Naismith unloved here?

[stewfil 12]

Steven has had a period at Norwich where he maybe never felt loved or had that feeling that he could help. He is a very generous-spirited guy. He likes helping. It is in his nature.

Read more at: https://www.scotsman.com/sport/football/teams/hearts/craig-levein-i-d-love-to-keep-naismith-but-could-earn-far-more-abroad-1-4843204

[GJL Mid-Norfolk Canary 2,035]

It was rumoured that whilst on loan at Hearts last season that Norwich were still paying 75% of his wage. Not sure if thats still the case this season but certainly explains as to why Hearts quite probably couldnt afford him outright and why he could possibly earn more elsewhere when he leaves Norwich , if we're not still footing the majority of the bill

[KeiranShikari 1,524]

I'm sure we would have loved him if he played well.

[Woodman 92]

There's another article about him here, pledging his love for Hearts, but I wonder how keen he is to stay at Hearts when we aren't paying the majority of his wages.

https://www.scotsman.com/sport/football/teams/hearts/steven-naismith-there-s-a-good-chance-i-could-end-up-staying-at-hearts-1-4842840

I do feel a bit torn when I see articles like this where he comes across as a nice bloke who seems to care and do a lot for those less fortunate than himself.

 

[lake district canary 4,830]

10 hours ago, KeiranShikari said:

I'm sure we would have loved him if he played well.

This is the point.  He was not a good fit with what we had. On paper, yes he looked a good acquisition, in reality he never looked like he would acclimatise to the Championship.

[lake district canary 4,830]

10 hours ago, KeiranShikari said:

I'm sure we would have loved him if he played well.

This is the point.  He was not a good fit with what we had. On paper, yes he looked a good acquisition, in reality he never looked like he would acclimatise to the Championship.

[Orly 291]

Rather strangely, I think he'd probably fit in quite well into the way Farke likes to play - what with the positional freedom granted to the attacking players.

In an alternate universe where Farke came in a season earlier, it might have been very different for Naismith.

That said, I wouldn't swap at-his-prime-Naismith for Pukki right now, so guess it worked out ok.

[Nuff Said 5,960]

6 hours ago, lake district canary said:

This is the point.  He was not a good fit with what we had. On paper, yes he looked a good acquisition, in reality he never looked like he would acclimatise to the Championship.

Why do you keep double posting Lakey?

[lake district canary 4,830]

16 minutes ago, Nuff Said said:

Why do you keep double posting Lakey?

To double the effect.....

Actually, I dont know why it's happening.  Apologies.

[......and Smith must score. 1,596]

8 hours ago, lake district canary said:

This is the point.  He was not a good fit with what we had. On paper, yes he looked a good acquisition, in reality he never looked like he would acclimatise to the Championship.

To be fair LDC he was brought in while we were a Premier League club in the hope/expectation that being a solid Premier League player he would step up to the plate and show a bit more effort in trying to preserve our status. If he had we might never had had to discover he was c*ap in both Divisions.

Dismal failure adequately describes his time at Carrow Rd alongside RVW, another misfit with an similar claim to that description.

[lake district canary 4,830]

1 minute ago, ......and Smith must score. said:

To be fair LDC he was brought in while we were a Premier League club in the hope/expectation that being a solid Premier League player he would step up to the plate and show a bit more effort in trying to preserve our status. If he had we might never had had to discover he was c*ap in both Divisions.

Dismal failure adequately describes his time at Carrow Rd alongside RVW, another misfit with an similar claim to that description.

👍True, although RVW was kind of untried as a premier league player....

[......and Smith must score. 1,596]

1 minute ago, lake district canary said:

👍True, although RVW was kind of untried as a premier league player....

I suppose RVW had more of an excuse but it doesn't alter the fact that they're both vying for top spot in the ' Dismal Failure Hall of Fame ' competition.

[lake district canary 4,830]

Agreed.

[splendidrush 720]

What does 'kind of untried as a Premier league player ' mean? You've lost me. 

[lake district canary 4,830]

3 hours ago, splendidrush said:

What does 'kind of untried as a Premier league player ' mean? You've lost me. 

