Lone striker or Partnership?

[Tambo]

This is not a knock on Jack Ross as he is the man in charge not me but what do you prefer a lone striker or a partnership?

We seen last season two up top is much better and really hope we don't persist on playing one up top especially when at home.

[Danderhall Hibs]

I quite like it - we’ve got a list of wide attacking players so by playing this formation we get 3 attackers rather than 2. Also give Scott Allan (and the likes) a greater chance of getting in the side in a midfield 3 rather than 2.

Also limited striker options so makes sense to play 1.

[MWHIBBIES]

Two up top isn't better. At a high level, very few sides play 2 pure strikers. We have the option of both which is good. The idea that 2 strikers is more attacking is incorrect so I don't see why 1 would be a problem at home. You execute 1 striker properly, it will score as many goals as any formation. Scott Allan doesn't have a place in a 442 either, and Murphy/Mckay are out of their natural position in a 352. The 4231 actually suits most of our players.

I think we'll play 2 in most games, especially when we get a new one in a Doidge gets fully fit (had covid).

[jeffers]

This is not a knock on Jack Ross as he is the man in charge not me but what do you prefer a lone striker or a partnership?

We seen last season two up top is much better and really hope we don't persist on playing one up top especially when at home.

Neither Nisbet or Doidge are great on their own, but of the two Nisbet is better at it and is improving IMO. I prefer one though with two wide men. Trouble is I don’t think we are getting enough from Murphy.

[wandering_hibee]

I like the solo striker role and I think that it works well with fast attacking wingers, which we have, and midfielders coming through which we are still light on with the exception of Macgennis who is really looking good in that role.

[hibby rae]

There are merits to both systems. So it's great we can play with both.

On a side note, in the recent games Nisbet reminds me a bit of Fletch when he was out main man. Anyone else thought this?

[wookie70]

Neither Nisbet or Doidge are great on their own, but of the two Nisbet is better at it and is improving IMO. I prefer one though with two wide men. Trouble is I don’t think we are getting enough from Murphy.
I disagree, I think Nisbet looks very good up their on his own. He won't win the high punts but we aren't playing that way. He holds the ball up very well and is a really intelligent player with a good range of passes. Much prefer our style so far this year than the more industrial style of last year. Ross looks like he has the final couple of bits he needed in the stylish fitba jigsaw in Magennis and DH

[calumhibee1]

I prefer two but it doesn’t suit us imo.

[J-C]

Neither Nisbet or Doidge are great on their own, but of the two Nisbet is better at it and is improving IMO. I prefer one though with two wide men. Trouble is I don’t think we are getting enough from Murphy.


I agree, Murphy has and is a big disappointment, the odd glimpse isn't cutting it right now. He had a decent loan spell at Burton but played no football for 18 months prior to that due to his knee injury, he's played just 20 games in a year since he signed with only 1 goal, not nearly enough.

[Stuart93]

Neither Nisbet or Doidge are great on their own, but of the two Nisbet is better at it and is improving IMO. I prefer one though with two wide men. Trouble is I don’t think we are getting enough from Murphy.

Aye he was really poor last night and poor on Sunday. I’d put MacKay out there on Sunday and see how he fairs

[eastmainsmsh]

Prefer 2 but we are playing well just feel last night they were there for taking

[makaveli1875]

Doidge and Nisbet are a good partnership seems daft not to use them both .

[Tambo]

Two up top isn't better. At a high level, very few sides play 2 pure strikers. We have the option of both which is good. The idea that 2 strikers is more attacking is incorrect so I don't see why 1 would be a problem at home. You execute 1 striker properly, it will score as many goals as any formation. Scott Allan doesn't have a place in a 442 either, and Murphy/Mckay are out of their natural position in a 352. The 4231 actually suits most of our players.

I think we'll play 2 in most games, especially when we get a new one in a Doidge gets fully fit (had covid).

Ok I guess playing one up top with them not scoring is much better that two up top with them scoring.

[ekhibee]

It'll be interesting to see how Mueller fits into the current setup. I don't think there's anything wrong at all with 2 up front, so will he play as part of that or play as a lone striker? And if they play 2 up front, it'll be interesting to see who gets the nod. Can't believe Mueller signed just to sit on the bench.

[ancient hibee]

Nisbet on his own is vastly improved from last season. He’s a clever player and I suspect while he was with Scotland he’s watched how Dykes gets flick ons or drops deep for the ball.He’s a much better,calmer,finisher than Dykes so knows if he improves other parts of his game he’s more likely to play for Scotland. All good news for us.

[hibbysam]

Two is fine but you can’t play 4-4-2 and expect to dominate the ball which results in requiring lots of hard work and counter attack. 3-5-2 against one striker can be a waste. I like the formation we are playing and it’s working in the main, we just never took any of the chances! Football is really eye catching, loads of chances, excitement.

