“Paul Hanlon says Hibs boss Jack Ross has built on Neil Lennon’s positivity”

[B.H.F.C]

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

They also got pumped 4-0 by Hearts and we’re getting 7 put past them in Europe. They were hardly some top drawer team. They went on a far better run last season than they did that season.

Had we taken one of our two very good chances at parkhead at 1-0 then it’s a totally different game, we were aggressive first half, we just didn’t get the rewards and lost the second goal at a bad time.

Do you really think the beginning of those three games I mentioned vs Celtic under lennon were aggressive? We were passive and men behind the ball, went behind, 1-0 once and 2-0 twice and had to chase it, had nothing to lose. I’m not even going to discuss the rangers games as they were rank back then and a shadow of the side they are now.

The game we went behind at Parkhead, drew 2-2, was a brilliant performance at a time when Celtic were about 60 odd domestic games unbeaten. 2-0 down at ER we forced our way back in to the game. 2-0 down against them this season, game was over and they strolled through the remainder of the game. The semi final was the exception, he got that totally wrong, obviously. Still managed to make a game of it second half once we did have a go. Two games under Ross at Parkhead have been easy for Celtic.

We weren’t aggressive in the game at Parkhead this year for me. Duffy misjudged a couple of balls, we got in and wasted good chances. We didn’t press anything like we did the week before against Rangers, like when we let Callum McGregor have all the time in the world to pick his spot. Do you really think our approach in the Celtic game was as it was the week previous against Rangers? The way we worked in the Rangers game is the only way to get a result against either.

[hibbysam]

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

The game we went behind at Parkhead, drew 2-2, was a brilliant performance at a time when Celtic were about 60 odd domestic games unbeaten. 2-0 down at ER we forced our way back in to the game. 2-0 down against them this season, game was over and they strolled through the remainder of the game. The semi final was the exception, he got that totally wrong, obviously. Still managed to make a game of it second half once we did have a go. Two games under Ross at Parkhead have been easy for Celtic.

We weren’t aggressive in the game at Parkhead this year for me. Duffy misjudged a couple of balls, we got in and wasted good chances. We didn’t press anything like we did the week before against Rangers, like when we let Callum McGregor have all the time in the world to pick his spot. Do you really think our approach in the Celtic game was as it was the week previous against Rangers? The way we worked in the Rangers game is the only way to get a result against either.

Not having that about those Lennon games. We were hopeless until they scored. Seriously passive and really defensive, sitting back and giving them the ball. It was like a flick of a switch when we went behind. All three of those games we started extremely slow and were nowhere near aggressive or in their faces.

I think our approach was the same as the rangers game. Goals change games though. We got the goal against rangers, we never got the goal against Celtic. It’s no surprise to hear them saying that was far and away their best performance of the season, and when they are at their best there is nothing we can do about it.

Let’s not kid ourselves on, 7 times out of 10 we will lose against the old firm. Whether we like it or not, that’s what budgets do. By the same token we should be beating the bottom teams in the league the same amount of times. By and large we have been. Our real test is Aberdeen and our record should be better there IMO.

[Since452]

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

Not having that about those Lennon games. We were hopeless until they scored. Seriously passive and really defensive, sitting back and giving them the ball. It was like a flick of a switch when we went behind. All three of those games we started extremely slow and were nowhere near aggressive or in their faces.

I think our approach was the same as the rangers game. Goals change games though. We got the goal against rangers, we never got the goal against Celtic. It’s no surprise to hear them saying that was far and away their best performance of the season, and when they are at their best there is nothing we can do about it.

Let’s not kid ourselves on, 7 times out of 10 we will lose against the old firm. Whether we like it or not, that’s what budgets do. By the same token we should be beating the bottom teams in the league the same amount of times. By and large we have been. Our real test is Aberdeen and our record should be better there IMO.

Spot on. Budget even shows when it comes to Aberdeen.

[hibbysam]

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

Spot on. Budget even shows when it comes to Aberdeen.

It does but we’re closer to Aberdeen, and our recent record is very poor in comparison. Would expect to get a bit closer in regards to them.

