Turning the Tables on the OF?

[julienbrellier]

3 hours ago, jambo-in-furness said:

 

Something that stuck in my mind from Saturday was the Hun commentators suggesting that Hearts couldn’t run around chasing the ball without tiring and leaving gaps in the later stages of the game.

 

Aye right!

To be fair to them they also said that hearts won’t be going away any time soon and that our running off the ball was impressive. Other than that the usual bias but it’s clear they see us as a serious threat.

[Thomaso]

4 hours ago, Italian Lambretta said:

The toughest game we have coming up is St Johnstone away on the wednesday night. 

If we want to have any aspirations of challenging the 2 arse cheeks then we need to go and do what livi dis at the weekend.

Tough game in Perth. They had two monumental defensive cock ups to lose a couple of goals against Livy and missed a few chances. It was never a 3-0 game.

[Darren]

4 hours ago, John Findlay said:

If we get a result at Celtic Park on the 2nd of December( personally I believe that will be tougher than Ibrox, as I believe Celtic are a better team than Sevco), then I would consider us title challengers and perhaps  doing a 1997/8 season or a 2005/6 season, however for me it is still a big ask.

There's six games before then, including away trips to Perth, Aberdeen and Motherwell. None of them particularly welcoming venues for Hearts, traditionally. The result at Celtic Park could be totally immaterial to us in terms of a title challenge by that point.

[Saint Jambo]

59 minutes ago, Bunny Munro said:

Looking at it in a more simple way.

 

Hibs finished 3rd with 63 points last year. Second place Celtic had 77, Rangers won with 102.

 

We aim to beat the bottom six every time we play them and we get 54 points. Only need 9 from the top 6 all season to finish 3rd. 

 

We already have at least that from potential top 6 teams.

 

While it is a simple way to look at it, it isn't really how the league works out. Last season Hibs took 36 from 48 points against bottom 6 opponents and 33 from 60 points against top 6 opponents. There isn't enough difference between the teams for teams to have that big a difference against bottom 6/ top 6 teams.

[TexasAndy]

3 hours ago, Saint Jambo said:

 

 

It's a fallacy that getting a result against the old firm is meaningless if you drop points the next week. We will drop points to non-old firm teams. Exactly when that happens is irrelevant. We dropped points to Ross County. When we equalised against Rangers, no one was thinking 'ah its all pointless because of that result in Dingwall'. If we draw against Dundee and then win our next 5 before we play Celtic, the fact the Dundee game came just after the Rangers game doesn't make it matter any more than if we win 5 but drop points at Aberdeen. Its a cliche. A cliche that might be a useful motovational too for a manager but is still a cliche.

I get your point but was thinking back to several seasons where Fergie won the league with Man U in seasons where they had a poor record against the other contenders but won it because of their consistency against the others.  Of course we will drop points but the point is consistency against the teams out with the OF will put us in challenging position.  

[Doc Rob]

3 hours ago, brux said:

Next 2 games will tell us a lot

The game in Perth is the best barometer of where we are at and how high our aspirations should go. The last time we won there was on our way to the Scottish Cup in 2012. Last win there in the league was a few years prior to that.

 

If we want to be challengers, this is the exact sort of game we need to win.

[EIEIO]

After years of heavy defeats in Glasgow , Saturday's result was most welcome. Even better that the equaliser came so late must have been a sore one for the assembled blue noses.

[TexasAndy]

3 hours ago, Salad Fingers said:

 

I agree with that. 97/98 we didn't beat the OF once (we were unlucky at Ibrox once) and still finished 17 points clear in third and only five points off Rangers in second. The only games we lost other than against the OF were Hibs and Dunfermline. Seven draws against the others though. 

Yeah that was an an example of a season where we had consistency against the rest but so did OF so ultimately the games v them were massive.  If we could match our own 97/98 season consistency i feel we would be much closer this time as the OF look more vulnerable than they did that season.

[Victor Meldrew]

2 hours ago, boag1874 said:

Sow vs Rangers to make it 2-1

Zeefuik (x2) vs Rangers to make it 2-2 (from 2-0 down)

Sow vs Celtic to make it 2-2

Souttar vs Celtic to make it 2-1

Halkett vs Rangers to make it 1-1
 

The last minute goal vs the old firm is becoming a bit of a Neilson trademark 

Which makes such a pleasant change from what it used to be like: holding on, just expecting them to score at the death.

[Lone Striker]

I agree totally with the view that this squad has a tougher mentality than what we've seen for many years.  That might well be largely down to the simple fact that we've now got a good number of young players who've spent all their time outside Scotland at good-level club academies  - which in turn means the credit goes to JS and his team for sourcing them.  

