Ross on 3AW tonight -

[Shaggy]

Ross Lyon Interview:

-> Drafting
Mentioned at the start that they expected to take three kids in the rookie draft.

-> Patterson
Questioned initially why they drafted patterson. Reasoning was that King had some knee and shoulder issues, and Gardiner was up and going but still fragile. Stanley is exciting but raw and McGrath is a few years off. Basically is was insuring McEvoy had a decent partner if SK and MG went down during the year,

-> Jess Smith
Mentioned that our 2.5 physios and 2.5 docters had tremendous faith in getting him up. Spoke about increasing the range of movement for the lad, in which the team was confident in doing. Mentioned that he was keen for three kids, but they were confident they could get Will Johnson later, and the staff detailed that the only other options were more rookie worthy at 60.

-> Luke Ball
Asked plainly why had Luke Ball decided to leave. Didn't answer the question.
Detailed that he was a required player, offered 350,000+ a year (3 years - I believe it must have been performance based as well)....Responded to time on ground issue that he was averaging 80's for the first half of the season. Re-iterated that he was a required player, and he decided to leave.

-> Lovett
Asked if they had spoken to him as it was not the best start to a new football club - Ross answered by saying that LH, NR and himself had spoken to him (I think he was referring to pre-trading for him though) and that they obtained many references. Basically brushed over the issue expressing that there were not criminal abuse or substance abuse issue that they were aware of.

Interview cut short for ads.

Dont agree with someof that Spinner.

Re Ball - The question from BT was suggestive we didnt want Ball etc - Lyon had to IMHO quickly stop that rot (BT often has a crack at us - this guy also said Clint Jones was not up to it as an AFL player...). Shame the other clowns started talking cause I got the sense Taylor was saying in the background that there was more to this....either way Ross shut him up with facts with respect to the game time cr@p.

IMHO there is clearly an issue between Ball and Lyon (Balls comment about saying more when the dust settles was telling for me) - I care not. Its TEAM Im interested in....one in all in - good enough for Dal Santo/Milne to suck up a bit of tough love from the coach then it should also be for Ball. The days of prima donna players running our club and the senipor coaches agenda are over and thank frk for that.

...

You arrogant little shite that you are.

Ball was benched in the most important quarter and game he has ever played in ... despite being one of best afield at the time.

Neither Dal nor Milney were as good as LB in the GF in case you missed it.

So what is your logic?

Potting people on BS is not a great attribute.

Seriously Daggy making up boorish posts accusing people of being "potted"...(do show me where?) is beneath even you....

I know you feel unloved round here, most see your views as a joke and I feel your pain (theres that arrogance you mentioned creeping in) but try and keep your dislike for individual posters seperate to what's actually being discussed on the topic - its so sad to see good footy discussion hijacked by lunatics who clearly only want to settle some score cause they feel someone was 'nasty' to them some time before. If I ever have been btw I dont apologise.

If you can't do that best say nothing - or even better spell yourself from the board?

Just a thought.

I really don't like your nasty streak.

Where does the bitterness come from?

Regardless LB was in our top 5 in GF; it doesn't make RL wrong or LB a c*** for leaving. I can understand both.

But don’t preach that LB is a prima donna and Dal and Milney aren't. The test was the GF IMO and LB really proved himself as top shelf.

As for your English lessons I accept you are better. You will make a great translator.

[Teflon]

Ross Lyon Interview:

-> Drafting
Mentioned at the start that they expected to take three kids in the rookie draft.

-> Patterson
Questioned initially why they drafted patterson. Reasoning was that King had some knee and shoulder issues, and Gardiner was up and going but still fragile. Stanley is exciting but raw and McGrath is a few years off. Basically is was insuring McEvoy had a decent partner if SK and MG went down during the year,

-> Jess Smith
Mentioned that our 2.5 physios and 2.5 docters had tremendous faith in getting him up. Spoke about increasing the range of movement for the lad, in which the team was confident in doing. Mentioned that he was keen for three kids, but they were confident they could get Will Johnson later, and the staff detailed that the only other options were more rookie worthy at 60.

