![Wink :wink:](./images/smilies/icon_wink.gif)
Ball having a big game against Blues
Moderators: Saintsational Administrators, Saintsational Moderators
-
- Club Player
- Posts: 763
- Joined: Tue 19 Jun 2007 7:18pm
- samoht
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 5847
- Joined: Sun 14 Mar 2004 10:45am
- Location: https://www.amazon.com.au/Fugitive-Sold ... B00EO1GCNK
- Has thanked: 612 times
- Been thanked: 455 times
- Contact:
Footy wise, or leadership wise?rodgerfox wrote:I reckon we miss him on-field to be honest.
It's really hard to tell, as Armo is not really a like for like.
One thing I have been really impressed with so far, is Armo's contested possession this year. Our matches the last two weeks have probably not really flattered anyone much, but his game against Freo was particularly good.
- rodgerfox
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 9059
- Joined: Wed 10 Mar 2004 9:10am
- Has thanked: 425 times
- Been thanked: 327 times
Both.SainterK wrote:Footy wise, or leadership wise?rodgerfox wrote:I reckon we miss him on-field to be honest.
It's really hard to tell, as Armo is not really a like for like.
One thing I have been really impressed with so far, is Armo's contested possession this year. Our matches the last two weeks have probably not really flattered anyone much, but his game against Freo was particularly good.
I think we could have played both Ball and Armitage. I don't think it had to be one or the other like everyone seems to suggest.
Tackling, composure, clearances and leadership are all things that Ball brings to the table.
I think we're missing him.
On the back of the weekends game, you could make a good case for Luke, but I am not sure his form has been consistent so far this year.rodgerfox wrote:Both.SainterK wrote:Footy wise, or leadership wise?rodgerfox wrote:I reckon we miss him on-field to be honest.
It's really hard to tell, as Armo is not really a like for like.
One thing I have been really impressed with so far, is Armo's contested possession this year. Our matches the last two weeks have probably not really flattered anyone much, but his game against Freo was particularly good.
I think we could have played both Ball and Armitage. I don't think it had to be one or the other like everyone seems to suggest.
Tackling, composure, clearances and leadership are all things that Ball brings to the table.
I think we're missing him.
Armo is great in the tackling stakes, maybe not quite so high as Luke, but one could argue he doesn't need to as often as his CP is higher than Ball and he already has possesion?
![Cool 8-)](./images/smilies/icon_cool.gif)
Maybe if Luke hadn't decided to leave, you may of seen both in the side this year, but we'll never know.
- samoht
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 5847
- Joined: Sun 14 Mar 2004 10:45am
- Location: https://www.amazon.com.au/Fugitive-Sold ... B00EO1GCNK
- Has thanked: 612 times
- Been thanked: 455 times
- Contact:
Armo vs Ball is interesting... but there are other young players that would have always made Ball a fringe player.
that's because Ball has below VFL level skills.
For example ..
Steven is going to be a better player than Ball, maybe as early as this year .. he has more skill, a much better kick , more run and is just as hard at it... he throws himself into contests.
that's because Ball has below VFL level skills.
For example ..
Steven is going to be a better player than Ball, maybe as early as this year .. he has more skill, a much better kick , more run and is just as hard at it... he throws himself into contests.
- rodgerfox
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 9059
- Joined: Wed 10 Mar 2004 9:10am
- Has thanked: 425 times
- Been thanked: 327 times
New team mates, new game plan, new coach etc. etc.SainterK wrote:
On the back of the weekends game, you could make a good case for Luke, but I am not sure his form has been consistent so far this year.
It takes time. He'll get better and better.
We didn't lose Ball so we could get Armitage. We had them both.SainterK wrote: Armo is great in the tackling stakes, maybe not quite so high as Luke, but one could argue he doesn't need to as often as his CP is higher than Ball and he already has possesion?![]()
There seems to be a mindset that it was either one or the other. I don't know why.
Maybe, but that's not my point.SainterK wrote: Maybe if Luke hadn't decided to leave, you may of seen both in the side this year, but we'll never know.
I just think we miss him on-field this year - and will as the season goes on.
- rodgerfox
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 9059
- Joined: Wed 10 Mar 2004 9:10am
- Has thanked: 425 times
- Been thanked: 327 times
I can't agree with that.samoht wrote:Armo vs Ball is interesting... but there are other young players that would have always made Ball a fringe player.
that's because Ball has below VFL level skills.
For example ..
