Naismith In!!!!

[Dazo]

4 minutes ago, Cruyff said:

It's very simple. 

 

It's either a top class manager....Ambition

 

Or Naisy (needs to pump Hibs). 

 

Nothing in between is going to be acceptable. 

In a nutshell. Hope the Naismith haters are ready for the in between. 

[Dazo]

12 minutes ago, Led Tasso said:

 

We had Celtic at home, they have them at Parkhead. Yes, bogus red card, etc. We didn't get a result.

What has that got to do with the incomparable comparison you made ? 

[Gizmo]

3 hours ago, Tom Hardy’s Dug said:

You’re enjoying Neilson not being there. That’s what you are enjoying - no shame in that.

 

There was no on field evidence of a desire to win that second half last night - I am sure anyone that watched it and the stats will back that up.

 

Win or lose at the weekend I’ll be disappointed if the board doesn’t appoint the best man for the job.

 

If that man is Naismith, fair enough. We’ll be back arguing about our next manager this time next year. 

Who then? Since plenty have set their stall out as to who is not good enough. 

I don't want a "that's for the board" since you've already pre-empted that for them by deciding Naismith isn't an acceptable choice...therefor have a go yourself.

 

Edited May 25, 2023 by Gizmo

[Watt-Zeefuik]

21 minutes ago, bigfatskinnyjambo97 said:

Fair enough mate - apologies for misrepresenting what point you were making. I'm passionate about the club and have probably tarred you with a brush that wasn't deserved. I'm half working/half looking at kickback so not got time to read everything's that's been said previously etc.

 

Ay the performance is Paisley was gantin first half but it really isn't easy to play expansive, attacking football against them as has been proven time and again this season. Aye, the second half wasn't good enough last night, but it's Ibrox mate - we're not gonna outplay them for 90 mins, not even with Messi up top. I just look at the performances against Celtic, Aberdeen and Rangers (the three top teams in the league) and they've all been of the required standard. The guy obviously gets the club and his passion is intoxicating for me! Anyway, each to their own - understand your concerns about him. Just don't think we're able to get much better, especially now that third been bungled. We'll see though! 

Cheers all good.

[Tom Hardy’s Dug]

6 minutes ago, Gizmo said:

Who then? Since plenty have set their stall out as to who is not good enough. 

I don't want a "that's for the board" since you've already pre-empted that them deciding Naismith isn't acceptable...therefor have a go yourself.

 

Ok here’s a question for you.

 

Naismith has said he wouldn’t be sure he was ready for the job if he was offered it. He hasn’t said he would definitely accept it.

 

If Naismith turned it down who would you want as manager?

[Watt-Zeefuik]

14 minutes ago, Dazo said:

What has that got to do with the incomparable comparison you made ? 

 

My original statement was that they got a win over the OF and we got a draw. They had Rangers at home and beat them. We had Celtic at home and lost, despite getting a draw at Ibrox. That's the comparison. That's why they're third and we're not. They have been the better team over the last 7 games, even with the improvement under Naismith.

[merseyjambo]

2 minutes ago, Led Tasso said:

 

My original statement was that they got a win over the OF and we got a draw. They had Rangers at home and beat them. We had Celtic at home and lost, despite getting a draw at Ibrox. That's the comparison. That's why they're third and we're not. They have been the better team over the last 7 games, even with the improvement under Naismith.

No we’re 3rd because of 2 points out of 9 against Livi, 4 points out of 9 against Killie, 5 points out of 12 against St Mirren and 1 point out of 24 against the OF. 19 of those games under Robbie. 10 points out of 57.

[Fozzyonthefence]

38 minutes ago, Tom Hardy’s Dug said:

Neilson didn’t coach Cochrane to become better then? Probably our most valuable asset and he has learned all of his 1st team improvement under Robbie.

 

Are you ignoring the other improvements in players last season as well?

