Saints continue to evolve and get stronger

[meher baba]

What utter rubbish.

Unlike you, many on here can distinguish between critique and trolling.

Then obviously I don't know what constitutes trolliing. Which comment of rf's on this thread was an example of trolling?

MY assertation was that you obviously don't know what constitutes trolling.

But if you wanted to troll, a good starting point is to pose a question without revealing your own opinion or agenda. Then you can lead whoever responds on a merry little dance without ever exposing yourself as a target.

Kind of like this last question of yours. An opportunity to troll on the subject of trolling. Meta-trolling! Well done, MB.

1. As if there are no other dissenting voices or healthy discussions on this forum. Please.

2. You're not as dumb as you make out.

The thought that I might be "meta-trolling" (great term!) in my last post did cross my mind.

However, seriously, I think that rf makes a lot of people hot under the collar because he poses some difficult questions to those posters who are always looking to accentuate the positive about the current situation (including, as Stinger once put it so well, not daring to breathe a favourable word about the "first wife" in case the "second wife" should happen to hear).

If you are someone who believes

1. the club is currently in the best possible hands right now (board, management, coach) and the future is consequently as rosy as you could want, with a flag in 2010 ours a strong probability; and
2. Before 2006, we had a meglomaniac as coach who wanted to run everything, stuffed up our fitness, had poor tactics (especially in the rucks and defence), stopped us winning one or two flags (which were ours for the taking given the list we had)

then many of rf's questions will seem like trolling because they tend subtly to undermine that world view (which I believe is largely right but a little over the top in the case of 1 and largely wrong in the case of 2).

But I don't think rf disguises his views at all: he has repeatedly said that Lyon isnt' a master tactician but simply a very lucky coach who has inherited a great list with great player leadership in Riewoldt and Hayes and who hasn't faced the same bad luck with injuries that plagued Thomas. He also thinks that coaches are overrated anyway, and we are all too preoccupied with their role relative to issues like the quality of the list and the contributions of individual players.

My personal view is that he undervalues Lyon and overvalues our list. But I don't think he can be accused of hiding his opinion behind his questions.

I also agree that he asks too many questions, and is inclined to get into byzantine arguments about who lied and who told the truth and what he actually said/meant, etc. However, once again, I don't think he's "trolling" (by my understanding of the word).

Annoying, yes. Wrong, often. But I actually find the guy to be pretty consistent in what he says and I suspect he is sincere.

FWIW.................

[White Winmar]

I tend to agree with your view MB. I don't think there's much doubt RF doesn't rate RL's ability to influence outcomes all that highly. I think he's been entirely consistent on that. In fact there is a whole school of thought out there on the "usefulness" of coaches, with many believing their influence is over rated. I used to belong to that school, having coached at suburban level, where the quality of your players largely determined where you ended up.

At the elite level, where there is little variance between the quality of the lists among the top 4-6, I believe every position relating to the team can make a significant difference. GT had his strengths, among them the ability to motivate the list and get it to "buy into" his vision. No doubt he is a charismatic type of leader, one who can articulate the big picture well and get others to follow. However, while this type of leader is usually effective in the short -term, they usually struggle with the finer details and therefore rely heavily on their assistants to pick up the slack. This is where I think GT came unstuck. Ask any of his former assistants and I think you'll find that delegation was not one of GT's strengths. Inevitably, charismatic-type leaders can't maintain the initial levels of energy they brought to the situation and things begin to unravel.

RL, on the other hand, is more introverted and detail driven. Remember the difference between his early days and those of GT? GT had the place excited, making big statements on where the saints were headed. RL was criticised, including by me, for almost being boring and understated to the extent that he couldn't motivate others to follow him. What he was big on was detail, structure, repetition in learning and a consistent game plan/approach. OF course he modified his approach over the first 18 months (Thank goodness!) with the results we have seen over the past two seasons. He is now a confident media performer, who exudes a quiet sense of strength and determination. His ability to build a competent team around him has also been crucial. He was, and remains, the right choice imho, for the long-term success of the club. Just as GT, the "charismatic" was the right man, again imho, at the time he took over.

I hope that articulates my views on the relative merits of the two. More space has been dedicated to this argument on this forum than any other. We all have our opinions and some, like RF, don't agree with mine on this one. That's o.k. too. It keeps the place interesting and is the reason this is one of the most interesting of all internet footy forums. Now if we could just cut out the personal abuse stuff when disagreements start to wind up...........

[fingers]

In a way I was glad that Lovett got arrested - at least it gave us something new to talk about instead of the same old stuff.

