Tactics, balanced midfield - I’m baffled

Never having played champ manager and increasingly only interested in football if it involves Hibs. I’m often a bit puzzled by modern day tactics and the challenge of finding a balanced midfield blend.

Last season we seemed to go with three at the back, two wide player and a central midfield three, with two up front. In my simple mind that means a deep lying central player (Gogic) and left and right central mid, cover all areas type?

Given Gogic strengths are his ability to win the ball and protect the back three, what is actually expected of the other two?

With Boyle and Doig in the side the above formation seemed to make sense to me.

If both should leave, we would have the opportunity to change our style. We have Cadden to come back, who can play right back or wide right. We have McKay, who is a wide left midfielder.

What are the alternative formations. If we lost Nisbet, would we change our style and go with a lone striker? That didn’t seem to work for Doidge under Hecky?

All of this baffles me a bit. I can see when tactics don’t work for us. The final was an example of that. Why do managers not respond more quickly to on field events. The derby at Easter Rd, the 0-2 game springs to mind too. Overrun in midfield, no change in approach, handed the game on a plate.

I was thinking about the formation/tactics next year too. Ross seems to be flexible depending on the players at his disposal which I think is the only reason we ended up playing 3 at the back this year.

From my perspective I'd like to see us make a 4-3-3 work. I can't remember a single Hibs side I've seen playing 4-3-3 successfully, no idea why.

This is quite possibly an ill-informed generalised observation, but it strikes me that this season at least, we performed better and got results when we played more on the break, moving swiftly from defence to attack. The worst performances seem to have been when we have dominated possession and just can't seem to break down a rearguard action by a mediocre defence.
I am a Gogic fan, and usually he'd be the first name on my midfield team sheet, but once he helps break up play in his DM role we need folk who can move the ball swiftly, and move themselves swiftly to get us forward. In that regard, obviously Boyle and Doig get plus marks, as I gather does the new boy MacKay. Nisbet too. Murphy, while appearing languid in his movement, can certainly cover the ground. Irvine puts the effort in but he seems to go up and down on the spot so I'm not convinced he has good enough speed, although on the plus side has shown he can see a quick pass. Hallberg and Cadden? Not exactly speed merchants, but I wouldn't question their effort/endurance. Big ? re Allan. Magennis has not shown me he is a runner and neither is Newell, who too often contributes to the exact opposite of the quick break, although maybe he is playing to orders as there has been the odd occasion when he covered the ground well (eg breakaway goal in the QOTS Cup win).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hibee Mac

I was thinking about the formation/tactics next year too. Ross seems to be flexible depending on the players at his disposal which I think is the only reason we ended up playing 3 at the back this year.

From my perspective I'd like to see us make a 4-3-3 work. I can't remember a single Hibs side I've seen playing 4-3-3 successfully, no idea why.

---

We've played a 433 many times this season.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by superfurryhibby

Never having played champ manager and increasingly only interested in football if it involves Hibs. I’m often a bit puzzled by modern day tactics and the challenge of finding a balanced midfield blend.

Last season we seemed to go with three at the back, two wide player and a central midfield three, with two up front. In my simple mind that means a deep lying central player (Gogic) and left and right central mid, cover all areas type?

Given Gogic strengths are his ability to win the ball and protect the back three, what is actually expected of the other two?

With Boyle and Doig in the side the above formation seemed to make sense to me.

If both should leave, we would have the opportunity to change our style. We have Cadden to come back, who can play right back or wide right. We have McKay, who is a wide left midfielder.

What are the alternative formations. If we lost Nisbet, would we change our style and go with a lone striker? That didn’t seem to work for Doidge under Hecky?

All of this baffles me a bit. I can see when tactics don’t work for us. The final was an example of that. Why do managers not respond more quickly to on field events. The derby at Easter Rd, the 0-2 game springs to mind too. Overrun in midfield, no change in approach, handed the game on a plate.

---

With regards to the other two in midfield, like you said, in most 3-5-2 they’re expected to do a bit of everything. Something which, going forward, Irvine and Newell can’t do very well, hence why we’re so reliant on Boyle, Nisbet and Doidge.

The problem with a 3-5-2 with a player like Gogic imo is that we don’t need a dedicated DM. We’ve already a spare center half (possibly even two) and you essentially become a back 5 when you don’t have the ball. Having someone who offers little going forward on top of that means you become over reliant on the wing backs to be good defensively and outstanding going forward.

We had the same issue with Bartley. It works better when you don’t have the ball a lot in the game such as against the OF but not so much when you’re playing Hamilton and you’ve got 3 centre half’s and a DM offering nothing going forward.

It’s very easy to say when tactics aren’t working but much harder to offer an alternative that would have worked. So far I’ve seen replace Porto with Daz or replace Newell with Hallberg and newsflash - neither would have won us the cup.

When people on here were saying that all we had to do to win the cup final was turn up, it was Hearts-esque arrogance. Back in the autumn St Johnstone were bottom of the league, but through an outstanding run after that they finished fifth and won two cups. They’ve kept the key personnel in their playing squad together and as such have an understanding that no other team in the league can match.

We are a team who hit on the counter and punish other teams mistakes, whether forced or unforced. We do our industry in midfield. We get balls into the box from out wide and cross the ball in through Boyle, Doig or McGinn. St Johnstone rarely make a serious mistake due to the understanding between players, they are very good at stopping balls getting into the box, are good in the air and can shut down a midfield through their pressing in numbers.

