St Kilda In Damage Control.... Today's Crikey

[stinger]

WEll to be honest I didn't interpret the article as anything but what pretty much everyone is saying. I don't reckon it teed off at the club.

If we were all being honest we would admit it IS a distraction the club doesn't need. I'm not so sure about the witch hunt about who wanted to recruit him. Who cares now? I was dead against the idea of recruiting him from the outset, but really I'm sure the club feel the same way and that is - let's get on with the season.

Losing Ball and now this does raise questions..

pretty much my take on the whole sorry affair too......bring on the footy ffs

[Milan Faletic]

I guess the club would be 'bad sports' if they publically acknowledged Ball tampered with the draft, and had he not, they'd have probably have been able to strike an equitible deal. I was taking a break from the off-season forum, not sure whether anyone questioned the AFL's stance on this?

Are you suggesting that Collingwood are guilty of Ball Tampering?

I'm Afridi so.

Very good.

So funny, I felt like I wanted to Shahid myself!!

That word Shahid just might enter the vocabulary, MB

Hate to be a party pooper, but isn't there a rule about copying an article in its entirety as the OP did. Just asking. Don't want us to get in to trouble.

[Leo.J]

Yep they hate us more than the other clubs. Makes sense really.

Lets face it, its a big story and EVERY other club would be treated the same. Why do people honestly believe we would be treated differently.

IMO they do give us a hard time because we give them nothing...

Unfortunately journalism has gone the way of the rest of the world, it's about cash and sensationalism. Journos don't report with any balance anymore...the facts are boring apparently.

Well I reckon the sacking of Lovett has been very balanced and mainly in our favour. Of course some people will be against what we did but on the whole we have come out in front. As for the recruiting of AL we are behind and again that is probably right. Afterall we gave away pick 16 and didnt get a player at all. Yes it is hindsight but it is also hindsight that MG has been good for us as King, Ray and so on. You have to take the good with the bad sometimes.

I agree in part with the above regarding Lovett.

I still think the club has been pinted in a negative light. But that's just my opinion obviously.

As far as the LB issue is concerned...

I believe we were painted as the bad guys, and the HS and 3MMM were the main culprits.

HS = one of our major sponsors competitors, and a buch of journos who are pissed because we give them no leaks off the record, and play a dead straight during media conferences.

3MMM = Eddy and Gary Pert say no more.

[plugger66]

Yep they hate us more than the other clubs. Makes sense really.

Lets face it, its a big story and EVERY other club would be treated the same. Why do people honestly believe we would be treated differently.

IMO they do give us a hard time because we give them nothing...

Unfortunately journalism has gone the way of the rest of the world, it's about cash and sensationalism. Journos don't report with any balance anymore...the facts are boring apparently.

Well I reckon the sacking of Lovett has been very balanced and mainly in our favour. Of course some people will be against what we did but on the whole we have come out in front. As for the recruiting of AL we are behind and again that is probably right. Afterall we gave away pick 16 and didnt get a player at all. Yes it is hindsight but it is also hindsight that MG has been good for us as King, Ray and so on. You have to take the good with the bad sometimes.

I agree in part with the above regarding Lovett.

I still think the club has been pinted in a negative light. But that's just my opinion obviously.

As far as the LB issue is concerned...

I believe we were painted as the bad guys, and the HS and 3MMM were the main culprits.

HS = one of our major sponsors competitors, and a buch of journos who are pissed because we give them no leaks off the record, and play a dead straight during media conferences.

3MMM = Eddy and Gary Pert say no more.

Is that the same Herald Sun who wrote about 100 positive articles on us last year. I dont think for one minute the herald Sun would write negitive articles because the age sponsor us. If that is the case why arent all the articles in the age positive.

[saintspremiers]

Yep they hate us more than the other clubs. Makes sense really.

Lets face it, its a big story and EVERY other club would be treated the same. Why do people honestly believe we would be treated differently.

Agree.

Browne is right about us needing to win the flag to prove the doubters.

We farked up in the trade period - no hiding from that.

[Leo.J]

Yep they hate us more than the other clubs. Makes sense really.

Lets face it, its a big story and EVERY other club would be treated the same. Why do people honestly believe we would be treated differently.

IMO they do give us a hard time because we give them nothing...

Unfortunately journalism has gone the way of the rest of the world, it's about cash and sensationalism. Journos don't report with any balance anymore...the facts are boring apparently.

