Why are Hibs so bad ? could it be that we are all to blame (part 1)

[bilko]

Hibs Hidden Hurdle
A sociological perspective

As a Hibs fan of 50 years standing, I along with my fellow Hi bees are looking to the end of yet another disastrous season. We wallow in the relegation zone and are probably going down, we have played 12 on the trot without a win, poor Terry Butcher looks like he can’t believe what he is seeing, and sections of the support are baying for blood, the message boards are awash with cries of Petrie, Farmer, Butcher, and almost all the players - Out.
The level of disappointment is perhaps based on an underlying awareness among fans that somehow this doesn’t stack up. In the modern day game we all know that football success is surely all about economic clout. The antics of the Champions League and English Premier League elite show us that money talks –as demonstrated by the Barcelona’s and Manchester United’s (and Celtic and Rangers in a Scottish context).
Yet Hibs have always been one of the bigger teams in Scotland, ok we might not be able to regularly compete with the old firm but we should be competing on a regular basis with those we see as our equals, the Aberdeen’s, Dundee Utds and Hearts. We have surely always had the 4th or 5th biggest support which over the years should presumably have been reflected in economic strength and therefore performance- but recently it doesn’t feel like that.
As fans we have all been brought up on tales of the glory days of the Famous Five and Turnbulls Tornadoes why can’t that happen again ?, of course we accept that there are going to be ups and downs but surely we should be doing better than we have in recent years.

However before we start responding with any knee jerk reactions this article argues that we need to take a step back - and look at the bigger picture. Let’s look at this from both a sociological as well as historical perspective. Perhaps there are some clues, - are there patterns here that need to be explored?
Could it be that this may not simply be about weak performances, poor individual decisions, bad luck or rubbish managers and players, could it be that there some other forces at work which have been influencing performance levels for much longer than we might imagine?
In a recent interview with former Hibs manager Alex McLeish one issue discussed was that Hibs appeared to have a “soft centre” and he said that
“I’ve just come from having lunch with Alex Smith who’s overseeing things at Falkirk right now and he remembered Bob Shankly talking about this so for years there’s been this kind of stigma.” (Scotsman 24/4/2014)
Now hold on, wasn’t Bob Shankley our manager from 1965 and 1969, surely it’s not being suggested that all the 100s of players and some 31 managers who have passed through Hibs since that time could all have suffered from this same “soft centre” malaise, surely that’s not possible ?.

Or is it?

This article argues that there is evidence that (with couple of exceptions) this may actually be the case, not only back to the 60s but for much much longer. I will also argue that all of us - the players, owners, officials, and fans in fact everyone in the “Hibs Family” may all be equally culpable in the development of this state of affairs.

To get some perspective let’s firstly analyse the facts, let’s look at our history in terms of results
For a Scottish team outside of the old firm it would appear reasonable to say that “success” can be measured as a top 4 finish in the top league and winning the odd cup. So what do the stats tell us - They tell us that for 103 of the 114 years since 1900, around when football was probably first recognisable as we know it, (1902 saw the introduction of both the penalty box and penalty spot.) Fifa.com - Hibs have been dire

In the modern era since the introduction of the premier league in 39 years ago Hibs have achieved this top 4 success a paltry 7 times, yet the records of the teams we see as our equals, those who we would expect to compete with on economic terms have been Aberdeen 23 times, Dundee Utd 20 times, Hearts 14 times and even the much smaller Motherwell on 8 (plus they have all won the cup -we all know about Hibs hopeless cup record so let’s not go there)
Then in the 16 years (1953 – 70) between our two successful periods (Famous Five and Turnbull), a time during which the maximum wage was abolished so making economic clout even more important, Hibs achieved a top 4 success 4 times, behind Hearts 10. Killie 7, and Dunfermline 5
If you go back further its gets worse - in the 39 seasons between 1900 and 1939 Hibs achieved a pathetic 3 top four finishes –behind Hearts 15, Motherwell and Airdrie 9, Morton and Dundee 7, and even little Falkirk and Third Lanark on 5
In all that time we have only had 11 seasons where we can claim to have had the consistent success we would expect, these were the 4 consecutive years from 71-74 during the Turnbulls Tornadoes era and also immediately after the war from 1946-52 where the famous 5 achieved it 7 times in 7 seasons (including 2 titles)
It’s clear then that not only in the modern age but throughout our entire history (with two short exceptions) our performance against our immediate competitors who are roughly our economic equal has been at best feeble. There is compelling evidence that for most of the last 114 years Hibs have consistently punched well below their economic weight and struggle to provide evidence to support the claim that they are one of the major clubs in Scottish football