[White Winmar]

Good point Fingers. I just realised what I've done in posting that last piece! I apologise in advance for potentially perpetuating this forum's most annoying battle!

[matrix]

its been a busy off season thats for sure......

[Duggie]

Yes, a very fine post WW.
I fervently hope that you can add-- without the slightest detraction-- a further chapter at the end of the 2010 season.

[karnak]

Post of the offseason.

congratulations.

The only post that could be better is after we win the flag in 2010 and we get to read about what it means for different people.

[joffaboy]

me too mate....but if ross makes a blue...posters should feel free to say so...without being shouted down or told to piss off to collingwood..

Correct

No not correct fingers.

Nobody was told to piss off to Collingwood for saying RL had made a mistake. I have been saying that for months, and that he should have been held responsible.

What many on here were sick of, was some on here virtually calling Nick Riewoldt, our captain, and Ross Lyon, our coach Liars for saying the truth about Luke Ball.

There are supposed St.Kilda supporters who would take the side of Paul Connors, Mike Sheahan, Eddie McGuire, and Mick Malthouse in inferring that NR and RL lied about the way Ball left.

It had nothing to do with saying Lyon was wrong. It had everything to do with questioning the integrity of our coach and captain and siding with Collingwood scum and their media supporters.

And I stand by what i said. If you support Collingwood scum over our captain and coach - PISS OFF AND SUPPORT COLLINGWOOD.

And if anybody thinks it refers to them - IF THE CAP FITS WEAR IT!!!!!!!

[meher baba]

me too mate....but if ross makes a blue...posters should feel free to say so...without being shouted down or told to piss off to collingwood..

Correct

No not correct fingers.

Nobody was told to piss off to Collingwood for saying RL had made a mistake. I have been saying that for months, and that he should have been held responsible.

What many on here were sick of, was some on here virtually calling Nick Riewoldt, our captain, and Ross Lyon, our coach Liars for saying the truth about Luke Ball.

There are supposed St.Kilda supporters who would take the side of Paul Connors, Mike Sheahan, Eddie McGuire, and Mick Malthouse in inferring that NR and RL lied about the way Ball left.

It had nothing to do with saying Lyon was wrong. It had everything to do with questioning the integrity of our coach and captain and siding with Collingwood scum and their media supporters.

And I stand by what i said. If you support Collingwood scum over our captain and coach - PISS OFF AND SUPPORT COLLINGWOOD.

And if anybody thinks it refers to them - IF THE CAP FITS WEAR IT!!!!!!!

JB, are you telling me that we are meant to believe anything people at the club tell us? Really, truly?

When people involved in football (and any other walk of life) talk to the media, they put spin on what they say.

What Riewoldt said was that there was a contract on the table for Ball when he walked out. Undoubtedly true. So what: without further information, it doesn't really invalidate the Sheahan line that Ball felt like he was pushed out.

What Ross Lyon said was

I think Rooey (Riewoldt) and Lenny (Hayes) are paid right up the top (at our club) and everyone else falls in behind them. It is very important to get the relativities right. At times everyone sees the relativities differently. If someone's perceptions sit outside that a little bit, they leave.

What this extremely laboured comment says to me is that Ball's perceptions of how much he should be paid were a "little bit" not the same as the club's.

It might be that Ball ultimately asked for $450k, $450k and $200k and the club was only prepared to offer $350k, $350k and $350k. $50k difference in total. A "little bit more" (less than 5%). Not inconsistent with what Lyon said and non inconsistent a story that we didn't really try to keep Ball.

I believe, in broad terms, that Lyon and Riewoldt were telling the truth. I also believe that the club didn't really try very hard to hang onto Ball because Lyon doesn't really rate him.

If that makes me Collingwood scum, so be it. It's what I think and I reckon it's pretty close to the money.

[stinger]

stick by all my past comments.....some of the posts on here confirm a statement made by someone in this morning's hun......basically....australia has changed ..no longer can a person express an opinion without fear or favour..and those that do not follow the mantra of the politically correct are labelled and vilified...or in this case ...told to piss off to the filth......typical....

[bob__71]

me too mate....but if ross makes a blue...posters should feel free to say so...without being shouted down or told to piss off to collingwood..

Correct

No not correct fingers.

Nobody was told to piss off to Collingwood for saying RL had made a mistake. I have been saying that for months, and that he should have been held responsible.

What many on here were sick of, was some on here virtually calling Nick Riewoldt, our captain, and Ross Lyon, our coach Liars for saying the truth about Luke Ball.

There are supposed St.Kilda supporters who would take the side of Paul Connors, Mike Sheahan, Eddie McGuire, and Mick Malthouse in inferring that NR and RL lied about the way Ball left.

