I don't think he is making it up but I do think that he is putting his own spin on it, and possibly words in Ball's mouth. There is a huge difference between saying he prefers to go one place and saying that he has ruled out another completely.

Denham has written a number of articles about the Ball situationover the last couple of months.

Firstly it was an article that Collingwood was interested in Ball

Then an article that Collingwood were prepared to offer him 500k per season.

Denham can only have been getting his information from either Ball or Connors.

Connors has shown in the past his proclivity to negotiate salaries through the media so I have no doubt that Connors is the 'source' of Denham's knowledge.

And I know I'll probably get flamed for this, but

Some on here need to get some perspective.

Luke Ball is a fabulous guy and was an elite player.

Anybody who actually believes that St Kilda, trying to win the premiership, would deliberately not play any player because the 'coach doesn't rate him' has very little understanding of the way Clubs are run.

So if you accept that his reduced 'gametime' was not due to a deliberate 'not play him' scenario, then what is left to ewxplain it?

That the fitness staff at St Kilda made a determination that he couldn't perform at the required level for longer.

Now some may feel that St Kilda's fitness staff have no clue, but I would point to the fact that this past season they had the least number of 'soft-tissue injuries' they've had in the last dacade so they must be doing something right.

There has been so much public posturing by Ball's camp/family/manager about all of thiis.

Firstly he wanted to go to Collingwood

Then it was leaked that Collingwood was offering him less? (I always though 500k was more than 300k?0

Then it was for more 'gametime'

Then it was because his position was 'untenable'.

It smacked of hystrionic pr from a desperate manager who failed to get the deal done becasue of his own conflict of interest. (Ball would be at Collingwood if Connors didn't bring his other client Jolly to their attention. Collingwood subsequently used the only currency they held, pick#14, on Jolly. This was the pick they were supposed to use for Ball)

The truth is that St Kilda (coaches, fitness match committee) had 'so little regard' for Ball that they selected him to play in each of their finals teams and he started the Grand Final on the ground, at the centre bounce.

IMO, his 'gametime' issue at St Kilda has never been anything other than a 'ftiness issue'.

St Kilda offered him a new 3 year contract in June (apparently 1 million over 3 years). He was on a heavily back-ended contract of 600k for this last season.

He and his manager chose not to sign it.

The 'gametime' issue didn't arise for at least a month after the contract was delivered to Ball.

Connors has obviously told him not to sign it because he could get more. What we have seen is his normal m.o. in trying to either 'extort' more from the player's existing Club or get him a better offer from another. Obviously St Kilda didn't budge on their offer (for whatever reasons) and we have subsequently seen what has transpired.

As an aside I believe Connors manages only 2 players at St Kilda - Ball and Maguire. If it proves that Maguire was delisted by St Kilda to gain salary cap money for Ball, than it will indeed be an interesting coversation to see how Connors explains it to Maguire?

It might be even more interesting at Family dinners at the Ball household when Luke sits down with his sister and her boyfriend - Matt Maguire?

Ball has said he doesn't want to play for Melbourne.

Ball also won't be able to play for collingwood either Old Xav............. But then why would you ever want to.

Denham has written a number of articles about the Ball situationover the last couple of months.

Firstly it was an article that Collingwood was interested in Ball

Then an article that Collingwood were prepared to offer him 500k per season.

Denham can only have been getting his information from either Ball or Connors.

Connors has shown in the past his proclivity to negotiate salaries through the media so I have no doubt that Connors is the 'source' of Denham's knowledge.

And I know I'll probably get flamed for this, but

Some on here need to get some perspective.

Luke Ball is a fabulous guy and was an elite player.

Anybody who actually believes that St Kilda, trying to win the premiership, would deliberately not play any player because the 'coach doesn't rate him' has very little understanding of the way Clubs are run.

So if you accept that his reduced 'gametime' was not due to a deliberate 'not play him' scenario, then what is left to ewxplain it?

That the fitness staff at St Kilda made a determination that he couldn't perform at the required level for longer.

Now some may feel that St Kilda's fitness staff have no clue, but I would point to the fact that this past season they had the least number of 'soft-tissue injuries' they've had in the last dacade so they must be doing something right.

There has been so much public posturing by Ball's camp/family/manager about all of thiis.

