feej Posted March 1 Share Posted March 1 1 minute ago, allystrachan said: I’d 100% rather Rowles & Kingsley in the middle with 2 left feet each, over Sibbick. If Sibbick is in the middle, someone needs to make sure he keeps everything simple! As soon as he starts thinking he’s special he makes a mess of it! I get what your saying, Toby is prone to mistakes, thankfully I'm not picking the team so if Naisy thinks Rowles/Kingsley is the way to go then that's what he'll do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pasquale for King Posted March 1 Share Posted March 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Leitch Posted March 1 Share Posted March 1 1 hour ago, hearts00 said: Halks or Kent? Kent. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soonbe110 Posted March 1 Share Posted March 1 1 hour ago, Chuck Berry said: Just Ross County. And Celtic I think. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chuck Berry Posted March 1 Share Posted March 1 3 minutes ago, soonbe110 said: And Celtic I think. I tried to blank this game from my consciousness. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
karipidis Posted March 1 Share Posted March 1 6 minutes ago, Pasquale for King said: That’s positive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pettigrewsstylist Posted March 1 Share Posted March 1 25 minutes ago, allystrachan said: I’d 100% rather Rowles & Kingsley in the middle with 2 left feet each, over Sibbick. If Sibbick is in the middle, someone needs to make sure he keeps everything simple! As soon as he starts thinking he’s special he makes a mess of it! How can you play a guy that refuses to head the ball or challenge for them in centre of your defence? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4marsbars Posted March 1 Share Posted March 1 That's very good news about Kent. Hibs felt hard done to on Wednesday. They often do. They don't appreciate that last-ditch defending and good goalkeeping are part of football and not just good luck on our part, hence, no matter how many goals they score they always say, after the game, 'it should have been (pick an implausible number that rarely happens in a real match)'. Their fans in the media go along with it. Long may they underestimate us. I love it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
feej Posted March 1 Share Posted March 1 25 minutes ago, Pasquale for King said: He never used his left foot EVER, and Halkett played on the left of him, more revisionism about a guy that had one assist in 6 years and didn’t manage to play 20 games on the trot. Wouldn’t swap him for Kent tbh. Fair enough, I did say as far as I could remember as did spend most of his time on the injury table. I like Kent a lot, has steadied the defence and he'll be missed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomaso Posted March 1 Share Posted March 1 You just know he will be out for weeks! The last thing we need at a time where we need to stabilise the ship! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomaso Posted March 1 Share Posted March 1 27 minutes ago, karipidis said: That’s positive. Well it’s better than it could be but hardly positive. 🤷♂️ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hansel Posted March 1 Share Posted March 1 1 minute ago, Thomaso said: You just know he will be out for weeks! The last thing we need at a time where we need to stabilise the ship! Typical. Our defence is pretty weak without him 😒 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wavydavy Posted March 1 Share Posted March 1 1 hour ago, hmfc_liam06 said: No we hadn’t. We made a double change after Kent got injured. I was meaning when he was off the pitch in front of the Wheatfield Stand which was the second time he went down. He was in deep discussion with the physios probably about wjether he shuld continue or not. Rowles and Pollock had just come on and Kent went back on because we could not make another change. It is the way you have to make changes that stopped us taking him off as we had only used four subs. Probably made his injury worse by going back on again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CMc Posted March 1 Share Posted March 1 53 minutes ago, 4marsbars said: That's very good news about Kent. Hibs felt hard done to on Wednesday. They often do. They don't appreciate that last-ditch defending and good goalkeeping are part of football and not just good luck on our part Growing up watching Makalambe, Andrew McNeil and the eternal Hanlonson double act explains a lot. The definition of aspiring to mediocrity. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McCrae Posted March 1 Share Posted March 1 1 hour ago, pettigrewsstylist said: How can you play a guy that refuses to head the ball or challenge for them in centre of your defence? Sibbick at RB would be fine. He is not a CH. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
db211833 Posted March 1 Share Posted March 1 2 hours ago, Hansel said: Typical. Our defence is pretty weak without him 😒 How do you know that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Watt-Zeefuik Posted March 1 Share Posted March 1 18 minutes ago, db211833 said: How do you know that? Because it was weak as shit last season before he arrived. Kingsley, Rowles, and Sibbick were our options last season when we couldn't have stopped a ball into the box if we'd let our players use tennis rackets out there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
superjack Posted March 1 Share Posted March 1 With both halkett and frankie out, is there someone in the B team that's a half decent centre back? Someone comfortable in the air? Even if its an inexperienced teenager, surely that's a better option than Toby who's hopeless in the air? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
