Steve Clarke "you can only play a style that suits the players you've got"

[TheSouthMoroccan]

..."a lot of people maybe looked at the way I set up the Kilmarnock team, but I had to set them up in a different way to get results".

Resonated with me when I read it this am in the paper. No coincidence that this comes from a seasoned campaigner, rather than a first timer. Two massive games coming up and while trying to remain upbeat, I can't help but feel we will end up in the bottom six. If I were wee Shaun I'd be regretting saying a couple of weeks ago that we were 7th when he took over and we are now 4th. Can't help but feel we are too big a club to have managers learning on the job. Time will tell #gonebyxmas

[MWHIBBIES]

Yep. A manager only understanding 1 way of playing is not a good thing. It may work yet, but it's a big risk.

[Steven79]

Yep. A manager only understanding 1 way of playing is not a good thing. It may work yet, but it's a big risk.

The lack of a plan B when Plan A isn't working worries me the most.

We just keep playing the same way hoping that it pays off which results in us doing the same thing again and again with no end product.

For example St Johnstone at home.

[DIXIHIBS]

Its common sense to play to your strengths. If you have a 4'10" centre forward you dont play high ball up to him etc. The big fear with maloney is his mindset to play his preferred style no matter what. P!ss with the c@ck youve got and all that.

[wookie70]

The lack of a plan B when Plan A isn't working worries me the most.

We just keep playing the same way hoping that it pays off which results in us doing the same thing again and again with no end product.

For example St Johnstone at home.

I'd be happy if I could see signs that Plan A was beginning to work. At least that would say we were on our way. I'm yet to be convinced that Plan A will be a viable way of playing even when he has had time and a couple of transfer windows.

[Eyrie]

A point I've been making for a while.

Maloney needs to set the team up based on the players he has available right now, and not how he wants us to play long term.

Classic example is putting Doig at CH and then using Stevenson to plug the gap at LWB caused by Mitchell being out. We all love Stevenson, but pace and trickery aren't his strong suits so being very one footed makes him easy for opponents to neutralise.

The sensible move is to use Doig's pace and stamina to provide an attacking threat at LWB and have Stevenson at CH where he can use his defensive nous and cover if Doig is caught up field.

[loanheadhibby]

Yep. A manager only understanding 1 way of playing is not a good thing. It may work yet, but it's a big risk.

it’s nonsensical when you think about it. Have a preferred way of playing by all means but surely any manager knows it has to be mixed up against certain opponents and certain games.

There will also be situations in games where your plan a is not working so you might have to launch it in box/play it over the top. We seems to be reluctant to try any of these methods when we are struggling

[B.H.F.C]

A point I've been making for a while.

Maloney needs to set the team up based on the players he has available right now, and not how he wants us to play long term.

Classic example is putting Doig at CH and then using Stevenson to plug the gap at LWB caused by Mitchell being out. We all love Stevenson, but pace and trickery aren't his strong suits so being very one footed makes him easy for opponents to neutralise.

The sensible move is to use Doig's pace and stamina to provide an attacking threat at LWB and have Stevenson at CH where he can use his defensive nous and cover if Doig is caught up field.

The Doig one baffles me a bit. In Maloney’s first two games he was arguably our best player playing at wing back. It was really obvious that him and Cadden were playing higher up the park and in both games there were numerous examples of one crossing and the other coming in at the back post.
.
Mitchell has done all right for us but I thought it was a signing for the sake of signing someone and it was the start of Doig getting shunted around needlessly.

Maloney has shown he’ll try different things, back four at Ibrox for example, just not enough for me although I’d like to think lack of options has been a contributing factor to that.

[Paulie Walnuts]

..."a lot of people maybe looked at the way I set up the Kilmarnock team, but I had to set them up in a different way to get results".

