Naismith - aims for return against Rangers ( updated )

[Robbo-Jambo]

17 minutes ago, Des Lynam said:

Still you thought it was an excellent signing at the time. Even one to cause envy. 

Indeed I did, if he could have been kept fit but things seem to getting worse with him, now folk saying he might need to get an operation on his hamstring. 

 

I just wish Levein would come out and tell the truth about the real extent of these injuries though. 

 

Guess I am talking out of frustration and disappointment a bit though. 

 

No problem with your comments though. 

[Cruyff Turn]

Naisy, like Glenn are our best players by a Country Miles. But if he’s not available, he’s about as much use as a chocolate fire guard. 

[Des Lynam]

1 minute ago, Robbo-Jambo said:

Indeed I did, if he could have been kept fit but things seem to getting worse with him, now folk saying he might need to get an operation on his hamstring. 

 

I just wish Levein would come out and tell the truth about the real extent of these injuries though. 

 

Guess I am talking out of frustration and disappointment a bit though. 

 

No problem with your comments though. 

It’s just frustration with the current situation. I wouldn’t believe what you read on here regarding his injury. 

[CJGJ]

15 minutes ago, Dusk_Till_Dawn said:

 

No sweet cheeks, if Hearts has said no to him asking for four years I’d have respected that - disappointed not to sign him (because a fit Naismith is a quality player) but completely behind the decision not to commit to the age of 36 (36 FFS!)

Yet happy to see Whelan sign until 36

[Bazzas right boot]

15 minutes ago, Dusk_Till_Dawn said:

 

No sweet cheeks, if Hearts has said no to him asking for four years I’d have respected that - disappointed not to sign him (because a fit Naismith is a quality player) but completely behind the decision not to commit to the age of 36 (36 FFS!)

 

 

I cba going back to his signing thread to prove that you are telling porkies. 

 

Only person you are fooling is yourself. 

[Jamhammer]

Maybe we’ll finally come up with a way to win without him. We’ve had near 12 months

[FruitJuice]

3 minutes ago, Smith's right boot said:

 

 

I cba going back to his signing thread to prove that you are telling porkies. 

 

Only person you are fooling is yourself. 

If you're going to call him a liar, at least put in the effort to back it up.  Saying that he is telling porkies but you cba looking to prove it isn't right.  

[Bazzas right boot]

3 minutes ago, FruitJuice said:

If you're going to call him a liar, at least put in the effort to back it up.  Saying that he is telling porkies but you cba looking to prove it isn't right.  

 

 

Nah, cba. 

 

If folk are saying they were against the Naismith signing and wouldn't have been arsed if he'd went elsewhere they can crack on. 

 

Absolute pish imo. 

 

 

Edited October 16, 2019 by Smith's right boot

[CJGJ]

2 hours ago, Tasavallan said:

 

A whole department dedicated to recruitment.      

Just like every major club

[mitch41]

5 hours ago, Smith's right boot said:

 

 

So we shouldn't sign older players in case they get injured? 

 

What age do you recommend as our limit? 

 

I already explained why a player of Naismiths quality and pedigree was out of our reach when he was younger and why we have him now. 

Could say the same for Whelan, maybe even Berra. 

 

What do you suggest to minimise this risk and more to the point why is it relevant? 

 

We seem to be pointing out lots of obvious things today. 

 

Folk get older, recovery times get longer in general. 

Our best player can't be that if injured. 

 

Nuggets of wisdom flying about today. 

So we shouldn't of signed Soapy. Players Callum Paterson have all been out for long periods just as many young lads have it's just a matter of luck.

[FruitJuice]

Just now, Smith's right boot said:

 

 

Nah, cba. 

 

If folk are sayig they were against the Naismith signing and wouldn't have been arsed if he'd went elsewhere they can crack on. 

 

Absolute pish imo. 

 

 

You called him a liar and you cba proving it?  Bad carry on.  