So what could be going on here.? Let’s examine this from a sociological perspective, let’s explore the subject of “cultural legacy” and how it might have affected Hibs

Sociological theory suggests that Cultural Heritage of any human group can be divided into
“Tangible” cultural heritage–these are things you can touch such as buildings, artefacts, landscapes etc. and also “Intangible” cultural heritage which
“consists of non-physical aspects of a particular culture, often maintained by social customs during a specific period in history. The ways and means of behaviour in a society, ….. These include social values and traditions (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tradition), customs (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convention_(norm)) and practices, .(Wikipedia –cultural heritage2014)

In Malcolm Gladwell’s book, “Outliers –the story of success” he explores this issue
“Culture legacies are powerful forces. They have deep roots and long lives. They persist generation after generation virtually intact , even as the economic and social and demographic conditions that spawned them have l vanished, and they play such a role in directing attitudes and behaviour that we cannot make sense of our world without them (Gladwell 2008 p 175)
Is it possible that a culture legacy that developed many generations ago has cast a long shadow from the past ?, is it possible that Hibs could still be being influenced by these attitudes, values, beliefs, practices, and social norms that provide us with a sense of identity and continuity and have been
“passed down from generation to generation through a social inheritance, in the same way that accent is passed down…. whatever mechanisms passes on speech patterns probably also passes on behavioural and emotional patterns as well” (Gladwell 2008 p 175)

Perhaps the most convincing evidence of the power of culture is provided In David Hackett Fischer’s fascinating book “Albion’s Seed: Four British Folkways in America” (Hackett Fisher 2009). He makes a convincing case for this idea that cultural legacies can cast a shadow that can continue over 100s of years.
In his study he offers evidence that four distinct British waves of human migration to 4 separate regions of the USA (Puritans from East Anglia to Massachusetts 1629-1640, Cavaliers from southern England to Virginia 1642-1675, Quakers from north midlands of England and Wales to the Delaware valley 1675-1725, and finally from the borderlands of north England and southern Scotland and also Northern Ireland to Appalachia 1718-1775) took with them 4 significantly different cultures.
He provides convincing evidence that these cultures formed these regions and that the cultural legacies they left still having powerful effects to this day, even though only 20% of the population actually have British ancestors. He offers evidence that these cultures have an effect not just in terms of how most of the people in these regions vote, what they eat, how they view authority, how they organise their lives, what crimes they commit, and what they believe, but also, perhaps more remarkably, how individuals behave and react in specific situations.
(see part 2 below)

[cabbageandribs1875]

i'l read this over the course of the next week :greengrin

[bilko]

Hibs Hidden Hurdle (part 2)


Gladwell’s book refers to a remarkable experiment by two psychologists, Cohen and Nisbitt early 1990s where a range of tests measured how people from the different regions reacted when faced with the same situation. They found significant differences in individual reactions and behaviour, for example in one case in the significantly different levels of anger individuals demonstrated when faces a particular set of circumstances, they found that this came down not to how intelligent they were , their genetic make up, their physical stature, or their emotional stability –what it came down to was where they came from.
The crucial point being that although cultures obviously change and evolve over time, Gladwell’s and Hackett Fishers studies provide evidence that the cultural norms developed through the social conditions in parts of Britain the 1600-1700s are still directly influencing individual and group behaviour in parts of the USA to which they had been exported -right up to this day.
“It’s one thing to conclude that that people living in circumstances pretty similar to their ancestors act a lot like their ancestors…but these people (in the experiment) weren’t living in circumstances similar to their British ancestors. They didn’t even necessarily have British ancestors, the just happened to have grown up in” (a specific region with a specific culture) (Gladwell 2008 p 174)

So let’s use this premise to analyse Hibs. Could this theory be applied and what would be the results ?
It’s pretty clear that Hibs “tangible” cultural heritage is Easter Rd itself, the strip, Leith and probably now east Edinburgh and beyond, but what is Hibs “intangible” cultural heritage, and where did it come from? and could it still be influencing individual and group behaviour today?
“This was now a community that to a large extent consisted of citizens who were born and bred in Edinburgh, but still there remained a strong hostility towards the Irish community. So it was that they remained an insular community, but that was certainly by necessity rather than choice. As happens with most immigrant groups in any part of the world to this day, the Irish were fiercely proud of their homeland and heritage, with the result that an entire sub-culture of Ireland had now developed in the centre of Edinburgh, and amazingly that was much to the complete ignorance of the rest of the population in Scotland's capital city.” (www.hibernian (http://www.hibernian) fc –origins of Hibernian part 2)

