Walker off the wage bill in January......? ( merged )

[Batistuta87]

10 hours ago, barcajambo said:

Has @sadj and @Batistuta87forgot there password? 😂

Doesn't change much for me. He's still not good enough for Hearts. Maybe a good sub to chuck on now and then in scrappy games like that, but no way is he a starter. 

 

 

[Rudi cant fail]

Maybe he has a clause in his clause in his contract similar to smith. If he plays so many games he gets another years contract. 

[davemclaren]

Heart of Midlothian manager Robbie Neilson wants to keep a hold of Jamie Walker, who scored their side's winner on Saturday against Dundee as a substitute, but says the 28-year-old winger's future is likely to be made by the player, wanted on loan by Livingston and St Johnsotone, himself over the next couple of weeks. (Edinburgh Evening News)

[Tom Hardy’s Dug]

1 hour ago, Hearts007 said:

Consistency has always been his problem  unfortunately

As it is with 80% of our attacking players

[wavydavy]

1 hour ago, Doc Rob said:

Much as I said he is a luxury player and we shouldn’t keep him earlier, I would still agree that it is worth playing him up front in the next couple of games if Boyce is still unfit. He can finish and that’s what we lack just now.

 

The only problem is that he tends to be awful when he starts games.

 

I agree. Maybe the fact that he does not seem to have a future at the club might be a good thing if he does play.

 

He will be putting himself in the shop window and he could even change Robbie's mind if he plays well and scores a few goals.

[sadj]

2 minutes ago, wavydavy said:

 

I agree. Maybe the fact that he does not seem to have a future at the club might be a good thing if he does play.

 

He will be putting himself in the shop window and he could even change Robbie's mind if he plays well and scores a few goals.

About what? 

[sadj]

30 minutes ago, Batistuta87 said:

Doesn't change much for me. He's still not good enough for Hearts. Maybe a good sub to chuck on now and then in scrappy games like that, but no way is he a starter. 

 

 

Thats sadly the crux of it i think. Some of the shit spraffed on here is batshit. 

[wavydavy]

4 minutes ago, sadj said:

About what? 

 

About letting him go on loan in January and not offering him a new contract.

[JimmyCant]

2 hours ago, Bull's-eye said:

 

Pretty much my thinking, Jamie Walker isn't good enough. Agreed.

He’s not a good enough type for a go at 2nd, but we’ve got loads in the same category 

[Fozzyonthefence]

39 minutes ago, Batistuta87 said:

Doesn't change much for me. He's still not good enough for Hearts. Maybe a good sub to chuck on now and then in scrappy games like that, but no way is he a starter. 

 

 

The problem is we have players starting every week that shouldn’t be starters.  JW would just be another one of them but I think he would have more impact as a sub than some of the guys who have been getting 90 minutes. 

[sadj]

10 minutes ago, wavydavy said:

 

About letting him go on loan in January and not offering him a new contract.

Dearie me!!! 

[JimmyCant]

56 minutes ago, Batistuta87 said:

Doesn't change much for me. He's still not good enough for Hearts. Maybe a good sub to chuck on now and then in scrappy games like that, but no way is he a starter. 

 

 

You get 11 starters only. To me the best way to approach the squad game is to have 11 starters (know your best team) half a dozen who can slot in for injuries, form loss and suspensions and can fight to start. 3-4 youngsters with genuine game time chances and a couple of wily old wildcards who will sometimes turn a difficult game for you. 
 

Walker won that game yesterday. No doubt in my mind. That’s 3 valuable points that probably would only have been one had he not come on. He’s done it frequently from the bench. He’s a perfect squad player as long as he is happy being one.

Edited December 19, 2021 by JimmyCant

[JimmyCant]

6 minutes ago, sadj said:

Dearie me!!! 

Dunno what you are deary meing about. loads of folk have been suggesting Walker for game time all season and yesterday showed why. He contributed as much in 20 odd minutes as GMS has contributed in his last 5 games 

[Bull's-eye]

25 minutes ago, JimmyCant said:

He’s not a good enough type for a go at 2nd, but we’ve got loads in the same category 

 

Threads about Jamie Walker 👍

[132goals1958]

1 minute ago, JimmyCant said:

Dunno what you are deary meing about. loads of folk have been suggesting Walker for game time all season and yesterday showed why. He contributed as much in 20 odd minutes as GMS has contributed in his last 5 games 

 

Me included. Reading comments from Neilson that his omission is due to players in his position playing really really well. Maybe I am missing something. If Jamie doesn't feature next week he can justifiably feel har done by.   

