PDA

View Full Version : Player ratings



Unseen work
18-07-2013, 07:34 PM
Was unable to see the game tonight so any chance of a view on how players played?
Cheers

Pretty Boy
18-07-2013, 07:36 PM
Williams 9

Stevenson 4
McPake 4
Forster 5
Hanlon 4

Craig 6
Tudor Jones 5
Thomson 7
Taiwo 6
Handling 4

Vine 6

Robertson 6
Harris 6
Caldwell no time

Liams
18-07-2013, 07:41 PM
Williams was outstanding!!

Hibs90
18-07-2013, 07:44 PM
Williams 9

Stevenson 5
McPake 4
Forster 5
Hanlon 5

Craig 7
Tudor Jones 4
Thomson 7
Taiwo 6
Handling 4

Vine 5

Robertson 6
Harris 6

Humo
18-07-2013, 07:45 PM
Vine wad he's a poor mans Nish and thats saying something!

For me williams and Thompson are the only ones who get pass marks

BarneyK
18-07-2013, 07:46 PM
Vine wad he's a poor mans Nish and thats saying something!

For me williams and Thompson are the only ones who get pass marks

Didn't get a chance to watch it but I think I'll reserve judgement on that one ta.

Pretty Boy
18-07-2013, 07:48 PM
Vine wad he's a poor mans Nish and thats saying something!

For me williams and Thompson are the only ones who get pass marks

Absolute nonsense re Vine.

Was nowhere near match fit and had minimal service but won his fair share in the air, had some decent hold up play that created a couple of half chances, almost scored and worked hard for the team.

Seeing what you want to see imo.

Humo
18-07-2013, 07:55 PM
If vine is all fenlon can come up with after weeks of knowing we wouldn't have doyle or griffiths then he should get the boot. That said if he scores the winner at tynie I'll grow a beard

bingo70
18-07-2013, 07:55 PM
Absolute nonsense re Vine.

Was nowhere near match fit and had minimal service but won his fair share in the air, had some decent hold up play that created a couple of half chances, almost scored and worked hard for the team.

Seeing what you want to see imo.

Also won a few free kicks, he'll be a handfull for defenders in the SPL.

IWasThere2016
18-07-2013, 07:55 PM
Vine wad he's a poor mans Nish and thats saying something!

For me williams and Thomson are the only ones who get pass marks

Both will be pivotal for us this season IMHO.

Humo
18-07-2013, 07:56 PM
Absolute nonsense re Vine.

Was nowhere near match fit and had minimal service but won his fair share in the air, had some decent hold up play that created a couple of half chances, almost scored and worked hard for the team.

Seeing what you want to see imo.


Its all very well working hard but if your ***** your *****.

Holmesdale Hibs
18-07-2013, 07:56 PM
Didn't watch the match but from reading this it looks like we were well beaten. A 9 for Williams and the rest 5s and 6s. Not great reading. Hopefully we can pull it back, 2-0 is difficult but not insubmountable.

Re Vine, it's impossible to tell anything about a player after 1 game. I remember people saying Stokes was pash and would never score goals. Sure there are plenty others. Lets give him some time before judging him.

BarneyK
18-07-2013, 07:58 PM
Its all very well working hard but if your ***** your *****.

And what are you basing this on?

lugz
18-07-2013, 07:59 PM
Its all very well working hard but if your ***** your *****.

Only thing that's ***** is what your typing

Pretty Boy
18-07-2013, 08:00 PM
Its all very well working hard but if your ***** your *****.

Not even going to dignify this with a response because it's trolling at it's worst.

bingo70
18-07-2013, 08:01 PM
Didn't watch the match but from reading this it looks like we were well beaten. A 9 for Williams and the rest 5s and 6s. Not great reading. Hopefully we can pull it back, 2-0 is difficult but not insubmountable.

Re Vine, it's impossible to tell anything about a player after 1 game. I remember people saying Stokes was pash and would never score goals. Sure there are plenty others. Lets give him some time before judging him.

We weren't that bad, defensively we struggled but we played some decent stuff in spells.

Vine did pretty well tonight, i'm baffled why anyone would pick him out for criticism. He's clearly not the quickest and i don't think he's got that many tricks up his sleeve but it's obvious he's a good team player, something we've not had up front for years.