[B.H.F.C]

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

Not having that about those Lennon games. We were hopeless until they scored. Seriously passive and really defensive, sitting back and giving them the ball. It was like a flick of a switch when we went behind. All three of those games we started extremely slow and were nowhere near aggressive or in their faces.

I think our approach was the same as the rangers game. Goals change games though. We got the goal against rangers, we never got the goal against Celtic. It’s no surprise to hear them saying that was far and away their best performance of the season, and when they are at their best there is nothing we can do about it.

Let’s not kid ourselves on, 7 times out of 10 we will lose against the old firm. Whether we like it or not, that’s what budgets do. By the same token we should be beating the bottom teams in the league the same amount of times. By and large we have been. Our real test is Aberdeen and our record should be better there IMO.

Didn’t think the Rangers and Celtic games were remotely similar. You just need to look how rattled Rangers were at full time. We got about them in a way that we didn’t do to Celtic. I’m no sure there is really any debate to be had there to be honest.

Even if you disagree about how we started those games against Celtic a few years ago, you can’t deny that we had a bit dig and belief to get back in to them that we’ve not shown in our last couple against Celtic.

[B.H.F.C]

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

It does but we’re closer to Aberdeen, and our recent record is very poor in comparison. Would expect to get a bit closer in regards to them.

Agree with you on this point. The gap isn’t such that we should be performing so poorly against them.

[hibbysam]

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

Didn’t think the Rangers and Celtic games were remotely similar. You just need to look how rattled Rangers were at full time. We got about them in a way that we didn’t do to Celtic. I’m no sure there is really any debate to be had there to be honest.

Even if you disagree about how we started those games against Celtic a few years ago, you can’t deny that we had a bit dig and belief to get back in to them that we’ve not shown in our last couple against Celtic.

The games panned out completely different though. That wasn’t due to our approach, Celtic scored when we never, we were well in the game first half and arguably better for lots of it. Second half was poor but that’s mostly what the second goal did to us.

Easy to say when a player like John McGinn puts his head down and drives us forward. Unfortunately we don’t have him now. We have to understand that. When a team like Celtic go 2-0 up, it’s few and far between that you get back into the game. They were outstanding second half.

[Andy74]

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

Didn’t think the Rangers and Celtic games were remotely similar. You just need to look how rattled Rangers were at full time. We got about them in a way that we didn’t do to Celtic. I’m no sure there is really any debate to be had there to be honest.

Even if you disagree about how we started those games against Celtic a few years ago, you can’t deny that we had a bit dig and belief to get back in to them that we’ve not shown in our last couple against Celtic.

Perhaps Celtic are actually better than some think?

We played pretty well at Parkhead but we were largely pretty easily dealt with in the end. Think they were much better against us than Rangers were. It’s not all about what we try and do.

[B.H.F.C]

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

Perhaps Celtic are actually better than some think?

We played pretty well at Parkhead but we were largely pretty easily dealt with in the end. Think they were much better against us than Rangers were. It’s not all about what we try and do.

Didn’t see it that way. Rangers weren’t poor against us. We did everything better than we did the next week though from our quality on the ball to what we did without it.

[B.H.F.C]

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

The games panned out completely different though. That wasn’t due to our approach, Celtic scored when we never, we were well in the game first half and arguably better for lots of it. Second half was poor but that’s mostly what the second goal did to us.

Easy to say when a player like John McGinn puts his head down and drives us forward. Unfortunately we don’t have him now. We have to understand that. When a team like Celtic go 2-0 up, it’s few and far between that you get back into the game. They were outstanding second half.

We don’t have John McGinn but have had results against Celtic since he left. We totally outplayed them at Easter Road withStevie Mallan playing as a holding midfielder.

As for the way the games panned out we also went behind against Rangers, with a lot less time to play but we had more about us that day. We went behind against Celtic and it was done.

[Andy74]

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

Didn’t see it that way. Rangers weren’t poor against us. We did everything better than we did the next week though from our quality on the ball to what we did without it.

