Give Naismith time, what he is trying to achieve, our identity

[Bongo 1874]

We are a possession based team that tries to win the ball high up the pitch,and then break into attacks from there.

 

Intensity is our identity are you just making this up? I'll give you the evidence and you can be the judge.

 

 

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://theanalyst.com/2023/08/scottish-premiership-stats-2023-24-opta/&ved=2ahUKEwibs5u1-fqBAxUGJsAKHTNIBJsQFnoECCMQAQ&usg=AOvVaw1R8mGYL6iULauwFJ59HmQI

 

As it stands we have the lowest PPDA in league, for those that don't know what PPDA is.

 

What does PPDA mean in football?

Passes Allowed Per Defensive Action

Passes Allowed Per Defensive Action (PPDA)

To measure the pressure that the defending team puts on the opposition players when they are in possession of the ball. The definition of PPDA is: PPDA = Number of Passes made by Attacking Team (oppoenent) / Number of Defensive Actions.

 

A high PPDA value indicates that a team sits off more than others; they make few attempts to press the player on the ball in the opposition's half or near the halfway line. Rather than counter-press after losing possession, the players make recovery runs and the team drops into a mid or low block.

 

What does a low PPDA mean? A low PPDA value indicates a higher intensity to a team's pressing. A low value shows that the team allows their opponents fewer passes for every defensive action that one of their players makes.

 

We are currently 1st with a score of 8.9.

 

Rangers 2nd 9.1

Celtic 3rd 9.4

Hibs 4th 10.5 🤣.

 

The link above shows the evidence.

 

Here is actual game footage.

 

the Aberdeen game shows what we are trying to achieve,they were forced to go long due to our high press,and constant pressure no time approach.

 

We dominated possession and the game despite having many players out.

 

Naismith hasn't had the luxury of bringing his own people in.

 

And for what it's worth, i don't believe the dof fully backs him.

 

Give him time he isn't the problem.

 

 

When Naismith does eventually leave this is the philosophy,  we need to stick to when appointing someone else.

 

This will allow a smooth transition,and no confusion of what is expected from the players,from fans.

 

 

Very confident for the game against Celtic.

 

[ri Alban]

I'd give him six month in the gaol for the subs against Hibs and impersonating a football manager. 

[Bull's-eye]

2 minutes ago, ri Alban said:

I'd give him six month in the gaol for the subs against Hibs and impersonating a football manager. 

 

Another one impersonating a Hearts supporter. Popped onto ignore 👍

 

Ignore this oddball Bongo, good positive post 👍

[rudi must stay]

He has the players pumped unlike McAvoy. Forrest's goal shows that, we'll get Hibs back we battered them. Things are okay but the gut feeling on Clement is Rangers have found a great coach

[GinRummy]

Welcome back Bongo.

 

He’ll get time and has made a bit of progress recently. We were the best we’ve been all season against Hibs, errors were made and we move on.  Hopefully with more play like we saw against those spoon burners.  

[ri Alban]

4 minutes ago, Bull's-eye said:

 

Another one impersonating a Hearts supporter. Popped onto ignore 👍

 

Ignore this oddball Bongo, good positive post 👍

Really? 

 

This place has some serious up their own arse folk.

[GinRummy]

11 minutes ago, ri Alban said:

Really? 

 

This place has some serious up their own arse folk.

You’re obviously not impersonating a Hearts supporter and are a genuine Hearts fan but there’s no need for the comment either imo. He ****ed up against Hibs but at least he had us playing the way a lot of us want to see Hearts play. 
 

There’ll be plenty time for negativity after we’ve played the old firm 😀

[Bongo 1874]

2 hours ago, rudi must stay said:

He has the players pumped unlike McAvoy. Forrest's goal shows that, we'll get Hibs back we battered them. Things are okay but the gut feeling on Clement is Rangers have found a great coach

Clement,looks a good appointment attacking and aggressive football again.

 

I want us to challenge both them,playing the way we are long term i think will benefit us.

 

Don't want to be overly critical but i do wonder if Forrest and McAvoy compliment Stevens mindset and beliefs,and long term i would like to see us go for takis as DOF.

 

His mindset matches our manager,and he's highly thought of at greece national team.

 

He would further expand our scouting  knowledge and team,with his contacts.

 

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/sport/football/hearts/takis-fyssas-wants-to-return-to-hearts-in-a-new-role-as-greek-explains-talks-to-sign-tynecastle-player-3697428&ved=2ahUKEwjAp4f4nfuBAxULV0EAHTZWDzMQ2LwJegQIGBAB&usg=AOvVaw3bbnal9tflwz2bcYOnvGcy

 

I'm positive and feel the club are moving in the right direction,will we see some go in terms of coaching, dof etc yes we will unfortunately that's life. 

 

That doesn't mean to say I'm saying,Savage, Forrest,McAvoy, are shit.

 

When a club is evolving sometimes you have offered as much as you possibly can.

 

And other people can then further the job.

 

With knowledge,contacts,experience etc.

