Ball deserves better

18/11/2009 11:11 AM

Paul Gough

Sportal

Luke Ball is turning out to be the best advertisement the AFL Players' Association could have ever hoped for in its long-running push to secure some sort of free agency for the players.

But unfortunately Ball's choice of preferred club highlights the reason why free agency is about as popular with footy fans as a rise in ticket prices and why as a result the AFL continues to resist any moves by the AFLPA to introduce free agency.

The former St Kilda captain wants to move to Collingwood - the biggest and most despised (at least by non-Magpies fans) club in the game - and is desperately hoping he can last long enough in Thursday night's national draft to be taken by the Magpies at pick 30.

But with a host of other clubs also interested in the 2005 best-and-fairest winner and with those clubs having in some cases multiple selections before the Magpies - who gave away their first-round pick in this year's draft, as well as selection 46, to secure former Sydney ruckman Darren Jolly, Ball is going to find it hard to get to his preferred club.

And as far as most AFL fans of the non-Collingwood persuasion are concerned, well, that is simply bad luck.

After all, they argue if free agency - which allows players to move freely between clubs rather than in the current restricted form of either through the October trade period or in the November national draft or pre-season draft - surely it would be the rich and powerful clubs such as Collingwood that would benefit the most.

Fans of battling clubs or those not considered to be amongst the glamour clubs of the competition such as Port Adelaide, Western Bulldogs, North Melbourne and Melbourne fear that if free agency is introduced then countless players will choose to move from their clubs to the likes of Collingwood, Carlton, Essendon and West Coast.

But if the salary cap and current list sizes, restricting the number of players any club can have on its list, remain in place then not every player can play for Collingwood should free agency be introduced.

And in Ball's case it's not as if he walked out on the Saints just because he wanted to play for Collingwood.

Instead Ball - one of the hardest working, most respected and likable players in the AFL, was harshly treated by the club he has given sterling service over the past

Photograph Copyright : Getty Images

Page12 3 »

Vodafone McLaren Mercedes

Strap yourself in and drive a Vodafone McLaren Mercedes F1 car thanks to Johnnie Walker

Comments

Posted by travis at

24/11/2009 04:34 PM

if Luke ball is the hardest working player you say he is why is didnt he lift his game after being dropped ?? and its the fact Luke wont talk to any other clubs that makes him the villan !! Luke Ball isnt hard done by he is an ego driven primadonna who wasnt preared to work harder to EARN his spot in the strong Saints side !!

Posted by Hernendez at

24/11/2009 06:04 PM

what a complete load of nonsense...people are not looking at Luke Ball as the villian of trade week rather a guy who wanted something, but who was dealing with a potential new employer(Collingwood) who refused to give anything up of note to St Kilda for the services of a former captain, all australian and Best & Fairest winner..to suggest he was worth a mid 2nd round pick is offensive to both St KIlda and also where they really rate Luke Ball, they nominated many young players Nathan Brown being one of many yet they refused to consider any other alternatives. St Kilda thought Andrew Lovett was worth a 1st round pick, aged 27 with priors, Carlton thought Brock Mclean was worth their first round pick pick 11 and its questionable if he has reached his full potential, then Collingwood thought Jolly was worth their first round pick he is a crash and bash ruckman who is 28...too often the Pies refuse to play fair in regards to trading equitably

Posted by Allan Jankie at

24/11/2009 06:12 PM

What a complete load of rubbish. Do you work for Paul Connors? The facts, that you neglected to mention in your thinly veiled attack on St Kilda are these:- St Kilda offered Ball a new contract in June/July He chose not to sign it. Yes it was worth susbstantially less than the overinflated money he was on as a result of a heavily back-ended contract signed when he was Club Captain, B&F winner and AA. But it stiull represented 4-5% of St Kilda's total salary cap and was a fair indication of his current value. St Kilda has consistantly stated that Ball was a required player. Ball chose to ask to be traded to Collingwood and nobody else. The deal wasn't completed because Collingwood refused to offer anything near Ball's fair value to St Kilda. In fact St Kilda asked only for what Western Bulldogs wanted for Everitt - a pick inside the top 22. If Brock McLean was worth pick #11 from Carlton then what is Ball worth? Instead they opted to 'deal' like they always do

