Our ‘Specific Substitution Ploy’

[BackOfTheNet]

Is it me, or does telling the world that you won’t change tactics/formation with 2/3 of your subs not the best idea? Also, it means that there’s only one sub to cover injury, fear of a 2nd yellow or indeed to try and change shape if current shape not working etc, meaning there will be certain players who - like Gnanduillet on Sunday - will not get off the bench to show what they could do?

 

I understand the “ploy”, but to me it seems restrictive. Sunday we needed a different approach. Fresh legs in the same formation didn’t actually help any, if anything Hibs had more of the ball. I’ll concede competition for places is a good thing. But if you’re Gnanduillet and you know Boyce won’t be taken off regardless and 2/3 subs are attacking that your time will be limited. If you’re Devlin, McEneff, Halliday etc the same.

 

The specific substitution ploy Hearts will use for extra attacking edge this season

A regular feature of Hearts’ matches this season will be the introduction of fresh-legged wingers around the hour mark.

By Barry Anderson

Tuesday, 14th September 2021, 7:00 am

 

Josh Ginnelly is enjoying the competition at Hearts.

 

Whether to inject blistering pace, greater creativity, or increase the team’s goalscoring threat, fans can expect the tactic to recur throughout the campaign. The plan is to overwhelm opponents at a point in the game when they may be starting to tire.

 

The Riccarton first-team squad is armed with a plethora of options to help execute this. Gary Mackay-Steven arrived in January, Josh Ginnelly signed a permanent contract in June after spending last season on loan, Ben Woodburn joined on loan from Liverpool last month, followed by Barrie McKay on a two-year deal last week.

 

Two wide players flanking a striker in a 3-4-3 formation allows plenty attacking intent, with another two in reserve primed to impact the last third of the match. Hearts are back in the Premiership and determined not to allow the other 11 teams a minute’s peace.

 

Hibs witnessed the first enactment of the ploy on Sunday when Ginnelly and McKay replaced Mackay-Steven and Woodburn respectively. A winning goal eluded the hosts, largely thanks to Matt Macey in the visitors' goal, but swapping wide men is to remain a frequent theme.

 

“I think everybody who actually watches football would agree that our team is very strong now,” said Ginnelly, speaking exclusively to the Evening News. “Look at our bench, we have some great players. We’ve never had the mindset of: ‘Let’s just see where we go.’ We have ambition and the mentality of the team is very strong.

 

“Ben Woodburn is an English Premier League player, Baz has just signed, Beni [Baningime] has come up from Everton. All the signings bring something to the table. They haven’t come in to just be a part of it. They want to affect the game.

Make a difference

“Me and the gaffer spoke about it early on Sunday morning before the derby. He wanted me to come on and make a difference but it’s quite tough in those games. You’re coming on and it’s 200 miles an hour. You need to stay switched on.

 

“We wanted to win for the fans but I think, if you said at the start of the season that we’d be second in the table and a point behind Rangers, we’d have taken it. There are plenty positives.

 

“I love playing here. It’s a good environment. There are no egos in the changing room, we are back in the Premiership and the fans are back in. Everything is good and everybody at Hearts wants to keep this unbeaten run going.”

 

Ten league games without defeat – split evenly between the end of last season and the start of this – encourages thoughts that Hearts could challenge for a top-four finish. Competition for places is stronger than it has been for many years at Tynecastle Park, allowing for the aforementioned winger sub idea.

“I like it. When you look at the team now, we have two players in every position and every single person can offer something,” added Ginnelly. “It’s good to have competition but there aren’t any bad relationships, it’s not a bad thing to have.

 

“You are going to train better, work harder, improve yourself, and that improves the team. The standard of training has obviously gone up. As I said, nobody here is an individual. We all know what we want to achieve and we are all pulling in that direction.

 

“We’ve made some really good signings so nobody is going to play every single game. We aren’t bothered because we want to achieve something as a team rather than individually.”

Injury issue

A muscle injury restricted Ginnelly’s involvement in the derby and he will be managed carefully this week in the build-up to Saturday’s match at Ross County. The Englishman’s bursts of pace still kept the Hibs left-back Josh Doig fully occupied late in the game.

 

For the player nicknamed “Gino”, sleep and rest are key aspects of pre-match preparation. Others are more wound up. “Everyone was right at it in training all week because we all knew what was riding on this derby. Some boys were up at six o’clock getting a feel for the game. I try to be like that but I love my sleep,” he smiled.

