***Official Heart of Midlothian v Dundee United Match Thread***

[Unknown user]

Just now, upgotheheads said:

 

What annoys me most is that we make the same mistake every game. We insist that possession and building carefully from the back, which is fair enough, but we're not very good at it, do it too slowly, and in the wrong part of the pitch. Passing the ball back and forward in front of our own penalty box invites the opposition deep into our own half, and bingo, one mistake and they are in  on goal. There's a video of the first goal on this thread somewhere showing Hill defending, he fails to cut out the first pass across goal when he could have done much better, and then he's watching the action when Fletcher follows up. Hill was ok for most of the rest of the game but he was definitely out of his depth during that spell. That is down to the manager imo if he tries to play that way with players who can't keep possession. it's just far too risky.

 

We're trying to invite the opposition deep into our half ffs, it's not a mistake.

[Debut 4]

2 minutes ago, upgotheheads said:

 

What annoys me most is that we make the same mistake every game. We insist that possession and building carefully from the back, which is fair enough, but we're not very good at it, do it too slowly, and in the wrong part of the pitch. Passing the ball back and forward in front of our own penalty box invites the opposition deep into our own half, and bingo, one mistake and they are in  on goal. There's a video of the first goal on this thread somewhere showing Hill defending, he fails to cut out the first pass across goal when he could have done much better, and then he's watching the action when Fletcher follows up. Hill was ok for most of the rest of the game but he was definitely out of his depth during that spell. That is down to the manager imo if he tries to play that way with players who can't keep possession. it's just far too risky.

Agree,bud.  It always a pass too many around the back and by that time you are getting close down by 3 or 4 opposition players a bawhair from your 18 yard box.
 

Surely there’s got to be the trigger point it has to be moved quickly through midfield or someone is showing for the longer ball? It used to work with Simms really well when we realised there was no short option.

 

If the pass too many is happening too frequently then someone isn’t doing their job on the park ahead of the defence and the manager needs to identify that. Or, it’s the defenders to blame(which it is sometimes) for being too safe on the ball and passing the buck.  There was a few times yesterday that Hill could’ve carried the ball towards Forrest but chose to recycle it to Rowles.  

[Hearts_fan]

Humps’ goal a replica of Sibbick’s v Hibs.

 

 

[upgotheheads]

23 minutes ago, Smithee said:

 

We're trying to invite the opposition deep into our half ffs, it's not a mistake.

 

Well it bloody-well isn't working. And it would only work if we had players good enough not to lose possession cheaply. If you read my post again you will see this; "That is down to the manager imo if he tries to play that way with players who can't keep possession. it's just far too risky."

[Unknown user]

Just now, upgotheheads said:

 

Well it bloody-well isn't working. And it would only work if we had players good enough not to lose possession cheaply. If you read my post again you will see this; "That is down to the manager imo if he tries to play that way with players who can't keep possession. it's just far too risky."

 

If it isn't working, how do you explain our long unbeaten run against non OF teams?

[jr ewing]

1 hour ago, upgotheheads said:

 

What annoys me most is that we make the same mistake every game. We insist that possession and building carefully from the back, which is fair enough, but we're not very good at it, do it too slowly, and in the wrong part of the pitch. Passing the ball back and forward in front of our own penalty box invites the opposition deep into our own half, and bingo, one mistake and they are in  on goal. There's a video of the first goal on this thread somewhere showing Hill defending, he fails to cut out the first pass across goal when he could have done much better, and then he's watching the action when Fletcher follows up. Hill was ok for most of the rest of the game but he was definitely out of his depth during that spell. That is down to the manager imo if he tries to play that way with players who can't keep possession. it's just far too risky.

Hill had 20 yards of space to run into time and time again but refused to. No idea why. 

[Rampant]

43 minutes ago, upgotheheads said:

 

Well it bloody-well isn't working. And it would only work if we had players good enough not to lose possession cheaply. If you read my post again you will see this; "That is down to the manager imo if he tries to play that way with players who can't keep possession. it's just far too risky."

