Why not Murray??

[bigwheel]

Had Oli not done well when he came on (and scored!), there would have definitely been some "No Simon Murray?" rage on here at the moment...brave call from Lennon in a big game- and it worked for us. I wonder what triggered the decision to go with Shaw. Fair play to him.

[Ronniekirk]

Had Oli not done well when he came on (and scored!), there would have definitely been some "No Simon Murray?" rage on here at the moment...brave call from Lennon in a big game- and it worked for us. I wonder what triggered the decision to go with Shaw. Fair play to him.

He has been scoring prolifically for development team in last few games Lennon rates him and goes to all the games so must have felt he could handle the Occassion
Murray has paid the price for missing chances in some of our drawn games that would have won us those Suspect his industry and running alone isn't enough for Lennon
Although against Hearts that may be whats needed Thought Murray may have been played in development games to get his scoring touch back But Lennon knows he can score prolifically at that level Its a catch 22 now If shaw is ready to be used to help his development lets not hold him back ,but Murray will only regain his scoring touch by playing and it wont be doing his confidence any good to not be getting any significant game time
Interesting to see how this develops


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Sammy7nil]

Had Oli not done well when he came on (and scored!), there would have definitely been some "No Simon Murray?" rage on here at the moment...brave call from Lennon in a big game- and it worked for us. I wonder what triggered the decision to go with Shaw. Fair play to him.

We were 3 - 1 down to a team that has not lost a domestic game for over a year, there was nothing to lose I suspect NL had seen Oli score a few recently where Murray had not scored for months and thought let's give the young boy a chance. It will really help his development and let NL know if he could possibly make the step up.

I do agree it was a gamble and there would have been an outcry had it bombed but IMHO it was a calculated gamble taking in to account their recent goal scoring exploits.

[Keith_M]

SM has shown he is a prolific striker, but only against the lower league teams. He's yet to show much against premier sides.


Maybe the Championship is actually his level. It's hard to tell unless he gets an extended run in the side but I don't think he's shown enough to justify that.

[easty]

SM has shown he is a prolific striker, but only against the lower league teams. He's yet to show much against premier sides.


Maybe the Championship is actually his level. It's hard to tell unless he gets an extended run in the side but I don't think he's shown enough to justify that.

He scored at Ibrox.

[Diclonius]

Murray will start on Tuesday.

[J-C]

Lennon said last season that he wanted to call up Shaw for the 1st team but couldn't as he was on loan, obviously rates him and has been banging them in at development games, looks like a young Alan Gordon type player.

[Hiber-nation]

Murray will start on Tuesday.

Do you know this for a fact? I can't see it at all.

[Hermit Crab]

Do you know this for a fact? I can't see it at all.


We will probably play with two up on Tuesday but no guarantees it will be Stokes and Murray.

[hibsdaft]

Had Oli not done well when he came on (and scored!), there would have definitely been some "No Simon Murray?" rage on here at the moment...brave call from Lennon in a big game- and it worked for us. I wonder what triggered the decision to go with Shaw. Fair play to him.

I'll admit, I thought Lennon had lost the plot with this one, partly because it was Shaw but also because we had a whole 50 mins to go with no further subbies.

[Hermit Crab]

I'll admit, I thought Lennon had lost the plot with this one, partly because it was Shaw but also because we had a whole 50 mins to go with no further subbies.


NL went for it, I respect him for that.

[Billy Whizz]

I'll admit, I thought Lennon had lost the plot with this one, partly because it was Shaw but also because we had a whole 50 mins to go with no further subbies.

We were 3-1 down, he needed to do something

[Diclonius]

We will probably play with two up on Tuesday but no guarantees it will be Stokes and Murray.

I get Shaw played well but it would be madness to start him ahead of an experienced striker in such an important game.

[Tyler Durden]

Had Oli not done well when he came on (and scored!), there would have definitely been some "No Simon Murray?" rage on here at the moment...brave call from Lennon in a big game- and it worked for us. I wonder what triggered the decision to go with Shaw. Fair play to him.