Resonated with me when I read it this am in the paper. No coincidence that this comes from a seasoned campaigner, rather than a first timer. Two massive games coming up and while trying to remain upbeat, I can't help but feel we will end up in the bottom six. If I were wee Shaun I'd be regretting saying a couple of weeks ago that we were 7th when he took over and we are now 4th. Can't help but feel we are too big a club to have managers learning on the job. Time will tell #gonebyxmas

I think a lot of what you say is fair.

The one bit I would disagree with is us being too big to have managers learning on the job. Our last two cup winning managers and probably the best manager we’ve had in the last 20 years all had their first managerial roles at Hibs. Likewise our worst ones - Calderwood, Butcher, Heckingbottom all came with a fair amount of managerial experience.

Appointing guys who have never been managers before doesn’t concern me one bit. You just need to make sure it’s the right ones.

[MWHIBBIES]

The Doig one baffles me a bit. In Maloney’s first two games he was arguably our best player playing at wing back. It was really obvious that him and Cadden were playing higher up the park and in both games there were numerous examples of one crossing and the other coming in at the back post.
.
Mitchell has done all right for us but I thought it was a signing for the sake of signing someone and it was the start of Doig getting shunted around needlessly.

Maloney has shown he’ll try different things, back four at Ibrox for example, just not enough for me although I’d like to think lack of options has been a contributing factor to that.

I'm positive he sees Doig as the left centre back long term.

Either that or it's only because Hanlon is out.

[Paulie Walnuts]

I'm positive he sees Doig as the left centre back long term.

Either that or it's only because Hanlon is out.

Was that not supposed to be Doig’s position before he broke through?

Fairly certain he played there through the youth teams. That’s not to say that doesn’t mean he has to stick to that position of course.

[brog]

..."a lot of people maybe looked at the way I set up the Kilmarnock team, but I had to set them up in a different way to get results".

Resonated with me when I read it this am in the paper. No coincidence that this comes from a seasoned campaigner, rather than a first timer. Two massive games coming up and while trying to remain upbeat, I can't help but feel we will end up in the bottom six. If I were wee Shaun I'd be regretting saying a couple of weeks ago that we were 7th when he took over and we are now 4th. Can't help but feel we are too big a club to have managers learning on the job. Time will tell #gonebyxmas

There are hundreds of examples of managers being an instant success, Steve Clarke himself for one at WBA along with Mowbray and Stubbs at ER. You say you're trying to remain upbeat but call our manager 'wee Shaun' and finish with #gonebyxmas. I suggest you try harder.

[Billy Whizz]

Was that not supposed to be Doig’s position before he broke through?

Fairly certain he played there through the youth teams. That’s not to say that doesn’t mean he has to stick to that position of course.

Think he started off as a left back, but played a few development games for Hibs as a centre back
For me the higher up the park he plays, the more effective he is

[J-C]

Was that not supposed to be Doig’s position before he broke through?

Fairly certain he played there through the youth teams. That’s not to say that doesn’t mean he has to stick to that position of course.

Not a bad thing for defenders to play other positions, it adds to their development, pretty sure Hanlon played a good few games at LB before nailing down the CH position.

[Paulie Walnuts]

Think he started off as a left back, but played a few development games for Hibs as a centre back
For me the higher up the park he plays, the more effective he is

Ah ok :aok:

[ancient hibee]

Most would agree that the style has to suit the players and Clarke has moulded Scotland into a pretty effective/attractive side with players knowing what to do and where to find each other on the pitch.For the first time in a long time when watching on TV you can see the shape of the team in varied situations. Considering the little time he has with them this is excellent. However also noticeable is that players coming into the team have to play the system. So it's not quite so straightforward as always suiting the players which means I think that the system has to be uncomplicated.

[SHODAN]

Ah, it's another Maloney's ***** thread. How predictable.

[Smartie]

Steve Clarke really impresses me as a manager.

In fairness to him though - it didn't happen straight away with Scotland, it has taken him a bit of time to get his ideas across.

I'm far from convinced by Maloney so far but it's early days and he's trying to do something really quite ambitious.

It'll be a bit of time before we can really judge him fairly.

