Will we allow ball to.....

undecided · Post: # 855669Post **undecided** » Thu 05 Nov 2009 4:13pm

Sign only a 1 year contract if he decides to stay.

For me it has to be atleast a 2 year deal to sshow he is truely comited.

Spinner · Post: # 855671Post **Spinner** » Thu 05 Nov 2009 4:22pm

Yeh, no one year deals.

markp · Post: # 855673Post **markp** » Thu 05 Nov 2009 4:27pm

If that's what he wants I'd take it... but offer him peanuts.

Moods · Post: # 855678Post **Moods** » Thu 05 Nov 2009 4:46pm

I agree with Markp. Chances are he'll leave at the end of the year - but 12 months is a long time. Who knows how he'll feel in 12 months time?

I've heard he's interested in going to the GC after this year, so better to use him for 1 more year than lose him for nothing.

plugger66 · Post: # 855683Post **plugger66** » Thu 05 Nov 2009 4:50pm

Moods wrote:I agree with Markp. Chances are he'll leave at the end of the year - but 12 months is a long time. Who knows how he'll feel in 12 months time?

I've heard he's interested in going to the GC after this year, so better to use him for 1 more year than lose him for nothing.

How did you hear he was interested in the Gold Coast when he wants to go to Collingwood. If bally stays both him and the club will come to some sort of agreement and my guess it will be 2 years.

ace · Post: # 855685Post **ace** » Thu 05 Nov 2009 4:52pm

plugger66 wrote:
Moods wrote:I agree with Markp. Chances are he'll leave at the end of the year - but 12 months is a long time. Who knows how he'll feel in 12 months time?

I've heard he's interested in going to the GC after this year, so better to use him for 1 more year than lose him for nothing.
How did you hear he was interested in the Gold Coast when he wants to go to Collingwood. If bally stays both him and the club will come to some sort of agreement and my guess it will be 2 years.

Gold Coast have heaps of MONEY inside their salary cap.

Mr Magic · Post: # 855686Post **Mr Magic** » Thu 05 Nov 2009 4:52pm

I'm happy to offer him whatever the CLub feels he's worth, for however long they mutually want to.
A request for 12 months from either party would be an indication, IMO, of a still fractured relationship.

Milan Faletic · Thu 05 Nov 2009 4:56pm

As I said on a previous thread, maybe we could offer a performance based contract.

$100,000 for every kick over 50 metres.

plugger66 · Post: # 855690Post **plugger66** » Thu 05 Nov 2009 4:57pm

ace wrote:
plugger66 wrote:
Moods wrote:I agree with Markp. Chances are he'll leave at the end of the year - but 12 months is a long time. Who knows how he'll feel in 12 months time?

I've heard he's interested in going to the GC after this year, so better to use him for 1 more year than lose him for nothing.
How did you hear he was interested in the Gold Coast when he wants to go to Collingwood. If bally stays both him and the club will come to some sort of agreement and my guess it will be 2 years.
Gold Coast have heaps of MONEY inside their salary cap.

When has it been proven Bally is money hungry?

Moods · Post: # 855692Post **Moods** » Thu 05 Nov 2009 4:57pm

plugger66 wrote:
Moods wrote:I agree with Markp. Chances are he'll leave at the end of the year - but 12 months is a long time. Who knows how he'll feel in 12 months time?

I've heard he's interested in going to the GC after this year, so better to use him for 1 more year than lose him for nothing.
How did you hear he was interested in the Gold Coast when he wants to go to Collingwood. If bally stays both him and the club will come to some sort of agreement and my guess it will be 2 years.

Just because he stays - doesn't mean that in his eyes we're not the best of a bad pick. Just reckon that it would nearly be impossible for him at the moment to completely embrace the club again - and maybe vice versa. However Andrew Lovett was in a similar position last year, and managed to play his best footy yet this year, so it can still work. My guess is that it will be a 2 year contract, but conditional for parties in the seecond year.

saintbrat · Post: # 855694Post **saintbrat** » Thu 05 Nov 2009 5:02pm

Moods wrote: However Andrew Lovett was in a similar position last year, and managed to play his best footy yet this year, so it can still work. My guess is that it will be a 2 year contract, but conditional for parties in the seecond year.