Lennon said that Shaw has been training well with the squad and he felt it's important to give him a chance soon or the boy would lose faith that the opportunity would come. Proved to be a good gamble.

This place is mad at times. Simon Murray has had a great start for us. It's only in the last 3 games where we've faced the strongest 2 teams in Scotland, that Murray has been on the bench. Now we get nonsense on here like "Lennon doesn't fancy Murray at the moment" etc

Some people went over board with Murrays start and similarly folk now going well OTT writing him off.

I think he'll start on Tuesday and every faith he'll be back in form

[gaz1875]

Here's my take. At the start of the season we looked very sharp (Betfred and Partick), pressed from the front and SM was bagging the goals. We sign Stokes and Lennon changes the system. Stokes is good but nothing sensational, he can't play upfront on his own and constantly drifts wide leaving no one in the centre. SM has potential, and gives us much more option, playing into channels and going over the top. This is Lennon's biggest problem, he changes the team to accommodate certain players. He should have kept the early season tactics of pressing the opposition in their own half, we should be doing a lot more than our current form is showing. Last season was similar, scrapped results and lets be honest limped over the line

[theonlywayisup]

I'll admit, I thought Lennon had lost the plot with this one, partly because it was Shaw but also because we had a whole 50 mins to go with no further subbies.

Shaw came on on the 70th minute - only 20 minutes to go, unless you mean including extra time if we had got two goals back.

[theonlywayisup]

Here's my take. At the start of the season we looked very sharp (Betfred and Partick), pressed from the front and SM was bagging the goals. We sign Stokes and Lennon changes the system. Stokes is good but nothing sensational, he can't play upfront on his own and constantly drifts wide leaving no one in the centre. SM has potential, and gives us much more option, playing into channels and going over the top. This is Lennon's biggest problem, he changes the team to accommodate certain players. He should have kept the early season tactics of pressing the opposition in their own half, we should be doing a lot more than our current form is showing. Last season was similar, scrapped results and lets be honest limped over the line

Interesting view!

I recall thinking something similar when we had Cummings and Boyle playing well, along with Malonga up until Christmas 2015. Then we sign Stokes and he becomes the unmovable fixture in the team. He had some excellent games for Hibs (ICT away, SC Final etc) but also many games when it didn't work for him.

It would take a brave man to drop Stokes to go back to what we had at the start of the season. The challenge for Lennon is to work out who's best to play with Stokes - maybe Shaw might become that player.

[wookie70]

I remember saying frequently to my mates in the early games of the season how hard we were working off the ball, hunting in packs and winning the ball back high up the park. Contrast that with the last couple of games. Simon Murray's form dropped off when we started playing at a more sedate pace and although he still worked hard he couldn't do it on his own and he was left chasing shadows. I'd like to see what Boyle and Murray were like as a two, wind them up and let them go

[bigwheel]

I remember saying frequently to my mates in the early games of the season how hard we were working off the ball, hunting in packs and winning the ball back high up the park. Contrast that with the last couple of games. Simon Murray's form dropped off when we started playing at a more sedate pace and although he still worked hard he couldn't do it on his own and he was left chasing shadows. I'd like to see what Boyle and Murray were like as a two, wind them up and let them go

And you would drop Stokes to play Boyle & Murray together ???


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Hiber-nation]

Here's my take. At the start of the season we looked very sharp (Betfred and Partick), pressed from the front and SM was bagging the goals. We sign Stokes and Lennon changes the system. Stokes is good but nothing sensational, he can't play upfront on his own and constantly drifts wide leaving no one in the centre. SM has potential, and gives us much more option, playing into channels and going over the top. This is Lennon's biggest problem, he changes the team to accommodate certain players. He should have kept the early season tactics of pressing the opposition in their own half, we should be doing a lot more than our current form is showing. Last season was similar, scrapped results and lets be honest limped over the line

I keep thinking this myself but how can you leave out a player with Stokes's quality?