Firstly he wanted to go to Collingwood

Then it was leaked that Collingwood was offering him less? (I always though 500k was more than 300k?0

Then it was for more 'gametime'

Then it was because his position was 'untenable'.

It smacked of hystrionic pr from a desperate manager who failed to get the deal done becasue of his own conflict of interest. (Ball would be at Collingwood if Connors didn't bring his other client Jolly to their attention. Collingwood subsequently used the only currency they held, pick#14, on Jolly. This was the pick they were supposed to use for Ball)

The truth is that St Kilda (coaches, fitness match committee) had 'so little regard' for Ball that they selected him to play in each of their finals teams and he started the Grand Final on the ground, at the centre bounce.

IMO, his 'gametime' issue at St Kilda has never been anything other than a 'ftiness issue'.

St Kilda offered him a new 3 year contract in June (apparently 1 million over 3 years). He was on a heavily back-ended contract of 600k for this last season.

He and his manager chose not to sign it.

The 'gametime' issue didn't arise for at least a month after the contract was delivered to Ball.

Connors has obviously told him not to sign it because he could get more. What we have seen is his normal m.o. in trying to either 'extort' more from the player's existing Club or get him a better offer from another. Obviously St Kilda didn't budge on their offer (for whatever reasons) and we have subsequently seen what has transpired.

As an aside I believe Connors manages only 2 players at St Kilda - Ball and Maguire. If it proves that Maguire was delisted by St Kilda to gain salary cap money for Ball, than it will indeed be an interesting coversation to see how Connors explains it to Maguire?

It might be even more interesting at Family dinners at the Ball household when Luke sits down with his sister and her boyfriend - Matt Maguire?

Good post MR magic

I am offically over he whole thing, if he comes good if not meh

you know Mr Magic

theres something about all that that actually gells !!!

Tread warily MFC... dilligence...

This was the pick they were supposed to use for Ball)

Pick 14 was never on the table from Collingwood. Ball didn't nominate Collingwood until Monday night of trade week, by that time, we had offered Pick 14 for Jolly.

All I know is that Ball & his manager still want to go to Collingwood. He has also told Brisbane he is not interested in moving to Brisbane.

3 Collingwood players yesterday re-configured their contracts yesterday so they can offer $800 K for Ball in 2010. I'm not really keen on him, he has the body of a 30 year old.

Pick 14 was never on the table from Collingwood. Ball didn't nominate Collingwood until Monday night of trade week, by that time, we had offered Pick 14 for Jolly.

All I know is that Ball & his manager still want to go to Collingwood. He has also told Brisbane he is not interested in moving to Brisbane.

3 Collingwood players yesterday re-configured their contracts yesterday so they can offer $800 K for Ball in 2010. I'm not really keen on him, he has the body of a 30 year old.

sold to the highest bidder

nexxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxttttt !!!

Pick 14 was never on the table from Collingwood. Ball didn't nominate Collingwood until Monday night of trade week, by that time, we had offered Pick 14 for Jolly.

All I know is that Ball & his manager still want to go to Collingwood. He has also told Brisbane he is not interested in moving to Brisbane.

3 Collingwood players yesterday re-configured their contracts yesterday so they can offer $800 K for Ball in 2010. I'm not really keen on him, he has the body of a 30 year old.

Why would they want to offer ball 800k? he wants to go there. Money is not the issue

Pick 14 was never on the table from Collingwood. Ball didn't nominate Collingwood until Monday night of trade week, by that time, we had offered Pick 14 for Jolly.

All I know is that Ball & his manager still want to go to Collingwood. He has also told Brisbane he is not interested in moving to Brisbane.

3 Collingwood players yesterday re-configured their contracts yesterday so they can offer $800 K for Ball in 2010. I'm not really keen on him, he has the body of a 30 year old.

If the Filth want to offer Luke Ball 800k well go right ahead, But don't forget you still own that white elephant pub in Port Melbourne that is draining your funds at a great rate.

Ball is a very good player & if the MFC can pick him up in the PSD i will be rapt, but he is not worth 800k which could pay 2 very good players.

Bring on Draft Day!!!

Pick 14 was never on the table from Collingwood. Ball didn't nominate Collingwood until Monday night of trade week, by that time, we had offered Pick 14 for Jolly.

All I know is that Ball & his manager still want to go to Collingwood. He has also told Brisbane he is not interested in moving to Brisbane.

