Hibs transfer rumours

[Brightside]

If Hanlon is the one to be dropped after that game on Sunday then they can have my ST back too.

[Speedway]

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

No, it's Speeders at the wind-up. One of these days we'll collectively realise he likes to chuck in a wee grenade here and there

I was just thinking that Kerr and Maybury are essentially waiting to sign for us, Brucie and Sillyname are rumoured to have been offered terms therefore we have the ability, in theory, to field a much changed side on Sunday.

Fenlon said there would be changes, but who has he got as things stand?

[HibbyAndy]

Maybury is a right back, Why would we play him at left back when we have Stevenson, Kujabi, Booth?.

[Speedway]

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

Maybury is a right back, Why would we play him at left back when we have Stevenson, Kujabi, Booth?.

Four Reasons:

1. Maybury can play and has played Left Back, fitting in with the 'jack of all trades, master of none' criteria that we have for signings now.

2. Lewis Stevenson

3. Pa Kujabi

4. Callum Booth

[Andy74]

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

Do you think we'll line up like this v. Yams?

Williams

Clancy
McPake
O'Hanlon
Maybury

Cairney
Kerr
Deegan
Forsyth

Griffiths
Sheridan

Possibly a tad unrealisitc but it would be better!

[hibsmad]

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

Maybury is a right back, Why would we play him at left back when we have Stevenson, Kujabi, Booth?.

Because theyr'e all rubbish.

[HibbyAndy]

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

Four Reasons:

1. Maybury can play and has played Left Back, fitting in with the 'jack of all trades, master of none' criteria that we have for signings now.

2. Lewis Stevenson

3. Pa Kujabi

4. Callum Booth

Well i wouldn't be signing Maybury to play him LB when we have other areas of the pitch in desperate need of cover.


Id sign him as a RB for sure.But not for LB.

[HibbyAndy]

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

Because theyr'e all rubbish.

The whole team is rubbish bar 2 or 3 players.

[JimBHibees]

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

I just seen Stephens driving an expensive car through Tranent High Street. He looked me straight in the eye and I think even he came to the realisation that he was staring at a better footballer than him.

I even had a cigarette in my hand.

Thats brilliant.

[JimBHibees]

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

Its clear we need another centre half to play, and if its nobody new then Hanlon should play there. That means we need someone else at left back, and for me whoever plays there be it Kujabi or Booth, then we have just made that position weaker.

I wonder if Maybury would be a short term answer at left back, but is he any better than what we have?

The rest of the team is weak, you could pick any combination of whats left, and then think straight away you needed to change it.

I think he probably could short term.

[hibsmad]

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

The whole team is rubbish bar 2 or 3 players.

Clancy claims his best position is right back so we need to give him more than one game there to see how good he is.

Therefore if Maybury signs then I would play him at left back. I'd certainly prefer him there than any of the other three (who have all been ripped a new one against them at least once in the past).

[HibbyAndy]

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

Clancy claims his best position is right back so we need to give him more than one game there to see how good he is.

Therefore if Maybury signs then I would play him at left back. I'd certainly prefer him there than any of the other three (who have all been ripped a new one against them at least once in the past).

Id bin Stephens and have Clancy CH and Maybury RB.

[Andy74]

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

I think he probably could short term.

Me too and if he doesn't trust/fancy Kujabi at left back then it would be a good, solid answer and enables Hanlon to get back beside McPake, which was working quite well.

Williams, Clancy, McPake, Hanlon and Maybury would be a decent back 5.

[JimBHibees]

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

Me too and if he doesn't trust/fancy Kujabi at left back then it would be a good, solid answer and enables Hanlon to get back beside McPake, which was working quite well.

Williams, Clancy, McPake, Hanlon and Maybury would be a decent back 5.

Agree certainly an improvement on Sunday.

[Franck Stanton]

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

Id bin Stephens and have Clancy CH and Maybury RB.

Yip, so would I, and it would be a massive improvement on the shambles fielded on Sunday past.

[Stevie Reid]

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

Agree certainly an improvement on Sunday.

Agree too, but one of the most worrying things from Sunday (from the point of view of someone who has had a good amount of faith in Fenlon) was the fact that he could possibly think that the back four played on Sunday was a good idea.

In the context of the disaster that was last season, McPake's leading from the back and his bringing out better performances from Hanlon was one of the very few highlights - for him to change that I would expect to see a back four that had worked together all summer and was well drilled. But we were anything but, and he managed to make a vulnerable area of the team (even at its best last season, we still were) even more vulnerable. Bringing Stephens in was madness, and everyone in the back four suffered from his selection.

[goosefat]

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

For me this is a huge part of the problem! As hibs fans, for starters we have never been short term but we have become subserviant to the term above in bold. **** lowering oor expectations! The jumbos from across the city are £40m in debt and do they lower their expectations? Do the ****! That is the winning mentality we need, the seige mentality!

How long do the board expect us to raise our butts in the air and accept a rogering? For me, enough is enough! I'll support the team, ffs, I have done for 40+ years but now is the time for action, from our board, not talk!

What Hearts do and how much debt they are in should be of no concern to Hibernian Football Club and should certainly not be used as some kind of template for success. Your grammar isn’t great and I may well have misunderstood some of your post but you do also seem to suggest that by running their club in this reckless fashion Hearts have somehow bred a "winning mentality”. I’m pretty sure this can be achieved without the £40m debt.

