Clerry Jambo Posted December 15, 2008 Share Posted December 15, 2008 Zaliukas could be a really good CH but the basic errors he made earlier in the Season have blackened his name although he has looked far better in recent weeks. Karapidis has settled into his role well - better than I expected. Csaba has persisted with them and they have improved without doubt. It's not so much having an ulterior motive is just that we know how things have been run in the past and with few tactical, positional and personnel changes it looks all too familiar - with the exception of the results of course. Agree DH re the above 2 players - I have been critical of both and I think rightly so but fair play they have upped their game recently. Still not convinced though but hey not the time for negativity!! :xmasgrin: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jammy T Posted December 15, 2008 Share Posted December 15, 2008 Given that the transfer window is closed Csaba has obviously had to make do with whats he got. In my opinion Zaliukas is a vastly better SPL centre half than Karipidis. It is also my opinion that Karipidis is a better holding midfielder than Brellier, better distribution and better discipline. I dont think Csaba has been guided down any route, he has acted on the results of his own observations. Why does every action at Tynecastle need to have an ulterior motive!!!! To ignore our defence before Xmas last year - with Zali in when we lost game after game after game, and to ignore our defence after Xmas last year - with Karipidis in for the duration and a vastly increased number of clean sheets Without giving Karipidis more than 45 mins of central defence duty pre-season Stunk of being told the Zaliukas was the man to partner Berra Given that he didnt give Karipidis equal game time to make his own decision, I dont know how you can argue he wasnt "guided" into Zaliukas getting the gig. Unless Csaba is a genius and some sort of clarevoyant And to be fair, Zali has worked in some games this season, and has cost us goals and results in others. I'm not sure he has improved that much to be honest. Most of us have always said he is a better defender than midfielder but he makes stupid mistakes. This has been happening for around 3 years when he has played defence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffalo Bill Posted December 15, 2008 Share Posted December 15, 2008 Csaba explained in the Gorgie Suite why he picks certain players in certain positions playing in certain formations depending whether or not we have the ball at any given time. He also explained the short, medium and long term strategies for the team. I am certain, having listened to him and having seen him sitting opposite me that he is in 100% control of the team. Buffalo Bill . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wibble Posted December 15, 2008 Share Posted December 15, 2008 What's Dave De Le Noir got to do with this thread????? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SectionDJambo Posted December 15, 2008 Share Posted December 15, 2008 Given past experience, it is understandable why people still ask who picks the team. Also given past experience, does anyone seriously think that we would have had the same consistency of selection, no matter the successful run we are enjoying, if Romanov or anyone other than Csaba was picking the team. It could be that Romanov asked/told Csaba to keep playing Sally Lucas and improve him as a player with his obviously very good coaching/man management skills. This appears to be working. Despite past bomb scares, he seems to be improving and concentrating a lot more than before. It is also very probable that Csaba thought that Kari would be a very effective holding midfielder given a run in the team. This has been proven, I think, up to now. There is, by Csaba's own admission, regular discussion with Romanov. So on one hand we worry that Romanov has lost interest, and on the other we still think he is picking the team. It can't be both. Does anyone think that Murray doesn't talk about the Rangers team with Smith, or Petrie with Pumpkinhead? Who told Smith to get rid of 6 or so players ASAP? Who signed Webster for Rangers when they didn't have a manager? Romanov has been an eejit in the past, but maybe he feels he has a real pro in charge now who he can trust not to go behind his back and keep him properly informed about the club without asking his other hired help, like Lopez seems to have been doing in the past. They do come from reasonably similar backgrounds in that they both experienced hardship and pulled themselves up by hard work. I think they trust each other. I may be wrong - this is my impression. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.