The way contract offer withdrawn - Ball
Moderators: Saintsational Administrators, Saintsational Moderators
- Eastern
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 14357
- Joined: Tue 09 Mar 2004 1:46pm
- Location: 3132
- Been thanked: 1 time
It appears to me that the "Contract Offer" was withdrawn AFTER Ross and other St Kilda officials spoke to Luke at Etihad Stadium on Friday (around noon).
We do know that meeting lasted around 20 minutes but we don't know what was said. There must have been something that triggered this and we will probably NEVER know. Time to move on !!
We do know that meeting lasted around 20 minutes but we don't know what was said. There must have been something that triggered this and we will probably NEVER know. Time to move on !!
NEW scarf signature (hopefully with correct spelling) will be here as soon as it arrives !!
![Image](http://i116.photobucket.com/albums/o23/saintbrat/9c94369c.jpg)
![Image](http://i116.photobucket.com/albums/o23/saintbrat/9c94369c.jpg)
- barks4eva
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 10748
- Joined: Tue 09 Mar 2004 12:39pm
- Has thanked: 190 times
- Been thanked: 92 times
Who was the dingbat that put him on $600,000 to begin with?
Leaving aside the fact that Luke Ball was overpaid on the output he delivered while commanding big bucks and it appears from the outside he cracked the sulks a bit, when his new contract offer was for a very fair $350,000 which is absolutely necessary with salary cap restraints and the need to reward better performing players, ( where did Ball finish in the B&F, did he crack the top 15? ), the real issue here is, who is the numbnut who signed him up on $600,000 to begin with, seriously I mean FAIR DINKUM, who was this goofball?
Surely it's obvious to any perspicacious individual that the previous contract was eventually going to run out of petrol from the get go!
Leaving aside the fact that Luke Ball was overpaid on the output he delivered while commanding big bucks and it appears from the outside he cracked the sulks a bit, when his new contract offer was for a very fair $350,000 which is absolutely necessary with salary cap restraints and the need to reward better performing players, ( where did Ball finish in the B&F, did he crack the top 15? ), the real issue here is, who is the numbnut who signed him up on $600,000 to begin with, seriously I mean FAIR DINKUM, who was this goofball?
Surely it's obvious to any perspicacious individual that the previous contract was eventually going to run out of petrol from the get go!
DO THE MATHS AND THE SQUARES ARE ALL ROOTED.
I would be very surprised if the contract was still on the table right up until Friday. It would have been pulled IMO the moment he stated that he was seeking a trade. No reason to leave a contract on the table if a player has clearly stated they wish to be moved on. No fact or rumour behind this, it is just my opinion.Eastern wrote:It appears to me that the "Contract Offer" was withdrawn AFTER Ross and other St Kilda officials spoke to Luke at Etihad Stadium on Friday (around noon).
We do know that meeting lasted around 20 minutes but we don't know what was said. There must have been something that triggered this and we will probably NEVER know. Time to move on !!
Fortius Quo Fidelius
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 25303
- Joined: Tue 01 Feb 2005 4:25pm
- Location: Trump Tower
- Has thanked: 142 times
- Been thanked: 284 times
Apparently the $600K he received this year was because the contract was 'back ended', no one is actually sure of what the real figures were.saintspremiers wrote:Dunno, can anyone help??barks4eva wrote:Who was the dingbat that put him on $600,000 to begin with?
(is Bally the next GT? Have we finally found a replacement!!)
Speaking (or hinting) of GT, I had completely forgotten about him throughout this entire saga. God help us when he decides to chime in on the discussion somewhere down the line (which is bound to happen). Please let him keep his mouth shut for once..........
Fortius Quo Fidelius
Is it only us on here who can have an opinion?saint75 wrote:Apparently the $600K he received this year was because the contract was 'back ended', no one is actually sure of what the real figures were.saintspremiers wrote:Dunno, can anyone help??barks4eva wrote:Who was the dingbat that put him on $600,000 to begin with?
(is Bally the next GT? Have we finally found a replacement!!)
Speaking (or hinting) of GT, I had completely forgotten about him throughout this entire saga. God help us when he decides to chime in on the discussion somewhere down the line (which is bound to happen). Please let him keep his mouth shut for once..........
Not at all. Everyone seems to have chimed in with an opinion and to be honest, our opinions on here make no dent in the media. We are all just venting to make ourselves 'feel better' and to try and understand what in the hell is going on.plugger66 wrote:Is it only us on here who can have an opinion?saint75 wrote:Apparently the $600K he received this year was because the contract was 'back ended', no one is actually sure of what the real figures were.saintspremiers wrote:Dunno, can anyone help??barks4eva wrote:Who was the dingbat that put him on $600,000 to begin with?