Vault Boy
18-07-2013, 08:03 PM
Its all very well working hard but if your ***** your *****.

Well the St Johnstone support who saw him put in 30 odd performances last year didn't seem to think he was *****. I'll go by their opinion for now.

Leighonel
18-07-2013, 08:10 PM
Vine wad he's a poor mans Nish and thats saying something!

For me williams and Thompson are the only ones who get pass marks

Haha.

I thought vines hold up play, link up, strength and touch were all good considering he hasnt trained or played much and we didnt really get the ball to him.

Williams has kept us in the tie and is well deserving of the 9's, Thomson wasnt far behind. KT played behind the midfield 4 but he was our biggest threat from midfield, so much control and composure.

edinburghhibee
18-07-2013, 08:11 PM
For me I'm gonna have a right go at our defence tonight. Embarrassing its the only word I can think of that won't get **** out. Everyone and their dug knows we are terrible at crosses yet we allow their players to swing balls in without any pressure. On two separate occasions tonight I counted times when a Malmo player was in on goal and hibs defence stepped up thinking he was going to cut it back only for us to give him a free shot on goal!! In my eyes simple things we got wrong tonight are we played Stevenson at Right back even though he has very rarely played there in the last 2-3 years and instead of protecting him we put Handling at right mid!!!! now I'll be first to admit I'm not a manager or a coach at any level but surely against the teams who managed to make it to Europe if you have a weakness such as Stevenson at right back then you need to help the lad by protecting him. The amount of times they just waltzed through us on our right flank was ridiculous. For what its worth I don't even think they were that good, certainly don't believe that if they were to play us in say November they would beat us. Their match fitness and match sharpness was the winning factor for them tonight coupled with our shocking defending. Ben Williams was the only thing tonight that stopped us taking a pasting from an average team. However getting a weeks worth of training and a full (partially full) ER may just swing this tie in our favour.

Unseen work
18-07-2013, 08:12 PM
Jheezo doesn't sound to promising! Glad to hear Thomson was good, how was the attacking options through handling vine and Craig?

bandylegs_jLeighton
18-07-2013, 08:16 PM
Williams was very good.

The makeshift defence were shaky, Stevenson and McPake looking most vulnerable.

Midfield played decent stuff in small spells. Thomson was by far the best in that he looked very comfortable playing at that level. Out of the two new boys Craig done better than Jones - his set pieces were good.

Vine done pretty well considering he's not had a proper preseason, and was up top on his own.

steviehibsleith
18-07-2013, 08:33 PM
Williams was very good.

The makeshift defence were shaky, Stevenson and McPake looking most vulnerable.

Midfield played decent stuff in small spells. Thomson was by far the best in that he looked very comfortable playing at that level. Out of the two new boys Craig done better than Jones - his set pieces were good.

Vine done pretty well considering he's not had a proper preseason, and was up top on his own.

Why is it a makeshift defence ? All four are defenders just because ones asked to play wingback instead of CH and one play left back instaed of right back well im sorry if the defence was as poor as everyone is saying i see no excuse. Young Forster aside as I havent seen enough of him and his age, the other three are not good enough . A fit Mcpake I would take but I dont think we are going to see that , he doesnt play enough and his hiding back issues. Hanlon and Stevenson have been part of a weak defence for 3 years . This isnt a knee jerk shout they are rank and have been for a while and if it wasnt for Big Ben how much worse coud it be.

bandylegs_jLeighton
18-07-2013, 08:51 PM
I hear what your saying about the defence being crap, but you can't argue that it's not makeshift when 2 of our regular starters were out injured, and half of the back 4 were playing out of position.

There is a massive difference between playing centre back and fullback. It's also a tough ask for Stevenson playing against a tricky wide player at right back when he is so predominately left footed.

