Sunday October 21 - 5:00pm Perth vs. Melbourne

[markn]

I called it last week in the grella thread that tardic was rubbish, yet i failed to get much ( if any) support.

Interesting that many of these same supporters are now questioning his worth.

You don't need 3 games to work out his useless. You only need 3 minutes.

[Herman Cain]

You don't need 3 games to work out his useless. You only need 3 minutes.

This is why your opinions fail to win any support.

[yelawolf]

I called it last week in the grella thread that tardic was rubbish, yet i failed to get much ( if any) support.

Interesting that many of these same supporters are now questioning his worth.

You don't need 3 games to work out his useless. You only need 3 minutes.

Carlos, Flores, Fred etc. all took time to settle into the league

not saying Tadic will turn into a star like the above but give him time ffs

hell even Kewell took half a season before he started performing...

Edited October 21, 2012 by yelawolf

[Footballism]

I called it last week in the grella thread that tardic was rubbish, yet i failed to get much ( if any) support.

His name is Tadic you fucking mong, not tardic.

[Jimmy]

Shut up Markn.

[Tesla]

His name is Tadic you fucking mong, not tardic.

This.

The Heart supporters behind me at AAMI Park, who are of Croatian extraction, definitely pronounce Tadic as 'Tardic.'

You are mistaken.

[markn]

His name is Tadic you fucking mong, not tardic.

It doesn't matter how you spell it, he still looks rubbish to me.

It must hurt some people that not every one on the heart roster are going to be any good to play in the a-league.

Let's stop looking at the club with rose colored glasses.

hell even Kewell took half a season before he started performing...

I don't think he performed at all.

Edited October 21, 2012 by markn

[belaguttman]

His name is Tadic you fucking mong, not tardic.

He'll have to change his name to Tardic if he ever signs with MV

[yelawolf]

I don't think he performed at all.

[Defibrillator]

Over the line!!!

[dRoy]

My mcf work colleague informs me it's pronounced yo-sip Tar-ditch.

[Tesla]

My mcf work colleague informs me it's pronounced yo-sip Tar-ditch.

Either your lying or you must have a pretty shit job if your working with someone from mcf.

[yelawolf]

tar-dick

[LR9]

Sign Sarkies, FFS.

Horrid 90+ mins from the side, very few playing for the shirt, especially that reTardic.

Perth are obv our boggie side, seem to have us covered every where.

Even though DMacs been one of our better players, 100% commit all the time, Id like to see:

Germano

Fred - Thomo

Mate - Willo - Garcia

Big man isnt working, they are lying to deep and cant beat defenders when those shitty long valls are sent forward. mobility of Willo could suit the syste.

Also big hats off to the Perth Heart Cider Boys, made the most out of a dismal team performance...

Edited October 21, 2012 by LR9

[Peter]

Sign Sarkies, FFS.

Another Sarkies fan. As I have said before we should have given him at least one more season after injury to show what he can do. Helped us out with goals and assists when he played that patch last season. In the second derby of season 1 he came on and took control of the midfield where we were getting over-run. He provides goals(o.k. he missed that one on one with Covic), quaility corners and free kicks, something we are lacking at the moment. And he gave 100% on and off the pitch for the club.

I doubt he would be too expensive to sign, that is if he would want to after being ditched. Come on Mr. Munn, how about it?

[The Aardvark]

This match continues my complete bafflement as to how we can be so inept from set pieces. Yesterdays match had the only two instances I have witnessed where we have looked somewhat dangerous from a free kick, with Williams miskick nearly putting Fred on the scorers sheet and Vrankovic somehow only able to put the ball at right angles to the goal.

Other than thse two instances though, almost every free kick or corner I have seen us play has been woeful.

For starters, our shots on goal from free kicks very very rarely call the keeper to action. Our corners seem to hit the area of the box we aren't present in, and our freekicks that are used to set up opportunities rarely make it past any innocent bystander inbetween the kicker and the target because for nsome reason the ball doesn't get airbourne.