Could it be that the people involved in Hibs first few decades (initially with charitable purposes and then and later as a business) had, by the turn of the century evolved their own specific Edinburgh/Irish subculture. This group were possibly a fairly sociable catholic people with a focus on community, family and charity, with a respect for folklore, who’s were possibly predominantly inspired by poets, writers, and musicians (proclaimer’s and irvine welsh ?). Could they have developed a culture (including a sporting one) that was quite different from the local Scottish one which by comparison was created by a perhaps more reserved Presbyterian people with a respect for education and commercial enterprise who were predominantly inspired by engineers, soldiers, administrators, and bankers ?
Could it be that through these people, at that time and place and in these social circumstances, Hibs developed a sporting culture whose practices, beliefs and social norms were about entertaining people, offering a sense of excitement, holding a great social event and having a good time along with the warm sense of belonging that came with it – could it have been that winning was really only a secondary goal and that these social goals where far more important , - so it was ok to have a “soft centre” - and could it also be that this is something that subconsciously, everyone within the Hibs family, both those born into it and those who join it, has bought into ever since ?

Football historians among you may of course point out that Celtic origins were very similar to Hibs so why did this this not happen to them . However while their early history was very similar it quickly changed. They soon embraced professionalism and offered financial inducements (and also poached most of Hibs team of the time) they then quickly became a PLC in 1897 and
“within its first year of operation…. resulted in a 20% dividend for shareholders and directors, but nothing for charity. The original impulse was truly dead.” (www.talfanzine.info (http://www.talfanzine.info) -A Brief History of Celtic FC’s Boardroom)
The original ideals possibly based around an Irish culture similar to Hibs was well and truly quashed. Celtic had embraced the local Scottish culture –and of course Celtic have been winners ever since. Ironically Celtic appear to continue to have close links with Ireland while at Hibs this connection is long gone, however from a cultural viewpoint the total opposite may be true.

Its worth noting that its not being suggested that “Irishness” was somehow inferior to “Scottishness”, the theory is that a specific culture grew up due to a specific set of social conditions , and was not necessarily better or worse –just different -and designed to provide what was important to that community at the time.

How can we explain Hibs successful years ?. Organisational culture is a complex subject around which many theories abound, however there appears to be a common theme that among the requirements for an organisational culture to be successfully changed is a need for strong individuals who have a clear vision and who are innovators. Is it possible that during our two short successful periods that key individuals, through pure strength of personality were able to realise their personal vision? and for a short period managed to counteract the culture of the soft centre.?

Eddie Turnbull appears to have had these qualities
“He was uncompromising, in his personality, in his ideals and in the standards of discipline he expected of his players, but that rigour was only to ensure that the ingenuity of his thinking”, (7/5/2011 independent)
“His playing career ended in 1959, but he immediately took the then radical step of gaining coaching qualifications. This made him one of the first "tracksuit managers" as opposed to the detached, pipe-smoking figures who had hitherto dominated the British game.(guardian 11/5/2011)

The same with the Famous Five, it appears a key figure was the manager Willie McCartney (who died shortly before Hibs won first title) and whose work was carried on by Hugh Shaw
These individuals also seemed to be great innovators with many “firsts” -their unique brand of “interchanging football”, entry to the European cup, and introduction of floodlights. They also went on tours throughout Europe and even Brazil,.
“early success was the vision of …. Willie McCartney, who were very forward-looking in taking a club on tours and competitions which others saw as a waste of time”
"Hibs took three sets of boots: the usual football boot of the day, a lighter 'shoe' with studs, which they had bought whilst touring Germany, and an even lighter rubber-soled shoe. They also took three sets of strips of varying materials. This is in stark contrast to the preparation of the Scotland National team of the time who still favoured the "tackity boot" (www. BBC Scotland a sporting nation)
It’s also worth noting that McCartney had been manager of Hearts for 13 years before joining Hibs –did he bring a different set of cultural beliefs and values with him?