We’ve shown over the league season that we are really good indeed at our style of play. Best of the rest. However due to Jack Ross only being in his first full season with us and COVID throwing everything into disarray, we’ve not had a chance yet to become more versatile. If you were to design a team who were to stifle us and make us look poor from the ground up, it wouldn’t be far off St Johnstone. The fact they put Rangers out at Ibrox goes to show they are a very good team.

All the “we just have to turn up” chat was ignoring the fact that St Johnstone had the right to turn up and when they do, they’ve got answers for what we offer at this moment in time. We weren’t winning that game.

How do we get to the stage where we can emulate their versatility? Keeping the manager, the core of our playing squad and letting them develop the understanding and chemistry that St Johnstone showed in abundance.

We have improved tenfold in the last eighteen months. The squad and manager deserves and needs the chance to keep developing us further for the good of the club.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Brightside

We've played a 433 many times this season.

---

Aye but he's saying successfully

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Northernhibee

It’s very easy to say when tactics aren’t working but much harder to offer an alternative that would have worked. So far I’ve seen replace Porto with Daz or replace Newell with Hallberg and newsflash - neither would have won us the cup.

When people on here were saying that all we had to do to win the cup final was turn up, it was Hearts-esque arrogance. Back in the autumn St Johnstone were bottom of the league, but through an outstanding run after that they finished fifth and won two cups. They’ve kept the key personnel in their playing squad together and as such have an understanding that no other team in the league can’t match.

We are a team who hit on the counter and punish other teams mistakes, whether forced or unforced. We do our industry in midfield. We get balls into the box from out wide and cross the ball in through Boyle, Doig or McGinn. St Johnstone rarely make a serious mistake due to the understanding between players, they are very good at stopping balls getting into the box, are good in the air and can shut down a midfield through their pressing in numbers.

We’ve shown over the league season that we are really good indeed at our style of play. Best of the rest. However due to Jack Ross only being in his first full season with us and COVID throwing everything into disarray, we’ve not had a chance yet to become more versatile. If you were to design a team who were to stifle us and make us look poor from the ground up, it wouldn’t be far off St Johnstone. The fact they put Rangers out at Ibrox goes to show they are a very good team.

All the “we just have to turn up” chat was ignoring the fact that St Johnstone had the right to turn up and when they do, they’ve got answers for what we offer at this moment in time. We weren’t winning that game.

How do we get to the stage where we can emulate their versatility? Keeping the manager, the core of our playing squad and letting them develop the understanding and chemistry that St Johnstone showed in abundance.

We have improved tenfold in the last eighteen months. The squad and manager deserves and needs the chance to keep developing us further for the good of the club.

---

:top marks

Some decent points on here about our struggles when we have a lot of the ball and are expected to break teams down.

I'm still not convinced it's a tactics or formation issue but one of personnel. We struggle to get the ball from defence into midfield and then when we have it in midfield we struggle to get it forward into the attack. In truth, we're probably more dangerous when the other team have the ball.

I always think we look a better team when Hallberg plays, even if I fully accept he's not as good a player as either Newell or Gogic.

All season I've felt we might need to be short of a few of our best players in order to have our strongest team out and I'm still convinced that's the case - that with any of Porteous, Newell, Nisbet or Murphy missing we somehow end up having a better team unit.

Tactics with this side I have to say I'm less interested in tbh. One way or another we'll figure it out. I'm not sure what we're playing half the time as it seems to be a variation on several formations.

Some interesting replies. It made me realise that I hadn't watched all that many games this season and maybe when I have done, my focus has been less than it would have been if I had been there in person.

I assumed we played the 3 5 2 more than any other formation over the course of the season, maybe more so in the league ( I certainly didn't watch league cup games until the semi final) ?

One thing that strikes me is the probability of the coming season being another transitional one, as there will almost certainly be a few big name players exiting ER. Is it fair to say that this is always going to be the case? Success means players come in and may only be here for a season or two, so our team is always changing and evolving compared to the likes of St Johnstone, who's stars are less in demand than our own?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Smartie

Some decent points on here about our struggles when we have a lot of the ball and are expected to break teams down.

I'm still not convinced it's a tactics or formation issue but one of personnel. We struggle to get the ball from defence into midfield and then when we have it in midfield we struggle to get it forward into the attack. In truth, we're probably more dangerous when the other team have the ball.

I always think we look a better team when Hallberg plays, even if I fully accept he's not as good a player as either Newell or Gogic.

All season I've felt we might need to be short of a few of our best players in order to have our strongest team out and I'm still convinced that's the case - that with any of Porteous, Newell, Nisbet or Murphy missing we somehow end up having a better team unit.

Tactics with this side I have to say I'm less interested in tbh. One way or another we'll figure it out. I'm not sure what we're playing half the time as it seems to be a variation on several formations.

---

I’m not a particular fan of Hallberg, he’s fine, but no more than that IMO. I do agree his attributes are closer to making us more than the sum of our parts where others make us less than the sum.

The first thing Hallberg did when he came on in the cup final was run ahead of the ball into the space in the left corner. It didn’t come to anything but it stuck out for me as it’s so rare to see a midfielder running ahead of the ball. I think we’re too structured and rigid in how Ross sets up. I also think we set up to remain solid and work our way into the game and try to finish strongly regardless of whether we’re playing Rangers or Ross County, certainly at home as I didn’t watch many away games.