Not sure why. It's a simple fact that rvw had not played in the PL before he came to us, making comparison with him and an experienced PL player slightly flawed.

[Dean Coneys boots 1,531]

he never wanted to be here. We foolishly chased him and threw the house at buying him, because Alex Neil loved him and thought he would keep us up singlehandedly. Eventually he caved in because we offered silly wages but only came for the money and that showed in his performances. He was a waning star with little to prove to himself or others in a yellow shirt and boy did it show. Proof positive that hungry young players on the up are so much better than once great men on the down. For me a nice enough bloke but one who has robbed this club in terms of what was taken and how much effort was made. And if his legs had gone and he wasn't up to it- again huge question marks over the scouting team at the time. All in all the WORST signing in our history given the costs involved. 

So my reply to him is that we never felt very loved either. 

[splendidrush 720]

So not 'kind of untried ' just untried.... why use 3 words when 1 will do?

[king canary 8,751]

23 hours ago, Orly said:

Rather strangely, I think he'd probably fit in quite well into the way Farke likes to play - what with the positional freedom granted to the attacking players.

In an alternate universe where Farke came in a season earlier, it might have been very different for Naismith.

That said, I wouldn't swap at-his-prime-Naismith for Pukki right now, so guess it worked out ok.

He played a few games under Farke and was still ****e.

[king canary 8,751]

On 14/12/2018 at 09:55, lake district canary said:

in reality he never looked like he would acclimatise to the Championship.

I seem to remember you constantly banging on about how he would come good...

Edited December 15, 2018 by king canary
typo

[wcorkcanary 4,783]

In defence of LDC, he has a positive attitude to all things City , for that he should be commended. i find him a useful antidote to any miserablists on here. FWIW , i thought at the time Naismith was a good buy, i was wrong. so was LDC . never been mistaken KC?

[lake district canary 4,830]

2 minutes ago, king canary said:

I seem to remember you constantly banging on about how he would come good...

Indeed. I thought he would start to shine. To me he always took up good positions and seemed to be a quick thinker, but more often than not he looked frustrated at what was going on around him and became a bit of a negative influence rather than a positive one and it got to the point I didn't want to see him in the team.

[Crabbycanary3 994]

Perhaps we may see the very rare sight of a (very VERY well paid) person, taking a pay cut to prioritize happiness over (even more) money? He's 32 so he has earned the vast majority of his money by now (enough for all of us to live off for the next 50 years plus, if we were 32)

Please do not come back to me with, that it is coming to the end of his career, so ought to 'earn' as much money as possible to see him through the rest of his, and his family's, lives.

If he IS that happy at Hearts then, he could show it by staying and taking a pay cut. He won't be paid in peanuts, that I am certain.

[Surfer 1,547]

Personally I blame Martin. If he had not made that horrendous backpass v Liverpool, we would have won that game, stayed up and Naismith would have led us to the Premier League title the next season well ahead of when those upstarts Leicester did. He had already done his bit in that game scoring and being a thorn in their side... but Martin destroyed his confidence. Lets put the blame where it belongs

[sgncfc 1,330]

On 15/12/2018 at 07:44, Dean Coneys boots said:

he never wanted to be here. We foolishly chased him and threw the house at buying him, because Alex Neil loved him and thought he would keep us up singlehandedly. Eventually he caved in because we offered silly wages but only came for the money and that showed in his performances. He was a waning star with little to prove to himself or others in a yellow shirt and boy did it show. Proof positive that hungry young players on the up are so much better than once great men on the down. For me a nice enough bloke but one who has robbed this club in terms of what was taken and how much effort was made. And if his legs had gone and he wasn't up to it- again huge question marks over the scouting team at the time. All in all the WORST signing in our history given the costs involved. 

So my reply to him is that we never felt very loved either. 

It's not his fault we are paying him stupid money. I think he tried his best, and I still think that he could have been quality - in his debut against Liverpool he was mustard but his teammates were appalling and managed to conjure defeat from a comfortable victory (yes, I mean you Russell Martin) and on that game our season was pretty much decided - I don't think Naismith, the club, and Alex Neil in particular, ever quite recovered.