 

“I knew from last season what it means to beat Hibs. I was struggling with my own injury although it wasn’t too bad. We’ve been working on it all week so I could give us something. I had a chance myself, I should probably have headed it across to Boycie.”

 

Like most wingers, Ginnelly thrives on confidence. Self-belief is seldom a problem but knowing he popular player with many Hearts supporters is exactly the kind of boost he needs as he tries to reclaim a starting place in the side.

 

“When I’ve been outside I’ve seen some fans and some of them have made positive comments,” he explained. “It’s good to just have them back in the ground. Even the away fans, it’s great for banter and it shows football is back.

 

“I’d agree that wingers need confidence. As an attacking player, you need to have a strong mentality. Everybody expects you to take the ball past your man every time and that isn’t going to happen. It’s great having the fans cheering you on, like they did on Sunday and like the did at Dundee United. It does give you that boost.”

Edited September 14, 2021 by BackOfTheNet

[BackOfTheNet]

And below is from another article, again highlighting that there was a predetermined substitution for Smith, and with the “ploy” the other 2 subs were also predetermined. So as I say, restrictive. And if I was one of the other players on the bench or didn’t even make it on the bench I’d be frustrated as it won’t matter what you do in training all week you know the 2 wingers on the bench are getting on and you have to hope one of your teammates in a position you can play gets injured or plays terribly or something which means they can’t/shouldn’t carry on. 

 

Neilson’s comments about the substitutions on Sunday:

 

Defender Michael Smith was withdrawn midway through the second half having suffered tightness playing for Northern Ireland against Switzerland last week. He will be monitored ahead of Saturday’s trip to Ross County.

 

“I thought all the players were great for us on Sunday,” stated Neilson. “Michael Smith was carrying a wee knock before the game and we knew we would have to take him off at some point. I thought he had a good game overall.

 

“Taylor Moore came on and we asked him to go and play right wing-back. He was great as well. Barrie McKay came on and showed his quality and Josh Ginnelly gives you that energy and spark. To a man, I thought our lads were excellent.”

Edited September 14, 2021 by BackOfTheNet

[The Old Tolbooth]

You'd like to think that we're putting this out there because it's probably not what we're going to do, are we that clever? 

 

I find it difficult to believe that when Woodburn is 100% back to full match fitness, that he won't play the full game and will be rotated on the hour mark no matter what, that's just bonkers! Also, Mackey didn't come here on a 2 year deal just to be brought on as a sub for the last half hour of games, he wants to be part of it and wants a starting spot. 

[GinRummy]

The subs were all a bit counter productive on Saturday and I agree with the OP that Gnanduillet would have probably made a difference. In Neilson’s defence, even if he did know that Michael Smith only had 60-70 minutes in him before the match, it would have been a huge call not to play him. The time to rest Smith and give him a bit of recovery time is not against Hibs. Woodburn was supposedly ‘stretching’ a bit so it’s understandable he went off. Also, I was pleased when Gino came on, he just didn’t play that well, that’s the gamble I suppose. 
 

As for the pre-planned subs. It won’t happen all the time and certainly won’t happen on 60-70 minutes every game. The game itself will dictate the subs rather than what is planned before the game. Nobody is going to tell me that if Woodburn (just as an example) is having a great game and is unplayable is going to be subbed on 70 minutes if we are chasing a goal. If he starts to lag and looks tired then aye but otherwise he’d stay on. 
 

 

 

 

[Locky]

Problem with the subs made on Sunday, was all 3 of them were very like for like, which just never had any impact on the game whatsoever. Taking GMS off just as he was coming into a game was a bit mental.

 

Said it on other threads, but the game was screaming out for Gnanduillet. But I wouldn't have taken Boyce off. That would involve a slight change to the shape of course but Neilson didn't seem to want to change a thing.

[Mikey1874]

I just took it the subs of Smith and Woodburn were fitness issues. 

 

Ideally I would have just brought on one of Ginnelly or McKay and Gnanduillet. Woodburn will surely play 90 minutes once he is fully fit. 

[Unknown user]

37 minutes ago, BackOfTheNet said:

Is it me, or does telling the world that you won’t change tactics/formation with 2/3 of your subs not the best idea? Also, it means that there’s only one sub to cover injury, fear of a 2nd yellow or indeed to try and change shape if current shape not working etc, meaning there will be certain players who - like Gnanduillet on Sunday - will not get off the bench to show what they could do?