 

 

Edited October 16, 2023 by Bongo 1874

[Sooks]

Results please , I give narey a flying copulation about PPDAPDAs

[been here before]

You're better using the D.I.S.C.O. What are DISCO? Well they're delirious, incredible, superficial, complicated oh, oh, ohs.

 

Not to be confused with YMCAs which have everything for young men to enjoy and you can hang out with all the boys.

 

Combine DISCO x YMCA and you get A E A E I O U U which means I sometimes cry.

Edited October 16, 2023 by been here before

[jamboinglasgow]

3 hours ago, Bongo 1874 said:

We are a possession based team that tries to win the ball high up the pitch,and then break into attacks from there.

 

Intensity is our identity are you just making this up? I'll give you the evidence and you can be the judge.

 

 

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://theanalyst.com/2023/08/scottish-premiership-stats-2023-24-opta/&ved=2ahUKEwibs5u1-fqBAxUGJsAKHTNIBJsQFnoECCMQAQ&usg=AOvVaw1R8mGYL6iULauwFJ59HmQI

 

As it stands we have the lowest PPDA in league, for those that don't know what PPDA is.

 

What does PPDA mean in football?

Passes Allowed Per Defensive Action

Passes Allowed Per Defensive Action (PPDA)

To measure the pressure that the defending team puts on the opposition players when they are in possession of the ball. The definition of PPDA is: PPDA = Number of Passes made by Attacking Team (oppoenent) / Number of Defensive Actions.

 

A high PPDA value indicates that a team sits off more than others; they make few attempts to press the player on the ball in the opposition's half or near the halfway line. Rather than counter-press after losing possession, the players make recovery runs and the team drops into a mid or low block.

 

What does a low PPDA mean? A low PPDA value indicates a higher intensity to a team's pressing. A low value shows that the team allows their opponents fewer passes for every defensive action that one of their players makes.

 

We are currently 1st with a score of 8.9.

 

Rangers 2nd 9.1

Celtic 3rd 9.4

Hibs 4th 10.5 🤣.

 

The link above shows the evidence.

 

Here is actual game footage.

 

the Aberdeen game shows what we are trying to achieve,they were forced to go long due to our high press,and constant pressure no time approach.

 

We dominated possession and the game despite having many players out.

 

Naismith hasn't had the luxury of bringing his own people in.

 

And for what it's worth, i don't believe the dof fully backs him.

 

Give him time he isn't the problem.

 

 

When Naismith does eventually leave this is the philosophy,  we need to stick to when appointing someone else.

 

This will allow a smooth transition,and no confusion of what is expected from the players,from fans.

 

 

Very confident for the game against Celtic.

 

 

I would agree, that I think Naismith is slowly building the team in the way he wants it. Saw a good thread on twitter last week which published a lot of stats and as someone pointed out, the stats are clearly showing that Naismith is building a way of playing for the team (even it doesn't look it to people watching.)

 

I think despite what the coaching staff and Naismith said, the earlier arrangement of McAvoy as manager caused problems. Our domestic results before the last international break was won 2, drew 1, lost 2. Since that break when Naismith has been made manager we have won 3, drawn 1 and lost 1. 

 

I was listening to Scarves around the Funnel last week and I just had to stop listening when they were have a real rant about Naismith. I find them normally very fair and I do think some criticism of him was fair, but felt it was all one sided, no positives to counter the criticism when apart from 90 seconds with two bad mistakes, we had put in a dominate performance against Hibs. 

 

To me, looking back at the games last season under Naismith, I think the style was easier to implement because it is a change of manager so players can be more receptive for a short term change, and having Ginnelly was the ideal outlet for how we wanted to play. So this season has been more like turning a tanker round to get the style of play. We have brought in players that can play the Ginnelly role but they need to get up to speed. Our team has been badly affected by injury which means we can have a stable team to build that style. The management set up was not ideal at this either. But I do think the tanker is coming to the end of its turn, I think we will have a team that will play more attacking football we want and win from it. 

[jamboinglasgow]

22 minutes ago, Sooks said:

Results please , I give narey a flying copulation about PPDAPDAs

 

To be fair that is how managers jobs will live or die on. But its also why football now is hard to give someone time as the pressure is greater for results. Was speaking to a Rangers supporting friend yesterday about Clements appointment, and he talked about the worry that the manager wants to build but you cant get that at Rangers, as few bad results and you could be gone, so the Old Firm cant have a long term plan. They appoint a manager and hope it goes right (Celtic stumbled onto Ange which really paid off.)

 

I think there is a similar pressure with Hearts, a few bad results and the fans can quickly turn.

[Sooks]

14 minutes ago, jamboinglasgow said:

 

To be fair that is how managers jobs will live or die on. But its also why football now is hard to give someone time as the pressure is greater for results. Was speaking to a Rangers supporting friend yesterday about Clements appointment, and he talked about the worry that the manager wants to build but you cant get that at Rangers, as few bad results and you could be gone, so the Old Firm cant have a long term plan. They appoint a manager and hope it goes right (Celtic stumbled onto Ange which really paid off.)

 

I think there is a similar pressure with Hearts, a few bad results and the fans can quickly turn.