It had nothing to do with saying Lyon was wrong. It had everything to do with questioning the integrity of our coach and captain and siding with Collingwood scum and their media supporters.

And I stand by what i said. If you support Collingwood scum over our captain and coach - PISS OFF AND SUPPORT COLLINGWOOD.

And if anybody thinks it refers to them - IF THE CAP FITS WEAR IT!!!!!!!

JB, are you telling me that we are meant to believe anything people at the club tell us? Really, truly?

When people involved in football (and any other walk of life) talk to the media, they put spin on what they say.

What Riewoldt said was that there was a contract on the table for Ball when he walked out. Undoubtedly true. So what: without further information, it doesn't really invalidate the Sheahan line that Ball felt like he was pushed out.

What Ross Lyon said was

I think Rooey (Riewoldt) and Lenny (Hayes) are paid right up the top (at our club) and everyone else falls in behind them. It is very important to get the relativities right. At times everyone sees the relativities differently. If someone's perceptions sit outside that a little bit, they leave.

What this extremely laboured comment says to me is that Ball's perceptions of how much he should be paid were a "little bit" not the same as the club's.

It might be that Ball ultimately asked for $450k, $450k and $200k and the club was only prepared to offer $350k, $350k and $350k. $50k difference in total. A "little bit more" (less than 5%). Not inconsistent with what Lyon said and non inconsistent a story that we didn't really try to keep Ball.

I believe, in broad terms, that Lyon and Riewoldt were telling the truth. I also believe that the club didn't really try very hard to hang onto Ball because Lyon doesn't really rate him.

If that makes me Collingwood scum, so be it. It's what I think and I reckon it's pretty close to the money.

I think you can believe 99% of what is said by representitives of St Kilda these days. I would say they would have one of the lowest amounts of spin of all the clubs.

[Mr Magic]

So when Lyon, Reiwoldt et al speak to the media, or feed information to the media, they are 'spinning the story'?
BUT
Maguire, Malthouse, Connors, Ball et al are not?

Why is it so hard to accept/admit that just maybe, St Kilda's offer to Ball was considerably less than Collingwood's?

That's the crux of the whole argument.
Ball and his entourage don't like the idea of the term 'mercenary' being used in coinjunction with him.
Therefore they have, IMO, been spinning this story for months.

The facts are that Greg Denham wrote articles months before the trade week that
a) Collingwood was interested in Ball
b) Collingwood was prepared to pay him around 500k per season.

Is it just pure coincidence that Ball ended up at Collingwood for 500k pa (over 2 years with the third year undisclosed/to be negotiated)?

You're prepared to accept that coincidence but not accept that there's any possibility that the way Lyon and Reiwoldt tell the story is actually the way it was?

As I've said, I don't care that Ball left for a better deal (IMO). Good luck to him if he could manage/arrange it.

But do you truly think that the codswallop being presented/portrayed to us by Maguire, Malthouse/Connors et al through their 'hired guns' Sheahan and Ralph, is more truthful than what St Kilda/Lyon and Reiwoldt have said publicly?

There is no question that St Kilda didn't rate Ball at 600+k per season, which is what his back-ended deal amounted to in 2009.
They didn't rate him, on current form as a 500k per season player either.
They rated him as a 350k per season player, and made him a contract offer accordingly.
He obviously didn't like that, rated himself higher. I've no problem with that.

I've asked you a couple of times withour response.
Please explain to me how you believe that Ball, offered 1 million over 3 years by the Saints, and signed for 500k per season over 2 years by Collingwood, is earning less at Collingwood than at St Kilda?

Because IMO, if that statement of nonsense(again IMO) is wrong, then how can anyone believe the claptrap fed to Sheahan and Ralph over the statements from Lyon/Reiwoldt?

[saint66au]

JB, are you telling me that we are meant to believe anything people at the club tell us? Really, truly?

When people involved in football (and any other walk of life) talk to the media, they put spin on what they say.

Lucky every journalist calls it exactly as he hears it eh??

[stinger]

why is it so hard to accept that both clubs are putting spin on this sorry saga.....the filth to protect ball and please their supporters...the saints to appease pissed off supporters.......not working though...hasn't appeased me.....

[SainterK]

Stinger, if the Saints agenda was to appease angry supporters by making them question Luke Balls loyalty, they could of done alot better than bringing up the fact he had a contract on the table and decided to leave.

[Mr Magic]

why is it so hard to accept that both clubs are putting spin on this sorry saga.....the filth to protect ball and please their supporters...the saints to appease pissed off supporters.......not working though...hasn't appeased me.....

Stinger,
You believe what you've been told, and it's coloured your view on the matter.