[Fozzyonthefence]

1 minute ago, Bull's-eye said:

 

Threads about Jamie Walker 👍

It’s surely relevant to the thread though if people are going to slag the guy off as not being good enough to compare him with others who aren’t good enough either but still get way more game time than him despite offering very little?

[wavydavy]

32 minutes ago, sadj said:

Dearie me!!! 

 

What does that mean?

[Wee Mikey]

40 minutes ago, JimmyCant said:

You get 11 starters only. To me the best way to approach the squad game is to have 11 starters (know your best team) half a dozen who can slot in for injuries, form loss and suspensions and can fight to start. 3-4 youngsters with genuine game time chances and a couple of wily old wildcards who will sometimes turn a difficult game for you. 
 

Walker won that game yesterday. No doubt in my mind. That’s 3 valuable points that probably would only have been one had he not come on. He’s done it frequently from the bench. He’s a perfect squad player as long as he is happy being one.

 

Too true. 👍

[Bull's-eye]

35 minutes ago, Fozzyonthefence said:

It’s surely relevant to the thread though if people are going to slag the guy off as not being good enough to compare him with others who aren’t good enough either but still get way more game time than him despite offering very little?

 

Not seeing anybody slagging him off and I'm pretty sure he knows himself why he fails to start every week.

 

He can't get a game, he pops up occasionally, gets us all excited then disappears into obscurity again . . Rinse & repeat.

 

These are facts not opinions.

 

Bringing other players into the thread is whataboutery because everybody on this thread can't not agree he's wasted his time for us, whatever the reasons.

The fact is, to use a popular JKB phrase, he's been a wage thief.

 

The thread is about him staying and knowing his history Ive seen the square root of zilch to make me want him to stay on . . . That's my opinion.

[niblick1874]

On 09/12/2021 at 14:41, niblick1874 said:

Hi Section Q, That's quite the headline you have going there. Why not, Walker going out on loan, then the question mark? Off the wage bill? WTF is going on with this place. 

 

 

On 10/12/2021 at 19:05, Section Q said:

You sound like an unhappy chappy mate.

Not much I can do about that.

Please try & stifle the urge to reply......👍

 

On 13/12/2021 at 12:09, niblick1874 said:

 

Why did you outdo the hack with a shit headline aimed at a Hearts player 

 

On 14/12/2021 at 06:59, Section Q said:

Broken record.....

 

On 15/12/2021 at 10:32, niblick1874 said:

 

Wrong. It's not a broken record. It's an unanswered question. Answer the question. Why did you not just put up the headline from the hack. Why did you, instead, come up with, and then put up, a derogatory headline aimed at a Hearts player.  

 

On 15/12/2021 at 18:13, Section Q said:

Oh Deary me.......!

 

Again, Why did you outdo the hack by posting such a shit headline aimed at a Hearts player. 

[Francis Albert]

2 hours ago, davemclaren said:

Heart of Midlothian manager Robbie Neilson wants to keep a hold of Jamie Walker, who scored their side's winner on Saturday against Dundee as a substitute, but says the 28-year-old winger's future is likely to be made by the player, wanted on loan by Livingston and St Johnsotone, himself over the next couple of weeks. (Edinburgh Evening News)

So basically Robbie (or Savage) isn't going to try to keep him.

Edited December 19, 2021 by Francis Albert

[OTT]

3 hours ago, Sertse said:

Vs Dundee at Tynecastle I reckon he would have made all the difference if he was brought on instead of gnanduillet. We'll never know obviously but he is very effective off the bench.

 

Not just that, Gnando the other week rounds the keeper and misses, I don't see Walker missing that. 

 

Problem with online debates is that folk seem to only believe in extremes, i.e 'he's not good enough for Hearts full stop.' or 'he should be starting every week'.

 

Walker can't handle starting every week but does have the talent in his locker to play for Hearts. We've been there and got the t-shirt, but he has a genuine knack for scoring important goals coming off the bench. I think in that role he could achieve big things here doing that. If a deal to keep him is doable, I really think the club should do it. GMS, Gino, McKay and Woodburn aren't those types of players. GMS has cost us as many points as he's won us with his misses, Gino hasn't got the composure in front of goal either, and McKay isn't a player whose first thought is to get a shot off. Woodburns not worked out. 