 

Its still early days  (and we've still to play St. J  and Dundee in the 1st round of matches), but an analysis of where our  19 points have come from so far shows that if we continue getting points at the same rate, then we're on course  for 63  points at the split.    Breaking that down a bit for the 33 games -

 

Pro-rata points from OF                 -   12

Pro-rata points from Abdn & Hibs -     6

Pro-rata points from the other 7   -  45  (approx)

 

Doubtful if we could remain unbeaten against the OF till the split though.

We have to get some wins against Aberdeen & Hibs though - getting only 2 points from 2 home games is poor.

Let's smash Scumdee on Saturday. No reason why we shouldn't be capable of beating St.J either after Livi showed how.

 

1 win is better than 2 draws.   It's why I think we need to increase our goal threat.

 

Post-split, who knows what we'd be able to take from the clubs in the top 6 - anything between 0 and 15.  But it will make for exciting times if we can actually reach the split with more than 60 points.

 

[Debut 4]

Obvious to say it’s about consistency.
 

But not just staying unbeaten or rarely losing, you need those wins to stay close.  We can look back at 1998 and see how late season draws took the wind out our challenge. 
 

No one has a crystal ball. Sometimes a draw is ok when you look at other results and your close rivals haven’t won either.  It can be the circumstances at the time.

 

The pressure is when you know you have to get 3 points ,and nothing else, to hang in there.  There will be scenarios ahead for this team and we’ll see how we approach them

or deal with them.  

[Mr Rabbit]

2 hours ago, A_A wehatethehibs said:

Im just the type of rare fan that does point to good moments of defending which sometimes I feel are a bit unsung. Yes they were on top, the better team, I’ve not denied that. But they are the champions so what do you expect? Us to go there and dominate? Just ain’t going to happen, is it, unless they are having a serious calamity of a game, so you need big moments from your defenders and we got enough of them to deserve to keep us in the game. I felt 1-0 HT was a reasonably fair reflection. It was the better defending that kept us in it, in particular it had to be 4 or 5 shots blocked by Halkett alone, whereas that game at Parkhead we were totally adrift and nowhere near the Celtic forwards. Without good defending you’ve no chance against the OF. Defending doesn’t mean stopping chances from happening, but being in the right place to get your body in the way and block those chances as well. Halkett deserved his goal at the end for the defensive improvements he has shown this season. And I am a guy who has absolutely slaughtered Halkett beyond belief on here. Most improved player I’ve seen in years tbh 

 

The other thing about the defending BTW it was clean and didn’t give the referee any decisions to make. No penalty shouts or red card shouts like rash Hibs defenders. So important.

No I didn’t expect us to dominate, especially at Ibrox however all I commented was that they were well on top in the first half, which they were. Morelos and Balogun should have scored IMO.
 

We did defend very well throughout, especially Halkett who was unbelievable throughout. I also thought Kingsley was very strong.

[Mister Dee]

3 hours ago, doctor jambo said:

This fallacy we should have been 3-4 down is guff.

That is why we brought Gordon in.

He is merely doing the job he was born to do, for the team he loves.

Quite why him being awesome surprises anyone is beyond me.

Guy is an animal.

It’s not ‘guff’.
CG is a magnificent keeper, I agree. 

But that doesn’t take into account the misses/mistakes by rangers -Morleos should have scored a few, but looks unfit, & lacking confidence, & when was the last time Macgregor made a mistake like that? 
On another day they would have buried us, and it’s not realistic to say we’ll challenge them over the season when they’ve got such quality in their squad. 
 

They did let their Club die though. 😱😆

[Pasquale for King]

5 hours ago, Herbert said:

 

Just noticed it was Halkett, I was just looking at the 9🤦‍♂️

I didn’t notice Gnanduillet celebrating, easy done 👍🏽. 

[graygo]

7 hours ago, Saint Jambo said:

 

 

It's a fallacy that getting a result against the old firm is meaningless if you drop points the next week. We will drop points to non-old firm teams. Exactly when that happens is irrelevant. We dropped points to Ross County. When we equalised against Rangers, no one was thinking 'ah its all pointless because of that result in Dingwall'. If we draw against Dundee and then win our next 5 before we play Celtic, the fact the Dundee game came just after the Rangers game doesn't make it matter any more than if we win 5 but drop points at Aberdeen. Its a cliche. A cliche that might be a useful motovational too for a manager but is still a cliche.

 

Wow!!  Well played mate, abso****inlutely. 

[graygo]

5 hours ago, Saint Jambo said:

 

The cliche isn't that you need to win the games you are meant to win. The cliche is that following a good result in a game you aren't expected to win, the very next match takes on particular importance and a poor result in that game somehow invalidates the good result. The focus of the various comments I was highlighting on this thread were all focused specifically on the Dundee game, not for example how well we do overall in our next 6 games against non-OF teams.

