Did we miss Ball?

[Sunday Red]

How do you guys think we fared without Luke Ball?
Did we miss his in and under work, or was the void filled beautifully by the likes of Baker (who admittedly had far greater output than usual, but all credit to him!)

We know Luke hasn't had the greatest of seasons or the most game time he's seen in his career, but do you think we missed him that much today?

[felixleo]

Who? (sorry too good an opportunity to miss) Once he is fit he is an automatic selection.

[Sunday Red]

Once he is fit he is an automatic selection.

Apparently he IS fit!

[saintsRrising]

Once he is fit he is an automatic selection.

Err no.

Once he is back doing what the coach wants he can earn his spot back.

Today our work-rate was superb and IMO ..Ball being dropped was part of the reason why.

[saintly_safes]

It was an easy win againt a side that imo would have been a little more physical that they actually were so its hard to gauge if he would have an impact of any real consequence even if he had of played.

[#1GILL]

NO

But he will come in handy when he is back

[battye]

Obviously we fared very well without him.

Ball has been in pretty poor form for a while now, due to a combination of a few things probably. But at the end of the day, the 10 or 15 possessions he was getting wasn't enough.

If he can get 25-30 possessions while maintaining his in-and-under / hard ball gets work, then he will stay in the team.

[Moods]

I guess equally important a question - did Eddy play better than what we would expect from Ball?

[saintsRrising]

I guess equally important a question - did Eddy play better than what we would expect from Ball?

Or rather did the WHOLE team recommit to the required work-rate and gameplan execution.

I personaly believe they did.

[Armoooo]

Well we may have if they had of had Edwards and Van Berlo...

[Zippy]

We're better with ball out there. I'm sure he'll be back soon.

This whole thing seems less controversial than the Dal/Milne dropping last year.

[saintsRrising]

This whole thing seems less controversial than the Dal/Milne dropping last year.

15-0 and now 16-0 will do that.

[BallBanger]

I guess equally important a question - did Eddy play better than what we would expect from Ball?

Exactly

[stinger]

How do you guys think we fared without Luke Ball?
Did we miss his in and under work, or was the void filled beautifully by the likes of Baker (who admittedly had far greater output than usual, but all credit to him!)

We know Luke hasn't had the greatest of seasons or the most game time he's seen in his career, but do you think we missed him that much today?

of course we did.....dempster and esddy don't hold a candle to him ability wise ...and it showed.....whilst eddie deserved another chance ...he blew it....

[battye]

Geary vs Eddy, who would you play?

Geary looks better in his disposal, he seems more comfortable kicking 40-50m, more so than Eddy does. Geary seems to find a bit more of the footy too.

[saintsRrising]

I guess equally important a question - did Eddy play better than what we would expect from Ball?

Exactly

It is actually not that important at all.

The important question is how well did the TEAM play.


I have seen more brilliant players that we fielded today (ie Plugger, Winmar, George Young, Ditterich.....) ..BUT I have NEVER EVER seen a St Kilda TEAM play as a TEAM as this one does and DID today.

The Crows entered this game in white hot form...so much so that many pundits picked them to win....and The saints made them look ridiculous today.

We are a MAGNIFICENT team....

[Moods]

I agree with everything you said SR. However the OP was whether we missed Ball or not. On the basis of such a dominant performance, the answer is a resounding No. Just like we didn't miss Gardiner. How can ANY player be missed when we are so dominant?

I'm certainly not against Ball being dropped, and I agree with you that it not only sends a powerful msg to Ball that the team requires more from him, but also a powerful msg to the team that everyone's accountable, regardless of rep.

HOWEVER, I believe that Ball MUST come back in unless he's injured within the next fortnight. I don't believe that the players who are replacing him (Eddy) give us more than what Ball gives us. IN fact at the moment it's fair to say that Eddy's gives less. He gathers no more possessions, provides more run, however isn't as hard and tough as Ball. His disposals are no more effective either.

For now though, Luke Ball's been rested/dropped which is a good thing for player and team.

[ace]

No we never missed Ball.

When Adelaide had Ball, our boys made them give Ball back.
When our boys had Ball, Adelaide refused to come and get Ball.
When Ball was in dispute our boys went and got Ball.

Our boys never missed Ball.

[Iceman234]

We're better with ball out there. I'm sure he'll be back soon.

This whole thing seems less controversial than the Dal/Milne dropping last year.

No, apparently it's been a sickening public humiliation, akin to a stoning...

Back on track, Bally is an integral part of our team, he'll be back and will play a huge part in the finals campaign.

[plugger66]

Once he is fit he is an automatic selection.

Err no.

Once he is back doing what the coach wants he can eran his spot back.

Today our workrate was superb and IMO ..Ball being dropped was part of the reason why.

You really dont beleive that do you?

[Ghost Like]

No we never missed Ball.

When Adelaide had Ball, our boys made them give Ball back.
When our boys had Ball, Adelaide refused to come and get Ball.
When Ball was in dispute our boys went and got Ball.

Our boys never missed Ball.

I like it

[saintly]

Obviously we fared very well without him.

Ball has been in pretty poor form for a while now, due to a combination of a few things probably. But at the end of the day, the 10 or 15 possessions he was getting wasn't enough.

If he can get 25-30 possessions while maintaining his in-and-under / hard ball gets work, then he will stay in the team.

its not just amount of possession but also the TOG. the less time on ground the more the other midfielders havre to take up the salck. so its a two prong problem.

if you look at todays newspapers all midfileders had similar amount of TOG.

it problably helped the others by Ball being out of the side. unfortunately!

[The Fireman]

I now have total confidence with the people in charge of team balance.

They seem to be pushing all the right buttons, from dropping Dal to Ball.

So for me here on out it's an armchair ride without worrying if the selectors are making the right decisions.

[saintsRrising]

The other way of looking at this is how good would it be IF Ball can lift and play like he has delivered in the past.


RL obviously knows how good Ball can be (a b it like Raph if you will)....and I am sure that RL wants our best possible 22 up and about and in-form in September.

An in-form Ball is clearly part of our best 22.

BUT TEAM comes first.

[AnythingsPossibleSaints]

I guess equally important a question - did Eddy play better than what we would expect from Ball?

Absolutely not, but most likely the team as a whole did, as a result of Bally not being picked. They all knew their spots could be on the line if they didn't play their best (especially guys like Bakes, who I think had a career high 32 possies) and they played accordingly. They were back to their early season form and had it not been for a lot of poor finishing in front of goal, we would probably have won by over 100 points (maybe well over).
And then there's the fact that when Bally comes back he'll probably play much better, as a result of being left out. It's a win-win.