 

If we had a David Milinkovic type player who could genuinely turn on moments of magic with direct play and goals and win us the game I'd see the argument to letting Walker go, but we don't. We have 3/4 wingers playing in a formation that demands them to be much less goal shy than they are. Its not working, and bringing Jamie on in the 2nd half could be the key to making this work for the time being. Gino & GMS can cause teams every type of problem except consistent goals. Letting them run the opposing team ragged for 45-60 minutes and bringing on Walker to find space and score goals makes a lot of sense. 

[davemclaren]

Just now, Francis Albert said:

So basically Robbie isn't going to try to keep him.

He seems ambivalent if that story is true. 

[JimmyCant]

25 minutes ago, Bull's-eye said:

 

.The thread is about him staying and knowing his history Ive seen the square root of zilch to make me want him to stay on . . . That's my opinion.

Did you see the two points he won us yesterday though aye ? Could be 2 very crucial points from a game that had nil nil written all over it. In fact at 0-0 for much longer Collum probably abandons it

[Francis Albert]

1 minute ago, Francis Albert said:

So basically Robbie isn't going to try to keep him.

 

3 minutes ago, davemclaren said:

He seems ambivalent if that story is true. 

Ambivalent = he doesn't care and so is not going to try to persuade him to stay. Fair enough and I doubt given how many minutes Robbie has played him Walker would take a lot of notice if Robbie did. 

 

 

[JimmyCant]

4 minutes ago, Francis Albert said:

 

Ambivalent = he doesn't care and so is not going to try to persuade him to stay. Fair enough and I doubt given how many minutes Robbie has played him Walker would take a lot of notice if Robbie did. 

 

 

I look at GMS and Gino and Woodburn and wonder in each case why none of them until yesterday have been replaced by Walker when we needed something, then I wonder why not and I can’t explain it. 

[132goals1958]

If Ginnelly, Mackay Steven or Woodburn had come on and effectively changed the game they would quite rightly have been lauded. For some reason some are reluctant to recognise Walker in a positive light.

[Bull's-eye]

13 minutes ago, JimmyCant said:

Did you see the two points he won us yesterday though aye ? Could be 2 very crucial points from a game that had nil nil written all over it. In fact at 0-0 for much longer Collum probably abandons it

 

Seen it all before, he'll probably score the winner coming off the bench against Hibs and earn himself a start. Then disappear up his own farter . . . .   Again.

 

I will reiterate again, JW is a very good player, but for whatever reason he cannot string together a reasonable run of form, if the club is to move forward then he's absolutely no good to us.

 

Judging by the clubs mooted to be after his services it's a wide ranging train of thought.

[Cruyff]

2 hours ago, JimmyCant said:

Dunno what you are deary meing about. loads of folk have been suggesting Walker for game time all season and yesterday showed why. He contributed as much in 20 odd minutes as GMS has contributed in his last 5 games 

Contributed more in 20 odd minutes than GMS, McKay, Woodburn and Gino have contributed in umpteen matches. 

[King Of The Cat Cafe]

If Boyce can't play, then Walker should play.  Knows how to graft on the ball and can make something out of nothing.  Makes opposing teams wary.

[Jambo in Bathgate]

2 hours ago, JimmyCant said:

You get 11 starters only. To me the best way to approach the squad game is to have 11 starters (know your best team) half a dozen who can slot in for injuries, form loss and suspensions and can fight to start. 3-4 youngsters with genuine game time chances and a couple of wily old wildcards who will sometimes turn a difficult game for you. 
 

Walker won that game yesterday. No doubt in my mind. That’s 3 valuable points that probably would only have been one had he not come on. He’s done it frequently from the bench. He’s a perfect squad player as long as he is happy being one.

He is a different option to throw on when we require a goal. I’m sure he will earn more with us than Livi or St J. I would offer him a two year extension. His goals have as you say generally won us all the points on a number of occasions 

[JimmyCant]

1 hour ago, Bull's-eye said:

 

Seen it all before, he'll probably score the winner coming off the bench against Hibs and earn himself a start. Then disappear up his own farter . . . .   Again.