I didn’t think Rangers were poor either but Celtic were better. Probably played their best game of the season against us and that makes it very difficult to do the same things as in a home game v Rangers.

[hibbysam]

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

We don’t have John McGinn but have had results against Celtic since he left. We totally outplayed them at Easter Road withStevie Mallan playing as a holding midfielder.

As for the way the games panned out we also went behind against Rangers, with a lot less time to play but we had more about us that day. We went behind against Celtic and it was done.

We responded far better to going a goal down against Celtic than we did against rangers. At 1-0 down we created two good chances and a number more decent half chances. At no point we’re we two behind against rangers. Rangers also could’ve scored multiple more goals against us had they taken fairly straight forward chances.

You disagree which is fine, but goals change games (we scored early against rangers and scored the equaliser against the run of play, failed to take chances against Celtic and they took theirs) and secondly Celtic were extremely good against us whereas it was probably Rangers’ poorest display of the season, we aren’t good enough to have an impact on every single team we play.

[B.H.F.C]

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

We responded far better to going a goal down against Celtic than we did against rangers. At 1-0 down we created two good chances and a number more decent half chances. At no point we’re we two behind against rangers. Rangers also could’ve scored multiple more goals against us had they taken fairly straight forward chances.

You disagree which is fine, but goals change games (we scored early against rangers and scored the equaliser against the run of play, failed to take chances against Celtic and they took theirs) and secondly Celtic were extremely good against us whereas it was probably Rangers’ poorest display of the season, we aren’t good enough to have an impact on every single team we play.

We did things well against Rangers that we didn’t do well against Celtic. We took some of our chances, we competed better and whilst Rangers missed chances, Celtic probably missed more the next week.

If we compete like we did against Rangers we’ll give Celtic a game tomorrow. If we gift them goals and allow them free hits from 25 yards, like at Parkhead, it’ll be the same outcome.

[MWHIBBIES]

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

Not having that about those Lennon games. We were hopeless until they scored. Seriously passive and really defensive, sitting back and giving them the ball. It was like a flick of a switch when we went behind. All three of those games we started extremely slow and were nowhere near aggressive or in their faces.

I think our approach was the same as the rangers game. Goals change games though. We got the goal against rangers, we never got the goal against Celtic. It’s no surprise to hear them saying that was far and away their best performance of the season, and when they are at their best there is nothing we can do about it.

Let’s not kid ourselves on, 7 times out of 10 we will lose against the old firm. Whether we like it or not, that’s what budgets do. By the same token we should be beating the bottom teams in the league the same amount of times. By and large we have been. Our real test is Aberdeen and our record should be better there IMO.

Between 2014/15 and 2018/19 I'm willing to bet our record is MUCH better than that. No real reason it cant be again.

[hibbysam]

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

Between 2014/15 and 2018/19 I'm willing to bet our record is MUCH better than that. No real reason it cant be again.

That’s because Rangers were utter rank. You can find spells all over where our record will be better or worse than that at times, however look back over the history, I’d bet even more that our record is there or thereabouts. If we get better than that then we are seriously overachieving or they are seriously underachieving. Our record at home recently has been good against Celtic, however we have beaten them a couple of times this century away, why folk think that should change now is beyond me.

[hibbysam]

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

We did things well against Rangers that we didn’t do well against Celtic. We took some of our chances, we competed better and whilst Rangers missed chances, Celtic probably missed more the next week.

If we compete like we did against Rangers we’ll give Celtic a game tomorrow. If we gift them goals and allow them free hits from 25 yards, like at Parkhead, it’ll be the same outcome.

We didn’t compete better first half against rangers than we did against Celtic. We never took a chance like we did against rangers. That’s different to competing. We allowed McGregor a shot yes, but in the same vein we allowed rangers free reign down our left, and left their top scorer unmarked in the box for the equaliser. We had more shots against Celtic than we did against rangers, we just never took any of the chances at key moments.

