We should have signed Naismith instead of Lafferty...

[26th of foot 6,115]

Last night in Trouville sur Mer, I persuaded a bar man in a cafe tabac to switch the TV, to allow me the opportunity to watch Scotland/Albania. The tabac had two customers and my opposition was a member of the local glee club, agreed with my suggestion as I stood him une verre de vin rose. Further, he agreed that Naismith played well. 

 

I say to King Zog, Rudi Vata, Enver Hoxha, ......................... Norman Wisdom; your team took a helluva beating.

[buster. 5,257]

10 minutes ago, 26th of foot said:

I say to King Zog, Rudi Vata, Enver Hoxha, ......................... Norman Wisdom; your team took a helluva beating.

Apparently The current occupier of the Whitehouse can't get enough of The Krankies.

 

ps. He doesn't know who Mr.Naismith is.

[26th of foot 6,115]

25 minutes ago, buster. said:

Apparently The current occupier of the Whitehouse can't get enough of The Krankies.

 

ps. He doesn't know who Mr.Naismith is.

I suspect The Donald will have instructed his lawyers to take out super-injunctions on all the folks he doesn't know, suspicious bastards!

[der Berliner 3,803]

To reply to the topic: not instead, but together.

 

People have serious objections to Naismith because of the events of 2012, but those were extraordinary by any stretch of imagination. Wrong choice of words and people are up in orbit.

 

More pragmatically, he still is a top Premiership footballer and would be a nigh-perfect creative chap in the way we play the game, just behind the striker. 8 games for Hearts, 7 goals and 3 assists, plus the goal(s) he scored for Scotland suggests that he's back to his best. Contract till next May and thus would cost peanuts. He wouldn't be a long term solution ... but so too aren't any of the loan guys. But if either deliver 55, rest assured, people would not care a jot.

 

SG will probably need half a season to settle in the Scottish game in its current incarnation and will make adjustments in January. IMHO, people like Lafferty, Cummings and Naismith are good enough to do a job in the Premiership, not least with the players around them now.

[pete 2,499]

18 minutes ago, der Berliner said:

To reply to the topic: not instead, but together.

 

People have serious objections to Naismith because of the events of 2012, but those were extraordinary by any stretch of imagination. Wrong choice of words and people are up in orbit.

 

More pragmatically, he still is a top Premiership footballer and would be a nigh-perfect creative chap in the way we play the game, just behind the striker. 8 games for Hearts, 7 goals and 3 assists, plus the goal(s) he scored for Scotland suggests that he's back to his best. Contract till next May and thus would cost peanuts. He wouldn't be a long term solution ... but so too aren't any of the loan guys. But if either deliver 55, rest assured, people would not care a jot.

 

SG will probably need half a season to settle in the Scottish game in its current incarnation and will make adjustments in January. IMHO, people like Lafferty, Cummings and Naismith are good enough to do a job in the Premiership, not least with the players around them now.

I have nothing against Naismith as we all say and do stupid things but I would prefer the long term solution now.

[DMAA 3,658]

One thing you can't take away from Naismith is that he is and always has been a very clinical finisher.

 

There is no doubt Naismith would score plenty from Barisic, Candeias and Tavernier's crosses.

 

For me we still badly lack a forward who will consistently score from crosses despite the fact we've got better crossers than we've had in a long time.

[der Berliner 3,803]

7 minutes ago, pete said:

I have nothing against Naismith as we all say and do stupid things but I would prefer the long term solution now.

Well, Naismith is 31 and can sure play on for another couple of years at his current level. Same with Lafferty.

 

I would assume that Liverpool handed SG those loanees with an eye on making him an instant success ... and probably letting all his folk joining him up too. All geared up to making him a Liverpool boss in the future. Thus, deep in our hearts (ignoring the success he needs to have at Ibrox for a moment) we'll know that neither players nor the manager will be here "forever", as was seemingly  the case with Walter et al. Hence, he got the personal from Liverpool and money from the board (wonder where all this came from) to make the EL group stages first and foremost, so a steady flow of money is secured - if only from set fees and crowds.

 

I would assume that "long term" solutions will either be made at the same level we are doing business now OR once we make the CL and preferrably the group stages at least once in the comming years. That will set us on a safe ground business-wise. Another option is someone handing us 10m+ for Morelos et al or these "rumoured far east business-men" invest heavily. All ifs and buts and we essentially can but trust in what the team does on the park for now, rather than anything we could hardly influence.

 

Hence, we probably have to be somewhat patient for the time being. Not a trait we are known for, aye?!

[alexscottislegend 2,375]

3 hours ago, JohnMc said:

I loved Naismith when he played for us. He's a clever player, he sees angles and runs many other players don't, he's hard working and he's got a nasty streak too, he doesn't get taken advantage of on the park. At the same time he comes across as a decent human being off it too. His press conference when he left was a monumental mistake. I've more sympathy for him than most, we forget that none of us knew what Green was planning, none of knew what team we might or might not have, it was a difficult and emotional time. All that being said he'd have been better saying nothing. It hurt and angered more coming from a bluenose, from a player a lot of us could relate to. 

 

However, if we can accept Kevin Kyle, Ian Black and Michael O'Halleron, if we can take back Kenny Miller, twice, if we can take back McGregor and Lafferty we can surely take back Naismith. However, I'd like to see another 6 months at Hearts, injury free and in good form before then. My only reservation on Naismith is around his ability now, can he still play to the same level. 

Agree totally.  When he and McGregor left they were both at the peak of their careers. We had no right to expect Scotland players at their respective ages to perform at the lowest league level. Wallace was different, he still had his best years ahead of him.

[RTB2004 58]

You're kidding me right?

[Ser Barristan Selmy 222]

3 hours ago, alexscottislegend said:

Agree totally.  When he and McGregor left they were both at the peak of their careers. We had no right to expect Scotland players at their respective ages to perform at the lowest league level. Wallace was different, he still had his best years ahead of him.

Wallace was different in that he was nowhere near as good as them.