 

I will reiterate again, JW is a very good player, but for whatever reason he cannot string together a reasonable run of form, if the club is to move forward then he's absolutely no good to us.

 

Judging by the clubs mooted to be after his services it's a wide ranging train of thought.

How far forward and how quick do you think we’ll be going like because then it gets back to Walker not being the only one we’d need to replace by a long chalk ?

[viva hate]

Walker should be knowhere near the starting line up in my opinion. He's been absolutely pish since coming back and one goal doesn't suddenly make him fit enough to start. Good option off the bench though.

[merseyjambo]

I think a lot will depend on Jamie Walker himself. 
 

On his day he’s a good player and can provide something different.

 

Do I see him as a week in, week out starter. No. He doesn’t fit into Robbie’s system. 
 

Having said that, like yesterday and other away days where we need to change things up, he’s a good option to have. 
 

At the end of the season, he’s free to go but his options I suspect will be limited. England. Unlikely. Which leaves either America or signing for someone like St Johnstone, St Mirren or Dundee United. 
 

Does Walker himself believe he’s capable of playing 90 minutes every week. 
 

If the wages were right and JW himself is happy to know he’s going to be used as an impact sub (might realise by doing that it will prolong his career) then I’d be tempted to keep him on. If he thinks he’s capable of playing 90 minutes every week, no chance.

[gordiegords]

Id keep him, impact sub and when he is on it im very confident when he runs at a defence he is actually dangerous, unlike some of the others, granted Jamie often goes missing, be interesting to see if he gets a start or 30 mins in the next two or three games, when jamie is on it, he is very dangerous, knows where the net is for sure.

[Francis Albert]

I think there have been many times this season when we could have done with an impact starter.

Yesterday was the latest. One shot on target in the game, in the 75th minute, despite totally dominating possession.

Players with a reputation for laziness or poor attitude have always been unpopular with some. Even Willie Bauld suffered unfairly  at first. Willie Hamilton may be the prime example of one under valued.

I am not romotely comparing Walker with those but ability and actual contribution counts for me as well as  or even more than  "attitude" or "body language" or even effort.

 

 

[Francis Albert]

OK my previous examples would mean nothing to most. Let me try Laryea Kingston. Again of course not a direct comparison.

 

Perhaps a thread on allegedly lazy "players with the wrong attitude I have liked" is warranted.

Edited December 19, 2021 by Francis Albert

[Thomson1874]

Jamie has always been a great finisher. The way he scored the goal yesterday reminded me of how Rudi would’ve finished a chance like that and it’s actually how Boyce should’ve took his chance against Rangers last week.

 

I think if Jamie is happy to play the role of an impact sub going forward and would be happy to take a lower paid contract to match his role in the squad then I would be happy to see him get an extension but if he wanted to be on the same money then I would let him go.

[Francis Albert]

8 minutes ago, Thomson1874 said:

Jamie has always been a great finisher. The way he scored the goal yesterday reminded me of how Rudi would’ve finished a chance like that and it’s actually how Boyce should’ve took his chance against Rangers last week.

 

I think if Jamie is happy to play the role of an impact sub going forward and would be happy to take a lower paid contract to match his role in the squad then I would be happy to see him get an extension but if he wanted to be on the same money then I would let him go.

Would need to know the salaries in each case to judge. And also whether "impact sub" is his only potential role. I don't think it is.

Edited December 19, 2021 by Francis Albert

[Thomson1874]

24 minutes ago, Francis Albert said:

Would need to know the salaries in each case to judge. And also whether "impact sub" is his only potential role. I don't think it is.

That’s very true. I would assume that he is a relatively higher earner due to being one of the bigger signings that summer and if that is the case then I would’ve have him on the same terms.

 

I would be delighted if he could contribute more but in my opinion I’ve seen enough from him when he starts games that he isn’t good enough to be a starter for us going forward. I think being an impact player is still an important role to play in the squad and you need players like that but he might not be happen with that.

[Paisley Jambo]

Delighted for Jamie.

 

Hopefully get more of a chance now. Offers more than GMS.

 

We should be building our squad in January and keeping JW to end of season if not beyond.

 

Let St J find help from elsewhere. They’ve never helped us.

[Lfhearts]

Nielson has told so many lies re Jamie who knows what situation is, first of all "he was not fit", then he "has to be patient" as better options available, "now he wants him to stay", whereas I think Neilson does not like him and Jamie knows it, I think sadly that he will be away as has been mismanaged this season.