3 Collingwood players yesterday re-configured their contracts yesterday so they can offer $800 K for Ball in 2010. I'm not really keen on him, he has the body of a 30 year old.

You're the like the 'cool guy' at the bar that reeks of desperation but has this stupid half asleep look on his face as if to say - 'I could take or leave you, ladies. I don't really know why I'm here.'

Nah, you don't want him. You're just posting on a Demons forum about the fact that Brisbane has been put off getting him because Ball said he didn't want to go there (yeah, that'll do it...) and that Collingwood players have been 're-configuring' contracts to give him $800k - tacitly saying that the MFC wouldn't pay him that (right, we have no room to move on our cap...).

Go. Away.

Denham has written a number of articles about the Ball situationover the last couple of months.

Firstly it was an article that Collingwood was interested in Ball

Then an article that Collingwood were prepared to offer him 500k per season.

Denham can only have been getting his information from either Ball or Connors.

Connors has shown in the past his proclivity to negotiate salaries through the media so I have no doubt that Connors is the 'source' of Denham's knowledge.

And I know I'll probably get flamed for this, but

Some on here need to get some perspective.

Luke Ball is a fabulous guy and was an elite player.

Anybody who actually believes that St Kilda, trying to win the premiership, would deliberately not play any player because the 'coach doesn't rate him' has very little understanding of the way Clubs are run.

So if you accept that his reduced 'gametime' was not due to a deliberate 'not play him' scenario, then what is left to ewxplain it?

That the fitness staff at St Kilda made a determination that he couldn't perform at the required level for longer.

Now some may feel that St Kilda's fitness staff have no clue, but I would point to the fact that this past season they had the least number of 'soft-tissue injuries' they've had in the last dacade so they must be doing something right.

There has been so much public posturing by Ball's camp/family/manager about all of thiis.

Firstly he wanted to go to Collingwood

Then it was leaked that Collingwood was offering him less? (I always though 500k was more than 300k?0

Then it was for more 'gametime'

Then it was because his position was 'untenable'.

It smacked of hystrionic pr from a desperate manager who failed to get the deal done becasue of his own conflict of interest. (Ball would be at Collingwood if Connors didn't bring his other client Jolly to their attention. Collingwood subsequently used the only currency they held, pick#14, on Jolly. This was the pick they were supposed to use for Ball)

The truth is that St Kilda (coaches, fitness match committee) had 'so little regard' for Ball that they selected him to play in each of their finals teams and he started the Grand Final on the ground, at the centre bounce.

IMO, his 'gametime' issue at St Kilda has never been anything other than a 'ftiness issue'.

St Kilda offered him a new 3 year contract in June (apparently 1 million over 3 years). He was on a heavily back-ended contract of 600k for this last season.

He and his manager chose not to sign it.

The 'gametime' issue didn't arise for at least a month after the contract was delivered to Ball.

Connors has obviously told him not to sign it because he could get more. What we have seen is his normal m.o. in trying to either 'extort' more from the player's existing Club or get him a better offer from another. Obviously St Kilda didn't budge on their offer (for whatever reasons) and we have subsequently seen what has transpired.

As an aside I believe Connors manages only 2 players at St Kilda - Ball and Maguire. If it proves that Maguire was delisted by St Kilda to gain salary cap money for Ball, than it will indeed be an interesting coversation to see how Connors explains it to Maguire?

It might be even more interesting at Family dinners at the Ball household when Luke sits down with his sister and her boyfriend - Matt Maguire?

This is reading too much into the situation.

A lot of guesswork and subjective impressions for me to take seriously, sorry.

Hmm. Is it possible that Ball looks at our list and sees the prospect of ...

Grimes, Morton, Moloney, Jones, Strauss, Blease, Scully, Bate, Sylvia, Maric, Davey, Trengove, Bennell, Jetta, Wonaeamirri, Petterd, Green and Bruce

... between them squeezing him out of a regular game in a couple of years time, whether midfield, forward or back?

Further to that, given the Demon's impending midfield transformation, is it possible that in a sense we have been excited at the prospect of getting him because in our minds we were recruiting to save last season, not build the next?

edit: I accidently had Morton in there twice (he was leaning on a lamp post and I got confused)

Further to that, given the Demon's impending midfield transformation, is it possible that in a sense we have been excited at the prospect of getting him because in our minds we were recruiting to save last season, not build the next?

No the way i see it is Ball would bring experience to our new look midfield.

