PDA

View Full Version : Midfield Hanlon



livi hibs 1875
14-07-2016, 10:31 PM
Could we see him playing there

cabbageandribs1875
14-07-2016, 10:32 PM
i'm sure PH started out as a midfielder...iirc

tamig
14-07-2016, 10:32 PM
He's good enough imo but we need him at the back.

livi hibs 1875
14-07-2016, 10:34 PM
He's good enough imo but we need him at the back.Could be a reason Forster was offered contract

neil7908
14-07-2016, 10:38 PM
Did OK but don't want to see him playing there regularly. Already have 4 quality CM's in Mcginn, Mcgeough, Bartley and Fyvie

Boyle89
14-07-2016, 10:39 PM
Was better than marv who had a shocker tonight. Still rather PH was at the back.

GreenPJ
14-07-2016, 10:46 PM
Was better than marv who had a shocker tonight. Still rather PH was at the back.

I thought Marv was the one who stopped us being bullied after 10 mins. He really mixed it up with the Brondby players and then other players also reacted and we started to take control. Also took a couple of heavy knocks and he was struggling after that.

GreenCastle
14-07-2016, 10:49 PM
Was better than marv who had a shocker tonight. Still rather PH was at the back.

Football opinions!

I thought Bartley was good and although caught on ball a few times - broke up play and stopped us being bullied in the middle.

We seem to have a lot of central midfielders - would like more wide players who are direct and beat a player.

Onceinawhile
14-07-2016, 10:49 PM
The midfield four that finished the game was mental.

Harris, Hanlon, mcginn and Keatings??

Really?

Brightside
14-07-2016, 10:50 PM
The midfield four that finished the game was mental.

Harris, Hanlon, mcginn and Keatings??

Really?

he played there only coz Fyvie wasn't available. did a job but not his role.

Onceinawhile
14-07-2016, 10:55 PM
he played there only coz Fyvie wasn't available. did a job but not his role.

Who Hanlon or Keatings? Who were both well out of position?

The idea that we don't need more midfielders was blown well out of the water for me tonight.

gaz1875
14-07-2016, 11:03 PM
Football opinions!

I thought Bartley was good and although caught on ball a few times - broke up play and stopped us being bullied in the middle.

We seem to have a lot of central midfielders - would like more wide players who are direct and beat a player.

I would agree with the Bartley opinion, he was okay looked laboured at times but they packed the midfield area (a bit like us last season).

snooky
14-07-2016, 11:06 PM
The midfield four that finished the game was mental.

Harris, Hanlon, mcginn and Keatings??

Really?

I felt for McGinn at the end - he looked spent.
He carried the midfield for the last 15mins. Harris & Keating were awol.

NadeAteMyLunch!
14-07-2016, 11:09 PM
He did okay but was a strange decision for me. Why was McGeough subbed? He ran off so don't think he had a knock. Surely him staying on and moving more central would have been a better option?

CallumHibs07
14-07-2016, 11:10 PM
Marv was poor tonight but anyone wanting Hanlon displacing him in midfield is mental. PH is a centre-back.

HibeeDaz6270
14-07-2016, 11:15 PM
Football opinions!

I thought Bartley was good and although caught on ball a few times - broke up play and stopped us being bullied in the middle.

We seem to have a lot of central midfielders - would like more wide players who are direct and beat a player.

I thought Bartley was probably our worst player. He slows everything down, caught off the pace and i just think we have better in that position.

I would have Dylan in there, a proper football player to make things happen. And have someone else to play out wide.

GreenOnions
14-07-2016, 11:20 PM
Football opinions!

I thought Bartley was good and although caught on ball a few times - broke up play and stopped us being bullied in the middle.

We seem to have a lot of central midfielders - would like more wide players who are direct and beat a player.

Sorry - although he's generally done well for us in the past I thought Bartley was our poorest performer tonight by some distance. He does give us that dig though which maybe allows McGinn to get further forward. Having said that I'd always prefer Fyvie in there if he's fit as that would improve our passing and building from the back.

Lennon trying out Hanlon in that area may indicate he likes the idea of "dig" in central midfield so maybe Bartley will have more opportunities this year than last. He'd have to play better than he did tonight though to be selected regularly.

MagicSwirlingShip
14-07-2016, 11:20 PM
Was a strange one tonight, he was strolling it at the back...

Then, moved into Midfield and he never won a tackle, header, or hit a pass.

Big Marv wasn't having his best game, so I can understand Lennon changing it, but Paul's not a midfielder in a million years, he needs to see the game infront of him to pick a pass and can't play on the half turn IMO.

Fyvie for next week please :scarf:

Skyegreen
14-07-2016, 11:30 PM
I thought Marv was the one who stopped us being bullied after 10 mins. He really mixed it up with the Brondby players and then other players also reacted and we started to take control. Also took a couple of heavy knocks and he was struggling after that.

I agree that he did do these things you say but this isn't wrestling, it's football and he was sadly a yard off the pace tonight. Caught in possession and his passing of the ball was horrendous! He's better than that but tonight wasn't his night I'm afraid.

J-C
15-07-2016, 12:13 AM
he played there only coz Fyvie wasn't available. did a job but not his role.


The midfield four that finished the game was mental.

Harris, Hanlon, mcginn and Keatings??

Really?


Who Hanlon or Keatings? Who were both well out of position?

The idea that we don't need more midfielders was blown well out of the water for me tonight.


Why did he not bring on Stanton if he wanted a player in the midfield ?

Scooter
15-07-2016, 12:38 PM
Was a strange one tonight, he was strolling it at the back...

Then, moved into Midfield and he never won a tackle, header, or hit a pass.