O'Keefe from Sydney requested trade - didn't get it, worked through it and Did fairly well in their Best and Fairest.

Milan Faletic · Thu 05 Nov 2009 5:05pm

saintbrat wrote:
Moods wrote: However Andrew Lovett was in a similar position last year, and managed to play his best footy yet this year, so it can still work. My guess is that it will be a 2 year contract, but conditional for parties in the seecond year.
O'Keefe from Sydney requested trade - didn't get it, worked through it and Did fairly well in their Best and Fairest.

That's true about O'Keefe. I don't think he was under the media spotlight like Luke is now though. It's going to be difficult for Luke if he stays. The media will pounce. If he stays, the club and Luke need to get on the front foot and try to nullify the media swiftly. They need to say that Luke is a part of the 2010 St Kilda playing list and that is that. A united front is imperative.

SainterK · Post: # 855708Post **SainterK** » Thu 05 Nov 2009 5:45pm

My take....

Luke often talks about how this year was the kick up the bum he needed, whilst I think that alot of what he said was lip service at the time, I am beginning to suspect that the real kick up the bum (should he realise it) was perhaps the lack of suitors during trade, and seeing just how highly Collingwood rated his services with their "offer" to the club....

One year or two, I don't really care, I just want the decision to be a real one, and not feel like he is just settling for the Saints....

Mr Magic · Post: # 855712Post **Mr Magic** » Thu 05 Nov 2009 5:50pm

Milan Faletic wrote:
saintbrat wrote:
Moods wrote: However Andrew Lovett was in a similar position last year, and managed to play his best footy yet this year, so it can still work. My guess is that it will be a 2 year contract, but conditional for parties in the seecond year.
O'Keefe from Sydney requested trade - didn't get it, worked through it and Did fairly well in their Best and Fairest.
That's true about O'Keefe. I don't think he was under the media spotlight like Luke is now though. It's going to be difficult for Luke if he stays. The media will pounce. If he stays, the club and Luke need to get on the front foot and try to nullify the media swiftly. They need to say that Luke is a part of the 2010 St Kilda playing list and that is that. A united front is imperative.

And IIRC, O'Keefe, and/or his management, didn't publicly 'bag' the Swans?

It's a long way from 'untenable' to reconciliation.

Saint Bev · Post: # 855721Post **Saint Bev** » Thu 05 Nov 2009 6:34pm

He has stated he doesn't want to go interstate.

skeptic · Post: # 855734Post **skeptic** » Thu 05 Nov 2009 7:18pm

i suspect he'll sign for 1 year... and then sign a 2-3yr contract midseason and play out his career at the saints

no source, just a gut feeling

stinger · Post: # 855763Post **stinger** » Thu 05 Nov 2009 8:05pm

skeptic wrote:i suspect he'll sign for 1 year... and then sign a 2-3yr contract midseason and play out his career at the saints

no source, just a gut feeling

hope you are right....

joffaboy · Post: # 855778Post **joffaboy** » Thu 05 Nov 2009 8:59pm

skeptic wrote:i suspect he'll sign for 1 year... and then sign a 2-3yr contract midseason and play out his career at the saints

no source, just a gut feeling

Lets start with a year if thats what Ball wants.

A year is a long time and this time next year the circumstances may be completely different.

Will be very happy to see LB back in Saints colours. Imagine a firing LB getting it to a flying Lovett???

Bernard Shakey · Thu 05 Nov 2009 9:02pm

SainterK wrote:My take....

Luke often talks about how this year was the kick up the bum he needed, whilst I think that alot of what he said was lip service at the time, I am beginning to suspect that the real kick up the bum (should he realise it) was perhaps the lack of suitors during trade, and seeing just how highly Collingwood rated his services with their "offer" to the club....

One year or two, I don't really care, I just want the decision to be a real one, and not feel like he is just settling for the Saints....