If the club had said they weren't signing Naismith as they thought giving a player that age a four year contract was too much, you would've understood and supported that decision.  But every other fan would've slated the club without seeing why they didn't sign him?  Pretty judgemental. 

[It should have been ten]

.

Edited October 16, 2019 by It should have been ten

[kila]

Disappointing if Naismith is pretty much done. Hopefully he can sort his hamstrings out and play a part soon.

 

4 year deal spreading his wages makes sense, coaching role surely a part of that despite Naismith denying it in the media when he signed.

 

 

[Worthing Jambo]

Jeez!

Is that the Forth Bridge injured now too!

What is going on?

[Bazzas right boot]

6 minutes ago, mitch41 said:

So we shouldn't of signed Soapy. Players Callum Paterson have all been out for long periods just as many young lads have it's just a matter of luck.

 

That’s my point Mitch. 

? 

[Worthing Jambo]

4 hours ago, queensferryjambo said:

 

 

Oops, should have added this.

[Bazzas right boot]

5 minutes ago, FruitJuice said:

You called him a liar and you cba proving it?  Bad carry on.  

If the club had said they weren't signing Naismith as they thought giving a player that age a four year contract was too much, you would've understood and supported that decision.  But every other fan would've slated the club without seeing why they didn't sign him?  Pretty judgemental. 

 

 

I'd have been pissed if he'd rocked up at the likes of  Aberdeen and we lost him because of a year contract. 

 

He's our best player. 

We done what was needed to get him. 

 

He's now Injured. 

Can't wait until he's back. 

 

I move on. 

 

Others question the meaning of life. 

 

 

 

[Bazzas right boot]

5 minutes ago, Worthing Jambo said:

Jeez!

Is that the Forth Bridge injured now too!

What is going on?

 

 

Feel sorry for it. 

It can't jump of itself at the thought of Naismith and the 4 year deal. 

 

 

[OTT]

Hate to be negative, however, the odds are pretty solid that the huns will beat us. Playing the OF is a higher intensity game than say.. st Mirren so I'd rather Naismith missed the huns and came back into a game we're he can actually make a difference. As things stand we're struggling to beat the shite in this league and I'd rather Naismith helped us pick points up in the games where we should already be doing that than risk him for 3 points we're unlikely as **** to win and potentially lose both the match and Naismith for god knows how long. 

 

I'll be very annoyed with Levein if he risks Naismith against them. Totally pointless exercise. 

[Worthing Jambo]

2 minutes ago, Smith's right boot said:

 

 

Feel sorry for it. 

It can't jump of itself at the thought of Naismith and the 4 year deal. 

 

 

Training injury I believe!

Ahem.

[FruitJuice]

1 minute ago, Smith's right boot said:

 

 

I'd have been pissed if he'd rocked up at the likes of  Aberdeen and we lost him because of a year contract. 

 

He's our best player. 

We done what was needed to get him. 

 

He's now Injured. 

Can't wait until he's back. 

 

I move on. 

 

Others question the meaning of life. 

 

 

 

You would've understood it if the club did decide against signing him because of the length of contract?  Not everybody wouldve criticised the club if they didn't sign him because of this. 

Calling the poster a liar is bad crack.  

[Dusk_Till_Dawn]

31 minutes ago, Smith's right boot said:

 

 

I cba going back to his signing thread to prove that you are telling porkies. 

 

Only person you are fooling is yourself. 

 

I’ll go back through it for you

[Bazzas right boot]

1 minute ago, Dusk_Till_Dawn said:

 

I’ll go back through it for you

 

 

Pointless as he hasn't signed for someone else so at best you can only prove that you said the 4 year deal was a risk. 

 

I can't say how you would have reacted had we lost out on him because we refused 4 years and he signed for one of our rivals instead, because that never happened. 

 

I can only go on what you said earlier, which I don't think is true. 

 

I think you'd have been pissed and ripped the club for arse paper had that played out. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[FruitJuice]

Just now, Smith's right boot said:

 

 

Pointless as he hasn't signed for someone else so at best you can only prove that you said the 4 year deal was a risk. 

