View Full Version : Hartigan
After yet another woeful display last Saturday, and the prospect of him leading the line again in Latvia, how many people are well and truly sick of the sight of Noel Hartigan?
jbrazil
21/06/2001, 11:13 PM
poor old hartigol! this poll isnt going to reflect kindly on his silky skills!
So far only 4 have voted him out...????
Do the rest of ye have an opinion as to why he should be 'leading our attack'?
A face
23/06/2001, 11:13 AM
or doesn't play, i just hope we get a result but my biggest fear is that the Hartigan thing takes off like Morley last year, it is never good for the player but it also drags the rest of the team down. Last year the whole thing got out of hand. If we could jus concentrate on supporting the team as a whole and not singal out players it might be better. what do you all think
Originally posted by A face
or doesn't play, i just hope we get a result but my biggest fear is that the Hartigan thing takes off like Morley last year, it is never good for the player but it also drags the rest of the team down. Last year the whole thing got out of hand. If we could jus concentrate on supporting the team as a whole and not singal out players it might be better. what do you all think
Morley and Hartigan, completely different situations. Morley paid for leaving for Shels a few years ago. Hartigan is just plain rubbish and has no interest in Cork City. He's just there cause it's a handy £150 a week...
Have never seen him play well for City ever. Only have one memory of him actaully scoring and that was against Rovers when City won the league Cup at the Cross and even then he had a ****e game besides the goal...
Even though Kabia didn't know what offside meant at least he looked impressive at times...
Éanna
23/06/2001, 11:40 PM
He was pretty good in the game today in Liepaja. I'm no fan, but he did wwell. People forget that the guy isn't a natural striker! It's Gunthers fault. MURPHY OUT!
"Hartigan superstar....scores more goals than Kabia!"
it was legendary
Leonard
24/06/2001, 1:44 PM
It's sad to see the retarded goldfish from Cityfc.com have made it. I suppose Niamh doesn't remember Hartigans storming game vs Athlone in the Cup semi-final or his cracking volley in the 4-1 win over St. Francis. If people are going to slag off Hartigan with no foundation, they should just pi*s off.
I think the real argument over Hartigan is why isn't he played in the centre of defence where he started with Coughlan. The two gelled well and were a real threat from set pieces.
I dunno all thing considered the guy though he cant jump in the air for raspberries (there better Joe) he held the ball up well in latvia, with 2 guys hanging off his shirt most times
Wow Leonard...a whole game he performed well in and a cracking goal...I am entitled to my opinion and I don't think he is good enough to play for City. He can never control the ball, he's not much good with his feet. He's obvious strength should be his heading but he doesn't exploit it. A good game and a goal doesn't make up for everything else.
Leonard
24/06/2001, 10:16 PM
Apologies for not mentioning his 31 appearences (plus four as sub) in his debut season in 96/97, when he scroed 7 goals (3 league, 1 FAI Cup, 3 MSC), his 36 appearances (plus 8 as sub) in 97-98 when he again scored 7 (5 League, 1 FAI Cup, 1 League Cup) and so on for his entire City playing career, but I find people find me slightly pedantic when I spew out such stats.
While you are certainly entitled to your opinion, you still completely ignore the fact that he is a fine centre half, and was devestating in defence with Coughlan. The position of striker has slightly been thrust upon him due to our lack of options in this department, something he cannot be blamed for. Nevertheless, he has kept trying and worked hard to become a better player, and kept well stum when he was left go, when the easier option would have been to moan in the press and run the club down. In my opinion, the boy has great control with his feet, and had another fine game against the Latvians over there in a difficult position. He will never be a true goalscorer, and will always have to work extremely hard to score. As long as we have players in defence who insist in hoofing the ball up, we'll need a Hartigan, as was so embarressingly proven when Hartigan left and Morely and Jimmy the Gnome were up front.
In any case, this argument will no doubt continue to rage on for as long as the Niall Quinn debate did/Peter Crouch (QPR) debate is raging. Hopefully the "No Harts" brigade will try some more constructive arguments, or it will get even more boring even quicker.