[B.H.F.C]

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

We didn’t compete better first half against rangers than we did against Celtic. We never took a chance like we did against rangers. That’s different to competing. We allowed McGregor a shot yes, but in the same vein we allowed rangers free reign down our left, and left their top scorer unmarked in the box for the equaliser. We had more shots against Celtic than we did against rangers, we just never took any of the chances at key moments.

We were better in every aspect of the game in the Rangers game for me. Defensively we didn’t give the same gifts and we were better in the final third. We were definitely more aggressive as well, as demonstrated by the way The Rangers reacted IMO.

[hibbysam]

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

We were better in every aspect of the game in the Rangers game for me. Defensively we didn’t give the same gifts and we were better in the final third. We were definitely more aggressive as well, as demonstrated by the way The Rangers reacted IMO.

Both Rangers had 19 shots to Celtics 20, Rangers had more possession than Celtic had, they were pretty identical in performances (first half especially of the Celtic game). Yes Celtic took over second half but that was more based on their class than anything we did. Ok, we caught them a couple of times first half with elbows (accidentally of course) and got a draw which Porto managed to wind them up about, we took our chances when they came, we didn’t against Celtic. The first goal against rangers, if that’s not a gift then I’ve no idea what is. It took a world class stop from Rocky to get that draw in the end.

[B.H.F.C]

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

Both Rangers had 19 shots to Celtics 20, Rangers had more possession than Celtic had, they were pretty identical in performances (first half especially of the Celtic game). Yes Celtic took over second half but that was more based on their class than anything we did. Ok, we caught them a couple of times first half with elbows (accidentally of course) and got a draw which Porto managed to wind them up about, we took our chances when they came, we didn’t against Celtic. The first goal against rangers, if that’s not a gift then I’ve no idea what is. It took a world class stop from Rocky to get that draw in the end.

I honestly don’t know how you can describe a 2-2 draw and a 3-0 defeat as an identical performance!

You reference Rocky, he made a world class stop against Rangers and gifted the second at Parkhead. Go through the team, nobody contributed at Parkhead, what they did at Easter Road against The Rangers.

[hibbydog]

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

Ross has a combined total of 13 games against Celtic, Rangers, Hearts and Aberdeen since joining. 2 wins, 1 draw, 10 losses.

No argument to be made. Must do better.

[hibbysam]

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

I honestly don’t know how you can describe a 2-2 draw and a 3-0 defeat as an identical performance!

You reference Rocky, he made a world class stop against Rangers and gifted the second at Parkhead. Go through the team, nobody contributed at Parkhead, what they did at Easter Road against The Rangers.

You look at the two results and automatically presume they were worlds apart. Go into detail in them and there’s very little difference. If Wright misses the chance against rangers could we have ended up losing easily? Yes. If one of the chances against Celtic go in, would the game have been different? Yes. Your the one that mentioned standing off from
25 yards out (referencing the McGregor goal) when the exact same thing happened for the rangers first goal. If you can’t look past the results and see huge similarities in our performances then fair enough. Celtic scored right at the start and right at the end of the first half, in between we could’ve score multiple goals due to our intensity and willingness to get up the park.

[James Stephen]

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

Between 2014/15 and 2018/19 I'm willing to bet our record is MUCH better than that. No real reason it cant be again.

Surely thats the exception that proves the rule though?

Rangers were weaker than they had probably ever been in their entire history, and Hibs had a particuarly strong team, therefore making the gap way narrower than it would normally be.

Rangers are much stronger now, and we are weaker, and the so that gap is way bigger.

It was our strong record that was the anomaly, rather than our current one.

[Iggy Pope]

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

Surely thats the exception that proves the rule though?

Rangers were weaker than they had probably ever been in their entire history, and Hibs had a particuarly strong team, therefore making the gap way narrower than it would normally be.

Rangers are much stronger now, and we are weaker, and the so that gap is way bigger.

It was our strong record that was the anomaly, rather than our current one.

What kept you Hibs? Line 2 it seems in answer to your question sir.