[southern hibby]

Said it several times now in several threads I would love to see Boyle and Murray come on in two or three games together around the 60 minute mark and let them run at players.

Defenders in Scotland generally are scared of pace and to have two fast players attacking your defence is probably a nightmare for defenders but to have two attacking when they have been running for an hour must really be a frightening prospect for any defence. Look at the problems Boyle caused Celtic by coming on with his pace, when he did.

One other thing I'd like to see us do more of is ( whatever stage of the game we are at ) is running at defenders who have been booked. Maybe it's just me but we never seem to try and wind up annoy defenders after they've been booked. Run at them with pace and let them challenge and maybe just maybe we'll play against ten men or a defender scared to put a hefty challenge in because he knows he might walk.

GGTTH

[Kojock]

NL went for it, I respect him for that.

It was mentioned that if the game goes to extra time then a fourth sub is permitted.

[madhatter]

I keep thinking this myself but how can you leave out a player with Stokes's quality?

When you write out the team sheet you don't put his name in the first 11. Other teams drop players of much better quality than Stokes. The way people talk of Stokes' quality you'd honestly think we had Messi...

The move to containing and dropping back into a solid shape doesnt work for us yet we've done that recently. We struggle to break down teams and absolutely need to press to get the ball further up the park. Yet we don't. Our best move against Celtic was a Whittaker (one of our oldest players) dart forward and Shaw (youngest player) to point behind the defender to where he wanted the ball.

The rest of the game it was all very tippy tappy and our passes were so weak that our play was shockingly slow. Players waiting on a trickling ball while they are being pressed. Hate seeing that, shameful seeing pros not playing passes with impetus. They obviously do it because we have players in our team who have terrible first touch or something...

I'd honestly start Shaw and Murray against Hearts. We need movement. We need players who stick to the middle of the pitch. We need pace. Stokes has ability but he has virtually no pace. Stokes upfront on his own against Hearts will shoot us in the foot.

[hughio]

When you write out the team sheet you don't put his name in the first 11. Other teams drop players of much better quality than Stokes. The way people talk of Stokes' quality you'd honestly think we had Messi...

The move to containing and dropping back into a solid shape doesnt work for us yet we've done that recently. We struggle to break down teams and absolutely need to press to get the ball further up the park. Yet we don't. Our best move against Celtic was a Whittaker (one of our oldest players) dart forward and Shaw (youngest player) to point behind the defender to where he wanted the ball.

The rest of the game it was all very tippy tappy and our passes were so weak that our play was shockingly slow. Players waiting on a trickling ball while they are being pressed. Hate seeing that, shameful seeing pros not playing passes with impetus. They obviously do it because we have players in our team who have terrible first touch or something...

I'd honestly start Shaw and Murray against Hearts. We need movement. We need players who stick to the middle of the pitch. We need pace. Stokes has ability but he has virtually no pace. Stokes upfront on his own against Hearts will shoot us in the foot.
Got to say I think you are right

[Golden Bear]

When you write out the team sheet you don't put his name in the first 11. Other teams drop players of much better quality than Stokes. The way people talk of Stokes' quality you'd honestly think we had Messi...

The move to containing and dropping back into a solid shape doesnt work for us yet we've done that recently. We struggle to break down teams and absolutely need to press to get the ball further up the park. Yet we don't. Our best move against Celtic was a Whittaker (one of our oldest players) dart forward and Shaw (youngest player) to point behind the defender to where he wanted the ball.

The rest of the game it was all very tippy tappy and our passes were so weak that our play was shockingly slow. Players waiting on a trickling ball while they are being pressed. Hate seeing that, shameful seeing pros not playing passes with impetus. They obviously do it because we have players in our team who have terrible first touch or something...

I'd honestly start Shaw and Murray against Hearts. We need movement. We need players who stick to the middle of the pitch. We need pace. Stokes has ability but he has virtually no pace. Stokes upfront on his own against Hearts will shoot us in the foot.

:agree:

Spot on.