Éanna
24/06/2001, 10:19 PM
I'm no fan of hartigan, but if anything I'd regard his ball control as his best aset. His skill in turning defenders spreading the play and taking the ball on the ground is pretty good by eL standards. He's at his weakest in the air, he's not too strong or quick and his shooting isn't great. All of this says- NOT A STRIKER! Spot on Leonard, play him at the back gunther!
his 31 appearences (plus four as sub) in his debut season in 96/97, when he scroed 7 goals (3 league, 1 FAI Cup, 3 MSC), his 36 appearances (plus 8 as sub) in 97-98 when he again scored 7 (5 League, 1 FAI Cup, 1 League Cup)
Are these stats supposed to be backing Hartigan? 3 league goals in 31 games in 96/97!!!! (Don't mind the MSC games, Noelle Feeney could knock in a hat-trick whe they're playing the likes Cobh Wanderers) Those stats only further the case for not playing Hartigan.
But apart altogether from goals. The guy is just not up to this standard of football. The only arguement I've heard FOR Hartigan is that he "has good control with his feet", but go out around the parks on a Sunday and you'll find thousands of fellas with "good control with their feet".
Hartigan has NO pace, very little ability in the air for a guy of his height, No strength, no tackling ability, no interest.
As for him playing in defence - the above qualities are needed even more there.
niamh
24/06/2001, 11:56 PM
no one denies that he tries. The fact you think he's played out off position is irrelevent. You proved my point in fact. I said I had never remembered him playing really well in a complete game and you replied citing ONE match and ONE good goal. Then you mention all his others stats, was his good in all these games too???
I don't think he is good enough to play for City. If there were other players I thought the same about I would say it. But after watching him (and others) play so crap for so long I think I'm entitled to say it without being referred to as a "retarded goldfish".
Leonard
25/06/2001, 6:24 PM
If we're going to have one of these "bigger ****s" arguments, then the fact that I can mention one good game and one good goal shows I've seen him play more often than you! Still, I would prefer not to sink to your level.
If you bothered reading my posting (apologies if you have difficulties understanding English) you would have seen me describe the central defence partnership of Coughlan and Hartigan as "devastating". This was ment to be an adjective for good. So to answer your 600th moronic question, yes, he did play well in these games. The last time I saw him play in this position for the first team was in Cahair against Scarborough pre-season, and he still looked comfortable in this position.
So to sum up for you, Niamh: Hartigan IS a good player: he's proved it playing in defence. Hartigan IS NOT a good striker, but CAN score goals from defence. He HAS played several excellent games for City (if you really want me to waste my time, I can compile a list of my 10 favourite Hartigan displays of all time). He IS good enough for City.
If you have anything intelligent to say, I'll be here, holding my breath in anticipation.
To answer some of your points, Neil, pace in defence isn't all that important, as all of our current defenders show week in week out. As for his early scoring record, three league goals for a central defender in his debut season is quite a good haul, especially when you consider Caulfield was top with 8 and O'Connell second with 7. Both Cahill, O'Brien and Hill came joint third with Hartigan on three.
Retarded golfish? Yes, possibly a bit unfair on goldfish there.
niamh
26/06/2001, 12:44 AM
You and Gunther are in a league of your own then....the Hartigan fan club...
niamh
26/06/2001, 12:58 AM
Agree to disagree then?
BTW I like goldfish ;-)
Hartigan IS a good player: he's proved it playing in defence. He HAS played several excellent games for City. He IS good enough for City.
That is completely a matter of opinion, but if you ask anyone who actually plays the game, or manages a football team, they will not agree - they will not have any interest. How come when Hartigan was released by Mountfield, his only offer was from Tramore! (1st Div MSL)
To answer some of your points, Neil, pace in defence isn't all that important, as all of our current defenders show week in week out.
What a load of ****** 'Leonard'! Pace IS crucial in defence! And saying that it's ok because Dec and Derek have no pace is rubbish. That's the exact reason BTW that I wouldn't have Dec or Derek near the first team - they have no pace and no skill. Can you imagine Hartigan trying to contain Foran or Crowe or anyone with a bit of strength or pace...
Leonard
26/06/2001, 3:04 PM
Gunter and I have nothing in common. If we did, then Hartigan would be playing in the centre of defence. I also have more hair and have the ability to grow better stubble.
I'm quitting this thread now. Anyone want to carry it on can meet me behind the stand in Longford tomorrow and we'll discuss this like adults: with our fists and my baseball bat.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.2 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.