Saintsational Fan Forum - A passionate community of St Kilda Football Club fans discussing news, history, players, trade rumours, results, AFL stats and more.
aussiejones wrote:If Luke was not performing , why did we offer him a 3 year deal at all ?
His form 'significantly' dropped off, interestingly enough, after the contract was put on the table. He was performing, but not to the level that was required or accepted at St Kllda. Their was a role for him at St Kilda, but he chose not to adapt/improve.
he was still one of our better players .....top three or four .....in the first half of the grand final.....then his game time was significantly reduced....
......because who in the hell knows with his groin whether he was capable of playing any more game time.......
We can all post different theories, doesn't make them accurate though
what is accurate is that luke played less than 50% of the game and still got over 20 possessions..
what i have also accurately reported is that ross said that he should have been given two more 6 minute bursts on the ground......he was no more stuffed...imhfo...that any of the other 21 players...and should have in fact, been fresher.....i'm only going on what are known facts and what i heard said with my own ears .....no theories whatsoever....
.everybody still loves lenny....and we always will
"Freedom of expression is the cornerstone of a free society,"
However, freedom of expression is not encouraged in certain forums.
aussiejones wrote:If Luke was not performing , why did we offer him a 3 year deal at all ?
His form 'significantly' dropped off, interestingly enough, after the contract was put on the table. He was performing, but not to the level that was required or accepted at St Kllda. Their was a role for him at St Kilda, but he chose not to adapt/improve.
My take is that Luke's form dropped off because his fitness levels dropped off. His fitness levels dropped off because he was unable to BOTH train during the week and play on the weekends because of his on-going condition. Dave Misson put Luke on a "mini pre-season" around the time he was dropped to the VFL (widely reported) in an attempt to get his body right. There may have been some differing opinions on the type of program Luke needed to follow on this leading to some communication breakdown. Dave Misson has the score on the board in relation to fitness & conditioning, so I would back his judgement on this !!
none of what you have posted is in dispute....
.everybody still loves lenny....and we always will
"Freedom of expression is the cornerstone of a free society,"
However, freedom of expression is not encouraged in certain forums.
aussiejones wrote:If Luke was not performing , why did we offer him a 3 year deal at all ?
His form 'significantly' dropped off, interestingly enough, after the contract was put on the table. He was performing, but not to the level that was required or accepted at St Kllda. Their was a role for him at St Kilda, but he chose not to adapt/improve.
he was still one of our better players .....top three or four .....in the first half of the grand final.....then his game time was significantly reduced....
......because who in the hell knows with his groin whether he was capable of playing any more game time.......
We can all post different theories, doesn't make them accurate though
what is accurate is that luke played less than 50% of the game and still got over 20 possessions..
what i have also accurately reported is that ross said that he should have been given two more 6 minute bursts on the ground......he was no more stuffed...imhfo...that any of the other 21 players...and should have in fact, been fresher.....i'm only going on what are known facts and what i heard said with my own ears .....no theories whatsoever....
Read what I wrote. Who was to say that his groin could have coped with the extra game time, not just in the GF but all year? He has been struggling with it, which is a well known fact also.
Also, had Luke had extra game time, do you actually believe it would have made such a huge difference to the result? Wouldn't have helped Milne, Schneider or McQualter with their goal kicking accuracy......this was the area that really let us down IMHFO!
The fact is that from June of this year, St Kilda has been offering Luke Ball a 3-year deal.
Three years is a significant contract in footy, and very much says that Ball was a required player at the club.
Nothing Ross Lyon did changes this - he dropped him for undisclosed reasons, but Ball played every finals game. You pick your absolute best 22 for the finals, and Ball was part of this.
Three year contract + selection for the finals + investing time to improve Ball's fitness and condition = I don't see what more St Kilda could have done to keep him at the club.
You can't guarantee someone gametime in a contract, but we've done everything else possible.
SainterK wrote:I'm not great at maths, but was does an additional 12 minutes to for his TOG...wouldn't it still be similar to what he has been averaging of late?
i'm only going with what the coach said ffs....
.everybody still loves lenny....and we always will
"Freedom of expression is the cornerstone of a free society,"
However, freedom of expression is not encouraged in certain forums.
Legendary wrote:
Three year contract + selection for the finals + investing time to improve Ball's fitness and condition = I don't see what more St Kilda could have done to keep him at the club.
