Luke Ball = Attention Seeker

[Sainternist]

Hopefully Luke is well stocked with kleenex soft tissues - of the OP variety - to help dry his eyes and blow his nose after the big game.

Imagine playing in two losing GF's in a row and the second being against the club you played for the year before.

Now that would be one hell of an epic fail tale to have to tell his grandchildren.

[saintbrat]

to be fair it's not Luke who is saying anything.

but ther must have been plenty said somewhere for the 'intense' feeling expressed by his captain and his coach,.....

[saint-stu]

Even if they probably wouldnt let you do the job you want to do. ie play in the firsts.

He was allowed to play in the first when he EARNED IT!

He was in crap form and was dropped!

[plugger66]

Even if they probably wouldnt let you do the job you want to do. ie play in the firsts.

He was allowed to play in the first when he EARNED IT!

He was in crap form and was dropped!

Thats right and that is why i couldnt give a stuff he is gone. After injury he became an average overpaid player in our side.

[saint-stu]

Hate him all you like for preferring the Pies where he was wanted to a club where the coach had made it pretty clear that he preferred a number of others. But please try to keep it a little bit real.

This bugs me. Ross has stated many times that Ball WAS wanted. He was offered a contract. Nick said in the media that Ball was offered a contract and chose to leave.

I don't agree that Ross obviously preferred others. He dropped Dal and Milney, does that mean he prefers others to them?

Can you really expect Ross to keep a player in the team when they're way out of form?

Ross and the club did the right thing. Luke Ball can get stuffed.

[rexy]

Hate him all you like for preferring the Pies where he was wanted to a club where the coach had made it pretty clear that he preferred a number of others. But please try to keep it a little bit real.

This bugs me. Ross has stated many times that Ball WAS wanted. He was offered a contract. Nick said in the media that Ball was offered a contract and chose to leave.

I don't agree that Ross obviously preferred others. He dropped Dal and Milney, does that mean he prefers others to them?

Can you really expect Ross to keep a player in the team when they're way out of form?

Ross and the club did the right thing. Luke Ball can get stuffed.

I have no love for Luke Ball, he is a collingwood player!

I have no hate for him either though, he was one of ours, our skipper and he was a courageous player in our jumper.

Can you not see that RL told him the truth about his ability and his position in the side which was that he had to earn his spot in our side on more than just hard ball gets and tackles and he chose to leave. This was the right thing for Ross to do but it was also the right thing for Luke ball to do. He was obviously worried that he could not produce what Lyon wanted, its just smart for him to leave.

The fact that Armitage has not cemented that spot in front of Eddy Peake Steven or Geary is further proof IMO. If you can not gut run and make your self an offensive option then you can not play saints footy.

[Finna]

to be fair it's not Luke who is saying anything.

No but they know what he likes to hear. He needs to be acknowledged otherwise he might crack the sads.

[saint-stu]

Can you not see that RL told him the truth about his ability and his position in the side which was that he had to earn his spot in our side on more than just hard ball gets and tackles and he chose to leave. This was the right thing for Ross to do but it was also the right thing for Luke ball to do. He was obviously worried that he could not produce what Lyon wanted, its just smart for him to leave.

The fact that Armitage has not cemented that spot in front of Eddy Peake Steven or Geary is further proof IMO. If you can not gut run and make your self an offensive option then you can not play saints footy.

It's possible but we're all speculating. It just really bugs me to hear that "we didn't want him", "we let him go for nothing", "Ross didn't like him".. etc. because I really don't buy it.

Armitage has been inconsistent and has had injuries this year. I think if he can get some consistency he will be picked regularly.

[rexy]

Can you not see that RL told him the truth about his ability and his position in the side which was that he had to earn his spot in our side on more than just hard ball gets and tackles and he chose to leave. This was the right thing for Ross to do but it was also the right thing for Luke ball to do. He was obviously worried that he could not produce what Lyon wanted, its just smart for him to leave.

The fact that Armitage has not cemented that spot in front of Eddy Peake Steven or Geary is further proof IMO. If you can not gut run and make your self an offensive option then you can not play saints footy.

It's possible but we're all speculating. It just really bugs me to hear that "we didn't want him", "we let him go for nothing", "Ross didn't like him".. etc. because I really don't buy it.

Armitage has been inconsistent and has had injuries this year. I think if he can get some consistency he will be picked regularly.

I dont buy it either, what I am saying is that Ross said your a good footballer and we want your services but we cant garauntee you anything and we think you are worth X because of deficiency AB and C.

Collingwood said said you are a good footballer and because of proficiency 12 and 3 we think you will be a best 22 player every week and you are worth Y.

Luke took the most attractive offer and the club did not back down on its beleif as its beleifs were based on what they see as the facts. Both sides are now playing in the GF so IMO both decisins are justified?

Why do people have to hate him, and others love him, he is just a collingwood player, he is unassuming and hard working and very un threatening.

If you want to hate someone, hate Didak or Maxwell or Obrien who are arrogant bully boys and media darlings.

