No deal with Magpies over Ball, says Lyon

[Saints43]

Any hope of a reconciliation seems dashed going by reports in today's Herald Sun that the relationship between Ball and Ross Lyon is 'untenable'.

I'm sure a fringe player at any club would not have the best relationship with the coach, but sad to hear nonetheless.

It's Ross's way or the Highway....



And so it should be.

That is sad. I was really hoping a trade couldn't be done and Luke would sit down with the club and thrash out their problems. That he could sign a new performance based contract with assurances of an improve deal once the coaches were satisfied that he deserved one.

[joffaboy]

Any hope of a reconciliation seems dashed going by reports in today's Herald Sun that the relationship between Ball and Ross Lyon is 'untenable'.

I'm sure a fringe player at any club would not have the best relationship with the coach, but sad to hear nonetheless.

It's Ross's way or the Highway....



And so it should be.

That is sad. I was really hoping a trade couldn't be done and Luke would sit down with the club and thrash out their problems. That he could sign a new performance based contract with assurances of an improve deal once the coaches were satisfied that he deserved one.

Yeah it is a shame but apparently his family dont believe the opportunity to play in a GF or to play with his mates for the next three years was any good.

Apparently his relationship is now untenable with Ross Lyon because Lyon did his job and in his opinion Ball wasn't doing what was required.

Sad it had to end this way - but hey Conners will be happy - Ball will get more from Collingwood (Denham reported that Collingwood were offering $500k a year - we were nowhere near that) and he will get more of a cut than he would have at the Saints.

Always a silver lining for someone in trade week.

[stinger]

here's the actual quote



'source close to Ball yesterday said it was "untenable" that Ball would remain under Saints coach Ross Lyon"



...which is how i saw it a few days ago......before the abuse...

[Stillwaiting]

here's the actual quote



'source close to Ball yesterday said it was "untenable" that Ball would remain under Saints coach Ross Lyon"



...which is how i saw it a few days ago......before the abuse...

Thought the minute he said he wanted to go tho the filth that he could never come back to the Saints. Hope its the PSD draft for you luke

[stinger]

I think you guys are being so harsh on Ball

He's a young guy trying to make a career for himself.

He's worried about his spot in the team and has reason to believe that he may not be in Lyon's bigger picture and has opted to go to a club that may require him more.
A move like this may well extend his career if he goes.

I don't see how any level headed person could hate him for this train of thought. I get so tired of this mentality that if someone doesn't do purely what is in the best interest of the club ONLY, he's a selfish, greedy egomaniac.
Justin Plapp got 1 last last chance to keep his spot on the list, backed into a pack against Essendon "for the team", got seriously injured as a result, didn't play again that season and was delisted. The club didn't reward his loyalty

If the deal falls through, I for one would welcome him back to fold with open arms. All this talk about delisting him or making him play the season out in the 2s is stupid.
Sure make him earn his spot, after he does, why hold malice?

For some of you guys, this whole thing has gotten out of proportion in your minds. The righteousness I hear

an excellent post ..well reasoned ..full of logic...even if i say so......not that the poster would care......

[axcellence]

I think you guys are being so harsh on Ball

He's a young guy trying to make a career for himself.

He's worried about his spot in the team and has reason to believe that he may not be in Lyon's bigger picture and has opted to go to a club that may require him more.
A move like this may well extend his career if he goes.

I don't see how any level headed person could hate him for this train of thought. I get so tired of this mentality that if someone doesn't do purely what is in the best interest of the club ONLY, he's a selfish, greedy egomaniac.
Justin Plapp got 1 last last chance to keep his spot on the list, backed into a pack against Essendon "for the team", got seriously injured as a result, didn't play again that season and was delisted. The club didn't reward his loyalty

If the deal falls through, I for one would welcome him back to fold with open arms. All this talk about delisting him or making him play the season out in the 2s is stupid.
Sure make him earn his spot, after he does, why hold malice?

For some of you guys, this whole thing has gotten out of proportion in your minds. The righteousness I hear

an excellent post ..well reasoned ..full of logic...even if i say so......not that the poster would care......

+1

Luke Ball has made a decision - and he'll cop it whichever way it comes. Let's not heap abuse on him. Have any of you ever refused a much better paying job out of loyalty? Most of working people these days switch jobs at the drop of a hat...

Those who live in glass houses...

[Mr Magic]

I think you guys are being so harsh on Ball

He's a young guy trying to make a career for himself.

He's worried about his spot in the team and has reason to believe that he may not be in Lyon's bigger picture and has opted to go to a club that may require him more.
A move like this may well extend his career if he goes.

