Jump to content

Naismith


Bowtow Jambo

Recommended Posts

AlphonseCapone
1 minute ago, farin said:

 

He needs more back massages then. 😄👍🏻

 

No one is turning that down at Hearts 🤭

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 347
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Thomaso

    26

  • wavydavy

    19

  • GinRummy

    18

  • Robbo-Jambo

    13

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

What frustrates me about JKB is that Naismith is criticised equally for not trying to play for the club and rushing back too soon. The two are polar opposites.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Hungry hippo said:

What frustrates me about JKB is that Naismith is criticised equally for not trying to play for the club and rushing back too soon. The two are polar opposites.

 

:thumbsup: .  Yes, he’s damned if does, and damned if he doesn’t.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pasquale for King
51 minutes ago, farin said:

 

Yep I remember that with Cameron back then, wouldn’t surprise me if a dunt in the back upset another problem area tbh. Wasn’t it the Chinese that perfected this type of diagnosis thousands of years ago ?. 

Acupuncture yeah, we should be looking at every possible means to get him playing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pasquale for King
17 minutes ago, Hungry hippo said:

What frustrates me about JKB is that Naismith is criticised equally for not trying to play for the club and rushing back too soon. The two are polar opposites.

Indeed they are 👍🏽

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, weehammy said:

Seem to recall that in the movie Bull Durham the pitcher wore his girlfriend’s knickers to cure his concentration problems. Would offer my wife’s but Vanacek borrowed and never returned loads of them.

:laugh2:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, We_are_the_Hearts said:

We can have a go at the club for a lot of things but this is not one of them. This has just been unlucky.

Is it though? What would have been lucky is if he played regularly. Naismith has not played regular football for five years. He absolutely robbed Norwich and he is doing the same for us. I’m sick of him to be honest. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, weehammy said:

Seem to recall that in the movie Bull Durham the pitcher wore his girlfriend’s knickers to cure his concentration problems. Would offer my wife’s but Vanacek borrowed and never returned loads of them.

 

I thought it was Zeefuik:naughty:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Kiwidoug said:

Don't suppose we are entitled to an injury update yet?  Part of the master plan.


The first most of us will hear he is not playing will be when Scott Wilson announces the team just before the game!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dusk_Till_Dawn
37 minutes ago, Cruickshank for Scotland said:


The first most of us will hear he is not playing will be when Scott Wilson announces the team just before the game!


Most of the injury news we get is just lies anyway

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, Cruickshank for Scotland said:


The first most of us will hear he is not playing will be when Scott Wilson announces the team just before the game!


Quite right. Give nothing away to the lochenders.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, GinRummy said:


Quite right. Give nothing away to the lochenders.

Stendel seemed surprised that the press ask about who is fit. In Germany they seem to be more secretive. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, davemclaren said:

Stendel seemed surprised that the press ask about who is fit. In Germany they seem to be more secretive. 


maybe going to get a bit more vague. Not going to go down well on here. I think he’s right to keep it quiet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dusk_Till_Dawn
2 minutes ago, GinRummy said:


maybe going to get a bit more vague. Not going to go down well on here. I think he’s right to keep it quiet.


A bit more vague? What than Levein making shit up? :rofl:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Francis Albert
14 minutes ago, davemclaren said:

Stendel seemed surprised that the press ask about who is fit. In Germany they seem to be more secretive. 

Or just usually fit?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, GinRummy said:


Quite right. Give nothing away to the lochenders.


Don’t think it’s a secret that Naismith will not be playing. Kirk has just announced his injury could be “long term”! ☹️

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dusk_Till_Dawn
2 minutes ago, Cruickshank for Scotland said:


Don’t think it’s a secret that Naismith will not be playing. Kirk has just announced his injury could be “long term”! ☹️


Well there’s a surprise. Budge will probably extend his contract 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Francis Albert
5 hours ago, Pasquale for King said:

A more qualified person will confirm it but the two problem areas are obviously connected and can affect each other. Remember Colin Cameron wearing a mouth guard to cure a groin problem? I’m going to physio for my back in an hour, I will ask.

Wow. What was he doing with his mouth?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Cruickshank for Scotland said:


Don’t think it’s a secret that Naismith will not be playing. Kirk has just announced his injury could be “long term”! ☹️


Aye you’re right. Common knowledge I suppose. Nobody really thought he’d make it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Barack said:

Washington will be back though.


A non-scorer for a prolific scorer (when fit!) 😖

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, GinRummy said:


maybe going to get a bit more vague. Not going to go down well on here. I think he’s right to keep it quiet.