-> Luke Ball
Asked plainly why had Luke Ball decided to leave. Didn't answer the question.
Detailed that he was a required player, offered 350,000+ a year (3 years - I believe it must have been performance based as well)....Responded to time on ground issue that he was averaging 80's for the first half of the season. Re-iterated that he was a required player, and he decided to leave.

-> Lovett
Asked if they had spoken to him as it was not the best start to a new football club - Ross answered by saying that LH, NR and himself had spoken to him (I think he was referring to pre-trading for him though) and that they obtained many references. Basically brushed over the issue expressing that there were not criminal abuse or substance abuse issue that they were aware of.

Interview cut short for ads.

Dont agree with someof that Spinner.

Re Ball - The question from BT was suggestive we didnt want Ball etc - Lyon had to IMHO quickly stop that rot (BT often has a crack at us - this guy also said Clint Jones was not up to it as an AFL player...). Shame the other clowns started talking cause I got the sense Taylor was saying in the background that there was more to this....either way Ross shut him up with facts with respect to the game time cr@p.

IMHO there is clearly an issue between Ball and Lyon (Balls comment about saying more when the dust settles was telling for me) - I care not. Its TEAM Im interested in....one in all in - good enough for Dal Santo/Milne to suck up a bit of tough love from the coach then it should also be for Ball. The days of prima donna players running our club and the senipor coaches agenda are over and thank frk for that.

...

You arrogant little shite that you are.

Ball was benched in the most important quarter and game he has ever played in ... despite being one of best afield at the time.

Neither Dal nor Milney were as good as LB in the GF in case you missed it.

So what is your logic?

Potting people on BS is not a great attribute.

Seriously Daggy making up boorish posts accusing people of being "potted"...(do show me where?) is beneath even you....

I know you feel unloved round here, most see your views as a joke and I feel your pain (theres that arrogance you mentioned creeping in) but try and keep your dislike for individual posters seperate to what's actually being discussed on the topic - its so sad to see good footy discussion hijacked by lunatics who clearly only want to settle some score cause they feel someone was 'nasty' to them some time before. If I ever have been btw I dont apologise.

If you can't do that best say nothing - or even better spell yourself from the board?

Just a thought.

I really don't like your nasty streak.

Where does the bitterness come from?

Regardless LB was in our top 5 in GF; it doesn't make RL wrong or LB a c*** for leaving. I can understand both.

But don’t preach that LB is a prima donna and Dal and Milney aren't. The test was the GF IMO and LB really proved himself as top shelf.

As for your English lessons I accept you are better. You will make a great translator.

You base your whole view on Luke Balls worth to our side on 1 game in conditions that were made for him and in which he played well.

I base my views on Luke Ball who hasnt been able to kick 40 meters for 3 years, whose been on an enormous contract reported at 600k and who cant run out of sight on a dark night. I also choose to back the coach who is on record as asking Luke to step up - who indicated he wanted Luke to remain and that Luke was in our best 22 (the proviso being Luke take the challenge and indicate he wants to remain at the club).

Improving your english wont fix your stupidity - some of the dumbest people I know are articulate enough when saying dumb things......you'd go well with them.

[Shaggy]

You base your whole view on Luke Balls worth to our side on 1 game in conditions that were made for him and in which he played well.

I base my views on Luke Ball who hasnt been able to kick 40 meters for 3 years, whose been on an enormous contract reported at 600k and who cant run out of sight on a dark night. I also choose to back the coach who is on record as asking Luke to step up - who indicated he wanted Luke to remain and that Luke was in our best 22 (the proviso being Luke take the challenge and indicate he wants to remain at the club).

Improving your english wont fix your stupidity - some of the dumbest people I know are articulate enough when saying dumb things......you'd go well with them.

Actually I do place a lot of weight on how players went in the GF. I was not disappointed in LB. I am sure RL wasn't either. 20 possessions in some 48% game time is not bad against the best mid field in the comp. What were you expecting?

You are the one to call LB a prima donna. In return I am calling you an ignorant dick.

[Teflon]

You base your whole view on Luke Balls worth to our side on 1 game in conditions that were made for him and in which he played well.

