inspirational figure. he really is.

 

looking at the way he talks to our players throughout the game.

 

the way he barracks the opposition

 

the way he generally just struts about with his chest out, its great to see.

 

HOWEVER...i think weve been so starved of proper professionals over the years that its actually a little sad how we - i included - have latched onto this guy as being some kind of messiah

 

i want to hammer home that im happy hes at our club and that hes our captain, but...im sorry to say, he looks like a shadow of a player out on the park

 

the game seems to continually pass him by and my question is....can we afford that?

Being honest, I have been really disappointed with Hartley bar a few games, the only stand out performance I can recall was Raith Rovers where he single handedly won us the game.

 

Overall, he has looked past it, slow, gives the ball away to much and where I totally disagree with Kelt, miles off a man, I don't mean his mand as at some times he's been so far away from any man its difficult to work out who he's meant to be up against in midfield.

 

Yes he is a good captain, or so it appears on the outside, but if he wasn't captain i'd want him out the team, assuming we had Fyvie or Pawlett fully fit, as we don't then we don't have any real options.

well said

well said

Massive difference between being a player who was formerly brilliant, still has it but can't manage 38 games a season yet for ninety minutes will make himself seen and heard and be the mouthpiece the team needs and being a player who can do magical things with a ball but  only when you can be arsed. If your team mates doesn't pass you're prone to have a massive strop yet have the cheek to try ridiculous shots from all angles with about 1 in 10 resulting in a game.

 

Each to their own though.

Let's see how we do without him against St Mirren eh? Then we can judge

 

a) the Brown effect

b) how much of a difference Hartley makes

Is it only 'well said' if they agree with you?

Is it only 'well said' if they agree with you?

 

Just if they use "facts" rather than lie through our teeth and make up stuff like the rest of us do.

Massive difference between being a player who was formerly brilliant, still has it but can't manage 38 games a season yet for ninety minutes will make himself seen and heard and be the mouthpiece the team needs and being a player who can do magical things with a ball but  only when you can be arsed. If your team mates doesn't pass you're prone to have a massive strop yet have the cheek to try ridiculous shots from all angles with about 1 in 10 resulting in a game.

 

Each to their own though.

 

calm down

 

Hartley has never been BRILLIANT

 

also hate the way youre making it out as if i dont like the guy

 

 

calm down

 

Hartley has never been BRILLIANT

 

also hate the way youre making it out as if i dont like the guy

Hartley has never been brilliant, like one of the best players in Scotland?

Is it only 'well said' if they agree with you?

 

in my opinion, yes

 

otherwise, if someone said something i dont agree with, it would be "poorly said"

in my opinion, yes

 

otherwise, if someone said something i dont agree with, it would be "poorly said"

 

Poorly said.

Hartley has never been brilliant, like one of the best players in Scotland?

 

Laudrup, Gascoigne, Zerouali, Larsson, Lee Miller and Moravcik were brilliant

 

paul hartley has never been, in those terms

Poorly said.

 

haha, you've got it now 

in my opinion, yes

 

otherwise, if someone said something i dont agree with, it would be "poorly said"

Laudrup, Gascoigne, Zerouali, Larsson, Lee Miller and Moravcik were brilliant

 

paul hartley has never been, in those terms

 

In those terms neither was Zerouali or Miller.

 

Poorly said, very very poorly said.

In those terms neither was Zerouali or Miller.

 

Poorly said, very very poorly said.

 

glad its catching on!

Laudrup, Gascoigne, Zerouali, Larsson, Lee Miller and Moravcik were brilliant

 

paul hartley has never been, in those terms

Outstanding

Brilliant

Good, if could be bothered

Average

Outstanding

Brilliant

Good, if could be bothered

Average

 

poorly said

BTW, loving mentioning Lee Miller in the same post as Laudrup and Larsson! He fairly teared it up at Notts County!

He is obviously at it with comments like that.  Lee Miller classed as excellent in Scotland, michty me.

 

As far as the noughties (for lack of a better term) I think you will struggle to identify any more influential and consistent player whilst playing for a team outside of the Old Firm than Paul Hartley at Hearts...

poorly said

 

You're reight. Classing Zero as average was probably pretty generous.

 

You're reight. Classing Zero as average was probably pretty generous.

 

He was far better than average!  Hardly in the same class as Laudrup or Larrson though.

Laudrup, Gascoigne, Zerouali, Larsson, Lee Miller and Moravcik were brilliant

 

paul hartley has never been, in those terms

You're surely having a laugh including Zero & Lee Miller in the same class as the others??

glad its catching on!

 

You will note it has been 100% at you.

 

Zerouali and Miller in that list, lollercaust!

He was far better than average!  Hardly in the same class as Laudrup or Larrson though.

 

I wouldn't say so.  He was very hit or miss at Aberdeen.  In the end he left Aberdeen after a very up and down spell, had a brief stint in Saudi Arabia and then ended up back in Morocco.

 

If he'd been as good as some folk used to say, he'd have got a gig in Spain or England, or somewhere like that, after leaving Aberdeen.

 

With Zerouali, there were occassional flashes of brilliance... but that's all they ever were.  There was never a sustained spell of good form.  If he was any better than average, he'd have dominated the SPL.  In reality, he was nowhere near that level.

I wouldn't say so.  He was very hit or miss at Aberdeen.  In the end he left Aberdeen after a very up and down spell, had a brief stint in Saudi Arabia and then ended up back in Morocco.

 

If he'd been as good as some folk used to say, he'd have got a gig in Spain or England, or somewhere like that, after leaving Aberdeen.

 

With Zerouali, there were occassional flashes of brilliance... but that's all they ever were.  There was never a sustained spell of good form.  If he was any better than average, he'd have dominated the SPL.  In reality, he was nowhere near that level.

Let's not let common sense get in the way here 

BTW, loving mentioning Lee Miller in the same post as Laudrup and Larsson! He fairly teared it up at Notts County!

 

haha was wondering when someone would pick me up on it!

He is obviously at it with comments like that.  Lee Miller classed as excellent in Scotland, michty me.

 

As far as the noughties (for lack of a better term) I think you will struggle to identify any more influential and consistent player whilst playing for a team outside of the Old Firm than Paul Hartley at Hearts...

 

and does consistent for a team outwith the old firm constitute "brilliance" these days?