I am just disappointed at results tbh mate . Annoys me that we are losing games to teams with smaller budgets and it wears down my tolerance for stats 

[Bongo 1874]

43 minutes ago, jamboinglasgow said:

 

To be fair that is how managers jobs will live or die on. But its also why football now is hard to give someone time as the pressure is greater for results. Was speaking to a Rangers supporting friend yesterday about Clements appointment, and he talked about the worry that the manager wants to build but you cant get that at Rangers, as few bad results and you could be gone, so the Old Firm cant have a long term plan. They appoint a manager and hope it goes right (Celtic stumbled onto Ange which really paid off.)

 

I think there is a similar pressure with Hearts, a few bad results and the fans can quickly turn.

Until we can expand our player wage budget to 10-15k highest earner.

 

Then we can mount a full on season challenge,first we challenge them in games and be competitive against them.

 

The club needs to look at ways this can be achieved.

 

Also our recruitment needs to be very good, look at Brighton/Brentford for an example.

 

I could post players i think are ready and suited to come in and do a job.

 

I really think a chance was lost in the summer to sell Shankland, and try and get more money to play with in this regards.

 

Brighton do this very well,they know exactly when to buy and sell.

 

They have planned well in advanced if the manager or a player goes,who would be suited to replace them.

 

 But they also stick to the philosophy that has got them good results.

 

They play possession based football and they press high, they lose a goal here by playing to these beliefs,do they panic? No they stick to what they know and has got them results,this is why i say give Naismith time.

 

They get there rewards second half when they press relentlessly, and Mitoma gets a goal from it.

 

Newcastle are my English club,but it's very difficult not to be impressed with Brighton,the results they are getting considering they aren't paying what the others are.

 

My point you can have success and make money but the beliefs and philosophy doesn't change.

Here is video.

 

The next manager plays to them beliefs and philosophy.

 

That's what the fans want and demand if we lose but go down fighting playing our way and our style,I can accept that.

 

Knowing they ran themselves into the ground trying.

 

 

 

 

Edited October 16, 2023 by Bongo 1874

[King prawn]

1 hour ago, jamboinglasgow said:

 

I would agree, that I think Naismith is slowly building the team in the way he wants it. Saw a good thread on twitter last week which published a lot of stats and as someone pointed out, the stats are clearly showing that Naismith is building a way of playing for the team (even it doesn't look it to people watching.)

 

I think despite what the coaching staff and Naismith said, the earlier arrangement of McAvoy as manager caused problems. Our domestic results before the last international break was won 2, drew 1, lost 2. Since that break when Naismith has been made manager we have won 3, drawn 1 and lost 1. 

 

I was listening to Scarves around the Funnel last week and I just had to stop listening when they were have a real rant about Naismith. I find them normally very fair and I do think some criticism of him was fair, but felt it was all one sided, no positives to counter the criticism when apart from 90 seconds with two bad mistakes, we had put in a dominate performance against Hibs. 

 

To me, looking back at the games last season under Naismith, I think the style was easier to implement because it is a change of manager so players can be more receptive for a short term change, and having Ginnelly was the ideal outlet for how we wanted to play. So this season has been more like turning a tanker round to get the style of play. We have brought in players that can play the Ginnelly role but they need to get up to speed. Our team has been badly affected by injury which means we can have a stable team to build that style. The management set up was not ideal at this either. But I do think the tanker is coming to the end of its turn, I think we will have a team that will play more attacking football we want and win from it. 

88 dominant minutes means feck all against Hibs if we don’t win. Naismith deserved to be slaughtered for the subs and changes he made. 

[Bender]

Managed to beat a team that hasn’t won a league game since the opening day and another team who needed penalties to avoid relegation, before chucking a 2 goal lead at home to a pretty awful Hibs team. 
 

The next Guardiola so he is. 

[PaddysBar]

He’ll be gone in November. 

[Sooks]

6 hours ago, PaddysBar said:

He’ll be gone in November. 

And give a kiss to his Mother 

[Guest]

The FAATB number was too high early in the season 

 

Less fannying around at the back please.

[1971fozzy]

8 hours ago, King prawn said:

88 dominant minutes means feck all against Hibs if we don’t win. Naismith deserved to be slaughtered for the subs and changes he made. 

This. Appalling decisions cost games like moving the defence and putting a bombscare like Toby Sibbick in as CB when he’s playing fine at RB - I mean why the Fek do that ??..

I’m yet to be convinced. Having seen us away from home as well.  He’s had shit luck with injuries I’ll give him that, and I’m not judging him on upcoming games v the old firm either. 
Hoping it comes together obviously as I like the guy but  heard it all before. Playing the Stendell way, the Cathro chess way. I’ll say this though anything’s better than the Robbie Neilson bore to death way that’s for sure.

 

[TexasAndy]

I think the vast majority of Hearts support are 'content' to give him time but like any manager anywhere (including Pep) if he goes on a long losing run then he will go.  I like Naismith and I am liking how he is trying to play, I also think the players are buying in to it.  