We simply can’t play Gogic & Newell together other than against the likes of the Old Firm, Aberdeen or Hearts away etc where defending is our first thought. Both play in the same area deep in our half and neither will ever run ahead of the ball. Leaving too much for a 3rd midfielder to do on his own in the oppositions half. Fundamentally, for me, we need midfielders willing and capable of running ahead of the ball, and also to drive forward with the ball when they do have it before laying it off. That’s neither Gocic or Newell and it’s a negative, let’s make sure we stay tight and try and nick it mentality when we play both. Rather than a positive let’s set out to win the game mentality IMO. Hopefully that changes as Ross continues to recruit, and recruit well, my concern is that he’s naturally a bit conservative and his first thought is to try to remain solid and work our way into a game.

I’ve faith Ross knows how to recruit good individuals and build a good squad. Still to be convinced he knows how to build towards turning those good recruits into a good and balanced team. Or one that can change and adapt to games/circumstances e.g. plan B. However it’s still early into Ross’ time so it will take another season or two to find that out either way. I think the midfield, and what he does, will either make or break Ross in terms of continuing our trajectory or whether he’s already peaked.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Northernhibee

It’s very easy to say when tactics aren’t working but much harder to offer an alternative that would have worked. So far I’ve seen replace Porto with Daz or replace Newell with Hallberg and newsflash - neither would have won us the cup.

When people on here were saying that all we had to do to win the cup final was turn up, it was Hearts-esque arrogance. Back in the autumn St Johnstone were bottom of the league, but through an outstanding run after that they finished fifth and won two cups. They’ve kept the key personnel in their playing squad together and as such have an understanding that no other team in the league can match.

We are a team who hit on the counter and punish other teams mistakes, whether forced or unforced. We do our industry in midfield. We get balls into the box from out wide and cross the ball in through Boyle, Doig or McGinn. St Johnstone rarely make a serious mistake due to the understanding between players, they are very good at stopping balls getting into the box, are good in the air and can shut down a midfield through their pressing in numbers.

We’ve shown over the league season that we are really good indeed at our style of play. Best of the rest. However due to Jack Ross only being in his first full season with us and COVID throwing everything into disarray, we’ve not had a chance yet to become more versatile. If you were to design a team who were to stifle us and make us look poor from the ground up, it wouldn’t be far off St Johnstone. The fact they put Rangers out at Ibrox goes to show they are a very good team.

All the “we just have to turn up” chat was ignoring the fact that St Johnstone had the right to turn up and when they do, they’ve got answers for what we offer at this moment in time. We weren’t winning that game.

How do we get to the stage where we can emulate their versatility? Keeping the manager, the core of our playing squad and letting them develop the understanding and chemistry that St Johnstone showed in abundance.

We have improved tenfold in the last eighteen months. The squad and manager deserves and needs the chance to keep developing us further for the good of the club.

---

Great post. However, turning up in the final would have helped.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tricla

Great post. However, turning up in the final would have helped.

---

What is “turning up”? We put our best team out, St Johnstone stifled every part of us expertly and we aren’t versatile enough to effectively charge what we do yet. Just another buzzword.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Northernhibee

What is “turning up”? We put our best team out, St Johnstone stifled every part of us expertly and we aren’t versatile enough to effectively charge what we do yet. Just another buzzword.

---

I don’t think it’s a buzzword.

To “turn up” is to apply the plan, and put in the required amount of effort and desire to see it through. Having a good plan, be that the formation or tactical, doesn’t count for **** if you don’t “turn up”

We didn’t have the desire or put in enough effort against St Johnstone.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Northernhibee

It’s very easy to say when tactics aren’t working but much harder to offer an alternative that would have worked. So far I’ve seen replace Porto with Daz or replace Newell with Hallberg and newsflash - neither would have won us the cup.

When people on here were saying that all we had to do to win the cup final was turn up, it was Hearts-esque arrogance. Back in the autumn St Johnstone were bottom of the league, but through an outstanding run after that they finished fifth and won two cups. They’ve kept the key personnel in their playing squad together and as such have an understanding that no other team in the league can match.

We are a team who hit on the counter and punish other teams mistakes, whether forced or unforced. We do our industry in midfield. We get balls into the box from out wide and cross the ball in through Boyle, Doig or McGinn. St Johnstone rarely make a serious mistake due to the understanding between players, they are very good at stopping balls getting into the box, are good in the air and can shut down a midfield through their pressing in numbers.

We’ve shown over the league season that we are really good indeed at our style of play. Best of the rest. However due to Jack Ross only being in his first full season with us and COVID throwing everything into disarray, we’ve not had a chance yet to become more versatile. If you were to design a team who were to stifle us and make us look poor from the ground up, it wouldn’t be far off St Johnstone. The fact they put Rangers out at Ibrox goes to show they are a very good team.

All the “we just have to turn up” chat was ignoring the fact that St Johnstone had the right to turn up and when they do, they’ve got answers for what we offer at this moment in time. We weren’t winning that game.

How do we get to the stage where we can emulate their versatility? Keeping the manager, the core of our playing squad and letting them develop the understanding and chemistry that St Johnstone showed in abundance.

We have improved tenfold in the last eighteen months. The squad and manager deserves and needs the chance to keep developing us further for the good of the club.

---

Some fair points.

But you could ask why it’s taken Ross and recruitment a season and a half to try find a solution. Majority of games we have most possession.

My concern is we still need more depth and quality to get top 4 again next season and we need to add more game winners to secure a trophy.

Similar replacements / types of players will get similar outcomes.

It’s quite obvious what we need so interesting to see how they address it. We should know in next few weeks if they are serious about learning from this seasons mistakes.

Are people forgetting that one of the reasons we spent 3 seasons in the championship was that we struggled against teams who bedded in against us?