(is Bally the next GT? Have we finally found a replacement!!)
Speaking (or hinting) of GT, I had completely forgotten about him throughout this entire saga. God help us when he decides to chime in on the discussion somewhere down the line (which is bound to happen). Please let him keep his mouth shut for once..........
GT's comments will be picked up that quickly (dependent on whether or not they are favourable to Ball or to St Kilda) due to his past issues with the previous administration. They media will run with them for days. Actually, as I was typing this, it occurred to me that if we do hear GT's opinions publicly, it will once and for all settle the debate as to whether GT truly loves the St Kilda Football Club or is more concerned with individual players.
Anyhoo, carry on.
Fortius Quo Fidelius
I'd say it was more likely it was withdrawn when he said I want to leave...Eastern wrote:It appears to me that the "Contract Offer" was withdrawn AFTER Ross and other St Kilda officials spoke to Luke at Etihad Stadium on Friday (around noon).
We do know that meeting lasted around 20 minutes but we don't know what was said. There must have been something that triggered this and we will probably NEVER know. Time to move on !!
- Spinner
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 8502
- Joined: Sat 02 Dec 2006 3:40pm
- Location: Victoria
- Has thanked: 185 times
- Been thanked: 133 times
Re: The way contract offer withdrawn - Ball
Correct.Mr Magic wrote:Who said it wasn't good enough?Spinner wrote:chook23 wrote:Does anyone else think RL could have handled the interview immediately after walking out of discussion room just after2pm yesterday.
In relation to the 3 year contract being recinded etc
Might it have been better to say the list management dept now that trading has been completed will be reviewing player contracts etc
The MEDIA in many articles/news and talkback today have really highlighted the withdrawal and the impact that would be having on LB and surrounding support
just seems to come across reflecting the club poorly
On another note pisses me off how the media making us out as the villan in the non trade........
Coll made promises (I pressume) to get him........when jolly became available he became the focus (and used the draft 14 pick that would have clinched the ball trade)
Like picking the puppy in the window and just as you about to leave with it it is put back because the kid picks the one in the next window.
How stupid do we look as an organisation to leave a contract on the table that was clearly not good enough to begin with....
I thought it had to be a given.
Luke Ball's manager.
The same manager who now claims St Kilda's offer was more than Collingwood's.
You can't have it both ways.
Luke Ball didn't sign the contract on offer since June. Therefore, not an adequate contract for whatever reason in the perspective of Luke.
Don't think your on the intended wavelength here, but having not signed the current offer would suggest that it wasn't what Luke wanted regardless of other factors.
We now go away and re-negotiate - Whether the offer ends up consisting of the same characteristics as the first might eventuate. But it needs to be re-assessed, it needs to be re-considered and it needs to be re-negotiated.
Much like what the club seems to be in the process of doing.
- Spinner
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 8502
- Joined: Sat 02 Dec 2006 3:40pm
- Location: Victoria
- Has thanked: 185 times
- Been thanked: 133 times
Im pretty sure Geelong didn't offer their first pick - In fact by memory it was a dispute between Geelong offering a third, and Essendon requesting a second rounder. Feel free to correct me if that was not the case thou....St Fidelius wrote:Too right!PJ wrote:bottom line
Who gives a rats whether we look like the bad guys - time we had this rep permanently - fear St.Kilda
St.Kilda got their man - A Lovett in trade
Ball - gets to think about himself, his manager and how he wants to end his career
Overall good outcome A+
Geelong offered Essendon their first pick last year and was knocked back, Lovett just played his best season to date, and we grabbed him with the same offer Geelong did last year.
A Great win!
I believe he was underpriced last year - and obviously overpriced a little this year....But there was competition (Bris and Port) so if thats what it took to secure a targeted player, then im extremely happy with that.
Didn't Ball win a B&F prior to the last contract or was it after? Perhaps it was, but it almost sounds like from most media sources that this guy has never been able to play.
Sounds like he was overrated in the first place if that is the case. Like I've said elsewhere, I'm still highly confused by all of this. Sounds like we're talking about some borderline player that can barely play. I recall some B Grade hack ripping the ball from a clutch of players, swivelling and hitting a guy on the chest 30m away in a GF no less.
