Those not involved

[craig 5,199]

I could agree with that if it was a proven fact,however i feel Hemdani has proved he can play in the SPL no problem,so for me that argument goes out the window

 

Maybe, but WS obviously feels that Hemdani is more suited to Euro games but KT is a player who is more suited to the SPL than Hemdani, or complements BF better.

 

The one thing is that whilst we are winning games surely WS gets the benefit of the doubt.

 

The other thing which I find much more surprising that his choice of KT over BH is that Faye gets a place on the bench before Hemdani does. As has been said, Hemdani is much better but also more versatile, I think.

[Super_Ally 0]

Hemdani is a class act and should be the first name on the teram sheet, even before ferguson. I cant believe whittaker always gets a game as he constantly gives the ball away and has little or no imagination in the last third of the park. I just dont rate the guy.

 

Seriously I find that opinion hilarious. I'll refer you to Craig's post above though; what matters is that Walter certainly doesn't agree with you. And that's a manager whose team are top of the league.

 

Hemdani is a decent holding midfielder with a few obvious failings. His ability took on mythical proportions during the rocky PLG era when many wished to convince themselves that Barry was not the best player in our squad and in the SPL.

[craig 5,199]

I was one of those that felt Ferguson was not playing to his full potential under PLG and wouldn't have been disappointed had he left.

 

However, the way he has played this season proves he is our most influential player and his contribution has been priceless.

 

I suspect that if Hemdani was the main man in the middle of the park we would be playing a much slower game which, IMO, wouldn't suit us in the SPL where teams get behind the ball quickly.

 

Hemdanis is much more effective when breaking up play and making the simple pass - but this is more often required in Europe than in the SPL because in the SPL the other team don't commit too many men forward.

 

RE Whittaker I have to agree with gisabeer - he has been largely unimpressive to me - I would prefer to go with Novo. Whittaker doesn't beat players, is not much more than a solid midfielder and when we are bereft of true creativity in the team it means we have no-one to get in behind the other team and get good cross balls in (which I am sure Boyd, Darcheville and Cousin would appreciate).

 

Whittaker is a decent player but has been uninspiring thus far.

[Gribz 743]

I don't find that weird at all Gribz - some players are more suited to certain types of games, that is all.

 

I understand that but not in Hemdani's case. He was our POTY last season as good as anyone in the country.

 

Seriously I find that opinion hilarious. I'll refer you to Craig's post above though; what matters is that Walter certainly doesn't agree with you. And that's a manager whose team are top of the league.

 

Cant agree with that either. KT has been poor this season and the mere decision to play him ahead of Hemdani isnt the sole reason we are top of the league. IMO if Hemdani was playing we would be playing even better and in a better position in the league. If he played at Tynecastle we may still be unbeaten as KT and Faye were shocking.

[Super_Ally 0]

I understand that but not in Hemdani's case. He was our POTY last season as good as anyone in the country.

 

 

 

Cant agree with that either. KT has been poor this season and the mere decision to play him ahead of Hemdani isnt the sole reason we are top of the league. IMO if Hemdani was playing we would be playing even better and in a better position in the league. If he played at Tynecastle we may still be unbeaten as KT and Faye were shocking.

 

Because of the type of player Hemdani is and what he brings to the team, I don't think his mere inclusion at Tynecastle would have been the difference between winning and losing. If Fergie had started on the other hand. As I keep pointing out a highly succesful football manager seems to agree with me.

 

Early in the season KT was playing very well, better than BH in european qualifiers. The odd bad game such as Tynecastle doesn't alter my opinion.

[craig 5,199]

You can't just assume that Hemdani would be playing better Gribz... his form at the start of this season was poor, which is why he has been dumped (I would think) from the SPL line up.

 

Maybe we would be playing better, maybe not.

 

But having watched the Hearts game last week I am 100% sure that the straight swap between KT and Hemdani would not have changed that result.

[Gribz 743]

I don't think his mere inclusion at Tynecastle would have been the difference between winning and losing. If Fergie had started on the other hand.

 

I think if Hemdani had played we may have not been beat, he would have broke up a lot of the Hearts play tht KT and Faye didnt get to. But its all hypothetical (sp).

 

And the same for Ferguson had he started. But I wouldnt agree that Ferguson is that better a player than Hemdani to say BH wouldnt have made a differene but BF would have. They are both as good as each other in different ways and both would have made a difference in that game IMO.

[Gribz 743]

You can't just assume that Hemdani would be playing better Gribz... .

 

In the same way people assume we wouldnt have lost if Ferguson had started??

[Super_Ally 0]

They are both as good as each other in different ways

 

:admin:

 

Not a chance.

 

They both have different qualities but Fergie is far more important to us.

[Gribz 743]

:admin:

 

Not a chance.

 

They both have different qualities but Fergie is far more important to us.

 

IF Ferguson would play to his ability in 90% of games then probably you have a point. But last season hemdani was the better player throughout.

 

So far this season BF has started the better and is playing well but he has to be consistant.

 

IMO its silly to compare as they are in the same team and id have both playing along side each other every game possible. Once Buffel is fit if have those 3 in a diamond.