Posted by David G at

24/11/2009 06:38 PM

Ball has shown himself to be a puffed up little princess who's taken his bat and ball and stormed off instead of putting his head down, working hard on the issues that the coach has with his game and forcing his way back into being one of the first chosen. It's absolute bollocks to suggest that he's been hard done by. He couldn't handle the hard work required of him and his overinflated ego, at least partly so because he was previously overpaid, and he couldn't deal with the reality of his actual value on the market as distinct from what he thinks he's worth. If he's such a hot commodity how come Collingwood weren't willing to part with a first rounder for him? That fact indicates his actual market value, not Ball's own opinion of himself, or Connors. He's made his own bed and now people are saying he's hard done by. Pffffftt!

Posted by Harry at

24/11/2009 08:39 PM

"Luke Ball is now at the mercy of the draft." How apt after he attempted to hold StKilda at the mercy of Collingwood by nominating only one club during the trade period! The simple fact is, which any rational trader will already know, is that Luke Ball attempted to leave StKilda in return for nothing to have the maximum chance of a priemership next year. This is the perfect advertisment for NOT having free agency - players having one last shot at a preimership by holding the current club to ransom.

Posted by Matt at

24/11/2009 08:54 PM

Absolute rubbish. Ball has been shown up as a greedy, selfish, too-smnart-by-half pretender. Fact is he's an injured scrapper who can't kick or run or come even close to seeing a full game out. He' fifth at best on St Kilda's list of mids, and despite never getting a tag (Imean why would you bother)he rarely stands out as anything other than 'that bloke who can tackle a bit'. He was paid too much for too long and the big dollarshas oivercooked his opinion of hismelf. Whoever gets him will regret it. Cruel game and all, but his has been the most inglorious exit from A-level sport that I can remember. Epitaph could have read: 'Luke Ball: one club, did his best.' instead it will read 'Luke Ball: Woewodin, only slower.'

Posted by Xavier at

24/11/2009 09:02 PM

Luke Ball is the Villian in all of this, The Saints offered him a 3 year contract in June and he turned it down ... Milne and Dal Santo didnt throw in the towel when they were dropped last year and they did improve there game. Luke Ball decides to whinge and leave the club. its ok when you get possies in the Grand Final on limited ground time but its what he doesnt do without the ball he just does not make space.

Posted by Dave at

24/11/2009 09:40 PM

Have to agree with Travis here. Luke Ball wants out of St Kilda for more playing time(because he wasn't good enough to earn a full time gig with saints), which is fair enough. What's not right is expecting St Kilda to bend over backwards and give him away for nothing. Adding to this is the fact that Ball's preferred team, Collingwood wants something for nothing.. (yes, a 25 year old former AA and club captain for Wellingham who? and a late pick is somethign for nothing in my eyes, especially now Melbourne and Essendon are planning to use their first round pick to get him)So, there. the real truth is Ball out smarted himself. Got dudded by Collingwood and possibly his manager, not by St Kilda or the draft system. For Ball's management and family to whine and cry in the media over his treatment by the Saints is just laughable. Please get your facts right first.

Posted by george Harding at

24/11/2009 10:10 PM

Since 1952 I have followed St.Kida passionately and I am ashamed that Luke Ball was offered as trade bait.

Posted by say no to free agency at

25/11/2009 09:21 AM

free agency will destroy the game just like it did in america sports. these greedy sports agents want everything to run like it does in the land of the free for all.