Although we're very much back in "fine margins" territory with him again, a positive next few weeks and he could go a long way towards getting us all onside. A bad few weeks and it will go the other way.

And it might simply boil down to luck with injuries and refereeing decisions as much as our manager making the right calls.

FWIW I don't see how we ever get the players capable of scoring enough goals playing Maloney's way, although I quite like that the defence looks more robust.

[B.H.F.C]

Steve Clarke really impresses me as a manager.

In fairness to him though - it didn't happen straight away with Scotland, it has taken him a bit of time to get his ideas across.

I'm far from convinced by Maloney so far but it's early days and he's trying to do something really quite ambitious.

It'll be a bit of time before we can really judge him fairly.

Although we're very much back in "fine margins" territory with him again, a positive next few weeks and he could go a long way towards getting us all onside. A bad few weeks and it will go the other way.

And it might simply boil down to luck with injuries and refereeing decisions as much as our manager making the right calls.

FWIW I don't see how we ever get the players capable of scoring enough goals playing Maloney's way, although I quite like that the defence looks more robust.

You don’t need to go back that far to find Clarke getting a lot of criticism.

Most important thing for any manager is having good players. Look at the team that started the other night and the majority are playing in the Premier League. Couple of years back, we were relying on a lot of players playing in the Champiomship. As the quality of player improved, the quality of the team improved. Obviously the manager plays an important part in pulling that together and, whilst I think Maloney could be doing things a bit differently at times, I think a bigger issue has been relying on a number of players that aren’t very good since he came in.

[Lago]

Que another sack the new manager thread. 🙄

[MWHIBBIES]

Ah, it's another Maloney's ***** thread. How predictable.


Que another sack the new manager thread. 🙄

Shame a decent dicussion just cant happen without posts like these.

You don't like the thread, don't bother being in it. The admins do a good job here, if they have a problem, it will be closed. We don't need this policing from members.

[brog]

Shame a decent dicussion just cant happen without posts like these.

You don't like the thread, don't bother being in it. The admins do a good job here, if they have a problem, it will be closed. We don't need this policing from members.

I guess you don't do irony.

[Hibbyradge]

I guess you don't do irony.

:tee hee:

[MWHIBBIES]

I guess you don't do irony.

Yawn

[green day]

Steve Clarke really impresses me as a manager.

In fairness to him though - it didn't happen straight away with Scotland, it has taken him a bit of time to get his ideas across..


You don’t need to go back that far to find Clarke getting a lot of criticism.


I can remember plenty people slagging him off for being boring and being gobsmacked that he got the contract extension.

Any suggestion that Steve Clarke is some wise old sage who never made a mis step in his Scotland career is nonsense, and to use it to beat Maloney is revisionism of the worst kind.


We don't need this policing from members.

To be fair, self policing by members would be better, we dont really need mods on this thread - but if people like the OP come on with what seems like a thinly disguised troll post (wee shaun / #gonebychristmas) then you can hardly blame people for having a wee pop.

[TheSouthMoroccan]

To be fair, self policing by members would be better, we dont really need mods on this thread - but if people like the OP come on with what seems like a thinly disguised troll post (wee shaun / #gonebychristmas) then you can hardly blame people for having a wee pop.[/QUOTE]

Not meant to be a troll post, just how I feel right now. Might be wrong, might be right, time will tell.

[brianmc]

Clarke has had almost 3 years to make Scotland decent - they were brutal for the first year and there were several calls for him to be sacked.
Maloney has had 1 transfer window.... And who knows how many of those signings were ones he actually wanted.
I think he'll come good. But he needs time.

[Unseen work]

I do get the argument.

But on the other hand I’d reccomend someone listen to Open Goals interview with Ange Postecoglu. He basically says he would never change because it’s what he believes in, not only that but in his opinion it’s the best way to win a game of football.

