***Official Heart of Midlothian vs **** The Well Match Thread***

[Lambert Simnel]

3-0, two for Shanks, one for Vargas. Teddy Bair can be good in patches, but I don't see any reason to fear this 'Well team, and they were flattered by the 2-1 scoreline at Fir Park.   

[The Black Prince]

20 hours ago, Bunny Munro said:

Rowles gives me the fear in a back 4.

That's because you're an idiot.

 

Rowles is a brilliant footballer.

[OTT]

5 minutes ago, The Black Prince said:

That's because you're an idiot.

 

Rowles is a brilliant footballer.

 

I don't think thats very fair. Rowles has played his best football in a back 3. In a back 4 his lack of physicality gets preyed on a lot more. 

 

He's getting better and very much is a brilliant footballer, but there is room for improvement still with how he deals with physical strikers/players. 

 

TBH the prospect of Neilson Kent Rowles as our CB trio next season intrigues me, Neilson is undoubtedly a talented young player, and we've seen with Souttar how beneficial playing with older more experienced players was. I think Kent and Rowles could really help kick his game on. My concern a bit is that Naismith appears to want to play 4 at the back might might limit his minutes quite a bit. 

[Pasquale for King]

Interesting that folk want Atkinson and Rowles to return to the starting lineup but not Gordon, if Clark doesn’t deserve to be dropped then why do the two Aussie’s replacements?

For what its worth, you play your best players. 

[skacel103]

6 minutes ago, Pasquale for King said:

Interesting that folk want Atkinson and Rowles to return to the starting lineup but not Gordon, if Clark doesn’t deserve to be dropped then why do the two Aussie’s replacements?

For what its worth, you play your best players. 

I know clark done well but I'm amazed Gordon isn't no.1. 

[Texaco]

2 hours ago, TexasAndy said:

I never want to feel over confident going in to any game but we are in a good place and should win this.  We are there to be shot down and every team in SPL is capable of coming to Tynecastle and getting a result if the stars align for them on the day.  I like how we are handling that pressure thus far.  2-0 Hearts.

I know how you feel. Years of underperforming makes you cautious and fear the worst. But put it this way the arse cheeks go into every game over confident and arrogant. It's why we hate them. But they get results. Often by the skin of thier teeth. We kinda need a bit of that mentality to keep winning. I like the Naismith ' we always find a way' philosophy.  Nothing wrong with being nervous going into a game but once it starts our quality and determination should shine through. I'II  back your 2-0.

[tiger Rudi]

1 hour ago, upgotheheads said:

 

I would call that our best starting 11. I think Clark will start in goal for a few weeks, and when third place is assured a rotation will start, but SN will announce it beforehand.

 

Having Lembikisa, Grant, Oda, Devlin, Denholm, Pollock, and Tait on the bench gives me a good feeling too. I think we'll be seeing a lot more of Tait especially. I would also add Tagawa because I think there's a player in there.

For me, it's a starting 11 that can change to a 3,5,2 at any point in a match. With Grant, Fraser and Tait on the bench, there's plenty scope to put an extra man in the midfield in a 10 role if needed. 

I feel for Tagawa a bit. He has no chance of ever getting his preferred position and I question whether he is adaptable enough to occupy another wider role. Forrest, Oda, McKay and Vargas would all be ahead of him unfortunately. 

 

[Cruickie's Moustache]

41 minutes ago, Pasquale for King said:

Interesting that folk want Atkinson and Rowles to return to the starting lineup but not Gordon, if Clark doesn’t deserve to be dropped then why do the two Aussie’s replacements?

For what its worth, you play your best players. 

Dexter is a 'fill in' loan player. Halkett is struggling and the other CB option is Toby.

Clark still not done anything wrong to be dropped.

BTW Clark would have saved the one Gordon let in on Sunday 😁

[Chimp]

49 minutes ago, Pasquale for King said:

Interesting that folk want Atkinson and Rowles to return to the starting lineup but not Gordon, if Clark doesn’t deserve to be dropped then why do the two Aussie’s replacements?

For what its worth, you play your best players. 

 

That's exactly what I've been saying but been shot down for it. It's absolutely fine just to drop Lembikisa who's been part of a winning team yet God forbid you drop Clark for our best goalkeeper and captain.

 

You get those saying oh but it will upset Clark or piss him off or whatever. As if Lembikisa or Kingsley for example would be fine with being dropped to the bench for no good reason. Has to work both ways, GK or not.