No Idle Talk Posted March 1 Share Posted March 1 I'm really quite annoyed that he was allowed to continue on Wednesday night. Something obviously wasn't right with him, he wasn't moving well at all. It was late on in the game and he should have been taken off as a precautionary measure or a damage limitation move. I admire him for wanting to go back on but sometimes players need protecting from themselves. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BackOfTheNet Posted March 1 Share Posted March 1 5 hours ago, Pasquale for King said: You also get an extra one at HT, If he wanted to get Fraser at 10 he could’ve done that in the 1st half and made the inevitable sub at HT. He still took Cochrane off instead of Kent.. That’s what I meant, if we took someone off at half time (with plenty candidates) then the three slots would still have been intact. Subbing 4 (or less) on in the 2nd half would have been a lot easier with 3 slots. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamboinglasgow Posted March 1 Share Posted March 1 12 minutes ago, No Idle Talk said: I'm really quite annoyed that he was allowed to continue on Wednesday night. Something obviously wasn't right with him, he wasn't moving well at all. It was late on in the game and he should have been taken off as a precautionary measure or a damage limitation move. I admire him for wanting to go back on but sometimes players need protecting from themselves. You cant win either way, Kingston went off years ago and left us with 10 men and was slaughtered for it. If Kent was told to not come back in and left us with 10 men, then Hibs scored, this place would be raging at Naismith. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
i wish jj was my dad Posted March 1 Share Posted March 1 9 minutes ago, jamboinglasgow said: You cant win either way, Kingston went off years ago and left us with 10 men and was slaughtered for it. If Kent was told to not come back in and left us with 10 men, then Hibs scored, this place would be raging at Naismith. Inconvenient but true Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Madjambo21 Posted March 1 Share Posted March 1 44 minutes ago, Watt-Zeefuik said: Because it was weak as shit last season before he arrived. Kingsley, Rowles, and Sibbick were our options last season when we couldn't have stopped a ball into the box if we'd let our players use tennis rackets out there. Definitely. Dreading Celtic now with Kent out. They have a big lad up top now and a lot of the chances against Scumdee were from crosses into the box. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fozzyonthefence Posted March 1 Share Posted March 1 54 minutes ago, Watt-Zeefuik said: Because it was weak as shit last season before he arrived. Kingsley, Rowles, and Sibbick were our options last season when we couldn't have stopped a ball into the box if we'd let our players use tennis rackets out there. We also tried Cochrane and Neilson in there last season. Every combination we tried seemed to be as hopeless as the previous one and we just conceded from cross after cross! 🙈 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Papa Posted March 1 Share Posted March 1 11 minutes ago, Madjambo21 said: Definitely. Dreading Celtic now with Kent out. They have a big lad up top now and a lot of the chances against Scumdee were from crosses into the box. We need to be much better at stopping crosses at source. We are utterly hopeless at that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pilmuir Posted March 1 Share Posted March 1 48 minutes ago, No Idle Talk said: I'm really quite annoyed that he was allowed to continue on Wednesday night. Something obviously wasn't right with him, he wasn't moving well at all. It was late on in the game and he should have been taken off as a precautionary measure or a damage limitation move. I admire him for wanting to go back on but sometimes players need protecting from themselves. I totally agree but in fairness Naismith was gesticulating at him to find out what was going on - Kent clearly made the decision to play on even if that decision should have been taken away from him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
karipidis Posted March 1 Share Posted March 1 3 hours ago, Thomaso said: Well it’s better than it could be but hardly positive. 🤷♂️ After seeing him at the Oriam today 1-2 weeks is very positive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dsjambo Posted March 1 Share Posted March 1 Horrendous luck again with injuries, probably the worst game for Kent to be missing but we’ll just have to get on with it. I can see SN bringing in Sibbick and going to a three with Rowles and Kingsley. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomaso Posted March 1 Share Posted March 1 2 hours ago, karipidis said: After seeing him at the Oriam today 1-2 weeks is very positive. Going by previous injuries 1 - 2 weeks at Hearts means 1 - 2 months! 😏 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