This isn't a new problem.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peevemor

Are people forgetting that one of the reasons we spent 3 seasons in the championship was that we struggled against teams who bedded in against us?

This isn't a new problem.

---

It's also a lot easier to mump and moan about than it is to fix.

You do need to have the right players with the right ability, the right attitude and the right freedom to try stuff without being castigated when it doesn't come off.

Results would suggest that on the whole Ross' team did almost as well as any other team in recent memory at actually managing to break down stuffy teams.

When you combine "stuffy" with actually being quite good (Aberdeen in seasons prior to last, St Johnstone last season) then it takes a lot more to break them down.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peevemor

Are people forgetting that one of the reasons we spent 3 seasons in the championship was that we struggled against teams who bedded in against us?

This isn't a new problem.

---

Agree! We've struggled against such teams and generally do better against teams that give our midfield space to be creative.

Back to the tactics, I'm a strong believer that you've got to win the midfield first if you want to win the game. That's not always the case, but we've had two recent examples of it.

Firstly with Hibs, that's five games against Saints and we've struggled in all of them, only scoring one 91st minute penalty. Saints make it extremely difficult to break them down and Hibs seem incapable of exerting any pressure on them; we become dispirited and then end up on the back foot as they score the 1st goal. You could say that the same happens in games that we've lost against Ross County, Livingston and Motherwell, albeit that only is after we've gone a goal down. What worries me is that the Hertz play very similar to the Saints and that's now our last two games against them that we've lost.

Secondly with Man City against Chelsea, when I heard that City had dropped their more defensive midfielders to play Sterling, I thought all very well if you score the first goal, but Chelsea will be difficult to break down and have enough creativity to create and score themselves. That's exactly how the game panned out.

I could be talking rubbish here, but against Saints we needed more midfielders and I'd have sacrificed one of Doidge and Nisbet to make space for that extra player. Win the midfield, then open up when there was the opportunity to do so.

I think as a team we're more suited to playing on the counter hence our spectacular away record and very average home record. Also think this is why we struggle against St Johnstone who cancel that out very well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Since452

I think as a team we're more suited to playing on the counter hence our spectacular away record and very average home record. Also think this is why we struggle against St Johnstone who cancel that out very well.

---

Given the lack of fans at games, did home advantage have any bearing on the way teams approached their games with us? The stats say there were factors around this.

Our midfield seems to lack a player who can take a man on (I'm excluding Boyle, who is a winger/wing back). It doesn't matter what level you play at, as soon as a player does that , space opens up. I can't really recall Newell, Magennis, Hallberg, Gogic or Irvine doing that.

|Here's hoping Allan finds fitness next season. He could be the key to unlock some defences.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Northernhibee

What is “turning up”? We put our best team out, St Johnstone stifled every part of us expertly and we aren’t versatile enough to effectively charge what we do yet. Just another buzzword.

---

By turning up I mean not being rubbish. We had a major off day at the wrong time. If we played we'll we'd likely have won.

I'm not discounting the fact St Johnstone are well drilled etc., however, we were slow, one dimensional, passes went astray, gap between midfield and the strikers was huge etc., etc. We were just humpty on the day and didn't 'turn up'.

Overall in terms of balance, work ethic , organisation and skill , I'd say St Johnstone probably have a better first XI than Hibs. We have a bigger squad so over the course of a season have amassed more points. Saints struggled early on as well but have been very strong in the last 20 odd games.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by allezsauzee

Overall in terms of balance, work ethic , organisation and skill , I'd say St Johnstone probably have a better first XI than Hibs. We have a bigger squad so over the course of a season have amassed more points. Saints struggled early on as well but have been very strong in the last 20 odd games.

---

I don't think they do. We've used a limited number of players this season and have picked up a lot more points from the other 10 teams than St Johnstone. It's only head to head that they've been more effective.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peevemor

I don't think they do. We've used a limited number of players this season and have picked up a lot more points from the other 10 teams than St Johnstone. It's only head to head that they've been more effective.

---

:agree: I think St. Johnstone have proved this season that the whole is greater than the sum of the parts. They are a cohesive unit, not one player is spectacular but each does their job for the team well and they are well managed, well organised, and very hard to break down because they work hard for each other out of possession.

It's been that way for a number of seasons, they don't give anyone an easy game.

We lost to the better team on the day last weekend, but over the season we were the better and more consistent side. The one thing I hope the final and the head-to-heads shows Jack is that he needs to mix it up a little and maybe forego playing with a three up top, and go more solid and industrious in midfield. You can't however blame JR for going with three front men who have bagged as many goals and none really taking the game by the scruff of the neck.

Callum Davidson is a very intelligent manager. I was lucky enough to see him close quarters when he was a coach at Saintees and he was very intuitive on the sidelines and he's made the move from coach and players 'friend', to manager who makes important decisions without fear nor favour. Lots of humility too, as well as humour. He'd be a good manager to work for, but he shares many of those traits with Jack Ross too. Both are good managers or they would both not be getting to finals, semi finals and a top 6 place.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peevemor

I don't think they do. We've used a limited number of players this season and have picked up a lot more points from the other 10 teams than St Johnstone. It's only head to head that they've been more effective.

---

We managed to field 8 players that were not deemed good enough to start the final when we drew with Celtic. I don't think St Johnstone have the strength in depth to do that but we've had 6 one on one opportunities to prove we are better than them this season and aside from quite a fortunate win at McDermaid we've not really done so.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by allezsauzee

We managed to field 8 players that were not deemed good enough to start the final when we drew with Celtic. I don't think St Johnstone have the strength in depth to do that but we've had 6 one on one opportunities to prove we are better than them this season and aside from quite a fortunate win at McDermaid we've not really done so.