Well I reckon the sacking of Lovett has been very balanced and mainly in our favour. Of course some people will be against what we did but on the whole we have come out in front. As for the recruiting of AL we are behind and again that is probably right. Afterall we gave away pick 16 and didnt get a player at all. Yes it is hindsight but it is also hindsight that MG has been good for us as King, Ray and so on. You have to take the good with the bad sometimes.

I agree in part with the above regarding Lovett.

I still think the club has been pinted in a negative light. But that's just my opinion obviously.

As far as the LB issue is concerned...

I believe we were painted as the bad guys, and the HS and 3MMM were the main culprits.

HS = one of our major sponsors competitors, and a buch of journos who are pissed because we give them no leaks off the record, and play a dead straight during media conferences.

3MMM = Eddy and Gary Pert say no more.

Is that the same Herald Sun who wrote about 100 positive articles on us last year. I dont think for one minute the herald Sun would write negitive articles because the age sponsor us. If that is the case why arent all the articles in the age positive.

Of course they were positive we won 22 games out 25!

And regarding the HS don't be suprised, it is after all part of the Murdoch stable... Ever seen any of the right wing tripe that Foxtel produces.

As far as The Age is concerned, that paper actually still has some journalistic integrity...some.

[kosifantutti23]

But rest assured the Saints are anxious at how the media chooses to spin the turn of events that saw them lose Luke Ball to Collingwood for nothing and now, not have Lovett as his replacement.

I didn't know Lovett was Ball's replacement. Given that we were still trying to sign ball to a contract after we had traded for Lovett it seems a bit strange that you would claim Lovett was ever Ball's replacement.

But when it comes to Saint's recruiting this year there are only two things that are newsworthy. Who cares about Walsh, Winmar, Smith, Pattison and Will Johnson?

It makes just as much sense to say Lovett is Max Hudghton's replacement.

[stinger]

And regarding the HS don't be suprised, it is after all part of the Murdoch stable... Ever seen any of the right wing tripe that Foxtel produces.

As far as The Age is concerned, that paper actually still has some journalistic integrity...some.

actually i much prefer right wing tripe to left wing touchy feely crap.......

[Leo.J]

And regarding the HS don't be suprised, it is after all part of the Murdoch stable... Ever seen any of the right wing tripe that Foxtel produces.

As far as The Age is concerned, that paper actually still has some journalistic integrity...some.

actually i much prefer right wing tripe to left wing touchy feely crap.......

Stalin and Mao weren't to touchy feely.

[Leo.J]

And regarding the HS don't be suprised, it is after all part of the Murdoch stable... Ever seen any of the right wing tripe that Foxtel produces.

As far as The Age is concerned, that paper actually still has some journalistic integrity...some.

actually i much prefer right wing tripe to left wing touchy feely crap.......

Btw I'd prefer a balanced or bilateral view myself.

[stinger]

And regarding the HS don't be suprised, it is after all part of the Murdoch stable... Ever seen any of the right wing tripe that Foxtel produces.

As far as The Age is concerned, that paper actually still has some journalistic integrity...some.

actually i much prefer right wing tripe to left wing touchy feely crap.......

Btw I'd prefer a balanced or bilateral view myself.

touche....

[Leo.J]

And regarding the HS don't be suprised, it is after all part of the Murdoch stable... Ever seen any of the right wing tripe that Foxtel produces.

As far as The Age is concerned, that paper actually still has some journalistic integrity...some.

actually i much prefer right wing tripe to left wing touchy feely crap.......

Btw I'd prefer a balanced or bilateral view myself.

touche....

[maverick]

Yep they hate us more than the other clubs. Makes sense really.

Lets face it, its a big story and EVERY other club would be treated the same. Why do people honestly believe we would be treated differently.

IMO they do give us a hard time because we give them nothing...

Unfortunately journalism has gone the way of the rest of the world, it's about cash and sensationalism. Journos don't report with any balance anymore...the facts are boring apparently.

Well I reckon the sacking of Lovett has been very balanced and mainly in our favour. Of course some people will be against what we did but on the whole we have come out in front. As for the recruiting of AL we are behind and again that is probably right. Afterall we gave away pick 16 and didnt get a player at all. Yes it is hindsight but it is also hindsight that MG has been good for us as King, Ray and so on. You have to take the good with the bad sometimes.