 

I understand the “ploy”, but to me it seems restrictive. Sunday we needed a different approach. Fresh legs in the same formation didn’t actually help any, if anything Hibs had more of the ball. I’ll concede competition for places is a good thing. But if you’re Gnanduillet and you know Boyce won’t be taken off regardless and 2/3 subs are attacking that your time will be limited. If you’re Devlin, McEneff, Halliday etc the same.

 

The specific substitution ploy Hearts will use for extra attacking edge this season

A regular feature of Hearts’ matches this season will be the introduction of fresh-legged wingers around the hour mark.

By Barry Anderson

Tuesday, 14th September 2021, 7:00 am

 

Josh Ginnelly is enjoying the competition at Hearts.

 

Whether to inject blistering pace, greater creativity, or increase the team’s goalscoring threat, fans can expect the tactic to recur throughout the campaign. The plan is to overwhelm opponents at a point in the game when they may be starting to tire.

 

The Riccarton first-team squad is armed with a plethora of options to help execute this. Gary Mackay-Steven arrived in January, Josh Ginnelly signed a permanent contract in June after spending last season on loan, Ben Woodburn joined on loan from Liverpool last month, followed by Barrie McKay on a two-year deal last week.

 

Two wide players flanking a striker in a 3-4-3 formation allows plenty attacking intent, with another two in reserve primed to impact the last third of the match. Hearts are back in the Premiership and determined not to allow the other 11 teams a minute’s peace.

 

Hibs witnessed the first enactment of the ploy on Sunday when Ginnelly and McKay replaced Mackay-Steven and Woodburn respectively. A winning goal eluded the hosts, largely thanks to Matt Macey in the visitors' goal, but swapping wide men is to remain a frequent theme.

 

“I think everybody who actually watches football would agree that our team is very strong now,” said Ginnelly, speaking exclusively to the Evening News. “Look at our bench, we have some great players. We’ve never had the mindset of: ‘Let’s just see where we go.’ We have ambition and the mentality of the team is very strong.

 

“Ben Woodburn is an English Premier League player, Baz has just signed, Beni [Baningime] has come up from Everton. All the signings bring something to the table. They haven’t come in to just be a part of it. They want to affect the game.

Make a difference

“Me and the gaffer spoke about it early on Sunday morning before the derby. He wanted me to come on and make a difference but it’s quite tough in those games. You’re coming on and it’s 200 miles an hour. You need to stay switched on.

 

“We wanted to win for the fans but I think, if you said at the start of the season that we’d be second in the table and a point behind Rangers, we’d have taken it. There are plenty positives.

 

“I love playing here. It’s a good environment. There are no egos in the changing room, we are back in the Premiership and the fans are back in. Everything is good and everybody at Hearts wants to keep this unbeaten run going.”

 

Ten league games without defeat – split evenly between the end of last season and the start of this – encourages thoughts that Hearts could challenge for a top-four finish. Competition for places is stronger than it has been for many years at Tynecastle Park, allowing for the aforementioned winger sub idea.

“I like it. When you look at the team now, we have two players in every position and every single person can offer something,” added Ginnelly. “It’s good to have competition but there aren’t any bad relationships, it’s not a bad thing to have.

 

“You are going to train better, work harder, improve yourself, and that improves the team. The standard of training has obviously gone up. As I said, nobody here is an individual. We all know what we want to achieve and we are all pulling in that direction.

 

“We’ve made some really good signings so nobody is going to play every single game. We aren’t bothered because we want to achieve something as a team rather than individually.”

Injury issue

A muscle injury restricted Ginnelly’s involvement in the derby and he will be managed carefully this week in the build-up to Saturday’s match at Ross County. The Englishman’s bursts of pace still kept the Hibs left-back Josh Doig fully occupied late in the game.

 

For the player nicknamed “Gino”, sleep and rest are key aspects of pre-match preparation. Others are more wound up. “Everyone was right at it in training all week because we all knew what was riding on this derby. Some boys were up at six o’clock getting a feel for the game. I try to be like that but I love my sleep,” he smiled.

 

“I knew from last season what it means to beat Hibs. I was struggling with my own injury although it wasn’t too bad. We’ve been working on it all week so I could give us something. I had a chance myself, I should probably have headed it across to Boycie.”

 

Like most wingers, Ginnelly thrives on confidence. Self-belief is seldom a problem but knowing he popular player with many Hearts supporters is exactly the kind of boost he needs as he tries to reclaim a starting place in the side.

 

“When I’ve been outside I’ve seen some fans and some of them have made positive comments,” he explained. “It’s good to just have them back in the ground. Even the away fans, it’s great for banter and it shows football is back.