Surely set pieces, being the one scenario stagnant enough for you to practise in full at training, shouldn't be so pathetic that when we get a freekick in a dangerous position I pray for it to be advantage because I know we won't score from a set piece. How hard can it be to get a shot on target, or atleast airbourne so that at the worst the keeper has to make a save. Shots that miss the goals be metres are inexcusable, especially when not under any direct pressure.

[jw1739]

Perth are obv our boggie side, seem to have us covered every where.

Interesting to look at the statistics.

In all league and finals matches played to date, listing games played, won, drawn, lost, we have:

Central Coast: 6,1,1,4;

Newcastle: 6,2,1,3;

Adelaide: 6,1,2,3;

Perth: 8,1,3,4;

NQF: 3,3,0,0;

Wellington: 7,2,3,2;

Brisbane: 6,1,2,3;

Victory: 7,3,2,1;

Gold Coast: 6,2,3,1;

Sydney: 6,2,4,0.

The only teams against whom we have more wins than losses are North Queensland and Gold Coast (both now defunct), Melbourne Victory and Sydney.

So far, season 3 is going pretty much according to what the statistics might predict. Suggests to me that it's not so much about the players and coaches, because we have seem significant changes in both, but rather the style of football we are playing.

[jw1739]

This match continues my complete bafflement as to how we can be so inept from set pieces....and the rest of this post

Watch us closely during the warm-up at AAMI when we are shooting at goal. Rarely does anyone actually get a shot on target.

[Joel21]

Play the ball down the middle ffs, have faith in tadic, last year we were playing even shitter than we are now in the first rounds

Remember that our group is relatively new they should start to gel as a team soon.

Plays like tommo's goal last week is what our team is capable of

[dRoy]

Either your lying or you must have a pretty shit job if your working with someone from mcf.

Not lying. The only team he supports is MK. He's not an "active" supporter in mcf anymore. But his brother is.

I have a great job.

[markn]

Remember that our group is relatively new they should start to gel as a team soon.

Thats no excuse. Supporters, sponsors and members WILL NOT and SHOULD NOT use the "new squad" as an excuse.

WE cut half our team last year. That is the clubs fault! Somebody must be held responsible when half our starting lineup is new.

Why did we have such a huge player turnover? Is someone not doing their job correctly?

We are not a first season team. This is our third.

[cadete]

Thats no excuse. Supporters, sponsors and members WILL NOT and SHOULD NOT use the "new squad" as an excuse.

WE cut half our team last year. That is the clubs fault! Somebody must be held responsible when half our starting lineup is new.

Why did we have such a huge player turnover? Is someone not doing their job correctly?

We are not a first season team. This is our third.

Are u even a Member this Season?

[The Aardvark]

WE cut half our team last year. That is the clubs fault! Somebody must be held responsible when half our starting lineup is new.

Why did we have such a huge player turnover? Is someone not doing their job correctly?

We are not a first season team. This is our third.

Actually all these are interrelated. The key reason for the high turnover comes back to us being a first season team at some point.

Quite simply, all the players we cut were out of contract post season two. At the end of season one however, guys like Terra and Worm were still contracted. So you could say we were solving first season problems at the end of season two.

Couple this with a new manager and it's pretty much explained.

Also who of Worm, Terra, Sarkies, Ibrahim, Taseski would improve our squad this season? And who of Babalj, Hamill and Good do you think would have been keen to stay?

If we didn't change half our list you'd be demanding that "somebody must be held responsible when half our squad is deadwood from seasons one and two".

You're right, we aren't a first season team, this is our third. I'm just surprised that you can't recognise that we are acting like it.

[markn]

You're right, we aren't a first season team, this is our third. I'm just surprised that you can't recognise that we are acting like it.

I dont fully understand this statement.

At some point every team in the competition was a 3rd season team.

I dont know whether replacing half the squad with those on one or two season contracts offers a strong base.

We should have beaten Wellington, and given Glory's outs we should have fought for a draw. We failed on both counts.