Big Marv wasn't having his best game, so I can understand Lennon changing it, but Paul's not a midfielder in a million years, he needs to see the game infront of him to pick a pass and can't play on the half turn IMO.

Fyvie for next week please :scarf:

He changed it cause Bartley was injured. Bartley done a great job last night got caught a few times but was never bullied and fought bk a few times

WeeRussell
15-07-2016, 12:40 PM
Not for me on the (little) evidence I've seen. Very good centre half and much needed in that position. Not a midfielder in my opinion.

Lancs Harp
15-07-2016, 12:41 PM
I think Hanlon is our best centre back would much prefer to see him there than as a holding player in midfield.

It offers an option of course, which is no bad thing.

patlowe
15-07-2016, 12:42 PM
The midfield four that finished the game was mental.

Harris, Hanlon, mcginn and Keatings??

Really?

I felt the same, we were basically playing a 4-3-3 - a midfield 3 which included a guy who generally can't defend, a centre half and McGinn. Could have been costly as a second goal for Brondby was tie over.

SeanWilson
15-07-2016, 12:42 PM
Why did he not bring on Stanton if he wanted a player in the midfield ?

completely different player?

Ozyhibby
15-07-2016, 12:43 PM
I've been reading on here all summer how we have plenty of midfielders but our first game of the season and Hanlon has to play there.
And it does not say much for the midfielders on the bench that Lennon went for Hanlon instead of them.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Smartie
15-07-2016, 01:18 PM
I've been reading on here all summer how we have plenty of midfielders but our first game of the season and Hanlon has to play there.
And it does not say much for the midfielders on the bench that Lennon went for Hanlon instead of them.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

A bit harsh.

Hanlon was the obvious choice to play a defensive role in midfield once Bartley went off. We needed a defensive midfielder against a better side like Brondby were.

The midfielders on the bench were more attack-minded.

3pm
15-07-2016, 01:21 PM
Was more pissed off about Dylan being taken off.

Billy Whizz
15-07-2016, 01:22 PM
Was more pissed off about Dylan being taken off.

He's only played 2/3 half games up until last night, maybe nursing him back gently

3pm
15-07-2016, 01:23 PM
He's only played 2/3 half games up until last night, maybe nursing him back gently

True Billy.

easty
15-07-2016, 01:27 PM
Why did he not bring on Stanton if he wanted a player in the midfield ?

Brondby were very physical, I wouldn't have brought on Stanton into the middle of the park. On reflection, you could have had Stanton on instead of Keatings, who didn't really offer anything when he came on.

GreenPJ
15-07-2016, 03:29 PM
I agree that he did do these things you say but this isn't wrestling, it's football and he was sadly a yard off the pace tonight. Caught in possession and his passing of the ball was horrendous! He's better than that but tonight wasn't his night I'm afraid.

We will agree to disagree. For the first 10 mins last night we looked like lost little boys being bullied by the big boys. We needed Marv to go in and shake it up and then McGregor, Hanlon, Gray took their lead from that. He took a knock after 20 mins and think he was struggling after that. He will never be our best passer or playmaker but he will be as important as McGinn in some games and for me he needed to put himself about last night and he did and he took some knocks as a result.

The only one (other than Keatings) who I thought was below par was McGeoch, he barely went past a man, whether that was being played wide am not sure but he also did not look to have the wee burst of pace we have seen from him before so hope there is no underlying injury, alternatively he might have been up against a good opponent but other than their number 8 didn't rate their midfield that much.

Franck Stanton
15-07-2016, 03:41 PM
Paul Hanlon in midfield ? Nah, he is a center half. Thought when he moved to midfield last night he was like a fish out of water. He can get away with it against lesser teams [ most of Scottish Championship] however, when up against better opposition, he is shown up for what he is - a center half playing out of position. Just my opinion lads/lassies.

staunchhibby
15-07-2016, 03:56 PM
Was fyvie injured for last night?

J-C
15-07-2016, 04:12 PM
Brondby were very physical, I wouldn't have brought on Stanton into the middle of the park. On reflection, you could have had Stanton on instead of Keatings, who didn't really offer anything when he came on.


That was the point I was trying to make, we have a midfielder sitting there and he brings Keatings on :confused:

J-C
15-07-2016, 04:15 PM
completely different player?


I should have mentioned instead of Keatings.

Jonnyboy
15-07-2016, 07:05 PM
Was fyvie injured for last night?

Yes. Paul only moved in there because Bartley took a knock and NL obviously wanted a physical presence in that role

greenlex
15-07-2016, 07:52 PM
[/B]

That was the point I was trying to make, we have a midfielder sitting there and he brings Keatings on :confused:

We needed a goal not shore up midfield. Keatings in there was a decent option. He was more likely to bag one than Stanton.

MagicSwirlingShip
15-07-2016, 10:04 PM
He changed it cause Bartley was injured. Bartley done a great job last night got caught a few times but was never bullied and fought bk a few times

I thought he was good first half.

Second half he was nowhere near his best.

Pete70
15-07-2016, 10:16 PM
Was a strange one tonight, he was strolling it at the back...

Then, moved into Midfield and he never won a tackle, header, or hit a pass.

Big Marv wasn't having his best game, so I can understand Lennon changing it, but Paul's not a midfielder in a million years, he needs to see the game infront of him to pick a pass and can't play on the half turn IMO.

Fyvie for next week please :scarf:

That pretty much sums it up for me. Exactly how I saw it.

Although big Marv did ok breaking up the play, I think we need Fyvie to create more going forward.

J-C
16-07-2016, 12:34 AM
We needed a goal not shore up midfield. Keatings in there was a decent option. He was more likely to bag one than Stanton.


Weird as I didn't think Stanton was the type of player to shore up the midfield but was an attacking midfielder but I do see what your saying re Keatings.