 

“I’d agree that wingers need confidence. As an attacking player, you need to have a strong mentality. Everybody expects you to take the ball past your man every time and that isn’t going to happen. It’s great having the fans cheering you on, like they did on Sunday and like the did at Dundee United. It does give you that boost.”

 

I don't see a single quote backing this up

[Nookie Bear]

12 minutes ago, Locky said:

Problem with the subs made on Sunday, was all 3 of them were very like for like, which just never had any impact on the game whatsoever. Taking GMS off just as he was coming into a game was a bit mental.

 

Said it on other threads, but the game was screaming out for Gnanduillet. But I wouldn't have taken Boyce off. That would involve a slight change to the shape of course but Neilson didn't seem to want to change a thing.

 

That is because much of our squad is 'like for like'.

 

GMS, Walker, McKay, Ginelli are all of a type

Boyce and Woodburn seem to be playing a similar role.

Halliday, Haring, Beni and Devlin are all of a similar type as well.

Even our wing backs are similar to each other.

 

Gnando is the obvious difference up front. McEneff offers something different in midfield but perhaps has been left behind as the squad improves.

 

We made progress in the summer transfer window but a couple of additions in January could make a huge difference.

[BackOfTheNet]

21 minutes ago, GinRummy said:

As for the pre-planned subs. It won’t happen all the time and certainly won’t happen on 60-70 minutes every game. The game itself will dictate the subs rather than what is planned before the game. Nobody is going to tell me that if Woodburn (just as an example) is having a great game and is unplayable is going to be subbed on 70 minutes if we are chasing a goal. If he starts to lag and looks tired then aye but otherwise he’d stay on. 

I’d like to hope you’re right it won’t happen every game, but it certainly did on Sunday. Going like for like wasn’t going to change anything (and it didn’t, other than Hibs get more of the ball). Gnanduillet was the obvious change up and confidence should be high after scoring his last outing. Even changing Boyce for Gnanduillet would be a change up and not like for like as they are completely different forwards. That alone would give their defence something to think about it. Said it in another thread, at 0-0 in a derby game no one would have batted an eye lid had we not brought on a player who’s only had a couple of proper days training since May, but that’s what we did. He didn’t play badly, but Hibs coped just fine. And Ginnelly for GMS seemed pre-determined too, despite as another poster saying he was actually just coming onto a game when taken off.

[Unknown user]

Sorry, I just need to say this again.

 

Barry Anderson is the only person that mentions a substitution ploy in that article.

 

We're not telling everyone what our plan is.

[Ribble]

It's something that all clubs try if they have 2 players of similar quality in attacking positions, teams that don't do it have subs that aren't of the same standard as the starters.

 

Why wouldn't you have winger A expel 90mins of energy in 60 against a full back then put fresh legs on against an already tiring player? Also the pre-planning part is so that the starter doesn't play within himself trying to manage his energy for a full 90mins.

[TheBigO]

30 minutes ago, Locky said:

Problem with the subs made on Sunday, was all 3 of them were very like for like, which just never had any impact on the game whatsoever. Taking GMS off just as he was coming into a game was a bit mental.

 

Said it on other threads, but the game was screaming out for Gnanduillet. But I wouldn't have taken Boyce off. That would involve a slight change to the shape of course but Neilson didn't seem to want to change a thing.

I think, with Gino already on at that point, instead of Moore, he should have brought Gnando on for Smith.

 

Gino rwb, Boyce pull a touch wider but not wide (so he's upmagain Doing at back post, dragging him in and giving Gino the line

 

Hibs werent massively attacking our wide areas, we'd have been fine defensively but 100x more potent

 

All hindsight of course. I would like Robbie to be more brave in general though

[jambo-rocker]

Right idea, poor execution. We were in the ascendency at that point and probably should have given it another 5-10 minutes.

[Saint Jambo]

When we made the changes we were on top and looked the more likely to win the game. There didn't seem to be a reason to radically change shape or style at that stage. Given that, putting on fresh wingers made a lot of sense. Against Aberdeen we changed shape and it really didn't work. Obviously this time it didn't work and Hibs managed to get back into the game more in the final 10-15minutes. Even then, if Ginnelly scores with his header at the back post then no one has a  problem.  If he had thrown on Gnanduillet and we had fallen out of the game in the same way and it finished 0-0 then everyone would be complaining about 'the tinkerman' changing things when we were on top. It all just smacks of hindsight to me and people wanting to nitpick every little thing about Neilson.

[Locky]

3 minutes ago, TheBigO said:

I think, with Gino already on at that point, instead of Moore, he should have brought Gnando on for Smith.