[TheBigO]

9 hours ago, King prawn said:

88 dominant minutes means feck all against Hibs if we don’t win. Naismith deserved to be slaughtered for the subs and changes he made. 

I still don't agree with this.  At all.  I seem in a minority.  But hey ho.

 

Lowry was spent. Beni coming on, I defy anyone who didn't think "magic, game's done".

 

The Kingsley one.  Look, we have 2 fantastic LBs, we're very lucky.  We have a third option there and it's Rowles.  Rowles has been playing there for Oz, he has played there a couple of times well for us too.  Toby has played CH very succesfully for us, including in derbies, in fact being a hero there in derbies.  Offiah to RB, he's been building into the team not an issue.  

 

The other option was Halliday.  Who is pony.  He'd have totally disrupted our play by being non-existent, rushing into things and being passed around, missing tackles and headers and generally being shite.  Against Boyle.

 

The subs weren't "wrong".  We made a couple of mistakes.  Big big difference.

 

Hind sight is wonderful but can be used poorly

[A_A wehatethehibs]

We’ve shown that 4th is unacceptable so we’ve now got to back that up.
 

Naismith has never been above 4th so at this moment in time he is below the expectations of the club.
 

It is imperative we get 3rd and guaranteed group stage this season. 

 

That was the whole point of the sacking and replacement of Robbie.
 

The same prize is on the line for 3rd.

 

This season may be the last time it’s available for a while with the recent decline in coefficient.
 

As of right now it’s, at best, naismith & Frankie are looking a sideways move from robbie & jig

 

We stopped the rot from the implosion of 2023, but where’s the step up in level looking toward 2024? Very few minimal signs of it performances wise, despite a full pre season and players signed. 

[A_A wehatethehibs]

8 minutes ago, TheBigO said:

I still don't agree with this.  At all.  I seem in a minority.  But hey ho.

 

Lowry was spent. Beni coming on, I defy anyone who didn't think "magic, game's done".

 

The Kingsley one.  Look, we have 2 fantastic LBs, we're very lucky.  We have a third option there and it's Rowles.  Rowles has been playing there for Oz, he has played there a couple of times well for us too.  Toby has played CH very succesfully for us, including in derbies, in fact being a hero there in derbies.  Offiah to RB, he's been building into the team not an issue.  

 

The other option was Halliday.  Who is pony.  He'd have totally disrupted our play by being non-existent, rushing into things and being passed around, missing tackles and headers and generally being shite.  Against Boyle.

 

The subs weren't "wrong".  We made a couple of mistakes.  Big big difference.

 

Hind sight is wonderful but can be used poorly

I felt immediately uncertain when he made the blunder of putting the error prone Toby Sibbick at CB in the middle of the game. 

 

Having someone weak and error prone at full back, at least their typical mistake doesn’t often directly cost you a goal, as it does with a CB or GK. Maybe cost us a couple of chances but being at full back, still got your CBs and GK in there as the last line. 

 

Yes Halliday would’ve been introducing a vulnerability but generally at LB he does a job, gets tackles in, competes, and can launch it to safety down the channel. The basics. Call it the lesser of 2 evils. 

 

And that was not hindsight. I felt at the time, in the moment, that it was a mistake to move Toby to the middle. And so it proved it cost us 2 points dropped. Not hindsight. 

[Jim Panzee]

10 hours ago, jamboinglasgow said:

 

To me, looking back at the games last season under Naismith, I think the style was easier to implement because it is a change of manager so players can be more receptive for a short term change, and having Ginnelly was the ideal outlet for how we wanted to play. So this season has been more like turning a tanker round to get the style of play. We have brought in players that can play the Ginnelly role but they need to get up to speed. Our team has been badly affected by injury which means we can have a stable team to build that style. The management set up was not ideal at this either. But I do think the tanker is coming to the end of its turn, I think we will have a team that will play more attacking football we want and win from it. 

 

really really badly. And it's not fringe players either. Any other SPFL team outwith the uglies would be getting pumped royally without Gordon, Halkett, Cochrane, Kingsley, Atkinson, Beni, McKay, Oda, Tagawa. It's almost an entire first team

 

I'm sure Neilsen would still be here had those players been available, and Naismith will be crossing everything to have a fit defence unit of Gordon, Kingsley, Cochrane, Halkett, Kent, Rowles & Atkinson to build from.

 

Hoping our luck will turn. 

[OTT]

9 hours ago, King prawn said:

88 dominant minutes means feck all against Hibs if we don’t win. Naismith deserved to be slaughtered for the subs and changes he made. 

 

Yep. 

 

I'm entirely open to him succeeding. But my starting position is that I don't think he had the experience to deserve being appointed. We're not St Mirren, Killie or some other club that is buzzing to finish top 6. We're aiming for 3rd, and the amount of mistakes a manager can make in pursuit of 3rd is low. Aberdeen snuck in ahead of us last season by 3 points? Well, we've just thrown away 2 against Hibs, 3 against Dundee and 3 against Motherwell. 

 

Its early days, I completely get that, and you can probably also make the argument, well Aberdeen had a bad start under Goodwin, and turned it around under Robson, so dropping points isn't the end of the world. 