Do you really want to be appeased?

What could the Club, Coach or Captain actually say that would appease you?
'We screwed Luke Ball' - would that do it?

What happens if it's not the truth though?

I believe what I've been told and it's coloured my view on the matter.

So all I'm left with to try and wade through the 'garbage' surrounding this is to look at what facts we do know, logically.

Sheahan's article comes a cropper (IMO) with the simple statement that
'Luke Ball is earning less at Collingwood than at St Kilda'.
I understand why Ball/Collingwood wnated that statement made, but just because Sheahan wrote it, doean't make it either logical or truthful, does it?

The mere fact that Ralph got on SEN and tried to 'prove its truth' by stating that Ball is on less than 600k per season so therefore he is playing for less at Collingwood shows that even they know they have 'played games' with the truth in this matter.

It was a 'hatchett job' with only one logical reason I can think of - to curry favour with powerful Collingwood.

[krabb]

People like Rodgerfox are everything thats bad about Fan Forums..professional baiters who really dont care about the forum they belong to..just the attention they crave for their sad sad selves.

HOW BLOODY DARE YOU HIJACK THIS GREAT THREAD WITH YOUR SELF-OBSESSED DRIBBLE!!!!!!



Rodgerfox is an intruder on this otherwise great forum and is the most annoying and destructive poster we've ever had

Are you for real?

Maybe you should insist on a brain test to post here....im sure you and some of your mates might sneak in.

(under the fence of course)

[stinger]

why is it so hard to accept that both clubs are putting spin on this sorry saga.....the filth to protect ball and please their supporters...the saints to appease pissed off supporters.......not working though...hasn't appeased me.....

Stinger,
You believe what you've been told, and it's coloured your view on the matter.

Do you really want to be appeased?

What could the Club, Coach or Captain actually say that would appease you?
'We screwed Luke Ball' - would that do it?

What happens if it's not the truth though?

I believe what I've been told and it's coloured my view on the matter.

So all I'm left with to try and wade through the 'garbage' surrounding this is to look at what facts we do know, logically.

Sheahan's article comes a cropper (IMO) with the simple statement that
'Luke Ball is earning less at Collingwood than at St Kilda'.
I understand why Ball/Collingwood wnated that statement made, but just because Sheahan wrote it, doean't make it either logical or truthful, does it?

The mere fact that Ralph got on SEN and tried to 'prove its truth' by stating that Ball is on less than 600k per season so therefore he is playing for less at Collingwood shows that even they know they have 'played games' with the truth in this matter.

It was a 'hatchett job' with only one logical reason I can think of - to curry favour with powerful Collingwood.

what i have been told is the truth....the club was shopping ball around long before the finals started.....of course that colours my view....the club didn't value him and gave lesser players more games and more game time.....they then tried to cut his salary...told him to take it or leave it...what would you do...i'm hardly going to change my mind..certainly the anti ball posters on here won't ...i find their comments re ball distasteful in the extreme.....i certainly won't be booing him on the weekend...and i will shed a tear for him when roo holds up the premiership club at seasons end....you are right though....i won't forgive the club for losing ball....have never forgiven them for swapping stewart for a f*** wit in barret either.....

[markp]

Yeah... and Eddy, Mick and Paul Connors haven't mentioned Ball was being shopped around out of sheer decency.

[saint66au]

People like Rodgerfox are everything thats bad about Fan Forums..professional baiters who really dont care about the forum they belong to..just the attention they crave for their sad sad selves.

HOW BLOODY DARE YOU HIJACK THIS GREAT THREAD WITH YOUR SELF-OBSESSED DRIBBLE!!!!!!



Rodgerfox is an intruder on this otherwise great forum and is the most annoying and destructive poster we've ever had

Are you for real?

Maybe you should insist on a brain test to post here....im sure you and some of your mates might sneak in.

(under the fence of course)

Yep very much for real...and thanks for the cheap shot

Werent we on opposite sides of the fence just a lil while ago..you were espousing free speech?

I'm not knocking what he says..just the way its done. I stick by my theory that he's a fake poster just doing it to rile people. I also stick to my promise to offer a total apology if Im proven wrong, and also to wear any warning heading my way, as I do totally realise Im being pretty outspoken

Just think his ridiculous game has gone on long enough and somone had to call him on it

Why do I get the funny impression that if my claims were made by one of your buddies from the "old days" you'd treat it with more respect?

[stinger]

Yeah... and Eddy, Mick and Paul Connors haven't mentioned Ball was being shopped around out of sheer decency.

read my signature

[barks4eva]

why is it so hard to accept that both clubs are putting spin on this sorry saga.....the filth to protect ball and please their supporters...the saints to appease pissed off supporters.......not working though...hasn't appeased me.....