The Hibs board issued a vision statement in 2008 ( Hibs FC board statement 29/01/08) and this is perhaps revealing in relation to what’s gone on over the past few years.
It talks about the wish to create “Easter Road as a top quality, modern stadium “ “the best possible facilities” and “developing a first-class training centre “ and it’s clear that Farmer and Petrie have done an excellent job in achieving their business vision, this must be congratulated .
It does also mention on field success and sustainability as goals however it also highlights a number of other behaviours that are seen as desirable, these include
“playing an entertaining brand of football”,
“the Hibernian family understands the need to ensure our Club is run in a way that the team’s efforts can be enjoyed not just by today’s supporters but by supporters in generations to come”
”that it would be negligent to pursue short term success” – (eh -so what about next Saturday ? )
look at these statements and decide whether this a blueprint for a team that’s likely to develop a culture where winning the next match is the number one priority?

However there may be hope. Last week Hibs announced a number of boardroom changes and also offered a new vision -
“ the vision seeks…. will be competitive in every match and where winning becomes a habit” (Scotsman 29/4/2014)
Could this at last be an acknowledgment of the need to find a way of getting over “Hibs hidden hurdle” and develop a different kind of culture.
The question now of course is – do we really want to ?

This article was a genuine attempt to take an academic approach to the application of a sociological theory that took into account all the evidence available. The theory may of course be a load of absolute tosh but I certainly think that the power of culture is something that’s little understood and often ignored.

[dave62]

i'l read this over the course of the next week :greengrin

I think I'll wait until the film comes out. :greengrin

[TornadoHibby]

Hibs Hidden Hurdle
A sociological perspective

As a Hibs fan of 50 years standing, I along with my fellow Hi bees are looking to the end of yet another disastrous season. We wallow in the relegation zone and are probably going down, we have played 12 on the trot without a win, poor Terry Butcher looks like he can’t believe what he is seeing, and sections of the support are baying for blood, the message boards are awash with cries of Petrie, Farmer, Butcher, and almost all the players - Out.
The level of disappointment is perhaps based on an underlying awareness among fans that somehow this doesn’t stack up. In the modern day game we all know that football success is surely all about economic clout. The antics of the Champions League and English Premier League elite show us that money talks –as demonstrated by the Barcelona’s and Manchester United’s (and Celtic and Rangers in a Scottish context).
Yet Hibs have always been one of the bigger teams in Scotland, ok we might not be able to regularly compete with the old firm but we should be competing on a regular basis with those we see as our equals, the Aberdeen’s, Dundee Utds and Hearts. We have surely always had the 4th or 5th biggest support which over the years should presumably have been reflected in economic strength and therefore performance- but recently it doesn’t feel like that.
As fans we have all been brought up on tales of the glory days of the Famous Five and Turnbulls Tornadoes why can’t that happen again ?, of course we accept that there are going to be ups and downs but surely we should be doing better than we have in recent years.

However before we start responding with any knee jerk reactions this article argues that we need to take a step back - and look at the bigger picture. Let’s look at this from both a sociological as well as historical perspective. Perhaps there are some clues, - are there patterns here that need to be explored?
Could it be that this may not simply be about weak performances, poor individual decisions, bad luck or rubbish managers and players, could it be that there some other forces at work which have been influencing performance levels for much longer than we might imagine?
In a recent interview with former Hibs manager Alex McLeish one issue discussed was that Hibs appeared to have a “soft centre” and he said that
“I’ve just come from having lunch with Alex Smith who’s overseeing things at Falkirk right now and he remembered Bob Shankly talking about this so for years there’s been this kind of stigma.” (Scotsman 24/4/2014)
Now hold on, wasn’t Bob Shankley our manager from 1965 and 1969, surely it’s not being suggested that all the 100s of players and some 31 managers who have passed through Hibs since that time could all have suffered from this same “soft centre” malaise, surely that’s not possible ?. Or is it?, this article argues that there is evidence that (with couple of exceptions) this may actually be the case, not only back to the 60s but for much much longer. I will also argue that all of us - the players, owners, officials, and fans in fact everyone in the “Hibs Family” may all be equally culpable in the development of this state of affairs.