Edited February 16 by Chimp

[KG1874]

My old man is buzzing for this one and the next 3 after. No seen him this confident for awhile he’s adamant rangers are getting caught. Me, no so much, one game at it a time until 3rd is secured then let’s see what’s what. 

[HopeDiouf]

6 minutes ago, Cruickie's Moustache said:

Dexter is a 'fill in' loan player. Halkett is struggling and the other CB option is Toby.

Clark still not done anything wrong to be dropped.

BTW Clark would have saved the one Gordon let in on Sunday 😁

tbf, neither have kingsley or cochrane or Kent.  So they all start and Rowles has to wait, as Kingsley Cochrane Kent done nothing to be dropped.

[Lovecraft]

Has there been any update on Halkett?

 

 

[Homme]

57 minutes ago, Pasquale for King said:

Interesting that folk want Atkinson and Rowles to return to the starting lineup but not Gordon, if Clark doesn’t deserve to be dropped then why do the two Aussie’s replacements?

For what its worth, you play your best players. 

 

Halkett has stepped in for Rowles since returning, has been poor / rusty and came off injured. Rowles walks straight back in.

 

Lembikisa isn't as good as Atkinson. 

Edited February 16 by Homme

[HopeDiouf]

Just now, Homme said:

 

Halkett has stepped in for Rowles since returning, has been poor / rust and is now injured. Rowles walks straight back in.

 

Lembikisa isn't as good as Atkinson.

Nope, Halket got a run out in the cup, as did a few others.  Kingsley and Kent have been first choice cb's.  They've done nowt wrong.

[HopeDiouf]

3 minutes ago, Homme said:

 

Halkett has stepped in for Rowles since returning, has been poor / rusty and came off injured. Rowles walks straight back in.

 

Lembikisa isn't as good as Atkinson. 

and Clark isn't as good as Gordon.

Edited February 16 by HopeDiouf

[DS98]

1 hour ago, The Black Prince said:

That's because you're an idiot.

 

Rowles is a brilliant footballer.

Rowles has been ****ing chronically bad in a back 4. The fact he needs 2 other centre halfs to help him out with the physical side of our game is embarrassing. 

[DS98]

4 minutes ago, HopeDiouf said:

Nope, Halket got a run out in the cup, as did a few others.  Kingsley and Kent have been first choice cb's.  They've done nowt wrong.

Kent and Kingsley for me. Kingsley is a far superior player to Rowles. 

[HopeDiouf]

Just now, DS98 said:

Kent and Kingsley for me. Kingsley is a far superior player to Rowles. 

I like them all tbf, my point really is if we can't drop Clark cause he's not done anything wrong, then we can't drop Kingsley or Kent either

[DS98]

1 minute ago, HopeDiouf said:

I like them all tbf, my point really is if we can't drop Clark cause he's not done anything wrong, then we can't drop Kingsley or Kent either

I agree. The ‘done nothing wrong’ metric is the only reason Clark is still number 1 so it should apply throughout the team. If I was Gordon and the Aussie boys came straight back in I’d be asking serious questions. 
 

I like Rowles too but only in a 3. Kingsley has shown he’s just as good in a 2 or 3.

[Pasquale for King]

28 minutes ago, Cruickie's Moustache said:

Dexter is a 'fill in' loan player. Halkett is struggling and the other CB option is Toby.

Clark still not done anything wrong to be dropped.

BTW Clark would have saved the one Gordon let in on Sunday 😁

Get a grip, hes made numerous mistakes and is still nowhere near as good as Gordon. No surprise that you’re confused about dropping guys that don’t deserve it, i was talking more about Cochrane and Kingsley. 

[Pasquale for King]

25 minutes ago, Chimp said:

 

That's exactly what I've been saying but been shot down for it. It's absolutely fine just to drop Lembikisa who's been part of a winning team yet God forbid you drop Clark for our best goalkeeper and captain.

 

You get those saying oh but it will upset Clark or piss him off or whatever. As if Lembikisa or Kingsley for example would be fine with being dropped to the bench for no good reason. Has to work both ways, GK or not.

Spot on

[Pasquale for King]

18 minutes ago, Homme said:

 

Halkett has stepped in for Rowles since returning, has been poor / rusty and came off injured. Rowles walks straight back in.

 

Lembikisa isn't as good as Atkinson. 