Players CAN have off years. Fair enough that he's hardly been at the top of his game in recent times, but surely surely we have a little bit of forward projection. We all know that he's been hit by injury issues, but he looked to have freed up in 2009. He was just being beaten to the ball by a hungry group including some reasonable types called Hayes, Dal Santo, and Montagna.
Still confused.
Sounds like he was overrated in the first place if that is the case. Like I've said elsewhere, I'm still highly confused by all of this. Sounds like we're talking about some borderline player that can barely play. I recall some B Grade hack ripping the ball from a clutch of players, swivelling and hitting a guy on the chest 30m away in a GF no less.
Players CAN have off years. Fair enough that he's hardly been at the top of his game in recent times, but surely surely we have a little bit of forward projection. We all know that he's been hit by injury issues, but he looked to have freed up in 2009. He was just being beaten to the ball by a hungry group including some reasonable types called Hayes, Dal Santo, and Montagna.
Still confused.
2009 - the year of the Saint (modified name from MasonCJ2)
- rodgerfox
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 9059
- Joined: Wed 10 Mar 2004 9:10am
- Has thanked: 425 times
- Been thanked: 327 times
Clearly.Lennon wrote:That doesn't mean that it was.Milton66 wrote:The club offered him a contract which they thought was fair and reasonable.
And clearly, it wouldn't have been.
We aren't saints here, pardon the pun.
There is a clear precedent of not respecting dudes that have been at the club prior to Lyon arriving.
He loves his own guys, but doesn't rate some others that were there prior. Goose, Max and Ball and obvious examples.
Whereas the dudes he has brought to the club, or specifically kept at the club, appear to be in favour.
I have no issue with this (although I think Lyon has got it wrong several times with selection and recruitment) as long as we keep winning.
But please let's not get high and mightly and think our club is doing anyone favours. We aren't.
We're being pricks I think.
And again, who cares if we're winning?
Just a tiny tiny generalisation right thereHe loves his own guys, but doesn't rate some others that were there prior. Goose, Max and Ball and obvious examples.
If he keeps getting us to GF's he can rate anyone he likes quite frankly..thats his job as senior coach and hes way more qualified than you or me to make those calls
You need to put "In my opinion" in your posts a whole lot more and less of "clearly" and "obviously" and "anyone can see".
![Image](http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v131/littlemiter/66sig.jpg)
THE BUBBLE HAS BURST
2011 player sponsor
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 6656
- Joined: Tue 09 Mar 2004 12:24pm
- Location: Hotel Bastardos
- Has thanked: 197 times
- Been thanked: 166 times
- Contact:
This would be the case with a change of coach at any club though. You always lose a few players, and there are always a few that the previous coach didn't rate too highly that step up with the opportunity to impress someone new.rodgerfox wrote:
There is a clear precedent of not respecting dudes that have been at the club prior to Lyon arriving.
He loves his own guys, but doesn't rate some others that were there prior. Goose, Max and Ball and obvious examples.
Whereas the dudes he has brought to the club, or specifically kept at the club, appear to be in favour.
From the supporters angle:- You aren't respecting our heroes.
From the coach's angle:- Prove yourself, reputation isn't enough.
Since Adam was a boy.
*Allegedly.
Bring back Lucky Burgers, and nobody gets hurt.
You can't un-fry things.
Last Post
Bring back Lucky Burgers, and nobody gets hurt.
You can't un-fry things.
Last Post
- Milton66
- SS Life Member
- Posts: 3521
- Joined: Tue 19 May 2009 9:53pm
- Location: None of your goddam business
Yeah, but... why wouldn't you love your guys considering that you recruited them in the first place because they suit your brand of footy?satchmo wrote:This would be the case with a change of coach at any club though. You always lose a few players, and there are always a few that the previous coach didn't rate too highly that step up with the opportunity to impress someone new.rodgerfox wrote:
There is a clear precedent of not respecting dudes that have been at the club prior to Lyon arriving.
He loves his own guys, but doesn't rate some others that were there prior. Goose, Max and Ball and obvious examples.
Whereas the dudes he has brought to the club, or specifically kept at the club, appear to be in favour.
From the supporters angle:- You aren't respecting our heroes.
From the coach's angle:- Prove yourself, reputation isn't enough.
Since Adam was a boy.
The downside is that you get rid off players who can't... regardles of reputation or name. That's life in AFL and all codes of sport.
I mean, you don't just recruit a player because you are infatuated by them.
Clearly there have been players who are unsuited to his requirements... and some like Mini and Dal have reinvented themselves.