---

St Johnstone made seven changes against us at ER and the game was identical to the final. They’ve got a squad who are all of a similar standard. We are reliant on a few, certainly attacking wise.

In the early part of the season Jack Ross said that the side was flexible and could switch quite easily from a back 4 to a 3 during a game if needed. In the games against St Johnstone he has surprisingly stuck rigidly to a 4 when maybe a change would have helped.

It is becoming another myth that we are a counter attacking team who hit on the break, we dont, we have more of the ball than any other team in the league bar the bigots.

We've struggled to beat teams who sit in, but we did it better than every other side bar again the bigots, if we are counter attacking, then every club in the country is the same, bar again the bigots.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by blackpoolhibs

It is becoming another myth that we are a counter attacking team who hit on the break, we dont, we have more of the ball than any other team in the league bar the bigots.

We've struggled to beat teams who sit in, but we did it better than every other side bar again the bigots, if we are counter attacking, then every club in the country is the same, bar again the bigots.

---

The problem with stats are they dont tell the whole story, we may have more of the ball but generally we do bugger all with it, sideways and back passing slowly until opposition regroup and get men behind the ball.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by J-C

The problem with stats are they dont tell the whole story, we may have more of the ball but generally we do bugger all with it, sideways and back passing slowly until opposition regroup and get men behind the ball.

---

We dont do bugger all with it JC, we are slow, we are ponderous, but we broke down enough teams over the season to get 3rd, and a cup final plus a semi.

We dont hit teams on the break if we let them get back into shape so easily.

It's a myth.

Most of the time we never had a proper balance on the left, the onus was also on us most of the time to take the game to what was considered weaker opposition, we lacked the quality and leadership to make the difference where games are decided by fine margins, other teams were aware of that and that allowed them to be patient. Still we did get a lot of things correct and that is reflected in where we finished.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by blackpoolhibs

We dont do bugger all with it JC, we are slow, we are ponderous, but we broke down enough teams over the season to get 3rd, and a cup final plus a semi.

We dont hit teams on the break if we let them get back into shape so easily.

It's a myth.

---

Your last bit echoes my point, slow and ponderous, we dont do enough with the ball when we do have it. How often have you and I moaned about Newell side and back passes doing sod all with it, stats say he has more complete passes in the team.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by blackpoolhibs

We dont do bugger all with it JC, we are slow, we are ponderous, but we broke down enough teams over the season to get 3rd, and a cup final plus a semi.

We dont hit teams on the break if we let them get back into shape so easily.

It's a myth.

---

Too often, I agree. I blame Jackthon Irvine in the cup final v. Thaint Johnthtone.

While it was only Queen of the South..

I felt this was one of the best 2nd half performances of the season

https://youtu.be/PAV0vJwmApw

Last 2 goals are counter attacking.

Compare this to the final when everything was slow..side ways and so predictable. Of course Saints are better than QOS plus playing 3 at the back - sometimes 5 makes it very difficult to break through.

We still need more creativity and trickery in wide areas - Boyle mostly runs onto balls but we need someone who can dribble past a player.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Key West

Most of the time we never had a proper balance on the left, the onus was also on us most of the time to take the game to what was considered weaker opposition, we lacked the quality and leadership to make the difference where games are decided by fine margins, other teams were aware of that and that allowed them to be patient. Still we did get a lot of things correct and that is reflected in where we finished.

---

We haven’t had the equivalent to Boyle on the left for a long time. We have had a few in that position like Murphy / Irvine but not consistent enough and I don’t even think that’s Irvines best position.

We went down the left loads in the final - Rooneys side - not sure if that was the plan to try nullify him or just because Boyle was tightly marked / wasn’t getting any space in behind.

I’m hopeful Mackay can give us more options but for me it’s finding a consistent player on that side.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GreenCastle

While it was only Queen of the South..

I felt this was one of the best 2nd half performances of the season

https://youtu.be/PAV0vJwmApw

Last 2 goals are counter attacking.

Compare this to the final when everything was slow..side ways and so predictable. Of course Saints are better than QOS plus playing 3 at the back - sometimes 5 makes it very difficult to break through.

We still need more creativity and trickery in wide areas - Boyle mostly runs onto balls but we need someone who can dribble past a player.

---

You can only counter attack against a team that's attacking you. That wasn't going to happen with St Johnstone unless we had managed the 1st goal.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peevemor

You can only counter attack against a team that's attacking you. That wasn't going to happen with St Johnstone unless we had managed the 1st goal.

---

Think that’s where the annoyance comes from with no real plan B. Plan A is to counter attack, like you say if we don’t score first the other team can sit in and soak up whatever we throw at them. In the final that wasn’t very much.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stuart93

Think that’s where the annoyance comes from with no real plan B. Plan A is to counter attack, like you say if we don’t score first the other team can sit in and soak up whatever we throw at them. In the final that wasn’t very much.

---

OK, but apart from speaking about Scott Allan, I have yet to see any of our resident experts suggest what plan B could have been.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peevemor

OK, but apart from speaking about Scott Allan, I have yet to see any of our resident experts suggest what plan B could have been.

---

Surely that’s the managers/data analysts job to go over footage from st J’s previous games and pinpoint weaknesses etc to come up with a plan B?

They’re in a much better position to do that than any “resident experts”. That’s what they’re paid to do.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stuart93

Think that’s where the annoyance comes from with no real plan B. Plan A is to counter attack, like you say if we don’t score first the other team can sit in and soak up whatever we throw at them. In the final that wasn’t very much.