 

But still, we saw declining standards under Levein. Its important we don't allow us to begin settling for anything less than 3rd. Its not an ambition, its an expectation and we need the manager to appreciate and understand that. Can't be throwing away points because of errors. 

Edited October 17, 2023 by OTT

[Go for it 1308]

11 hours ago, Sooks said:

Results please , I give narey a flying copulation about PPDAPDAs

Thus us where I'm at. I couldn't give a flying **** about stats , assists and all that pish. Just ****ing  beat the team in front of you at all costs. Its not rocket science ffs🙄

[Prehen]

Naisy came in being promoted as 1) delivering attacking football, and 2) giving youth a chance. Enough spoken about the PPDAPDAs, I would also like to state nothing has changed on the second as well, bar Denholm got his new contract and a few minutes on the pitch.

Results matter first and foremost, we had a friendly run of fixtures to being season and no one given minutes. We only have to look across the City and Monty already giving 16yr olds time on the pitch. That grates me they are getting great press, when I thought Hearts would lead the way on youth development this season, with Naisy at the helm. How wrong I was.

[TheBigO]

36 minutes ago, A_A wehatethehibs said:

I felt immediately uncertain when he made the blunder of putting the error prone Toby Sibbick at CB in the middle of the game. 

 

Having someone weak and error prone at full back, at least their typical mistake doesn’t often directly cost you a goal, as it does with a CB or GK. Maybe cost us a couple of chances but being at full back, still got your CBs and GK in there as the last line. 

 

Yes Halliday would’ve been introducing a vulnerability but generally at LB he does a job, gets tackles in, competes, and can launch it to safety down the channel. The basics. Call it the lesser of 2 evils. 

 

And that was not hindsight. I felt at the time, in the moment, that it was a mistake to move Toby to the middle. And so it proved it cost us 2 points dropped. Not hindsight. 

Aye maybe.  What I'm saying I guess though is its geuinely hind sight.  We don't know how Halliday would have done.  He had 2 not ideal options and in my opinion he went for the lesser of two evils.  Saying it's "wrong" is overly simplistic.

 

We don't see training.  Do you know how Halliday has been doing?  Do you know how Sibbick has been doing?

 

Sibbick came on when Cochrane was sent off against Hibs end of last season in a game that really meant something and was superb.  He and Hill stood firm, defended brilliantly.  So he's done it for Naisy before, that means something.  That's been overlooked.

 

Not meaning to make a big thing of it, really not.  But it's a stick being used to beat Naismith, the derby subs, and I think it's unfair.  Trying circumstances given the injuries etc and we still went out and smashed that game right in the dick.  Literally 2 daft moments, one of which was quite unlucky, and boom, its Naismith's fault.  What about the weeks he made great subs?  Killie away in the quarter final?  Anyone? No?  It works both ways.

 

We've got a management team in who will work their butts off for us, let's give them a chance to grow and implement what they want.  It's not been great, but it's not a disaster either - a disaster is Cathro-Levein territory when we can see the players are truly way below our standard AND not working for the team and we're bottom of the league!! What we have is the bones of a right good team, loads of injuries and a young manager with fire in his belly.  Let's give it time to breathe man.

[Glamorgan Jambo]

Hopefully Bongo is right and I’m wrong about Naismith 

[john thomas]

1 hour ago, TheBigO said:

I still don't agree with this.  At all.  I seem in a minority.  But hey ho.

 

Lowry was spent. Beni coming on, I defy anyone who didn't think "magic, game's done".

 

The Kingsley one.  Look, we have 2 fantastic LBs, we're very lucky.  We have a third option there and it's Rowles.  Rowles has been playing there for Oz, he has played there a couple of times well for us too.  Toby has played CH very succesfully for us, including in derbies, in fact being a hero there in derbies.  Offiah to RB, he's been building into the team not an issue.  

 

The other option was Halliday.  Who is pony.  He'd have totally disrupted our play by being non-existent, rushing into things and being passed around, missing tackles and headers and generally being shite.  Against Boyle.

 

The subs weren't "wrong".  We made a couple of mistakes.  Big big difference.

 

Hind sight is wonderful but can be used poorly

Precisely

If , as has been suggested, he brought Halliday on and this resulted in Hibs winning he would have been roasted for not putting Rowles (excellent at LB) on .

Beni sub made plenty sense , arguably too sensible 

Two fekk ups had nothing to do with any of that .

 

[rudi must stay]

Football is all the same one ball two goals what you need is somebody inspirational somebody that can make the team believe anything is possible. I believed in Stendal no question, RN not really, Naismith I think perhaps. I'd still bring in a huge now I think our club is now built for it

[King prawn]

2 hours ago, TheBigO said:

I still don't agree with this.  At all.  I seem in a minority.  But hey ho.

 

Lowry was spent. Beni coming on, I defy anyone who didn't think "magic, game's done".

 

The Kingsley one.  Look, we have 2 fantastic LBs, we're very lucky.  We have a third option there and it's Rowles.  Rowles has been playing there for Oz, he has played there a couple of times well for us too.  Toby has played CH very succesfully for us, including in derbies, in fact being a hero there in derbies.  Offiah to RB, he's been building into the team not an issue.  

