*** Official Ross County Vs Heart of Midlothian match day thread

[PapaShango]

We also need Gordon back in goals. Clarke has been decent but for me Gordon saves both those goals yesterday, that’s the difference with him and Clarke. Baffling we still refuse to play our best player in that position. 

[PapaShango]

49 minutes ago, kingantti1874 said:

we were playing a team fighting for their lives, we were unlucky with the pen and the free kick HOWEVER the game exposed the fragility in the squad.  
 

Hof and Kent have been enormous losses, a stretch too far on top of the other players missing. 
 

We are the best of the rest clearly, however we are no where near the old firm or a title challenge. 
 

With players moving on and players who ongoing injury challenges pretty clear we will need 4/5 players minimum again in the summer.

 

Danny Armstrong should be top target

Armstrong will be miles out of our budget. Just signed a new deal and no chance we will have the money to pay Killie over a million for him.

[Horatio Caine]

9 hours ago, Watt-Zeefuik said:

There's a section of fans on here that I fully believe are devoted, spirited Hearts fans but whom will still look at our run of points this season and say, "yes but we didn't ACTUALLY PLAY well during that time . . ."

 

There's a subset of that group that still pine for Stendel's gegenpress.

 

I will say that I don't get it, which isn't that surprising as there's a great deal in this world that I don't get, but for me given the choice between winning ugly and losing pretty, I will take winning "ugly" every time. To me preferring to lose elegantly over a nervy, ground out win is Hibs AF.

 

Yes, you can win a game or two or maybe even five or six just getting lucky while not playing that well, but you simply do not win 14 out of 20 matches playing badly. Yes, we can aspire to a higher standard, but we compete in the SPFL Premiership and by our standard we've done quite well.

 

The point of football is to score more goals than the other team. Ultimately I don't give a shit about anything else vis a vis Hearts.

 

I also am frankly sick of hearing that players that have been key contributors in a period where we've gained 44 out of a possible 60 points as "not good enough for Hearts." They were plenty good enough to be on the pitch when we were winning by the truckload. To think we are going to have Paul Hartleys and Rudi Skacels or even Lawrence Shanklands at every position is madness.

 

Toby Sibbick is a maddening player given his obvious talent and the simple mental mistakes he's made. But he's also a bench player who came on and kept Celtic off the scorer's sheet in a fabulous home win just 13 days ago. I can agree that his time at Hearts may be drawing to a close but you can say that without being an abusive arsehole about a player that's given us some fantastic moments (in addition to, yes, some hair-pulling screaming) in his time.

 

He's plenty "good enough" to be at Hearts. Who TF do we think we are? Yes, I think and hope we can try for better but FFS behave.

Well said. Thank you.

[Bazzas right boot]

10 hours ago, Hearts_fan said:

 

You could stand an inch in front of the goalkeeper if the ball isn’t in play. 

 

If the ball is in play and you’re within literally inches of the goalkeeper in any direction, it would be difficult to argue you’re not interfering.

 

However, Shanks was many feet away, and seemingly not blocking the view of the goalkeeper when the ball was kicked. The goalkeeper looked more hampered by his own teammates standing in front of the ball. They’re not obliged to put a wall up, but they did and interfered with their goalie’s view of the ball.  

 

To me, that’s what happened. Why should Shanks be penalised when it’s their own players that are blocking the goalie’s view of the ball. 

 

If the wall wasn’t there, the goalkeeper would have had absolutely no problem seeing the ball.

 

 

 

 

Once the ball is kicked if he's offside,  he's offside when he's in front of the gk.

 

If he's not trying to do block the gk, put him off etc from that position  then why bother doing it?

 

He was offside and it was called correctly.

[kingantti1874]

29 minutes ago, PapaShango said:

Armstrong will be miles out of our budget. Just signed a new deal and no chance we will have the money to pay Killie over a million for him.

If we qualify for Europe we will net in excess of £6m. The hotel and the surrounding benefit of the hotel is expect to bring in £2.5-£3m with a 50% profit margin. We’ve just agreed a new sponsorship deal and Overall turnover should be around the £25million mark

 

In addition, FOH funds and benefactor funds no longer need directed towards infrastructure projects like the hotel and  we may not be able to retain Cochrane or Shankland. 