 

Or even this shitest of seasons - Ginnelly to striker? Inspired really wasn’t it? Getting Sibbick his fan hate driven rut? (how many Naismith evangelists were chasing Sibbick out of the club 6 months ago?)

I’m not sure Neilson did the coaching did he?  Cochrane, the guy Neilson allegedly told wouldn’t play again this season if Kingsley was fit.  Add in Atkinson and Oda and there are 3 players that Naismith is getting a tune out of that Neilson had seemingly given up on (our 3 best players against Aberdeen last Saturday), whether you want to call that good coaching or good player management. 
 

As for judging whether a manager is improving players it’s not exactly a back and white thing though, especially if we haven’t seen them play at their previous clubs and I must confess that I don’t think I’d seen many, if any, of our signings of the last couple of seasons play before. And I won’t be alone. 

[Fozzyonthefence]

3 minutes ago, merseyjambo said:

No we’re 3rd because of 2 points out of 9 against Livi, 4 points out of 9 against Killie, 5 points out of 12 against St Mirren and 1 point out of 24 against the OF. 19 of those games under Robbie. 10 points out of 57.

11 out of 30 v Livi, Killie, St Mirren is a bad enough stat! 😳

[merseyjambo]

1 minute ago, Fozzyonthefence said:

11 out of 30 v Livi, Killie, St Mirren is a bad enough stat! 😳

Exactly, a lot are criticising Naismith for losing last night in a must win game when the problem is much more deep seated. 10 out of 27 against those clubs under RN is a much bigger issue than Naismith drawing in Paisley and at Ibrox.

[Gizmo]

18 minutes ago, Tom Hardy’s Dug said:

Ok here’s a question for you.

 

Naismith has said he wouldn’t be sure he was ready for the job if he was offered it. He hasn’t said he would definitely accept it.

 

If Naismith turned it down who would you want as manager?

I asked first. 

[Watt-Zeefuik]

16 minutes ago, merseyjambo said:

No we’re 3rd because of 2 points out of 9 against Livi, 4 points out of 9 against Killie, 5 points out of 12 against St Mirren and 1 point out of 24 against the OF. 19 of those games under Robbie. 10 points out of 57.

 

And Aberdeen were in touching distance because they garnered a total of 4 points in 9 matches from the WC break to Feb 4, during which we blew past them. They got 6 from St. Mirren, 5 from Ross County, and 3 out of 24 against the OF.  After that bad run, they sorted themselves out and won 8 from 9, an absolutely fantastic run of results for them that overhauled our difference.

 

We can do this all day.

 

Once again, regardless of anything else or whose fault was what, had we played like the third best team in Scotland over the last 7 games we would have gotten third. Aberdeen were better than us over that stretch. They got a home OF win and we didn't. Despite having three OF games over the last seven to our 2 and playing us at Tynecastle, they have 10 points from six and we have 8. We can argue about whose fault that is until the cows come home (and I'm most certainly not saying it's all Naismith's, and give Aberdeen credit for beating Rangers when they were still harboring dreams of catching Celtic), but that was the competition. They beat us and they're third.

Edited May 25, 2023 by Led Tasso

[davemclaren]

League positions are earned over a season of results. 

[merseyjambo]

1 minute ago, Led Tasso said:

 

And Aberdeen were in touching distance because they garnered a total of 4 points in 9 matches from the WC break to Feb 4, during which we blew past them. They got 6 from St. Mirren, 5 from Ross County, and 3 out of 24 against the OF.  After that, they sorted themselves out and won 8 from 9, an absolutely fantastic run of results for them that overhauled our difference.

 

We can do this all day.

 

Once again, regardless of anything else or whose fault was what, had we played like the third best team in Scotland over the last 7 games we would have gotten third. Aberdeen were better than us over that stretch. They got a home OF win and we didn't. Despite having three OF games over the last seven to our 2 and playing us at Tynecastle, they have 10 points from six and we have 8. We can argue about whose fault that is until the cows come home (and I'm most certainly not saying it's all Naismith's, and give Aberdeen credit for beating Rangers when they were still harboring dreams of catching Celtic), but that was the competition. They beat us and they're third.

