FarmerTweedy Posted September 1, 2014 Share Posted September 1, 2014 I'm happy to trust Ribbie on this but I felt he was doing well when he came in. He was the form striker in pre season and imo had forced carrick down the pecking order. Anyhow I'm assuming El Has and carrick are now fit and ready to play? I'm not so sure about that, Carrick played at Ibrokes and I reckon would have been involved ahead of Oliver for other games (league at least) if he hadn't got injured. I reckon with a fully fit squad, Oliver would be fifth in line for a striker spot, or maybe 4th if El Hass is deployed off the front. I think this move makes a lot of sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UnbelievableJeff Posted September 1, 2014 Share Posted September 1, 2014 I'm not so sure about that, Carrick played at Ibrokes and I reckon would have been involved ahead of Oliver for other games (league at least) if he hadn't got injured. I reckon with a fully fit squad, Oliver would be fifth in line for a striker spot, or maybe 4th if El Hass is deployed off the front. I think this move makes a lot of sense. Going out on loan in a one year deal not a bit strange ? Is that a development move or a last chance saloon move ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the geezer Posted September 1, 2014 Share Posted September 1, 2014 El hass is no9 - a striker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fabienleclerq Posted September 1, 2014 Share Posted September 1, 2014 I'm not so sure about that, Carrick played at Ibrokes and I reckon would have been involved ahead of Oliver for other games (league at least) if he hadn't got injured. I reckon with a fully fit squad, Oliver would be fifth in line for a striker spot, or maybe 4th if El Hass is deployed off the front. I think this move makes a lot of sense. Oliver was better in pre season than DC, hes also scored this season. Im happy to trust the managment but imo games in league one wont develop him as much as staying at Hearts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the geezer Posted September 1, 2014 Share Posted September 1, 2014 If hes not playing at Hearts then its a no-brainer.....more goals and exposure to some monster CHs to deal with. Good luck Gary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffalo Bill Posted September 1, 2014 Share Posted September 1, 2014 Good move for all concerned. There will undoubtedly be a clause in the deal that says we can recall him at a moment's notice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mahgrassyshoes Posted September 1, 2014 Share Posted September 1, 2014 Oliver was better in pre season than DC, hes also scored this season. Im happy to trust the managment but imo games in league one wont develop him as much as staying at Hearts. Oliver scored more in preseason than carrick but that was never going to oust Dale for the start of the season. This loan will be good for Oliver. He's obviously technically very good but needs to learn to play against players who are basically bullies. He'll get that in league one as that will be their best opportunity to bring him down to their level. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fabienleclerq Posted September 1, 2014 Share Posted September 1, 2014 Oliver scored more in preseason than carrick but that was never going to oust Dale for the start of the season. This loan will be good for Oliver. He's obviously technically very good but needs to learn to play against players who are basically bullies. He'll get that in league one as that will be their best opportunity to bring him down to their level. I think hes coped with the bigger defenders hes been up against when ive seen him. Imo hes a better player than DC but im happy to trust robbies judgement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UnbelievableJeff Posted September 1, 2014 Share Posted September 1, 2014 Oliver scored more in preseason than carrick but that was never going to oust Dale for the start of the season. This loan will be good for Oliver. He's obviously technically very good but needs to learn to play against players who are basically bullies. He'll get that in league one as that will be their best opportunity to bring him down to their level. Are those leagues really still full of cloggers and hardmen ? The few times I've ever paid much attention they seem be full of youngsters trying to make it the hard way(from the bottom up) The SPL has more tough cookies than the lower leagues because unfortunately Scottish Football at the top end is so Dickensian that those types of players are valued assets. He'll do okay there, probably better than okay but I wouldnt expect he'll be learning any more being kicked about in one league as opposed to another in the Scottish game. I rated him higher than Carrick in terms of potential at this stage, but I suppose Carrick did more last season to suggest he was ready than Oliver has to date. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uncle Buck Posted September 1, 2014 Share Posted September 1, 2014 Sorry, I do like Oliver, but to suggest he's currently a better player than Carrick is madness. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Creepy Lurker Posted September 1, 2014 Share Posted September 1, 2014 El hass is no9 - a striker Craig Beattie was my favourite centre half. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RobNox Posted September 1, 2014 Share Posted September 1, 2014 Going out on loan in a one year deal not a bit strange ? Is that a development move or a last chance saloon move ? Judging by his performances and goals, I see it as a development move. He looks a real prospect, but no point having him sitting around as 4th / 5th choice at Hearts. He needs regular game time and will get it at Stenny. I rate him as a better long term prospect than Carrick, but he needs to be playing regularly to continue his development. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Musemic Posted September 1, 2014 Share Posted September 1, 2014 Gary Oliver will benefit playing every week, hearts will benefit later on in the season or next season He's only under contract until the end of this season. The obvious danger with that is that, if he's banging them in for Stenny, he could sign a pre-contract with another club in January Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RobNox Posted September 1, 2014 Share Posted September 1, 2014 He's only under contract until the end of this season. The obvious danger with that is that, if he's banging them in for Stenny, he could sign a pre-contract with another club in January If that is the case, I'd definitely like to see us extend his contract. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArcticJambo Posted September 1, 2014 Share Posted September 1, 2014 Oliver was better in pre season than DC, hes also scored this season. Im happy to trust the managment but imo games in league one wont develop him as much as staying at Hearts. This is my take too. He would develop better playing with Hearts. That is not to say of course that those who remain will likewise develop with Hearts. I haven't seen the other strikers/forwards up close but if they are superior to Oliver in skill and touch then Hearts have got some great players and bags of potential coming through. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UnbelievableJeff Posted September 1, 2014 Share Posted September 1, 2014 There's a strange contradiction here. We sign the laddie for a year, give him a first team chance which he grabs with both hands and then we ship him out for half his remaining contract period. I could see the point if we had him on a 2-3 year deal but it's asking a lot of the laddie to play for a contract at a combination of 3 months at Stenny after which he is free to do what he wants or hope that he breaks into the first team. In my opinion he was already good enough to be in the squad somewhere in the choice list, whether it's behind Carrick or not. He deserved to stay and fight for another chance. He is certainly good enough to come off the bench.Unless there are promises and assurances behind the scenes or we have an option on him, it's not making a huge amount of sense to send him off there when he's got such a limited deal. Send him on a development loan by all means, but get him signed for a bit longer first, otherwise we could easily be developing him for someone else to pinch. The above assumes that he is actually only on a one year deal as others have said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Bilel Mohsni Posted September 1, 2014 Share Posted September 1, 2014 If he can be recalled at any time, then the game time should do him good, I would imagine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
airdriejambo3 Posted September 1, 2014 Share Posted September 1, 2014 Heard he kicked the living Hibs out of Robbie on the way out. i aslo heard he slashed robbie's face, knee capped Levein and told Ann Budge that he hates her face Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UnbelievableJeff Posted September 1, 2014 Share Posted September 1, 2014 If he can be recalled at any time, then the game time should do him good, I would imagine. If it's a case of him going and getting some game time and coming back to be kept on long term then it's absolutely fine. I would have named him in a match day squad ahead of Walker for example though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Musemic Posted September 1, 2014 Share Posted September 1, 2014 There's a strange contradiction here. We sign the laddie for a year, give him a first team chance which he grabs with both hands and then we ship him out for half his remaining contract period. I could see the point if we had him on a 2-3 year deal but it's asking a lot of the laddie to play for a contract at a combination of 3 months at Stenny after which he is free to do what he wants or hope that he breaks into the first team. In my opinion he was already good enough to be in the squad somewhere in the choice list, whether it's behind Carrick or not. He deserved to stay and fight for another chance. He is certainly good enough to come off the bench.Unless there are promises and assurances behind the scenes or we have an option on him, it's not making a huge amount of sense to send him off there when he's got such a limited deal. Send him on a development loan by all means, but get him signed for a bit longer first, otherwise we could easily be developing him for someone else to pinch. The above assumes that he is actually only on a one year deal as others have said. Yup. http://www1.skysports.com/football/news/11095/9360025/spfl-scotland-u19-forward-gary-oliver-signs-new-one-year-hearts-deal It's a bit of an odd one as far as I'm concerned too but I'll trust RN & CL on this one...they've got everything right so far Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RobNox Posted September 1, 2014 Share Posted September 1, 2014 There's a strange contradiction here. We sign the laddie for a year, give him a first team chance which he grabs with both hands and then we ship him out for half his remaining contract period. I could see the point if we had him on a 2-3 year deal but it's asking a lot of the laddie to play for a contract at a combination of 3 months at Stenny after which he is free to do what he wants or hope that he breaks into the first team. In my opinion he was already good enough to be in the squad somewhere in the choice list, whether it's behind Carrick or not. He deserved to stay and fight for another chance. He is certainly good enough to come off the bench.Unless there are promises and assurances behind the scenes or we have an option on him, it's not making a huge amount of sense to send him off there when he's got such a limited deal. Send him on a development loan by all means, but get him signed for a bit longer first, otherwise we could easily be developing him for someone else to pinch. The above assumes that he is actually only on a one year deal as others have said. I agree we should sign him up on a longer contract. Let him get regular first team action at Stenny, but always with a view to bringing him back to Tynie. I would be disappointed if we lose him as I think he is a cracking prospect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paterson's Tache Posted September 1, 2014 Share Posted September 1, 2014 He'll score bags of goals in that league. He's certainly good enough be a starter at an Alloa or a Cowdenbeath in the Championship if it weren't for the fact we're also down with them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jammy T Posted September 1, 2014 Share Posted September 1, 2014 Remember he got his one year deal early in close season, way before he started showing such good form. No doubt an extension is being or will be discussed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimmy McNulty Posted September 2, 2014 Share Posted September 2, 2014 Some of the patter on this thread is chronic. Sorry, but it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Bilel Mohsni Posted September 2, 2014 Share Posted September 2, 2014 Hopefully the extension had an option for first refusal at a further extension. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bighusref Posted September 2, 2014 Share Posted September 2, 2014 If it's a case of him going and getting some game time and coming back to be kept on long term then it's absolutely fine. I would have named him in a match day squad ahead of Walker for example though. If we wanted to sub Nicholson or King for any reason, we wouldn't have an option on the bench to do that if we didn't have Walker on the bench. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McCrae Posted September 2, 2014 Share Posted September 2, 2014 There's a strange contradiction here. We sign the laddie for a year, give him a first team chance which he grabs with both hands and then we ship him out for half his remaining contract period. I could see the point if we had him on a 2-3 year deal but it's asking a lot of the laddie to play for a contract at a combination of 3 months at Stenny after which he is free to do what he wants or hope that he breaks into the first team. In my opinion he was already good enough to be in the squad somewhere in the choice list, whether it's behind Carrick or not. He deserved to stay and fight for another chance. He is certainly good enough to come off the bench.Unless there are promises and assurances behind the scenes or we have an option on him, it's not making a huge amount of sense to send him off there when he's got such a limited deal. Send him on a development loan by all means, but get him signed for a bit longer first, otherwise we could easily be developing him for someone else to pinch. The above assumes that he is actually only on a one year deal as others have said. IMO I think RN has doubts about him being in the longer term plans of the club. This is a chance for Oliver to get game time and hopefully improve enough to win a longer term contract. Oliver is a good finisher.... But his reading of the game and movement is not anywhere near the same level as the likes of Keats. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the geezer Posted September 2, 2014 Share Posted September 2, 2014 There's a strange contradiction here. We sign the laddie for a year, give him a first team chance which he grabs with both hands and then we ship him out for half his remaining contract period. I could see the point if we had him on a 2-3 year deal but it's asking a lot of the laddie to play for a contract at a combination of 3 months at Stenny after which he is free to do what he wants or hope that he breaks into the first team. In my opinion he was already good enough to be in the squad somewhere in the choice list, whether it's behind Carrick or not. He deserved to stay and fight for another chance. He is certainly good enough to come off the bench.Unless there are promises and assurances behind the scenes or we have an option on him, it's not making a huge amount of sense to send him off there when he's got such a limited deal. Send him on a development loan by all means, but get him signed for a bit longer first, otherwise we could easily be developing him for someone else to pinch. The above assumes that he is actually only on a one year deal as others have said. Great post Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomaso Posted September 2, 2014 Share Posted September 2, 2014 It is a pity we could not have loaned out Oliver to a Championship Club to bang in some goals against Hibs and Rangers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UnbelievableJeff Posted September 2, 2014 Share Posted September 2, 2014 If we wanted to sub Nicholson or King for any reason, we wouldn't have an option on the bench to do that if we didn't have Walker on the bench. It's a bit scary that Walker seems to be the sole back up for those two. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malcolm Tucker Posted September 2, 2014 Share Posted September 2, 2014 It's a bit scary that Walker seems to be the sole back up for those two. Got to remember Keatings/Carrick/El Hass/Flanagan/Ian Smith can all play there at a push as well. But I think 3 wingers is enough for a squad. Wouldn't have been fair on Dave Smith keeping him, he would hardly have got a sniff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UnbelievableJeff Posted September 2, 2014 Share Posted September 2, 2014 Got to remember Keatings/Carrick/El Hass/Flanagan/Ian Smith can all play there at a push as well. But I think 3 wingers is enough for a squad. Wouldn't have been fair on Dave Smith keeping him, he would hardly have got a sniff. Clearly he isn't the only option that bh alluded to. The question really is, would he be the best option. I think a better option would be to have our best remaining players on the bench and as many game changers as possible amongst them Oliver, to my mind, is a game changer. Walker currently isn't. Oliver can also play wide in a midfield front 3 if required. Little sense in debating it now. it's a done deal and I hope there is a planned route back to the first team for the laddie as this is way too early to be casting any kind of final judgement on him. It does make you wonder, joking apart, if perhaps his attitude hasn't been right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dalstonjambo Posted September 2, 2014 Share Posted September 2, 2014 Clearly he isn't the only option that bh alluded to. The question really is, would he be the best option. I think a better option would be to have our best remaining players on the bench and as many game changers as possible amongst them Oliver, to my