[Canscot]

2 hours ago, Paisley Jambo said:

Delighted for Jamie.

 

Hopefully get more of a chance now. Offers more than GMS.

 

We should be building our squad in January and keeping JW to end of season if not beyond.

 

Let St J find help from elsewhere. They’ve never helped us.

They gave us money in our hour of need.  

[chrystaf]

6 hours ago, OTT said:

 

Not just that, Gnando the other week rounds the keeper and misses, I don't see Walker missing that. 

 

Problem with online debates is that folk seem to only believe in extremes, i.e 'he's not good enough for Hearts full stop.' or 'he should be starting every week'.

 

Walker can't handle starting every week but does have the talent in his locker to play for Hearts. We've been there and got the t-shirt, but he has a genuine knack for scoring important goals coming off the bench. I think in that role he could achieve big things here doing that. If a deal to keep him is doable, I really think the club should do it. GMS, Gino, McKay and Woodburn aren't those types of players. GMS has cost us as many points as he's won us with his misses, Gino hasn't got the composure in front of goal either, and McKay isn't a player whose first thought is to get a shot off. Woodburns not worked out. 

 

If we had a David Milinkovic type player who could genuinely turn on moments of magic with direct play and goals and win us the game I'd see the argument to letting Walker go, but we don't. We have 3/4 wingers playing in a formation that demands them to be much less goal shy than they are. Its not working, and bringing Jamie on in the 2nd half could be the key to making this work for the time being. Gino & GMS can cause teams every type of problem except consistent goals. Letting them run the opposing team ragged for 45-60 minutes and bringing on Walker to find space and score goals makes a lot of sense. 

One of the few sensible posts.  Half want him out as he's not good enough and half want him playing every game.

[chrystaf]

2 hours ago, Lfhearts said:

Nielson has told so many lies re Jamie who knows what situation is, first of all "he was not fit", then he "has to be patient" as better options available, "now he wants him to stay", whereas I think Neilson does not like him and Jamie knows it, I think sadly that he will be away as has been mismanaged this season.

May be a bit of truth in that.  Who in their right mind as our manager would play Gnando before Jamie.

[Chuck Berry]

7 hours ago, Cruyff said:

Contributed more in 20 odd minutes than GMS, McKay, Woodburn and Gino have contributed in umpteen matches. 

 

This, although slighly harsh on McKay.

[Section Q]

19 hours ago, niblick1874 said:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Again, Why did you outdo the hack by posting such a shit headline aimed at a Hearts player. 

Troll .....

[Sub4TiddlerMurray]

Jamie Walker is an exceptionally talented player.

 

Last season (as I remember it) his form at the start was indifferent, maybe 1 in 4 games he made an impact, the other three anonymous. It was this early season form that I suspect influenced Neilson and he rightly benched him. My guess is that Neilson was not impressed with Walker's attitude and body language: i.e. not enough fire and hunger in his belly. I remember thinking then that he should be let go.

 

Then, towards the latter part of the season, Walker had some very impressive games and scoring goals from the bench. After each good game he was benched for the next. And it started looking a bit unfair as he seemed to be making an effort and making a big difference on the park.

 

Since then, I've often thought that "if a player of Walker's quality is on the bench and can't get a start, that tells you how good a squad we now have."

 

So, why on earth would we even think about not resigning him...unlesss someone better is signed to take his place. 

 

Against Dundee, he turned the game and looked to have that fire and hunger. If Neilson has managed to fire him up with the right attitude, then we must keep him. He is simply too good to let other teams get him on the cheap.

 

People saying he can't last 90 minutes are talking p!sh. He's 28 years old and as fit as any other player in the squad.

 

 

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

For all this alleged talent that Jamie Walker has, he could barely get a game for anyone away from Tynecastle, then came back to a team put in to the second tier and was mediocre. If we are going to improve as a team, Jamie Walker is not the answer (nor is GMS, Gnanduillet etc. but just because Walker is on a par with these type of players doesn't mean these are the players you want in your team).

[A.JAMBO]

10 hours ago, JimmyCant said:

Did you see the two points he won us yesterday though aye ? Could be 2 very crucial points from a game that had nil nil written all over it. In fact at 0-0 for much longer Collum probably abandons it

3 points