Steven is going to be a better player than Ball, maybe as early as this year .. he has more skill, a much better kick , more run and is just as hard at it... he throws himself into contests.
Luke Ball was a very good player for us. And is still a very good footballer who does things that all sides need.
We have a dozen guys in the side right now who's footskills appear to be below VFL standard.
- samoht
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 5847
- Joined: Sun 14 Mar 2004 10:45am
- Location: https://www.amazon.com.au/Fugitive-Sold ... B00EO1GCNK
- Has thanked: 612 times
- Been thanked: 455 times
- Contact:
An average 60 year old off the street can run and kick further than Ball.rodgerfox wrote:samoht wrote:Armo vs Ball is interesting... but there are other young players that would have always made Ball a fringe player.
that's because Ball has below VFL level skills.
For example ..
Steven is going to be a better player than Ball, maybe as early as this year .. he has more skill, a much better kick , more run and is just as hard at it... he throws himself into contests.
I can't agree with that.
Luke Ball was a very good player for us. And is still a very good footballer who does things that all sides need.
We have a dozen guys in the side right now who's footskills appear to be below VFL standard.
Not sure how to use the quote function like that, so will just answer your points collectively.rodgerfox wrote:New team mates, new game plan, new coach etc. etc.SainterK wrote:
On the back of the weekends game, you could make a good case for Luke, but I am not sure his form has been consistent so far this year.
It takes time. He'll get better and better.
We didn't lose Ball so we could get Armitage. We had them both.SainterK wrote: Armo is great in the tackling stakes, maybe not quite so high as Luke, but one could argue he doesn't need to as often as his CP is higher than Ball and he already has possesion?![]()
There seems to be a mindset that it was either one or the other. I don't know why.
Maybe, but that's not my point.SainterK wrote: Maybe if Luke hadn't decided to leave, you may of seen both in the side this year, but we'll never know.
I just think we miss him on-field this year - and will as the season goes on.
All true points you make about his new environment, and I'll guess we'll see if he improves.
He certainly played a better attacking game yesterday than he has in recent years, which I find myself feeling more annoyed about that than congratulatory, given he is now doing it for the opposition.
The younger players will need to adjust to life in the seniors, as much as Luke will need to adjust to life at Collingwood, and I think we'll see them improve as the year progresses also.
- rodgerfox
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 9059
- Joined: Wed 10 Mar 2004 9:10am
- Has thanked: 425 times
- Been thanked: 327 times
I think that's something that has suddenly appeared from Saints fans since he left the club.samoht wrote:
An average 60 year old off the street can run and kick further than Ball.
Sure, kicking is not his strength, but his running ability is very underrated.
We have plenty of guys who can't hit targets 30m away.
- samoht
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 5847
- Joined: Sun 14 Mar 2004 10:45am
- Location: https://www.amazon.com.au/Fugitive-Sold ... B00EO1GCNK
- Has thanked: 612 times
- Been thanked: 455 times
- Contact:
We need to remember that Luke Ball never has a tagging opponent - he's playing in space as no one pays him respect... he has no run and no carry and no kicking penetration so the opposition let him play free and tag someone who is damaging.
Would we waste Jones tagging Ball ? ... the answer is a big NO !
Was Ball taking a tagger off Dal or Hayes or Montagna and making their life easier ... ?
Would we waste Jones tagging Ball ? ... the answer is a big NO !
Was Ball taking a tagger off Dal or Hayes or Montagna and making their life easier ... ?
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 5017
- Joined: Sun 14 Mar 2004 10:42am
- Location: Bayside
- Has thanked: 9 times
- Been thanked: 91 times
Who would he replace just out of interest, I can't see anyone but Armo being the one. Hence being one or the other.rodgerfox wrote:Both.SainterK wrote:Footy wise, or leadership wise?rodgerfox wrote:I reckon we miss him on-field to be honest.
It's really hard to tell, as Armo is not really a like for like.
One thing I have been really impressed with so far, is Armo's contested possession this year. Our matches the last two weeks have probably not really flattered anyone much, but his game against Freo was particularly good.
I think we could have played both Ball and Armitage. I don't think it had to be one or the other like everyone seems to suggest.
Tackling, composure, clearances and leadership are all things that Ball brings to the table.
I think we're missing him.
His running ability is certainly at question IMO, he struggled to play and commit to the Saints game plan.
- rodgerfox
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 9059
- Joined: Wed 10 Mar 2004 9:10am
- Has thanked: 425 times
- Been thanked: 327 times
That's a good question. I think you'd have to look at the stats in the areas such as clearances, tackles and contested footy.maverick wrote:
Who would he replace just out of interest, I can't see anyone but Armo being the one. Hence being one or the other.