I don't see how any level headed person could hate him for this train of thought. I get so tired of this mentality that if someone doesn't do purely what is in the best interest of the club ONLY, he's a selfish, greedy egomaniac.
Justin Plapp got 1 last last chance to keep his spot on the list, backed into a pack against Essendon "for the team", got seriously injured as a result, didn't play again that season and was delisted. The club didn't reward his loyalty

If the deal falls through, I for one would welcome him back to fold with open arms. All this talk about delisting him or making him play the season out in the 2s is stupid.
Sure make him earn his spot, after he does, why hold malice?

For some of you guys, this whole thing has gotten out of proportion in your minds. The righteousness I hear

an excellent post ..well reasoned ..full of logic...even if i say so......not that the poster would care......

+1

Luke Ball has made a decision - and he'll cop it whichever way it comes. Let's not heap abuse on him. Have any of you ever refused a much better paying job out of loyalty? Most of working people these days switch jobs at the drop of a hat...

Those who live in glass houses...

I'm sorry, but I'm starting to get billious about all this.

IMO,Paul Connors has been feeding stories to Denham at The Oz that are nothing more than blatantly trying to spin this situation.

Facts of the situation as I understand them:-

Ball was on 600k, the result of a back-loaded long-term contract signed when he was at his peak of playing abilities.

Ball was offered in June a much lower 3 year contract based on what St Kilda felt he was currently worth (300-400k?)

As the season wore on, Ball's inability to quickly recover from playing games impacted his ability to train, tehreby imp[acting on the amount of actual game time he could play under our gameplan.

As a result of that he started to get less and less actual game time.

A decision was made by the match committee, in conjunction with the fitness people, to stop him playing and get some hardcore training into him so that he could regain some of his base fitness and return to a more acceptable game time. This included a period of playing in the Sandringham side where he could maintain some 'match fitness' without the rigours of AFL football.

When the finals came around Ball was selected to play.

On Grand Final day he started in the centre square.

Somewhere in all of this a decision was reached between Ball and Connors to check out his other playing options.

Now I really have no issue with him going to another CLub if that is what he wants to do. He's a big boy and is responsible for his decisions.

WHat I will not cop though is this 'campaign' by Connors and others from the Ball camp to somehow 'paint' my Saints as the 'bad guys' in all of this.

What is so wrong in just telling the truth? Ball/Connors wanted more money adn Collingwood apparently has offered it. (anybody who believes the nonsense being peddled by Connors and his mouthpiece Denham that Ball was offered more by the Saints than Collingwood needs a reality check, IMO).

Obviously Ball/Connors/the camp fear that being known as having left the Saints for more money is not good for his image?

Hence this farcical bs crapola that is being spread as a defense of Luke Ball's decision.

'Saints offered more'
'more game time'
'untenable under Lyon'

BTW, the 'more game time' excuse is a beauty. The connotation is that St Kilda deliberately didn't play him more. Does anybody actually believe that teh match committee, coaches adn fitness staf conspired to stop Luke Ball from playing as much as he could?
Of course not.
The truth is they believed he couldn't play more than the time they gave him on the field.
Maybe they were wrong in their assesment? Only time will tell.

[stinger]

maybe mm...but ross did admit that they stuffed up...or that someone...not him.... stuffed up in the grand final and that ball should have been given another two six minute bursts in the3rd and 4th quarters......would that have won us the game..?.who knows...his last burst in round 14 contributed to our win......


...that sort of shoots holes in your argument about his inability to play more.....who really knows...not us...



what i will say however is that there has been a history of mismanagement with ball over his career with the saints.....that's pretty much common knowledge.....

[Mr Magic]

maybe mm...but ross did admit that they stuffed up...or that someone...not him.... stuffed up in the grand final and that ball should have been given anothertwo six minute bursts in the3rd and 4th quarters......would that have won us the game..?.who knows...his last burst in round 14 contributed to our win......

what i will say however is that there has been a history of mismanagement with ball over his career with the saints.....that's pretty much common knowledge.....

ANd even if that thing about the GF is 100% accurate, would that be enough for Ball to become disenchanted with the Saints?

And if it was, do you really believe that he only started looking for other options after that?
Denham has been writing articles for weeks about Collingwood and Ball. Well before the GF. I believe that Connors has been feeding him the info, so was he doing that without Ball's approval?

Something is really smelly about all this and I've come to the conclusion that the stench is coming from Connors/Ball/Ball's camp.

The only logical reason I can come to is that they don't relish the idea of Luke Ball being pictured as a 'mercenary' and are therefore 'spinning' as much as they can to try and 'paint' us/our coach and anybody else as the problem here.

Well I'm not prepared to accept that.
From what I can see, it is Ball/Connors/Ball's camp who are fully responsible for this.


BTW I still haven't heard when Collingwood gave Luke Ball teh physical/medical examination you would expect to accompany a 500k contract offer?