---

No it's not. How can we counter attack when we dont move the ball forward quick enough, and we are the 3rd best team at keeping possession in the league.

We do try and play football, albeit slowly, we try and invite teams onto us and play through the gaps, lines is the new buzzword.

If you say it enough times, it will become the new myth to replace signing Leigh Griffiths was Petries fault because we would not offer £....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stuart93

Surely that’s the managers/data analysts job to go over footage from st J’s previous games and pinpoint weaknesses etc to come up with a plan B?

They’re in a much better position to do that than any “resident experts”. That’s what they’re paid to do.

---

I appreciate that. But with thousand of years of watching (and playing) football between us, nobody has said what we could have done differently tactically to break them down.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peevemor

I appreciate that. But with thousand of years of watching (and playing) football between us, nobody has said what we could have done differently tactically to break them down.

---

Because despite how much we watch football we aren’t all tacticians etc and understand the ins and outs as to how to break other teams down.

As I said that’s up to the manager and his backroom staff, not us on a message board

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peevemor

OK, but apart from speaking about Scott Allan, I have yet to see any of our resident experts suggest what plan B could have been.

---

352, Doig & Boyle wingbacks. Gogic, Irvine & Murphy in the middle.

442, Stevenson LB & Doig LM.

Both options were discussed pre match, and also in previous games against St Johnstone. Whether they would have worked we’ll never know. However I never saw anyone advocating a lopsided 442 with no left winger that had been unsuccessful against them in the previous games. Our plan b in the final was some like for like changes and give Murphy half an hour at left mid instead of Irvine somewhere vaguely out left.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Modfather

352, Doig & Boyle wingbacks. Gogic, Irvine & Murphy in the middle.

442, Stevenson LB & Doig LM.

Both options were discussed pre match, and also in previous games against St Johnstone. Whether they would have worked we’ll never know. However I never saw anyone advocating a lopsided 442 with no left winger that had been unsuccessful against them in the previous games. Our plan b in the final was some like for like changes and give Murphy half an hour at left mid instead of Irvine somewhere vaguely out left.

---

Pep is being slaughtered for changing something that did not work previously against Chelsea, we could have done similar and still lost.

I dont know either way, the thing i feel should be looked at is the way we lost. Players playing as if they were somehow running in sand, players not able to find space or make runs into space, and players looking like they just couldnt be arsed.

Now i know they would have been sent out with clear instructions, that is a given, but for those players to all play so poorly on the same day is a scandal.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peevemor

I appreciate that. But with thousand of years of watching (and playing) football between us, nobody has said what we could have done differently tactically to break them down.

---

3-5-2 - match them up. Play Porto and McGregor together with Hanlon.

Or even sit in deep and get them to attack us and use space to counter.

It’s not rocket science and as Modfather has explained it’s not like this is was the first time we played Saints.

That’s the worst part for me is the players were hung out to dry with crap game plan and then performing poorly made it even worse as it was a complete non event.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by blackpoolhibs

Pep is being slaughtered for changing something that did not work previously against Chelsea, we could have done similar and still lost.

I dont know either way, the thing i feel should be looked at is the way we lost. Players playing as if they were somehow running in sand, players not able to find space or make runs into space, and players looking like they just couldnt be arsed.

Now i know they would have been sent out with clear instructions, that is a given, but for those players to all play so poorly on the same day is a scandal.

---

Pep had a winning formula.

Pep then played a starting 11 in the clubs biggest ever game that had never played together.

That’s why he’s getting slated and players are unhappy with him.

You could tell Hibs players weren’t happy during the final and what made it worse was the lack of subs at half time and change of plan in a game which was winnable.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GreenCastle

We haven’t had the equivalent to Boyle on the left for a long time. We have had a few in that position like Murphy / Irvine but not consistent enough and I don’t even think that’s Irvines best position.

We went down the left loads in the final - Rooneys side - not sure if that was the plan to try nullify him or just because Boyle was tightly marked / wasn’t getting any space in behind.

I’m hopeful Mackay can give us more options but for me it’s finding a consistent player on that side.

---

For me the left side was a glaring weakness depending on the opponents, a succession of players were made to look ineffective being played out of position, Doig had some success but through no fault of his own it wasn’t enough, no disrespect to Lewis when he played but he is very rarely going to hurt you by getting to the bye line, creating an assist or scoring, other teams were happy to invite a switch of play to the left and it wouldn’t have taken a Jurgen or Pep to notice that it was damage limitation, in effect it also created an imbalance in the midfield whereupon certain combination simply didn’t work.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by blackpoolhibs

It is becoming another myth that we are a counter attacking team who hit on the break, we dont, we have more of the ball than any other team in the league bar the bigots.

We've struggled to beat teams who sit in, but we did it better than every other side bar again the bigots, if we are counter attacking, then every club in the country is the same, bar again the bigots.

---

It's not a myth. This analysis below shows that we had scored 27% of our goals from counter attacks. We were more reliant on counter attacks than virtually any other team IIRC.

Albeit with roughly 20% of goals coming from spells of possession, so that wasn't miles behind and aligns with your general point.

http://analyticsfc.co.uk/blog/2021/0...h-premiership/

Not to over simplify things but we do have a pretty balanced midfield IMO. We have just chosen to rely on Boyle and to a lesser extent Doig, to provide most of the width. Having the left midfielder play a little more infield helps us not get over-run, whilst still allowing us 2 forwards up top.