We won yesterday. We're clear in 3rd for the second season in a row, and progressing in the cup.

 

How is it not working?

Edited February 5, 2023 by Rampant

[Jambo in Bathgate]

How many times have we seen the Uglies do that to a team when they have been playing below standard. Yesterday was a such a game. We brought on substitutes that changed the game. Hearts are now doing to the others what we come to expect of those two in matches. I believe that the SPFL is now split in three. Those two, Hearts and the rest. Hopefully over the coming years with recruitment we can get closer to the top two. 

[upgotheheads]

38 minutes ago, Rampant said:

We won yesterday. We're clear in 3rd for the second season in a row, and progressing in the cup.

 

How is it not working?

 

Frankly we got lucky yesterday because we were playing against ten men for more than an hour, and the win was in doubt to the last kick of the game. We have rescued points very late in games, even into injury time on numerous occasions, and we have lost early goals in very similar circumstances to yesterday more often than we should. Every team coming to Tynecastle knows this and presses us high and early. I am not against the 'build from the back' game, and in fact I am for it, but it's how it's carried out that worries me. As others have said, yesterday Hill had good opportunities to get the ball forward to Forrest quickly, but instead turned inside and gave the ball to Snodgrass, who was usually being marked. A bit of variety to put the opposition in two minds about pressing high would be welcome, especially early in the game.

[Jambo in Bathgate]

1 hour ago, Smithee said:

 

If it isn't working, how do you explain our long unbeaten run against non OF teams?

We are without doubt the third team in Scotland. We are now winning when not playing well. Our substitutes can now change games. Just like the uglies. 

[Jambo in Bathgate]

1 minute ago, upgotheheads said:

 

Frankly we got lucky yesterday because we were playing against ten men for more than an hour, and the win was in doubt to the last kick of the game. We have rescued points very late in games, even into injury time on numerous occasions, and we have lost early goals in very similar circumstances to yesterday more often than we should. Every team coming to Tynecastle knows this and presses us high and early. I am not against the 'build from the back' game, and in fact I am for it, but it's how it's carried out that worries me. As others have said, yesterday Hill had good opportunities to get the ball forward to Forrest quickly, but instead turned inside and gave the ball to Snodgrass, who was usually being marked. A bit of variety to put the opposition in two minds about pressing high would be welcome, especially early in the game.

Luck has nothing to do with it. Game changing substitutions made the difference. 

[upgotheheads]

Just now, Jambo in Bathgate said:

Luck has nothing to do with it. Game changing substitutions made the difference. 

 

We were hanging on and wasting time trying to protect a one goal lead in the seventh minute of injury time, and we had to make some pretty radical subs and shape changes to rescue the game. We should really be comfortable in the last 20 minutes at home to the bottom team in the league, 

[Jingle Bells]

Thought Grant did well when he came on. Not everything came off for him but he added some urgency and drive to the midfield.

We looked much better when playing with a back four.  

[Unknown user]

6 minutes ago, upgotheheads said:

 

Frankly we got lucky yesterday because we were playing against ten men for more than an hour, and the win was in doubt to the last kick of the game. We have rescued points very late in games, even into injury time on numerous occasions, and we have lost early goals in very similar circumstances to yesterday more often than we should. Every team coming to Tynecastle knows this and presses us high and early. I am not against the 'build from the back' game, and in fact I am for it, but it's how it's carried out that worries me. As others have said, yesterday Hill had good opportunities to get the ball forward to Forrest quickly, but instead turned inside and gave the ball to Snodgrass, who was usually being marked. A bit of variety to put the opposition in two minds about pressing high would be welcome, especially early in the game.

 

Sounds a lot like it's working.

[4marsbars]

Missed the game yesterday.... oh well.

 

Why was Rowles substituted? Is he OK?

[GinRummy]

2 minutes ago, 4marsbars said:

Missed the game yesterday.... oh well.

 

Why was Rowles substituted? Is he OK?

I took it to be tactical. Kingsley got a knock but don’t think Rowles did. 