The bottom line is that the season has to be regarded as a failure.

 

People can argue about whether we need someone with experience or not.

 

I’m leaning more towards giving him a chance if he wants the pressure of the job and is happy to take it on a 1 year deal which can be reviewed during the season.

 

We can’t afford another costly mistake and if you take someone like Heckinbottom who couldn’t do the business at ER but can get Sheffield United promoted, we could end up making another huge mistake by offering a known name a 3 year deal. 
 

Naismith for 12 months to be reviewed is less of a risk financially.

[Fozzyonthefence]

5 minutes ago, Led Tasso said:

 

And Aberdeen were in touching distance because they garnered a total of 4 points in 9 matches from the WC break to Feb 4, during which we blew past them. They got 6 from St. Mirren, 5 from Ross County, and 3 out of 24 against the OF.  After that bad run, they sorted themselves out and won 8 from 9, an absolutely fantastic run of results for them that overhauled our difference.

 

We can do this all day.

 

Once again, regardless of anything else or whose fault was what, had we played like the third best team in Scotland over the last 7 games we would have gotten third. Aberdeen were better than us over that stretch. They got a home OF win and we didn't. Despite having three OF games over the last seven to our 2 and playing us at Tynecastle, they have 10 points from six and we have 8. We can argue about whose fault that is until the cows come home (and I'm most certainly not saying it's all Naismith's, and give Aberdeen credit for beating Rangers when they were still harboring dreams of catching Celtic), but that was the competition. They beat us and they're third.

We can still be the 3rd best team over the last 7 games.  It still won’t be enough because Aberdeen have been better over the full season.  Or should I say less bad?

[WageThief]

31 minutes ago, Tom Hardy’s Dug said:

Ok here’s a question for you.

 

Naismith has said he wouldn’t be sure he was ready for the job if he was offered it. He hasn’t said he would definitely accept it.

 

If Naismith turned it down who would you want as manager?

 

If Steven Naismith turned it down, I'd go for his dad David Naismith.  

[karipidis]

7 minutes ago, Led Tasso said:

 

And Aberdeen were in touching distance because they garnered a total of 4 points in 9 matches from the WC break to Feb 4, during which we blew past them. They got 6 from St. Mirren, 5 from Ross County, and 3 out of 24 against the OF.  After that bad run, they sorted themselves out and won 8 from 9, an absolutely fantastic run of results for them that overhauled our difference.

 

We can do this all day.

 

Once again, regardless of anything else or whose fault was what, had we played like the third best team in Scotland over the last 7 games we would have gotten third. Aberdeen were better than us over that stretch. They got a home OF win and we didn't. Despite having three OF games over the last seven to our 2 and playing us at Tynecastle, they have 10 points from six and we have 8. We can argue about whose fault that is until the cows come home (and I'm most certainly not saying it's all Naismith's, and give Aberdeen credit for beating Rangers when they were still harboring dreams of catching Celtic), but that was the competition. They beat us and they're third.

Robson had been in charge of the team for a much longer period prior to those 7 games (Naismith has only been in charge for 6 games). Naismith’s first role in management and I would say there have been 4 good performances out of 6. Celtic at home was incredibly unlucky with a terrible decision. Aberdeen were incredibly lucky against rangers as rangers battered them and then scored a freak goal. Those small margins can happen in a 6 game period. I don’t think many managers in Naismiths situation, with a divided and demoralised squad, would have gotten much more out of them. 

[Go for it 1308]

1 hour ago, Cruyff said:

It's very simple. 

 

It's either a top class manager....Ambition

 

Or Naisy (needs to pump Hibs). 

 

Nothing in between is going to be acceptable. 

Spot on!!