To get some perspective let’s firstly analyse the facts, let’s look at our history in terms of results
For a Scottish team outside of the old firm it would appear reasonable to say that “success” can be measured as a top 4 finish in the top league and winning the odd cup. So what do the stats tell us - They tell us that for 103 of the 114 years since 1900, around when football was probably first recognisable as we know it, (1902 saw the introduction of both the penalty box and penalty spot.) Fifa.com - Hibs have been dire

In the modern era since the introduction of the premier league in 39 years ago Hibs have achieved this top 4 success a paltry 7 times, yet the records of the teams we see as our equals, those who we would expect to compete with on economic terms have been Aberdeen 23 times, Dundee Utd 20 times, Hearts 14 times and even the much smaller Motherwell on 8 (plus they have all won the cup -we all know about Hibs hopeless cup record so let’s not go there)
Then in the 16 years (1953 – 70) between our two successful periods (Famous Five and Turnbull), a time during which the maximum wage was abolished so making economic clout even more important, Hibs achieved a top 4 success 4 times, behind Hearts 10. Killie 7, and Dunfermline 5
If you go back further its gets worse - in the 39 seasons between 1900 and 1939 Hibs achieved a pathetic 3 top four finishes –behind Hearts 15, Motherwell and Airdrie 9, Morton and Dundee 7, and even little Falkirk and Third Lanark on 5
In all that time we have only had 11 seasons where we can claim to have had the consistent success we would expect, these were the 4 consecutive years from 71-74 during the Turnbulls Tornadoes era and also immediately after the war from 1946-52 where the famous 5 achieved it 7 times in 7 seasons (including 2 titles)
It’s clear then that not only in the modern age but throughout our entire history (with two short exceptions) our performance against our immediate competitors who are roughly our economic equal has been at best feeble. There is compelling evidence that for most of the last 114 years Hibs have consistently punched well below their economic weight and struggle to provide evidence to support the claim that they are one of the major clubs in Scottish football

So what could be going on here.? Let’s examine this from a sociological perspective, let’s explore the subject of “cultural legacy” and how it might have affected Hibs

Sociological theory suggests that Cultural Heritage of any human group can be divided into
“Tangible” cultural heritage–these are things you can touch such as buildings, artefacts, landscapes etc. and also “Intangible” cultural heritage which
“consists of non-physical aspects of a particular culture, often maintained by social customs during a specific period in history. The ways and means of behaviour in a society, ….. These include social values and traditions (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tradition), customs (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convention_(norm)) and practices, .(Wikipedia –cultural heritage2014)

In Malcolm Gladwell’s book, “Outliers –the story of success” he explores this issue
“Culture legacies are powerful forces. They have deep roots and long lives. They persist generation after generation virtually intact , even as the economic and social and demographic conditions that spawned them have l vanished, and they play such a role in directing attitudes and behaviour that we cannot make sense of our world without them (Gladwell 2008 p 175)
Is it possible that a culture legacy that developed many generations ago has cast a long shadow from the past ?, is it possible that Hibs could still be being influenced by these attitudes, values, beliefs, practices, and social norms that provide us with a sense of identity and continuity and have been
“passed down from generation to generation through a social inheritance, in the same way that accent is passed down…. whatever mechanisms passes on speech patterns probably also passes on behavioural and emotional patterns as well” (Gladwell 2008 p 175)

Perhaps the most convincing evidence of the power of culture is provided In David Hackett Fischer’s fascinating book “Albion’s Seed: Four British Folkways in America” (Hackett Fisher 2009). He makes a convincing case for this idea that cultural legacies can cast a shadow that can continue over 100s of years.
In his study he offers evidence that four distinct British waves of human migration to 4 separate regions of the USA (Puritans from East Anglia to Massachusetts 1629-1640, Cavaliers from southern England to Virginia 1642-1675, Quakers from north midlands of England and Wales to the Delaware valley 1675-1725, and finally from the borderlands of north England and southern Scotland and also Northern Ireland to Appalachia 1718-1775) took with them 4 significantly different cultures.
He provides convincing evidence that these cultures formed these regions and that the cultural legacies they left still having powerful effects to this day, even though only 20% of the population actually have British ancestors. He offers evidence that these cultures have an effect not just in terms of how most of the people in these regions vote, what they eat, how they view authority, how they organise their lives, what crimes they commit, and what they believe, but also, perhaps more remarkably, how individuals behave and react in specific situations.
(see part 2 below)

I understand that there is a simple guide to trying to get points over to unprepared audiences and that is to "KEEP IT SIMPLE AND TO THE POINT" otherwise people lose interest in the post (etc) very quickly. :agree:

Sadly, I lost interest in reading your post when I saw the length and structure of it and the title of it! :agree:

Sorry! :wink:

You might have the answer but I doubt if many will have the time to find it!:wink:

[Hiber-nation]

Thanks for this bilko, a bit deep but interesting all the same.

[et_hibby]

Well thought out - thanks for posting.