Or just hate Mick, I do.

[saint-stu]

Luke took the most attractive offer and the club did not back down on its beleif as its beleifs were based on what they see as the facts. Both sides are now playing in the GF so IMO both decisins are justified?

Maybe I'm naive, but I like to think that's it's more than just a job. Remember these guys made pact all those years ago to stick together and try to win a flag.

Why do people have to hate him, and others love him, he is just a collingwood player, he is unassuming and hard working and very un threatening.

I agree with you about his personality, but he left us to play for Collingwood. We could definitely still use him and he's at Collingwood helping them to beat us.

I reckon Nick is angry that he turned his back on the saints too, so we're not alone.

If you want to hate someone, hate Didak or Maxwell or Obrien who are arrogant bully boys and media darlings.

Or just hate Mick, I do.

Don't need any suggestion to hate that lot . Maxwell is an arrogant turd. I really can't stand him.

[rodgerfox]

The Luke Ball thing is a funny one.

He's a very, very significant factor in Collingwood's rise to raging flag favourite.

He's very, very important to them.


So we still have people talking about how woeful he was for us (which may or may not be true) but now he finds himself as a key player in a team that is highly fancied to win the flag.

The fact that Luke Ball is not with us anymore is not the issue - the issue is that a player of his type was the missing link for Collingwood to become a genuine threat.

The issue is not that losing Luke Ball may cost us a flag - the issue is that Collingwood getting Luke Ball might cost us a flag.

[rexy]

The Luke Ball thing is a funny one.

He's a very, very significant factor in Collingwood's rise to raging flag favourite.

He's very, very important to them.


So we still have people talking about how woeful he was for us (which may or may not be true) but now he finds himself as a key player in a team that is highly fancied to win the flag.

The fact that Luke Ball is not with us anymore is not the issue - the issue is that a player of his type was the missing link for Collingwood to become a genuine threat.

The issue is not that losing Luke Ball may cost us a flag - the issue is that Collingwood getting Luke Ball might cost us a flag.

Good post. Good point.

I just hate all the personal stuff saying he is a traitor and this and that, not needed IMO.

Like it or not its a business and at some point you have to look after yourself, most of us would not leave our current jobs to do the same elsewhere for an extra 5K, but we might for 25. With footballers the numbers may be higher but the premise is the same.

Hawthorn have handled the Campbell Brown departure very well IMO.

[bigcarl]

He left for a club that would fit him in, rather than fitting into ours.

Give me Kosi, Gwilt, Dempster and Eddy anyday...guys that are happy to be moulded into whatever is best for the TEAM.

yep, and aren't too precious to do as they are asked.

[saintkid]

The Luke Ball thing is a funny one.

He's a very, very significant factor in Collingwood's rise to raging flag favourite.

He's very, very important to them.


So we still have people talking about how woeful he was for us (which may or may not be true) but now he finds himself as a key player in a team that is highly fancied to win the flag.

The fact that Luke Ball is not with us anymore is not the issue - the issue is that a player of his type was the missing link for Collingwood to become a genuine threat.

The issue is not that losing Luke Ball may cost us a flag - the issue is that Collingwood getting Luke Ball might cost us a flag.

Well then, even if he plays on Saturday I reckon he wont be the dominant player he can be for them as there is no way he will be 100% come Saturday. Maybe it's a sign of our good fortune to come.

[saint-stu]

Like it or not its a business and at some point you have to look after yourself, most of us would not leave our current jobs to do the same elsewhere for an extra 5K, but we might for 25. With footballers the numbers may be higher but the premise is the same.

It's not just a business from the fans point of view. And although money would come into it for players, I think loyalty is a big part of their decision too.

Hawthorn have handled the Campbell Brown departure very well IMO.

Very different circumstances. Brown was put up to be traded last year and he was furious. I don't think you'll see any saints fans calling Matt Maguire a traitor.

[Tom_Aus]

Am i mistaken but doesn't Luke Ball now play for collingwood? So for that reason i hope he does not get up to play (as he is in their best 22). To me, thats all there is to it..

[meher baba]

P

Hawthorn have handled the Campbell Brown departure very well IMO.

Very different circumstances. Brown was put up to be traded last year and he was furious. I don't think you'll see any saints fans calling Matt Maguire a traitor.[/quote]

At the risk of being accused of reinventing history (although I certainly didn't invent what I am about to say) there have been some very strong rumours circulating that before the 2009 GF the Saints had talked informally to both the Pies and the Roos about a possible trade for Ball.

FWIW (not much to most on here, I suspect, as it would spoil a good story if it turned to Be true).

[saintsRrising]

The Luke Ball thing is a funny one.

He's a very, very significant factor in Collingwood's rise to raging flag favourite.

He's very, very important to them.

.

tish...

The main reason for the Pies rise this year is that after years of good recruiting and player development that they have "aped" a lot of what Lyon brought to the Saints with our workrate and defensive gameplan.

This is the main factor in their rise this year.

They have been beating the Cats recently for the same reason the Saints have...Gameplan and Workrate..and not Ball.