[LarrysRightFoot]

Personally I think it’s too early to judge Naismith solely on results. 
 

He inherited a squad very low in confidence is in the process of overhauling the style of play, tactics etc.

 

He seems very positive and single minded in what he wants. He also seems to have a real drive to win - not avoid defeat but win. 

 

None of the players are ‘his’ (that’s obviously not to say some of them he likes/wants). 

I think the great Ange Postecoglu lost 3 of his first games as Celtic manager. 

 

IF he gets the job, with a preseason and new signings behind him I’d be fairly confident going into the new season. 

[GinRummy]

1 hour ago, Led Tasso said:

 

Still not getting too excited about a home win over a relegation dodger, however thumping. Yes, we were in dire need of a win and got it. The real credit to Naisy is the Aberdeen game and I think I've given it to him.

Why not get excited about the 1 point we’ve taken against the old firm this season. Played nine lost eight but…let me guess Rangers were on their holidays. This forum is absolutely bananas. Neilson ****s up time and again during our bad spell this season and there was no shortage of folk defending him. 
 

Meanwhile, Hibs game aside because evey manager needs more than 5 ****ing days before he is judged, Naismiths results have been, hammered Ross County, beat of Celtic with ten men, drew with st Mirren with ten men, beat Aberdeen and drew at Ibrox.  
 

If that were Robbie getting those results we wouldn’t be in the mess we are in and there would be plenty supporting him as manager. 
 

 

Edited May 25, 2023 by GinRummy

[Watt-Zeefuik]

9 minutes ago, GinRummy said:

Why not get excited about the 1 point we’ve taken against the old firm this season. Played nine lost eight but…let me guess Rangers were on their holidays. This forum is absolutely bananas. Neilson ****s up time and again during our bad spell this season and there was no shortage of folk defending him. 
 

Meanwhile, Hibs game aside because evey manager needs more than 5 ****ing days before he is judged, Naismiths results have been, hammered Ross County, beat of Celtic with ten men, drew with st Mirren with ten men, beat Aberdeen and drew at Ibrox.  
 

If that were Robbie getting those results we wouldn’t be in the mess we are in and there would be plenty supporting him as manager. 
 

 

 

Aunties and uncles and all that. If Halkett, Beni, Gordon, and Boyce had been healthy the whole season Neilson would be manager and we'd be third.

 

Let me be clear — if Naismith gets the permanent position and turns in results like this last 6, I certainly won't be calling for his ouster, because as I've said above I have a strong preference for a club that makes changes slowly, doesn't sack quickly, and doesn't make interim appointments permanent quickly. I know others want us to move fast but I strongly disagree.

 

As it is I think he's done well for being an interim. But that's different than handing an incredibly critical summer transfer window over him much less what is likely to be at least a two year contract.

[GinRummy]

Just now, Led Tasso said:

 

Aunties and uncles and all that. If Halkett, Beni, Gordon, and Boyce had been healthy the whole season Neilson would be manager and we'd be third.

 

Let me be clear — if Naismith gets the permanent position and turns in results like this last 6, I certainly won't be calling for his ouster, because as I've said above I have a strong preference for a club that makes changes slowly, doesn't sack quickly, and doesn't make interim appointments permanent quickly. I know others want us to move fast but I strongly disagree.

 

As it is I think he's done well for being an interim. But that's different than handing an incredibly critical summer transfer window over him much less what is likely to be at least a two year contract.

It’s not Aunties and Uncles at all. Naismith has put together a run of results and performances that Neilson backers, including you, would have been tripping over themselves to praise him.

 

The question often asked when folk wanted rid of Robbie was who should we get to replace him. An answer of don’t know was met with derision. So who should get the job?

Interim so different but the down side is you’ve inherited another man’s problems and can’t bring your own players in to sort it so that transfer window gives Naismith more of a chance to cement  his very positive start. 
 