[JimmyCant]

2 hours ago, Smithee said:

 

We're trying to invite the opposition deep into our half ffs, it's not a mistake.

Correct. There’s loads of people who simply don’t understand our system and our reasoning for only playing two in deep midfield. However the system does break down a lot if we don’t have high enough tempo to play through the lines.Happened all first half and until we stretched the width and McKay started hogging the touch line as the outball and we started popping it quicker, we really struggled. Helped a bit by the sending off but it took us a long time in the game to get going. Once we sussed it out and brought in a bit of pace and power in Kuol and Humphreys there was only one team in it. We’re very easy to play against if we’re not popping it about at speed and very hard to play against when we go through the gears.

 

I thought young Kuol was outstanding yesterday. He has blistering pace but he’s also an intelligent player and he tries his heart out. He’s a starter for me in an 3-4-3 and McKay and Ginelly can fight over the other space. 

Edited February 5, 2023 by JimmyCant

[Unknown user]

Just now, GinRummy said:

I took it to be tactical. Kingsley got a knock but don’t think Rowles did. 

Rowles took one to the face in the opposition box at one point, it looked accidental though. I thought his eyes were watering after, he maybe got a hand in the eyes or something

[JimmyCant]

10 minutes ago, Jingle Bells said:

Thought Grant did well when he came on. Not everything came off for him but he added some urgency and drive to the midfield.

We looked much better when playing with a back four.  

I like Grant. Not sure I see a starting place for him in a 3-4-3 but he’s a game changer from the bench quite a lot of the time

Edited February 5, 2023 by JimmyCant

[GinRummy]

4 minutes ago, Smithee said:

Rowles took one to the face in the opposition box at one point, it looked accidental though. I thought his eyes were watering after, he maybe got a hand in the eyes or something

Didn’t notice that 👍

[Unknown user]

6 minutes ago, JimmyCant said:

Correct. There’s loads of people who simply don’t understand our system and our reasoning for only playing two in deep midfield. However the system does break down a lot if we don’t have high enough tempo to play through the lines.Happened all first half and until we stretched the width and McKay started hogging the touch line as the outball and we started popping it quicker, we really struggled. Helped a bit by the sending off but it took us a long time in the game to get going. Once we sussed it out and brought in a bit of pace and power in Kuol and Humphreys there was only one team in it. We’re very easy to play against if we’re not popping it about at speed and very hard to play against when we go through the gears.

 

I thought young Kuol was outstanding yesterday. He has blistering pace but he’s also an intelligent player and he tries his heart out. He’s a starter for me in an 3-4-3 and McKay and Ginelly can fight over the other space. 

 

We have a whole bunch of players who, for our level, are excellent on the ball.

To take advantage of that, they need space, and there are only limited ways to create space on the tightest pitch in the league, which we play every second game on.

 

It's a pragmatic solution and he deserves credit for it.

Edited February 5, 2023 by Smithee

[jock _turd]

6 minutes ago, upgotheheads said:

 

We were hanging on and wasting time trying to protect a one goal lead in the seventh minute of injury time, and we had to make some pretty radical subs and shape changes to rescue the game. We should really be comfortable in the last 20 minutes at home to the bottom team in the league, 

 

 

There was no luck involved . It is not bad luck to have a player sent of for deliberately trying to injure an opponent so lets put that to bed.  I said before the game started they would be out trying to injure our boys and that is exactly what happened.  On top of that D Utd had only two shots on target the entire game while Hearts had seven ,actually if you look at the match stats they are quite revealing looking at them we skooshed that game 🤣

[GinRummy]

That wank Edwards is long overdue a red. He always leaves something on his challenges and is a danger to his fellow pros. Dirty animal. 

[Jambo in Bathgate]

10 minutes ago, upgotheheads said:

 

We were hanging on and wasting time trying to protect a one goal lead in the seventh minute of injury time, and we had to make some pretty radical subs and shape changes to rescue the game. We should really be comfortable in the last 20 minutes at home to the bottom team in the league, 

Were you at the game. Humphries hit the post before his wonder goal. Dundee United changed from defending to attack when they lost the lead. It was to be expected. 

