hibs.net Messageboard

Results 1 to 18 of 18

Thread: Dropping Jamie

  1. #1
    Testimonial Due Billychaotic182's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Scotland
    Age
    36
    Posts
    3,881
    Gamer IDs

    Gamertag: Billy Chaotic PSN ID: BillyChaotic

    Dropping Jamie

    Really? Why drop the one player who would have the most to play for. He’s playing to get into the World Cup squad and we drop him
    For barker who couldn’t finish his dinner?!? That was horrific. Totally don’t understand if. Why change a team that hasn’t lost in 11?


  2. Log in to remove the advert

  3. #2
    Barker has all the pace and skill you could want but given that his %age of end product is woeful.

  4. #3
    Shocking decision to drop him

  5. #4
    Testimonial Due Billychaotic182's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Scotland
    Age
    36
    Posts
    3,881
    Gamer IDs

    Gamertag: Billy Chaotic PSN ID: BillyChaotic
    Also to not play Bartley at all? Mind blowing.

  6. #5
    Left by mutual consent!
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Posts
    2,137
    I was worried going q up front as it reminded me of when we put Stokes up front on his own and we struggled for goals.

    Kamberi and MaClaren are the reasons we were in for a shout for 2nd, mental to change it tonight.

  7. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by JeMeSouviens View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Barker has all the pace and skill you could want but given that his %age of end product is woeful.
    Agree, but he was our main (only) threat and a couple of his attempts cutting in off his right foot were decent efforts. Woeful with his left peg though. I think Kamberi missed McLaren but even when they were together it still misfired.

  8. #7
    @hibs.net private member Winston Ingram's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Edinburgh
    Posts
    11,800
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by Billychaotic182 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Really? Why drop the one player who would have the most to play for. He’s playing to get into the World Cup squad and we drop him
    For barker who couldn’t finish his dinner?!? That was horrific. Totally don’t understand if. Why change a team that hasn’t lost in 11?
    Maclaren is *****. Anyone who watched him at Pittodrie wouldn’t have questioned his absence tonight. He was ***** when he came on. Shaw would’ve been a better option

  9. #8
    @hibs.net private member Scouse Hibee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Age
    56
    Posts
    22,366
    Quote Originally Posted by Winston Ingram View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Maclaren is *****. Anyone who watched him at Pittodrie wouldn’t have questioned his absence tonight. He was ***** when he came on. Shaw would’ve been a better option
    What about his other games?

  10. #9
    Testimonial Due PiemanP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Dalry
    Posts
    1,724
    I don’t think Maclaren can complain at being dropped, but it should have been for oil shaw, and not to change the whole formation that had been working really well. Barker to me remains at best an impact sub.

    Also madness not to start marv in these games, especially at tyncastle IMO. Draw would have been fine tonight too.

  11. #10
    @hibs.net private member Frazerbob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Persevered Towers
    Age
    51
    Posts
    10,896
    Quote Originally Posted by PiemanP View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I don’t think Maclaren can complain at being dropped, but it should have been for oil shaw, and not to change the whole formation that had been working really well. Barker to me remains at best an impact sub.

    Also madness not to start marv in these games, especially at tyncastle IMO. Draw would have been fine tonight too.
    The draw would’ve been fine tonight. Unfortunately NL didn’t know that.

  12. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by Scouse Hibby View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    What about his other games?
    Dangerous play trying to be logical after a derby loss. Everyone is ***** right now and nothing will change that.

    You are spot on. Maclarens record so far speaks for itself.

  13. #12
    Testimonial Due Lee Marvin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Edinburgh
    Posts
    2,131
    Changing the whole shape to shoehorn in a barker was a very very strange call, especially since we were undefeated for over 3 months playing 3 at the back and 2 up front.

    This is what cost us the points imo.

    Still absolutely gutted/raging this morning!!!

  14. #13
    I think the issue is that Lennon wanted both Barker and Boyle on the wings. If you go that route, you want 4 at the back (because you probably shouldn't rely on Barker to defend left-back) and so you only have one frontman, unless you want to drop a central midfielder, and why would this Hibs team ever want to do that?

    It's a tactical decision, rather than having one player be a drop-in replacement for another. I don't think it's a slight against Maclaren, just a tactical decision which didn't work out.

    I'm more perturbed that Whittaker is getting game time above Bartley.

  15. #14
    Dropping one half of the inform strike partnership in the country was a ludicrous decision that bit Lennon on the backside.

  16. #15
    @hibs.net private member Golden Bear's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    15,173
    Quote Originally Posted by Billychaotic182 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Also to not play Bartley at all? Mind blowing.


    Bartley has always been outstanding against hertz. He would have been my number 1 pick on the teamsheet.

    Lennon has said in the past that Tynie is not the place where you can play with 2 wide players yet that is exactly what he tried to do. It's baffling to say the least.

  17. #16
    @hibs.net private member jeffers's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Edinburgh
    Posts
    7,486
    Quote Originally Posted by Lee Marvin View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Changing the whole shape to shoehorn in a barker was a very very strange call, especially since we were undefeated for over 3 months playing 3 at the back and 2 up front.

    This is what cost us the points imo.

    Still absolutely gutted/raging this morning!!!
    That was initially my thoughts and I'd definitely have started Bartley, he is a must in derbies at Tynecastle. But in NL's defence he can't legislate for so many poor performances. The usually reliable Stevenson switching off, SJM and Darren McGregor having their worst games in a long time, Kamberi being largely ineffective. I could go on through the rest of the starting 11 as other than Ambrose I'm struggling to think of any others who came close to receiving pass marks. I thought beforehand his selection/tactics were wrong, but when so many players have an off night it doesn't matter what the tactics are.

  18. #17
    @hibs.net private member Billy Whizz's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Edinburgh
    Age
    62
    Posts
    44,268
    Quote Originally Posted by Winston Ingram View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Maclaren is *****. Anyone who watched him at Pittodrie wouldn’t have questioned his absence tonight. He was ***** when he came on. Shaw would’ve been a better option
    Go and give it a rest please, starting to get a bit fed up of your McLaren bashing

  19. #18
    Elephant Stone
    Left by mutual consent!
    Quote Originally Posted by Golden Bear View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote


    Bartley has always been outstanding against hertz. He would have been my number 1 pick on the teamsheet.

    Lennon has said in the past that Tynie is not the place where you can play with 2 wide players yet that is exactly what he tried to do. It's baffling to say the least.
    I was more baffled when he decided to put Barker up front and go with no wide players. He was our most dangerous player by a mile and was giving their right back hell, was completely wasted when he got put up front.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
hibs.net ©2020 All Rights Reserved
- Mobile Leaderboard (320x50) - Leaderboard (728x90)