 

Gino rwb, Boyce pull a touch wider but not wide (so he's upmagain Doing at back post, dragging him in and giving Gino the line

 

Hibs werent massively attacking our wide areas, we'd have been fine defensively but 100x more potent

 

All hindsight of course. I would like Robbie to be more brave in general though

This was my big takeaway from Sunday. Can totally see what Neilson is trying to play, and don't disagree with it, but that was a game there that was only going to be won by the team who were bold enough to commit. And sadly I can't ever see that being us.

[kingantti1874]

4 minutes ago, Locky said:

This was my big takeaway from Sunday. Can totally see what Neilson is trying to play, and don't disagree with it, but that was a game there that was only going to be won by the team who were bold enough to commit. And sadly I can't ever see that being us.

i think the smith forced substitution caused a problem.. Gnando would have been on otherwise

[Auldbenches]

6 minutes ago, Saint Jambo said:

When we made the changes we were on top and looked the more likely to win the game. There didn't seem to be a reason to radically change shape or style at that stage. Given that, putting on fresh wingers made a lot of sense. Against Aberdeen we changed shape and it really didn't work. Obviously this time it didn't work and Hibs managed to get back into the game more in the final 10-15minutes. Even then, if Ginnelly scores with his header at the back post then no one has a  problem.  If he had thrown on Gnanduillet and we had fallen out of the game in the same way and it finished 0-0 then everyone would be complaining about 'the tinkerman' changing things when we were on top. It all just smacks of hindsight to me and people wanting to nitpick every little thing about Neilson.

Very good post until the usual accusations your last sentence.  

[Mr Rabbit]

43 minutes ago, GinRummy said:

The subs were all a bit counter productive on Saturday and I agree with the OP that Gnanduillet would have probably made a difference. In Neilson’s defence, even if he did know that Michael Smith only had 60-70 minutes in him before the match, it would have been a huge call not to play him. The time to rest Smith and give him a bit of recovery time is not against Hibs. Woodburn was supposedly ‘stretching’ a bit so it’s understandable he went off. Also, I was pleased when Gino came on, he just didn’t play that well, that’s the gamble I suppose. 
 

As for the pre-planned subs. It won’t happen all the time and certainly won’t happen on 60-70 minutes every game. The game itself will dictate the subs rather than what is planned before the game. Nobody is going to tell me that if Woodburn (just as an example) is having a great game and is unplayable is going to be subbed on 70 minutes if we are chasing a goal. If he starts to lag and looks tired then aye but otherwise he’d stay on. 
 

 

 

 

Agreed that the subs definitely stalled our momentum however I think we were a little unfortunate that Smith and then Woodburn were struggling and needing off.

 

If we had held off with the GMS signing we could have removed Woodburn instead however at the time I think it was the right sub as Woodburn was our most dangerous player.

 

Gino who normally is a real threat, especially as a sub when players tire, hardly had an impact. Taylor Moore offered little and more worryingly was constantly beat in the air. McKay was our best sub and looked very lively but at that point Boyce was hardly moving.

 

Gnando was due to come on but I think Woodburn called to come off. So more unfortunate than anything else.

[Debut 4]

Managers can be unlucky and be forced into change but I don’t understand upsetting a rhythm or a good partnership that has been working well during the 90 mins?

The conditions of the game will surely change the opinion or thoughts of a manager late on?
 

Neilson was forced into changing Smith but I don’t think he thought about the combination on that side.  Moore was clearly there just to fill in for the rest of the game and was never going to bomb up and down the park.  Therefore, Ginnelly wasn’t going to get the correct support and was largely ineffective.  

 

[DH1986]

Bringing on two wingers with nothing to aim at doesn’t make a lot of sense to me.

 

That Mackay cross for Gino would have been right up Gnandos street.

[Bazzas right boot]

10 minutes ago, Saint Jambo said:

When we made the changes we were on top and looked the more likely to win the game. There didn't seem to be a reason to radically change shape or style at that stage. Given that, putting on fresh wingers made a lot of sense. Against Aberdeen we changed shape and it really didn't work. Obviously this time it didn't work and Hibs managed to get back into the game more in the final 10-15minutes. Even then, if Ginnelly scores with his header at the back post then no one has a  problem.  If he had thrown on Gnanduillet and we had fallen out of the game in the same way and it finished 0-0 then everyone would be complaining about 'the tinkerman' changing things when we were on top. It all just smacks of hindsight to me and people wanting to nitpick every little thing about Neilson.

 

Every discussion will go the same way. 