[sadj]

1 minute ago, GinRummy said:

That wank Edwards is long overdue a red. He always leaves something on his challenges and is a danger to his fellow pros. Dirty animal. 

Said yesterday that red for him has been coming for at least 5 games. 

[upgotheheads]

Just now, Jambo in Bathgate said:

Were you at the game. Humphries hit the post before his wonder goal. Dundee United changed from defending to attack when they lost the lead. It was to be expected. 

Yes I was at the game, and we were hanging on in the last ten minutes against 10 men.

[GinRummy]

1 minute ago, sadj said:

Said yesterday that red for him has been coming for at least 5 games. 

He’s at it all the time eh. Hopefully he either changes his ways or ref’s get wide to him and get the cards out more often. 

[MattyK82]

6 minutes ago, upgotheheads said:

Yes I was at the game, and we were hanging on in the last ten minutes against 10 men.

Na. We weren’t hanging on. I don’t recall DU peppering our box with crosses and shots in the last 10. A couple of forays which were defended well. 
 

We were sloppy in possession though which we didn’t need to be. 
 

Gino getting himself sent off didn’t help for the last few minutes mind you.

 

 

[kingantti1874]

11 hours ago, tcjambo said:

They won't get relegated. There are at least three teams worse than them in the division.

 

 

 

 

 

 

given they are bottom of the league that’s a big call

[4marsbars]

24 minutes ago, GinRummy said:

I took it to be tactical. Kingsley got a knock but don’t think Rowles did. 

Bold substitution that paid off: how often have we seen the McKay to Cochrane underlap on the edge of the box? 

[GinRummy]

1 minute ago, 4marsbars said:

Bold substitution that paid off: how often have we seen the McKay to Cochrane underlap on the edge of the box? 

Smithee suggesting Rowles took a face knock. Worked well in any case. Aye, Cochrane plays well with McKay, was a great team goal. 👍

[Unknown user]

4 minutes ago, GinRummy said:

Smithee suggesting Rowles took a face knock. Worked well in any case. Aye, Cochrane plays well with McKay, was a great team goal. 👍

Tbh I can't remember when it was, it was a bit of a blur 

[JTJ]

United will struggle even more if Fletcher gets injured as he's about their only striker. Moving Watt on was cost-cutting but they really should have brought in another as replacement.

 

Football-wise they are far from worst BUT they do leave the boot in a lot. They may need to rely on Motherwell and Killie just being as bad as they are now.

[Unknown user]

I thought bringing Lewis Neilson was a nice touch by the way

[Drylaw Hearts]

We really need to sort our midfield.

 

I hope we go 442 or 433 v Hamilton.

[Drylaw Hearts]

7 minutes ago, Smithee said:

I thought bringing Lewis Neilson was a nice touch by the way

He was the only CH on the bench when Kingsley went off.

[jamboozy]

46 minutes ago, GinRummy said:

That wank Edwards is long overdue a red. He always leaves something on his challenges and is a danger to his fellow pros. Dirty animal. 

That’s three games where our players have or potentially could’ve been injured by this scum, I call them that because they know exactly what they are doing and therefore are deserving of the title.

[Thomaso]

2 hours ago, Rampant said:

We won yesterday. We're clear in 3rd for the second season in a row, and progressing in the cup.

 

How is it not working?

The results have been excellent but in my humble opinion we have been riding our luck playing a back 3! Rowles, Sibbick and Hill have been dodgy at best and we leave acres of space down the wings for the opposition to exploit.

[Thomaso]

17 minutes ago, Drylaw Hearts said:

We really need to sort our midfield.

 

I hope we go 442 or 433 v Hamilton.

We desperately need to fix our defence!

[davemclaren]

4 minutes ago, Thomaso said:

We desperately need to fix our defence!

We miss Smith on the right, defensively. 