allystrachan Posted March 1 Share Posted March 1 7 hours ago, pettigrewsstylist said: How can you play a guy that refuses to head the ball or challenge for them in centre of your defence? Still a Better option than Sibbick at CH. I’m not against Sibbick in the squad or at RB, but let’s be honest… we have enough RB’s that are struggling, we don’t need a third. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pasquale for King Posted March 1 Share Posted March 1 7 hours ago, feej said: Fair enough, I did say as far as I could remember as did spend most of his time on the injury table. I like Kent a lot, has steadied the defence and he'll be missed. Definitely, been a brilliant signing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dagger Is Back Posted March 1 Share Posted March 1 Sunday isn't the worst game for him to be missing IMO. Still want and hope that we win every game but it's far more important that we have our best 11 against the rest. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greedy Jambo Posted March 1 Share Posted March 1 I fear for us without Kent on Sunday, he's a level above any other defender we have. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nessjambo67 Posted March 2 Share Posted March 2 17 hours ago, Thomaso said: You just know he will be out for weeks! The last thing we need at a time where we need to stabilise the ship! He should have come of right away don’t understand it he’s got nothing to prove Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nessjambo67 Posted March 2 Share Posted March 2 14 hours ago, Pilmuir said: I totally agree but in fairness Naismith was gesticulating at him to find out what was going on - Kent clearly made the decision to play on even if that decision should have been taken away from him. Totally agree it’s a poor decision especially when we still has options on the bench and given the stage of the game it’s bonkers now he’s out Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NottsJambo Posted March 2 Share Posted March 2 Am assuming we can't recall Neilson? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomaso Posted March 2 Share Posted March 2 1 hour ago, Nessjambo67 said: He should have come of right away don’t understand it he’s got nothing to prove Had we not used all our subs? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoff Kilpatrick Posted March 2 Share Posted March 2 6 minutes ago, Thomaso said: Had we not used all our subs? Nope. We made 4 out of 5. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Rob Posted March 2 Share Posted March 2 15 minutes ago, Geoff Kilpatrick said: Nope. We made 4 out of 5. Isn’t there a total number of times you’re allowed to bring subs on through? I can’t recall the exact rules Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kila Posted March 2 Share Posted March 2 (edited) 13 minutes ago, Doc Rob said: Isn’t there a total number of times you’re allowed to bring subs on through? I can’t recall the exact rules Three sub 'opportunities' during the game, with subs done at HT not counting. Basically stops teams having five breaks in play to make five separate subs. We made a double sub (our third break in play/sub opportunity) on 87', a few mins after Kent needed treatment. https://downloads.theifab.com/downloads/changes-to-the-laws-of-the-game-2022-23?l=en Edited March 2 by kila Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nessjambo67 Posted March 2 Share Posted March 2 37 minutes ago, Thomaso said: Had we not used all our subs? We still had sibbick as an option Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hmfc_liam06 Posted March 2 Share Posted March 2 33 minutes ago, Geoff Kilpatrick said: Nope. We made 4 out of 5. As soon as we made the Cochrane and Vargas sub we couldn’t make any more subs, regardless if we’d used 4/5. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corstorphine Jambo Posted March 2 Share Posted March 2 He could have pretended it was a head knock and used a concussion sub!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soonbe110 Posted March 2 Share Posted March 2 1 hour ago, NottsJambo said: Am assuming we can't recall Neilson? Have you looked at Thistles goals against? Third worst in the league and nearly two per game. Not saying it’s all down to Neilson but he can hardly be excelling with those stats. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Findlay Posted March 2 Share Posted March 2 Injuries are part and parcel of football. We just have to knuckle down and get on with it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jambo in Bathgate Posted March 2 Share Posted March 2 21 hours ago, 4marsbars said: That's very good news about Kent. Hibs felt hard done to on Wednesday. They often do. They don't appreciate that last-ditch defending and good goalkeeping are part of football and not just good luck on our part, hence, no matter how many goals they score they always say, after the game, 'it should have been (pick an implausible number that rarely happens in a real match)'. Their fans in the media go along with it. Long may they underestimate us. I love it. We also had a number of shots blocked by Hibs defenders in the second half. Also Vargas’s miss hits. Press don’t report that fact. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomaso Posted March 3 Share Posted March 3 23 hours ago, Nessjambo67 said: We still had sibbick as an option He wasn’t - we couldn’t make any more subs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomaso Posted March 3 Share Posted March 3 23 hours ago, Doc Rob said: Isn’t there a total number of times you’re allowed to bring subs on through? I can’t recall the exact rules Correct Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nessjambo67 Posted March 3 Share Posted March 3 4 hours ago, Thomaso said: He wasn’t - we couldn’t make any more subs Only 4 subs made by 88 mins according to the stats !! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goader Posted March 3 Share Posted March 3 1 hour ago, Nessjambo67 said: Only 4 subs made by 88 mins according to the stats !! Only 3 substition periods though, so we were done Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.