[HUTCHYHIBBY]

Im not prepared to take the rap for Hibs being *****!

[GreenLake]

A nice long disquisition makes a change from a brutal short inquisition! :greengrin

[marinello59]

Why don't you got to Ireland and tell them they will never be a successful as the Scots because their culture has left them with a soft centre? You seem to have developed a rather distasteful theory to try and confirm a conclusion you had already reached.

[SlickShoes]

We are pish because our club has been run as a business so that we can break even and try to make a profit.

We aren't run to win things which is criminal for any sports team.

Being happy with just existing is a state of mind that feeds down form the top of the club right to the very bottom.

The point of sports is to win, the point of hibs is to exist.

[marinello59]

We are pish because our club has been run as a business so that we can break even and try to make a profit.

We aren't run to win things which is criminal for any sports team.

Being happy with just existing is a state of mind that feeds down form the top of the club right to the very bottom.

The point of sports is to win, the point of hibs is to exist.

That's pretty much it for me.

[greenpaper55]

Other clubs buy better players than us!, i could have saved the OP bruised fingers.

[edinburghhibee]

Good read to be fair, although I agree with marinello that it does read as tho your saying the Irish are soft centred and the Scottish are winners. I think that there is possibly something in what you say thojust not with regards to the above. I didn't realise our history was so bad to be honest but there you have it.

[Stax]

I'm hungover so forgive me if I'm wrong. The gist of your post seems to be we were founded by a load of lazy old oirishmen and we've never quite got a hold of the "Scottish" or Presbyterian work ethic? It took an ex hearts manager to instill a winning and again as you say "Scottish" mentality? It's either the longest wind up ever posted on here or a brilliant well thought article..as I say head's a bit fuzzy but you've crammed a good few stereotypes in there.

[Dashing Bob S]

Interesting points but I think that they need to get the ball into the box quicker for the likes of Collins and Cunmings.

[hibsbollah]

Its a reasonable theory. I dont read it as 'Hibs are founded by irishmen, the irish are losers, hence Hibs are losers', he's saying that we were founded for a socio-economic Purpose more than pure sporting success, we had an amateur ethic for years after our competitors went professional, hence a culture developed in the organisation of a 'shrug shoulder' mentality to losing that has carried on right up to Farmer and Petrie. Thats why it makes me no difference if Calderwood Fenlon Butcher Mixu or Yogi is at the helm. It also explains why Mowbray got somewhere when he changed the culture behind the scenes.

...or it could be just bad luck :dunno:

[heretoday]

Come on! It's a football club not a socio-political movement! You might just as well ask why are Dundee or Motherwell such underachievers. It's football, man.

[Kaiser1962]

We are pish because our club has been run as a business so that we can break even and try to make a profit.

We aren't run to win things which is criminal for any sports team.

Being happy with just existing is a state of mind that feeds down form the top of the club right to the very bottom.

The point of sports is to win, the point of hibs is to exist.

Rangers were. And were the most successful football club in the world at doing so.

[BH Hibs]

We are pish because our club has been run as a business so that we can break even and try to make a profit.

We aren't run to win things which is criminal for any sports team.

Being happy with just existing is a state of mind that feeds down form the top of the club right to the very bottom.

The point of sports is to win, the point of hibs is to exist.

This along with signing pish last minute deadline day players that will do instead of a bit of quality along with cheap option managers.

[Hibernia&Alba]

A well written post, and one I enjoyed, bilko. Perhaps there's something to be said for the argument that the entire culture of the club has played a role in our long term underachievement. It's a theory that ties in with what is called 'the Hibs way'. Perhaps we're dreamers and idealists, lacking the ruthless business like ambition that is required to be successful. Too nice for our own good perhaps? It's difficult to put your finger on a definitive all embracing explanation. Perhaps it's simply a case of losing becoming a habit; a hard cycle to break. Whatever the reason(s) , our long term record isn't what it should be. So how do we change it? A new and ambitious owner and boardroom would be the biggest step, but how realistic is it?

[Hibernia&Alba]

We are pish because our club has been run as a business so that we can break even and try to make a profit.

We aren't run to win things which is criminal for any sports team.

Being happy with just existing is a state of mind that feeds down form the top of the club right to the very bottom.

The point of sports is to win, the point of hibs is to exist.

Your point seems to suggest the exact opposite of the OP. Whilst he says Hibs haven't been business like enough over the years, filled with well meaning idealists, you seem to be saying the club has been just like a business and that's the reason for failure.