I base my views on Luke Ball who hasnt been able to kick 40 meters for 3 years, whose been on an enormous contract reported at 600k and who cant run out of sight on a dark night. I also choose to back the coach who is on record as asking Luke to step up - who indicated he wanted Luke to remain and that Luke was in our best 22 (the proviso being Luke take the challenge and indicate he wants to remain at the club).

Improving your english wont fix your stupidity - some of the dumbest people I know are articulate enough when saying dumb things......you'd go well with them.

Actually I do place a lot of weight on how players went in the GF. I was not disappointed in LB. I am sure RL wasn't either. 20 possessions in some 48% game time is not bad against the best mid field in the comp. What were you expecting?

You are the one to call LB a prima donna. In return I am calling you an ignorant dick.

Good for you.....you little prima donna....

[Shaggy]

You base your whole view on Luke Balls worth to our side on 1 game in conditions that were made for him and in which he played well.

I base my views on Luke Ball who hasnt been able to kick 40 meters for 3 years, whose been on an enormous contract reported at 600k and who cant run out of sight on a dark night. I also choose to back the coach who is on record as asking Luke to step up - who indicated he wanted Luke to remain and that Luke was in our best 22 (the proviso being Luke take the challenge and indicate he wants to remain at the club).

Improving your english wont fix your stupidity - some of the dumbest people I know are articulate enough when saying dumb things......you'd go well with them.

Actually I do place a lot of weight on how players went in the GF. I was not disappointed in LB. I am sure RL wasn't either. 20 possessions in some 48% game time is not bad against the best mid field in the comp. What were you expecting?

You are the one to call LB a prima donna. In return I am calling you an ignorant dick.

Good for you.....you little prima donna....

Not so little Tef.

[Mr Magic]

So Shaggy, I'll pose the question that I have done previously in these threads when it reaches this point:-

Do you believe that Ball was deliberately given less game tiem for reasons other than 'fitnesss'?
Because that is the logical connotation reached by the 'Ball was treated badly' argument.

[fingers]

So Shaggy, I'll pose the question that I have done previously in these threads when it reaches this point:-

Do you believe that Ball was deliberately given less game tiem for reasons other than 'fitnesss'?
Because that is the logical connotation reached by the 'Ball was treated badly' argument.

I know the question was directed to Shaggy but in answer to your first questions.....Ball's game time in the GF was by design. The boy can't run. Great hard ball winner but then that is it.

[Mr Magic]

So Shaggy, I'll pose the question that I have done previously in these threads when it reaches this point:-

Do you believe that Ball was deliberately given less game tiem for reasons other than 'fitnesss'?
Because that is the logical connotation reached by the 'Ball was treated badly' argument.

I know the question was directed to Shaggy but in answer to your first questions.....Ball's game time in the GF was by design. The boy can't run. Great hard ball winner but then that is it.

So if your answer is correct (and I happen to also agree with it), then what is this whole bs nonsense about game time?

It's either one or the other.

And I don't believe no matter how badly a relationship is fractured between coach and player, no coach will select a player and deliberately leave him sitting on the bench when he's fit (unless there is a form/discipline issue within that game).

And that is the logical conclusion that you arrive at if you follow through the 'game time reason' given by Ball adn his managament.

IMO it is errant nonsense to believe that in the most inmportant game of the season, the coach deliberately left him sitting on the bench for any reason other than 'fitness'.

[saintnick12]

Luke alluded to the fact that he will expound further once the dust is settled, I can't help but take the cynical view that he will wait to see if his form justifies it next year...

Does that also make me arrogant?

Maybe we will have to wait till he retires and brings out a biography to get the "real story". Or maybe Ross will retire a premiership coach and write his story first

[Elvis]

Luke alluded to the fact that he will expound further once the dust is settled, I can't help but take the cynical view that he will wait to see if his form justifies it next year...

Does that also make me arrogant?

Maybe we will have to wait till he retires and brings out a biography to get the "real story". Or maybe Ross will retire a premiership coach and write his story first

If that happens then I'm predicting one of these biographies sells well, the other runs for a week then, is consigned to the bargain bins before being put out of its misery and pulped!