But really, we're winning so it's hard to say off the top of my head.
I think his running is fine.maverick wrote: His running ability is certainly at question IMO, he struggled to play and commit to the Saints game plan.
As for the game plan, clearly, he wasn't able to do something that Lyon wanted him to do. What precisely that was, I'm not sure.
I can't help but think though, that getting Lovett made losing Ball a non-factor for us.
Losing Lovett however, suddenly made it a factor.
- SaintWodonga
- Club Player
- Posts: 1868
- Joined: Wed 04 Jul 2007 12:01am
- Location: Wodonga
- Contact:
Re: Ball having a big game against Blues
Who cares?meher baba wrote:One goal with each foot, hitting targets by foot, and strong at the clearances.
Not sure.rodgerfox wrote:That's a good question. I think you'd have to look at the stats in the areas such as clearances, tackles and contested footy.maverick wrote:
Who would he replace just out of interest, I can't see anyone but Armo being the one. Hence being one or the other.
But really, we're winning so it's hard to say off the top of my head.
I think his running is fine.maverick wrote: His running ability is certainly at question IMO, he struggled to play and commit to the Saints game plan.
As for the game plan, clearly, he wasn't able to do something that Lyon wanted him to do. What precisely that was, I'm not sure.
I can't help but think though, that getting Lovett made losing Ball a non-factor for us.
Losing Lovett however, suddenly made it a factor.
I know he wasn't able to kick goals at St Kilda, and suddenly he can kick multiple in a game, hence why this thread was probably started
![Mad :x](./images/smilies/icon_mad.gif)
![Wink :wink:](./images/smilies/icon_wink.gif)
- samoht
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 5847
- Joined: Sun 14 Mar 2004 10:45am
- Location: https://www.amazon.com.au/Fugitive-Sold ... B00EO1GCNK
- Has thanked: 612 times
- Been thanked: 455 times
- Contact:
If Luke Ball has been reduced to a cheap goal kicking forward playing in space and 25 metres out and taking advantage of the fact that he is free and loose without an opponent - then he's losing even more of my respect.
Milne has to kick his goals with an opponent constantly breathing down his neck.
Milne has to kick his goals with an opponent constantly breathing down his neck.
Last edited by samoht on Mon 03 May 2010 12:57pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 5017
- Joined: Sun 14 Mar 2004 10:42am
- Location: Bayside
- Has thanked: 9 times
- Been thanked: 91 times
Fair enough, agree losing Lovett and Ball wasn't great.rodgerfox wrote:That's a good question. I think you'd have to look at the stats in the areas such as clearances, tackles and contested footy.maverick wrote:
Who would he replace just out of interest, I can't see anyone but Armo being the one. Hence being one or the other.
But really, we're winning so it's hard to say off the top of my head.
I think his running is fine.maverick wrote: His running ability is certainly at question IMO, he struggled to play and commit to the Saints game plan.
As for the game plan, clearly, he wasn't able to do something that Lyon wanted him to do. What precisely that was, I'm not sure.
I can't help but think though, that getting Lovett made losing Ball a non-factor for us.
Losing Lovett however, suddenly made it a factor.
I agree some on here have gone too far the other way in bagging Ball (probably after idolising him when he was here), but trying as hard as I can to have two eyes open, I can't find a spot for him if its not Armo.
As much as Armo doesn't have Ball's seasoned body, nor his clearance ability (currently anyway), I think in time (by finals 2010) his output for this team would exceed Ball's. I think Ball's defensive workrate gut running from contest to contest was the question, too often his opponent got easy ball.
Armo's big advantage over Ball is his goal sense and kicking penetration, as yet his ball winning and clearance ability is unproven.
I back him though.
One last thing on Ball, my disappointment in him is that I see the player he is supposed to be running around in Cats colours and I wonder why Ball never became this good. The player is Joel Selwood.
- rodgerfox
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 9059
- Joined: Wed 10 Mar 2004 9:10am
- Has thanked: 425 times
- Been thanked: 327 times
I thought he was directly opposed to Brock McLean, but ran hard forward to create opportunities and critical times in the game.samoht wrote:If Luke Ball has been reduced to a cheap goal kicking forward playing in space and 25 metres out and taking advantage of the fact that he is free and loose without an opponent - then he's losing even more of my respect.
Winning clearances is tough, kicking goals in doing so is very valuable.