2009 is gone & represents the third year of hell we had to go through.

This is reading too much into the situation.

A lot of guesswork and subjective impressions for me to take seriously, sorry.

maybe...but makes compelling reading.

If Ball did want to play for us...surely he would have made some sort of overture...more than just a meet that is.. albeit its not really for us to know what has/is transpiring.

what do we know..

He doesnt want to move interstate ( apparently )

He has indicated either or a preference for more game time and premiership opportunities.

He was prepared to go to Collingwood and by all accounts would still be happy to do so.

Rumour has it some are into his ear down playing us.

I dunno.. Seems the club maybe cooling on the idea...ad more power to it if thats the case as we should not be held to any ransom. Seems we may have learnt something from the Judd fiasco.

Cant remember who it was who weeks ago suggested we would not be seeing Ball in red and blue had his sources right.

I think the club would indeed like Ball but is cagey on his price and /or conditions. No one player is a panacea and I think the club has refused the siren's seduction. Keep the ear plugs in boys and smooth sailing. Lets see what turns up

Pick 14 was never on the table from Collingwood. Ball didn't nominate Collingwood until Monday night of trade week, by that time, we had offered Pick 14 for Jolly.

Old Xaverian,

Do you actually believe that the mooted move of Ball to Collingwood occured on the Monday of Trade Week?

Are you really that naive?

Denham had been writing stories for weeks about the Ball/Collingwood connection.

The deal, including how much he was going to get paid had been ironed out well before trade week - just like the Judd to Carlton deal had been worked outr by (guess which manager?) well before the 'charade' of him 'interviewing' prospective clubs.

Collingwood knew before trade week even started what they needed to do to get Ball. They needed to satisfy Western Bulldogs who were prepared to trade Everitt to St Kilda for a draft pick in the first 22. St Kilda were prepared to let Ball go to whomever would provide what WB wanted. Collingwood kept negotiating in bad faith (as they seem to do so often) hoping that St Kilda would buckle under the pressure of getting nothing for Ball. Well St Kilda didn't 'buckle' and now we have the situation we have where you are suggesting that Collingwood is prepared to 'rort' the salary cap and draft rules.

Connors was 'a party to these negotiations and knew exactly what was going on.

Don't let the fact that Connors is a fellow 'Xaverian' cloud your perspective.

Connors earns his money, like all managers, from a commission of his clients paycheck. The bigger the paycheck, the bigger the commission. For Connors it's a 'no-brainer' - 5% of 500k is a lot more than 5% of 300k.

And Hannibal, do you really think a player manager, in the midst of crucial negotiations is going to 'blurt out' the whole truth about those negotiations to a guy who is the parent of his children's friends?

He'll tell you what he wants you to know and most probably pass on. Some of it may be true, some not. But you can almost guarantee that it won't be the whole truth. (not having a go here - just a cautionary note)

RPFC

You can believe what you want to. I'm not trying to convince anybody to my way of thinking. Just pointing out some salient facts which I believe have been overlooked in your debate so far.

Quite frankly I really don't care where Ball plays next year.

If he stays at St Kilda and plays under the Coaches instructions - fine

If he goes to Melbourne - fine

If he goes to Collingwood - fine

I just want the truth to come out - not the complete and utter BS being pushed by Ball's camp/manager/family to try and 'blame' St Kilda for this mess. A mess that that is entirley their own fault. They chose to go down the path they did and must now live with the consequences, whatever they are.

RPFC

You can believe what you want to. I'm not trying to convince anybody to my way of thinking. Just pointing out some salient facts which I believe have been overlooked in your debate so far.

If nothing else, I appreciate the perspective of a sincere St Kilda fan.

OX is nothing but a troll.

sold to the highest bidder

nexxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxttttt !!!

Don't believe anything from this bloke. He has been been pulling figures out of his ass like all Collingwood supporters do since there was a chance that Ball could come to us. I'll take BS from our own but not Collingwood supporters. I don't know why he's even on here.

Old Xaverian,

Do you actually believe that the mooted move of Ball to Collingwood occured on the Monday of Trade Week?

Are you really that naive?

Ball was offered a 3 year contract in late July. Obviously, there was a reason he didn't sign the contract.

Normally his manager would have courted a few clubs, I'd say that the Buckley appointment, Malthouse being "re-signed" & our season still being live, would have meant that the Ball situation invoked nothing more than a passing glance.