Show me the MONEY is what is missing from this equation.
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>)
aussiejones wrote:If Luke was not performing , why did we offer him a 3 year deal at all ?
His form 'significantly' dropped off, interestingly enough, after the contract was put on the table. He was performing, but not to the level that was required or accepted at St Kllda. Their was a role for him at St Kilda, but he chose not to adapt/improve.
he was still one of our better players .....top three or four .....in the first half of the grand final.....then his game time was significantly reduced....
......because who in the hell knows with his groin whether he was capable of playing any more game time.......
We can all post different theories, doesn't make them accurate though
what is accurate is that luke played less than 50% of the game and still got over 20 possessions..
what i have also accurately reported is that ross said that he should have been given two more 6 minute bursts on the ground......he was no more stuffed...imhfo...that any of the other 21 players...and should have in fact, been fresher.....i'm only going on what are known facts and what i heard said with my own ears .....no theories whatsoever....
Read what I wrote. Who was to say that his groin could have coped with the extra game time, not just in the GF but all year? He has been struggling with it, which is a well known fact also.
Also, had Luke had extra game time, do you actually believe it would have made such a huge difference to the result? Wouldn't have helped Milne, Schneider or McQualter with their goal kicking accuracy......this was the area that really let us down IMHFO!
i accept what you say..re the grand final.but he does get the hard ball....as he did when the scores were level in round 14 when he kicked to the goal square for gardiner to mark......one of those in the final quarter would
have been good.....
as to his supposed stuffed groin....i am not so sure...the club denies he still has op.....if he does it is not a well known fact as claimed by you...and the filth would not be willing to part for a coll half mill if it was....
.everybody still loves lenny....and we always will
"Freedom of expression is the cornerstone of a free society,"
However, freedom of expression is not encouraged in certain forums.
SainterK wrote:I'm not great at maths, but was does an additional 12 minutes to for his TOG...wouldn't it still be similar to what he has been averaging of late?
i'm only going with what the coach said ffs....
I am only going by what the coach says...but I am not convinced that is all you're going by.
No need to get huffy, I am just asking would a couple of percentages more in the TOG convinced him to stay....and I don't think so.
I agree Stinger. He is BRILLIANT when it comes to getting the hard ball regardless of his other deficiencies.
We all loved Luke and I think his actions are what have upset the St Kilda faithful so much. I believe the coaching and fitness staff would have worked very closely with him over the preseason to get him fit and to manage both his groin and fitness issues to get him more game time this year. For whatever the reason, Luke was not satisfied with this.
saint75 wrote:I agree Stinger. He is BRILLIANT when it comes to getting the hard ball regardless of his other deficiencies.
We all loved Luke and I think his actions are what have upset the St Kilda faithful so much. I believe the coaching and fitness staff would have worked very closely with him over the preseason to get him fit and to manage both his groin and fitness issues to get him more game time this year. For whatever the reason, Luke was not satisfied with this.
i agree with those comments...all of them....
.everybody still loves lenny....and we always will
"Freedom of expression is the cornerstone of a free society,"
However, freedom of expression is not encouraged in certain forums.
SainterK wrote:I'm not great at maths, but was does an additional 12 minutes to for his TOG...wouldn't it still be similar to what he has been averaging of late?
i'm only going with what the coach said ffs....
I am only going by what the coach says...but I am not convinced that is all you're going by.
No need to get huffy, I am just asking would a couple of percentages more in the TOG convinced him to stay....and I don't think so.
no...i think he started making plans when he got dropped just as the club started to make theirs when they thought he might baulk at signing a substantially reduced contract...
.everybody still loves lenny....and we always will
"Freedom of expression is the cornerstone of a free society,"
However, freedom of expression is not encouraged in certain forums.
Moods wrote:
GT was the one who allowed Ball to finish his schooling and rest his OP, even when we could probably have done with him playing in 03. He even allowed him to play footy for Xavier College as well! How many #2 draft picks get that luxury whilst getting paid 40k a year?
Don't know about #2 picks, but have you heard oft a #1 pick named Jack Watts?
Moods wrote:
GT was the one who allowed Ball to finish his schooling and rest his OP, even when we could probably have done with him playing in 03. He even allowed him to play footy for Xavier College as well! How many #2 draft picks get that luxury whilst getting paid 40k a year?