[stinger]

loyalty is a two way street mm......doesn't seem to work either way in our current afl it would seem...as evidenced by this article...


http://www.theage.com.au/news/rfnews/fo ... ntentSwap1



...i too really hate f****** trade week....

[ace]

The Magpies don't have to deal with St Kilda on Luke Ball.

They have sabotaged St Kilda by getting Luke Ball to walk out.

Now that they have Darren Jolly they can simply shut up shop and go home, knowing that they wont have to face a team wth Luke Ball in it during next years finals.

Collingwood only needs to deal if they see an advantage in taking Ball and giving up less of themselves and then only if they can fit Ball in under their salary cap.

[markp]

...that sort of shoots holes in your argument about his inability to play more.....

No it doesn't... it's a totally separate issue.

I think Mr Magic's summation is probably pretty close to the truth.

It was about money (and people getting in his ear), now it's about damage control... I'll bet now Ball seems to be hanging in the wind he wishes he could start this week over.

[stinger]

...that sort of shoots holes in your argument about his inability to play more.....

No it doesn't... it's a totally separate issue.

I think Mr Magic's summation is probably pretty close to the truth.

It was about money (and people getting in his ear), now it's about damage control... I'll bet now Ball seems to be hanging in the wind he wishes he could start this week over.

how's that.....

[SainterK]

Stinger, are you backing up Luke's position in this?

[stinger]

maybe mm...but ross did admit that they stuffed up...or that someone...not him.... stuffed up in the grand final and that ball should have been given anothertwo six minute bursts in the3rd and 4th quarters......would that have won us the game..?.who knows...his last burst in round 14 contributed to our win......

what i will say however is that there has been a history of mismanagement with ball over his career with the saints.....that's pretty much common knowledge.....

ANd even if that thing about the GF is 100% accurate, would that be enough for Ball to become disenchanted with the Saints?

A

..it's f****** accurate alright...i heard ross say it myself ffs.....maybe they were shopping him around,,,ever thought of that....????

[Milton66]

maybe mm...but ross did admit that they stuffed up...or that someone...not him.... stuffed up in the grand final and that ball should have been given anothertwo six minute bursts in the3rd and 4th quarters......would that have won us the game..?.who knows...his last burst in round 14 contributed to our win......

what i will say however is that there has been a history of mismanagement with ball over his career with the saints.....that's pretty much common knowledge.....

ANd even if that thing about the GF is 100% accurate, would that be enough for Ball to become disenchanted with the Saints?

And if it was, do you really believe that he only started looking for other options after that?
Denham has been writing articles for weeks about Collingwood and Ball. Well before the GF. I believe that Connors has been feeding him the info, so was he doing that without Ball's approval?

Something is really smelly about all this and I've come to the conclusion that the stench is coming from Connors/Ball/Ball's camp.

The only logical reason I can come to is that they don't relish the idea of Luke Ball being pictured as a 'mercenary' and are therefore 'spinning' as much as they can to try and 'paint' us/our coach and anybody else as the problem here.

Well I'm not prepared to accept that.
From what I can see, it is Ball/Connors/Ball's camp who are fully responsible for this.


BTW I still haven't heard when Collingwood gave Luke Ball teh physical/medical examination you would expect to accompany a 500k contract offer?

A very balanced view MM.

It would appear that his decision to leave was made before the GF.

I can see why some supporters are annyoed with Luke TBH.

[ace]

loyalty is a two way street mm......doesn't seem to work either way in our current afl it would seem...as evidenced by this article...


http://www.theage.com.au/news/rfnews/fo ... ntentSwap1

Hawthorn can try and spin it any way they like, but the fact is when they would not deal in certain protected players, Port asked for a list of protected players.
Hawthorn provided that list.

Port compared that list with Hawthorn's player list and saw that Campbell Brown was not protected.

Jeff has now come out and protected all former premiership players.
Too late Jeff, your managers had already sent the list and Port has let everyone know who those managers were not prepared to protect.

[Mr Magic]

loyalty is a two way street mm......doesn't seem to work either way in our current afl it would seem...as evidenced by this article...


http://www.theage.com.au/news/rfnews/fo ... ntentSwap1



...i too really hate f****** trade week....

Yes you're correct on that Stinger.

But what I dislike intensely is this apparent deliberate 'tarnishing' of St Kilda by Ball/Connors/Ball's camp.

Nowhere have I read an article or statement that we shopped Luke Ball around.
Nowhere have a read an article/statement that St Kilda told Luke Ball he wasn't a required player.

What did St Kilda do wrong to Luke Ball other than offer him a new 3 year contract on less money than his current expiring one was?

And for that we are being painted in a 'bad light'.
Aspersions are being cast on our :-
Coach
Staff
Club
Ethics

To what end?
SO Luke Ball can go to COllingwood and earn more than we were prepared to pay him?