mind, is a game changer. Walker currently isn't. Oliver can also play wide in a midfield front 3 if required. Little sense in debating it now. it's a done deal and I hope there is a planned route back to the first team for the laddie as this is way too early to be casting any kind of final judgement on him. It does make you wonder, joking apart, if perhaps his attitude hasn't been right. Or just more likely that Sow, Keatings, Carrick, El Hass, Nicholson and King were all ahead of him for the forward positions and that his development would be better served for a few months by starting 2 games a week (for our under 20s and one at senior football) at a level that would allow him to find his feet and hopefully score a lot of goals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UnbelievableJeff Posted September 2, 2014 Share Posted September 2, 2014 Or just more likely that Sow, Keatings, Carrick, El Hass, Nicholson and King were all ahead of him for the forward positions and that his development would be better served for a few months by starting 2 games a week (for our under 20s and one at senior football) at a level that would allow him to find his feet and hopefully score a lot of goals. I don't have any problem understanding his place in the pecking order and I don't have any problem with him going out on loan. My problem is understanding why we would continue to develop someone who isn't on a long deal. Maybe that was his decision of course but he did enough in pre-season for me to get the kind of deal that others got. On a 3 year deal I have no problem with his going to Stenhousemuir for a few months. One a one year deal it's strange. Nothing more to be said on it really. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikey1874 Posted September 2, 2014 Share Posted September 2, 2014 The one year deal might be more about giving Oliver an incentive to work towards something better. Or his own wishes. Still believe he is very well thought of at Hearts. Good player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jambogjh Posted September 2, 2014 Share Posted September 2, 2014 Does anyone know if Oliver was offered an extended contract? I'd be very surprised if he hasn't, defiantly one for the future. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UnbelievableJeff Posted September 2, 2014 Share Posted September 2, 2014 Does anyone know if Oliver was offered an extended contract? I'd be very surprised if he hasn't, defiantly one for the future. Signed a one year deal in June. Maybe he'll get an extension in January. Certainly hope so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mahgrassyshoes Posted September 2, 2014 Share Posted September 2, 2014 Are those leagues really still full of cloggers and hardmen ? The few times I've ever paid much attention they seem be full of youngsters trying to make it the hard way(from the bottom up) The SPL has more tough cookies than the lower leagues because unfortunately Scottish Football at the top end is so Dickensian that those types of players are valued assets. He'll do okay there, probably better than okay but I wouldnt expect he'll be learning any more being kicked about in one league as opposed to another in the Scottish game. I rated him higher than Carrick in terms of potential at this stage, but I suppose Carrick did more last season to suggest he was ready than Oliver has to date. The two stenny centre halves were pretty big. One was a fecking giant! I'd imagine there will be a few big lads kicking about at centre half in league 1. There are obviously a few big guys in our league and the one above, but that's no good if Oliver is nowhere near the first team. As I said technically he's very good but he can be bullied a wee bit. I hope his one year contract with the option to extend as he's got the potential to he very good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paterson's Tache Posted September 2, 2014 Share Posted September 2, 2014 There's a strange contradiction here. We sign the laddie for a year, give him a first team chance which he grabs with both hands and then we ship him out for half his remaining contract period. I could see the point if we had him on a 2-3 year deal but it's asking a lot of the laddie to play for a contract at a combination of 3 months at Stenny after which he is free to do what he wants or hope that he breaks into the first team. In my opinion he was already good enough to be in the squad somewhere in the choice list, whether it's behind Carrick or not. He deserved to stay and fight for another chance. He is certainly good enough to come off the bench.Unless there are promises and assurances behind the scenes or we have an option on him, it's not making a huge amount of sense to send him off there when he's got such a limited deal. Send him on a development loan by all means, but get him signed for a bit longer first, otherwise we could easily be developing him for someone else to pinch. The above assumes that he is actually only on a one year deal as others have said. I think they could still offer a new deal while he's at Stenhousemuir. Still a Hearts player, just on loan to another club so I can't see any reason why he couldn't be offered a new deal during the loan spell. There's no way Hearts would let him bag 20 goals in League One then let him leave to Raith (for example) on a pre-contract. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UnbelievableJeff Posted September 2, 2014 Share Posted September 2, 2014 The two stenny centre halves were pretty big. One was a fecking giant! I'd imagine there will be a few big lads kicking about at centre half in league 1. There are obviously a few big guys in our league and the one above, but that's no good if Oliver is nowhere near the first team. As I said technically he's very good but he can be bullied a wee bit. I hope his one year contract with the option to extend as he's got the potential to he very good. At the end of the day, the new management team haven't got much, if anything, wrong to date so they need to be given free reign to do what they think is best. It's not just about Gary Oliver and if he's a casualty but the club keeps growing stronger , then so be it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.