[bigwheel]

When you write out the team sheet you don't put his name in the first 11. Other teams drop players of much better quality than Stokes. The way people talk of Stokes' quality you'd honestly think we had Messi...

The move to containing and dropping back into a solid shape doesnt work for us yet we've done that recently. We struggle to break down teams and absolutely need to press to get the ball further up the park. Yet we don't. Our best move against Celtic was a Whittaker (one of our oldest players) dart forward and Shaw (youngest player) to point behind the defender to where he wanted the ball.

The rest of the game it was all very tippy tappy and our passes were so weak that our play was shockingly slow. Players waiting on a trickling ball while they are being pressed. Hate seeing that, shameful seeing pros not playing passes with impetus. They obviously do it because we have players in our team who have terrible first touch or something...

I'd honestly start Shaw and Murray against Hearts. We need movement. We need players who stick to the middle of the pitch. We need pace. Stokes has ability but he has virtually no pace. Stokes upfront on his own against Hearts will shoot us in the foot.

Just so I understand - as well as playing an untried pair upfront, neither of whom are anywhere near as good as Stokers - to play two up front would you also revert to a four in midfield ? Which has never worked for us any time we have played it this season. or would you go a three in defence?

[MB62]

The problem is not Stokes, it is he is being played on his own up front. The reason he is on his own is because we play big Marv as a holding player between defence and midfield. Therefore, we have to lose a man somewhere and a striker is where Lennon has chosen to lose the player from.
Stokes in recent games, has looked so frustrated being up there on his own. From what I can see, it looks like Dylan has been the man tasked with supporting Stokes from midfield, but I could count on one finger how many goals D.M has scored for us. Neither SJM or DM are prolific goal scorers from central midfield and that leaves A.S. isolated up front.
Our 4-1-4-1 set up is designed mainly to not lose goals (that's not worked) rather than scoring goals.

I felt on Saturday we should have been running at them from the start, trying to run the legs off them after their trip to Munich midweek, instead of trying to contain them, played in to their hands a bit. We might have still lost, celtc are not 60 games undefeated domestically without being able to handle all kind of different tactics, but at least we would have been having a dash from the start.
Individual errors cost us in that first half, nobody can legislate for that, but if we had been more on the front foot rather than the containing foot, they might not have those same chances.

All just different opinions of course, and that's mine, which is a wee tad less important than NL's :greengrin

[calumhibee1]

I keep thinking this myself but how can you leave out a player with Stokes's quality?

Stokes has played 12 games and scored 8 goals. Now keep in mind that he never got the benefit of boosting his numbers in the league cup games where we scored a barrel load and the idea of dropping Stokes just doesn’t make sense to me.

[BSEJVT]

The problem is not Stokes, it is he is being played on his own up front. The reason he is on his own is because we play big Marv as a holding player between defence and midfield. Therefore, we have to lose a man somewhere and a striker is where Lennon has chosen to lose the player from.
Stokes in recent games, has looked so frustrated being up there on his own. From what I can see, it looks like Dylan has been the man tasked with supporting Stokes from midfield, but I could count on one finger how many goals D.M has scored for us. Neither SJM or DM are prolific goal scorers from central midfield and that least A.S. isolated up front.
Our 4-1-4-1 set up is designed mainly to not lose goals (that's not worked) rather than scoring goals.

I felt on Saturday we should have been running at them from the start, trying to run the legs off them after their trip to Munich midweek, instead of trying to contain them, played in to their hands a bit. We might have still lost, celtc are not 60 games undefeated domestically without being able to handle all kind of different tactics, but at least we would have been having a dash from the start.
Individual errors cost us in that first, nobody can legislate for that, but if we had been more on the front foot rather than the containing foot, they might not have those same chances.

All just different opinions of course, and that's mine, which is a wee tad less important than NL's :greengrin

Exactly as I see it.

Stokes is a far better footballer than I had previously given him credit for but IMO cannot play as a lone striker.