[SlickShoes]

Your point seems to suggest the exact opposite of the OP. Whilst he says Hibs haven't been business like enough over the years, filled with well meaning idealists, you seem to be saying the club has been just like a business and that's the reason for failure.

Thats correct

[GGTTHibees]

So much effort to read :dummytit:

[Pete]

I like sociology and it's a very interesting post. The passage of time must effect things though.

Either way, we now have two very strong, driven entities at the club who will work in tandem.

I think we'll embrace a winning culture.

[ian omand]

[QUOTE=SlickShoes;4007501]We are pish because our club has been run as a business so that we can break even and try to make a profit.

We aren't run to win things which is criminal for any sports team.

Being happy with just existing is a state of mind that feeds down form the top of the club right to the very bottom.

The point of sports is to win, the point of hibs is to exist.[/QUOTE


Absolutely spot on, the desire to succeed is driven from the very top of any company usually because they have a vested interest, increased share value, higher salaries, bigger bonuses etc.
The only determination driving our club is to do what is required but without expense, that mantra has succeeded up till now but unfortunately it is about to cost them thousands and the trust of the Hibs support.

[Pete]

Your point seems to suggest the exact opposite of the OP. Whilst he says Hibs haven't been business like enough over the years, filled with well meaning idealists, you seem to be saying the club has been just like a business and that's the reason for failure.

It's been run like a business, but the wrong type. There's been weak leadership as far as entertainment goes.

We might still be subconsciously effected by our roots but other factors must surely effect us. We now have very different visual assets and a very business like place to call home. I also think the football fan in general has changed as prices go up and as we are now investors, we have also changed. Social media has proven, and maybe helped reinforce the message that as a unit one of our priorities is a winning team.

[hibsbollah]

I like sociology and it's a very interesting post. The passage of time must effect things though.

Either way, we now have two very strong, driven entities at the club who will work in tandem.

I think we'll embrace a winning culture.

The 'passage of time' goes both ways though. If we were incorporating an 'amateur' ethos from say, the late 19thC when we reformed, till the post war era when we started winning leagues under
Shaw and McCartney, you have fifty years of underachievement culture to overcome. It sounds farfetched, but theres plenty of studies of organisations and their psychological culture to back it up. The Chicago Cubs are a prime example in another sport where years of failure becomes ingrained and cultural in an organisation.

[Keith_M]

You don't quite get how Internet Forums work, do you?


:wink:

[sesoim]

I don't think we've had a really good owner/chairman of the club since I started supporting Hibs (mid 80s). I'm grateful to STF for what he did 23/24 years ago, but his apathy towards football has leaked down through the years and damaged the club. Clearly he has been happy with what Petrie is doing, but if STF cared about the football, he would have gotten involved years ago and made sure we got the right guys in to sort everything out where it matters - on the park.

1990/91 was scary and we were all grateful for what STF did for us at the time. It's something to ponder, but if we HAD went out of business and started again with a different owner, maybe playing at Meadowbank initially, would we in a worse position now? I'm not sure if we would be.

[ekhibee]

I don't think we've had a really good owner/chairman of the club since I started supporting Hibs (mid 80s). I'm grateful to STF for what he did 23/24 years ago, but his apathy towards football has leaked down through the years and damaged the club. Clearly he has been happy with what Petrie is doing, but if STF cared about the football, he would have gotten involved years ago and made sure we got the right guys in to sort everything out where it matters - on the park.

1990/91 was scary and we were all grateful for what STF did for us at the time. It's something to ponder, but if we HAD went out of business and started again with a different owner, maybe playing at Meadowbank initially, would we in a worse position now? I'm not sure if we would be.
Interesting points there sesoim, I agree with a lot of what you say too, but I was also wondering; do you think we would all be having the discussions about how badly the club was run if we'd accepted Farmer's (and Petrie's) proposal to move to a new ground at Straiton, sharing with Hearts, but with a substantial amount of money to spend on players? I'm a fan and have been since the late 60's, I would never support any other team either, but fans can be very fickle and hibs.net just seems to back up that theory IMO. We voted to turn it down, and since then more and more fans seem to have become disenchanted with how the club is run, but we had the chance to do something about it and refused. I dunno, there's no easy answer to the question you asked, or to mine.

[bilko]

I’m glad I put this on Hibsnet as a post (rather than an article as I originally planned) as its generated lots of interesting discussion.
This article was a genuine attempt to take an academic approach to the application of a sociological theory that took into account all the evidence available. The theory may of course be a load of absolute tosh but I certainly think that the power of culture is something that’s little understood and often ignored.

