Thomas should have listened to Butterss

barks4eva · Post: # 842119Post **barks4eva** » Tue 06 Oct 2009 12:59pm

Butterss wanted to draft Judd, but it was Thomas's decision to make and he instead chose to use this selection on Ball!

I'm still trying to figure out whether this decision by Thomas has cost us one, two or three premierships so far.

Admittedly Ball was crucified by Thomas who played him into the ground when his body was not right, which resulted in longer term ramifications, and ultimately rendered Ball a distant third behind Hodge and Judd in any pecking order, but Butterss was imploring we use the selection on Judd from the get go.

IMHO the St kilda football club should employ Thomas in an advisory role on recruiting, trading and drafting and when his considered judgement is offered, then do the exact opposite.

Rubbish Butterss all you want, but he wanted St kilda to draft Judd, NOT Ball, in the end this one decision has cost us so much.

So now Ball wants to play for the filth and Judd is now captain of the scum and we still do not have a premiership.

It could have been oh so different!

Yeah thanks Grant

Jewellzy · Post: # 842122Post **Jewellzy** » Tue 06 Oct 2009 1:04pm

I suggest anyone who keeps telling themselves we blew it with the Luke Ball pick, go back to 2004-05 and watch the games.

The guy was a stud. And had it've not been for OP, he'd be rated as highly if not higher than Judd and Hodge.

Go dig out a post from said era and show me where someone - ANYONE - who wished we drafted one of the other two over Ball.

Hindsight is a wonderful thing.

barks4eva · Post: # 842123Post **barks4eva** » Tue 06 Oct 2009 1:08pm

Jewellzy wrote: Hindsight is a wonderful thing.

Yes, wonderful foresight from Butterss, if ony Thomas had of listened to him.

SydneySainter · Tue 06 Oct 2009 1:12pm

Even if we had drafted Hodge or Judd, OP could have just had the same crippling effect on them while Ball became a premiership captain at the Eagles or Hawks.

Post: # 842128Post **n1ck** » Tue 06 Oct 2009 1:12pm

Jewellzy wrote:I suggest anyone who keeps telling themselves we blew it with the Luke Ball pick, go back to 2004-05 and watch the games.

The guy was a stud. And had it've not been for OP, he'd be rated as highly if not higher than Judd and Hodge.

Go dig out a post from said era and show me where someone - ANYONE - who wished we drafted one of the other two over Ball.

Hindsight is a wonderful thing.

Well said.

Thinline · Post: # 842129Post **Thinline** » Tue 06 Oct 2009 1:13pm

Barks, you wouldn't be fishing for Rodgers would you?

lefty · Post: # 842132Post **lefty** » Tue 06 Oct 2009 1:16pm

Is this topic a joke?

What if this, what if that, whinge whinge whinge, he did some good things, some things didnt work out. Get over it.

Stop blaming everything past and present on GT.

Post something useful or nothing at all.

I'm sure there's plenty of clubs who should of picked Nick Dal Santo or Joel Selwood too.

Animal Enclosure · Tue 06 Oct 2009 1:18pm

It is a bit sad to think that our riches from the 2001 draft are gradually eroding.

Ball, X, Goose all either gone, going or struggling.

Joey & Grammy going strong thankfully.

Eastern · Post: # 842147Post **Eastern** » Tue 06 Oct 2009 1:25pm

LET'S NOT LET THE FACTS GET IN THE WAY OF A GOOD STORY HERE

Yes, there was a link between Rod Butterss and Chris Judd. Rod Butterss was Chris Judd's coach in the under 14's or 15's at East Sandringham and offered an opinion at the time that he thought Judd was a very good player. NOTHING MORE, NOTHING LESS !!

hotdish · Post: # 842148Post **hotdish** » Tue 06 Oct 2009 1:26pm

So you are saying that Beverage had no say on the Ball selection Barks?

Who is to say that if Judd got drafted to the saints, that the rock hard Telstra Dome surface wouldn't have given him OP also...

matrix · Post: # 842162Post **matrix** » Tue 06 Oct 2009 1:38pm

didnt judd get op
and wouldnt have grant then just played him into the ground??
thus we end up in the same possie we are right now??

supersaints · Tue 06 Oct 2009 2:00pm

Ball was a gun until he was driven into the ground playing with injury, the reason Judd got out to pick three was that he had dodgy shoulders (in fact he had a shoulder operation prior to the draft, the medicos were concerned he would have re-occuring problems)... personally, i hope Bally changes his mind and stays...

