Formation

[macca70]

I thinks it’s time for Lennon to rethink the set up of the team.

This 5 Man midfield with 1 up front is clearly not effective.

It appears to me that we done seem to get enough bodies into the box. When our midfielders are on the ball we seem to be totally lacking of options ahead of them.

If we are going to play 1 up front, we really need McGiin and McGeoch getting into the box to offer options for Boyle and Barker.

Boyle and Barker do some great work down the sides going past players but the final ball very rarely finds a Hibs player.

Our formation maybe ensures we control the midfield but doesn’t seem to be offering anything from an attacking perspective.

The service to Murray has been non existant and he seems to be reliant on chasing lost causes.

Would love to see us go back to basics and try a good old fashioned 442, playing 2 strikers from the start every week.

[J-C]

The problem with 4-4-2 Is the midfield get outnumbered and all the creativity comes from out wide.

[JimboHibs]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I thinks it’s time for Lennon to rethink the set up of the team.

This 5 Man midfield with 1 up front is clearly not effective.

It appears to me that we done seem to get enough bodies into the box. When our midfielders are on the ball we seem to be totally lacking of options ahead of them.

If we are going to play 1 up front, we really need McGiin and McGeoch getting into the box to offer options for Boyle and Barker.

Boyle and Barker do some great work down the sides going past players but the final ball very rarely finds a Hibs player.

Our formation maybe ensures we control the midfield but doesn’t seem to be offering anything from an attacking perspective.

The service to Murray has been non existant and he seems to be reliant on chasing lost causes.

Would love to see us go back to basics and try a good old fashioned 442, playing 2 strikers from the start every week.

Equally our wide players fail to offer an end product consistently,There's no doubt they have the ability to beat a player but when it comes to scoring regularly its terrible.... taking Aberdeen as an example Hayes,McGinn & now GMS offered much more than either of our wide players.

[Sammy7nil]

We are well in to the season and the problem NL has he still does not know his best starting 11. I don't think he has 11 players he trusts to perform week after week.

[Nicho87]

Simon Murray no where near good enough yesterday. Yes he wasn't the only one but any time it was played in to feet he lost it.

[neil7908]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Equally our wide players fail to offer an end product consistently,There's no doubt they have the ability to beat a player but when it comes to scoring regularly its terrible.... taking Aberdeen as an example Hayes,McGinn & now GMS offered much more than either of our wide players.

Lennon has my total support and I understand setting up your team differently depending on who you your playing - tactical flexibility is vital.

My concern at the moment is what is our preferred formation and starting 11? In truth I'm not sure NL knows. That worries me a bit given he's been here for a season and a half and signed many of the current squad.

I think the pool of players we have is excellent but we need a few more players of real quality to move us up a level.

Out wide is an interesting one as we've generally looked good in that area.

However, I agree with you that we need more. Boyle has come on leaps and bounds this season and is a critical player for us but I'd still like to see him contribute more as I think he has the ability to go very far in the game.

Barker has often flattered to deceive and despite his obvious skill, doesn't do enough to really punish the opposition.

If you look at the goals we've conceded in the last 3 games they've nearly all come from wide players (Windass, Sinclair and GMS). Maybe that says more about our defence, particularly the right side, but I'd love to see one our wide players makes that kind of impact.

It's also clear that going forward we just don't have the right set up yet. Murray looks horribly isolated on his own but we don't seem to have a pairing that quite works either.

Equally, our midfield barely set foot in the opposition box. When McGinn goes I'd be delighted to get Henderson back but I think we really need someone who plays further forward and can link the midfield and attack and get into the box to chip in some goals.

Reading back that all seems a bit negative. I don't think we have too many reasons for despondency but yesterday was a real kick in the stones. How we react over the next 3 games will be crucial but whatever happens before the winter break, I hope we don't have lose sight of the areas that need strengthening.

[calumhibee1]

A small tweak we could make to the formation would be to look at going 4-2-3-1 like a lot of big teams do. Bartley and McGeough as the two sitting deep while your two wingers and McGinn are expected to play further up the pitch with McGinn playing just off the forward and the two wide men hugging the touchline.