J-C
18-07-2013, 09:04 PM
Still can't understand why Forster didn't plat at RB, he's played there before and a natural right footer. A back 4 of Forster. McPake. Hanlon. Stevenson. would make a lot more sense, listening to Sportsound, Stevenson was continually switching the ball to his left peg??

lucky
19-07-2013, 06:28 AM
Hibs were not as bad as some on here are making out. But Stevenson is not a right back, likewise Hanlons no full back. Williams was our best player but Thompson and Tawio did well. Vine held the ball up and linked up play. OTJ struggled and Hibs improved when he went off.

gegs70
19-07-2013, 07:27 AM
They just lack match sharpness/ fitness remember Malmo are half way through their season and that showed. Having said that possesion stats suggest we 51%, 7 shots on targetd etc .. With a big crowd on thursday showing " the spitit of Athens game" we could give them a real fright. Fenlon really needs to find a proper striker or 2 as he has had plenty of time and we have missed all of our targets. wasnt too convinced by the back 4 either...mcpake hasnt had much game time either and it was an inexperienced back 4.

basehibby
19-07-2013, 08:34 AM
Not nearly as bad a performance as some would have you believe. Certainly in the first half hour or so Malmo looked like a side riding high at the top of their league half way through the season, but thereafter I thought Hibs took the game to them and were a wee bit unfortunate not to get the away goal.
Williams did his job well and was our MOM but the rest of the side did OK and did not look like a team still in pre-season. I was left with the overriding impression that we are far from out of this tie - and I think the team will feel the same.

offshorehibby
19-07-2013, 10:17 AM
Why is it a makeshift defence ? All four are defenders just because ones asked to play wingback instead of CH and one play left back instaed of right back well im sorry if the defence was as poor as everyone is saying i see no excuse. Young Forster aside as I havent seen enough of him and his age, the other three are not good enough . A fit Mcpake I would take but I dont think we are going to see that , he doesnt play enough and his hiding back issues. Hanlon and Stevenson have been part of a weak defence for 3 years . This isnt a knee jerk shout they are rank and have been for a while and if it wasnt for Big Ben how much worse coud it be.

Stevenson is not a RB, Hanlon spent most of the game drifting in to a central position. I believe Forster played regularly at RB and you had Mullen a RB on the bench.

ahibby
19-07-2013, 10:20 AM
What happened to McGivern?

Stevie Reid
19-07-2013, 10:23 AM
What happened to McGivern?

Injured his knee v Raith last week.

Fergus52
19-07-2013, 10:25 AM
They just lack match sharpness/ fitness remember Malmo are half way through their season and that showed. Having said that possesion stats suggest we 51%, 7 shots on targetd etc .. With a big crowd on thursday showing " the spitit of Athens game" we could give them a real fright. Fenlon really needs to find a proper striker or 2 as he has had plenty of time and we have missed all of our targets. wasnt too convinced by the back 4 either...mcpake hasnt had much game time either and it was an inexperienced back 4.

51% possession and seven shots on target is pretty good for an away european game.

RoscoHibby
19-07-2013, 10:44 AM
I'm all for being positive, but if they took 7 of us last night, we couldn't really have complained. Defence was terrible, no marking, no movement when on the ball and very little creativity.

Dont like to have a go at young players, but this is more at Fenlon, but young Handling is just not ready for 1st team football, was a waste of a (half filled) jersey last night. Sure he's a good player, but completely powderpuff, their supposed 'best player' was playing left mid....so to have him directly up against him, knowing stevenson isn't that strong at right back....was complete folly. The 2nd goal totally backs this up, and we were carved open at will many times in the 1st half down that side. Cant believe he lasted the 90 mins either.

Thought Vine looked decent, Thomson had good game,wee boozy looked threatening when he came on, we really need to give him a new contract soon. Williams kept us in the tie.

If we start the next leg with a bit more energy and composure, this mob can be got at, but we'll have to start infinitely better and get the 1st goal, defo be there, more in hope and support than expectant though.

Iain G
19-07-2013, 10:48 AM
I am wondering why you would play a left footed midfield player at right back when you have a perfectly good promising young right back sitting on the bench?!? :confused:

hail1875hail
19-07-2013, 10:53 AM
Williams 9

Stevenson 4
McPake 4
Forster 6
Hanlon 5

Handling 4
Taiwo 6
Thompson 7
OTJ 4
Craig 5

Vine 6

Subs:
Harris 6
Robertson 5

steviehibsleith
19-07-2013, 01:40 PM
I hear what your saying about the defence being crap, but you can't argue that it's not makeshift when 2 of our regular starters were out injured, and half of the back 4 were playing out of position.

There is a massive difference between playing centre back and fullback. It's also a tough ask for Stevenson playing against a tricky wide player at right back when he is so predominately left footed.

