Mike Sheahan's Solution

[Nasher 33,607]

It's not weather or not he would have played, it's whether or not his body was cactus or not, and as he would not undergo a medical with us, I don't see how taking this risk was viable at the expense of a top 20 pick. Then again with our leadership the way it is then maybe it was, but how could we have known that at the time, and how could we have known he wouldn't have retired after one season - or even immediately, if he really didn't want to play here? We're in real hindsight warrior territory here, with a splash of revisionism tossed in for good measure.

[daisycutter 29,447]

Could someone please change thread title to

Mike Sheahan's Non-Solution

[Sir Why You Little 36,753]

It's not weather or not he would have played, it's whether or not his body was cactus or not, and as he would not undergo a medical with us, I don't see how taking this risk was viable at the expense of a top 20 pick. Then again with our leadership the way it is then maybe it was, but how could we have known that at the time, and how could we have known he wouldn't have retired after one season - or even immediately, if he really didn't want to play here? We're in real hindsight warrior territory here, with a splash of revisionism tossed in for good measure.

Before he did the knee this year how many games did he miss?

He was fine.

It was a terrible oversight that we should have pounced on. May have even kept $cully on board if he had had such a leader to learn from.

The one black mark i do hold against the current board.

[hardtack 10,435]

Before he did the knee this year how many games did he miss?

He was fine.

It was a terrible oversight that we should have pounced on. May have even kept $cully on board if he had had such a leader to learn from.

The one black mark i do hold against the current board.

Well, we missed him and there is no point in dwelling on it. At least they learned their lesson and went hard at Clark and got their man. I expect that following the supporter meeting and the comments regarding their looking for a big forward, they will be doing the same this year with Cloke.

[mauriesy 7,189]

It was a terrible oversight that we should have pounced on.

You've got no idea how hard we tried, or how hard he refused, or how wedded Ball was to getting to Collingwood, in order to make that assessment. It's just another opportunity for you to diss the club.

Ball is now a premiership player, he got exactly what he wanted by refusing to go anywhere but Collingwood. It was a potential we couldn't offer.

[praha 11,220]

They'll come out of this. Although, I am anticipating a GWS loss.

[Sir Why You Little 36,753]

You've got no idea how hard we tried, or how hard he refused, or how wedded Ball was to getting to Collingwood, in order to make that assessment. It's just another opportunity for you to diss the club.

Ball is now a premiership player, he got exactly what he wanted by refusing to go anywhere but Collingwood. It was a potential we couldn't offer.

I have got an idea. Not very hard. The club should have read his number out when it came to us.

That is how hard you go.

We delisted experience and did not replace.

Thus in 2012 we are 0-9.

Imagine if Neeld had a luke Ball in the middle...

Edited May 31, 2012 by why you little

[PaulRB 6,305]

The revolution part 1 started with 186 and the sacking of Bailey. Many changes were made to the Footy Dept, who in turn realised that our on-field LG and game style needed a complete overhaul.

Revolution part 2 is where we now sit, enduring a losing streak as we sit tight and see what the impact the FD's changes will have.

To those moaning "0 - 11 sack the ..." the reality is we were only a reasonable chance of winning a couple of the 11 if we have played this season (Tigers, Lions and Saints/Dogs) as we played last year (as some would prefer). So the headline is more like "0 - 3 of the games we had a chance in.". Hardly worth the self flagellation some would like ...

The on-field fortunes will change soon and the off field changes will mean we'll be able to maintain any onfield momentum and capitalise on success when it comes.

Next year I'd hope to see Strauss free Grimes to move into the midfield, Gysberts there as well, along side Jack Viney. The team to have gotten over the hump of shifting gears up to elite level fitness and defensive/contested ball winning capacity. Then add a couple of killer trades or draft picks...

Suddenly Cam will be seen as the Messiah...

Edited May 31, 2012 by PaulRB

[Sir Why You Little 36,753]

Well, we missed him and there is no point in dwelling on it. At least they learned their lesson and went hard at Clark and got their man. I expect that following the supporter meeting and the comments regarding their looking for a big forward, they will be doing the same this year with Cloke.

Agreed. We must go hard for all prospects.

[rpfc 28,084]

It's not weather or not he would have played, it's whether or not his body was cactus or not, and as he would not undergo a medical with us, I don't see how taking this risk was viable at the expense of a top 20 pick. Then again with our leadership the way it is then maybe it was, but how could we have known that at the time, and how could we have known he wouldn't have retired after one season - or even immediately, if he really didn't want to play here? We're in real hindsight warrior territory here, with a splash of revisionism tossed in for good measure.

We are, and I understand why we didn't take him.

It was not black and white (heh) and we all move on.

http://demonland.com/forums/index.php?/topic/18237-luke-ball-in-the-national-draft/page__st__325

20 pages of fun on the subject...