I am sure the reason he drops wide is that he knows he cannot hold the ball in against 2 big heifers coming through the back of him and that does leave us light in the middle

[pacoluna]

people suggesting we drop stokes for the derby.
:faf: :crazy:

[lord bunberry]

Stokes has played 12 games and scored 8 goals. Now keep in mind that he never got the benefit of boosting his numbers in the league cup games where we scored a barrel load and the idea of dropping Stokes just doesn’t make sense to me.
There’s no way Stokes should be dropped. I’d like to see us play with another striker tomorrow, but Stokes has to start.

[Lago]

The problem is not Stokes, it is he is being played on his own up front. The reason he is on his own is because we play big Marv as a holding player between defence and midfield. Therefore, we have to lose a man somewhere and a striker is where Lennon has chosen to lose the player from.
Stokes in recent games, has looked so frustrated being up there on his own. From what I can see, it looks like Dylan has been the man tasked with supporting Stokes from midfield, but I could count on one finger how many goals D.M has scored for us. Neither SJM or DM are prolific goal scorers from central midfield and that least A.S. isolated up front.
Our 4-1-4-1 set up is designed mainly to not lose goals (that's not worked) rather than scoring goals.

I felt on Saturday we should have been running at them from the start, trying to run the legs off them after their trip to Munich midweek, instead of trying to contain them, played in to their hands a bit. We might have still lost, celtc are not 60 games undefeated domestically without being able to handle all kind of different tactics, but at least we would have been having a dash from the start.
Individual errors cost us in that first, nobody can legislate for that, but if we had been more on the front foot rather than the containing foot, they might not have those same chances.

All just different opinions of course, and that's mine, which is a wee tad less important than NL's :greengrin
Excellent analysis.

[Paisley Hibby]

Interesting view!

I recall thinking something similar when we had Cummings and Boyle playing well, along with Malonga up until Christmas 2015. Then we sign Stokes and he becomes the unmovable fixture in the team. He had some excellent games for Hibs (ICT away, SC Final etc) but also many games when it didn't work for him.

It would take a brave man to drop Stokes to go back to what we had at the start of the season. The challenge for Lennon is to work out who's best to play with Stokes - maybe Shaw might become that player.
I thought the best combination was Stokes with Keatings - shame we don't have that as an option any more 😖

[overdrive]

Exactly as I see it.

Stokes is a far better footballer than I had previously given him credit for but IMO cannot play as a lone striker.

I am sure the reason he drops wide is that he knows he cannot hold the ball in against 2 big heifers coming through the back of him and that does leave us light in the middle

It was pointed out in the commentary on Saturday that Stokes improved when Shaw came on and played as the centre forward which allowed Stokes to drift about, trying to make things happen.

[Phil MaGlass]

Stokes cant play lone striker as he has no support, god knows why Lennon persists with one up. We (IMO) need to have two up front against the poppy thieves.

[RIP Bestie]

people suggesting we drop stokes for the derby.
:faf: :crazy:

Or dropping him at all!
You have to play your bests players.
My information is that something has happened between Lennon and Murray and Lennobn no longer trusts him.

[wookie70]

And you would drop Stokes to play Boyle & Murray together ???


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Possibly, but I would rather play him behind Boyle and Murray or perhaps play him and Murray with Boyle on the right. Stokes has done nothing wrong and has actually scored at a good rate and been good when he gets the ball. The issue is he is not a front player who does well playing on his own as his greatest quality for me is the ability to play short and telling passes. Tricky to do that when there is no-one within 30 yards of you and you are surrounded by 2 or 3 defenders. Playing Stokes up front on his own hasn't worked and when Lennon has been forced into making the changes we have been substantially better.

The Hearts game will be even trickier selection wise as Marv is usually our best player in these games. If it was me I would play the defense that was starting to work before it was changed on Saturday - Whitts Effe Hanlon Lewis with Marv in front of them. I would then have Dylan SJM and Boyle with SJM on the left and Boyle on the right and play Murray and Stokes up top.

