No Deeks last night - coincidence ?

[crewetollhibee]

Improved performance, midfield tighter and chipping in with a couple of goals. Better all-round team effort. Coincidence ? Thoughts ?

[scott7_0(Prague)]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Improved performance, midfield tighter and chipping in with a couple of goals. Better all-round team effort. Coincidence ? Thoughts ?

Coincidence

so it is all Deeks fault now!!

I believe that is is or should be - horses for courses.

[M11BMO]

If Deek's had played we would have scored more. Simples.

[smurf]

Yip agreed.

A team without a 20 goals a season player will always do better.

[Hibbyradge]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Coincidence

so it is all Deeks fault now!!

I believe that is is or should be - horses for courses.

I agree with this and I don't think Deek would have added anything to last night's performance.

We looked like a really hard working team unit and I'm not sure that sort of approach suits Derek Riordan's game.

Derek, like the whole team granted, has had a very poor season so far. Few goals, missed penalties, mediocre performances and then getting sent off when he was captain, would suggest that he can no longer take being in the starting line up for granted.

It might do him some good, though. Fingers crossed.

[crewetollhibee]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Coincidence

so it is all Deeks fault now!!

I believe that is is or should be - horses for courses.

But it wasn't horses for courses, he was banned not dropped. I was just wondering aloud what I am sure others and indeed CC will have done, as to whether the performance overall was better than it MAYBE would have been if Deeks had been available/selected. Not a Deek's basher here, hope they get him on a new contract ASAP.

[allezsauzee]

In a word...yes

[blackpoolhibs]

No Nish too.

[Ed De Gramo]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

But it wasn't horses for courses, he was banned not dropped. I was just wondering aloud what I am sure others and indeed CC will have done, as to whether the performance overall was better than it MAYBE would have been if Deeks had been available/selected. Not a Deek's basher here, hope they get him on a new contract ASAP.

Thought we played fantastically without him.

Hopefully CC will keep the same team on saturday

[Disc O'Dave]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Yip agreed.

A team without a 20 goals a season player will always do better.

To be fair Smurfy, he's currently a 2 goals a season striker

But I see where the OP is coming from - perhaps it was better last night that the team didn't have the one "white knight" / "messiah" / "only place we'll ever get a goal from" focal point. Maybe the knowledge that they all had to be 100% on their game to "compensate" was the main factor......

[Part/Time Supporter]

Riordan also didn't play in the first 3-0 and only came on as a sub at 2-0 in the second 3-0 (set up the third).

[allezsauzee]

i remember 1-0 victories with goals from Darren Jackson and Keith Houchen and Riordan wasn't playing in those games either....i think you may have something there!

[essexhibee]

Not so sure its cause of no Riordan. More likely the fact that we played 4-5-1 with an actual target man upfront that made the difference.

Valdas Trackys what a hero!!

[1two]

Murray in midfield last night... Coincidence?

I think not!

[Bad Martini]

Some folk just love to Riordan bash........

When he's scoring, assisting, turning the game around and making things happen its a different story. Fickle fitba fans roond here. Remember how sheite it was with nae Riordan in the team........as I recall he come on recently and started to turn the game, from the bench. All that let him doon was a lack of equally skilled and determined team mates that day (or most of them).

Him and Stokes done the same against Maribor IIRC.

Short memories - if in doubt, lets rip Riordan who wasnae even playing

[heretoday]

Whatever they do I hope they keep the same team from now on.

[Bad Martini]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Whatever they do I hope they keep the same team from now on.

I'd say, I hope the keep the same team until someone stops playing well. THEN, and only THEN, drop them.

This is how our managers seem to continually **** it up. My point is simple and applies to the 11 last night who done ****ING BRAW as equally as it does to Riordan, Nish and anyone else who wasn't playing and it's this;
Play the players in position...
Play the players who are playing well...
Dont play them out of position...
When they dont play well, drop them...

Simples!