FYI Cadete - Previous posts informed others that i purchased a number of A Reserve seat memberships this season. That shouldn't make my opinions (or others who post that are not members) any more or less valid.

[cadete]

I dont fully understand this statement.

At some point every team in the competition was a 3rd season team.

I dont know whether replacing half the squad with those on one or two season contracts offers a strong base.

Its pretty simple mate, as the club was going into its first season it obviously gave most of its players in its initial squad two season long contracts. This meant at the end of last season if they were not up to scratch then their time at the club had come to an end.

What are u even asking for?

Do u think we should have resigned Sarkies instead of signing Grella on a one year contract?

Or do u think we should have left Taseski on the list instead of signing one the best young Aussie defenders going around in Vrankovic?

Maybe we should of resigned Worm instead of getting Garica?

Or we could even have resigned Maycon and not got D Mac

Which one is it then mate???

Edited October 22, 2012 by cadete

[markn]

I enjoy getting great satisfaction knowing that all cadete want to do is argue any point i present.

Its getting to the point where you just want to argue with me because its me....even though my points have a very strong basis to it. I enjoy going fishing when cadete is around.

Anyway to further entertain myself, my reples to your questions are:

Do u think we should have resigned Sarkies instead of signing Grella on a one year contract?

Maybe have both. Towards the end of last season (especially against victory at home), Sarkies probably had his best game for the club. Easily the best player on the day. Shame he was later injured and we never saw him again.

Or do u think we should have left Taseski on the list instead of signing one the best young Aussie defenders going around in Vrankovic?

Which one is it then mate???

Whos taseski? Who did he play for? I never saw him play for us. So if we didn't release Taseski would Vrankovic not be signed?

Keep it comming Cad

Maybe we should of resigned Worm instead of getting Garica?

Or we could even have resigned Maycon and not got D Mac

I like how (according to you) one signing is directly reated to the release of another.

One signing should not have any relationship to the signing or release of another player.

But according your fantastic theory, finkler would never have been signed if carlo or harry was still at the club.

You cannot argue against the finkler statement. Just read your initial rebutal to understand why.

Edited October 22, 2012 by markn

[Baresi]

Lol, markn, ever heard of a salary cap? A player limit, perhaps?

Unfortunately we can't have all of everything.

[Tesla]

I like how (according to you) one signing is directly reated to the release of another.

One signing should not have any relationship to the signing or release of another player.

Unfortunately, in the real world, one signing is directly related to the release of another.

For a guy whop was previously claiming to be some sort of business expert, surely you would know something about budgets, limited resources, etc.

As well as the restrictions Ellki mentioned

[Che]

ffs

[The Aardvark]

We should have beaten Wellington, and given Glory's outs we should have fought for a draw. We failed on both counts.

I'm not arguing with you here. We have failed in both matches, but for mine it has been mostly through poor finishing and some major errors.

I dont know whether replacing half the squad with those on one or two season contracts offers a strong base.

To quote you I don't understand this statement?

Maybe have both. Towards the end of last season (especially against victory at home), Sarkies probably had his best game for the club. Easily the best player on the day. Shame he was later injured and we never saw him again.

Sarkies was an injury prone player who whilst he turned in the ocassional good performance, often underperformed. It's a shame he hasn't lived up to our hopes moreso, and seeing as he would be behind each of Fred, Thompson, Garcia, Germano and Grella in selection order this season I'm quite happy for his spot and funds to be allocated elsewhere.

Whos taseski? Who did he play for? I never saw him play for us. So if we didn't release Taseski would Vrankovic not be signed?

Keep it comming Cad

I'm not sure what this statement says? Taseski was a list clogger who spent two seasons in our squad, taking a spot that could have been used on someone like a Madaschi, for no output.

I like how (according to you) one signing is directly reated to the release of another.

One signing should not have any relationship to the signing or release of another player.

I disagree completely. Each signing massively impacts others, especially in a league like the A-League where there are salary cap and squad size constraints. For example, Vrankovic would not have been signed had Hamill and Good remained.