 

I can't say how you would have reacted had we lost out on him because we refused 4 years and he signed for one of our rivals instead, because that never happened. 

 

I can only go on what you said earlier, which I don't think is true. 

 

I think you'd have been pissed and ripped the club for arse paper had that played out. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

But you have been saying how others would've reacted.  

[old school tie]

Remember I suggested a pay if you pay contract at the time

[Dusk_Till_Dawn]

24 minutes ago, Smith's right boot said:

 

 

Pointless as he hasn't signed for someone else so at best you can only prove that you said the 4 year deal was a risk. 

 

I can't say how you would have reacted had we lost out on him because we refused 4 years and he signed for one of our rivals instead, because that never happened. 

 

I can only go on what you said earlier, which I don't think is true. 

 

I think you'd have been pissed and ripped the club for arse paper had that played out. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

That is one shit-hot stream of consciousness right there 

[Biffa Bacon]

1 hour ago, old school tie said:

Remember I suggested a pay if you pay contract at the time

You are remembering that a contract is negotiable by both parties. No way he would have signed a pay as you play contract, well not with us anyway. Maybe if he was getting £50k a game it might have been an option for him. I still think we are lucky to have him.

[Clerry Jambo]

2 hours ago, OTT said:

Hate to be negative, however, the odds are pretty solid that the huns will beat us. Playing the OF is a higher intensity game than say.. st Mirren so I'd rather Naismith missed the huns and came back into a game we're he can actually make a difference. As things stand we're struggling to beat the shite in this league and I'd rather Naismith helped us pick points up in the games where we should already be doing that than risk him for 3 points we're unlikely as **** to win and potentially lose both the match and Naismith for god knows how long. 

 

I'll be very annoyed with Levein if he risks Naismith against them. Totally pointless exercise. 

We aren't in any position to pick and choose which players will play in certain games. We are in serious bother with this current mob and we need to hope the injured players get back quickly and get us winning matches.

[baron of ness]

Is it that time of night when the beer kicks in?

Am going to watch now tv and Peaky Blinders  HHGH.

[Forever Hearts]

2 hours ago, Smith's right boot said:

 

 

Nah, cba. 

 

If folk are saying they were against the Naismith signing and wouldn't have been arsed if he'd went elsewhere they can crack on. 

 

Absolute pish imo. 

 

 

Plenty of posters didn't want Naismith on a four year deal. 

[Bazzas right boot]

2 hours ago, FruitJuice said:

But you have been saying how others would've reacted.  

 

 

 Based on a posting  history, yes. 

 

Can never say for sure tho, as he signed for us and not someone else. 

 

 

Edited October 16, 2019 by Smith's right boot

[Bazzas right boot]

1 minute ago, Forever Hearts said:

Plenty of posters didn't want Naismith on a four year deal. 

 

 

Aye, but he signed. 

 

If the move hadn't happened because we refused to Budge on a lower length of deal and then he signed for someone else..... 

Tears, snotters, slavers, pant wetting Everywhere on here. 

 

Folk denying that tho and saying they'd have been OK with it. 

I call bull shite on that. 

 

Some of the posters moaning about Naismith would have been the first to batter Hearts about the head had he signed for Aberdeen or the likes. 

I can imagine the posts if that had happened. 

 

Tbf, some have been honest and agreed it seemed like it was 4 years or not at all and signing him was the best thing. 

 

Others just can't help themselves. 

 

 

 

[Forever Hearts]

3 minutes ago, Smith's right boot said:

 

 

Aye, but he signed. 

 

If the move hadn't happened because we refused to Budge on a lower length of deal and then he signed for someone else..... 

Tears, snotters, slavers, pant wetting Everywhere on here. 

 

Folk denying that tho and saying they'd have been OK with it. 

I call bull shite on that. 

 

Some of the posters moaning about Naismith would have been the first to batter Hearts about the head had he signed for Aberdeen or the likes. 

I can imagine the posts if that had happened. 