If he was to change the style for one game what sort of message would that give the players? That he doesn’t have faith in them or that they need to change from game to game depending on an opponent? His is a firm no, he plays how he thinks because in his view that’s the best way to win football matches. Yes it might not always come off but he’s not going to change something he believes in to something he has no faith or confidence in.

Imo Maloney in similar to Ange in his views and it’s not about trying to play a certain style for the sake of it, but it’s because in his opinion it’s the best way to win football.

Hence why he’s trying to do it now and not go with a random formation or tactics till the summer.

[CapitalGreen]

Clarke has to change style to suit the players he’s got because (A) he has very little time on the training field with them to coach them to play a different style and (B) he has a fixed pool of players to choose from and he can’t recruit players to suit a particular style if he doesn’t have suitable players available.

[JimBHibees]

..."a lot of people maybe looked at the way I set up the Kilmarnock team, but I had to set them up in a different way to get results".

Resonated with me when I read it this am in the paper. No coincidence that this comes from a seasoned campaigner, rather than a first timer. Two massive games coming up and while trying to remain upbeat, I can't help but feel we will end up in the bottom six. If I were wee Shaun I'd be regretting saying a couple of weeks ago that we were 7th when he took over and we are now 4th. Can't help but feel we are too big a club to have managers learning on the job. Time will tell #gonebyxmas

Complete cheap shot post no need.

[Eyrie]

I do get the argument.

But on the other hand I’d reccomend someone listen to Open Goals interview with Ange Postecoglu. He basically says he would never change because it’s what he believes in, not only that but in his opinion it’s the best way to win a game of football.

If he was to change the style for one game what sort of message would that give the players? That he doesn’t have faith in them or that they need to change from game to game depending on an opponent? His is a firm no, he plays how he thinks because in his view that’s the best way to win football matches. Yes it might not always come off but he’s not going to change something he believes in to something he has no faith or confidence in.

Imo Maloney in similar to Ange in his views and it’s not about trying to play a certain style for the sake of it, but it’s because in his opinion it’s the best way to win football.

Hence why he’s trying to do it now and not go with a random formation or tactics till the summer.

Different situation though.

Postecoglu was appointed in the summer so he had time to work with the Celtc squad and sign players.

Maloney arrived mid-season to take over an existing squad. Yes, he was well backed in January but those players are injured (Clarke, Mitchell) or on the bench/being eased in (Henderson, Hauge, Melkerson). Only Bushieri has played regularly.

There's nothing random about playing to the strengths of the players available.

[Smartie]

What was weird was that I actually thought the players looked pretty handy playing Maloney's way in the first couple of games, the ones prior to the Christmas break.

After having a bit of time with no matches to bed in and bring players in we looked far worse.

The injuries and suspensions will have played a big part, who knows how it might have gone if we'd got our first choice players out every week?

Personally I find it easier to chuck criticism along the lines of "you need to play to your strengths" around than it is to actually suggest what that might look like. Ultimately, with our current injury situation you've still got a dearth of strikers, a lack of creativity and Drey Wright in the team. That's probably more significant than whether we play 3 at the back or one striker or two.

Maloney might be as well figuring out now who might cut it playing the way he wants to play in future.

[Unseen work]

Different situation though.

Postecoglu was appointed in the summer so he had time to work with the Celtc squad and sign players.

Maloney arrived mid-season to take over an existing squad. Yes, he was well backed in January but those players are injured (Clarke, Mitchell) or on the bench/being eased in (Henderson, Hauge, Melkerson). Only Bushieri has played regularly.

There's nothing random about playing to the strengths of the players available.

Im not saying the situations are the same, more the mindset they might share.

Postecoglu got stick to begin with for some results and the players he had weren’t overally suited to the style we he kept with it and demanded they do it. He’s very clear in the interview that anyone that shows resistance to his ideas will be gone as he will not change no matter the result or performances.

For anyone that’s interested;

https://youtu.be/UPH89zMxp6Q

https://youtu.be/IniEoVkgI-M

Comes across very well imo.