[BSEJVT]

Possibly, but I would rather play him behind Boyle and Murray or perhaps play him and Murray with Boyle on the right. Stokes has done nothing wrong and has actually scored at a good rate and been good when he gets the ball. The issue is he is not a front player who does well playing on his own as his greatest quality for me is the ability to play short and telling passes. Tricky to do that when there is no-one within 30 yards of you and you are surrounded by 2 or 3 defenders. Playing Stokes up front on his own hasn't worked and when Lennon has been forced into making the changes we have been substantially better.

The Hearts game will be even trickier selection wise as Marv is usually our best player in these games. If it was me I would play the defense that was starting to work before it was changed on Saturday - Whitts Effe Hanlon Lewis with Marv in front of them. I would then have Dylan SJM and Boyle with SJM on the left and Boyle on the right and play Murray and Stokes up top.

Stokes is the best finisher we have

Playing him (or not playing him at all) behind anyone makes no sense to me.

If there was anyone I wanted to be in the box waiting for the ball to come or something to drop to him it would be Stokes

[Deansy]

When you write out the team sheet you don't put his name in the first 11. Other teams drop players of much better quality than Stokes. The way people talk of Stokes' quality you'd honestly think we had Messi...

The move to containing and dropping back into a solid shape doesnt work for us yet we've done that recently. We struggle to break down teams and absolutely need to press to get the ball further up the park. Yet we don't. Our best move against Celtic was a Whittaker (one of our oldest players) dart forward and Shaw (youngest player) to point behind the defender to where he wanted the ball.

The rest of the game it was all very tippy tappy and our passes were so weak that our play was shockingly slow. Players waiting on a trickling ball while they are being pressed. Hate seeing that, shameful seeing pros not playing passes with impetus. They obviously do it because we have players in our team who have terrible first touch or something...

I'd honestly start Shaw and Murray against Hearts. We need movement. We need players who stick to the middle of the pitch. We need pace. Stokes has ability but he has virtually no pace. Stokes upfront on his own against Hearts will shoot us in the foot.

My 2 biggests complaints about Hibs just now, the 'Tippy-Tappy' stuff - trying to 'walk the ball into the net' has completely obliterated the '1st Time-shot' !. And the slow passing, with no urgency or speed - that's bad enough but we also seem unable to play a ball for the team-mate to run onto, instead of having to check/slow their stride or, in some cases, stopping completely and having to go back to collect the ball !

[HIBEES 4 LIFE]

It was pointed out in the commentary on Saturday that Stokes improved when Shaw came on and played as the centre forward which allowed Stokes to drift about, trying to make things happen.

100% this, Stokes is now probably more of a number 10 than a 9. He needs to be in the hole behind a more mobile striker. Stokes isn't going to run past players, but he holds the ball well, has a good first touch and can link play. Playing Shaw and Murray would be disastrous, Murray (despite being older) is still very raw and his runs could be more intelligent. He needs to run less but with more purpose not just running for the sake of it. Shaw has no experience at this level and that needs to be done slowly, albeit I would like to see him feature more, but 20 min cameo's are fine for now.

I think we should play a basic 4-4-1-1 on Tuesday, Lennon needs to stop fitting players in because he wants to play names.

With a 4, if he asks the full backs to play defensively then Bartley can possibly miss out, with McGinn and McGeouch as a pair. But if he's asking our full backs to attack then Bartley is the protection we need. That would mean dropping McGinn or McGeouch. 2 wide men from Swanson, Barker and Boyle. The full backs would depend on tactics, defensive probably SDG and attacking probably Whitty.

Its about picking the team and tactics that will win the game, not picking tactics around our best players.

[ancient hibee]

Bit puzzled by this idea that Bartley playing stops the midfield getting forward.I would have thought that with him running the half way area that the other midfielders would play much higher.They show no inclination to do that.So either this is what the manager wants or they are not prepared to leave their comfort zone.Given their career goal scoring record I suspect the latter.It’s great to spray the ball around but long overdue that they get forward to continue the move instead of watching from thirty yards behind the play.