 

Tbf, some have been honest and agreed it seemed like it was 4 years or not at all and signing him was the best thing. 

 

Others just can't help themselves. 

 

 

 

They obviously would've been ok with it if they didn't want him on a four year deal in the first place. 

[Guest ToqueJambo]

17 minutes ago, Forever Hearts said:

Plenty of posters didn't want Naismith on a four year deal. 

 

Let's not sign a proven EPL and international player for as long as we can? Those posters are geniuses.

[Forever Hearts]

Just now, ToqueJambo said:

 

Let's not sign a proven EPL and international player for as long as we can? Those posters are geniuses.

On top money, who is injury prone, is 32 and has had two operations whilst at Hearts? Aye, it takes a genius to work out it might not go to plan. 

[Guest ToqueJambo]

12 minutes ago, Forever Hearts said:

On top money, who is injury prone, is 32 and has had two operations whilst at Hearts? Aye, it takes a genius to work out it might not go to plan. 

 

Are they fortune tellers as well as geniuses. Brilliant! 32 eh so he'll be 36 in 4 years? How old's Whelan again playing in a much tougher area of the park. Remember Totti, Crespo, Sheringham, Zlatan, Henrik Larsson, Jimmy Bone and other world greats who played up front at the very top level in their mid 30s? No you obviously don't. 

 

Larsson by the way had two terrible injuries late in his career and still played for Man Utd at 36.

 

Imagine we signed Naismith for only 1 year - this season - and he was injured for half of it? Now that would've been daft. Instead we've got a fantastic professional who wants to play for us and also wants to transition into coaching. What idiots we are to imaging that would be a good signing.

Edited October 16, 2019 by ToqueJambo

[jr ewing]

Missed a lot of games when he started with Kilmarnock. 

[FruitJuice]

48 minutes ago, Smith's right boot said:

 

 

 Based on a posting  history, yes. 

 

Can never say for sure tho, as he signed for us and not someone else. 

 

 

I was glad we signed him, even if it did mean a four year deal. I dont think the club would've broke the bank for him.  Based on what we have seen when he is on form, we haven't had a player of that class for years.  The man is a delight to watch.  I also don't think Naismith would've took a deal like that knowing he was a risk due to injuries, he's too genuine for that.  I love having him at the club.  I'd be a hypocrite if I didn't say I was over the moon we got him.  I think if he doesn't play much due to injury, he wont be sitting back and doing feck all.  If it looks like long term injury is going to affect him, I think he'll do the decent thing and negotiate another role at the club.  If he doesn't play as often as we thought, well get value from him in other ways.  It was a no brainer getting him to the club. I'd sack levein yesterday but nothing but credit for going with this.  We won't look back on his time at the club thinking he just used us as his pension fund.  If he does play often, it's a privilege to watch him play for us.  

 

Edited October 16, 2019 by FruitJuice

[HMFC 86]

8 hours ago, Forever Hearts said:

Your failure to grasp even the simplest of comments makes conversing with you pretty much impossible. 

really don’t know why you even bother engaging with that Levein cheerleader and hubz fan

[ramrod]

3 minutes ago, FruitJuice said:

I was glad we signed him, even if it did mean a four year deal. I dont think the club would've broke the bank for him.  Based on what we have seen when he is on form, we haven't had a player of that class for years.  The man is a delight to watch.  I also don't think Naismith would've took a deal like that knowing he was a risk due to injuries, he's too genuine for that.  I love having him at the club.  I'd be a hypocrite if I didn't say I was over the moon we got him.  I think if he doesn't play much due to injury, he wont be sitting back and doing feck all.  If it looks like long term injury is going to affect him, I think he'll do the decent thing and negotiate another role at the club.  If he doesn't play as often as we thought, well get value from him in other ways.  It was a no brainer getting him to the club. I'd sack levein yesterday but nothing but credit for going with this.  We want look back on his time at the club thinking he just used us as his pension fund.  If he does play often, it's a privilege to watch him play for us.  