 

[Watt-Zeefuik]

9 minutes ago, GinRummy said:

It’s not Aunties and Uncles at all. Naismith has put together a run of results and performances that Neilson backers, including you, would have been tripping over themselves to praise him.

 

The question often asked when folk wanted rid of Robbie was who should we get to replace him. An answer of don’t know was met with derision. So who should get the job?

 

Yes, it was asked by others. I thought it was a silly question because none of us are in a position to know.

 

9 minutes ago, GinRummy said:

Interim so different but the down side is you’ve inherited another man’s problems and can’t bring your own players in to sort it so that transfer window gives Naismith more of a chance to cement  his very positive start.

 

The full time manager's job is a much heaver set of responsibilities than just picking the team and setting the tactics. It's why Levein did the whole GM/head coach thing with Robbie and Cathro, and a big reason why Neilson fell flat on his face at MK Dons. He wasn't ready for that. Despite his time being up here I'd say he was doing a fair bit better at that part of the job by the time he came back.

 

I have no idea if Naismith's ready to do that or not. I'm hoping McKinlay susses that out.

 

But my main point about interim vs. permanent is that stability and continuity are important. You sacrifice a lot when you sack a manager, including players who fit in one system but don't in the next, and it means you have to do a bunch of new recruitment and spend new transfer fees and all that. If we pick Naismith, I want us to stick with him even if things don't go well. If we're not ready to stick with him through some ugly patches, we shouldn't appoint him.

[doctor jambo]

Post split games

- robbed bs Celtic by non red card

2 draws including away at rangers and a 2 goal comeback

pumped aberdeen

 

win the derby and that’s pretty outstanding 

[GinRummy]

15 minutes ago, Led Tasso said:

 

Yes, it was asked by others. I thought it was a silly question because none of us are in a position to know.

 

 

The full time manager's job is a much heaver set of responsibilities than just picking the team and setting the tactics. It's why Levein did the whole GM/head coach thing with Robbie and Cathro, and a big reason why Neilson fell flat on his face at MK Dons. He wasn't ready for that. Despite his time being up here I'd say he was doing a fair bit better at that part of the job by the time he came back.

 

I have no idea if Naismith's ready to do that or not. I'm hoping McKinlay susses that out.

 

But my main point about interim vs. permanent is that stability and continuity are important. You sacrifice a lot when you sack a manager, including players who fit in one system but don't in the next, and it means you have to do a bunch of new recruitment and spend new transfer fees and all that. If we pick Naismith, I want us to stick with him even if things don't go well. If we're not ready to stick with him through some ugly patches, we shouldn't appoint him.

Do what?

 

This isn’t MK Dons and the managers job is designed so he can focus on the first team. There is no reserve team, we have a lowland league team coach, two assistants, a recruitment team, a sporting director and all sorts of sports science and medical people. Picking the team and setting the tactics will almost literally be his job.  
 

All managers have been backed since admin so you’ll not need to worry about it. If anything they’ve generally been backed too long. 

Edited May 25, 2023 by GinRummy

[Sir PH]

3 hours ago, Led Tasso said:

 

We had Celtic at home, they have them at Parkhead. Yes, bogus red card, etc. We didn't get a result.

And the red card played a massive part in us not getting a result. So your point doesn't make any sense. 

[merseyjambo]

1 hour ago, Led Tasso said:

 

Aunties and uncles and all that. If Halkett, Beni, Gordon, and Boyce had been healthy the whole season Neilson would be manager and we'd be third.

 

Let me be clear — if Naismith gets the permanent position and turns in results like this last 6, I certainly won't be calling for his ouster, because as I've said above I have a strong preference for a club that makes changes slowly, doesn't sack quickly, and doesn't make interim appointments permanent quickly. I know others want us to move fast but I strongly disagree.

 

As it is I think he's done well for being an interim. But that's different than handing an incredibly critical summer transfer window over him much less what is likely to be at least a two year contract.