[madhatter]

Bit puzzled by this idea that Bartley playing stops the midfield getting forward.I would have thought that with him running the half way area that the other midfielders would play much higher.They show no inclination to do that.So either this is what the manager wants or they are not prepared to leave their comfort zone.Given their career goal scoring record I suspect the latter.It’s great to spray the ball around but long overdue that they get forward to continue the move instead of watching from thirty yards behind the play.

Whether Bartley plays or not, in my eyes the midfield are about 10 yards deeper than they need to be (especially when he does play). Zero support centrally and very little chance of someone bursting a gut to get forward. So I agree with this.

I rate McGeouch but playing him behind Stokes honestly makes us so slow upfront. Also, not sure if it just me but Slivka, McGinn, Bartley and McGeouch are very similar from what I can see. They each have their strong points but none of them are blessed with pace. None of them are going to burst past the striker(s) to get into the box. I think this is where the tippy tappy football comes from, we can get to about 25-30 yards out slowly (their entire defence being back) and we are so easy to defend against, so we end up tapping the ball in and around the opposition's box but have absolutely no penetration coming from midfield. Outwith McGinn, none of our central midfielders try to take a man on, beating your marker tends to create a lot of space but we just don't do it fast enough and often enough.

I've seen our striker hold the ball up and yet our midfielders make no effort to support and jog slowly watching what is going on. Balance of the team is still not right for me. It's improving but what I worry about is - are we more defensively sound (some of the time) because our entire midfield is more focused on defending than attacking. It's clear we have a divide between defence and attack hence why we struggle to score goals. We always look strongest when countering, the reason for that is we usually have McGinn send a long pass to Boyle and then we attack with 3 players. The rest of the time in a lot of the games it honestly sometimes looks like we could play 360 minutes and not score a goal. What happens when we start defending very badly? We are starting to leak goals and we don't score many. We've started the league quite well but we need to be vigilant - we are either just away from stringing a series of 1-0 wins or we are about to encounter a series of 3-1 defeats.

Team is improving but I'd prefer more attacking impetus especially in midfield.

[blackpoolhibs]

Or dropping him at all!
You have to play your bests players.
My information is that something has happened between Lennon and Murray and Lennobn no longer trusts him.

Doesn't trust him, :greengrin has he dipped his pockets or worse his bird? :wink:

Can't see anything football wise that would cause Lennon to lose trust in him?

[madhatter]

Well Stokes was dropped for reasons other than people suggested. Are people suggesting to drop him still in the wrong? Anybody looking at that Hearts team knows they are slow physical players. Murray, Barker and Boyle caused them so much grief!

Also well done Murray. Hopefully that stops people creating rumours of Lennon having no trust in him...

:flag:

[Allant1981]

Or dropping him at all!
You have to play your bests players.
My information is that something has happened between Lennon and Murray and Lennobn no longer trusts him.

so a lot of rubbish then

[Tyler Durden]

Lennon said that Shaw has been training well with the squad and he felt it's important to give him a chance soon or the boy would lose faith that the opportunity would come. Proved to be a good gamble.

This place is mad at times. Simon Murray has had a great start for us. It's only in the last 3 games where we've faced the strongest 2 teams in Scotland, that Murray has been on the bench. Now we get nonsense on here like "Lennon doesn't fancy Murray at the moment" etc

Some people went over board with Murrays start and similarly folk now going well OTT writing him off.

I think he'll start on Tuesday and every faith he'll be back in form

:top marks:wink:

[gaz1875]

Here's my take. At the start of the season we looked very sharp (Betfred and Partick), pressed from the front and SM was bagging the goals. We sign Stokes and Lennon changes the system. Stokes is good but nothing sensational, he can't play upfront on his own and constantly drifts wide leaving no one in the centre. SM has potential, and gives us much more option, playing into channels and going over the top. This is Lennon's biggest problem, he changes the team to accommodate certain players. He should have kept the early season tactics of pressing the opposition in their own half, we should be doing a lot more than our current form is showing. Last season was similar, scrapped results and lets be honest limped over the line


Much quicker up front tonight :greengrin