[Unseen work]

What was weird was that I actually thought the players looked pretty handy playing Maloney's way in the first couple of games, the ones prior to the Christmas break.

After having a bit of time with no matches to bed in and bring players in we looked far worse.

The injuries and suspensions will have played a big part, who knows how it might have gone if we'd got our first choice players out every week?

Personally I find it easier to chuck criticism along the lines of "you need to play to your strengths" around than it is to actually suggest what that might look like. Ultimately, with our current injury situation you've still got a dearth of strikers, a lack of creativity and Drey Wright in the team. That's probably more significant than whether we play 3 at the back or one striker or two.

Maloney might be as well figuring out now who might cut it playing the way he wants to play in future.

Id agree with this re the change in the first couple of games.

To me it was very noticeable how Cadden and Doig were very high and wide, really stretching the game and trying to pin the opposition back. The two behind the striker could then drop in the gaps and drive forward or play passes.

Our back like was much higher and we won the ball back pretty sharp and would immediately get into the opposition.

[Viva_Palmeiras]

To be fair, self policing by members would be better, we dont really need mods on this thread - but if people like the OP come on with what seems like a thinly disguised troll post (wee shaun / #gonebychristmas) then you can hardly blame people for having a wee pop.

Not meant to be a troll post, just how I feel right now. Might be wrong, might be right, time will tell.[/QUOTE]

Did you ever see these guys - I think they usually stotted about Goldbergs and the Bridges with the clapper boards that read “The End of the World is Nigh”?

With that last sentence, “that’s you that is” said in the style of David Baddiel in the Mary Whitehouse Experience.

fWiW the club tried the “steady as she goes” with Ross has gone for a different tack in Maloney. Which is why I think that Ron and Ken will stand by their man taking into account the circumstances as good managers should do.

[Paulie Walnuts]

What was weird was that I actually thought the players looked pretty handy playing Maloney's way in the first couple of games, the ones prior to the Christmas break.

After having a bit of time with no matches to bed in and bring players in we looked far worse.

The injuries and suspensions will have played a big part, who knows how it might have gone if we'd got our first choice players out every week?

Personally I find it easier to chuck criticism along the lines of "you need to play to your strengths" around than it is to actually suggest what that might look like. Ultimately, with our current injury situation you've still got a dearth of strikers, a lack of creativity and Drey Wright in the team. That's probably more significant than whether we play 3 at the back or one striker or two.

Maloney might be as well figuring out now who might cut it playing the way he wants to play in future.

Agree with this.

For all of the no plan B, needs to play a system that suits our players chat, I don’t think there’s a system that gets creativity out of what we have. It’s just not there regardless of what system we play. Too many players who are way out their depth in and around our starting 11.

[wookie70]

I do get the argument.

But on the other hand I’d reccomend someone listen to Open Goals interview with Ange Postecoglu. He basically says he would never change because it’s what he believes in, not only that but in his opinion it’s the best way to win a game of football.

If he was to change the style for one game what sort of message would that give the players? That he doesn’t have faith in them or that they need to change from game to game depending on an opponent? His is a firm no, he plays how he thinks because in his view that’s the best way to win football matches. Yes it might not always come off but he’s not going to change something he believes in to something he has no faith or confidence in.

Imo Maloney in similar to Ange in his views and it’s not about trying to play a certain style for the sake of it, but it’s because in his opinion it’s the best way to win football.

Hence why he’s trying to do it now and not go with a random formation or tactics till the summer.

A bit easier to implement that style when you have a huge squad and the best players in the league in a club who have always played attacking football and had the lion's share of the ball. If he tried it at Hibs I dare say it would be similar to Maloney

[GRA]

Clarke has had almost 3 years to make Scotland decent - they were brutal for the first year and there were several calls for him to be sacked.
Maloney has had 1 transfer window.... And who knows how many of those signings were ones he actually wanted.
I think he'll come good. But he needs time.