Look that's fair enough, and yes the reporting is reasonable IMO too.
I get most annoyed with comments like St Kilda let Luke Ball go, which simply was not true.

At least I put my money where my mouth is, I used to buy the HS very morning and since GF day, I have bought 3 if that....and do not miss it.

Also don't miss SEN at all either, thank god I am not listening at the moment...

Point being, don't read the garbage, it doesn't give you anything you don't know anyway....

[Con Gorozidis]

Honestly, the Pies could have offered us pick 50 for Ball and the media would still say that it was still our fault we got nothing.

Don't know why I let it bother me. The media have been spinning it this way since Lovett made his first mistake and it's the way they will spin it for months ahead, particularly if Ball gets off to a flyer.

Better get used it.

50 is better than nothing. and they offered us 25. dont blame the media. cos we did get nothing. which is why they say what got nothing. they are just reporting the fact.

are crikey sydney based now since stephen mayne sold up? they do love a good afl bash.

ross lyon reckons he has 10 written references. 9 are from lovetts mum i think.

[MC Gusto]

What's really pathetic is some posters actually choose to believe Paul Connors, Mike Sheahan, Eddie McGuire and Mick Malthouse's version of events in relation to Luke Ball as opposed to Ross Lyon's and Nick Riewoldt's assessment of what really happened!

Some even take exception to Nick standing up for the St kilda Football Club and showing these lies up for what they are!

FACT is Ross Lyon and Nick Riewoldt were there and the others are getting second and third hand info, yet it still doesn't stop a few on here who think Luke Ball walks on water and the sun shines out of his arse!

IMHO, Ball is a prima donna private schoolboy who absolutely creamed top dollar out of this football club for way too long, $600,000 a year, more than Hayes at the time and delivered way less than that value, so coming down from that ridiculous figure that some imbecile paid him to begin with was obviously too much for ball and his melodramatics and sulking didn't sit well with Lyon!

So the press, Mike Sheahan or whoever can write what they like and air headed nuffies with NFI will choose to believe Paul Connors version as opposed to Nick Riewoldt's, but hey the same people thought Grant Thomas could coach and cracked it big time when he got exited out, so it's hardly surprising these malcontents are slow on the uptake!

+1

[SydneySainter]

Honestly, the Pies could have offered us pick 50 for Ball and the media would still say that it was still our fault we got nothing.

Don't know why I let it bother me. The media have been spinning it this way since Lovett made his first mistake and it's the way they will spin it for months ahead, particularly if Ball gets off to a flyer.

Better get used it.

50 is better than nothing. and they offered us 25. dont blame the media. cos we did get nothing. which is why they say what got nothing. they are just reporting the fact.

are crikey sydney based now since stephen mayne sold up? they do love a good afl bash.

ross lyon reckons he has 10 written references. 9 are from lovetts mum i think.

Yes, they did offer us pick 25 and what the media fail keep failing to mention is that all the Saints wanted was a good player in return. Didn't have to be the same ilk of Bartel, but a quality player. We wanted Everitt and if the Dogs were happy to exchange Everitt for pick 25, the deal would have been done. But they said no, they wanted at least pick 21, why aren't they being portrayed as pig-headed or greedy? Malthouse was also quoted recently in saying that the Saints wanted pick 30 and Goldsack, but that was a trade that Collingwood refused to entertain. If pick 30 and Goldsack wasn't good enough, clearly they were after a bargain trade, using the fact that Ball had been dropped twice as an excuse as to why they shouldn't have to trade market value for him. I missed the part where dropping a player means you don't value them. Not valuing them means dropping them to the VFL and letting them rot, but although Ball was dropped twice, he was recalled twice and still played every final.

I think its funny now that when the Saints didn't agree to a trade on Ball, Pies supporters alike were all blaming the Saint and I heard some very scathing comments in regards to how greedy our club was being. But when he still goes for pick 30 in the draft, they're all stoked because they got him at a bargain. Does that mean all Ball was worth was pick 30, or did no other club have the guts to take him with an earlier pick because Ball and Connors had launched a scare campaign?

Was Paul Roos just being pig-headed and greedy when he refused to trade O'Keefe because he didn't get offered what he thought he was worth, or was it because he valued a player enough to want fair compensation?

[matrix]

it was in the Advertiser this week too
Geoff Roach (?) said something like we got rid of bally for lovett

i mean
jesus friggin christ
how the hell do you get a gig when ya cant even get it right

ohh yeah,
thats right...
its the media.