What a pile of shite your first paragraph is. By that reckoning Hibs would be pushing for Champions League spots as they’ve been missing Boyle and Nisbet, their 2 main strikers for most of the season yet have still managed to accrue a point less than ourselves. Surely a partnership as prolific would have meant an extra 30 points. 🙄🙄🙄🙄

 

Do you think Gordon would have done any better than Clark during our 6 game losing streak. Beni they knew would be missing all season so that’s not even a valid argument. The only one you can have any credence with is Halkett but the failure to replace him falls with the manager and recruitment team. 
 

Even with those injured players, there is no guarantee that we’d have done any better.

All teams have injuries. Aberdeen have had Duk out. 
 

The difference between last season and this is that we tucked away teams like Livi, St Mirren and Dundee (last years Killie) and probably had 7-10 more points against those teams than we did this year.

 

Please stop trying to make excuses for ‘Bob’s’ ineptitude. 

 

[KyleLafferty]

Whatever happens on Saturday, the club should be announcing what’s happening on the Monday when the dust is settled. Either Naismith is thanked for his efforts and back to the b team or leaving. Or he’s giving the job. We’ve had over 7 weeks to find someone.

[Dazo]

11 minutes ago, Sir PH said:

And the red card played a massive part in us not getting a result. So your point doesn't make any sense. 

His point is to undermine SN so makes perfect sense, in his head anyway. 

[Dusk_Till_Dawn]

12 minutes ago, KyleLafferty said:

Whatever happens on Saturday, the club should be announcing what’s happening on the Monday when the dust is settled. Either Naismith is thanked for his efforts and back to the b team or leaving. Or he’s giving the job. We’ve had over 7 weeks to find someone.

Can already see a “we we’re considering Steven all along” statement as they bullshit their way into this one.

[tightrope]

Let's not forget, our football was shit most part of the season and I think we rode our luck a lot of the time. Seeing a bit passion now that was not there previously. Imo.

[FJT]

Agreed. People seem to have short memories. Results and performances were dire until some improvements under Naismith (in a very short space of time).  Beat hibs on Saturday and I think we should see what he can do. 

[Rudy T]

15 minutes ago, KyleLafferty said:

Whatever happens on Saturday, the club should be announcing what’s happening on the Monday when the dust is settled. Either Naismith is thanked for his efforts and back to the b team or leaving. Or he’s giving the job. We’ve had over 7 weeks to find someone.

Said it already, I don’t believe we’ve ever started looking. Naismith is getting the job, the way he’s talking he’s been told as much.

 

I’m trying to get on board with it, so as it’s no shock come a week on Monday when the statement comes out.

[GinRummy]

2 minutes ago, Rudy T said:

Said it already, I don’t believe we’ve ever started looking. Naismith is getting the job, the way he’s talking he’s been told as much.

 

I’m trying to get on board with it, so as it’s no shock come a week on Monday when the statement comes out.

Minor point but if we beat Hibs I’d think we’ll announce it this Monday and not wait another week. 

[Rudy T]

Just now, GinRummy said:

Minor point but if we beat Hibs I’d think we’ll announce it this Monday and not wait another week. 

 I think they’ll string it out for a week as if they’ve actually thought about alternatives, regardless of the Hibs result. 

[kingantti1874]

13 minutes ago, Dusk_Till_Dawn said:

Can already see a “we we’re considering Steven all along” statement as they bullshit their way into this one.

 

why would they bullshit to appoint the guy in situ doing a good job.

 

 

[Watt-Zeefuik]

22 minutes ago, merseyjambo said:

What a pile of shite your first paragraph is. By that reckoning Hibs would be pushing for Champions League spots as they’ve been missing Boyle and Nisbet, their 2 main strikers for most of the season yet have still managed to accrue a point less than ourselves. Surely a partnership as prolific would have meant an extra 30 points. 🙄🙄🙄🙄

 

Do you think Gordon would have done any better than Clark during our 6 game losing streak. Beni they knew would be missing all season so that’s not even a valid argument. The only one you can have any credence with is Halkett but the failure to replace him falls with the manager and recruitment team. 
 