[BringBackMadDog]

Ross Lyon Interview:

-> Drafting
Mentioned at the start that they expected to take three kids in the rookie draft.

-> Patterson
Questioned initially why they drafted patterson. Reasoning was that King had some knee and shoulder issues, and Gardiner was up and going but still fragile. Stanley is exciting but raw and McGrath is a few years off. Basically is was insuring McEvoy had a decent partner if SK and MG went down during the year,

-> Jess Smith
Mentioned that our 2.5 physios and 2.5 docters had tremendous faith in getting him up. Spoke about increasing the range of movement for the lad, in which the team was confident in doing. Mentioned that he was keen for three kids, but they were confident they could get Will Johnson later, and the staff detailed that the only other options were more rookie worthy at 60.

-> Luke Ball
Asked plainly why had Luke Ball decided to leave. Didn't answer the question.
Detailed that he was a required player, offered 350,000+ a year (3 years - I believe it must have been performance based as well)....Responded to time on ground issue that he was averaging 80's for the first half of the season. Re-iterated that he was a required player, and he decided to leave.

-> Lovett
Asked if they had spoken to him as it was not the best start to a new football club - Ross answered by saying that LH, NR and himself had spoken to him (I think he was referring to pre-trading for him though) and that they obtained many references. Basically brushed over the issue expressing that there were not criminal abuse or substance abuse issue that they were aware of.

Interview cut short for ads.

Dont agree with someof that Spinner.

Re Ball - The question from BT was suggestive we didnt want Ball etc - Lyon had to IMHO quickly stop that rot (BT often has a crack at us - this guy also said Clint Jones was not up to it as an AFL player...). Shame the other clowns started talking cause I got the sense Taylor was saying in the background that there was more to this....either way Ross shut him up with facts with respect to the game time cr@p.

IMHO there is clearly an issue between Ball and Lyon (Balls comment about saying more when the dust settles was telling for me) - I care not. Its TEAM Im interested in....one in all in - good enough for Dal Santo/Milne to suck up a bit of tough love from the coach then it should also be for Ball. The days of prima donna players running our club and the senipor coaches agenda are over and thank frk for that.

...

You arrogant little shite that you are.

Ball was benched in the most important quarter and game he has ever played in ... despite being one of best afield at the time.

Neither Dal nor Milney were as good as LB in the GF in case you missed it.

So what is your logic?

Potting people on BS is not a great attribute.

The thing with Ball is that he gets it well but he doesn't distibute it well enough so he's not damaging. He stops and props, gives it off and doesn't link up. That's why even though he played well in the 1st Q I don't think Geelong were too worried about him. No point getting in the back half and stagnating with it.

Summed it up perfectly Moccha, Ball got possies because Geelong didn't bother manning him up, he just doesnt hurt you enough. We were sitting just insode 50 in the forward pocket, and there was at least 3 occasions that I remember Ball standing 20 metres on his own across 50 and Geelong players look at him and then fall back into space to block Kosi and Roo. It was also telling that Lenny and Ball both got a similar number of possessions in the first quarter yet Lenny got the hard tag, Ball was allowed to run loose. Next year Lovett will destroy teams if he is given the same freedom, and with Lenny, Dal, Joey, Gram and Goddard to contend with teams wont know who to tag

[borderbarry]

One thing that has perplexed me on the GF game time issue re Luke Ball, is the comment made by Ross Lyon shortly after the GF, when he said that he now realized Luke had less than half the game time, but it was'nt his call. If that is the case, whose call was it? The midfield coach? And if so, why has'nt he been attacked over it?

[aussiejones]

"Its TEAM Im interested in....one in all in - good enough for Dal Santo/Milne to suck up a bit of tough love from the coach then it should also be for Ball. The days of prima donna players running our club and the senior coaches agenda are over"

AGREE ...... He is gone ........ I hope he does well.

Ross is BOSS

Enough on BALL already ...

[Scoop]

So Shaggy, I'll pose the question that I have done previously in these threads when it reaches this point:-

Do you believe that Ball was deliberately given less game tiem for reasons other than 'fitnesss'?
Because that is the logical connotation reached by the 'Ball was treated badly' argument.