Don't know about #2 picks, but have you heard oft a #1 pick named Jack Watts?
It is all about how young the player is.
Remeber Jack Steven talking about putting his Scool bag next To Harvey's looker when he first arived.
And as to Ball playing for Xavier....I do not know what the logic is that states that it is ok to play school footy with OP..but AFL not. If he needed rest he should not have been playing period. Xavier, Scorpions or Seniors!!
Flying the World in comfort thanks to FF Points....
Moods wrote:
GT was the one who allowed Ball to finish his schooling and rest his OP, even when we could probably have done with him playing in 03. He even allowed him to play footy for Xavier College as well! How many #2 draft picks get that luxury whilst getting paid 40k a year?
Don't know about #2 picks, but have you heard oft a #1 pick named Jack Watts?
Yes I have. Why? He played at the scorpions didn't he? He also played 3-4 very average games for the dees in his 1st year. How is that similar to Luke?
Moods wrote:
GT was the one who allowed Ball to finish his schooling and rest his OP, even when we could probably have done with him playing in 03. He even allowed him to play footy for Xavier College as well! How many #2 draft picks get that luxury whilst getting paid 40k a year?
Don't know about #2 picks, but have you heard oft a #1 pick named Jack Watts?
Yes I have. Why? He played at the scorpions didn't he? He also played 3-4 very average games for the dees in his 1st year. How is that similar to Luke?
He also played for Brighton Grammar, Only played for Scorps and Melbourne when his school footy allowed.
I'm pretty sure Luke played some games for the Scorps in 2002.
Luke saw Steven and he saw Armitage and he saw his OP and saw the writing on the wall. If he wants to play as an integral part of a senior AFL team he needs to do it at another club.
If we didn't lose Luke Ball this year, we'd have lost Armitage the next.
I feel for the kid. Couldda been anything. Thomas threw him under packs when he was 19, injured, and still finding his feet. That's when you play them at half back and let them get used to the big bodies. Grant Thomas and that f***-knuckle incompetent mother fucker Chris Jones - guy who's dimwitted ineptitude cost us at least one, probably two flags (04 and 05) - the meat-and-potatoes guy (some will know what I'm talking about), destroyed Luke Ball and that's the sad thing about all this.
Ball and his family are said to be disappointed with his lack of chances at St Kilda.
Flipside is: How on EARTH can a player be guaranteed game time?
How can a bloke who's injury-riddled form has been bordering on s*** for years make demands of a club like this?
And how can he do that when he knows he's being paid over and above his value?
I was angry to start with when all this started.
Now I just think Bally's a flaky dud.
Pathetic.
Good riddance.
"The inches we need are everywhere around us. They're in every break in the game. Every minute, every second. On this team we fight for that inch. On this team we tear ourselves and everyone around us to pieces for that inch. We claw with our fingernails for that inch. Because we know when we add up all those inches that's gonna make the f***in' difference between winning and losing! Between living and dying!'
Aside from his dummy spit for lack of game time what gets me with Ball is the recent comments of how "untennable" it would suddenly be to remain a saint.
Sure HE may not have said it...- mum couldve (how olds this bloke?), his manager couldve but Lukes a big boy.......he PAYS his manager to act on his behalf and if these comments from "Lukes camp" are gonna be thrown out there in the media...Luke (from Saints fans anyway) cant expect anything else other than to be judged by them. Facts are - buck stops with Luke (clearly....)
I stood there at Etihad the miserable day after a GF loss listening to Lukey boy praise the super coaching dept at St Kilda who were "always supportive, kept communicating with me and at no stage left me wondering what I need to do to improve" - I actually walked away and thought...."you know after the tough year this bliokes had......the great game he put in.....he's going to come back bigger and better in 2010.........week later "I want to go to Collingwood..." FFS
From that we are now "untennable" ???
IF I were Luke I would be saying to my manager - I want to go to Collinwgood - Im not interested in p!ssing on everyone at St Kilda on the way out......do the deal....do it with some thought to MY reputation AND GRACE cause make no mistake Ball's "squeeky clean nice guy" image will be tarnished by throwing mud.
I realise to some its just saints supporters who cant stand to see one of their own, justifiably earning a living in another clubs colors - but its not that its how you handle yourself - and whether Luke likes it or not these comments and HIS managers actions are an extension of him and will be perceived so.