Against St Johnstone we've just not passed the ball quickly enough or shown any individual quality to get the job done.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GreenCastle

3-5-2 - match them up. Play Porto and McGregor together with Hanlon.

Or even sit in deep and get them to attack us and use space to counter.

It’s not rocket science and as Modfather has explained it’s not like this is was the first time we played Saints.

That’s the worst part for me is the players were hung out to dry with crap game plan and then performing poorly made it even worse as it was a complete non event.

---

We matched them up with a 3-5-2 in the League Cup semi and didn't fare any better.

I do agree with your other points though. We needed to do something different (or have that up our sleeve) even just to give the players a bit more belief that the game would pan out differently.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tyler Durden

It's not a myth. This analysis below shows that we had scored 27% of our goals from counter attacks. We were more reliant on counter attacks than virtually any other team IIRC.

Albeit with roughly 20% of goals coming from spells of possession, so that wasn't miles behind and aligns with your general point.

http://analyticsfc.co.uk/blog/2021/0...h-premiership/

Not to over simplify things but we do have a pretty balanced midfield IMO. We have just chosen to rely on Boyle and to a lesser extent Doig, to provide most of the width. Having the left midfielder play a little more infield helps us not get over-run, whilst still allowing us 2 forwards up top.

Against St Johnstone we've just not passed the ball quickly enough or shown any individual quality to get the job done.

---

Doig is our best option at the moment but he is still very much learning the game and his percentages should improve as he gains experience but he may not be helped depending on the team formation by McKay who again is considered at this point only to have potential. I think with good width though including Cadden 4-4-2 would be a better and more flexible line up in terms of an attacking sense, it would also alleviate the responsibilities that Porteous currently struggles with as the main defender in a back 3. Despite their different styles and qualities Doig and Nisbet are never comfortable or effective in the role of lone striker, my central midfield 2 would always include Gogic with probably Irvine as the other.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tyler Durden

We matched them up with a 3-5-2 in the League Cup semi and didn't fare any better.

I do agree with your other points though. We needed to do something different (or have that up our sleeve) even just to give the players a bit more belief that the game would pan out differently.

---

We battered them in the semi final and if we had taken a chance and then defended property it would have been different.

That same approach, with our front two both playing this time would surely have been better than the total non contribution to the game we witnessed this time.

The games were totally different.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tyler Durden

It's not a myth. This analysis below shows that we had scored 27% of our goals from counter attacks. We were more reliant on counter attacks than virtually any other team IIRC.

Albeit with roughly 20% of goals coming from spells of possession, so that wasn't miles behind and aligns with your general point.

http://analyticsfc.co.uk/blog/2021/0...h-premiership/

Not to over simplify things but we do have a pretty balanced midfield IMO. We have just chosen to rely on Boyle and to a lesser extent Doig, to provide most of the width. Having the left midfielder play a little more infield helps us not get over-run, whilst still allowing us 2 forwards up top.

Against St Johnstone we've just not passed the ball quickly enough or shown any individual quality to get the job done.

---

St Johnstone get behind the ball quick, they stifle the play and play to their strengths, we dont hit them on the break because we are not quick enough to hit many teams on the break unless Boyle is involved.

I'd suggest our midfield have been the problem all season, albeit a decent problem that contributed in our 3rd place finish.

Of course we will at some stages during our games have counter attacked teams, it would be stupid to say we've not, but it would also be stupid to say that is our tactics, as it's not.

Our tactics are possession based, to pass through teams and get the ball wide or into the front two's feet then build.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stuart93

Plan A is to counter attack

---

Why on earth would anybody think this?

Is this just buying into the Jack Ross plays boring football (untrue) narrative?

We've played on the front foot in about 80 percent of the matches we've played this season. The ONE time I'd say this was true was on the last day of the season when we played with a shadow team v Celtic.

I think what we miss is a Pat McGinlay type who can burst through 'the lines', or a Leigh Griffiths who can shoot from distance. It's just a bit of tinkering required with this team IMO.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tyler Durden

We matched them up with a 3-5-2 in the League Cup semi and didn't fare any better.

I do agree with your other points though. We needed to do something different (or have that up our sleeve) even just to give the players a bit more belief that the game would pan out differently.

---

We played really well first 30 mins of the semi final - hit the post twice.

It was Irvine and Caddens first games too so still finding their feet.

After 30 mins we were the complete opposite in the semi final though.

I’m adamant Ross picked the wrong team and formation in final - we played into their hands and they took the opportunity and the rest is history.

I dont think its was a tactical mistake tbh. Our players just didn't turn up. Man v Man their players put in a better performance. The formations really dont matter if your opposing play puts in more effort than you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Brightside

I dont think its was a tactical mistake tbh. Our players just didn't turn up. Man v Man their players put in a better performance. The formations really dont matter if your opposing play puts in more effort than you.

---

I think is too simplistic.

They were thrown under the bus with tactics that didn’t work which didn’t play to our strengths - played into the Saints strengths. Saints put everything into it but that’s because their formation soaked up our tactics and threats. Where as the game passes many of our players by.

Man City final / Hibs final - both managers made errors picking teams and tactics and the underdogs won.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by blackpoolhibs

St Johnstone get behind the ball quick, they stifle the play and play to their strengths, we dont hit them on the break because we are not quick enough to hit many teams on the break unless Boyle is involved.

I'd suggest our midfield have been the problem all season, albeit a decent problem that contributed in our 3rd place finish.

Of course we will at some stages during our games have counter attacked teams, it would be stupid to say we've not, but it would also be stupid to say that is our tactics, as it's not.