It also didn't appease you when Thomas was sacked,........ best thing that could have happened so we could actually get a decent coach,........ but it didn't stop you from carrying on like a two bob watch........ thinking the sky had fallen in because Grant's dictatorship was overthrown, oh dear


FACT is stinger YOU wrote that Lyon disrespected Ball and YOU know SFA, YOU were NOT there when the falling out began, so YOU are in NO position to write verbatim that Lyon treated Ball with disrespect,

IMHO, Ball probably didn't take criticism too well and carried on like a prima donna and got the private schoolboy sulks,

FAIR DINKUM who was the moron who put him on $600,000 more money than Lenny Hayes to begin with?:roll:

Ball was worth $350,000 based on his output and this what was offered to him, which he refused to sign mid year,

IMHO, he cracked it, dropping $250,000 a year, perhaps if he was only on $500,000 it would not have been such a massive drop,

and I'm sure after he transgressed for the second time( only St Kilda player to do it and the only player in the AFL to do it twice ) gifting opposition goals with that stupid interchange rule, he would have received a massive and deserved spray from Lyon,

reckon after having been mollycoddled for five and a half years and treated like Thomas's ninth child, he got the sulks and his attitude and response more than anything was the key factor in the whole messy affair,

I saw McQualter get a massive spray, get delisted etc...etc... and he's now in the leadership group, I'm sure Lyon was very surprised and disappointed by Luke Ball's attitude and how he responded to criticism and expected a lot more from him!

But hey if you want to believe Paul Connors and Mike Sheahan's version and label Ross Lyon and Nick Riewoldt as being at best disingenuous then that is hardly surprising given that you took everything Grant Thomas said to be gospel, etc..etc... but it is extremely ignorant to outright post your nonsense about Lyon disrespecting Ball when you were NOT there, but given your track record and lack of cognitive awareness on so many issues, it is hardly surprising!

[stinger]

you did stick your neck out saints66au....

[markp]

Yeah... and Eddy, Mick and Paul Connors haven't mentioned Ball was being shopped around out of sheer decency.

read my signature

Read it.

Now what?

Any more hearsay you'd like to report as fact to suit your argument?

[stinger]

why is it so hard to accept that both clubs are putting spin on this sorry saga.....the filth to protect ball and please their supporters...the saints to appease pissed off supporters.......not working though...hasn't appeased me.....

It also didn't appease you when Thomas was sacked,........ best thing that could have happened so we could actually get a decent coach,........ but it didn't stop you from carrying on like a two bob watch........ thinking the sky had fallen in because Grant's dictatorship was overthrown, oh dear


FACT is stinger YOU wrote that Lyon disrespected Ball and YOU know SFA, YOU were NOT there when the falling out began, so YOU are in NO position to write verbatim that Lyon treated Ball with disrespect,

IMHO, Ball probably didn't take criticism too well and carried on like a prima donna and got the private schoolboy sulks,

FAIR DINKUM who was the moron who put him on $600,000 more money than Lenny Hayes to begin with?:roll:

Ball was worth $350,000 based on his output and this what was offered to him, which he refused to sign mid year,

IMHO, he cracked it, dropping $250,000 a year, perhaps if he was only on $500,000 it would not have been such a massive drop,

and I'm sure after he transgressed for the second time( only St Kilda player to do it and the only player in the AFL to do it twice ) gifting opposition goals with that stupid interchange rule, he would have received a massive and deserved spray from Lyon,

reckon after having been mollycoddled for five and a half years and treated like Thomas's ninth child, he got the sulks and his attitude and response more than anything was the key factor in the whole messy affair,

I saw McQualter get a massive spray, get delisted etc...etc... and he's now in the leadership group, I'm sure Lyon was very surprised and disappointed by Luke Ball's attitude and how he responded to criticism and expected a lot more from him!

But hey if you want to believe Paul Connors and Mike Sheahan's version and label Ross Lyon and Nick Riewoldt as being at best disingenuous then that is hardly surprising given that you took everything Grant Thomas said to be gospel, etc..etc... but it is extremely ignorant to outright post your nonsense about Lyon disrespecting Ball when you were NOT there, but given your track record and lack of cognitive awareness on so many issues, it is hardly surprising!

i suppose if you repeat crap often enough..some one none too bright might just buy it...as you obviously have...show me where i every said that ross disrespected ball...the words not even in my vocabulary ffs so you attack against me doesn't even get off the ground ..because it is a lie pedalled by your mate...and...you won't get another chance to set me up either....