Even with those injured players, there is no guarantee that we’d have done any better.

All teams have injuries. Aberdeen have had Duk out. 
 

The difference between last season and this is that we tucked away teams like Livi, St Mirren and Dundee (last years Killie) and probably had 7-10 more points against those teams than we did this year.

 

Please stop trying to make excuses for ‘Bob’s’ ineptitude. 

 

 

I'm about done with this thread as people are getting mad about tangential things I say and I'm tired of arguing about little stuff.

 

Gordon was the captain. He was a major leader in the team by all accounts. He'd have made a difference in leadership. We had to play Snoddy at holding mid and he was bad at it because Haring and Beni were both out and Kio wasn't up to it, and once teams realized they could press him we were a disaster. Boyce has the least claim but he was a savvy pro and I think he'd have helped a little. But whatever.

 

Of course there's no guarantee. This is a football board, I'm not presenting scientific research here.

 

And for the last ****ing time, I'm not making excuses for Neilson. (whom I do not and have never called Bob. That's the Boot's schtick and I don't like it any more than anyone else.) Injuries happen and managers have to deal with it. He should have been able to turn around the team and he didn't, in part because I think he mentally chucked it after he didn't get what he wanted in the window. He needed to be sacked. He deserved to be sacked. But for the love of Bauld, Robertson, and Rudi, if we can't ****ing talk about injuries as contributing to the problems this season without someone throwing a shit fit about "making excuses" then this board is worthless for Hearts conversation and I'll just go hang out in the Shed.

 

Neilson's been gone for nearly two months with there being the closest there's ever been to consensus among Hearts fans about him needing to go and people are still ****ing obsessed with him. Grow the **** up.

 

And with that, I'm gonna take a break from this accursed thread.

[MattyK82]

3 hours ago, merseyjambo said:

Exactly, a lot are criticising Naismith for losing last night in a must win game when the problem is much more deep seated. 10 out of 27 against those clubs under RN is a much bigger issue than Naismith drawing in Paisley and at Ibrox.

It finished 2-2 did it not? 😉

[By The Light..]

3 hours ago, merseyjambo said:

No we’re 3rd because of 2 points out of 9 against Livi, 4 points out of 9 against Killie, 5 points out of 12 against St Mirren and 1 point out of 24 against the OF. 19 of those games under Robbie. 10 points out of 57.

 

Absolutely spot on.

 

Another way to summarise is our dreadful away form, 3 wins all season and none in 2023 

[KyleLafferty]

If it’s Naismith he’ll get my backing like every other hearts manager before him. I think he commands respect because of his playing career. Anyone growing up remembers him winning stuff with rangers, hattrick against Chelsea and his 50 caps for Scotland. He’s played for Walter smith, roberto Martinez. He lives and breathes football. He’ll set demands, can’t imagine him moving training so he can golf 🤪. He needs an older head beside him and I don’t want to removed mcavoy from the academy as he’s doing a good job.

[merseyjambo]

34 minutes ago, MattyK82 said:

It finished 2-2 did it not? 😉

We did but combination of lates and little sleep is starting to take its toll. 
 

Thanks for the correction 😁😁😁😁

[soonbe110]

3 hours ago, merseyjambo said:

The bottom line is that the season has to be regarded as a failure.

 

People can argue about whether we need someone with experience or not.

 

I’m leaning more towards giving him a chance if he wants the pressure of the job and is happy to take it on a 1 year deal which can be reviewed during the season.

 

We can’t afford another costly mistake and if you take someone like Heckinbottom who couldn’t do the business at ER but can get Sheffield United promoted, we could end up making another huge mistake by offering a known name a 3 year deal. 
 