The fact is that yes, we may have still chased and gotten Gracia had we kept Worm, and may have signed Macallister had we kept Maycon, but why would you?

No squad is going to carry players who aren't in the best 11 and don't have the potential to be in the best 11. One of those boxes has to be ticked, with the possible exception of 2nd string goalkeepers. Even Hoffman and Gray are rated enough to be seen as possible best 11 players at stages throughout the season by the coaching staff.

Maycon ticked neither of those boxes, and therefore he got cut. We keep players like him and very soon we run out of spots for guys like Macallister. Ultimately it comes down to a choice between retaining spuds like Maycon and getting players like Macallister who could contribute more. As we've seen ion our first two seasons, players like Tomic, Taseski and Ibrahim do nothing for the club by filling up space.

[cadete]

I enjoy getting great satisfaction knowing that all cadete want to do is argue any point i present.

Its getting to the point where you just want to argue with me because its me....even though my points have a very strong basis to it. I enjoy going fishing when cadete is around.

Anyway to further entertain myself, my reples to your questions are:

Seriously u really like setting yourself up for failure.

Maybe have both. Towards the end of last season (especially against victory at home), Sarkies probably had his best game for the club. Easily the best player on the day. Shame he was later injured and we never saw him again.

Well I have saw Sarkies play 3 games VPL games this Winter for Bergers and none of his performances indicated at all that we need someone like him to take the spot of a defender or foward when we already have enough CM's in a squad that has RESTRICTED NUMBERS.

Whos taseski? Who did he play for? I never saw him play for us. So if we didn't release Taseski would Vrankovic not be signed?

Keep it comming Cad

The Simple Answer is: YES.

Kilment Taseski was on the MHFC List for over two years, he was signed as a defender and played four games for us in our first season and I believe a couple of NYL games towards the end of last season before playing for the Zebras in the VPL last season.

I like how (according to you) one signing is directly reated to the release of another.

One signing should not have any relationship to the signing or release of another player.

In a League where there is a Salary Cap and Cap on Squad Numbers this is EXACTLY THE CASE.

But according your fantastic theory, finkler would never have been signed if carlo or harry was still at the club.

You cannot argue against the finkler statement. Just ready your initial rebutal to understand why.

WTF are u going on about?

How is the infamous poor recruiting/list management of MV relevant at all to how our club should recruit/manage its list???

[markn]

If our current striker is poor, we buy another.

If we lack a defender we buy another.

If you gk is poor we buy another

In the real world, if i am not of any worth to my employer, i am replaced. I am not replaced IF someone else is available, i am replaced because i do not fulfil my tasks. Companies may even hire others, assess their performance, then sack the underperformer.

If my staff member is not suitable, i find another. Once that new person is hired and i am satisfied, i sack and replace accordingly.

Football is the same. How many times do clubs buy players, then release what they no longer need. Clubs dont sack, then look, then buy. They buy.....then sack.

Didnt Chris Dores leave collingwood because lynch was signed? Collingwood didn't release dores then sign lynch.

[KSK_47]

You cant just fire someone if their performance is deemed underwhelming unless their is a clause stating this. And I doubt you would find a player willing to sign a performance based contract.

[markn]

You cant just fire someone if their performance is deemed underwhelming unless their is a clause stating this. And I doubt you would find a player willing to sign a performance based contract.

True. But you can do as mentioned at the end of the season, or holf off on renewing their contracts etc.

Or leave space on the list to fill if needed. Given that we released half the squad and only filled half back, i think the club may not be sure whether their current crop is good enough. Thus they will buy accordingly.......and not sack and replace as some have mentioned prior. (CADETE.......i love getting you annoyed)

Even epl clubs have a player roster cap. They just choose not to fill it so they can buy players when needed.

[cadete]

Your Chris DAWES example is a pretty ratshit comparison as in the AFL if u need to recruit a readymade player to your club you are pretty much limited to those already in the one professional competition.

That is why Collingwood waited until they had signed Lynch to tell Dawes he could leave if he wished.

In Soccer Heart did not have that worry when they got rid of their deadwood.