[King Paddy]

I think it was proved last night that Deeks is a luxury we can't afford. What we seemed to have all over the pitch from watching the highlights was constructive effort. IMO i would bench derek for sat.

[Hibee D]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I'd say, I hope the keep the same team until someone stops playing well. THEN, and only THEN, drop them.

This is how our managers seem to continually **** it up. My point is simple and applies to the 11 last night who done ****ING BRAW as equally as it does to Riordan, Nish and anyone else who wasn't playing and it's this;
Play the players in position...
Play the players who are playing well...
Dont play them out of position...
When they dont play well, drop them...

Simples!

Totally agree. Why change a winning team unless you need to. Dont think last night was because we had no Riordan in the team but do not think playing him as lone striker benefits the team or Riordan.

[declan macmanus]

We did really well without Deek at Aberdeen


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[truehibernian]

CC kept faith with the side that played Utd as he felt they deserved more from that game and were unlucky. I think he will keep the team as they are given we had our first clean sheet since last season and scored 3 really good goals.

Who better to bring on as well if we need to grab a winner or change the game.

Same eleven that started last night v Well please. Derek to come on and grab a couple in the closing 20 minutes when the game is safe

[offshorehibby]

Nothing against DR but he has to start with same team on saturday that started against the hun.

[woodyloon]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I think it was proved last night that Deeks is a luxury we can't afford. What we seemed to have all over the pitch from watching the highlights was constructive effort. IMO i would bench derek for sat.

Sorry got to disagree, I think if Deeks is played in a position more suited to his game we will get more of what we used to get from him.

He is not a player who can lead the line or play as the lone striker. It might mean him having to play a position he doesn't like but were he gets goals from, like left midfield.

[AgentDaleCooper]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Riordan also didn't play in the first 3-0 and only came on as a sub at 2-0 in the second 3-0 (set up the third).

that occurred to me as well.

it doesn't mean that we're better without him - it does, however, show that we don't need him to win games, which is a relief.

[basehibby]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Improved performance, midfield tighter and chipping in with a couple of goals. Better all-round team effort. Coincidence ? Thoughts ?

It may just have played in our favour as Deeks is far from the ideal player to play up front on his own while the sturdier Trakys seems to have had a decent game there.

Interestingly Deeks didn't start in our last 3-0 win at Ibrox - but did come off the bench to chip in with a superb assist for no 3 IIRC.

Definately rather have him available though - and starting more often than not.

[IWasThere2016]

I am a huge Deeks fan - and I do think CC will play him this weekend.

However, CC must be tempted not to - given we went from such a low the game before to such a high on Wednesday.

[RIP]

Would Deeks have stopped 2 goalbound headers on the line?

Did you see the first one. Trackys moved back 3 yards to the goalline - then he clears

Total defensive duties from the striker

Honestly - it was like playing with 11 men on Wednesday

[Prawn Sandwich]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Would Deeks have stopped 2 goalbound headers on the line?

Did you see the first one. Trackys moved back 3 yards to the goalline - then he clears

Total defensive duties from the striker

Honestly - it was like playing with 11 men on Wednesday

I was at the game on Wednesday and that was exactly what I was thinking particularly in the 2nd half. I wasn't just thinking is Riordan a luxury, but also Nish can't defend like Trackys?

They played like a team who all knew their duties and had the desire. I thought when Murray and Wotherspoon went off that this might unbalance the side somehow especially when it was Thicot who came on for Murray. But no, they played like a 'team' talking to and encouraging each other.

I was surrounded by Rangers fans albeit in the posh bit and they applauded Hibs off the park. I was simply stunned at such a change in performance after the absolute clueless and spineless display shown by Hibs last Sunday. It was like watching a different side!

[Brooster]

No it is no coincidence that the players pull together more when DR is not in the team.

[marinello59]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Riordan also didn't play in the first 3-0 and only came on as a sub at 2-0 in the second 3-0 (set up the third).

That's because he is a real fan who loves watching us beat the Huns in their own back yard. He knew what he was doing when he got sent off in the Derby