I hear what you are saying but heres the thing - what happens if we want to change tactics and go to a back 3 and push forward ? what happens if we get a injury to a defender and have no DIRECT replacement on the bench . Perhaps Sky is to blame for my rant watching real defenders who can adapt and at least do a defensive job if asked to play a different defensive role. A small wing back i would accept not to play CH but this wasnt the case.

Unseen work
19-07-2013, 02:50 PM
Was handling really as bad as all these 4s he's been given? Was he right wing or behind vine?

HFC 0-7
19-07-2013, 05:28 PM
I hear what your saying about the defence being crap, but you can't argue that it's not makeshift when 2 of our regular starters were out injured, and half of the back 4 were playing out of position.

There is a massive difference between playing centre back and fullback. It's also a tough ask for Stevenson playing against a tricky wide player at right back when he is so predominately left footed.

Who is our 2 defensive regular starters that were missing? McGivern is the only one I can think of. The guys playing have had plenty of games. Can see why Stevenson would have a bad game as he was well out of position, a centre or left sided midfielder playing RB?!?!? McPake was very dodgy and he has no excuses.

We are still very weak and will struggle to cause teams problems without a decent striker and a creative midfielder. The defence though, IMO, will more often than not ship more goals than we will score. We have been iffy at the back for a few seasons now and we havent changed a thing.

As it stands this team will not be much of an improvement if any to last season and in my eyes europe is pretty much over. I just hope we have more signings in the pipeline to help us in the league, too late for europe but in time for the start of the season.

truehibernian
19-07-2013, 05:53 PM
I've posted numerous times about Danny and my worry that he will become either 1) disheartened (though he most certainly won't show it nor will he give up) or 2) put under fan pressure due to him being played in a totally foreign position to what he is used to.

Danny Handling is a superb young prospect, however only if he is allowed to flourish as a striker/centre forward, in a pairing. This playing him out wide is annoying me, it annoyed me when it became 'standard' for Pat to use him out there, and it's grating me now. He is very slight, but he's fleet footed and I wish some had watched him in the youths and 20's (albeit JM has/had started utilising him in a creative role from midfield in the 20's games last season - no doubt to try and get him accustomed to the position).

He is a natural finisher and goal scorer, with good strikers instincts - please Pat, see this, and play Danny sparingly but up top with a partner when given chances to play :aok:.

Golden Bear
19-07-2013, 06:00 PM
I've posted numerous times about Danny and my worry that he will become either 1) disheartened (though he most certainly won't show it nor will he give up) or 2) put under fan pressure due to him being played in a totally foreign position to what he is used to.

Danny Handling is a superb young prospect, however only if he is allowed to flourish as a striker/centre forward, in a pairing. This playing him out wide is annoying me, it annoyed me when it became 'standard' for Pat to use him out there, and it's grating me now. He is very slight, but he's fleet footed and I wish some had watched him in the youths and 20's (albeit JM has/had started utilising him in a creative role from midfield in the 20's games last season - no doubt to try and get him accustomed to the position).

He is a natural finisher and goal scorer, with good strikers instincts - please Pat, see this, and play Danny sparingly but up top with a partner when given chances to play :aok:.

Totally agree. And I get similarly annoyed when young Harris is portrayed as some sort of right sided midfielder when it's patently obvious that his best position is an attacking left sided wide player.

Unseen work
19-07-2013, 06:01 PM
I've posted numerous times about Danny and my worry that he will become either 1) disheartened (though he most certainly won't show it nor will he give up) or 2) put under fan pressure due to him being played in a totally foreign position to what he is used to.

Danny Handling is a superb young prospect, however only if he is allowed to flourish as a striker/centre forward, in a pairing. This playing him out wide is annoying me, it annoyed me when it became 'standard' for Pat to use him out there, and it's grating me now. He is very slight, but he's fleet footed and I wish some had watched him in the youths and 20's (albeit JM has/had started utilising him in a creative role from midfield in the 20's games last season - no doubt to try and get him accustomed to the position).

He is a natural finisher and goal scorer, with good strikers instincts - please Pat, see this, and play Danny sparingly but up top with a partner when given chances to play :aok:.

It frustrating me too as even though I think he has played well wide right for never playing it before and being alot better their than Wotherspoon at end of season it's very unfair how hard a time some people seem to give him
On here for being a young guy out of position. He needs a chance upfront and by that I don't mean 60 mins, he need a good couple of games to prove how good he is. IMO he's a better prospect than caldwell

proud_and_green
19-07-2013, 06:05 PM
I'm all for being positive, but if they took 7 of us last night, we couldn't really have complained. Defence was terrible, no marking, no movement when on the ball and very little creativity.