Jolly was always priority number 1 & until the Monday night of trade week, Ball would never have been a priority. I doubt with the hysteria that involves any mooted player to Collingwood would have not existed if Ball/Collingwood were actually in talks onwards July.

Jolly was always priority number 1 & until the Monday night of trade week, Ball would never have been a priority. I doubt with the hysteria that involves any mooted player to Collingwood would have not existed if Ball/Collingwood were actually in talks onwards July.

Old you make this statement as if it is an honour to play for Collingwood. I Beg to differ in every way.

I don't think you can put the blame on Casey. The issue seems to be that our premiership window is not close enough for him.

If he enters the primary draft to try to avoid us , I'd forget him

Totally agree.

If Luke wants to play for Melbourne then he can do that very easily by nominating for the PSD, and we will pick him up. Good.

If he doesn't nominate for the PSD then he doesn't want to play for the 'Dees, and there is no point in wasting picks 11, 18, 34 or 50 for him.

Ball was offered a 3 year contract in late July. Obviously, there was a reason he didn't sign the contract.

Normally his manager would have courted a few clubs, I'd say that the Buckley appointment, Malthouse being "re-signed" & our season still being live, would have meant that the Ball situation invoked nothing more than a passing glance.

Jolly was always priority number 1 & until the Monday night of trade week, Ball would never have been a priority. I doubt with the hysteria that involves any mooted player to Collingwood would have not existed if Ball/Collingwood were actually in talks onwards July.

This is a joke yes?

Surely nobody, even an educated Collingwood supporter would believe this Brothers Grimm Fairy Tale that the deal of Ball to Collingwood only arose on teh Monday of Trade Week.

That's the problem, The average Feral Filth Fan actually believes the BS manure put out by Collingwood as fact, rather than the errant nonsense that it is.

Tell em you seriously don't believe that Ball didn't have a deal with Collingwood before Trade Week?

As for Jolly, I'll let you in on a little secret that your good mate, the other old Xaverian, has neglected to tell you.

He offered Jolly to Hawthorn well before COllingwood and only spoke to Collingwood after Hawthorn decided to concentrate on Burgoyne.

I realize that kind of throws your whole neat story out with teh garbage where it belongs, but that's the problem when Connors is acting for both Jolly and Ball and COllingwood only has 1 first round pick to trade.

As long as we put the powerpoint away, we should be fine

You really don't like those power points hey!

Thanks for your insights Mr Magic. The machinations of some of the clubs and the player managers are certainly very interesting.

Personally, I think Luke Ball and his family are eminently suited to Collingwood and the Old Xaverian. The Pies have a tougher fixture next year and I suspect they will struggle to make the 8 let alone the top 4 so I will have no problems observing Mr Ball dither at a a declining club if he makes it to the Pies. I believe Fremantle's a nice spot if Mark Harvey decides to take him in the ND. The docks at Adelaide aren't too bad either although Choko might not speak the same language.

He offered Jolly to Hawthorn well before Collingwood and only spoke to Collingwood after Hawthorn decided to concentrate on Burgoyne.

Then if that is the case, why was Jolly a guest of McGuire during our finals matches? One of my best friends is ROK (I played school footy against for years) & he told me they had been courting Jolly for quite a time. The ruck area was seen as a bigger weakness than out clearance weakness, which is still there but will be alleviated by Sidebottom, one of at least 10 players from that draft already superior to Watts.

From the dealings Hawthorn had with Sydney & ROK last year, Roos didn't want a thing to do with Hawthorn. Jolly was never on the table.

I know quite a bit of what actually occurred with Ball & even Judd for that matter, what remains true, is there will be questions asked both of Melbourne & St. Kilda if they fail to retain/recruit Ball.

I know quite a bit of what actually occurred with Ball & even Judd for that matter, what remains true, is there will be questions asked both of Melbourne & St. Kilda if they fail to retain/recruit Ball.

[censored] there will be questions asked if Ball does not Make it to Melbourne. If Ball doesn't want to come to the club, fine his choice. A choice he could seriously regret, but his choice.

He would be a great Pick up but not the only decent Player available.

You may well be the one asking Questions about it Old, but will many be listening???

Back to your cave.....Your day pass will expire soon.

Hey OX.

Good to see you're out of therapy for the first time since the Prelim Final!