Without this change in gameplan they would not be where they are now...and would not be the team they are now.

Ball was a slight upgrade on the Pie he replaced, the 31 yo O"Bree....but is younger and so will go on longer.

[saint-stu]

At the risk of being accused of reinventing history (although I certainly didn't invent what I am about to say) there have been some very strong rumours circulating that before the 2009 GF the Saints had talked informally to both the Pies and the Roos about a possible trade for Ball.

FWIW (not much to most on here, I suspect, as it would spoil a good story if it turned to Be true).

That's a nasty rumour. Why would you want to spread this?

[bigcarl]

The main reason for the Pies rise this year is that after years of good recruiting and player development that they have "aped" a lot of what Lyon brought to the Saints with our workrate and defensive gameplan.

Agree sRs. And Ball is still a good, average player being paid an elite wage.

[saintsRrising]

At the risk of being accused of reinventing history (although I certainly didn't invent what I am about to say) there have been some very strong rumours circulating that before the 2009 GF the Saints had talked informally to both the Pies and the Roos about a possible trade for Ball.

FWIW (not much to most on here, I suspect, as it would spoil a good story if it turned to Be true).

That's a nasty rumour. Why would you want to spread this?

MB has never liked Lyon....

He has to keep gritting his teeth as Lyon keeps proving him wrong...

Eddy being but the latest of a long line of MB expoused supposed Lyon mistakes.

At the risk of being accused of reinventing history (although I certainly didn't invent what I am about to say) there have been some very strong rumours circulating that before the 2009 GF the Saints had talked informally to both the Pies and the Roos about a possible trade for Ball.

.

Odd...I don't seem to remember these very strong rumours.

Can you post a link to one of them?

[markp]

At the risk of being accused of reinventing history (although I certainly didn't invent what I am about to say) there have been some very strong rumours circulating that before the 2009 GF the Saints had talked informally to both the Pies and the Roos about a possible trade for Ball.

FWIW (not much to most on here, I suspect, as it would spoil a good story if it turned to Be true).

Yep, and he and his 'people' kept it to themselves, as did mick and eddy...

Out of decency, one would assume.

Nice rumour to invent...

Out of desperation, one would assume.

[Finna]

The Luke Ball thing is a funny one.

He's a very, very significant factor in Collingwood's rise to raging flag favourite.

He's very, very important to them.


So we still have people talking about how woeful he was for us (which may or may not be true) but now he finds himself as a key player in a team that is highly fancied to win the flag.

The fact that Luke Ball is not with us anymore is not the issue - the issue is that a player of his type was the missing link for Collingwood to become a genuine threat.

The issue is not that losing Luke Ball may cost us a flag - the issue is that Collingwood getting Luke Ball might cost us a flag.

Which is why we wouldnt trade for him and did all we could to try and stop him from going there.

[Mr Magic]

At the risk of being accused of reinventing history (although I certainly didn't invent what I am about to say) there have been some very strong rumours circulating that before the 2009 GF the Saints had talked informally to both the Pies and the Roos about a possible trade for Ball.

FWIW (not much to most on here, I suspect, as it would spoil a good story if it turned to Be true).

Yep, and he and his 'people' kept it to themselves, as did mick and eddy...

Out of decency, one would assume.

Nice rumour to invent...

Out of desperation, one would assume.

Actually, the rumour is that StKilda had informal discussions with NM over a Trade for Ball.
This has never been confirmed by anybody from either CLub officially including any of Ball's 'team' who were more than happy to raise any reason they could think of to explain Ball's desire to leave. Surely if ther was any truth to the rumour it would have been raised?

As for the rumoured Collingwood trade, unfortnately the poster who has just raised it is, I believe, engaging in wishful thinking in trying to justify his view of the situation.

The whole Collingwood saga was played out in The Australian via Greg Denham adn nowhere was a 'pre-emtive' trade ever mentioned.
ONly that:-
Collingwood had interst in an out of contract Ball
followed by
Collingwood being prepared to offer ot of contract Ball 500k per season
eventuating with
Ball desiring to go to Collingwood for 500k per season.
What a surprise?
The articles were written well before Ball apparently became disenchanted with teh coach, gamestyle, players, admin, weather and anything else about Moorabbin.
But it did happen when he was offered a much lower salary than he had been on.

Of course some posters would prefer to believe Liar Malthouse, Eddie Everywhere, Nick Hard Kick Maxwell adn spoon fed journalists' version of events over the Club, Coach and Captain of St Kilda.
One can only wonder at the motives for that.

[WinnersOnly]

Quote from H/S article...

Meanwhile, Goddard seemed to foreshadow disappointment for former teammate and close friend Luke Ball, who finds himself under an injury cloud.

''He's a good mate of mine, you feel for him somewhat, but it's a harsh reality of footy,'' Goddard said.

''I think tonight we got away unscathed, so that's a bonus for us, but yeah, it's a shame and Luke's a good mate.''

Maybe karma has come back to bite our old friend LB !