 

We should easily be able to stump up a million now. 

Edited March 17 by kingantti1874

[Horatio Caine]

1 hour ago, KyleLafferty said:

Biggest compliment I can give Naisy and this Hearts team is, even when 2-0 down, I had full belief we could get back into the game. Under Neilson 2-0 was dead and buried. That’s a sign of how good Naismith has been for us this year.

Just listened to Postecoglou after Spurs 0-3 to Fulham! His view was that every team suffers setbacks and it's part of the learning/developing process. Didn't sound like he was wetting himself or planning to empty half his team.

[Lido]

Having been at most of the games this season, I feel that the majority of the teams see us as a scalp and up their game considerably against us. They chase, close us down, eleven men behind the ball etc. They use a lot of energy and tire in the second half especially when we bring fresh legs on. The Airdrie game was so different as they had a go at us from the off and paid the consequences. Now I'm not saying I'm correct but these teams definitely raise their game against us and the management team will be working hard behind the scenes to break them down sooner.

[Hearts_fan]

47 minutes ago, Bazzas right boot said:

 

Once the ball is kicked if he's offside,  he's offside when he's in front of the gk.

 

If he's not trying to do block the gk, put him off etc from that position  then why bother doing it?

 

He was offside and it was called correctly.

 

Sorry, he’s not offside regardless of where he is so long as he is not interfering with play.

 

He was clearly trying to make it difficult for the goalkeeper to get ready for the free kick during the period when the ball was not in play. That was self-evidently why he was in that position, plus it was probably a training ground routine that they’ve been practising, and which the manager has encouraged.

 

They’re professional footballers, I think they know what the rules are regarding interfering with play. If it is as simple as how you are portraying it, you must think Shankland is stupid. 

[Hearts_fan]

37 minutes ago, Jim_Duncan said:

Anyone remember PAOK’s first goal in the away leg? The one that was given. Pretty sure they had at least one player standing in Clark’s eyeline. 

 

Vaguely remember that occurring. Was that a goal from open play? 

[ShedBoy]

21 minutes ago, Hearts_fan said:

 

Sorry, he’s not offside regardless of where he is so long as he is not interfering with play.

 

He was clearly trying to make it difficult for the goalkeeper to get ready for the free kick during the period when the ball was not in play. That was self-evidently why he was in that position, plus it was probably a training ground routine that they’ve been practising, and which the manager has encouraged.

 

They’re professional footballers, I think they know what the rules are regarding interfering with play. If it is as simple as how you are portraying it, you must think Shankland is stupid. 

Not always true. As an ex referee it’s astounding how little some footballers know about the laws of the game 👍🏻

 

 

[Hearts_fan]

A key factor regarding Shankland’s “interfering with play” yesterday was that it was a free kick and the ball wasn’t in play. It would have been a different story if it had been a driving run and shot from Kingsley.

 

The point is, how can you interfere with play when the ball isn’t in play?  

 

[Hearts_fan]

Just now, ShedBoy said:

Not always true. As an ex referee it’s astounding how little some footballers know about the laws of the game 👍🏻

 

 

 

Yeah, but we’re talking about Hearts players and management, namely Shankland and Naismith, in whose professionalism I for one have belief in.

[ShedBoy]

1 minute ago, Hearts_fan said:

 

Yeah, but we’re talking about Hearts players and management, namely Shankland and Naismith, in whose professionalism I for one have belief in.

The referee and his team. As shite as we thought they were, got the decision bang on.

 

Scenario:-

 

90th minute Hampden.

 

Scottish Cup final.

 

h1b5 have a free kick on the edge of the box.

 

Le fondre is standing in Zanders line of sight and in an offside position.

 

Martin Boyle cracks one into the net.

 

What we saying?

 

 

[Shaggy2]

49 minutes ago, Jim_Duncan said:

Anyone remember PAOK’s first goal in the away leg? The one that was given. Pretty sure they had at least one player standing in Clark’s eyeline. 

