of these yesterday morning involved an offer the Saints had raised earlier in the week - Tyson Goldsack and pick 30 - but were turned down.

Interesting...........

 

[amos]

Re: Luke Ball - Who was at fault? Neutral fans only pls!

I never read the thread but Luke Ball is at least worth a 1st rounder given Collingwood's position in the draft. Whether they had one to offer or not doesn't bother me much but neutrally looking at it, Ball is worth a firsty. Lyon ****ed his season, but not his career.

 

[The Panther]

Re: Luke Ball - Who was at fault? Neutral fans only pls!

Taken from an article in the Age titled "Saints star may walk for nothing"


Interesting...........

If that is the case, then Ross Lyon is an extremely petty individual

 

[greennick]

Re: Luke Ball - Who was at fault? Neutral fans only pls!

that's rubbish. people are including leon davis' finals in their judgement on his season, when the all australian side does not include finals.

leon had a quite last couple of rounds, and before that he was ok.. his form in the middle of the season however was stellar. probably only 2 or 3 players had a better patch of form this year.

whether you like it or not, leon davis is a current all australian.

would you trade an all australian for a player who is not young and is not in his sides best 22?

Hey, I am not saying I would trade Leon for Ball (given the injuries Ball has had this is not worth it). However, I am saying there is no way he should have been AA and everyone, even many Pie supporters agree.

 

[bombers007]

Re: Luke Ball - Who was at fault? Neutral fans only pls!

ball for medhurst thought that may have been a good deal?? maybe not i think saints wanted to much now there going to get nothing for him.

 

[greennick]

Re: Luke Ball - Who was at fault? Neutral fans only pls!

If that is the case, then Ross Lyon is an extremely petty individual

Why does that make him petty? He didn't think the deal was worth it. If Ball had have nominated a range of clubs (I am sure there are many that would have paid what he was after), then there may have been a better chance of a deal coming together. However, he nominated one club and no appropriate deal could be found. Both sides have defensible positions, so nobody is to blame. Saints feel he his form is getting back (i mean 20 possies in the GF, including a heap of contested, with only 50% game time because he was being managed off the back of his injuries this year) and didn't want to give him to their main competitor for a pick that won't net them anything that will help them this year and a player that likely won't make their team.