[JimBHibees]

Aye he was really poor last night and poor on Sunday. I’d put MacKay out there on Sunday and see how he fairs

Don't think Murphy has been poor in either game. Had a dew decent link ups last night and is very good one on one. Would keep him in as can create a lot for the team.

[JimBHibees]

I agree, Murphy has and is a big disappointment, the odd glimpse isn't cutting it right now. He had a decent loan spell at Burton but played no football for 18 months prior to that due to his knee injury, he's played just 20 games in a year since he signed with only 1 goal, not nearly enough.

Scored more than one goal has he not 3 off the top of my head santa Coloma, Celtic and Dundee. Very good player imo and would be reluctant to be taking him out the team especially when he is still getting up to speed.

[J-C]

Scored more than one goal has he not 3 off the top of my head santa Coloma, Celtic and Dundee. Very good player imo and would be reluctant to be taking him out the team especially when he is still getting up to speed.

Just going by Wiki, last season 19 and 1 goal,didn't add the Santa Coloma tbh, still not convinced.

[MWHIBBIES]

Ok I guess playing one up top with them not scoring is much better that two up top with them scoring.
I don't think that is better. I also clearly didn't say that.

[MWHIBBIES]

Just going by Wiki, last season 19 and 1 goal,didn't add the Santa Coloma tbh, still not convinced.

Wiki lists his 2 goals last season as well, just gotta look at the full stats bit.

[Smartie]

Last night was my first look at Nisbet live and I have to say I wasn't all that impressed.

He looked nothing like a lone striker to me.

His hold up play was average, and he didn't really do that well with any of the half-chances that came his way.

Once more, I think he looks like someone who looks far more comfortable in a 2 up front and it's amazing now how many Hibs strikers we've had to say that about. Very few have ever been able to pull of the lone striker role and it's a formation/style that I've never been convinced by Hibs playing.

We did appear to play well last night but we still managed to be short of being ruthless at both ends of the park in a game where we should really have been able to exert dominance into a win, and it feels to me like it might end up being costly.

(I should add - I thought he was absolutely outstanding on Sunday, but that was watching on tv.)

[Vini1875]

Neither Doidge or Nisbet are good enough to play as lone strikers, but I do like them in a partnership. They feed off each other in a way that Boyle and Murphy don't with Nisbet. Problem really is who do you sacrifice to make way for 2 up front?

[J-C]

Wiki lists his 2 goals last season as well, just gotta look at the full stats bit.


On my phone which doesn't show the full stats, yea 3 goals scored.

[davemcbain]

Surprised no-one mentioning Gullan in the mix - from what I've seen he might offer something different. Yet to be convinced he's a goal threat, but might be useful to unsettle a defence?

[O'Rourke3]

On his own last night chances fell to the wide players. He can do it but won't score as many I felt we'd have been better with two from the start. With high balls coming in I'm more confident Doidge is needed.

Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

[B.H.F.C]

I think Nisbet has the ability to play up front on his own. But he does need to improve. If he really wants to play at a decent level he’ll need to learn how to do it because most teams play with one central these days.

Even though we got back in to the game, I thought we were better in the first hour of the game. Main criticism of him for me last night is that he should have scored.

[Iggy Pope]

Not an oracle or anything but I doubt I would have to go to search on Wiki when wondering how many goals the veteran campaigner Jamie Murphy has scored for Hibs, particularly if I was about to spraff about it on here. Such knowledge at ones fingertips eh?

I thought he did OK last night and I’m about to update his Wiki page to confirm this.

[hibbysam]

I think Nisbet has the ability to play up front on his own. But he does need to improve. If he really wants to play at a decent level he’ll need to learn how to do it because most teams play with one central these days.

Even though we got back in to the game, I thought we were better in the first hour of the game. Main criticism of him for me last night is that he should have scored.

I think he’s improving and growing at a rapid rate of knots, his performance was good first half last night, he had a poor 5 minutes after he got angry at Boyle for not squaring it to him, but out-with that his overall play was very good. Like you say it was missing his usual decent finishing touch.

[Winston Ingram]

Neither Nisbet or Doidge are great on their own, but of the two Nisbet is better at it and is improving IMO. I prefer one though with two wide men. Trouble is I don’t think we are getting enough from Murphy.

I’d disagree and say that Doidge is better on his own.

Nisbet needs a partner as his hold up play is poor.

[allezsauzee]

I’d disagree and say that Doidge is better on his own.

Nisbet needs a partner as his hold up play is poor.

I agree with this. If we play one up front, it's Doidge as he's better at holding the ball and bringing others into play. Nisbet wants to flick it on to someone rather than hold it up. I think we look a better team with both playing but there will be games (playing the old firm and away to Aberdeen) where we probably can't do that.

[Iain G]

It's very much a squad game now, especially with the added European games in the mix, and we now have the flexibility in the squad to rotate most positions and to change between 4231 / 442 / 352 / 433 etc as the games suit.

Jack and co have built a good squad there that gives us options and flexibility and there is no longer the concept of a strongest starting eleven as we used to view it.

Just a little light at the back at the moment.