Probably worse than what Shankland did yesterday. The PAOK guy feigned movement towards the ball causing Zander more confusion. Actually don’t really have a problem with either outcome, just wish there was one route every official followed. Consistently inconsistent. 

[Hearts_fan]

9 minutes ago, ShedBoy said:

The referee and his team. As shite as we thought they were, got the decision bang on.

 

Scenario:-

 

90th minute Hampden.

 

Scottish Cup final.

 

h1b5 have a free kick on the edge of the box.

 

Le fondre is standing in Zanders line of sight and in an offside position.

 

Martin Boyle cracks one into the net.

 

What we saying?

 

 

 

I don’t believe Shankland was standing in their keeper’s line of sight when the ball was in play. His own wall were though.

[Bongo 1874]

2 hours ago, KyleLafferty said:

Biggest compliment I can give Naisy and this Hearts team is, even when 2-0 down, I had full belief we could get back into the game. Under Neilson 2-0 was dead and buried. That’s a sign of how good Naismith has been for us this year.

We don't always agree, but this is spot on.

 

Slight criticism we need to learn how to play without our starman.

 

 

[Bazzas right boot]

48 minutes ago, Hearts_fan said:

 

Sorry, he’s not offside regardless of where he is so long as he is not interfering with play.

 

He was clearly trying to make it difficult for the goalkeeper to get ready for the free kick during the period when the ball was not in play. That was self-evidently why he was in that position, plus it was probably a training ground routine that they’ve been practising, and which the manager has encouraged.

 

They’re professional footballers, I think they know what the rules are regarding interfering with play. If it is as simple as how you are portraying it, you must think Shankland is stupid. 

 

He was offside and in the way of the gk way.

Clearly interfering with play.

 

Shankland in this case was stupid,  very good chance the fk would have went in without him fannying about in front of the gk.

 

Ill ask again-

If he's not trying to block the gk view, then what is the point of him being there in the first place?

Why not go 10 yards to the right, rather in front of the gk?

 

Clearly offside and the officials got it correct.

 

 

Edited March 17 by Bazzas right boot

[Hearts_fan]

2 minutes ago, Bazzas right boot said:

 

He was offside and in the way of the gk way.

Clearly interfering with play.

 

Shankland in this case was stupid,  very good chance the fk would have went in without him fannying about in front of the gk.

 

Ill ask again-

If he's not trying to block the gk view, then what is the point of him being there in the first place?

Why not go 10 yards to the right, rather in front of the gk?

 

Clearly offside and the officials got it correct.

 

 

 

“Shankland was stupid” ??

 

“If he's not trying to block the gk view, then what is the point of him being there in the first place?”

 

He was clearly trying to block the goalkeeper’s view … when the ball was not in play. 

 

That was not open play.

 

You can see him looking over his shoulder before the free kick is taken, – he is clearly trying to block the keeper’s view at this stage, but the ball wasn’t in play so it doesn’t matter what he was doing. 

 

He vacated that position immediately before the ball was kicked, therefore when the ball was in play, he was not blocking the view of the goalkeeper.

 

Players stand in offside positions all the time, for example at goal kicks to try and influence the back line of the opponents.

 

 

 

 

[Robbo-Jambo]

2 hours ago, Bazzas right boot said:

 

Once the ball is kicked if he's offside,  he's offside when he's in front of the gk.

 

If he's not trying to do block the gk, put him off etc from that position  then why bother doing it?

 

He was offside and it was called correctly.

He was basically stupid for doing it because the goalie would never have stopped it anyway.

[leginten]

3 hours ago, Pasquale for King said:

It was Newell and Doyle-Hayes that both tackled McKay at the same time, Campbell was a sub and was lucky not to see red too after Newell was sent off. 
But yes that little scroat sent them out to kick us off the park.

I remember the one in the first half. But wasn’t it Campbell who “tackled” McKay at knee height late on in the game when McKay was breaking out of defence? Beaton only booked him. One of the worst challenges I’ve ever seen. 