Clark isn’t as good as Gordon. Which one of Kingsley or Cochrane drops out for Rowles? 

[4marsbars]

6 minutes ago, HopeDiouf said:

I like them all tbf, my point really is if we can't drop Clark cause he's not done anything wrong, then we can't drop Kingsley or Kent either

 

I don't think you can apply rules so rigidly.

 

Clark is a goalie. That's his only position. The question for him is whether or not he plays. FWIW I think Naismith has handled Gordon's return perfectly. Clark's record over the whole season makes it reasonable that he holds onto his place.

 

Deciding which of several centre backs to play is more complicated. You have to consider whether you're playing a back 3, 4, or 5, and who goes best with whom. It's a nice problem to have. For me, Kent gets picked every time (and is runner-up only to Shankland for POTY). At the same time, Rowles and Kingsley have been outstanding in their own ways. With some formations, you can play Kingsley at LB, but then you'd have to think about whether and where to play Cochrane, one of our best players over the past three seasons.

 

Given the above, it's Halkett who is not yet a first pick (if fit, any update when he returns?). I'd very much like the old Halkett back.

 

Not to mention, Neilson. Such strength in depth.

 

The other thing is that on Sunday, pre-match, Naismith said Kent had been left-out because he had a wee niggle (which sounded like it had been around a while). An injured Kent would be one of the worst things that could happen. Does anyone know any more about how he is?

[Pasquale for King]

12 minutes ago, HopeDiouf said:

I like them all tbf, my point really is if we can't drop Clark cause he's not done anything wrong, then we can't drop Kingsley or Kent either

Good point 

[Pasquale for King]

Just now, 4marsbars said:

 

I don't think you can apply rules so rigidly.

 

Clark is a goalie. That's his only position. The question for him is whether or not he plays. FWIW I think Naismith has handled Gordon's return perfectly. Clark's record over the whole season makes it reasonable that he holds onto his place.

 

Deciding which of several centre backs to play is more complicated. You have to consider whether you're playing a back 3, 4, or 5, and who goes best with whom. It's a nice problem to have. For me, Kent gets picked every time (and is runner-up only to Shankland for POTY). At the same time, Rowles and Kingsley have been outstanding in their own ways. With some formations, you can play Kingsley at LB, but then you'd have to think about whether and where to play Cochrane, one of our best players over the past three seasons.

 

Given the above, it's Halkett who is not yet a first pick (if fit, any update when he returns?). I'd very much like the old Halkett back.

 

Not to mention, Neilson. Such strength in depth.

 

The other thing is that on Sunday, pre-match, Naismith said Kent had been left-out because he had a wee niggle (which sounded like it had been around a while). An injured Kent would be one of the worst things that could happen. Does anyone know any more about how he is?

So who would you play?

[Pasquale for King]

1 hour ago, skacel103 said:

I know clark done well but I'm amazed Gordon isn't no.1. 

Me too 

[Homme]

Clark and Gordon will most likely know the script. Gordon even signed an extension to his contract even though he hasn't regained his no1 spot. 

 

He's happy. Clark hasn't done anything to be dropped either even if we all love CG more. 

 

Clark has been part of that winning team too people don't want Dexter dropping out of.

 

 

[HopeDiouf]

1 minute ago, 4marsbars said:

 

I don't think you can apply rules so rigidly.

 

Clark is a goalie. That's his only position. The question for him is whether or not he plays. FWIW I think Naismith has handled Gordon's return perfectly. Clark's record over the whole season makes it reasonable that he holds onto his place.

 

Deciding which of several centre backs to play is more complicated. You have to consider whether you're playing a back 3, 4, or 5, and who goes best with whom. It's a nice problem to have. For me, Kent gets picked every time (and is runner-up only to Shankland for POTY). At the same time, Rowles and Kingsley have been outstanding in their own ways. With some formations, you can play Kingsley at LB, but then you'd have to think about whether and where to play Cochrane, one of our best players over the past three seasons.

 

Given the above, it's Halkett who is not yet a first pick (if fit, any update when he returns?). I'd very much like the old Halkett back.

 

Not to mention, Neilson. Such strength in depth.

 

The other thing is that on Sunday, pre-match, Naismith said Kent had been left-out because he had a wee niggle (which sounded like it had been around a while). An injured Kent would be one of the worst things that could happen. Does anyone know any more about how he is?