I know the question was directed to Shaggy but in answer to your first questions.....Ball's game time in the GF was by design. The boy can't run. Great hard ball winner but then that is it.

So if your answer is correct (and I happen to also agree with it), then what is this whole bs nonsense about game time?

It's either one or the other.

And I don't believe no matter how badly a relationship is fractured between coach and player, no coach will select a player and deliberately leave him sitting on the bench when he's fit (unless there is a form/discipline issue within that game).

And that is the logical conclusion that you arrive at if you follow through the 'game time reason' given by Ball adn his managament.

IMO it is errant nonsense to believe that in the most inmportant game of the season, the coach deliberately left him sitting on the bench for any reason other than 'fitness'.

Finally, people talking some sense on this issue......good to see MM and fingers can apply logic and common sense....

Been having the same argument with a filth supporter at work....a coach will take someone off who is playing well in a GF....what ....to make a point....because he doesn't want to win it....please!!

....and agree with aussiejones....it is now time to move on.

[Wigsy]

Borderbarry - absolutely correct. He admitted that his game time was a mistake and actually palmed responsibility to others. I'm surprised no-one in the media ran with that.

[groupie1]

Maybe Gerard can ask him what he sees in Raph Clarke, and how he preferred him over Max. Maybe ask him why he chose to get rid of Matt Maguire only to pick up Jesse Smith who is probably less likely to play again due to on-going injury concerns. Also, maybe ask him why he treated Luke Ball the way he did and whether he thinks that his departure from the club will have a destabilising effect. Also maybe Gerard can ask him who our back-up key defenders are should one of Fischer, Dawson or Blake go down. And maybe ask him about why we are recruiting recycled players and the impact that is going to have on the long term sustainability of the Footy Club. Just a few questions which I'm sure no-one will ask.

You are such an astute judge of football maybe you should be coaching.

Here's one of your gems from March this year.

http://www.saintsational.com/forum/view ... ht=#713352

Good to see ol' Rossco trying some of the new kids....Fair Dinkum, Geary, McQualter, Blake etc, etc.

Another Nuthin' year for the Saints I'm afraid.

ha ha... got him, good one

[asiu]

IMO it is errant nonsense to believe that in the most inmportant game of the season, the coach deliberately left him sitting on the bench for any reason other than 'fitness'.

if i gave the orders , to get it and kick it long , i probably wouldnt start ball on the ground either

[sainterjo]

Good for you.....you little prima donna.....

Not so little Tef.

This is the new Saintsational, where anything goes! Come on, you're sooks, virgins and whingers if you don't!

[asiu]

ummmmmmmm


thin slips right in

[matrix]

[Ghost Like]

Borderbarry - absolutely correct. He admitted that his game time was a mistake and actually palmed responsibility to others. I'm surprised no-one in the media ran with that.

I've heard other people tell me that 'quote' about Lyon, if true I'm a little disappointed in Ross as I believe him to be a person to take full responsibility for what happens in the coach's box and with the team. Even if it was an oversight, I would expect him to simply admit that that was one of many errors made by players and coach on GF day...some or all of may have been a factor in losing that day.

Still I trust those mistakes will be worked on and not repeated, the review done and on to the planning for our assault in 2010.

[Mr Magic]

Borderbarry - absolutely correct. He admitted that his game time was a mistake and actually palmed responsibility to others. I'm surprised no-one in the media ran with that.

I've heard other people tell me that 'quote' about Lyon, if true I'm a little disappointed in Ross as I believe him to be a person to take full responsibility for what happens in the coach's box and with the team. Even if it was an oversight, I would expect him to simply admit that that was one of many errors made by players and coach on GF day...some or all of may have been a factor in losing that day.

Still I trust those mistakes will be worked on and not repeated, the review done and on to the planning for our assault in 2010.

Even if you acceot the 'quote' at face value, how is it turned into a criticism of Lyon?
SUrely everyone can accept that the fitness staff determine if a player is fit enough to return to the field?
Or do some truly believe that the Coach (any coach) will overule the fitness staff and send a player back on the field whom they deem not ready to play?

I'm really struggling to understand how this 'quote' somehow validates Ball's decision to leave/quit/desert the Saints.