Posted by Nathan at

25/11/2009 09:41 AM

Being a Collingwood supporter this will be a little bias, but im glad that we did not offer a first round pick for Ball. As has been previously mentioned Ball's crash and bash style will most likely restrict him playing well into his 30's therefore only giving the club that he gets picked up by tomorrow 5 yrs max of service. Also the fact that he is, dare I say possibly over his best footy there is no way on Earth he is worth a first round pick. I'm glad Collingwood did not offer much more than a late attempt to secure pick 25 from North Melb, because he simply is not worth it. He has got a great record but our great game has change considerably over the past 5 yrs, it has become more athletic and players like Ball are a dying breed. If he goes to another club good luck to him, it leaves a reasonable kid in the draft for us to pick up.

Posted by Dr Spaceman at

25/11/2009 01:21 PM

You state that Ross Lyon said that any player who could not give total commitment to the club should let him know and they would be moved on. You then say the Saints failed to do so. I was not present on the night however I don’t recall any reporting in the media that Ross said those players that could not commit would be moved on "to the club of their choice". I don’t recall reading that they would be moved on "to the club of their choice even if that club was not prepared to trade fairly and equitably". Ross said he’d move them on and he has in fact moved Luke on, with the process to be completed tomorrow night. If you are applying Lyon’s words to the Luke Ball scenario you are implying that the reason Ball sought a trade is because he could not give total commitment to the Saints. Oh course we don’t know because Ball himself has said nothing. Yet better you bag a club which as done as it indicated.

Posted by Neil at

25/11/2009 02:55 PM

Can't agree with an article that implies Ball might have thought he had better opportunity at Collingwood rather than Melbourne or Essendon. Perfect fit for Melbourne now that McLean has left.

Posted by Glenn at

25/11/2009 05:05 PM

As a StKilda supporter, EXTREMELY disappointed in Luke Ball. Club comes before player, HOWEVER, maybe his first year explains his bad attitude to having to work harder...remember Luke, we gave you pretty much the entire 1st season to do your schooling and play with your school mates?! I sincerely hope he goes to someone other than Collingwood, just to stick it up him! Fortius Quo Fidelius = Strength Through Loyalty; clearly you do not fit the creed Luke. You've gone from honest and hard working to egotistical and arrogant in my eyes. I look forward to booing you in 2010!

Posted by Andrew at

25/11/2009 09:02 PM

Chris Judd decided to leave West Coast and one of the reasons he went to Carlton is in his own words 'they could get the deal done". He wanted a fair trade for the club he was at. Luke Ball didn't give a stuff about St.Kilda and said 'trade me to Collingwood only'. I think if you investigated the information correctly, you will find in trade week Port Adelaide offered pick 9 for Ball and the 2 clubs agreed but Ball wouldn't leave Melbourne, living at his parents place at age 25! Likewise West Coast and the Bulldogs with St.Kilda had a three way trade on the table getting Everitt to St.Kilda and Nicoski to the Bulldogs, but Ball would not agree. St.Kilda were happy to move him on when he wanted to be traded but sought an equitable deal to be compensated. And if Ball was tired of getting dragged and dropped to the VFL, he should have worked harder and fixed the serious flaws in his game

Posted by Dave at

26/11/2009 10:17 AM

Luke ball asked to be traded, he refused to sign a new contract. Collingwood didn't rate him as highly as StKilda. These are the facts. Lets see if he is good enough for to be picked up early in the draft. He's not worth 500g a season, he can't kick any more than 40 mts, does not have any great pace and dosen't kick goals, like good midfielders do. If anyone watched the Grand Final replay, he may have had 22 touches, but he did nothing with them, couldn't hit a target. I can't think of 1 game he personaly won for StKilda. I hope Collingwood get him, or Carlton.

Posted by tank at

26/11/2009 04:45 PM

Wish he stayed at the Saints... cause all losers should stick together. Dave if he came to Carlton, he would be a winner!!

Submit a comment

Name

Comment

Share this article