I accept that.  I don't think we should be telling Hibs anything about anyone likely to play.  I think in general they could give updates on guys like Garruchio who will not be playing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Francis Albert
10 minutes ago, Cruickshank for Scotland said:


Don’t think it’s a secret that Naismith will not be playing. Kirk has just announced his injury could be “long term”! ☹️

Does he ever has other sorts of injuries?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Cruickshank for Scotland said:


A non-scorer for a prolific scorer (when fit!) 😖


might mean McLean or wighton not playing. Glass half full and all that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

been here before
4 minutes ago, Cruickshank for Scotland said:


A non-scorer for a prolific scorer (when fit!) 😖

 

121 goals in 477 club appearances and 10 in 51 for Scotland is prolific aye?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, been here before said:

 

121 goals in 477 club appearances and 10 in 51 for Scotland is prolific aye?


Prolific compared to Washington that’s for sure! Aye?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Cruickshank for Scotland said:


Don’t think it’s a secret that Naismith will not be playing. Kirk has just announced his injury could be “long term”! ☹️


Not unexpected but where did you hear / read that ?

 

edit.   Evening news 

 

Edited by 1971fozzy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

kingantti1874
22 minutes ago, Cruickshank for Scotland said:


Don’t think it’s a secret that Naismith will not be playing. Kirk has just announced his injury could be “long term”! ☹️


I think he said “we need to be careful with him as it will be beneficial for us in the long term” when asked if he would be available for hibs 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, 1971fozzy said:


Not unexpected but where did you hear / read that ?

 


Coverage of Kirk’s interview on Facebook

Link to comment
Share on other sites

been here before
4 minutes ago, Cruickshank for Scotland said:


Prolific compared to Washington that’s for sure! Aye?

 

But not really prolific overall though.

 

No doubt youll know better than everyone else though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, kingantti1874 said:


I think he said “we need to be careful with him as it will be beneficial for us in the long term” when asked if he would be available for hibs 


Fair enough but I read it that he was ruled out of the Derby.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, kingantti1874 said:


I think he said “we need to be careful with him as it will be beneficial for us in the long term” when asked if he would be available for hibs 

 

Correct.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, been here before said:

 

But not really prolific overall though.

 

No doubt youll know better than everyone else though.


Are you just on to have a pop again or do you have a point to make?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Cruickshank for Scotland said:


Don’t think it’s a secret that Naismith will not be playing. Kirk has just announced his injury could be “long term”! ☹️

Oh god great ....😢

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is there a specialist Naismith could go see? I mean, we can't have the hamstrings going, the knees going and the back going. Maybe there are changes he could make to how he plays which would reduce the strain on his body. Tommy Wright credits himself for Maclean lasting so long because he kept him off artificial surfaces. Perhaps thats a first step and managing his game time effectively until we can see some sort of sustained improvement on his injury situation. (I.e can play longer than 30 mins before hitting the pain barrier).

 

Its unbelievably frustrating because Naismith is a talisman in terms of what he can do for us. With him in the team performances go up and there is a will to win, the second he's off the park that disappears (which speaks volumes about the mentality of the squad). Its crucial that we find a way of maximising his involvement without these long spells out. Quite frankly 45 minutes at Hamilton and missing the derby is a terrible trade off.  

 

The example I keep using is Totti. The guy played until he was 40 and managed to do so for a number of reasons - externally, football in Italy is played at a slower pace, for example adjusting his game so it was less built around running and more about excellent placement. Towards his final seasons he become more of a super sub as he still had the quality without the legs. Much like Naismith IMO. Naismith playing anymore than 40 minutes is a waste of everyones time. He's not got the body for it anymore. Using him when opposition legs tire and he can make an impact is far more useful. I really hope Stendel sees this and makes the necessary adjustments as Naismith cannot play 1 half and then miss 3/4/5 games continuously. Its bad management of an absolute gift of a player.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

been here before
9 minutes ago, Cruickshank for Scotland said:


Are you just on to have a pop again or do you have a point to make?

 

That your point is, as ever, shite.

 

Naismith ("prolific and more prolofic than Washington") 121 goals in 477 career appearances. 

 

Washington 130 in 358. 

 

But then your original point wasnt that he was more prolific than Washington, just that Naismith was prolific.

 

Have you another caveat you forgot to mention?

 

Edited: Infact know what, dont bother. You're not worth the childish pish you keep spounting until you think you're right.

 

Edited by been here before
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, kingantti1874 said:


I think he said “we need to be careful with him as it will be beneficial for us in the long term” when asked if he would be available for hibs 


Just checked his quote he said -

 

“Having him available would be great but we might need to look a wee bit long term with him”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, OTT said:

Is there a specialist Naismith could go see?