It's not the decision to leave that I object to.
My objection is to the deliberate attempts to belittle/damage St Kilda for no other apprent reason than to obfuscate the real motive for the move - money.

[stinger]

Stinger, are you backing up Luke's position in this?

no....i am devastated......i can see us going backwards...hope not ...but i cn see the class the class of 2001 departing en masse with the job not finished....doesn't mean i hold him entirely to blame...i don't.....there are always two sides to every story and the club isn't blameless in all of this.....

[markp]

...that sort of shoots holes in your argument about his inability to play more.....

No it doesn't... it's a totally separate issue.

I think Mr Magic's summation is probably pretty close to the truth.

It was about money (and people getting in his ear), now it's about damage control... I'll bet now Ball seems to be hanging in the wind he wishes he could start this week over.

how's that.....

Because if you're saying the supposed rotation stuff-up on GF day either justifies Ball wanting out, or proves that he did not have recovery and fitness problems during the season then that doesn't make sense.

All it really proves is that there was a rotation stuff-up during that game.

[SainterK]

Stinger, are you backing up Luke's position in this?

no....i am devastated......i can see us going backwards...hope not ...but i cn see the class the class of 2001 departing en masse with the job not finished....doesn't mean i hold him entirely to blame...i don't.....there are always two sides to every story and the club isn't blameless in all of this.....

I too am devasted....

However if there are two sides to every story, I would like to hear about St Kilda's side for a change?

[Mr Magic]

maybe mm...but ross did admit that they stuffed up...or that someone...not him.... stuffed up in the grand final and that ball should have been given anothertwo six minute bursts in the3rd and 4th quarters......would that have won us the game..?.who knows...his last burst in round 14 contributed to our win......

what i will say however is that there has been a history of mismanagement with ball over his career with the saints.....that's pretty much common knowledge.....

ANd even if that thing about the GF is 100% accurate, would that be enough for Ball to become disenchanted with the Saints?

A

..it's f****** accurate alright...i heard ross say it myself ffs.....maybe they were shopping hum around,,,ever thought of that....????

Doesn't make sense Stinger. If they were shopping him around then
a) it would have become public
b) they would not have left the 3 year contract on the table.

I realize you like Luke Ball, and so do I, but IMO what we are seeing here is the mismangement of the situation by his manager and 'camp'.

I believe they've told him they will get him more money than what St Kilda had originally offered.
Unfortunately for Luke, brinkmanship is a dangerous game.

In all of this we've heard absolutely nothing from the Saints other than the statement that Ball ahd asked for a trade to Collingwood after being offered a 3 year contract in June.
Every other piece of news has come from Connors mouthpece Greg Denham or other media.

If St Kilda had wanted to off-load Luke Ball do you think they would have done it on Tuesday afternoon of Trade Week?
I don't.

No Stinger, everyhting I've seen, read or heard tells me that this whole situation has arisen because of the actions of Ball/Connors/Ball's camp.
Our Club has nothing to be ashamed of in its dealings in this situation.

[stinger]

and that ball was capable of playing more game than he was being given ffs.....


...his role was reduced below what he was capable of on the day....that's obvious...whether it was intentional or not who knows....

[joffaboy]

I does seem like Conners is leaking to the media and spinning this like crazy.

The manager is paid to act on their clients behalf so Ball wouldn't be part of the negotiations however...

All this "Luke Ball and his family" - "relation is now untenable" stuff would come from the source.

And it is true that Denham has been writing articles about ball and Collingwood well before the GF.

Does this mean Conners/Ball knew they were going to pull this before the GF? Would seem so.

Ball has every right to go to another club and get more money but it seems that Conners was leaking to put pressure on the Saints to up their 3 year June deal.

Now his tune has changed considering the Saints wouldn't budge

First it was "reportedly" a $500k a year offer

Next it was less money than the St.Kilda offer (so that means logically the Saints offered more than $500k which would seem highly unlikely)

Then it was for more game time and opportunities (has Collingwood guaranteed Ball more game time? And how could they really do that?).

And opportunities. Would have thought the opportunity to play in a GF and a three year contract to work hard and get back into the team would be opportunities.

Lastly we have the family inferring that the Saints have treated him poorly and his relationship is untenable with the coach - inferring it is all Ross Lyons fault.

Really getting dirty. Granted Conners would be the dirt thrower but he represents Ball - and that is what is the dissapointing aspect of this whole sorry business.

Luke Balls reputation has taken a hit because of his representation and that is sad.

[Mr Magic]

and that ball was capable of playing more game than he was being given ffs.....


...his role was reduced below what he was capable of on the day....that's obvious...whether it was intentional or not who knows....

And if it wasn't intentional - is that reason to leave?

And I renew the question.
Who was talking to Collingwood weeks ago, well before the GF, enough for Denham to write articles about Ball and Collingwood?