The scope for recruitment not just includes A League players at other clubs (D Mac) but also foreign players (Go Hard, Gray, Tadic) and Aussies applying their trade overseas (Garcia, Grella).

[KSK_47]

Given that we released half the squad and only filled half back, i think the club may not be sure whether their current crop is good enough.

The club got rid of a lot of players that to be honest we can really live without and I think this season is more about signing quality over quantity.

As for the length of contacts offered to the new signings, yes a lot of the new players have yet to prove themselves in the long term so a one year contract is sort of like the 'trial period' when you start a new job

[The Aardvark]

Markn, i think your sack/replace argument is an interesting one, but one that only half applies to our situation.

The fact is there aren't enough spots on the list to carry two players of similiar ilk in order to identify if the new player is that much better than the other. In a squad of 21 odd players, every player needs to be capable of performing when needed.

Why hang onto players like Maycon, Taseski, Roganovic and Ibrahim when all have demonstrated they aren't good enough. I'm not interested in keeping them because even if their replacement isn't good enough, that is still the same output they were giving anyway. So the worst case scenario is the same output under a different name.

Worm and Terra were different to the above in that they were semi-regulars, howeve rthey were also VISA players, and an out of form Williams was arguably just as good as them, with the added benefit of being an Australian.

Unlike the business environment, professional sport has the added benefit of putting the players skills on display to the public, so you can make a fair assesment of them without actually having them work/play for you.

In some ways we have done what you have suggested. Fred was trialed and proven to be better as an attacking mid than Sarkies. Dugandzic better than Worm. Both these players were recruited and proven to be better replacements before Worm and terra were sacked were they not? And did we not trial players to see if they were worthwhile signing? But again with limited squad size this can only be done to small degrees.

Frankly I'm not sure where this argument is heading. This thread is fast becoming "a look at the mysterious world of list management" and I'm not sure where your argument is going to end up, because quite clearly the club has vastly improved it's squad this season already.

[Peter]

I thought I may as well wade in where I am not required.

There is a short supply of quality strikers in Australia and a short supply of quality Australian strikers (look at the national team). Apart from perhaps Scott MacDonald who I am not sure wants to return to Australia, I would like to know who would have been a better pick up than D-Mac or Tadic to play up front? Sure there are thousands of options, but it would appear that JD and JA (and perhaps scout Skoko) thought these two were the best that Heart could lure to Melbourne.

As pointed out earlier in this thread, strikers can't score if they don't receive service.

[Rellum]

I thought I may as well wade in where I am not required.

There is a short supply of quality strikers in Australia and a short supply of quality Australian strikers (look at the national team). Apart from perhaps Scott MacDonald who I am not sure wants to return to Australia, I would like to know who would have been a better pick up than D-Mac or Tadic to play up front? Sure there are thousands of options, but it would appear that JD and JA (and perhaps scout Skoko) thought these two were the best that Heart could lure to Melbourne.

As pointed out earlier in this thread, strikers can't score if they don't receive service.

I think Tadic is a good pick up, but a player that uses skill to beat opponents will never do well in the formation and style we are playing. I would never have singed DMac as I think players with limited skill like him only suit a game style like you see from Perth or Wellington and now us. I would rather have seen Zac Walker playing as a reserve to Tadic even if they are slightly different players. Learning the game to step up next season if he proved worthy. But I agree Aussie strikers are a rare breed so it is a valid question.

[belaguttman]

I like how (according to you) one signing is directly reated to the release of another.

One signing should not have any relationship to the signing or release of another player.

But according your fantastic theory, finkler would never have been signed if carlo or harry was still at the club.

You cannot argue against the finkler statement. Just read your initial rebutal to understand why.

markn, it's possible to take either approach, it depends on whether you are trying to build a team of champions or a champion team. Our club philosophy is developed around building a champion team (among other goals). It's important then to build an integrated team where player's abilities complement their team mates and the team style. we are also clearly trying to recruit flexible players who are able to play in several positions and several roles, this allows us to play different formations and tactics depending on our opponent.