I get the goalie argument a bit..  Equally, I'd argue can't have different rules for different players and we need squad unity and fairness.    For me, if we're playing our best outfield 10 regardless of "fairness", then we should really be playing our best goalie as well.  Just my opinion.

[OTT]

30 minutes ago, Homme said:

 

Halkett has stepped in for Rowles since returning, has been poor / rusty and came off injured. Rowles walks straight back in.

 

Lembikisa isn't as good as Atkinson. 

 

Really? I think they're obviously very different players, and I think against Hibs, Celtic, Rangers and probably Aberdeen I would lean towards Atkinson because he's tightened his defensive game up extremely well since Smith moved on, but against teams we have to break down, I'm going Dexter all day long. 

[tiger Rudi]

10 minutes ago, Pasquale for King said:

Clark isn’t as good as Gordon. Which one of Kingsley or Cochrane drops out for Rowles? 

Neither, Naismith has been using Cochrane in midfield occasionally when everybody is available. He makes sure he mentions how well he's done in post match interviews too. Almost as if he's justifying it. I think Cochrane will play in front of Kingsley against Well. We will start with a 4, that can change to a 3 at any time. 

[4marsbars]

6 minutes ago, Pasquale for King said:

So who would you play?

 

Back 4: Atkinson, Kent, Rowles, Kingsley (with Cochrane as left midfield)

Back 3: Kingsley, Kent, Rowles (with wingbacks Atkinson and Cochrane)

 

I think Atkinson is better than Lembikisa, but would probably bring Dexter on at some point especially when his attacking abilities are needed.

 

But it all depends on tactics / game plan / opposition, how many games per week, fitness / tiredness. You want a stable central defence (including goalie), and squad rotation is also good. Of course, that sounds complex but so is life. That's why having an obviously intelligent manager is such an asset.

 

Also, I don't believe in 'knowing your first 11'. 

 

 

 

[HopeDiouf]

4 minutes ago, tiger Rudi said:

Neither, Naismith has been using Cochrane in midfield occasionally when everybody is available. He makes sure he mentions how well he's done in post match interviews too. Almost as if he's justifying it. I think Cochrane will play in front of Kingsley against Well. We will start with a 4, that can change to a 3 at any time. 

so who's getting dropped from midfleld?  Hoff, Beni, Forrest all doing well lately.  Unless Vargas injured maybe that makes space.

[upgotheheads]

1 hour ago, skacel103 said:

I know clark done well but I'm amazed Gordon isn't no.1. 

'The usual process is that the incumbent keeps his position until injury or poor form intervenes. Clark hasn't been injured.

[Bunny Munro]

For me our best back 4 is;

Atkinson Kent Kingsley Cochrane 

 

 

Our best back 3 is harder, because our only natural RCB for a 3 is Sibbick and he's off form/unfancied.

[Pasquale for King]

23 minutes ago, tiger Rudi said:

Neither, Naismith has been using Cochrane in midfield occasionally when everybody is available. He makes sure he mentions how well he's done in post match interviews too. Almost as if he's justifying it. I think Cochrane will play in front of Kingsley against Well. We will start with a 4, that can change to a 3 at any time. 

Nonsense, hes moved Cochrane to midfield when the three at the back failed again and there was no other options.
He shouldn’t go back to that system at home to Motherwell so Kingsley/Cochrane/Rowles are unlikely to start. 

[Pasquale for King]

22 minutes ago, 4marsbars said:

 

Back 4: Atkinson, Kent, Rowles, Kingsley (with Cochrane as left midfield)

Back 3: Kingsley, Kent, Rowles (with wingbacks Atkinson and Cochrane)

 

I think Atkinson is better than Lembikisa, but would probably bring Dexter on at some point especially when his attacking abilities are needed.

 

But it all depends on tactics / game plan / opposition, how many games per week, fitness / tiredness. You want a stable central defence (including goalie), and squad rotation is also good. Of course, that sounds complex but so is life. That's why having an obviously intelligent manager is such an asset.

 

Also, I don't believe in 'knowing your first 11'. 

 

 

 

Cochrane has played left midfield before and it hasn’t been a success, who would you drop to play him there? 
Best 11 can change from week to week nowadays, but in general you play your best players. 

[Bongo 1874]

Motherwell leak goals,they give away corners and set pieces.

 

Tomorrow the fans need to see the lads over the line.

 

I know you can do it.

 

Unbeaten in a 11 games the place should be rocking, as soon as you step foot into Tynecastle tomorrow.