The point is, even if we magically had the perfect management and board in place tomorrow, it would still take more than a season or two before we turn this ship around. As a Hibs fan I agree we should expect better but I’m also well aware of the reality of our position.

We are where we are and, as I said before, things will clearly not improve overnight so we do therefore need to lower our short term expectations.

[JimBHibees]

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

Agree too, but one of the most worrying things from Sunday (from the point of view of someone who has had a good amount of faith in Fenlon) was the fact that he could possibly think that the back four played on Sunday was a good idea.

In the context of the disaster that was last season, McPake's leading from the back and his bringing out better performances from Hanlon was one of the very few highlights - for him to change that I would expect to see a back four that had worked together all summer and was well drilled. But we were anything but, and he managed to make a vulnerable area of the team (even at its best last season, we still were) even more vulnerable. Bringing Stephens in was madness, and everyone in the back four suffered from his selection.

Totally agree with the bit in bold, personally amazed that was seen as a good idea. McPake and Hanlon while being no world beaters as a partnership at least appeared to have an understanding and personally thought McPake beside him had brought Hanlon on. To bring in Stephens who to me is bang average was an interesting choice and resulted in the moving of both McPake and Hanlon which didnt help either or the team. What will be even more worrying is if the folly is repeated on Sunday. Get McPake and Hanlon back in the middle please.

[Andy74]

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

Agree too, but one of the most worrying things from Sunday (from the point of view of someone who has had a good amount of faith in Fenlon) was the fact that he could possibly think that the back four played on Sunday was a good idea.

In the context of the disaster that was last season, McPake's leading from the back and his bringing out better performances from Hanlon was one of the very few highlights - for him to change that I would expect to see a back four that had worked together all summer and was well drilled. But we were anything but, and he managed to make a vulnerable area of the team (even at its best last season, we still were) even more vulnerable. Bringing Stephens in was madness, and everyone in the back four suffered from his selection.

Can't disagree with that. I've been very surprised to see him playing such a role, from nowhere, pre season and now into the season.

I mean, Fenlon must have seen him at the first game he attended v St Johnstone, then again against St Johnstone later on, and he was not exactly great v Huddersfield either.

We simply can't afford a factor in there that is going to destabilise things and make us easy to score against again.

[Hibiza]

looks like it. pure rubbish

[Craig_in_Prague]

A team with Stephens, Sproule, Stevenson and Wotherspoon starting in it, I'm afraid are going to.get absolutely nowhere.
I know playing younger players in a poor team can do them more harm than good.. but if they cant at least give us what those mentioned can (which is F.A.) then their talent must be pretty poor.
Playing the younger ones might not improve results but I'm sure the fans could at least accept we are trying to bring quality into the club but whilst we short on them we will play younger players with energy and enthusiasm and mix them with the handful of players that are of sufficient standard.

Its cringeworthy seeing those players in Hibs team.

[machibby]

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

looks like it. pure rubbish

This thread?!!!

[.Sean.]

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

For a team like Hibs, anything less than a top 4 finish should be classed as dismal failure! Or the 'terrible awful' according to Minnie!

I swear Hibs fans are getting more like Aberdeen supporters by the minute.

[.Sean.]

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

looks like it. pure rubbish

I'm certain you're a Jambo.

[Lmc2105]

Would love to see a target man brought in for sunday as speedway team suggested looked strong and looked like a team that could hurt them,

This 451 or 4231 doesn't work and a big man has to be a priority for sunday as webster and zailukas will have a field day against griffiths on his own! Especially if the way we played the ball into him on sunday! Still think as speedway suggested fenlon will pull a couple out the bag,

[Platinum Scotty]

As a complete novice when it comes to posting and as someone who isnt a regular attender to the games, I am probably going to get shot down here for even daring to raise this point but what the heck, its about taking chances eh...

This forum has been a constant source of news for folks like myself who arent at all the games, and for geogrpaphical reason arent likely to be at many games in the near future, to such an extent that I believe i have been as well informed as anyone could be - that is until the last few months...............the reason, simply due to the fact that when I click a link that I naively beleived that I would see something at least relating to the thread title.

this one for instance, an optimist would expect to see, no matter how unbeleivable, rumours about signings - alas no......the thread has been hijacked to discuss at length, issues that if they were that important surely deserve their own threads - nor for one minute am I suggesting the issues arent important (I beleive they are) - purely that the threads are of interest for a reason, and its normally the title, so please if only for the folks like me, can we try and keep them relevant and start new threads when folks feel as passionate about an issue

i note my own irony on putting this comment on a rumour thread of course !!!

[Hamish]

07 Aug 2012 17:20:37
alan maybury has signed ma source is a family member

from Football Rumours.

Also mention of Gary Twigg again

[Matty_Jack04]

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

I swear Hibs fans are getting more like Aberdeen supporters by the minute.

[MrSmith]

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

I swear Hibs fans are getting more like Aberdeen supporters by the minute.

Nothing like an Aberdeen fan buddy! As a long suffering Hibee, I would like to see a more aggressive winning attitude. I feel we must expect more, why not?

[Hermit Crab]

Any word on sheridan or indeed any other rumours??