 

If we are really aiming to win the league and we accept that Rangers are the biggest challenger to that, then it becomes even clearer that its a cliche to say the Rangers result is meaningless if we drop points against Dundee. Draws against Rangers and Dundee leaves us worse off in absolute terms than the 'expected' results of losing to Rangers and beating Dundee (2points vs 3points), but leaves us a point better off in relative terms to Rangers. The cliche that this shows is actually true is that if you are comparing two teams in close proximity in the league, the game between them is a '6 pointer'.

 

What you are highlighting is that what really matters is where we are after 38games. That is my point too. There is no reason to tie these two games in particular together, any more so than say the Rangers game and the second last game of the season. The Rangers result was a good result regardless of what happens in any other game. Dropping points to Dundee at home will be a poor result regardless of what the score was in the proceeding game. One doesn't invalidate the other as the cliche claims.

 

What if Rangers lose their next game?

[Halliphax]

9 hours ago, John Findlay said:

If we get a result at Celtic Park on the 2nd of December

We've come close already, albeit it was 3-2 but that was with seemingly shite tactics or bottle; we appear to have remediated this as Ibrox has shown.

[OTT]

15 minutes ago, Halliphax said:

We've come close already, albeit it was 3-2 but that was with seemingly shite tactics or bottle; we appear to have remediated this as Ibrox has shown.

 

I think going to Glasgow and not losing is a huge win for us. If we can repeat that feat at Celtic Park then it will be interesting as would suggest a massive shift in attitude at the club. 

[Rocky jamboa]

There seems to be a shift in mentality throughout the whole club. Robbie talking about going through there looking for a win. Sticking with our same line up and pretty much same formation as we played v livi and Motherwell. The players talking about going through there for a win. The majority of fans on here expecting something from the game. 

 

I think everyone realises we have a good squad now, full of ambitious young guys, unlike the uninterested journeymen we've had over the last few seasons, coupled with the fact the OF aren't anything special at the moment. 

 

Hopefully we can keep it going and bring in 1 or 2 quality additions in January to really go for it. 

[DH1986]

We’ve carried a fair bit of luck in the two OF games so far……but with the effort put in by every player in those matches they’ve maybe earned that little bit of luck.

 

We’ll drop points along the way but I don’t think it will be down to the players application or attitude.

 

Id like to see us add a striker in January though.

[doctor jambo]

3 hours ago, Mister Dee said:

It’s not ‘guff’.
CG is a magnificent keeper, I agree. 

But that doesn’t take into account the misses/mistakes by rangers -Morleos should have scored a few, but looks unfit, & lacking confidence, & when was the last time Macgregor made a mistake like that? 
On another day they would have buried us, and it’s not realistic to say we’ll challenge them over the season when they’ve got such quality in their squad. 
 

They did let their Club die though. 😱😆

Nah, a few years ado you could argue shagger was the top keeper in the country.

Not by a million miles now , hence his blunder .

Same with Morelos, his ship long sailed.

You play guys off form ( as we did with Pereira) and you shouldn’t be stunned if they cannot do their job.

Nothing about Morelos or McGregor surprised me at the weekend.

The fact it surprised the press shows how far from journalism they have fallen.

[Fourcandles]

3 hours ago, Awbdy Oot said:

 

What if Rangers lose their next game?

St Midden have won their  last 3, the only team this term to have won 3 in a row.

They have played the same 11 for these games and look very solid.

They have no injuries I believe.

Even without this form they’re always difficult at home.

 

Rangers could easily spill points, there’s no guaranteed wins for them ATM.

 

.

[Savage Vince]

13 hours ago, TexasAndy said:

Michael Stewart made a great point after we beat Motherwell.  If Hearts keep beating the rest then we don't have to get so hung up on the OF games.  Not saying we shouldn't aim to beat them but for instance there would be no value in the draw at Ibrox if we drop points at home to Dundee next week.  

 

97/98 was a great example of this. Our record in the league against both was poor however we beat every other team very regularly and ran them both close until JJ decided to concentrate on the cup final. 

[Musemic]

One thing in our favour is that we only have 13 games between now and the winter break whereas both the arse cheeks have 18, each with a League Cup semi and 4 European matches (and travelling for the away legs) to put up with until then. They may both have bigger squads than we do but we have a good chance of at least staying close to them until the break and if Joe Savage can work some more magic in the transfer window then who knows where we will end up?