 

We aren't a charity . We are firmly staring a bottom six place this season after scraping into the top six in the last two seasons . We've signed our  top earner on a 4 yr deal who has hardly played a minute in months . 

Nobody at the cluc especially the manager seems to know when he's coming back . 

This looks a risk that has the potential to back fire spectacularly that's the worry .

[Hectormasson]

1 hour ago, Clerry Jambo said:

We aren't in any position to pick and choose which players will play in certain games. We are in serious bother with this current mob and we need to hope the injured players get back quickly and get us winning matches.

Correct and asap,very important fixtures every game ,,,to get as many points possible " we dont want a bottom 4 fight from now till may !

[Guest ToqueJambo]

8 minutes ago, ramrod said:

We aren't a charity . We are firmly staring a bottom six place this season after scraping into the top six in the last two seasons . We've signed our  top earner on a 4 yr deal who has hardly played a minute in months . 

Nobody at the cluc especially the manager seems to know when he's coming back . 

This looks a risk that has the potential to back fire spectacularly that's the worry .

 

Or, given he has a long contract and time to recover (and that there are many examples of 30+ players playing well), a risk that will pay off big style.

[mitch41]

3 hours ago, Smith's right boot said:

 

That’s my point Mitch. 

? 

And yet was Hughes and McLean is a  mistake. This could and maybe should be Berra's last season. Whelan looks like he could do another season after this one finishes.

[Forever Hearts]

55 minutes ago, ToqueJambo said:

 

Are they fortune tellers as well as geniuses. Brilliant! 32 eh so he'll be 36 in 4 years? How old's Whelan again playing in a much tougher area of the park. Remember Totti, Crespo, Sheringham, Zlatan, Henrik Larsson, Jimmy Bone and other world greats who played up front at the very top level in their mid 30s? No you obviously don't. 

 

Larsson by the way had two terrible injuries late in his career and still played for Man Utd at 36.

 

Imagine we signed Naismith for only 1 year - this season - and he was injured for half of it? Now that would've been daft. Instead we've got a fantastic professional who wants to play for us and also wants to transition into coaching. What idiots we are to imaging that would be a good signing.

No need for a fortune teller. He IS 32, he IS on top money and he HAS had two operations whilst at Hearts. 

[Guest ToqueJambo]

Just now, Forever Hearts said:

No need for a fortune teller. He IS 32, he IS on top money and he HAS had two operations whilst at Hearts. 

 

That's not fortune telling. That's saying what's happened. Plenty players recover from injuries to have great careers, including players who get injured in their 30s.

[FruitJuice]

29 minutes ago, ramrod said:

We aren't a charity . We are firmly staring a bottom six place this season after scraping into the top six in the last two seasons . We've signed our  top earner on a 4 yr deal who has hardly played a minute in months . 

Nobody at the cluc especially the manager seems to know when he's coming back . 

This looks a risk that has the potential to back fire spectacularly that's the worry .

I honestly dont think Naismith will keep taking money as a player if he thinks he won't play that often.  He's too genuine for that.  He won't just use us as a pension fund   

[Forever Hearts]

6 minutes ago, FruitJuice said:

I honestly dont think Naismith will keep taking money as a player if he thinks he won't play that often.  He's too genuine for that.  He won't just use us as a pension fund   

Like he did with Norwich? 

[FruitJuice]

4 minutes ago, Forever Hearts said:

Like he did with Norwich? 

Then again...  😁

[Morgan]

6 minutes ago, Forever Hearts said:

Like he did with Norwich? 

Fair point.

[JamboAl]

2 hours ago, ramrod said:

We aren't a charity . We are firmly staring a bottom six place this season after scraping into the top six in the last two seasons . We've signed our  top earner on a 4 yr deal who has hardly played a minute in months . 

Nobody at the cluc especially the manager seems to know when he's coming back . 

This looks a risk that has the potential to back fire spectacularly that's the worry .

There's a lot in what you say but I doubt if Hearts offered him a 4 year contract without sound medical guidance.  Do you?