Dont like to have a go at young players, but this is more at Fenlon, but young Handling is just not ready for 1st team football, was a waste of a (half filled) jersey last night. Sure he's a good player, but completely powderpuff, their supposed 'best player' was playing left mid....so to have him directly up against him, knowing stevenson isn't that strong at right back....was complete folly. The 2nd goal totally backs this up, and we were carved open at will many times in the 1st half down that side. Cant believe he lasted the 90 mins either.

Thought Vine looked decent, Thomson had good game,wee boozy looked threatening when he came on, we really need to give him a new contract soon. Williams kept us in the tie.

If we start the next leg with a bit more energy and composure, this mob can be got at, but we'll have to start infinitely better and get the 1st goal, defo be there, more in hope and support than expectant though.

But they didn't!

Pretty Boy
19-07-2013, 06:31 PM
I've posted numerous times about Danny and my worry that he will become either 1) disheartened (though he most certainly won't show it nor will he give up) or 2) put under fan pressure due to him being played in a totally foreign position to what he is used to.

Danny Handling is a superb young prospect, however only if he is allowed to flourish as a striker/centre forward, in a pairing. This playing him out wide is annoying me, it annoyed me when it became 'standard' for Pat to use him out there, and it's grating me now. He is very slight, but he's fleet footed and I wish some had watched him in the youths and 20's (albeit JM has/had started utilising him in a creative role from midfield in the 20's games last season - no doubt to try and get him accustomed to the position).

He is a natural finisher and goal scorer, with good strikers instincts - please Pat, see this, and play Danny sparingly but up top with a partner when given chances to play :aok:.

Would agree with that.

He's not a wide midfielder or any kind of midfielder and never will be. His performances are reflecting this.

The sad fact is that if he playing him out of position continues then he won't make it at Hibs. That's a shame because he has plenty potential as a striker, not saying he would definitely make it but there would be a far better chance that he will do so.

Jonnyboy
20-07-2013, 10:50 PM
Was handling really as bad as all these 4s he's been given? Was he right wing or behind vine?

It's all about opinions. You gave OTJ a 5 when a 2 might have been more appropriate :wink:

Unseen work
21-07-2013, 07:09 AM
It's all about opinions. You gave OTJ a 5 when a 2 might have been more appropriate :wink:

Think your getting confused mate, I missed the game so no idea how anyone played haha. Must of been someone else! Tudor jones that poor?!

The Baldmans Comb
21-07-2013, 07:35 AM
Just back yesterday and still very surprised that Fenlon hadnt done his very basic homework.

Malmo are strongest in left midfield and Hibs put Handling and therefore Stevenson up against wave after wave of constant attacks.

Stevenson is a dreadfully limited trier but he didnt deserve to be exposed so obviously when a simple switch with Forster and Hanlon would have him in his normal left back role.

Jonnyboy
21-07-2013, 09:22 PM
Think your getting confused mate, I missed the game so no idea how anyone played haha. Must of been someone else! Tudor jones that poor?!

Perils of old age :greengrin

OTJ wasn't the best but early days yet

18/03/07
22-07-2013, 09:13 PM
I've posted numerous times about Danny and my worry that he will become either 1) disheartened (though he most certainly won't show it nor will he give up) or 2) put under fan pressure due to him being played in a totally foreign position to what he is used to.

Danny Handling is a superb young prospect, however only if he is allowed to flourish as a striker/centre forward, in a pairing. This playing him out wide is annoying me, it annoyed me when it became 'standard' for Pat to use him out there, and it's grating me now. He is very slight, but he's fleet footed and I wish some had watched him in the youths and 20's (albeit JM has/had started utilising him in a creative role from midfield in the 20's games last season - no doubt to try and get him accustomed to the position).

He is a natural finisher and goal scorer, with good strikers instincts - please Pat, see this, and play Danny sparingly but up top with a partner when given chances to play :aok:.
I agree with what is posted here,Danny is a centre forward and will be a good one,but don't know why PF played him in front of LS,don't know if young Stanton or Horribine were fit or not but both are midfielders who might have worked a bit harder to help LS