Costa vs Hearfield

Costa vs Hearfield

Ok...now we have it. Two young tiro's fighting it out for the same position next year.

Why not just play both?

I agree play both, Troy and daniel as the attacking mids and Bertos upfront with the other striker/

Exactly - get both of them in there.

And Costa?

costo is better than troy imo

Thanks George

There's no way at all that Costa is better than Hearfield.

Was just thinking that one of Costa's main disadvantages is size.  He's tiny and can't make genuine efforts to challenge headers.

Seem to recall him heading in the goal.

Both work in progress, to be honest Hearfield was pretty ordinary for most of the season and was only just showing signs of what he might do.

Dont really care the thought of either of them coming off the bench to replace the other and run the opposition ragged next season is really appealing.

Lies he scored from a header didn't he, he was being marked by the 6'4" Ognenovski.
Costa has more pase than Hearfield, instead of contesting headers he pulls his marker off and runs round him to pick up the bounce.
Costa has a didn't go elbowing people getting red carded and suspended for 2 games at a crucial time during the end of the season.
I agree with others above plat both. 4-4-2 with Costa and smeltz (or replacement) as strikers, Hearfield and (super) Bertos as attacking mid field
With Brown and Christie. regular back 4. Daniel to come on 60-70 mark as impact player for Hearfield or Costa. (Replacing Costa than Swapping position with Hearfield.

I for one would really have like to see more of David Mulligan. Seeing him play for the All Whites he is really good, didn't quite click with the back four?

He's a dead ball specialist we could use that in corners, Bertos and Daniel are all right but Mulligan is in a different class.

Play both!

Class and Mulligan are two words which don't belong in the same sentence. Whatever he had, he certainly doesn't appear to have it now.

....and just for the sake of argument. Costa didn't exactly leap 25 feet in the air for his goal, did he? Not like he outjumped Oganowski, he sneaked in front of him. Costa doesn't pose a threat in the air but that's not what he's there for.

Anyone but him.

I'm pretty sure I said challenge headers.  There was nobody challenging him there.
loyalgunner2009-01-20 13:28:05

Mulligan is poo!

I'd say Hearfield is the better player but I like Costa 100000000x more. If Costa had an extended run of games he would improve significantly imo.

He (Costa) is small and the Ogre simply muscled him off the ball virtually the whole game. Royal2009-01-20 14:43:29

I thought Costa was good against the Ogmonster. There was one instance where he hurried him and Og was forced to conceed a corner etc. He also scored the goal of course.

It's not like Oar, Danning, Zullo, Berger, Jamieson, Patafa (played very well against Perth) are big players but they have done reasonably well..
valeo2009-01-20 14:48:20

A lot of the succesful younger players are "wingers" though, Zullo for example. So they aren't running at 12 foot tall, hairy centrebacks for the whole game.

was impressed by Hearfield when watching them train at ROF the other day. He can find the back oif the net (just not in games)

Also remember that Troy is a couple of years older than Costa and at that age 2 years of development is huge.

Costa in 2 years > Troy now IMO.

Plus Ricki is right. We absolutely need the youth team so that promising players like Troy and Costa get regular game time so that they continue to develop.

To bad we can't use them in the Team Wellington side so they get some game time. but a youth side would be cool

I've been very impressed with Troy this season.....he has learnt well and come on in leaps and bounds in his first season with a new club in a new country - can't be that easy for a young fella....

He had an outstanding game in Sydney when we won 2-1 in November before having to make way in our starting lineup for Fred. Since he came back into the team he has had to find form again, which he was definitely doing as witnessed by the next game in Sydney before Brosque got under his skin and he snapped....

Costa has been good, but not electric in the game time he has had so far, and I believe he is  certainly going to be something special in good time (maybe this week in Melbs???).

I think they are both very promising players and a crucial part of our next few seasons, but Troy has a more established part to play until Costa has that blinder of a game this week.....

How much they will both learn and benefit from a quality AM signing who gives them space and reads/controls/links their runs behind the back 4 next season....

I am very please that Costa is getting some game time, that he scored and that both of them are a part of our squad.....

imo Costa's natural position is on the wing or in behind the strikers.

If big hulking defenders stopped skillful, smaller players every time then football would be very dull also. Doesn't happen. Costa will learn.
valeo2009-01-20 18:03:39

costa + troy = young flair.

if u were going to play both, and have bertos partnering either of them up front. i cant see us scoring many goals, i think we need a more mature striker in front of goal, bertos can only score if its an open goal and he uses his cock, hes feet are useless.

but we gotta get a youth team, or i reckon we will struggle to compete in a few years down the track, not only is a youth team good for development, but the club could also make some cash with transfering unused youth graduates.

It also hinders squad players that only play once or twice a year. They get no game time at all while at other clubs they can play in the youth team.

I think it was because it was too much money. Not too sure

I think it was because of money, and travel issues etc

The FFA largely funds the youth league - they refused to fund our youth team on the bases that they didn't want to expend Oz money on developing NZ young players. It seems that we'd have been allowed to play if we got the funding from here, but the Government refused to put up cash so we got screwed on that front.

We then tried to set up a base in Canberra and play the youth league with a mixture of Canberra and NZ youngsters, but that also fell through, especially after Canberra started making noises about getting their own franchise into the A-league.

So that's how we basically missed out, and my understanding is that we've now given up on the entire concept.

from the FFA's point of view its fair that they dnt fund a nz youth team, but not having one must put the club at a massive disadvantage. i think the canberra idea is problay the most feasible one, unless the govt and nz soccer pull a few million out of there (soccer) ball sacks. it almost seems to be a waste having quality young players on our books if they arent like to get any/much game time over a season, example draper

Ah. So we're going back to it. Fair enough, not having a team in the youth league is a massive disadvantage.

If there was ever an issue that NZF should be involved with it's establishing the Youth League team, I think it's a hugely exciting concept for Football in this country.  Funding that is like having a full time squad in preparation for U17s/U20s!