 

If there is, we will find them. We have our top man conducting a review of the medical team as we speak. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, been here before said:

 

That your point is, as ever, shite.

 

Naismith ("prolific and more prolofic than Washington") 121 goals in 477 career appearances. 

 

Washington 130 in 358. 

 

 

That's not a fair comparison. Washington clubs and goals before Hearts.

 

2009–2012 St Ives Town[a] 80 (54)
2012–2014 Newport County 39 (5)
2014–2016 Peterborough United 82 (27)
2016–2018 Queens Park Rangers 92 (13)
2018–2019 Sheffield United 15 (0)

 

Naismith

 

2003–2007 Kilmarnock 102 (29)
2007–2012 Rangers 98 (28)
2012–2016 Everton 103 (18)
2016–2019 Norwich City 44 (6)

 

There's a marked difference in the quality of leagues both have spent most of their time in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, been here before said:

 

That your point is, as ever, shite.

 

Naismith ("prolific and more prolofic than Washington") 121 goals in 477 career appearances. 

 

Washington 130 in 358. 

 

But then your original point wasnt that he was more prolific than Washington, just that Naismith was prolific.

 

Have you another caveat you forgot to mention?

 

Edited: Infact know what, dont bother. You're not worth the childish pish you keep spounting until you think you're right.

 


Of these 130 goals Washington scored 54 of these goals for St Ives! 😂

The rest were all in lower league football unlike Naismith who has scored at the top level for Rangers, Everton and Scotland so quoting stats at me was “shite”!

As for not bothering replying PLEASE do not reply to any of my posts because I have certainly had enough of your “childish pish”.

Edited by Thomaso
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, JFK-1 said:

 

That's not a fair comparison. Washington clubs and goals before Hearts.

 

2009–2012 St Ives Town[a] 80 (54)
2012–2014 Newport County 39 (5)
2014–2016 Peterborough United 82 (27)
2016–2018 Queens Park Rangers 92 (13)
2018–2019 Sheffield United 15 (0)

 

Naismith

 

2003–2007 Kilmarnock 102 (29)
2007–2012 Rangers 98 (28)
2012–2016 Everton 103 (18)
2016–2019 Norwich City 44 (6)

 

There's a marked difference in the quality of leagues both have spent most of their time in.


Correct.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

been here before
12 minutes ago, JFK-1 said:

 

That's not a fair comparison. Washington clubs and goals before Hearts.

 

2009–2012 St Ives Town[a] 80 (54)
2012–2014 Newport County 39 (5)
2014–2016 Peterborough United 82 (27)
2016–2018 Queens Park Rangers 92 (13)
2018–2019 Sheffield United 15 (0)

 

Naismith

 

2003–2007 Kilmarnock 102 (29)
2007–2012 Rangers 98 (28)
2012–2016 Everton 103 (18)
2016–2019 Norwich City 44 (6)

 

There's a marked difference in the quality of leagues both have spent most of their time in.

 

Indeed there is but thats not the point the slaver in chief was making.

 

He made a statement that was wrong. Anyone with half a brain might have checked the stats or the respective levels before stating such rubbish. Not Thomaso though.... "aye but ah meant, but but but, but ah meant...".

 

Whatever way its dressed up though the slavers point that Naismith is a "prolific" goalscorer is pish.

Edited by been here before
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, been here before said:

 

That your point is, as ever, shite.

 

Naismith ("prolific and more prolofic than Washington") 121 goals in 477 career appearances. 

 

Washington 130 in 358. 

 

But then your original point wasnt that he was more prolific than Washington, just that Naismith was prolific.

 

Have you another caveat you forgot to mention?

 

Edited: Infact know what, dont bother. You're not worth the childish pish you keep spounting until you think you're right.

 

 

The suggestion that Washington is a more prolific goal scorer than Naismith because he banged in a load of goals in the English 7th Tier. 

 

There really have been some harrowing posts flying around today. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, been here before said:

 

Indeed there is but thats not the point the slaver in chief was making.

 

He made a statement that was wrong. Anyone with half a brain might have checked the stats or the respective levels before stating such rubbish. Not Thomaso though.... "aye but ah meant, but but but, but ah meant...".

 

Whatever way its dressed up though the slavers point that Naismith is a "prolific" goalscorer is pish.


😂

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, TheOak88 said:

 

The suggestion that Washington is a more prolific goal scorer than Naismith because he banged in a load of goals in the English 7th Tier. 

 

There really have been some harrowing posts flying around today. 


More embarrassing for him than harrowing! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, TheOak88 said:

 

We have our top man conducting a review of the medical team as we speak. 

Who???

 

(Not sure if you'll get the movie quote I'm angling at here, but something to lighten the mood). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




×
×
  • Create New...