[macca70]

Lennon seemed to have a settled 11 prior to the International break and knew his best team but post break, we seem to be back to chopping and changing and trying set up to accommodate the players we have.

He seems to be trying to shoehorn McGregor into that defence which appears to have had a massively disruptive effect on Efe and Hanlon.

Efe and Hanlon have been immense together, McGregor comes in and Efe and Hanlon look really unsettled.

[The Leith Dutch]

I'm at the point where I feel we have a good squad of players but no obvious team.

Defence
Defensively I like 3 Centre Backs but we don't have good enough wing backs for that not to leave us light either on solidity or attacking power in the rest of the team. Doubly so if you use Bartley to break up play - him + 3 Centre backs should make us difficult to break down.

Strikers
I feel you need either a striking partnership or a guy who can play on his own up front. I don't feel we have a partnership and our best chance of developing one seems to be Shaw + 1 and I just don't think Shaw is ready for being a guaranteed starter.

Stokes can't play on his own up front while Murray isn't getting enough goals (made worse by not having much contribution from the midfield).

Width
To me we've got a decent pair of wingers but it's a style of play you need to commit to.

That means you probably need to go one up front to allow you to play 3 in the middle to avoid being over run in Centre Midfield. The only other options I can see are either expect the wingers to handle defensive duties in which case we've got the wrong wingers or to get two guys to hold down Centre midfield on their own which is a pretty tough ask and which also points to no plan B of attacking through the middle.

The short answer is that I think a lot of our problems here stem not so much from having poor strikers as the wrong strikers for the team we've assembled.

I feel like having a Moult type of player plus a good, rounded attacking mid in a 4-5-1 with wingers is where we should probably be going. I actually feel that the closest we've got within the team would be Shaw and Fraser Murray - they look like the players we need but I just don't feel they're ready to be starters week in week out.

[southern hibby]

Here’s a unique thought, maybe if NL picked a formation and played it for several weeks without changing it weekly the players would grow into that formation and understanding of it.

I’m in no way having a pop at NL but surely it can’t be good for players week in week out coming out to play a different formation and not getting a chance to adapt to that formation.

However yesterday’s performance was absolutely shocking from every player and the really should be ashamed of that effort they put in.

GGTTH

[wookie70]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Lennon seemed to have a settled 11 prior to the International break and knew his best team but post break, we seem to be back to chopping and changing and trying set up to accommodate the players we have.

He seems to be trying to shoehorn McGregor into that defence which appears to have had a massively disruptive effect on Efe and Hanlon.

Efe and Hanlon have been immense together, McGregor comes in and Efe and Hanlon look really unsettled.

I agree but the injuries to Gray and Whittaker are probably the bigger catalyst for those changes.

[Brightside]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

The problem with 4-4-2 Is the midfield get outnumbered and all the creativity comes from out wide.

the problem with 442 is our lack of RBs.

[MWHIBBIES]

There is a reason no decent side plays 4-4-2.

[J-C]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

A small tweak we could make to the formation would be to look at going 4-2-3-1 like a lot of big teams do. Bartley and McGeough as the two sitting deep while your two wingers and McGinn are expected to play further up the pitch with McGinn playing just off the forward and the two wide men hugging the touchline.

I do like 4-2-3-1 but is McGinn good enough to be the creative player in the whole just behind the striker, I can't see it. Also Bartley just isn't good enough to be in the 2 behind, not technically able to perform in that system(my opinion that is), his passing and vision isn't up to that role, he's a breaker upper player, in there to win 50-50's and give the ball to a more creative player. The player best suited to playing behind the striker is Swanson, with Dylan and McGinn sitting in behind, Boyle out on the right and Stokes on the left as an inside forward(or Barker). This leaves the problem of wingbacks/fullbacks, Stevenson's crossing isn't the best at times but he has a great engine in him and Gray/Whittaker are looking less likely to be the players we need to move forward as a club.