[Ex member of the SaS]

Ok still 11 in front of Killie but the game was like 90% of our games this season, so I am surprised everyone is surprised. Take of the maroon specs and see we have been poor all season and goals from Shanks has pulled us up the league.

Shanks booking was a farce as he never once claimed the penalty and got up right away to play on!

Why he stood so obviously offside is a mystery, and turning to see where the keeper was, so as to block his view, gave Var A choice to make, knowing Beaton was in the booth should have had alarm bells ringing.

Sibbick is a known brain fart and should have booted it out instead of trying to control it and clear it.

Once again poor starting line up and slow start with too many pointless passes. SN has done well changing formation and tactics part way through the game but that just makes it obvious his initial line up if failing badly. Ross co game is case in point.

15 corners, 21 shots and only 6 on target is poor by any standards.

Just when SN starts to get kudos he makes the same mistakes, when will he learn?

[joondalupjambo]

5 hours ago, kingantti1874 said:

If we qualify for Europe we will net in excess of £6m. The hotel and the surrounding benefit of the hotel is expect to bring in £2.5-£3m with a 50% profit margin. We’ve just agreed a new sponsorship deal and Overall turnover should be around the £25million mark

 

In addition, FOH funds and benefactor funds no longer need directed towards infrastructure projects like the hotel and  we may not be able to retain Cochrane or Shankland. 

 

We should easily be able to stump up a million now. 

Yep but it is not going into Kilmarnock FC's and Armstrong's bank accounts.  If it is going anywhere it will be into L.Shankland's account😀

[OBE]

Wonder if Dhanda thought "Hearts are pish", I'll just bide here...

Edited March 17 by OBE

[Jambof3tornado]

14 hours ago, Pans Jambo said:

Yip. Theres a massive collective who seem to think that Hearts are the ‘best of the rest’ but to fair, today showed we are not!

We are when the rest are utter dug keek.

[jr ewing]

I wonder how Kilmarnock will do against them 🤔 

[GinRummy]

2 hours ago, Ex member of the SaS said:

Ok still 11 in front of Killie but the game was like 90% of our games this season, so I am surprised everyone is surprised. Take of the maroon specs and see we have been poor all season and goals from Shanks has pulled us up the league.

Shanks booking was a farce as he never once claimed the penalty and got up right away to play on!

Why he stood so obviously offside is a mystery, and turning to see where the keeper was, so as to block his view, gave Var A choice to make, knowing Beaton was in the booth should have had alarm bells ringing.

Sibbick is a known brain fart and should have booted it out instead of trying to control it and clear it.

Once again poor starting line up and slow start with too many pointless passes. SN has done well changing formation and tactics part way through the game but that just makes it obvious his initial line up if failing badly. Ross co game is case in point.

15 corners, 21 shots and only 6 on target is poor by any standards.

Just when SN starts to get kudos he makes the same mistakes, when will he learn?

I wasn’t surprised. We’ve edged a lot of games this season and I see no reason why us fans should take any game for granted. My question to you though is - Poor all season in what context? Like it or not we are effectively in a league of ten, if we’ve been poor and everyone else has been ‘poorer’ then what’s the issue exactly?

Edited March 17 by GinRummy

[Watt-Zeefuik]

3 hours ago, Ex member of the SaS said:

Ok still 11 in front of Killie but the game was like 90% of our games this season, so I am surprised everyone is surprised. Take of the maroon specs and see we have been poor all season and goals from Shanks has pulled us up the league.

Shanks booking was a farce as he never once claimed the penalty and got up right away to play on!

Why he stood so obviously offside is a mystery, and turning to see where the keeper was, so as to block his view, gave Var A choice to make, knowing Beaton was in the booth should have had alarm bells ringing.

Sibbick is a known brain fart and should have booted it out instead of trying to control it and clear it.

Once again poor starting line up and slow start with too many pointless passes. SN has done well changing formation and tactics part way through the game but that just makes it obvious his initial line up if failing badly. Ross co game is case in point.

15 corners, 21 shots and only 6 on target is poor by any standards.

Just when SN starts to get kudos he makes the same mistakes, when will he learn?

 

I'll repeat what I said earlier, when you take 44 of a possible 60 points, you haven't been playing badly. The point of the game is to score more goals than the opponents and win as many games as possible and lose as few as possible, and when you do that consistently, you're not playing badly.

 

It was not surprising in that Don Cowie has given a shake to what shouldn't be that bad a County side  (we're after one of their players after all) and we didn't take our chances, and stuff like that just happens in football. On the same day, Fulham beat Spurs 3-0 because it's a funny game and sometimes stuff happens.

 

We have a makeshift defence because of injuries, the pitch was wretched, the ref was wretched, and our rookie manager got the tactics wrong, meanwhile we missed some chances. There's absolutely no need to look deeper than that.

[andythejambo]

On 16/03/2024 at 18:12, Lambert Simnel said:

Not sure we can really put Toby in the same class as Hartley or Big Zal, tbh.

Read what I wrote....many Hearts fans wanted Zal and PH binned, before they turned the corner. Not trying to compare at all. 

[Debut 4]

8 hours ago, Hearts_fan said:

 

I don’t believe Shankland was standing in their keeper’s line of sight when the ball was in play. His own wall were though.

The goalie had to look around Shankland to see where the ball was.  So, an offside player has obstructed his view.  
 

All that aside there’s been too much “tweaking” of the rules.  Offside was brought into stop these things happening.  In simple terms in the past if you were closer to the goal than the defence when the ball is played, you are offside.

 

It was to stop poaching.   We now have many scenarios that bring too much to think about in the game and kind of go against the essence of it when it comes to team preparation and organisation.  

What’s the point of a team practicing shape and the offside trap when an attacker can linger offside at the first ball without going for it but run in for the cut back to score?   It’s not enhanced attacking play, its made it an unfair advantage.  No matter how much we love to see goals and attacking play, defending shouldn’t be cheapened by grey areas or too many intricacies in the rule book. 

 

[colinmaroon]

29 minutes ago, andythejambo said:

Read what I wrote....many Hearts fans wanted Zal and PH binned, before they turned the corner. Not trying to compare at all. 

 

Zal cost us a few games early on but most of his bombscare moments didn't actually cost us.

 

Elvis also early on did an Atkinson on more than a few occasions.

 

If Toby makes at a reasonable level and is still committed at 26/27 I still think he could turn out a top central defender next

 

Caveat: heading the ball under pressure. 

[Mikey1874]

When Hearts beat Hibs at Easter Road, we were 2 points ahead of Kilmarnock in 3rd place

[Bazzas right boot]

3 hours ago, andythejambo said:

Read what I wrote....many Hearts fans wanted Zal and PH binned, before they turned the corner. Not trying to compare at all. 

 

Zal had the raw materials for a CD tho, always did.

He was also very good at times.

Zal was far better than Sibbick. 

 

 

[feedthefox]

11 hours ago, Bazzas right boot said:

 

He was offside and in the way of the gk way.

Clearly interfering with play.

 

Shankland in this case was stupid,  very good chance the fk would have went in without him fannying about in front of the gk.

 

Ill ask again-

If he's not trying to block the gk view, then what is the point of him being there in the first place?

Why not go 10 yards to the right, rather in front of the gk?

 

Clearly offside and the officials got it correct.

 

 

 

Completely agree, Kingsley is good enough to score without Shanks standing in front of keeper. Soon as it went in I knew it would be ruled out and I'd be screaming for the same if it was against us. Whole thing was quite bizarre and if I was Kingsley I'd be raging.

[Bazzas right boot]

Just now, feedthefox said:

 

Completely agree, Kingsley is good enough to score without Shanks standing in front of keeper. Soon as it went in I knew it would be ruled out and I'd be screaming for the same if it was against us. Whole thing was quite bizarre and if I was Kingsley I'd be raging.

 

Yip, and if he wasn't trying to interfere the why be there, it makes no sense to just stand there for no reason?

Even less so if you think about the gk saving it and Shankland being  offside at any rebound.

 

Clearly he's there for a purpose.