Hotel De Los Muertos: Your room is ready... Care to step inside?
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 6656
- Joined: Tue 09 Mar 2004 12:24pm
- Location: Hotel Bastardos
- Has thanked: 197 times
- Been thanked: 166 times
- Contact:
Precactly!Milton66 wrote:Yeah, but... why wouldn't you love your guys considering that you recruited them in the first place because they suit your brand of footy?satchmo wrote:This would be the case with a change of coach at any club though. You always lose a few players, and there are always a few that the previous coach didn't rate too highly that step up with the opportunity to impress someone new.rodgerfox wrote:
There is a clear precedent of not respecting dudes that have been at the club prior to Lyon arriving.
He loves his own guys, but doesn't rate some others that were there prior. Goose, Max and Ball and obvious examples.
Whereas the dudes he has brought to the club, or specifically kept at the club, appear to be in favour.
From the supporters angle:- You aren't respecting our heroes.
From the coach's angle:- Prove yourself, reputation isn't enough.
Since Adam was a boy.
The downside is that you get rid off players who can't... regardles of reputation or name. That's life in AFL and all codes of sport.
I mean, you don't just recruit a player because you are infatuated by them.
Clearly there have been players who are unsuited to his requirements... and some like Mini and Dal have reinvented themselves.
*Allegedly.
Bring back Lucky Burgers, and nobody gets hurt.
You can't un-fry things.
Last Post
Bring back Lucky Burgers, and nobody gets hurt.
You can't un-fry things.
Last Post
- Milton66
- SS Life Member
- Posts: 3521
- Joined: Tue 19 May 2009 9:53pm
- Location: None of your goddam business
Adam sends his regards.satchmo wrote:Precactly!Milton66 wrote:Yeah, but... why wouldn't you love your guys considering that you recruited them in the first place because they suit your brand of footy?satchmo wrote:This would be the case with a change of coach at any club though. You always lose a few players, and there are always a few that the previous coach didn't rate too highly that step up with the opportunity to impress someone new.rodgerfox wrote:
There is a clear precedent of not respecting dudes that have been at the club prior to Lyon arriving.
He loves his own guys, but doesn't rate some others that were there prior. Goose, Max and Ball and obvious examples.
Whereas the dudes he has brought to the club, or specifically kept at the club, appear to be in favour.
From the supporters angle:- You aren't respecting our heroes.
From the coach's angle:- Prove yourself, reputation isn't enough.
Since Adam was a boy.
The downside is that you get rid off players who can't... regardles of reputation or name. That's life in AFL and all codes of sport.
I mean, you don't just recruit a player because you are infatuated by them.
Clearly there have been players who are unsuited to his requirements... and some like Mini and Dal have reinvented themselves.
![Very Happy :D](./images/smilies/icon_biggrin.gif)
Hotel De Los Muertos: Your room is ready... Care to step inside?
-
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 6656
- Joined: Tue 09 Mar 2004 12:24pm
- Location: Hotel Bastardos
- Has thanked: 197 times
- Been thanked: 166 times
- Contact:
I think that Ross absolutely nailed it. You wouldn't want to be the one standing between him and the premiership!markp wrote:Yup, the shallow veneer of professionalism surrounding Lyon is just a cheap facade which barely covers the fact that he is running the place like his own personal fiefdom, and he is removing certain 'out of favour' players like a petulant teen deleting friends on facebook.
He must be stopped.
*Allegedly.
Bring back Lucky Burgers, and nobody gets hurt.
You can't un-fry things.
Last Post
Bring back Lucky Burgers, and nobody gets hurt.
You can't un-fry things.
Last Post
Wow - huge statement.rodgerfox wrote:
There is a clear precedent of not respecting dudes that have been at the club prior to Lyon arriving.
Roo
Kosi
Lenny
Dal
Milne
Blake
Gilbert
Joey
bj
Sam Fisher
Baker
off the top of my head - all seem to be pretty well respected by the coach.
Weren't they all there prior to RL coming on board?
Lance or James??