 

The other option was Halliday.  Who is pony.  He'd have totally disrupted our play by being non-existent, rushing into things and being passed around, missing tackles and headers and generally being shite.  Against Boyle.

 

The subs weren't "wrong".  We made a couple of mistakes.  Big big difference.

 

Hind sight is wonderful but can be used poorly

We’ll have to agree to disagree on this one  Id argue it’s not a case of hindsight with this one - called it at half time, why on Earth change all of the back 4 instead of putting 1 player in “like for like” ? 

 

Beni was so atrociously bad in his last game that throwing him into a derby was always going to be a bad idea - he was out of puff after 5 minutes. 
 

I don’t think a more experienced manager makes the changes Naismith does and I don’t think we would’ve drawn the game. 

[Dsjambo]

2 hours ago, A_A wehatethehibs said:

I felt immediately uncertain when he made the blunder of putting the error prone Toby Sibbick at CB in the middle of the game. 

 

Having someone weak and error prone at full back, at least their typical mistake doesn’t often directly cost you a goal, as it does with a CB or GK. Maybe cost us a couple of chances but being at full back, still got your CBs and GK in there as the last line. 

 

Yes Halliday would’ve been introducing a vulnerability but generally at LB he does a job, gets tackles in, competes, and can launch it to safety down the channel. The basics. Call it the lesser of 2 evils. 

 

And that was not hindsight. I felt at the time, in the moment, that it was a mistake to move Toby to the middle. And so it proved it cost us 2 points dropped. Not hindsight. 

Not hindsight from me either. The obvious move was a straight swap with Halliday in at LB making it only one change (less disruption) as opposed to Offia coming on and moving Rowles and Sibbick making it three changes (a great deal more disruption) A crucial mistake that cost us dearly on the day. I get the concern about Halliday v Boyle but Halliday is an experienced pro and would have coped I’m sure. If he can’t be trusted to come on and do a job he shouldn’t be on the bench.

[gordon simpson]

17 hours ago, ri Alban said:

I'd give him six month in the gaol for the subs against Hibs and impersonating a football manager. 

away and throw shite at the moon 

[Jim Panzee]

18 minutes ago, Dsjambo said:

Not hindsight from me either. The obvious move was a straight swap with Halliday in at LB making it only one change (less disruption) as opposed to Offia coming on and moving Rowles and Sibbick making it three changes (a great deal more disruption) A crucial mistake that cost us dearly on the day. I get the concern about Halliday v Boyle but Halliday is an experienced pro and would have coped I’m sure. If he can’t be trusted to come on and do a job he shouldn’t be on the bench.

don't disagree with this in principle - it is the logical choice on paper. 

 

but I would've had a real concern with halliday up against Boyle - or Youan. Possibly Naismith having the same worry. Simple ball over the top / channel behind halliday and he's done for pace.

 

Should Halliday be on the bench? as per other threads on this - he's probably there to come on for the last 5 mins and to play more in midfield / centrally where his (now) lack of pace will be less exposed.

 

with a fully fit squad, Halliday may even struggle to make the bench.

[Sooks]

The Sibbick Halliday debate is missing the point imo

 

Sibbick was having a fine game at RB and not giving their supposed flying machine wingers a sniff . Rowles did very well at both LB and LCB . Sibbick just is not as good at RCB as he is at RB . Bringing on Halliday would have probably been equally disastrous at LB as Sibbick at RCB . The problem was not so much the option he chose , because both options weakened us significantly . The issue is that we kept Halliday on as a squad player when he is not good enough at any position to be a back up . Boyle and Youan would have left Halliday spinning like a top and probably have seen him sent off for smashing one of them in frustration and everyone would be saying that we should have put Sibbick to CB

[A_A wehatethehibs]

16 minutes ago, Dsjambo said:

Not hindsight from me either. The obvious move was a straight swap with Halliday in at LB making it only one change (less disruption) as opposed to Offia coming on and moving Rowles and Sibbick making it three changes (a great deal more disruption) A crucial mistake that cost us dearly on the day. I get the concern about Halliday v Boyle but Halliday is an experienced pro and would have coped I’m sure. If he can’t be trusted to come on and do a job he shouldn’t be on the bench.

Toby was playing well too at RB.
 

He gets nervous, so just leave him be at RB and he’d have got through the game fine.

 

It was a classic case of a young inexperienced manager trying to be too smart and I expect Naismith himself would accept that lesson. Why bother disrupting the rest of the back 4 because your left backs got injured? All you do is multiply the disruption? 

 

Even if he’d just chucked Offiah on to LB, I think I could’ve probably accepted that. 
 

Tell you who would be coming in handy right about now with injuries to 3 full backs. Mick Smith. I thought he was maybe worth chucking another year deal in case of emergency given the injuries we always seem to get. Now threadbare at the back again 

[TheBigO]

16 minutes ago, King prawn said:

We’ll have to agree to disagree on this one  Id argue it’s not a case of hindsight with this one - called it at half time, why on Earth change all of the back 4 instead of putting 1 player in “like for like” ? 