Teflon wrote:Aside from his dummy spit for lack of game time what gets me with Ball is the recent comments of how "untennable" it would suddenly be to remain a saint.
Sure HE may not have said it...- mum couldve (how olds this bloke?), his manager couldve but Lukes a big boy.......he PAYS his manager to act on his behalf and if these comments from "Lukes camp" are gonna be thrown out there in the media...Luke (from Saints fans anyway) cant expect anything else other than to be judged by them. Facts are - buck stops with Luke (clearly....)
I stood there at Etihad the miserable day after a GF loss listening to Lukey boy praise the super coaching dept at St Kilda who were "always supportive, kept communicating with me and at no stage left me wondering what I need to do to improve" - I actually walked away and thought...."you know after the tough year this bliokes had......the great game he put in.....he's going to come back bigger and better in 2010.........week later "I want to go to Collingwood..." FFS
From that we are now "untennable" ???
IF I were Luke I would be saying to my manager - I want to go to Collinwgood - Im not interested in p!ssing on everyone at St Kilda on the way out......do the deal....do it with some thought to MY reputation AND GRACE cause make no mistake Ball's "squeeky clean nice guy" image will be tarnished by throwing mud.
I realise to some its just saints supporters who cant stand to see one of their own, justifiably earning a living in another clubs colors - but its not that its how you handle yourself - and whether Luke likes it or not these comments and HIS managers actions are an extension of him and will be perceived so.
Very dissapointed.
i agree with those comments...i too was at the dome and was impressed with luke...there has got to be more in it....
.everybody still loves lenny....and we always will
"Freedom of expression is the cornerstone of a free society,"
However, freedom of expression is not encouraged in certain forums.
Teflon wrote:Aside from his dummy spit for lack of game time what gets me with Ball is the recent comments of how "untennable" it would suddenly be to remain a saint.
Sure HE may not have said it...- mum couldve (how olds this bloke?), his manager couldve but Lukes a big boy.......he PAYS his manager to act on his behalf and if these comments from "Lukes camp" are gonna be thrown out there in the media...Luke (from Saints fans anyway) cant expect anything else other than to be judged by them. Facts are - buck stops with Luke (clearly....)
I stood there at Etihad the miserable day after a GF loss listening to Lukey boy praise the super coaching dept at St Kilda who were "always supportive, kept communicating with me and at no stage left me wondering what I need to do to improve" - I actually walked away and thought...."you know after the tough year this bliokes had......the great game he put in.....he's going to come back bigger and better in 2010.........week later "I want to go to Collingwood..." FFS
From that we are now "untennable" ???
IF I were Luke I would be saying to my manager - I want to go to Collinwgood - Im not interested in p!ssing on everyone at St Kilda on the way out......do the deal....do it with some thought to MY reputation AND GRACE cause make no mistake Ball's "squeeky clean nice guy" image will be tarnished by throwing mud.
I realise to some its just saints supporters who cant stand to see one of their own, justifiably earning a living in another clubs colors - but its not that its how you handle yourself - and whether Luke likes it or not these comments and HIS managers actions are an extension of him and will be perceived so.
Thinline wrote:
How can a bloke who's injury-riddled form has been bordering on s*** for years make demands of a club like this?
So now he's been bordering on s*** for years, huh?
Lmao.
If that were true, nobody would care that he was leaving.
It's all very well to jump and down because someone in Luke's camp said his position is untenable at St Kilda... say he's mudslinging and damaging his reputation... but I tell you, some on here aren't exactly covering themselves with glory either.
Thinline wrote:
How can a bloke who's injury-riddled form has been bordering on s*** for years make demands of a club like this?
So now he's been bordering on s*** for years, huh?
Lmao.
If that were true, nobody would care that he was leaving.
It's all very well to jump and down because someone in Luke's camp said his position is untenable at St Kilda... say he's mudslinging and damaging his reputation... but I tell you, some on here aren't exactly covering themselves with glory either.
Thanks lemon....cause we really MATTER on here..FFS..
SainterK wrote:
Ball and his family are said to be disappointed with his lack of chances at St Kilda.
If he's disapointed by having the chance to play in a GRAND FINAL then he is going to the right place. If he wasnt picked I would understand. He was in the team on the day, thats the biggest chance in football and a lot of players don't even get that opportunity.