Naismith for 12 months to be reviewed is less of a risk financially.

Who decides on new signings? Do they only get 12 month contracts as well? 

Can’t run a business with the leadership team potentially only a few months from leaving.  We would not be able to sign anyone decent in January if we were 5th, 6th in the league. 

[soonbe110]

2 hours ago, GinRummy said:

Do what?

 

This isn’t MK Dons and the managers job is designed so he can focus on the first team. There is no reserve team, we have a lowland league team coach, two assistants, a recruitment team, a sporting director and all sorts of sports science and medical people. Picking the team and setting the tactics will almost literally be his job.  
 

All managers have been backed since admin so you’ll not need to worry about it. If anything they’ve generally been backed too long. 

Has anyone confirmed that Naismith has his Pro licence? Having to do that programme at the same time as taking on his first management job is a big ask. 

[merseyjambo]

14 minutes ago, soonbe110 said:

Who decides on new signings? Do they only get 12 month contracts as well? 

Can’t run a business with the leadership team potentially only a few months from leaving.  We would not be able to sign anyone decent in January if we were 5th, 6th in the league. 

Players play for teams not managers. 
 

Everyone is making the same comment, we can’t afford to make another mistake. 
 

People on here are talking about paying a manager 10k a week. A 3 year contract there and it goes wrong after 6 months, that’s one hell of a payout we are on the hook for. 
 

I want the best for the club but living down here, outside Rangers and Celtic, they think the standard of the SPL is about the same as Radcliffe Borough. It’s probably why a lot of ambitious managers regard the SPL with disdain. Hardly anyone goes from the SPL to a much bigger job. Only Stevie G has done that and that went horribly wrong.

 

Robbie Neilson was given a rolling 1 year contract when he got the job. What I’m saying is, why don’t we do the same with Naismith.

[gorgierulesapply88]

1 hour ago, KyleLafferty said:

Whatever happens on Saturday, the club should be announcing what’s happening on the Monday when the dust is settled. Either Naismith is thanked for his efforts and back to the b team or leaving. Or he’s giving the job. We’ve had over 7 weeks to find someone.

He should NOT be allowed to leave the club at all btw. He should either be given the job or touted for it when and if the inevitable happens.

[gorgierulesapply88]

11 minutes ago, merseyjambo said:

Players play for teams not managers. 
 

Everyone is making the same comment, we can’t afford to make another mistake. 
 

People on here are talking about paying a manager 10k a week. A 3 year contract there and it goes wrong after 6 months, that’s one hell of a payout we are on the hook for. 
 

I want the best for the club but living down here, outside Rangers and Celtic, they think the standard of the SPL is about the same as Radcliffe Borough. It’s probably why a lot of ambitious managers regard the SPL with disdain. Hardly anyone goes from the SPL to a much bigger job. Only Stevie G has done that and that went horribly wrong.

 

Robbie Neilson was given a rolling 1 year contract when he got the job. What I’m saying is, why don’t we do the same with Naismith.

Brendan Rodgers? 

[kingantti1874]

4 minutes ago, gorgierulesapply88 said:

Brendan Rodgers? 

thats a piss take I assume 

Edited May 25, 2023 by kingantti1874

[kingantti1874]

If not.  
 

Football coach - Leicester City - United Kingdom

Born: 1973, Northern Ireland, United Kingdom

• Annual: €11,407,776.00
• Monthly: €950,648.00
• Weekly: €219,380.31
• Daily: €43,876.06

[Aussie Jambo]

Has Naisy already got the job though? 

Asking for a friend. 

[gorgierulesapply88]

32 minutes ago, kingantti1874 said:

If not.  
 

Football coach - Leicester City - United Kingdom

Born: 1973, Northern Ireland, United Kingdom

• Annual: €11,407,776.00
• Monthly: €950,648.00
• Weekly: €219,380.31
• Daily: €43,876.06

He mentioned nobody from the SPL has went to a big club.