Some comments have also suggested I’ve argued that “Irishness” was somehow inferior to “Scottishness”, that was not the intention, the theory is that a specific culture grew up due to a specific set of social conditions , and was not necessarily better or worse –just different -and designed to provide what was important to that community at the time.

The facts show we have performed below what could logically be expected for over 100 years, and not just in the cup (when researching this article I was genuinely surprised how consistently poor our performance has been)
So the question is why ? and as for that “soft centre “ thing (which was clearly in evidence yet again against Killie on Saturday ) –If that’s not something to do with culture then what is it all about ?

So what is the answer to the conundrum –“why are Hibs so bad” . Having spent weeks researching this article and now taking everything into account I suggest we choose from the following two options

a) To lobby Edinburgh University to create a “Chair of Hibs Studies” and get some PHD students working on sociological theories full time ??

or as suggested by one comment-

b) We start getting better balls into Collins and Cummings in the box

Ill organise a poll shortly

[Islington Hibs]

Bilko thank you for the post. One of the most interesting, original and thought provoking I have read. I think there is possibly some truth in it.

It certainly is baffling why Hibs have so consistently under-performed as success is very closely related to economic muscle. Dundee, being a 'Protestant' club perhaps undermine the theory as they have pissed away their inheritance to perhaps an even greater extent?

That said it is odd that Hibs, regardless of whom is at the helm, consistently under-perform and it suggests their is a lack of belief and a soft under-belly.

I think your cultural points have some baring. I also think that we have started to accept our lot and get quite pleased when we do OK. I remember a few seasons back the official website started selling tickets for 'the table topping clash with Celtic.' At the time I thought the advertising a bit premature, for by the time the game came it wasn't table topping at all. The point being we are quick to gush on a couple of decent results then its all woe. A lack of consistency and self belief. This may have been enhanced by our woeful record against Hearts which really goes back the best part of 30 years (who having been on drugs made it an unfair contest) but their sense of entitlement is palpable which I suspect feeds on success (Gotten fairly or not).

Bottom line Hibs need to harden up. Easier said than done. We still have a large support which is all the more impressive given just how bad it has been. This is about leadership and Hibs need to find an owner/ leader who is determined, will not tolerate second best and has an attention to detail that drags this club up. If it means half the support staff go so be it but this person needs to be respected and feared. I am sceptical that a 'professional CEO which we have just gotten is the answer to this, but we will see, and I hope to be proved wrong.) Certainly if Hibs go down a radical rethink is required as getting back up will not be easy.

Brilliant, controversial and thought provoking post.

[Malthibby]

Mrs. Bilko needs to get you out more.
'Soft centre' Hibs does ring a chord though, even in the Turnbull years
we couldn't quite deliver what we seemed capable of, but still loved the football and still talk about it.
I really enjoyed watching Mowbray's teams, even though his tendency to play without a goalkeeper
ensured we lost too many games, so perhaps my expectations were and are culturally inhibited.
Meybes we need to just survive the play-offs and then employ a dozen hacking bar stewards
to kick ourselves up the league? Doesn't sound right, does it. "Eveybody hates us & we don't care' doesn't fit
either, so are we really just a bunch of jessies? Better hope not or Hamilton/Falkirk will get it right up us.
GG

[erin go bragh]

Interesting read Bilko . Our top 4 finnishes or lack of them is dire but we have won as many league titles(4) as Aberdeen and Hearts have . So we dont finnish in the top 4 much but when we do our percentage of winning the league ,when we do ,must be a dam sight higher than they twos .

Ggtth

[HUTCHYHIBBY]

It seems an awful lot of trouble to go to, but, I think the OP could be at the wind up!

[Criswell]

Most of us agree we have under-acheived for most of our history. The theory that this is down to deep-seated cultural and sociological reasons may hold some validity for the early part of our history, but I don't think it can explain why it continues through the modern professional era.

I see no real impediments as to why we can't "punch our weight" and compete successfully against similar sized clubs (not to mention smaller ones!) if we really have the desire to. The most important thing is to get the right people into where it matters most; in which I mean the decision makers. It is they who ultimately determine the direction, ambition and culture of the club. It is also crtitical that everyone involved in the running of the club is on the same wave length!

Petrie has signalled change is to happen, but we have heard that before and nothing much has happened. I can only wish the new CEO well and hope this is the first step towards a more successful future.