 

Beni was so atrociously bad in his last game that throwing him into a derby was always going to be a bad idea - he was out of puff after 5 minutes. 
 

I don’t think a more experienced manager makes the changes Naismith does and I don’t think we would’ve drawn the game. 

He was far from atrociously bad in his last game! He was best player on the park, or certainly one of the few with pass marks against St Mirren!  Are you thinking all the way back to Rosenborg?  Again, I have to reiterate - and it's something I fall back on a lot - we don't see training.  That's massive!

 

I get that it wasn't hindsight for you cos you said it.  But I do stand by the fact that doesn't mean you "called it".  It means there were two quite unappealing options.  I'd have chosen what Naisy chose, you'd have chosen the other.  Firstly we don't know what would have happened if Halliday come on - we might have lost 5-2.  We might have won 10-0.  We don't know.  What I do know is that a total of 5 seconds changed the game.

 

I go back to trust.  Last season under Naisy, Toby had some very good games at CH including that backs to the wall 10 man game against Hibs.  Halliday got a big chance at LB against St Mirren in a very important game and was by quite some distance the worst player on the park and hooked at half time.  Again, this shit matters.  Honestly go back and watch that if you can, it's as bad an individual performance as you'll see in maroon (in a "with no high profile disasters" kinda way if that makes sense)

 

Toby has lapses which are notable.  Brain fart moments.  But for the other 89 mins, he's generally very good.  He does the right things, he's positive on the ball, he's so bloody athletic.  But he makes silly mistakes.  Halliday, kind of the opposite, for me he does nothing well (other than being a good finisher), so you're bringing a guy in who you simply can't rely on and is there just to fill a space versus moving a guy to CH who may or may not have a fart.  It's not as clear cut as being made out in the slightest and as I say, he chose the correct option given the choices.

 

Let's also not overlook Hibs danger very much coming down the wings.  We kept pace at RB with Offiah and we put Rowles on Boyle.  It all adds up.

 

In other games we win, if the manager has made a sub and you said to your neebur a different sub - have you called that too!?  I don't mean that to be cheeky, it's just I sit at games and say or think do this do that too.  I neither have all the info to make the call nor say "shit" wasn't I wrong if we don't make my sub!!!

[Dazo]

31 minutes ago, King prawn said:

We’ll have to agree to disagree on this one  Id argue it’s not a case of hindsight with this one - called it at half time, why on Earth change all of the back 4 instead of putting 1 player in “like for like” ? 

 

Beni was so atrociously bad in his last game that throwing him into a derby was always going to be a bad idea - he was out of puff after 5 minutes. 
 

I don’t think a more experienced manager makes the changes Naismith does and I don’t think we would’ve drawn the game. 

Going over old ground here but if the subs were that bad how come we didn’t lose the game and how did we manage to go on to dominate again after the individual errors ? 

[Bender]

3 hours ago, TheBigO said:

Lowry was spent. Beni coming on, I defy anyone who didn't think "magic, game's done".

 

Aye Lowry was spent, but we had Boyce and Grant sat on the bench who would've made far more sense. Instead he brought on a defensive midfielder to try and sit on a two goal lead with half an hour to go. An utterly ridiculous thing to do in a derby and one that flies entirely in the face of this horseshit that he wants us to play attacking football.

 

That substitution absolutely killed our momentum. Absolutely crazy to think anyone would defend that decision.

[Bender]

Remember the absolute meltdowns last season when Neilson changed our shape at Easter Road to match up with them? I wonder why nobody bothered with the mental gymnastics to defend that decision when it backfired.

[Pasquale for King]

11 minutes ago, Bender said:

 

Aye Lowry was spent, but we had Boyce and Grant sat on the bench who would've made far more sense. Instead he brought on a defensive midfielder to try and sit on a two goal lead with half an hour to go. An utterly ridiculous thing to do in a derby and one that flies entirely in the face of this horseshit that he wants us to play attacking football.

 

That substitution absolutely killed our momentum. Absolutely crazy to think anyone would defend that decision.

I totally agree, but with the evidence that Bongo has provided the reason why he did it, to hopefully press them better is clear. Obviously didn’t work though. 

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

14 hours ago, Sooks said:

Results please , I give narey a flying copulation about PPDAPDAs

This. I'd take being bored shitless if we won 38 games 1-0.

[Mr Elwood P]

18 hours ago, Bongo 1874 said:

We are a possession based team that tries to win the ball high up the pitch,and then break into attacks from there.

 

Intensity is our identity are you just making this up? I'll give you the evidence and you can be the judge.

 

 

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://theanalyst.com/2023/08/scottish-premiership-stats-2023-24-opta/&ved=2ahUKEwibs5u1-fqBAxUGJsAKHTNIBJsQFnoECCMQAQ&usg=AOvVaw1R8mGYL6iULauwFJ59HmQI

 

As it stands we have the lowest PPDA in league, for those that don't know what PPDA is.

 

What does PPDA mean in football?