No other team was going to touch him, since he made it clear it was only Collingwood he wanted.
Collingwood never offer a fair trade.
Luke's so called manager was also representing Jolly, who we all know is now at Collingwood, and Goose, who we all know has been delisted.

I would suggest Mr Connors is the one requiring a kick up the khyber.

Milan Faletic · Thu 05 Nov 2009 9:34pm

SainterK wrote:My take....

Luke often talks about how this year was the kick up the bum he needed, whilst I think that alot of what he said was lip service at the time, I am beginning to suspect that the real kick up the bum (should he realise it) was perhaps the lack of suitors during trade, and seeing just how highly Collingwood rated his services with their "offer" to the club....

One year or two, I don't really care, I just want the decision to be a real one, and not feel like he is just settling for the Saints....

Good insight, SainterK. He is a smart guy and I think he will be struggling with the lack of suitors. We are the team to be with for 2010, there is no doubt about that. So I reckon Luke and/or his "manager" have erred big time.

PJ · Post: # 855808Post PJ » Thu 05 Nov 2009 9:40pm

To be quite frank I'd rather see us give Armitage some serious game time so 1 years good for me - here's your premiership medal Luke, there's your hat, what's your hurry?

st_Trav_ofWA · Thu 05 Nov 2009 9:44pm

saintbrat wrote:
Moods wrote: However Andrew Lovett was in a similar position last year, and managed to play his best footy yet this year, so it can still work. My guess is that it will be a 2 year contract, but conditional for parties in the seecond year.
O'Keefe from Sydney requested trade - didn't get it, worked through it and Did fairly well in their Best and Fairest.

O'keefe aslo wanted to leave to return to Vic .. Luke wants to stay in Vic but play for a diff team ... i dunno i look at Luke in a differant light after all of this

plugger66 · Post: # 855814Post **plugger66** » Thu 05 Nov 2009 9:48pm

st_Trav_ofWA wrote:
saintbrat wrote:
Moods wrote: However Andrew Lovett was in a similar position last year, and managed to play his best footy yet this year, so it can still work. My guess is that it will be a 2 year contract, but conditional for parties in the seecond year.
O'Keefe from Sydney requested trade - didn't get it, worked through it and Did fairly well in their Best and Fairest.
O'keefe aslo wanted to leave to return to Vic .. Luke wants to stay in Vic but play for a diff team ... i dunno i look at Luke in a differant light after all of this

Must not have had a great opinion of Sammy Hamill when he came to the saints.

Mr Magic · Post: # 855816Post **Mr Magic** » Thu 05 Nov 2009 9:50pm

plugger66 wrote:
st_Trav_ofWA wrote:
saintbrat wrote:
Moods wrote: However Andrew Lovett was in a similar position last year, and managed to play his best footy yet this year, so it can still work. My guess is that it will be a 2 year contract, but conditional for parties in the seecond year.
O'Keefe from Sydney requested trade - didn't get it, worked through it and Did fairly well in their Best and Fairest.
O'keefe aslo wanted to leave to return to Vic .. Luke wants to stay in Vic but play for a diff team ... i dunno i look at Luke in a differant light after all of this
Must not have had a great opinion of Sammy Hamill when he came to the saints.

Are you suggesting that the Hammill scenario was the same as the Ball scenario?

saint66au · Post: # 855817Post **saint66au** » Thu 05 Nov 2009 9:52pm

plugger66 wrote:
st_Trav_ofWA wrote:
saintbrat wrote:
Moods wrote: However Andrew Lovett was in a similar position last year, and managed to play his best footy yet this year, so it can still work. My guess is that it will be a 2 year contract, but conditional for parties in the seecond year.
O'Keefe from Sydney requested trade - didn't get it, worked through it and Did fairly well in their Best and Fairest.
O'keefe aslo wanted to leave to return to Vic .. Luke wants to stay in Vic but play for a diff team ... i dunno i look at Luke in a differant light after all of this
Must not have had a great opinion of Sammy Hamill when he came to the saints.

Reckon Sammy and Luke's reasons for wanting to leave were/are pretty different