There comes a point in every man's life when he has to say, "Enough is enough." For me, that time is now. I have been dealing with claims that I cheated and had an unfair advantage in <redacted>. Over the past three years, I have been subjected to a <redacted>investigation followed by <redacted> witch hunt. The toll this has taken on my family, and my work for <redacted>and on me leads me to where I am today – finished with this nonsense. (Oops just got a spontaneous errection <unredacted>)
There comes a point in every man's life when he has to say, "Enough is enough." For me, that time is now. I have been dealing with claims that I cheated and had an unfair advantage in <redacted>. Over the past three years, I have been subjected to a <redacted>investigation followed by <redacted> witch hunt. The toll this has taken on my family, and my work for <redacted>and on me leads me to where I am today – finished with this nonsense. (Oops just got a spontaneous errection <unredacted>)
- Dis Believer
- Saintsational Legend
- Posts: 5088
- Joined: Sun 28 Mar 2004 1:42pm
- Location: The terraces at Moorabbin, in the pouring rain.......
- Has thanked: 256 times
- Been thanked: 272 times
You're kidding, right? In three years the guy got us within 5 minutes of the elusive 2nd premiership that our club has been chasing for over 4 decades and you think he got some of his recruitment and selection wrong ???rodgerfox wrote:Clearly.
And clearly, it wouldn't have been.
We aren't saints here, pardon the pun.
There is a clear precedent of not respecting dudes that have been at the club prior to Lyon arriving.
He loves his own guys, but doesn't rate some others that were there prior. Goose, Max and Ball and obvious examples.
Whereas the dudes he has brought to the club, or specifically kept at the club, appear to be in favour.
I have no issue with this (although I think Lyon has got it wrong several times with selection and recruitment) as long as we keep winning.
But please let's not get high and mightly and think our club is doing anyone favours. We aren't.
We're being pricks I think.
And again, who cares if we're winning?
I think your inadequacies are showing there ol' dodgy.
I hope he keeps on getting it "wrong" in your opinion then, because so far he has seemed to recruit specific to need, do great value trades (no pick 6 & 31 for a gumby ruckman) and has an eye on the future at the same time (lots of bottom age kids in the last draft with an eye on the compromised drafts coming up).
Other than the Ball saga this year, which clearly has more than just RL behind it, I can't think of too much he has done wrong, other than the initial tinkering required to his game plan to get it right. I don't think even the most naive of us would expect a first-timer to have it perfect from the get-go would they?
The heavy metal artist formerly known as True Believer!
IF you look around the room and can't identify who the sucker is, then it's probably you!
IF you look around the room and can't identify who the sucker is, then it's probably you!
- Milton66
- SS Life Member
- Posts: 3521
- Joined: Tue 19 May 2009 9:53pm
- Location: None of your goddam business
Hmmmmm.
Well it's pretty obvious that Ross was in love with Bin Laden and instigated the 9/11 bombings... which in turn sowed the seeds for the global financial crisis, just to protect player that he recruited at the expense of Luke Ball.
Is it any wonder poor old Luke decided to leave?
I think Rodgerfox is on to something here.![Rolling Eyes :roll:](./images/smilies/icon_rolleyes.gif)
Well it's pretty obvious that Ross was in love with Bin Laden and instigated the 9/11 bombings... which in turn sowed the seeds for the global financial crisis, just to protect player that he recruited at the expense of Luke Ball.
Is it any wonder poor old Luke decided to leave?
I think Rodgerfox is on to something here.
![Rolling Eyes :roll:](./images/smilies/icon_rolleyes.gif)
Hotel De Los Muertos: Your room is ready... Care to step inside?
-
- Club Player
- Posts: 1357
- Joined: Wed 07 Apr 2004 8:42pm
The question is I believe ....given a coach inherits a list , then over time develops a game style .... some existing players will be suitable and some not. What is a coach to do ? alter his game plan to 'accomodate' the list ? or try to convert players to the style required by the game plan / style ?
Unless Ball could deliver as required , then he becomes surplus irrespective of his past place in the team and achievements.
Re the 3 yr contract offer . We dont know the terms , but obviously it reflected Ball's preceived value . An offer can be accepted until it is withdrawn .....this seems what happened. There is no obligation to re offer just cos Ball / Collingwood couldnt do the deal.
Much as I love Ball it seems he must go ....unless by some slight chance he can 'make up' and be accepted back !
I fear its too late ....... good luck Bally
Unless Ball could deliver as required , then he becomes surplus irrespective of his past place in the team and achievements.
Re the 3 yr contract offer . We dont know the terms , but obviously it reflected Ball's preceived value . An offer can be accepted until it is withdrawn .....this seems what happened. There is no obligation to re offer just cos Ball / Collingwood couldnt do the deal.
Much as I love Ball it seems he must go ....unless by some slight chance he can 'make up' and be accepted back !
I fear its too late ....... good luck Bally