Our tactics are possession based, to pass through teams and get the ball wide or into the front two's feet then build.

---

I think that’s part of the reason some fans, myself included, are still to click with this team and Ross. We are somewhere in between a counter attacking team and a possession based team. We sit deep and often have Gogic and Newel both in front of the defence. Yet other than Boyle, we don’t counter attack with any great pace or urgency. We have a lot of the ball but often it’s slow, static and possession without a purpose. It’s clearly effective as we finished 3rd but hopefully a means to an end in how Ross wants us to play.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Andy74

We battered them in the semi final and if we had taken a chance and then defended property it would have been different.

That same approach, with our front two both playing this time would surely have been better than the total non contribution to the game we witnessed this time.

The games were totally different.

---

If we had taken a chance and then defended properly in the Cup final it would have been different too!

I wasn't arguing for or against 3-5-2. I've just seen lots of comments that we've played St Johnstone 6 times and did the same thing every time. We've played different formations in the 2 biggest games and lost both.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peevemor

I appreciate that. But with thousand of years of watching (and playing) football between us, nobody has said what we could have done differently tactically to break them down.

---

As the oldest of old codgers I'll have a shot.

I think there were two totally ways we could have played. If we changed nothing we could still have won playing as normal but it was a longshot and we should have spent the time since the semi working on a different method.

First I thought they were quite lucky to beat St Mirren who missed a number of open goals before SJ scored-one sidefoot from the middle of the 6 yard box actually went for a shy. The chances came from hard running from SM left. Rooney was all over the place-so befuddled he fell over the ball. So our first alternative was Stevenson at left back with Doig in front of him instructed to be Boyle on the left.This would have meant them confronting pace on both sides of their defence and restricted their efforts at doubling(trebling?)up on Boyle. Might have worked -certainly would have made them think.

The other method would rely on our ability to hold the ball and go nowhere. We could have played keep the ball and invited them to come out and get it. This would have taken them right out of their comfort zone -a style of play which relies on opponents attacks breaking down or them playing aimless balls into the SJ box.We could have said we're not coming at you we'll just play for penalties what are you gonna do? Far fetched probably but at least playing to one of our strengths-something we failed to do for 90 minutes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Modfather

I think that’s part of the reason some fans, myself included, are still to click with this team and Ross. We are somewhere in between a counter attacking team and a possession based team. We sit deep and often have Gogic and Newel both in front of the defence. Yet other than Boyle, we don’t counter attack with any great pace or urgency. We have a lot of the ball but often it’s slow, static and possession without a purpose. It’s clearly effective as we finished 3rd but hopefully a means to an end in how Ross wants us to play.

---

I'm on the same page at the moment. We don't press teams and we typically like to keep it tight and let the players settle into the game for the first 20 minutes. A lot of times that works for us but it was suicide in the Cup final and we never recovered.

Next season I'd like to see the team pass the ball at pace with some accuracy. Far too often our passing is really slack and not many players want to receive it when closely marked. That's a recipe for disaster against teams who want to sit deep and let us play infront of them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GreenCastle

I think is too simplistic.

They were thrown under the bus with tactics that didn’t work which didn’t play to our strengths - played into the Saints strengths. Saints put everything into it but that’s because their formation soaked up our tactics and threats. Where as the game passes many of our players by.

Man City final / Hibs final - both managers made errors picking teams and tactics and the underdogs won.

---

I'm not sure that happened. How often did Boyle beat his man? How often did we string a pass together in the middle of the park? I think we had some basic failures on the pitch and just pushing Doig further up wouldn't have fixed that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Smartie

Tactics with this side I have to say I'm less interested in tbh. One way or another we'll figure it out. I'm not sure what we're playing half the time as it seems to be a variation on several formations.

---

I think that's by design.
3-5-2 without the ball then we get the ball/counter McGinn shifts to RB and create a back 4 with Boyle pushing up to be part of the front 3.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Northernhibee

What is “turning up”? We put our best team out, St Johnstone stifled every part of us expertly and we aren’t versatile enough to effectively charge what we do yet. Just another buzzword.

---

It's not losing two 50 50s one after the other to Callum Booth then diving in when standing up would have worked and competed for a header in our box. Didn't win one second ball when it is knocked up to our striker who although not winning the header it dropped every time about 20 yards where he was and not once did we remotely get near it. 5 mins from the end 10 yards outside their box Murray Davidson is able to control a second ball in about 20 yards of space without any pressure at all. So many of the basics were nowhere near good enough.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JimBHibees

It's not losing two 50 50s one after the other to Callum Booth then diving in when standing up would have worked and competed for a header in our box. Didn't win one second ball when it is knocked up to our striker who although not winning the header it dropped every time about 20 yards where he was and not once did we remotely get near it. 5 mins from the end 10 yards outside their box Murray Davidson is able to control a second ball in about 20 yards of space without any pressure at all. So many of the basics were nowhere near good enough.

---

The team lacked passion and commitment, not many people denying that and nothing exemplified it more than the wimpish attempts at tackles on Booth, a man hardly known for his robust physical approach to the game.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hibee Mac

I was thinking about the formation/tactics next year too. Ross seems to be flexible depending on the players at his disposal which I think is the only reason we ended up playing 3 at the back this year.

From my perspective I'd like to see us make a 4-3-3 work. I can't remember a single Hibs side I've seen playing 4-3-3 successfully, no idea why.

---

I might be wrong, but wasn’t Mowbray’s side predominately a 4-3-3?

Nah, its cool bro. Don't worry.

Fitba folk ken... :rolleyes: