*** Official Heart of Midlothian v Hibernian Match day thread ( PPV available )***

[Chimp]

33 minutes ago, Ian Black 8 said:

I'd be raging if that penalty was gave against me as a player and we would all be raging if that was given against us 

 

Just cos you'd be raging doesn't mean it isn't a pen though?

 

A foul is a foul, that happens outside the box - say in our own half, a free kick is awarded and there would be no complaints. 

[The Real Maroonblood]

59 minutes ago, Australis said:

Apologies last night to my fellow Jambos and kickbackers.

 

I posted a few things last night, after having to much to drink, that I now regret.

 

Got a well deserved warning from the mods and I thank them for that.

 

Can't stand the wee team and how they constantly everytime we play them throw stuff at our players and get away with it. It grinds my gears 

 

Some of the names I called the wee team fans were out of order.

 

Apologies to you all if I offended anyone.

 

 

 

What names did you call them?

[5jambo1]

33 minutes ago, Chimp said:

 

Just cos you'd be raging doesn't mean it isn't a pen though?

 

A foul is a foul, that happens outside the box - say in our own half, a free kick is awarded and there would be no complaints. 

exactly my thinking. Fish runs towards the ball and doesn’t get it, tries to stop clattering Vargas but blatantly barges him with his hip. He doesn’t get the ball and wiped the player out. I don’t quite understand the argument for it not being a penalty. As you said, anywhere else on the park it’s a foul and there’s no debate 

 

vargas made a meal out of it yes, but again, probably enough contact for him to go down anyway 

[Chimp]

Just now, 5jambo1 said:

exactly my thinking. Fish runs towards the ball and doesn’t get it, tries to stop clattering Vargas but blatantly barges him with his hip. He doesn’t get the ball and wiped the player out. I don’t quite understand the argument for it not being a penalty. As you said, anywhere else on the park it’s a foul and there’s no debate 

 

vargas made a meal out of it yes, but again, probably enough contact for him to go down anyway 

 

Definitely 👍

[ELITHEDUG]

12 hours ago, Pasquale for King said:

Looks like we started 4-4-2 eh? Vargas behind Shankland instead of ahead of him 🤦🏽. 

yeah and look where that got us 🙁

[Gundermann]

57 minutes ago, chrystaf said:

The penalty aside, we have definitely lost our mojo.  A limp and insipide performance with very little coordination or team work.

 

My main concern is with our defence which looked likely to concede every time they attacked.  A virtual bomb scare with everyone flapping at the ball and only Hoff calm enough to get us out of trouble.

 

I just wonder if it was a reaction to the heavy defeat on Saturday, rather than it being used as a motivation.  

 

That said, if Vargas had squared the ball on two of his breakaway chances and maintained greater composure for his third, we could have won. 

 

That's it in a nutshell. 

[Pasquale for King]

Just now, ELITHEDUG said:

yeah and look where that got us 🙁

The formation wasn’t the problem for once, Fraser and Forrest cutting inside, two inverted full backs, Vargas behind Shankland allowing them to push up led to a congested midfield where we continually tried to play through. Tactics were the problem with the players that he played. 

[Pasquale for King]

1 hour ago, Ian Black 8 said:

I'd be raging if that penalty was gave against me as a player and we would all be raging if that was given against us 

The game has changed since then, why do so many ex players struggle to grasp that?

[Carter]

Watching the highlights confirms what I felt at the game, Cochrane has to challenge Miller at their goal. By passing him on to Kingsley we become exposed. If Cochrane does pass the opportunity to challenge he then needs to fill the space vacated by Kingsley. He doesn't do that and probably gets in the way of Kent. It's an awful piece of defending once again in a game of that magnitude from Cochrane. He didn't win an aerial duel with Miller all evening. 

 

If there is genuine interest from English Championship in Cochrane then we need to cash in. Still making big mistakes in crucial games. I'd be very surprised if teams at that level aren't concerned about change of pace going forward and recovery pace with Cochrane. 

 

We were vulnerable in both full back positions all evening. 

[Pasquale for King]

1 hour ago, pettigrewsstylist said:

Had a wee look at highlights again this morn with fresh eyes. Forrest has only attack and how he can effect game on his mind when he gets the ball near the halfway line for the penalty award moment. Not a safe pass, only how he can effect game. He is limited for sure but he makes that award happen last night tho. Many others on the pitch would not have been able to or have chosen not to. Lets recognise in a team that struggles to build clear cut opportunities he is well worthy of a role. 

 

But he rarely creates anything else, a hard working good Scottish laddie, Oda probably creates far more given the opportunities. We need better than Forrest..

[Chimp]

4 minutes ago, Carter said:

Watching the highlights confirms what I felt at the game, Cochrane has to challenge Miller at their goal. By passing him on to Kingsley we become exposed. If Cochrane does pass the opportunity to challenge he then needs to fill the space vacated by Kingsley. He doesn't do that and probably gets in the way of Kent. It's an awful piece of defending once again in a game of that magnitude from Cochrane. He didn't win an aerial duel with Miller all evening. 

 

If there is genuine interest from English Championship in Cochrane then we need to cash in. Still making big mistakes in crucial games. I'd be very surprised if teams at that level aren't concerned about change of pace going forward and recovery pace with Cochrane. 

 

We were vulnerable in both full back positions all evening. 

Would have to agree with that. As tidy a footballer he is, he makes too many mistakes for my liking. Especially in big games. I like him as a player and he has the potential to get better but I'd be fine with us cashing in on too. Kingsley a better LB for me.

[Pasquale for King]

1 hour ago, Australis said:

Apologies last night to my fellow Jambos and kickbackers.

 

I posted a few things last night, after having to much to drink, that I now regret.

 

Got a well deserved warning from the mods and I thank them for that.

 

Can't stand the wee team and how they constantly everytime we play them throw stuff at our players and get away with it. It grinds my gears 

 

Some of the names I called the wee team fans were out of order.

 

Apologies to you all if I offended anyone.

 

 

 

I’m sure nobody would take any offence about anything you called those inbred mutants. 

[Pasquale for King]

7 minutes ago, Carter said:

Watching the highlights confirms what I felt at the game, Cochrane has to challenge Miller at their goal. By passing him on to Kingsley we become exposed. If Cochrane does pass the opportunity to challenge he then needs to fill the space vacated by Kingsley. He doesn't do that and probably gets in the way of Kent. It's an awful piece of defending once again in a game of that magnitude from Cochrane. He didn't win an aerial duel with Miller all evening. 

 

If there is genuine interest from English Championship in Cochrane then we need to cash in. Still making big mistakes in crucial games. I'd be very surprised if teams at that level aren't concerned about change of pace going forward and recovery pace with Cochrane. 

 

We were vulnerable in both full back positions all evening. 

Spot on, both fullbacks have learnt extremely little defensively in their time at the club. 

[Carter]

1 minute ago, Chimp said:

Would have to agree with that. As tidy a footballer he is, he makes too many mistakes for my liking. Especially in big games. I like him as a player and he has the potential to get better but I'd be fine with us cashing in on too. Kingsley a better LB for me.

Pretty sure that we'll look to cash in on some players this summer. The coveted player trading upside being crystallised. There will surely be a heavy temptation to look to cash in on Cochrane as he enters his final year as well as Rowles if someone wants to pay decent money. Rowles has improved but Saturday was a painful illustration of his flaws. 

 

Midfield and both full back areas become a priority. We never at any stage last night looked as though we had control of that game. Hoff is making really good progress in that area but he was woefully short of capable assistance in the middle of the park for most of that shambles last night. 

[pettigrewsstylist]

14 minutes ago, Pasquale for King said:

But he rarely creates anything else, a hard working good Scottish laddie, Oda probably creates far more given the opportunities. We need better than Forrest..

Im talking about the here and now tho. We could say that about 80% of squad tbh.

Edited February 29 by pettigrewsstylist

[pettigrewsstylist]

1 hour ago, Ian Black 8 said:

I'd be raging if that penalty was gave against me as a player and we would all be raging if that was given against us 

I actually think the Forrest one was a better shout, albeit soft aswell.

[pettigrewsstylist]

23 minutes ago, Carter said:

Watching the highlights confirms what I felt at the game, Cochrane has to challenge Miller at their goal. By passing him on to Kingsley we become exposed. If Cochrane does pass the opportunity to challenge he then needs to fill the space vacated by Kingsley. He doesn't do that and probably gets in the way of Kent. It's an awful piece of defending once again in a game of that magnitude from Cochrane. He didn't win an aerial duel with Miller all evening. 

 

If there is genuine interest from English Championship in Cochrane then we need to cash in. Still making big mistakes in crucial games. I'd be very surprised if teams at that level aren't concerned about change of pace going forward and recovery pace with Cochrane. 

 

We were vulnerable in both full back positions all evening. 

Its why went went 3 at back this yr i imagine.

[Fozzyonthefence]

1 hour ago, Geoff Kilpatrick said:

Maybe so, but the standard has been set on plenty of occasions this season. Soft pens are pens. There is no standard of qualification anymore.

 

Would you expect a free kick elsewhere on the pitch?

To be honest, no. There was contact but every bit of contact doesn’t mean it is a foul.  One of the softest I’ve seen this season (and there’s been some shockers, both given and not given).  If that was given at the other end we’d all be raging, bar none (except the interlopers).

[Pasquale for King]

7 minutes ago, pettigrewsstylist said:

Im talking about the here and now tho. We could say that about 80% of squad tbh.

Yes and who assembled the squad, and who trains them and chooses the tactics and formations? Without Shankland we are a poor team, Forrest included. 

[ScandinavianJambo]

13 hours ago, The Old Tolbooth said:

Agree with everything there mate 

That sounds about right. Naismith was holding on to the draw. Strange choice otherwise.

[Jack Torrance]

13 hours ago, Pasquale for King said:

Absolutely but Forrest didn’t do anything of note, he tried.

 

13 hours ago, Jamboelite said:

Marginally better than an awful Vargas who cant calm himself when opportunities come his way.

 

Both, with more composure last night, could have won the game. Good coaching should improve that.

 

It's worth noting however that both were heavily involved in the penalty incident and without that we'd have been talking about a defeat, today.

[Jack Torrance]

49 minutes ago, pettigrewsstylist said:

I actually think the Forrest one was a better shout, albeit soft aswell.

 

Agreed. I think he was going to give it for that but rightly let it play out and gave it for the second one, when it was clear there was no advantage.

 

If you look closely after he points to the spot, he then points to indicate the first and second challenges, which suggests he was giving it for either.

 

If he had blown for the first one, I reckon he'd have also stuck with his original decision, if it was reviewed. Neither would have been an obvious error and the very fact we're all here debating the decision, backs that up.

[Fozzyonthefence]

5 minutes ago, Jack Torrance said:

 

Agreed. I think he was going to give it for that but rightly let it play out and gave it for the second one, when it was clear there was no advantage.

 

If you look closely after he points to the spot, he then points to indicate the first and second challenges, which suggests he was giving it for either.

 

If he had blown for the first one, I reckon he'd have also stuck with his original decision, if it was reviewed. Neither would have been an obvious error and the very fact we're all here debating the decision, backs that up.

If we’d lost the Vargas one at the other end I’d be raging.  If it was the Forrest one I think I’d give up football!  Not even close to being a foul on Forrest, he just overran the ball at the end of a good positive run. 

[Go for it 1308]

2 hours ago, The Real Maroonblood said:

What names did you call them?

I apologise as well to my fellow jambos. I started the thread ' WTF was that all about???' . I called a guy a prick and deservedly got banned. Too much lager and emotion. Ked, if you're reading this apologies 

[pettigrewsstylist]

53 minutes ago, Jack Torrance said:

 

Agreed. I think he was going to give it for that but rightly let it play out and gave it for the second one, when it was clear there was no advantage.

 

If you look closely after he points to the spot, he then points to indicate the first and second challenges, which suggests he was giving it for either.

 

If he had blown for the first one, I reckon he'd have also stuck with his original decision, if it was reviewed. Neither would have been an obvious error and the very fact we're all here debating the decision, backs that up.

Hadnt noticed that. Good spot!

[RustyRightPeg]

3 hours ago, Ian Black 8 said:

I'd be raging if that penalty was gave against me as a player and we would all be raging if that was given against us 

 

You'd still appeal for it though. Fish looking 60 yards upfield and losing his bearings, Vargas nips in. Yes their feet don't make contact, but Vargas is considerably smaller than Fish, and body on body contact would be enough to put you on the deck. 

[The Real Maroonblood]

24 minutes ago, Go for it 1308 said:

I apologise as well to my fellow jambos. I started the thread ' WTF was that all about???' . I called a guy a prick and deservedly got banned. Too much lager and emotion. Ked, if you're reading this apologies 

It's easy done. 

[Go for it 1308]

1 minute ago, The Real Maroonblood said:

It's easy done. 

👍

[jimbojambo]

It was worth it to hear Montgomery whinging about referees and VAR. The whole world is against them it seems. Putting pressure on the referee on Saturday already. 

[RustyRightPeg]

30 minutes ago, Go for it 1308 said:

I apologise as well to my fellow jambos. I started the thread ' WTF was that all about???' . I called a guy a prick and deservedly got banned. Too much lager and emotion. Ked, if you're reading this apologies 

 

I was banned as well.

 

Still stand by my point that it's a complete over reaction to an average performance on our part.

 

Hibs cup final, we didn't lay a glove on them and they still couldn't get the job done. Killie lost, nobody made any ground on us. In theory, not a bad point considering we were so poor for large stretches of the game.

[Ex member of the SaS]

2 hours ago, 5jambo1 said:

exactly my thinking. Fish runs towards the ball and doesn’t get it, tries to stop clattering Vargas but blatantly barges him with his hip. He doesn’t get the ball and wiped the player out. I don’t quite understand the argument for it not being a penalty. As you said, anywhere else on the park it’s a foul and there’s no debate 

 

vargas made a meal out of it yes, but again, probably enough contact for him to go down anyway 

The thing is the penalty was not for the barge, the penalty was given because Fish back healed Vargas on the ankle just above his foot ( perhaps even standing on his foot too) . Personally think there was a foul on Forrest too as he made no attempt to play the ball. I don't think Fish was carded for the penalty either.

[Sub4TiddlerMurray]

3 hours ago, Ian Black 8 said:

I'd be raging if that penalty was gave against me as a player and we would all be raging if that was given against us 

 

Respect to you as a Hearts legend Ian, but Miller wipes out Forrest in the box without getting anywhere near the ball. That's a pen all day long IMO. Then Fish steams forward into Vargas with his hip, knocking him over, again without getting a touch on the ball. The fact that Fish's trailing foot just clips Vargas, or that Vargas exaggerated his fall, seems immaterial to me. When I saw Fish collide at speed with Vargas in real time it looked a sore one.

 

As a punter, I have no idea why ex-pros see that differently.

 

[Carter]

11 minutes ago, RustyRightPeg said:

 

You'd still appeal for it though. Fish looking 60 yards upfield and losing his bearings, Vargas nips in. Yes their feet don't make contact, but Vargas is considerably smaller than Fish, and body on body contact would be enough to put you on the deck. 

It's really not a penalty. Thankfully we got it as was hard to see where we getting a goal otherwise. 

 

The over reliance on Shankland for goals is really concerning. I know there will be a counter argument that someone would take his place etc etc but a player who has been directly responsible for the determining contribution to 27 of the 52 points we've taken so far is probably a greater reliance on one player than we see on any comparable level across the division.  

[upgotheheads]

1 minute ago, Carter said:

It's really not a penalty. Thankfully we got it as was hard to see where we getting a goal otherwise. 

 

The over reliance on Shankland for goals is really concerning. I know there will be a counter argument that someone would take his place etc etc but a player who has been directly responsible for the determining contribution to 27 of the 52 points we've taken so far is probably a greater reliance on one player than we see on any comparable level across the division.  

 

I thought the tackle on Forrest was a fair shout for a penalty, so I'm claiming that two half penalties = one real one.

[pettigrewsstylist]

1 minute ago, Carter said:

It's really not a penalty. Thankfully we got it as was hard to see where we getting a goal otherwise. 

 

The over reliance on Shankland for goals is really concerning. I know there will be a counter argument that someone would take his place etc etc but a player who has been directly responsible for the determining contribution to 27 of the 52 points we've taken so far is probably a greater reliance on one player than we see on any comparable level across the division.  

Life after Shankland will be keeping some awake at night. Irreplaceable within budgets, a bit like Ginnelly.

The idea that we would have just had another guy winning those points by raking the onion bag is about £3m short of reality.

[wavydavy]

13 hours ago, GinRummy said:

2025 his contract is up. 

 

Pity 👍

[Ex member of the SaS]

As for the game, We were very poor and some players should go in the summer ( some will I know ). Last ditch defending sows the team is together and fighting for each other but we should never be in that position. Poor team selection and tactics almost cost us the game. Many on here get up in arms when constructive criticism is made but it has been clear ( even during the run ) there are frailties in management. I still think FM has too much influence and is most of the problem. SN is learning his trade what he is not learning is from his mistakes, mistakes any rookie manager will make but he keeps repeating them.

On the plus side we played poorly but they still could not beat us. Their hoofball to an aging Boyle was clear from KO but we did nothing to make cover. He broke from half way and I am convinced he handled the ball twice before getting to our box but would VaR have noticed?

Celtic next and we need to get in their faces and make tackles in THEIR half, allowing their defenders to wander into our half unopposed is fatal. Can't afford too many slip ups between now and the split.

[GinRummy]

22 minutes ago, wavydavy said:

 

Pity 👍

No idea if it was right or not but when he signed it was rumoured he was on close to top money. If that’s the case I’d think offloading him and bringing in someone else would be best. 

[Chimp]

14 hours ago, GinRummy said:

2025 his contract is up. 

 

No it's not, it expires on 31st May 2024

[Firefox]

1 hour ago, Sub4TiddlerMurray said:

 

Respect to you as a Hearts legend Ian, but Miller wipes out Forrest in the box without getting anywhere near the ball. That's a pen all day long IMO. Then Fish steams forward into Vargas with his hip, knocking him over, again without getting a touch on the ball. The fact that Fish's trailing foot just clips Vargas, or that Vargas exaggerated his fall, seems immaterial to me. When I saw Fish collide at speed with Vargas in real time it looked a sore one.

 

As a punter, I have no idea why ex-pros see that differently.

 

This all day long! Well done Kevin Clancy ( did I really just say that) for sticking to your original decision!

[martoon]

I couldn't be sure at the time but, having seen it on TV, I think it's a clear penalty.

[Bongo 1874]

7 hours ago, Bazzas right boot said:

 

We were playing hibs last night, do keep up.

 

Your obsession with judging every manager against the OF is boring as you use it is an excuse to push your shitey agendas.

 

If you were an ex player,  why aren't you in mgt now with your brilliant hindsight and ideas?

 

 

 

Naismith who i am a fan off,will rightly be judged in big games.

 

 

We were pish first half against Motherwell, we were nowhere near it at Ibrox, and last night,the tempo and intensity wasn't there.

 

You had players allowing Rocky to stroll out from the back with the ball.

 

Emiliano had the freedom of Tynecastle, our press was no existent.

 

They are paid good money to get it right.

 

Why are we so far off it?

 

I demand to know, how Kilmarnock gave Rangers a better game than us.

 

And don't bother saying the pitch,Because both teams play on it.

 

 

Edited February 29 by Bongo 1874

[jbee647]

3 hours ago, pettigrewsstylist said:

I actually think the Forrest one was a better shout, albeit soft aswell.

Likewise, you definitely see the Hibs defenders arm impeding Forrest, fact is, if this is either of the old firm, the awarding of a penalty for either (Forrest  or Vargas) is not even up for discussion 

 

[Pasquale for King]

3 hours ago, Jack Torrance said:

 

 

Both, with more composure last night, could have won the game. Good coaching should improve that.

 

It's worth noting however that both were heavily involved in the penalty incident and without that we'd have been talking about a defeat, today.

I thought Vargas at least got himself into dangerous positions, Forrest didn’t go outside his man once and was easily brushed off the ball. Just not good enough to be first choice for us. 

[RustyRightPeg]

30 minutes ago, Bongo 1874 said:

Naismith who i am a fan off,will rightly be judged in big games.

 

 

We were pish first half against Motherwell, we were nowhere near it at Ibrox, and last night,the tempo and intensity wasn't there.

 

You had players allowing Rocky to stroll out from the back with the ball.

 

Emiliano had the freedom of Tynecastle, our press was no existent.

 

They are paid good money to get it right.

 

Why are we so far off it?

 

I demand to know, how Kilmarnock gave Rangers a better game than us.

 

And don't bother saying the pitch,Because both teams play on it.

 

 

 

As a tactical expert, surely you saw the ploy was deliberate to leave Bushiri on the ball? Not once did he 'stroll' out. He was cumbersome and tripped over it more than once, then went back the way. 

[wavydavy]

33 minutes ago, Bongo 1874 said:

Naismith who i am a fan off,will rightly be judged in big games.

 

 

We were pish first half against Motherwell, we were nowhere near it at Ibrox, and last night,the tempo and intensity wasn't there.

 

You had players allowing Rocky to stroll out from the back with the ball.

 

Emiliano had the freedom of Tynecastle, our press was no existent.

 

They are paid good money to get it right.

 

Why are we so far off it?

 

I demand to know, how Kilmarnock gave Rangers a better game than us.

 

And don't bother saying the pitch,Because both teams play on it.

 

 

 

Can't really disagree with any of this.

[Carter]

1 hour ago, pettigrewsstylist said:

Life after Shankland will be keeping some awake at night. Irreplaceable within budgets, a bit like Ginnelly.

The idea that we would have just had another guy winning those points by raking the onion bag is about £3m short of reality.

We'll alter the way we play in all likelihood. Thing is there is really no discernible style of play about this side. The way we service Shankland at times (last 180 minutes as an example) is absolutely woeful. He's not absolved of criticism either though. His link up play a d touch last night was really poor. 

 

That shower of shite last night pressed us high and we had no solution to that other than to try and go long. Devlin can't really be trusted to take it in tight spaces and look after it. I felt there were times in the 1st half last night where Devlin wasn't keen to show for it and we had no option than to go long.

 

We're probably a victim to a large extent of having a truly exceptional goalscorer and we rely us his goals to dig us out. But there's certainly no real style of play as such. 

[Fozzyonthefence]

4 minutes ago, Pasquale for King said:

I thought Vargas at least got himself into dangerous positions, Forrest didn’t go outside his man once and was easily brushed off the ball. Just not good enough to be first choice for us. 

Totally disagree. Forrest has been much more consistent than Vargas this season.  And without him we don’t get that penalty last night.  Should be starting most games.

 

Last night he was about the only player trying to make things happen (and did for the penalty) and we looked more likely when he got on the ball.  He did get too predictable though and was trying to cut inside all the time, that’s going to happen when you play a right footer on the left wing.  

[Bongo 1874]

Just now, RustyRightPeg said:

 

As a tactical expert, surely you saw the ploy was deliberate to leave Bushiri on the ball? Not once did he 'stroll' out. He was cumbersome and tripped over it more than once, then went back the way. 

Bushiri did come out, the ploy should of been to let him go on the outside every time as he's right footed.

 

He was playing on the left hand side of the centre half's.

 

By forcing him onto his weaker side.

 

He then has two options go up the line with it potentially losing the ball.

 

Or turn and play backwards.

 

Shankland’s press wasn't good enough.

 

Gino knew how to do this.

 

see how Rowles Gino and Devlins understanding forces the mistake.

 

Rowles being aggressive forces them back.

 

Devlin keeps up intensity.

 

Gino cuts of pass back to keeper.

 

Simple but very effective.

 

 

[pettigrewsstylist]

2 minutes ago, Fozzyonthefence said:

Totally disagree. Forrest has been much more consistent than Vargas this season.  And without him we don’t get that penalty last night.  Should be starting most games.

 

Last night he was about the only player trying to make things happen (and did for the penalty) and we looked more likely when he got on the ball.  He did get too predictable though and was trying to cut inside all the time, that’s going to happen when you play a right footer on the left wing.  

👌👏