The only post worth reading on this thread. Maloney needs time. If he's been here with a full season under his belt, hopefully with the squad he wants and having a better run of luck with injuries, and we're heading in the wrong direction then threads like this will be justified.

Sadly he won't get it due to the fickle nature of football. And if we don't get top 6 or decent results against Hearts then the knives will be out, regardless of what he does.

[DetroitHibs]

So we're removing posts that question and criticize the manager now? Embarrassing 🙄

[Pilrig_Sauzee]

I think Maloney is made of strong enough stuff to take some flak. In context of Steve Clarke’s comments it’s fair enough to jump into the debate. It’s a fans’ forum and talking about the manager seems pretty standard. It is for Hibs anyway!

My view is we haven’t been at our best for sure, but i don’t think it’s a binary choice of make squad olay a specific way, or play the squad the best way they can. To progress and be ready for new players, it needs to evolve. I am firmly in the give him time camp, but absolutely he needs to create more and win more. But then the bookies love me so I’ll be as right about this as I am most Saturdays at 4.45.

[wookie70]

The only post worth reading on this thread. Maloney needs time. If he's been here with a full season under his belt, hopefully with the squad he wants and having a better run of luck with injuries, and we're heading in the wrong direction then threads like this will be justified.

Sadly he won't get it due to the fickle nature of football. And if we don't get top 6 or decent results against Hearts then the knives will be out, regardless of what he does.

How many training sessions and games is three years in International football. I do agree Maloney should get time. Ron etc have got us into this managerial appointment and they should stand by that decision and give it the time it needs to succeed or to show that it never will. You are right about the time they will give though as the knives are out awaiting sharpening and in three games time the fans will either down the tools or pick them up.

[B.H.F.C]

How many training sessions and games is three years in International football. I do agree Maloney should get time. Ron etc have got us into this managerial appointment and they should stand by that decision and give it the time it needs to succeed or to show that it never will. You are right about the time they will give though as the knives are out awaiting sharpening and in three games time the fans will either down the tools or pick them up.

Three years isn’t that long in international terms. However, the level of player available and playing is night and day.

For Clarke’s first game in 2019 the team was Marshall, O’Donnell, Mulgrew, McKenna, Robertson, McGinn, McLean, McGregor, Forrest, Brophy and Fraser.

In comparison to that we had Gordon, McTominay, Hanley, Tierney, Patterson, Gilmour, McGregor, Taylor, McGinn, Christie and Adams.

We were missing Robertson and Hendry through injury, one obviously a top player but the other has been playing Champions League this year. Even in terms of players coming off the bench it was mainly players playing at a high level including Serie A and the Premier League.

Clarke has done a decent job but the main reason we’re doing well, IMO, is because we have a far better group of players than we did when he took over and for a long time before that.

I do think Maloney could be doing some things a bit differently but our biggest issue is having a number of players that aren’t very good or aren’t fit. They’ve already got one manager sacked this season (and that was before the best one was sold). For all the talk of styles etc, I don’t think that’s our biggest issue and I’m not sure anyone would have done much better with what was available. All that said, if he doesn’t get through this semi final there will be plenty of folk will never give him or his team a chance once he gets them assembled.

[Smartie]

Three years isn’t that long in international terms. However, the level of player available and playing is night and day.

For Clarke’s first game in 2019 the team was Marshall, O’Donnell, Mulgrew, McKenna, Robertson, McGinn, McLean, McGregor, Forrest, Brophy and Fraser.

In comparison to that we had Gordon, McTominay, Hanley, Tierney, Patterson, Gilmour, McGregor, Taylor, McGinn, Christie and Adams.

We were missing Robertson and Hendry through injury, one obviously a top player but the other has been playing Champions League this year. Even in terms of players coming off the bench it was mainly players playing at a high level including Serie A and the Premier League.

Clarke has done a decent job but the main reason we’re doing well, IMO, is because we have a far better group of players than we did when he took over and for a long time before that.

