Ball deserves better

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 eight years during which time he played 142 games.

The 25-year-old, who got tired of being constantly dragged on and off the interchange bench and even spent time in the VFL this season, is only looking to move to Collingwood in a bid to get the kind of game time he believes his talents deserve.

And if he believes Collingwood - and not the other clubs that are interested in him such as Melbourne and Essendon which Ball is refusing to even meet - can provide him with the best opportunity to do that then what is wrong with that?

But instead Ball finds himself the villain of draft week over his stance but what is wrong with someone wanting to choose their own employer?

It is a notion that those of us that live in the world outside of professional sport take for granted.

Ball has done everything right in this process after St Kilda coach Ross Lyon in his much-publicised speech following the Saints' heartbreaking grand final loss to Geelong said that any player who could not give total commitment to the club should let him know and they would be moved on.

But Ball did that and the Saints did not move him on, instead failing to reach agreement with Collingwood during trade week over a suitable deal.

Now Ball is at the mercy of the draft and could be snapped up by either Melbourne, which has picks 11 and 18, or Essendon, which has picks 24 and 26, or indeed any other club that has a pick ahead of the Magpies in the draft.

But while there is no doubt Ball will end up still playing in the AFL next season and will be handsomely rewarded for doing it - with any club duty bound to meet his contract requirements of $1 million over the next two seasons - that does not mean the situation he has had to endure is fair or right.

Indeed the whole messy scenario has summed up just why the AFL Players' Association is pushing for free agency.

And while even the AFLPA does not expect the league to ever grant unlimited free agency - surely players of the calibre of Luke Ball that have played over 100 games, been a club captain, a best-and-fairest winner and outstanding citizen off the field should be allowed to go to the club of their choice when they are suddenly thrown on the scrapheap by their original club.