Every thread ends up the same way. 

It's just folk angling to have digs at Bob. 

 

I agree with your view, I'd also add Gino was poor when he came on. Shit happens. 

 

Some folk are genuinely trying to have a discussion and debate others are just bringing it back to Bob and what he's done wrong.

 

 

 

 

[Bazzas right boot]

36 minutes ago, Nookie Bear said:

 

That is because much of our squad is 'like for like'.

 

GMS, Walker, McKay, Ginelli are all of a type

Boyce and Woodburn seem to be playing a similar role.

Halliday, Haring, Beni and Devlin are all of a similar type as well.

Even our wing backs are similar to each other.

 

Gnando is the obvious difference up front. McEneff offers something different in midfield but perhaps has been left behind as the squad improves.

 

We made progress in the summer transfer window but a couple of additions in January could make a huge difference.

 

 

Also fair. 

 

 

[GinRummy]

27 minutes ago, BackOfTheNet said:

I’d like to hope you’re right it won’t happen every game, but it certainly did on Sunday. Going like for like wasn’t going to change anything (and it didn’t, other than Hibs get more of the ball). Gnanduillet was the obvious change up and confidence should be high after scoring his last outing. Even changing Boyce for Gnanduillet would be a change up and not like for like as they are completely different forwards. That alone would give their defence something to think about it. Said it in another thread, at 0-0 in a derby game no one would have batted an eye lid had we not brought on a player who’s only had a couple of proper days training since May, but that’s what we did. He didn’t play badly, but Hibs coped just fine. And Ginnelly for GMS seemed pre-determined too, despite as another poster saying he was actually just coming onto a game when taken off.

I said at the time that I couldn’t believe GMS was taken off when he was. I agree, Gnando would have been a better option to change things. 
 

As for the pre-determined subs idea in general, some weeks it’ll happen and some weeks it won’t. 

[Cut The Crap]

32 minutes ago, Smithee said:

Sorry, I just need to say this again.

 

Barry Anderson is the only person that mentions a substitution ploy in that article.

 

We're not telling everyone what our plan is.

 

Correct.

 

BA might have the information from elsewhere and he might even be right, but there are no quotes in either article to suggest that the substitutions made were "predetermined".

[Pasquale for King]

You surely have to look at the game before making your subs to see what if anything needs changed. 
You can have an idea about who will need subbed due to knocks etc but telling everyone you have predetermined subs is daft, Neilson does it in an article last week where he said you need 3/4/5/6 wingers because they are asked to do a lot of running. I would say the wing backs do more. 
It must be crap for the other subs who knew on Sunday they were unlikely to come on. 

[GinRummy]

I’m fairly sure Robbie said the plan for the wingers was to split them 60 minutes then 30 minutes. Might’ve been in his pre match interview but maybe not. He has said it recently though. 

[Gambo]

I'd rather we had an attacking ploy from start of game tbh.

[TheBigO]

6 minutes ago, Gambo said:

I'd rather we had an attacking ploy from start of game tbh.

I kind of think we do and we did play that game mostly on the front foot, BUT this is so tired and I hate to say it again cos I really like him, but it falls down at Smith. Our wingback options need improved, especially on the right. Too ponderous, too safe.

 

But even then We cut Hibs open a couple of times and had we scored or had a touch of luck, these conversations wouldn't be happening but I think we almost all just want Robbie to let loose a bit.

 

Starting lineup was fine really. But we had them on the ropes and a real positive change at the time Smith came off would have been the move.

 

It's all a bit what if we lose rather than how can we win. Even when we're ahead, what if we look se the lead rather than how can we put this to bed.

[JamboAl]

41 minutes ago, Pasquale for King said:

You surely have to look at the game before making your subs to see what if anything needs changed. 
You can have an idea about who will need subbed due to knocks etc but telling everyone you have predetermined subs is daft, Neilson does it in an article last week where he said you need 3/4/5/6 wingers because they are asked to do a lot of running. I would say the wing backs do more. 
It must be crap for the other subs who knew on Sunday they were unlikely to come on. 

Could not agree more.

Because of the players we have (or don't have) it can often not be too difficult for our opponents to second guess what changes we might make but we should give them no confirmation of our intentions.

[Unknown user]

Just now, JamboAl said:

Could not agree more.

Because of the players we have (or don't have) it can often not be too difficult for our opponents to second guess what changes we might make but we should give them no confirmation of our intentions.

 

We didn't. Barry Anderson said it, no one else.

[martoon]

It's stuff like this that makes the Neilson doubts permanent, for me. 