[stirlingshirejambo]

16 hours ago, longmalx said:

Big issue in first half was Snodgrass being so deep, meaning we had 2 players extra at the back doing nothing leaving everyone else with no space.

 

Him picking up the ball so deep is ok against a pressing team but today United hardly pressed at all. We only started playing when Grant / Snodgrass played alongside each other rather than Snoddy sitting on top of the defence.

 

I just can’t see why we didn’t start the game with a back 4, or at least Snodgrass much further forward. We are a better team with Grant in it since although he has his faults he finds good positions and creates space for others. I think he had the first pass to a strikers feet at the edge of the box after 75.

 

Our midfield wouldn’t have been so bad if Halliday/Snodgrass had lined up like this to start with. Why Neilson didn’t spot this in the first half I’ll never know.

 

Kuol is clearly very raw - good work for the goal but it’s clear he’s miles from being a starter just now. 

 

We can’t start with a back 4 as with Smith out we do not have a right back that Robbie trusts (Atkinson) and Hill is definitely not a right back nor is Sibbick

fact we played Gino right back later in game is testament to that

if we play Halliday there he will cut back inside every time and inevitably the ball will go backwards again something that is killing our momentum as it is 

[stirlingshirejambo]

2 hours ago, jr ewing said:

Hill had 20 yards of space to run into time and time again but refused to. No idea why. 

I think he’s carrying an injury still

i think he could made more of an effort to cut out cross at goal and think he just didn’t trust himself to get forward 

noticed he had an ice pack on leg when celebrating Humphreys goal

frustrating as hell as the 2 wide centre back should be bringing the ball out

[Jingle Bells]

1 hour ago, JimmyCant said:

I like Grant. Not sure I see a starting place for him in a 3-4-3 but he’s a game changer from the bench quite a lot of the time

Depends a lot on whether you consider 3-4-3(i.e. 5 at the back)as a failed experiment or not, Jimmy. 

[Morti1874]

8 minutes ago, davemclaren said:

We miss Smith on the right, defensively. 

Need to go to back 4, with smith at right back, playing the 3 is making players keeping passing back the way 

[wavydavy]

2 hours ago, jr ewing said:

Hill had 20 yards of space to run into time and time again but refused to. No idea why. 

 

Sibbick did the same against Rangers.

[wavydavy]

17 minutes ago, Shaun-mortimer said:

Need to go to back 4, with smith at right back, playing the 3 is making players keeping passing back the way 

 

Robbie actually said that we were too slow in moving the ball about and you could see that he had told Cochrane to make some runs into space when he came on.

 

So the question is are the players knocking the ball about at the back because of the formation or the lack of runners in front of them?

 

Does it really matter if we play with a back 3 or 4 ? so long as we move the ball quicker and players run into spaces to receive forward passes.

Edited February 5, 2023 by wavydavy

[4marsbars]

52 minutes ago, Shaun-mortimer said:

Need to go to back 4, with smith at right back, playing the 3 is making players keeping passing back the way 

Yes, one defeat in 11 (12?) suggests we need a major rethink.

[milky_26]

1 hour ago, davemclaren said:

We miss Smith on the right, defensively. 

and devlin in midfield

[davemclaren]

3 minutes ago, milky_26 said:

and devlin in midfield

Indeed. 

[Mikey1874]

2 hours ago, upgotheheads said:

 

Frankly we got lucky yesterday because we were playing against ten men for more than an hour, and the win was in doubt to the last kick of the game. We have rescued points very late in games, even into injury time on numerous occasions, and we have lost early goals in very similar circumstances to yesterday more often than we should. Every team coming to Tynecastle knows this and presses us high and early. I am not against the 'build from the back' game, and in fact I am for it, but it's how it's carried out that worries me. As others have said, yesterday Hill had good opportunities to get the ball forward to Forrest quickly, but instead turned inside and gave the ball to Snodgrass, who was usually being marked. A bit of variety to put the opposition in two minds about pressing high would be welcome, especially early in the game.

 

No luck yesterday. A very dynamic attacking performance after the substitutions.