[Pasquale for King]

12 minutes ago, upgotheheads said:

'The usual process is that the incumbent keeps his position until injury or poor form intervenes. Clark hasn't been injured.

So if Shankland was injured for a month, Tagawa took his place and did what was expected of him he would retain his place when Shankland was fit?

[Pasquale for King]

33 minutes ago, OTT said:

 

Really? I think they're obviously very different players, and I think against Hibs, Celtic, Rangers and probably Aberdeen I would lean towards Atkinson because he's tightened his defensive game up extremely well since Smith moved on, but against teams we have to break down, I'm going Dexter all day long. 

Spot on

[upgotheheads]

31 minutes ago, OTT said:

 

Really? I think they're obviously very different players, and I think against Hibs, Celtic, Rangers and probably Aberdeen I would lean towards Atkinson because he's tightened his defensive game up extremely well since Smith moved on, but against teams we have to break down, I'm going Dexter all day long. 

 

Lembikisa is a good player; there's not much between him and Nat when it comes to defending, but Nat is a better player in the final third than Dexter IMO. He can go wide when necessary but is better at carrying the ball inside when the opportunity arises.

[upgotheheads]

3 minutes ago, Pasquale for King said:

So if Shankland was injured for a month, Tagawa took his place and did what was expected of him he would retain his place when Shankland was fit?

Nope. We can't play Gordon and Clark together but we often play Tagawa and Shanks together.

[Takeshi kovac]

34 minutes ago, OTT said:

 

Really? I think they're obviously very different players, and I think against Hibs, Celtic, Rangers and probably Aberdeen I would lean towards Atkinson because he's tightened his defensive game up extremely well since Smith moved on, but against teams we have to break down, I'm going Dexter all day long. 

Dexter got ripped apart against Dundee although he was up against one of the better fullbacks in the League. He didn’t have that excuse against Airdrie though and that first half he got turned inside out. Defensively Natty is much better don’t think there is a lot in it offensively, Dexter possibly shades it. I would start Natty all day long

[Pasquale for King]

11 minutes ago, upgotheheads said:

Nope. We can't play Gordon and Clark together but we often play Tagawa and Shanks together.

Unlikely but you answered the question like a seasoned politician 👍🏽👏🏾. 
What if the other attackers play well too?

Edited February 16 by Pasquale for King

[Pasquale for King]

5 minutes ago, upgotheheads said:

 

Lembikisa is a good player; there's not much between him and Nat when it comes to defending, but Nat is a better player in the final third than Dexter IMO. He can go wide when necessary but is better at carrying the ball inside when the opportunity arises.

Could you list Atkinsons assists and goals this season, Dexter has created far more already in his few games. 

[tiger Rudi]

37 minutes ago, HopeDiouf said:

so who's getting dropped from midfleld?  Hoff, Beni, Forrest all doing well lately.  Unless Vargas injured maybe that makes space.

I think for Well, I would drop Grant/Fraser. Shanks and Vargas up front. Cochrane can play on the left in a 4 man midfield. Forrest on right.

 

Alternatively Cochrane can sit in with Beni, releasing Hoff to play in a three with Vargas and Forrest either side. 

[scottg71]

I wonder how Shankland would take to Clark being dropped for Gordon. Seem to be great mates and go on holiday together often. 

[Fxxx the SPFL]

13 minutes ago, Pasquale for King said:

Could you list Atkinsons assists and goals this season, Dexter has created far more already in his few games. 

Yep Dexter is two footed and has put some decent crosses in I would start him and bring Natty on imo

[Pasquale for King]

1 minute ago, **** the SPFL said:

Yep Dexter is two footed and has put some decent crosses in I would start him and bring Natty on imo

Definitely 

[Pasquale for King]

6 minutes ago, scottg71 said:

I wonder how Shankland would take to Clark being dropped for Gordon. Seem to be great mates and go on holiday together often. 

That really shouldn’t be a consideration in managing a football club, is he taking Clark with him if he leaves? 

[4marsbars]

25 minutes ago, Pasquale for King said:

Cochrane has played left midfield before and it hasn’t been a success, who would you drop to play him there? 
Best 11 can change from week to week nowadays, but in general you play your best players. 

 

As I said, it's complex. Complex can mean if you want this you can't have that.

 

Best 11 changes. Agreed. Therefore, there's no such thing. 

 

Strength in depth is what we have. I'm happy clapping.