 

Inflexibility, limited tactical nous...I'm pleased with our start and we've recruited very well but I can't shake the feeling that RN is the weak link in the entire enterprise.

 

As always, happy to be proved wrong if it means Hearts are moving onwards and upwards.

[Robbo-Jambo]

2 hours ago, Locky said:

Problem with the subs made on Sunday, was all 3 of them were very like for like, which just never had any impact on the game whatsoever. Taking GMS off just as he was coming into a game was a bit mental.

 

Said it on other threads, but the game was screaming out for Gnanduillet. But I wouldn't have taken Boyce off. That would involve a slight change to the shape of course but Neilson didn't seem to want to change a thing.

We have something different on the bench with Gnando and we should have used him to mix it up a bit in the second half. 

[marcus]

10 minutes ago, Smithee said:

 

We didn't. Barry Anderson said it, no one else.

 

Quoting you to re-emphasise your point Smithee, not a single thing in that article points to Hearts spouting our tactics to the media.

 

People too quick (and happy) to stick the boot in, even over a made up non-story like this.

[AGoodLaugh]

I mean Ginnelly has literally said "it's nice that we have competition for places" and based on that Anderson has written an entire article about a 'ploy' that he's made up 

[Robbo-Jambo]

7 minutes ago, martoon said:

It's stuff like this that makes the Neilson doubts permanent, for me. 

 

Inflexibility, limited tactical nous...I'm pleased with our start and we've recruited very well but I can't shake the feeling that RN is the weak link in the entire enterprise.

 

As always, happy to be proved wrong if it means Hearts are moving onwards and upwards.

We have a very attacked mind squad but do we have the manager to utilise it fully ?

 

Have my doubts tbh, plus in the post match interview Neilson looked a bit too happy and accepting that we only got one point.

[Nookie Bear]

2 minutes ago, marcus said:

 

Quoting you to re-emphasise your point Smithee, not a single thing in that article points to Hearts spouting our tactics to the media.

 

People too quick (and happy) to stick the boot in, even over a made up non-story like this.

 

It looks to me more like people are calmly discussing the substitutions on Sunday. Like football fans.

[martoon]

9 minutes ago, Robbo-Jambo said:

We have a very attacked mind squad but do we have the manager to utilise it fully ?

 

Have my doubts tbh, plus in the post match interview Neilson looked a bit too happy and accepting that we only got one point.

 

The set up is a good one but not for every game or from first whistle to last during.

 

There will be games and stages of games where Gnando and Boyce should play together.

 

Get the feeling that's not likely to happen often, particularly from kick off.

 

It would appear to be just paper talk in this instance but I reckon many of us were already anticipating such inflexible and rigid tactics.

 

Neilson did announce his new tactical approach in the Summer. Seemed strange to me then that he only had one approach and was telling the world all about it.

 

I was, of course, attacked relentlessly by the Neilson Defence Squad.

[naeclue]

We switched to 4 4 2 towards the game, as we did against Aberdeen. Things got worse on both occasions, Hibs came closest to scoring in that period.

 

GMS had three decent attempts on target, ok one should’ve been in, but created others for himself. Seemed strange to take him off, as we weren’t threatening that much elsewhere.

 

Appreciate we are still work in progress, but (admittedly against 3 strong sides) we’ve scored two penalties and one goal from open play at home.

 

 

[Pasquale for King]

26 minutes ago, Robbo-Jambo said:

We have a very attacked mind squad but do we have the manager to utilise it fully ?

 

Have my doubts tbh, plus in the post match interview Neilson looked a bit too happy and accepting that we only got one point.

He enjoyed the game, like his pal across the city, both Levein protégés. I suppose we really shouldn’t be surprised. 

[martoon]

Love the Clouseau-esque thread title.

 

[Pasquale for King]

1 hour ago, GinRummy said:

I’m fairly sure Robbie said the plan for the wingers was to split them 60 minutes then 30 minutes. Might’ve been in his pre match interview but maybe not. He has said it recently though. 

He did indeed, he does it practically every game. 
His tactics, his words. Hope thats enough for everyone. 
https://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/sport/football/hearts/robbie-neilson-backs-new-hearts-signing-barrie-mckay-to-earn-scotland-recall-3379142

Edited September 14, 2021 by Pasquale for King

[Mikey1874]

37 minutes ago, martoon said:

It's stuff like this that makes the Neilson doubts permanent, for me. 

 

Inflexibility, limited tactical nous...I'm pleased with our start and we've recruited very well but I can't shake the feeling that RN is the weak link in the entire enterprise.