I do think Maloney could be doing some things a bit differently but our biggest issue is having a number of players that aren’t very good or aren’t fit. They’ve already got one manager sacked this season (and that was before the best one was sold). For all the talk of styles etc, I don’t think that’s our biggest issue and I’m not sure anyone would have done much better with what was available. All that said, if he doesn’t get through this semi final there will be plenty of folk will never give him or his team a chance once he gets them assembled.

I do think Clarke deserves some credit for the evolution of the squad though. He's given Patterson a chance in spite of playing very little club football, and he's looked good at this level. He could have left Hanley out in the cold, he brought him back in and he's done well. A solution was found to playing Tierney and Robertson together. We have countless options in the middle of the park and he's found a really good blend in there, even if it means some high profile players not being picked (or in McTominay's case, finding a role for him elsewhere). Again, he persisted with Adams and allowed him to get over a slowish start to bed into the team and he now looks a good player at this level too. None of these things have been "no brainers" and they've required a bit of deftness on the part of the manager.

We've had plenty of managers over the past few decades who made peculiar calls re personnel. There's no doubt that we have a better squad of players than we've had for a while but I think Clarke deserves credit for his role in getting the squad to a position where we know who the really good players are - as well as for the fact that the good players appear desperate to turn up and not just play for Scotland but knock their pan in for them. We've now got players who might be forgiven for being more bothered about playing for their clubs but that really doesn't seem to be the case.

[SHODAN]

So we're removing posts that question and criticize the manager now? Embarrassing ��

Nah, just prefer they were all merged so the board isn't flooded with daily threads, each offering a marginally different perspective on why Maloney is ****.

[matty_f]

So we're removing posts that question and criticize the manager now? Embarrassing 🙄

Who is removing them?

[B.H.F.C]

I do think Clarke deserves some credit for the evolution of the squad though. He's given Patterson a chance in spite of playing very little club football, and he's looked good at this level. He could have left Hanley out in the cold, he brought him back in and he's done well. A solution was found to playing Tierney and Robertson together. We have countless options in the middle of the park and he's found a really good blend in there, even if it means some high profile players not being picked (or in McTominay's case, finding a role for him elsewhere). Again, he persisted with Adams and allowed him to get over a slowish start to bed into the team and he now looks a good player at this level too. None of these things have been "no brainers" and they've required a bit of deftness on the part of the manager.

We've had plenty of managers over the past few decades who made peculiar calls re personnel. There's no doubt that we have a better squad of players than we've had for a while but I think Clarke deserves credit for his role in getting the squad to a position where we know who the really good players are - as well as for the fact that the good players appear desperate to turn up and not just play for Scotland but knock their pan in for them. We've now got players who might be forgiven for being more bothered about playing for their clubs but that really doesn't seem to be the case.

Aye he absolutely deserves his share of credit.

Just in terms with the comparison to Maloney, I think it’s a bit unfair as he’s generally had a pretty poor squad available to him since he came in. He definitely could have done a few things differently but, if comparing to Clarke, it’s not all that long ago that he was getting criticised for a lot of fairly similar things (negative football etc).

[Unseen work]

A bit easier to implement that style when you have a huge squad and the best players in the league in a club who have always played attacking football and had the lion's share of the ball. If he tried it at Hibs I dare say it would be similar to Maloney

The point I’m trying to make isn’t the outcome of it but more why Maloney might not change his style and hearing Ange’s interview it made me think they may share the same thought process.

It undoubtedly helps having better players though but you just have to look at Celtic at the start of the season and the players that never suited it have left and they’ve recruited to suit the system.

In fairness I do think we done that too but injuries have cost us seeing it properly materialise.

[Hibbyradge]

So we're removing posts that question and criticize the manager now? Embarrassing 🙄

Embarrassing post! :tee hee:

[DetroitHibs]

Embarrassing post! :tee hee:

🔔🔚

[Hibbyradge]

🔔🔚

That one is even worse!

[WeeRussell]

🔔🔚

Ironically this will probably be the first post to actually be removed from the thread 😂