 

 

[OTT]

2 minutes ago, Bazzas right boot said:

 

Zal had the raw materials for a CD tho, always did.

He was also very good at times.

Zal was far better than Sibbick. 

 

 

 

Agree - Zal was regularly called a bombscare amongst other things, but despite that he was a very solid solid CB - he won his headers, won his tackles and was a physically dominant and strong defender. Sibbick isn't. 

 

Look, maybe Sibbick in 4/5 years when he's 28/29 will be a really good CB, but I don't think he's going to get there here. He needs to play regularly and the fact is that we cannot trust him. If Kent had been playing, we'd probably have either sneaked a win or had a hard fought draw. 

 

Maybe, Naismith can try him on the right of a back 3 with Kent & Rowles, but given how infrequently Sibbick has featured I don't think Naisy trusts him either!! 

[Bazzas right boot]

8 minutes ago, OTT said:

 

Agree - Zal was regularly called a bombscare amongst other things, but despite that he was a very solid solid CB - he won his headers, won his tackles and was a physically dominant and strong defender. Sibbick isn't. 

 

Look, maybe Sibbick in 4/5 years when he's 28/29 will be a really good CB, but I don't think he's going to get there here. He needs to play regularly and the fact is that we cannot trust him. If Kent had been playing, we'd probably have either sneaked a win or had a hard fought draw. 

 

Maybe, Naismith can try him on the right of a back 3 with Kent & Rowles, but given how infrequently Sibbick has featured I don't think Naisy trusts him either!! 

 

Agreed, choosing Kingsley over him at rb was also very telling.

 

 

[Pasquale for King]

12 hours ago, leginten said:

I remember the one in the first half. But wasn’t it Campbell who “tackled” McKay at knee height late on in the game when McKay was breaking out of defence? Beaton only booked him. One of the worst challenges I’ve ever seen. 

I thought it was Halkett he tackled but that was James Scott, you are right It was McKay. Just watched the highlights, how they finished with 10 men on that pitch is unbelievable. 

[Mirror]

13 hours ago, Watt-Zeefuik said:

 

I'll repeat what I said earlier, when you take 44 of a possible 60 points, you haven't been playing badly. The point of the game is to score more goals than the opponents and win as many games as possible and lose as few as possible, and when you do that consistently, you're not playing badly.

 

It was not surprising in that Don Cowie has given a shake to what shouldn't be that bad a County side  (we're after one of their players after all) and we didn't take our chances, and stuff like that just happens in football. On the same day, Fulham beat Spurs 3-0 because it's a funny game and sometimes stuff happens.

 

We have a makeshift defence because of injuries, the pitch was wretched, the ref was wretched, and our rookie manager got the tactics wrong, meanwhile we missed some chances. There's absolutely no need to look deeper than that.

That's been a few times this season that the conclusion has been Naismith has got it wrong. Before anyone fly's off the handle I'm not suggesting that he gets sacked but he's got to learn. 

 

Going to a place like that and playing such a defensive formation. Our attacking options are limited but if we'd started the game with a 4-3-3 with either Grant or Fraser (neither have been great, hopefully a better option there next season 🤞) at the top of the midfield 3 then maybe things would have been different.

 

But when the opposition sees that backline and midfield it likely gives them some belief. Rowles doesn't get stuck in, Sibbick/Atkinson each have a bomb scare moment in them, Denholm doesn't really have an identity.

 

Keep Shankland isolated and 2 on him then hope he doesn't produce some magic.

[gordiegords]

I need to learn we can’t swap hoff for denolm, Kent for sibbick and expect to breeze it.

[jimbojambo]

At this time of the season you tend to get strange results due to teams in trouble having more to play for. Throw into the mix our injuries bad pitch referee and luck and it just wasn't our day. Probably would have been better received if Aberdeen had lost. We'll sort Killie out in 2 weeks with Hoff, Frankie, Mackay etc back. 

[EH11 2NL]

17 hours ago, Ex member of the SaS said:

Ok still 11 in front of Killie but the game was like 90% of our games this season, so I am surprised everyone is surprised. Take of the maroon specs and see we have been poor all season and goals from Shanks has pulled us up the league.

