Tommy Wiseau Posted March 19, 2011 Share Posted March 19, 2011 Webster = One of the best defenders ever to play for Hearts. Bouzid = One of the worst defenders ever to play for Hearts. LOLZ. Are they feck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wright1989 Posted March 20, 2011 Share Posted March 20, 2011 There's no question that Webster's a better defender than Bouzid it's more to do with balance at the back. After thinking about it I'll reserve my judgement until Zal and Webster have had a few more matches together in CD. I think that's a better idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Palmer Posted March 20, 2011 Share Posted March 20, 2011 Well, I don't think I need to reply to the question I was asked as I think it's already been answered. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ginger jambo98 Posted March 20, 2011 Share Posted March 20, 2011 Webster has played in five games for us And the record from those games is won 3 drawn 1 lost 1 that is a 60% win record, 20% draw and 20% loss, which equates to 10 of the 58 points we have. If we had been achieving those percentages in the games he hasn't played in this season we would presently be sitting on 60 points. If you are intent on arguing a point I would suggest that at this stage a better argument would be that there hasn't, as yet, been any dramatic improvement. And the period you refer to, when we were on a huge high, came to an end weeks prior to Webster arriving. Hmmm, facts are facts - won't help the knockers feel any better though. Keep up the maths PJ1 - I'm in your corner ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coco Posted March 20, 2011 Share Posted March 20, 2011 I don't think Webster and Zaliukas are a particularly good blend as a centre half pair. Neither likes to make the first challenge (whereas Bouzid does). Webster played most of his good football for us on the left side of the defence - and is currently playing on the right. Bouzid and Webster for me would be a better blend. I thought that Webster's passing was atrocious yesterday. Continually put Thomson (who was having a very poor game) under pressure by not committing anyone before shovelling it to him. And the same with the passes to midfield players coming deeper with an opponent right behind them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wright1989 Posted March 20, 2011 Share Posted March 20, 2011 I don't think Webster and Zaliukas are a particularly good blend as a centre half pair. Neither likes to make the first challenge (whereas Bouzid does). Webster played most of his good football for us on the left side of the defence - and is currently playing on the right. Bouzid and Webster for me would be a better blend. I thought that Webster's passing was atrocious yesterday. Continually put Thomson (who was having a very poor game) under pressure by not committing anyone before shovelling it to him. And the same with the passes to midfield players coming deeper with an opponent right behind them. Now imagine.. Webster and Diamond. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Palmer Posted March 20, 2011 Share Posted March 20, 2011 I don't think Webster and Zaliukas are a particularly good blend as a centre half pair. Neither likes to make the first challenge (whereas Bouzid does). Webster played most of his good football for us on the left side of the defence - and is currently playing on the right. Bouzid and Webster for me would be a better blend. I thought that Webster's passing was atrocious yesterday. Continually put Thomson (who was having a very poor game) under pressure by not committing anyone before shovelling it to him. And the same with the passes to midfield players coming deeper with an opponent right behind them. Massive surprise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamboAl Posted March 20, 2011 Share Posted March 20, 2011 The defence has looked very shaky since Webster stepped in for Bouzid. Maybe he's not the bombscare the Kickback managers think he is. Correct. We had a run of clean sheets but since Webster came back, he has played 3 games plus half an hour. We lost no goals during the half hour against the sheep but have shipped 5 goals in the 3 games he has completed. Is that co-incidence or should we be worried? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cigaro Posted March 20, 2011 Author Share Posted March 20, 2011 'MOTM' Cigaro is spot on. Cigaro 'The Torpedo' knows his stuff when it comes to defenders. To clarify, I'm not saying Bouzid is a better footballer than Webster, I'm saying that he is a better partner for Zal at this moment in time. We're currently competing in this season, not next. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Palmer Posted March 20, 2011 Share Posted March 20, 2011 To clarify, I'm not saying Bouzid is a better footballer than Webster, I'm saying that he is a better partner for Zal at this moment in time. We're currently competing in this season, not next. Not according to Coco. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sydney Posted March 20, 2011 Share Posted March 20, 2011 And you are laughing, why exactly? He found your comments laughable. Even I could see that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Barnaby Posted March 20, 2011 Share Posted March 20, 2011 So simple question. Have we been a stronger defensive unit since webster came back? I think not! He may be a "better" football player than Bouzid, but has he made our defence more solid? I think not. He doesnt play well with Zal, he is an individual. No use to the team. For me he can eff right of. Arrogant with a bad attitude. If you are reading this you arrogant ****, piss off. You're view of yourself is overblown. Webster I hate you....we were better before you signed. F*k off.* Answer to your question Yes we are a much better team with Webster in it, he is the best central defender at the club by a mile Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coco Posted March 20, 2011 Share Posted March 20, 2011 Not according to Coco. Miller/McLeish. Hegarty/Narey. Levein/Jardine. Pressley/Webster. McLaren/Levein. Weir/Ritchie. All centre half partnerships where one was the more physical direct player and the other swept up. Then you have the likes of Puyol/Pique. Ferdinand/Vidic. Terry/Carvalho. Etc etc etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Brightside Posted March 20, 2011 Share Posted March 20, 2011 Correct. We had a run of clean sheets but since Webster came back, he has played 3 games plus half an hour. We lost no goals during the half hour against the sheep but have shipped 5 goals in the 3 games he has completed. Is that co-incidence or should we be worried? [/quote Except we kept a clean sheet away to Hamilton on his first game back when he played a full 90mins. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H2 Posted March 20, 2011 Share Posted March 20, 2011 Right now I'd play Zal up front for the long ball and play Bouzid and Webster in defence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamboelite Posted March 20, 2011 Share Posted March 20, 2011 Webster has played in five games for us And the record from those games is won 3 drawn 1 lost 1 that is a 60% win record, 20% draw and 20% loss, which equates to 10 of the 58 points we have. If we had been achieving those percentages in the games he hasn't played in this season we would presently be sitting on 60 points. If you are intent on arguing a point I would suggest that at this stage a better argument would be that there hasn't, as yet, been any dramatic improvement. And the period you refer to, when we were on a huge high, came to an end weeks prior to Webster arriving. Good to see sensible posting on this thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geddy Posted March 20, 2011 Share Posted March 20, 2011 Trying to put my argument over whildt pished is never that good an idea! I feel that as someone else sober and more eloquent said Webster is not getting the point of Zal being captain. There is confusion in the defence as Webster wants to be captain. The way he wanders around shouting orders shows this. With Bouzid (yes probably not as good or refined as Webster) actually works WITH Zal which means a steadier defence. I do believe this combination works. To be honest I still dont like Webster (or as I typed whilst pissed Judas!) for what he did before to our club. Maybe I aint as forgiving as others, but due to that, the idea (quite reasonably requested by others) of the partnership needing time to gel I struggle with. I personally would rather have 2 people who understand each other and work together, to me that is Zal and Bouzid at this moment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bighusref Posted March 20, 2011 Share Posted March 20, 2011 We don't miss Bouzid but he isn't anywhere near as bad as some would have you believe. Webster = One of the best defenders ever to play for Hearts. Bouzid = One of the worst defenders ever to play for Hearts. Utter shite. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
winston churchill Posted March 20, 2011 Share Posted March 20, 2011 i am really looking forward to seeing what club big bad bouzid signs for in the summer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.