[Con Gorozidis]

It was interesting to hear Matthew Lloyd say on Melbourne radio station SEN on Wednesday morning that if the Saints conducted their due diligence on Lovett that they claimed to have done, that they didn’t speak to him in his capacity as the most recent captain of Essendon.

If they didn’t speak to the skipper, and they already knew that Lovett had twice been suspended by Bomber coach Matthew Knights, just who was it from Windy Hill who advised them that Lovett would be a good pick-up?

They spoke to his mentor and the Essendon doctor, Dr. John Quinn and James Hird...

Do your home work Ashley Browne.

Secondly Ball wanted to leave, and he wanted to go to Collingwood, and Collingwood wanted him, which left us with no chance of getting anything decent for him.

So as mentioned above had we taken pick 40 for Ball we would have been a laughing stock anyway.

AND...we will get nothing from the media in particular the Herald Sun because we give them nothing, and we are sponsored by their competition The Age...As for the other outlets if they only have one side of the story they'll run with that, like they did with the Luke Ball saga.

Unfortunately we have no friends in high places, and because we're good people want us to fail.

quinny aint a dr. hes a fitness guy. and pies offered up 25 not 40.

how would 40 make us a laughing stock anyway? like 40 is just so terrible compared to nothing.

herald sun arent anti saints - they are just pro pies. its the collingwood daily. they will probably have a 4 page spread on sean rusling tomorrow.

[Mr Magic]

It was interesting to hear Matthew Lloyd say on Melbourne radio station SEN on Wednesday morning that if the Saints conducted their due diligence on Lovett that they claimed to have done, that they didn’t speak to him in his capacity as the most recent captain of Essendon.

If they didn’t speak to the skipper, and they already knew that Lovett had twice been suspended by Bomber coach Matthew Knights, just who was it from Windy Hill who advised them that Lovett would be a good pick-up?

They spoke to his mentor and the Essendon doctor, Dr. John Quinn and James Hird...

Do your home work Ashley Browne.

Secondly Ball wanted to leave, and he wanted to go to Collingwood, and Collingwood wanted him, which left us with no chance of getting anything decent for him.

So as mentioned above had we taken pick 40 for Ball we would have been a laughing stock anyway.

AND...we will get nothing from the media in particular the Herald Sun because we give them nothing, and we are sponsored by their competition The Age...As for the other outlets if they only have one side of the story they'll run with that, like they did with the Luke Ball saga.

Unfortunately we have no friends in high places, and because we're good people want us to fail.

quinny aint a dr. hes a fitness guy. and pies offered up 25 not 40.

how would 40 make us a laughing stock anyway? like 40 is just so terrible compared to nothing.

herald sun arent anti saints - they are just pro pies. its the collingwood daily. they will probably have a 4 page spread on sean rusling tomorrow.

They didn't have 25 - they had to get it from North Melbourne and offered them Wellingham for it.
NM didn't want Wellingham so kept the pick.
It was of no value to us anyway. We needed a pick inside the first 22 to satisfy Western Bulldogs. That's waht they wanted for Everitt.

So our choice was to take pick 30, which we obviously didn't want.
OR
try and convince Ball to stay, which he didn't want.

Collingwood and Ball just engineered (tampered) with the draft to allow Ball to get through to them.
If anybodsy thinks that the fact that Ball got through to pick 30 is a true reflection of his worth, then they're dreaming.
They neglect to take into account that he had a 500k salary (for salary cap purposes) on himself which stopped some (many/most?) from even considering him becasue of lack of space in their own salary caps.

That and the fdact he refused to spaek to any other CLub allowed him to fall so far down the list.
Not becasue pick 30 was a true and fair reflection of his worth.

[MCG-Unit]

No Collingwood didn't have 25 - but they offered the Kangas 30 plus Wellingham for 25 - to which the Kangas must have said yes.............

How else could Lyon say at the close of trading - Pick 25 and 62 were on the table, but it wouldn't get the deal done
I heard him live on SEN, and it was in the print media next day

Shivers, this has been posted several times already

[Mr Magic]

No Collingwood didn't have 25 - but they offered the Kangas 30 plus Wellingham for 25 - to which the Kangas must have said yes.............