Shanks booking was a farce as he never once claimed the penalty and got up right away to play on!

Why he stood so obviously offside is a mystery, and turning to see where the keeper was, so as to block his view, gave Var A choice to make, knowing Beaton was in the booth should have had alarm bells ringing.

Sibbick is a known brain fart and should have booted it out instead of trying to control it and clear it.

Once again poor starting line up and slow start with too many pointless passes. SN has done well changing formation and tactics part way through the game but that just makes it obvious his initial line up if failing badly. Ross co game is case in point.

15 corners, 21 shots and only 6 on target is poor by any standards.

Just when SN starts to get kudos he makes the same mistakes, when will he learn?

What can Naismith do about that? All the best attackers were on the pitch, he can't hit the target for them. Or put a decent corner in. Naismith sets the team up and it had 21 shots, it's on the players to convert. 

[Selkirkhmfc1874]

Just now, jimbojambo said:

At this time of the season you tend to get strange results due to teams in trouble having more to play for. Throw into the mix our injuries bad pitch referee and luck and it just wasn't our day. Probably would have been better received if Aberdeen had lost. We'll sort Killie out in 2 weeks with Hoff, Frankie, Mackay etc back. 

Just putting it down to bad day at the office

[Chimp]

1 hour ago, gordiegords said:

I need to learn we can’t swap hoff for denolm, Kent for sibbick and expect to breeze it.

 

This is basically what it came down to and shows the importance of both players in the side. The way in which Sibbick weakens our defence is so glaringly obvious.

[tcjambo]

11 minutes ago, Chimp said:

 

This is basically what it came down to and shows the importance of both players in the side. The way in which Sibbick weakens our defence is so glaringly obvious.

Rowles was the worst of our defenders in the game on Saturday. Toby got caught in two minds for their first goal but otherwise was faultless in the first half.

[HopeDiouf]

14 minutes ago, Chimp said:

 

This is basically what it came down to and shows the importance of both players in the side. The way in which Sibbick weakens our defence is so glaringly obvious.

Id argue Rowles caused more problems, but Sibbick was the one who's error got punished.  Rowles got away with it on the day.

[boag1874]

26 minutes ago, tcjambo said:

Rowles was the worst of our defenders in the game on Saturday. Toby got caught in two minds for their first goal but otherwise was faultless in the first half.

His one fault was a big fault though and crucially not for the first time. This is the issue with Toby, he can be having a good game but there’s always that one howler in him where he loses concentration and we get punished. I really want him to do well but if he would just learn not to be so naive and when to take the safe option under pressure in the box he’d get on so much better.

Edited March 18 by boag1874

[Deevers]

5 minutes ago, boag1874 said:

His one fault was a big fault though and crucially not for the first time. This is the issue with Toby, he can be having a good game but there’s always that one howler in him where he loses concentration and we get punished. I really want him to do well but if he would just learn not to be so naive and when to take the safe option under pressure in the box he’d get on so much better.

Toby has a bit of a habit of dithering on the ball. If he could cut that out he’d be a huge asset for us.  He actually reminds me a bit of Big Zal when he first came to us. Marius had a habit of producing bombs are moments in games, but eventually cut them out. I’ve always hoped Toby would do likewise.

[Harry Potter]

Sportscene last night replaced by some food programme, 😧.

[briever]

On 17/03/2024 at 01:01, Pans Jambo said:

Yip. Theres a massive collective who seem to think that Hearts are the ‘best of the rest’ but to fair, today showed we are not!

 

Of course we're the best of the rest.

[tcjambo]

17 minutes ago, boag1874 said:

His one fault was a big fault though and crucially not for the first time. This is the issue with Toby, he can be having a good game but there’s always that one howler in him where he loses concentration and we get punished. I really want him to do well but if he would just learn not to be so naive and when to take the safe option under pressure in the box he’d get on so much better.

I agree, although Zander was also to blame. The trouble with Rowles though is that he is just not physically robust enough, whereas Toby is. I was so disappointed for his indecision because he had a blinder up until then.