[B.H.F.C]

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

You look at the two results and automatically presume they were worlds apart. Go into detail in them and there’s very little difference. If Wright misses the chance against rangers could we have ended up losing easily? Yes. If one of the chances against Celtic go in, would the game have been different? Yes. Your the one that mentioned standing off from
25 yards out (referencing the McGregor goal) when the exact same thing happened for the rangers first goal. If you can’t look past the results and see huge similarities in our performances then fair enough. Celtic scored right at the start and right at the end of the first half, in between we could’ve score multiple goals due to our intensity and willingness to get up the park.

Why ask hypothetical questions? Surely just reflect on what actually happened?

The only similarities are that we created chances and conceded chances in both games. We made less defensive errors in The Rangers game and we were more clinical in the final third so, to me, the performance isn’t identical.

And it just had a different feel in how we went about it for me.

[hibbysam]

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

Why ask hypothetical questions? Surely just reflect on what actually happened?

The hypothetical questions were what happened in the opposite games and why they ended up so different in terms of scoreline. Fairly straight forward. Nothing to do with aggression.

The only similarities are that we created chances and conceded chances in both games. We made less defensive errors in The Rangers game and we were more clinical in the final third so, to me, the performance isn’t identical.

We never made less defensive errors against rangers though. We were less clinical, that doesnt mean we were less competitive or aggressive though. We had to be aggressive to get into positions to create and miss chances, which was the whole argument.

[B.H.F.C]

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

We never made less defensive errors against rangers though. We were less clinical, that doesnt mean we were less competitive or aggressive though. We had to be aggressive to get into positions to create and miss chances, which was the whole argument.

It was my original argument and I stand by that. The Celtic game was done an hour before the full time whistle blew but we went for 90 minutes in the Rangers game. We fought and scrapped, held on when we had to and got back in.

You’re clearly taking the opposite view to me. But you’ve described things as ‘pretty identical’ and that couldn’t be further from the truth when you break down what each individual player did in each game.

[Andy74]

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

It was my original argument and I stand by that. The Celtic game was done an hour before the full time whistle blew but we went for 90 minutes in the Rangers game. We fought and scrapped, held on when we had to and got back in.

You’re clearly taking the opposite view to me. But you’ve described things as ‘pretty identical’ and that couldn’t be further from the truth when you break down what each individual player did in each game.

Different games against different opposition though - there is more than one team on the pitch and sometimes you can only do what the opponents allow you to.

Celtic on form at home are a different proposition to Rangers at Easter Road probably not having their best day.

[B.H.F.C]

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

Different games against different opposition though - there is more than one team on the pitch and sometimes you can only do what the opponents allow you to.

Celtic on form at home are a different proposition to Rangers at Easter Road probably not having their best day.

Surely that works both ways though and they can only do what their opponent (us) allowed them? Celtic had control against us that Rangers didn’t and that was down to us not doing certain things as well as they did the week before IMO.

[USAHibee]

Can we not just set settle the side of positivity.

As fans we seem to jump on every little piece of negativity.

I might be niave but let's just try and support
the team like the good old days.

Everyone seems to be written off after one bad pass, mistake or result.

I suppose we are all a bit board at the moment
And the smallest issues are accentuated but watching the team from afar there is so much to be positive about..

[hibbysam]

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

It was my original argument and I stand by that. The Celtic game was done an hour before the full time whistle blew but we went for 90 minutes in the Rangers game. We fought and scrapped, held on when we had to and got back in.

You’re clearly taking the opposite view to me. But you’ve described things as ‘pretty identical’ and that couldn’t be further from the truth when you break down what each individual player did in each game.

Our performances were pretty identical. The game wasn’t done an hour before the end. Celtic killed the game second half by being so good. Your completely missing the point that goals change games. If you seriously don’t believe that we were aggressive and competitive in the first half at Celtic park then fair enough, that’s your opinion. The game certainly ran away from us but that’s what happens when a top side turn up against you and play at the top of their game.

We had something to hold onto against rangers, we took a chance, we then got battered a bit and went behind, we then took another chance and then held on in the end. The most important aspects? Taking chances. We will create chances in every game, we will be aggressive in majority of our games. We won’t take chances in every game but that’s football.