How else could Lyon say at the close of trading - Pick 25 and 62 were on the table, but it wouldn't get the deal done
I heard him live on SEN, and it was in the print media next day

Shivers, this has been posted several times already

Doesn't change the fact that St Kilda told Collingwood from the get-go they were interested in only 2 options

A draft pick that would be enough for WB to trade Everitt
Or a player from Collingwood in the Everitt mould - Nathn Brown was nominated by us.

And apparently until Hawthorn refused to take Connors' other client Jolley (apparently they felt an obligation to continue trying to deal for Burgoyne), Collingwood were happy to give us their pick #14 for Ball, which would have solved everybody's problems.

Are you another one who's made up his mind becasue of crap written by journalists trying to curry favour with Collingwood or looking for a sensational story?

Maybe you should have listened to Greg Denham on SEN this morning?
Afterall he was the original recipient of Connors' 'leaks' on Luke Ball.
You know the journalist who wrote the Ball to Collingwood for 500k per season stories months before trade week.
Well before St Kilda tried to trade him to another CLub (according to Stinger's source).

See that's the problem in the logic of all those trying to run the 'Ball was pushed' argument.

Connors was negotiating with Collingwood well before any of this transpired.
IMO, Ball did not suddenly wake up on the Monday morning of trade week and decide - I'm leaving.
He had a deal in place already weeks/months before.
I mean how would he know that Collingwood wanted him if he hadn't already arranged a deal with them (including salary)?

Nothing wrong with that either. Just don't BS about it on the way out. Tell the truth.
He got a better deal elsewhere.
End of story.

But no,
Luke and his management/family/camp don't like the idea of him being thought of as someone who left for a better deal.

Hence all this nonsense being 'fed' to journalists.
Say anything exceot that the deal at Collingwood is better.

Does anybody herre honestly believe that Ball is earning less at Collingwood than the 1 million over 3 years he was offered by the Saints?
Truly believe that?

I had a friend of mine try to tell me last night that he heard it from someone on the Collingwood Board that Ball is only on 250k at Collingwood. He truly believes that.

When I tried to explain to him that Collingwood are using 500k of their salary cap on Ball his response was, 'but he's only on 250k so that has to be wrong'.

Collingwood don't want their supporter base thinking that Ball is on 500k in case he doesn't become the player for them that they are hoping for. Their memories of Woewodin are still fresh.

Luke Ball is a proud young man. I hope for his sake that he can get back to playing good footy asap (not against us) because I would hate to see the feral filth turn on him like I know they can.

[stinger]

St Kilda told Collingwood from the get-go
.

i hate that f****** expression...more than that crap about the elephant in the room ...whats the matter with saying...from the start ffs....

...now i really am off to the footy....

[plugger66]

So we believe certain reporters but not others. I suppose like anything people believe those who write things that suit what they want to hear.

[Mr Magic]

So we believe certain reporters but not others. I suppose like anything people believe those who write things that suit what they want to hear.

No I actually believe reporters who report accurately.
Denham wrote that:-
Collingwood was interested in Ball
Collingwood had offered him 500k per season.

Where is Ball? - Collingwood
And what price did he put on his services for the Draft? - 500k pa

Now I might be wrong, but isn't that exactly what Denham wrote?
Isn't that accurate?

Now compare it with some of the other articles written on the subject.
How does their accuracy stack up against Denham on this?

'Ball is earning less at Collingwood than at St Kilda' - Mike Sheahan in the Herald Sun

'It's true because Ball was on 600k at St kilda and 500k is less than that' - John Ralph on SEN.

[plugger66]

So we believe certain reporters but not others. I suppose like anything people believe those who write things that suit what they want to hear.

No I actually believe reporters who report accurately.
Denham wrote that:-
Collingwood was interested in Ball
Collingwood had offered him 500k per season.

Where is Ball? - Collingwood
And what price did he put on his services for the Draft? - 500k pa

Now I might be wrong, but isn't that exactly what Denham wrote?
Isn't that accurate?

Now compare it with some of the other articles written on the subject.
How does their accuracy stack up against Denham on this?

'Ball is earning less at Collingwood than at St Kilda' - Mike Sheahan in the Herald Sun

'It's true because Ball was on 600k at St kilda and 500k is less than that' - John Ralph on SEN.

When did he write that? Was it in June or after everyone else knew he was wanting to go to the Pies. By the way is this the same Denham who said Fev isnt going to Brisbane and we are getting McMahon.