Passes Allowed Per Defensive Action

Passes Allowed Per Defensive Action (PPDA)

To measure the pressure that the defending team puts on the opposition players when they are in possession of the ball. The definition of PPDA is: PPDA = Number of Passes made by Attacking Team (oppoenent) / Number of Defensive Actions.

 

A high PPDA value indicates that a team sits off more than others; they make few attempts to press the player on the ball in the opposition's half or near the halfway line. Rather than counter-press after losing possession, the players make recovery runs and the team drops into a mid or low block.

 

What does a low PPDA mean? A low PPDA value indicates a higher intensity to a team's pressing. A low value shows that the team allows their opponents fewer passes for every defensive action that one of their players makes.

 

We are currently 1st with a score of 8.9.

 

Rangers 2nd 9.1

Celtic 3rd 9.4

Hibs 4th 10.5 🤣.

 

The link above shows the evidence.

 

Here is actual game footage.

 

the Aberdeen game shows what we are trying to achieve,they were forced to go long due to our high press,and constant pressure no time approach.

 

We dominated possession and the game despite having many players out.

 

Naismith hasn't had the luxury of bringing his own people in.

 

And for what it's worth, i don't believe the dof fully backs him.

 

Give him time he isn't the problem.

 

 

When Naismith does eventually leave this is the philosophy,  we need to stick to when appointing someone else.

 

This will allow a smooth transition,and no confusion of what is expected from the players,from fans.

 

 

Very confident for the game against Celtic.

 

File this under your assessment of Forrest & Grant. All that data isn't particularly useful when we haven't played the two best teams in the league yet...

[Bender]

9 minutes ago, Pasquale for King said:

I totally agree, but with the evidence that Bongo has provided the reason why he did it, to hopefully press them better is clear. Obviously didn’t work though. 

 

It didn't. Just like it didn't work at home to Kilmarnock or Motherwell. Or how it didn't work against Rosenborg, Dundee or St Mirren away from home either. 

 

We've played one good side this season and gotten a hiding. Absolutely nothing to suggest history won't repeat itself on Sunday.

Edited October 17, 2023 by Bender

[Pasquale for King]

32 minutes ago, Bender said:

 

It didn't. Just like it didn't work at home to Kilmarnock or Motherwell. Or how it didn't work against Rosenborg, Dundee or St Mirren away from home either. 

 

We've played one good side this season and gotten a hiding. Absolutely nothing to suggest history won't repeat itself on Sunday.

Rosenborg were a good team, we can but hope we raise our game against Celtic as we usually do. 

[Bender]

2 hours ago, Pasquale for King said:

Rosenborg were a good team, we can but hope we raise our game against Celtic as we usually do. 

Rosenborg struggled to get past Crusaders and were languishing near the bottom of the league when we played them. Should always have progressed from that tie. PAOK have been the only team you could see a clear gulf in quality imo. 

[OTT]

Not sure this addresses much of Bongo's OP but when I think of Hearts identity as a club, JJ's team and big Kevin Kyle nodding in the winner in the derby is where my mind goes. 

 

I associate Hearts as very much a substance over style club, where as Hibs is more the opposite. They're quite comfortable losing whilst comforting themselves with the flair play and "hibs way" of playing. 

 

Its maybe why I'm having difficulty buying into possession based football. I think to execute it well you need to have quality players, particularly in the final 3rd which can carve open teams to create chances and goals - something we notoriously have found difficult over the last 3 years. 

 

Something which I find very striking is how Celtic and Rangers play, when we concede goals against them so many of them feel like ****ing Kyogo or Morelos getting on to the end of a ball and tapping it past out keeper. Very rarely worldies with most seeming to just different versions of cut backs. 

 

That kind of gets the cogs turning in that Celtic and Rangers face 2 banks of 5 more than any other team in the league. These tap in style goals are the path of least resistance, cut backs very often create goal scoring chances, yet how often do our wingers actually hit the byline to do the same? We seem to get bogged down trying to pass the ball into the net and have done for at least the last 3 years. 

 

I'd like to see Oda, Forrest, McKay, Vargas hitting the byline and trusting Shanks to get on the end of the ball. I think that is a better more pragmatic way to play. Use Atkinson and Cochrane to support the wingers and forget this trying to pass our way through 2 banks of 5. It won't work anywhere near enough to be effective.

[Bozi]

Here's the thing, imagine for a second he manages to beat TheClubFormerlyKnownAsRangers in the semifinal and we get Hibs in the final.

 

Now Nielson was hounded because he lost a Scottish cup tie to Hibs, despite his record against Hibs being excellent second time around, beating them at Hampden twice, that one loss was held against him. 

 

Now imagine we are to the final, lose against Hibs...is that game over? Because that seems to be the measure for some fans now.

 

Personally I didn't want Naismith and thought it was a mistake not to go for an experienced coach, you can talk about far attacking play on the front foot all you like but the reality is you have to win games and that's when managers (particularly in Scotland) have to take the pragmatic approach. 

 

I will give him time, but so far I've not seen a great footballing revolution and 3 games without a win against Hibs will start to be used against him if he doesn't improve that stat and fast