Are posters stating that it's ok for him to do that because the Coach didn't play him more in the GF and after the game said that it was a mistake not to play him 'for another 6 minute burst' on the ground?
That's sufficient reason for Ball to leave?

[SainterK]

Borderbarry - absolutely correct. He admitted that his game time was a mistake and actually palmed responsibility to others. I'm surprised no-one in the media ran with that.

I've heard other people tell me that 'quote' about Lyon, if true I'm a little disappointed in Ross as I believe him to be a person to take full responsibility for what happens in the coach's box and with the team. Even if it was an oversight, I would expect him to simply admit that that was one of many errors made by players and coach on GF day...some or all of may have been a factor in losing that day.

Still I trust those mistakes will be worked on and not repeated, the review done and on to the planning for our assault in 2010.

Even if you acceot the 'quote' at face value, how is it turned into a criticism of Lyon?
SUrely everyone can accept that the fitness staff determine if a player is fit enough to return to the field?
Or do some truly believe that the Coach (any coach) will overule the fitness staff and send a player back on the field whom they deem not ready to play?

I'm really struggling to understand how this 'quote' somehow validates Ball's decision to leave/quit/desert the Saints.

Are posters stating that it's ok for him to do that because the Coach didn't play him more in the GF and after the game said that it was a mistake not to play him 'for another 6 minute burst' on the ground?
That's sufficient reason for Ball to leave?

Add another 6 minute burst to his TOG, and you may creep it just over the 50% mark. Does that make everyone feel better, because it simply confirms that he had been preplanned to play as a burst player similar to the previous weeks.

I also thought that Ross said "we" when referring to the coulda/shoulda's at the end of the game?

[Mr Magic]

Borderbarry - absolutely correct. He admitted that his game time was a mistake and actually palmed responsibility to others. I'm surprised no-one in the media ran with that.

I've heard other people tell me that 'quote' about Lyon, if true I'm a little disappointed in Ross as I believe him to be a person to take full responsibility for what happens in the coach's box and with the team. Even if it was an oversight, I would expect him to simply admit that that was one of many errors made by players and coach on GF day...some or all of may have been a factor in losing that day.

Still I trust those mistakes will be worked on and not repeated, the review done and on to the planning for our assault in 2010.

Even if you acceot the 'quote' at face value, how is it turned into a criticism of Lyon?
SUrely everyone can accept that the fitness staff determine if a player is fit enough to return to the field?
Or do some truly believe that the Coach (any coach) will overule the fitness staff and send a player back on the field whom they deem not ready to play?

I'm really struggling to understand how this 'quote' somehow validates Ball's decision to leave/quit/desert the Saints.

Are posters stating that it's ok for him to do that because the Coach didn't play him more in the GF and after the game said that it was a mistake not to play him 'for another 6 minute burst' on the ground?
That's sufficient reason for Ball to leave?

Add another 6 minute burst to his TOG, and you may creep it just over the 50% mark. Does that make everyone feel better, because it simply confirms that he had been preplanned to play as a burst player similar to the previous weeks.

I also thought that Ross said "we" when referring to the coulda/shoulda's at the end of the game?

That was m,y recollection also, but for the sake of the debate, let's just accept that RL stated what others believe he did.
How does that justify Ball's decision/actions since then?

I see lots trying to rationalise what to me seems quite simple.
Ball decided to leave becasue he felt Collingwood offered him a better all round deal.
IMO everything else we have seen from him, his management, his family and his personal BS spruiker Jon Ralph, has been nothing more than an attempt to portray Luke as a 'victim' forced out by the 'big mean bully' Lyon.

I don't care if he wants to go.
I do care that he felt the need to sink to these games to try adn justify his decision to leave.
I care becasue I don't believe we (Saints) behaved so badly towards him that we deserve the public pillioring we've received over this.

[borderbarry]

The comment from Ross Lyon re Luke BALL having less game time was not his call, is not meant to validate Ross or excuse Luke for leaving. Simply I am asking why Ross is being blamed for Luke's GF lack of game time, and whose responsibility would it have been not to have played him longer? The midfield coach? If so why are we attacking Ross and not the midfield coach?