[FarmerTweedy]

12 hours ago, Saint Jambo said:

 

 

It's a fallacy that getting a result against the old firm is meaningless if you drop points the next week. We will drop points to non-old firm teams. Exactly when that happens is irrelevant. We dropped points to Ross County. When we equalised against Rangers, no one was thinking 'ah its all pointless because of that result in Dingwall'. If we draw against Dundee and then win our next 5 before we play Celtic, the fact the Dundee game came just after the Rangers game doesn't make it matter any more than if we win 5 but drop points at Aberdeen. Its a cliche. A cliche that might be a useful motovational too for a manager but is still a cliche.

Totally correct!  Glad you saved me typing all that! 

[Saint Jambo]

8 hours ago, TexasAndy said:

I get your point but was thinking back to several seasons where Fergie won the league with Man U in seasons where they had a poor record against the other contenders but won it because of their consistency against the others.  Of course we will drop points but the point is consistency against the teams out with the OF will put us in challenging position.  

That I agree with. Its the attempt of fans to impose patterns on it that I disagree with. The idea that the Rangers and Dundee games are intrinsically linked. There was an experiment where someone tossed a coin, with random chances meaning there were sometimes strings of a few heads and tails. They then showed the result of those coin tosses to basketball fans and told them it was a pattern of 3-pointer hits and misses. Most of the fans reported that they could see where the player had clearly been on a 'hot streak' or a 'cold streak'.

 

5 hours ago, Awbdy Oot said:

 

What if Rangers lose their next game?

This kind of goes to my point above. The result of Rangers next game doesn't impact relatively how our results effect our position in relation to them, if you assume that whether they win, lose or draw will not be impacted by whether they beat us or not. Does the fact we drew rather than lost to Rangers make it more or less likely they will drop points away to St Mirren. My view is it doesn't make a difference.

[FarmerTweedy]

13 hours ago, TexasAndy said:

Michael Stewart made a great point after we beat Motherwell.  If Hearts keep beating the rest then we don't have to get so hung up on the OF games.  Not saying we shouldn't aim to beat them but for instance there would be no value in the draw at Ibrox if we drop points at home to Dundee next week.  

It's not really a great point though, in fact it's a very poor one. Our games against the arsecheeks have 24 points up for grabs. We've done well to take 4 out of 6 so far, but if we lose the rest, it ends up with secvo 10 points, celtic 9 and us 4, and they've then got the points from the 4 arsecheek derbies to add onto that.  Sevco won the first, best case scenario for us is probably that the rest finish as draws, but even that means sevco 16 points, celtic 12 and us 4 before the games against 'the rest'. We've drawn 3 of 7 already, and it's just not realistic to think we could win all (or almost all) the rest from here on in. We're going to drop points in at least a few of these games, so if we want to really challenge the arsecheeks, we're going to need to keep taking some more points off them.

[FarmerTweedy]

12 hours ago, Salad Fingers said:

 

I agree with that. 97/98 we didn't beat the OF once (we were unlucky at Ibrox once) and still finished 17 points clear in third and only five points off Rangers in second. The only games we lost other than against the OF were Hibs and Dunfermline. Seven draws against the others though. 

Failure to beat the OF was the problem. We did about as well as we realistically possibly could against the rest, but picked up a total of 3 points from a possible 24 against the OF.  It's just pie in the sky to think it would be possible to make up for that against the rest. If we want to seriously challenge the arsecheeks, we have to take them on and get some results against them.

[graygo]

1 hour ago, Saint Jambo said:

That I agree with. Its the attempt of fans to impose patterns on it that I disagree with. The idea that the Rangers and Dundee games are intrinsically linked. There was an experiment where someone tossed a coin, with random chances meaning there were sometimes strings of a few heads and tails. They then showed the result of those coin tosses to basketball fans and told them it was a pattern of 3-pointer hits and misses. Most of the fans reported that they could see where the player had clearly been on a 'hot streak' or a 'cold streak'.

 

This kind of goes to my point above. The result of Rangers next game doesn't impact relatively how our results effect our position in relation to them, if you assume that whether they win, lose or draw will not be impacted by whether they beat us or not. Does the fact we drew rather than lost to Rangers make it more or less likely they will drop points away to St Mirren. My view is it doesn't make a difference.

 

My view too mate, sorry if that wasn't clear. 👍

[ri Alban]

If we try to win every game, I'll be happy. Don't care how it's done.

[sandylejambo]

I believe that Saturdays result will have a bearing on our position in the league in as much as the confidence gained and the fighting mentality that it instills in the players. None of the current starting 11 will sit back and take defeat against Dundee if they go behind, they will fight like badgers to get it back and probably would.

[Barry Radge]

What Old firm is that? The old firm was Celtic and Rangers who died in 2012. Celtic and the Tribute Act (the Rangers International FC) are not the old firm.