Beej · Post: # 842210Post **Beej** » Tue 06 Oct 2009 2:14pm

In hindsight Butterss was right but, lets be honest, the sun even shines on a dog's ass sometimes.

You can't listen to a club president for recruiting advice.

Think about it, how pathetic would a club have to be be if they not only listened, but followed the advice of the club president on who to draft?

And club presidents don't belong in conversations regarding footballing matters. End of.

ausfatcat · Post: # 842216Post **ausfatcat** » Tue 06 Oct 2009 2:17pm

OLB wrote:In hindsight Butterss was right but, lets be honest, the sun even shines on a dog's ass sometimes.

Butters also strikes me as a person to make it up as well to try a diminish GT, This stuff about Butters wanting Judd before Ball only popped up years after the draft.

But the fact also remains it wasn't GT's decision and it certainly wasn't Butters decision either, it was Beveridge and he couldn't forsee OP was going to ruini Ball, no one could.

barks4eva · Post: # 842221Post **barks4eva** » Tue 06 Oct 2009 2:25pm

ausfatcat wrote: the fact also remains it wasn't GT's decision

Wrong, Thomas made the final call = FACT

For example Raph Clarke was 100% Thomas's call = FACT

McGough was 100% Thomas's call also for that matter!

ausfatcat · Post: # 842222Post **ausfatcat** » Tue 06 Oct 2009 2:27pm

Of course McGough was he was a trade but recruiting was Beveridge. Some people here seem to think the Ball/Judd decision was GT and Butters going at it in a office which is BS.

bigred · Post: # 842223Post **bigred** » Tue 06 Oct 2009 2:28pm

GT was a visionary.

Milton66 · Post: # 842224Post **Milton66** » Tue 06 Oct 2009 2:29pm

barks4eva · Post: # 842225Post **barks4eva** » Tue 06 Oct 2009 2:29pm

ausfatcat wrote:Of course McGough was he was a trade but recruit was Beveridge

Raph Clarke was not a trade!

Eastern · Post: # 842226Post **Eastern** » Tue 06 Oct 2009 2:31pm

barks4eva wrote:
ausfatcat wrote: the fact also remains it wasn't GT's decision
Wrong, Thomas made the final call = FACT

For example Raph Clarke was 100% Thomas's call = FACT

McGough was 100% Thomas's call also for that matter!

PROOF ?????????????????? !!

vacuous space · Tue 06 Oct 2009 2:45pm

Eastern wrote:PROOF?

There is none. It's internet fanfiction. Beveridge made the call. It just happened to be the wrong one. If the board had made some cash available in the recruiting process, we might have made less mistakes along the way. It's not like we stopped making mistakes after Thomas was gone. 06 we drafted Howard, traded for Birss and re-drafted Ferguson. 07 we re-drafted Gehrig before our last pick and traded for Charlie Gardiner.

Ball seemed like the right call at the time. Anyone who says otherwise is revising history.

barks4eva · Post: # 842249Post **barks4eva** » Tue 06 Oct 2009 2:54pm

PROOF?

I know this as FACT, I cannot tell you how, why or where this info came from and I'm sure you'd not want me to broadcast it over the net.

All I can tell you is, FACT

Thomas 100% = McGough, R. Clarke

Rendell, Thomas 100% = Brooks, Guerra, Acland

The man running the football department and coaching the team is going to make some calls on players, it's not rocket science to figure that much out.

For example, some picks were taken out of Beveridge's hands.

Choose to believe me or not, I don't really give a toss, but I assure you it's the gospel truth.

Anyway Thomas is gone, you really need to move on!

Saints43 · Post: # 842259Post **Saints43** » Tue 06 Oct 2009 3:02pm

You finished your repeti-tirades about GT wanting to trade Milne? Any reason?

fingers · Post: # 842264Post **fingers** » Tue 06 Oct 2009 3:03pm

barks4eva wrote: McGough was 100% Thomas's call also for that matter!

He will come good - he has to. I have his autographed number 30 jumper!!!!

Milton66 · Post: # 842267Post **Milton66** » Tue 06 Oct 2009 3:04pm

Saints43 wrote:You finished your repeti-tirades about GT wanting to trade Milne? Any reason?

... because GT was right!