 

As always, happy to be proved wrong if it means Hearts are moving onwards and upwards.

 

Eventually Woodburn will play for 90 minutes. No chance he will be subbed when fully fit. Then it's up to Ginnelly and McKay to do better but that's also up to supporting Cochrane and whoever is right wing back to get further forward which will be easier if Devlin is good enough. That will also help Souttar to get forward more. 

 

The problem is still not creating enough but the team is set up to do that. 

[GinRummy]

Just now, Pasquale for King said:

He did indeed, he does it practically every game. 

I thought he did. Sometimes I read things and it’s the journo sort of putting his own spin on things but I was 99% Neilson had said it. 

[GinRummy]

1 minute ago, Mikey1874 said:

 

Eventually Woodburn will play for 90 minutes. No chance he will be subbed when fully fit. Then it's up to Ginnelly and McKay to do better but that's also up to supporting Cochrane and whoever is right wing back to get further forward which will be easier if Devlin is good enough. That will also help Souttar to get forward more. 

 

The problem is still not creating enough but the team is set up to do that. 

It is and it isn’t. We need support for Boyce then we will see more clear cut chances. 

[Mikey1874]

31 minutes ago, AGoodLaugh said:

I mean Ginnelly has literally said "it's nice that we have competition for places" and based on that Anderson has written an entire article about a 'ploy' that he's made up 

 

Its rubbish.

 

The team isn't fully set up yet. Need to wait for Woodburn to be fully fit then the likely addition to starting line up of Moore and Devlin. 

[merrymac]

9 minutes ago, naeclue said:

We switched to 4 4 2 towards the game, as we did against Aberdeen. Things got worse on both occasions, Hibs came closest to scoring in that period.

 

GMS had three decent attempts on target, ok one should’ve been in, but created others for himself. Seemed strange to take him off, as we weren’t threatening that much elsewhere.

 

Appreciate we are still work in progress, but (admittedly against 3 strong sides) we’ve scored two penalties and one goal from open play at home.

 

 

When did we switch to a four?

Quote from Robbie -"Taylor Moore came on and we asked him to go and play right wing-back." 

We got worse cos Moore is no wingback, and it shows the lack of options in that area.

The stuff from Anderson is bollocks, 2 of 3 the subs were injury/fitness related.

[Unknown user]

6 minutes ago, Pasquale for King said:

He did indeed, he does it practically every game. 
His tactics, his words. Hope thats enough for everyone. 
https://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/sport/football/hearts/robbie-neilson-backs-new-hearts-signing-barrie-mckay-to-earn-scotland-recall-3379142

Is that it? Jesus

[BackOfTheNet]

I by no means created the thread as a Neilson bashing opportunity, but as others have mentioned, Neilson has previously indicated that he wants options in the wingers places as he does see wingers that can tire teams out at the end of games when they come on. Which is a perfectly legitimate position to take. On top of that we see that changing wingers is the preferred substitution tactic, and on Sunday in particular the GMS/Ginnelly one seemed premeditated and bringing McKay on was not the right option. Should have been clear to anyone Gnanduillet was the sub that should’ve come on. So there is certainly room for debate on premeditated substitutions, as there’s evidence (even if observational) that it’s happening.

[Mikey1874]

 

If 

2 minutes ago, BackOfTheNet said:

I by no means created the thread as a Neilson bashing opportunity, but as others have mentioned, Neilson has previously indicated that he wants options in the wingers places as he does see wingers that can tire teams out at the end of games when they come on. Which is a perfectly legitimate position to take. On top of that we see that changing wingers is the preferred substitution tactic, and on Sunday in particular the GMS/Ginnelly one seemed premeditated and bringing McKay on was not the right option. Should have been clear to anyone Gnanduillet was the sub that should’ve come on. So there is certainly room for debate on premeditated substitutions, as there’s evidence (even if observational) that it’s happening.

 

If Ginnelly had scored from Barrie McKay's inch perfect cross would it still have been the wrong substitution?

[Jamhammer]

6 minutes ago, GinRummy said:

It is and it isn’t. We need support for Boyce then we will see more clear cut chances. 

This is the main issue for me. Boyce constantly plays too deep. Even if we get support up, which we rarely do and he’s managed to hold the ball up his passing isn’t great. His first touch is poor the majority of the time.

He’s an instinctive finisher playing like an extra midfielder at times. 
I really like him, despite those limitations he’ll graft and, given ammunition score goals. We aren’t scoring enough and if you don’t score you don’t win