No Idle Talk Posted March 18 Share Posted March 18 2 hours 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. Sibbick wasn't good on Saturday. I won't attempt to say otherwise. But being sandwiched in between Atkinson and Rowles is a tough shift. They are both crap. Atkinson especially. I still think if Toby Sibbick has a future at Hearts it is as a defensive midfielder, not a centre back. He gets caught ball watching too often to be a centre back. Maybe that part of his game will improve as he gets older. But for now it is a visible flaw in his game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
i8hibsh Posted March 18 Share Posted March 18 Sibbick is one of the most likeable players in a long long time and overall a good signing but we simply must go a level up in quality. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
i8hibsh Posted March 18 Share Posted March 18 Ross County are ****ing dogmeat and yet again we struggled against them. This should be keeping Naismith up at night - it is his failings. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chimp Posted March 18 Share Posted March 18 10 minutes ago, No Idle Talk said: Sibbick wasn't good on Saturday. I won't attempt to say otherwise. But being sandwiched in between Atkinson and Rowles is a tough shift. They are both crap. Atkinson especially. I still think if Toby Sibbick has a future at Hearts it is as a defensive midfielder, not a centre back. He gets caught ball watching too often to be a centre back. Maybe that part of his game will improve as he gets older. But for now it is a visible flaw in his game. Based on what? And don't say his debut against Rangers years ago ha. He's been tried there already this season and was poor. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
upgotheheads Posted March 18 Share Posted March 18 (edited) 16 minutes ago, No Idle Talk said: Sibbick wasn't good on Saturday. I won't attempt to say otherwise. But being sandwiched in between Atkinson and Rowles is a tough shift. They are both crap. Atkinson especially. I still think if Toby Sibbick has a future at Hearts it is as a defensive midfielder, not a centre back. He gets caught ball watching too often to be a centre back. Maybe that part of his game will improve as he gets older. But for now it is a visible flaw in his game. The trouble is we're struggling for fit centre backs but not so much for defensive mids. I agree that he doesn't have the nous to play the position, and he looks better further forward. He has shown a few times that he can ping long passes very accurately so maybe when he's playing it should be a 4-1-3-2 or similar with him as the 1. Edited March 18 by upgotheheads Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tiger Rudi Posted March 18 Share Posted March 18 33 minutes ago, Ex member of the SaS said: It's Toby's indecision that cost us. Either put it out for a corner or knee it back to Zander. Trying to bounce it on his knee ready to hoof it up the park was a huge mistake. The time he has been playing, if he hasn't sorted this by now he never will. Maybe a decent squad player but we need better permanent cover for that position, where we can afford Toby and A N Other is something for the manager and board. Yep that about sums it up. I have a lot of time for Toby but we simply can't put up with the frequency of costly errors from him that lead to goals conceded and lost points. In his defence, I would ask the question, who was screaming at him "man on, empty it" or whatever. Would a Kent, Halkett or Gordon have "allowed" that to happen? Another CB in the Kent mould is needed. For me, Toby just doesn't look like a defender at times, his body shape just isnt right prior to tackling. Look at the 2nd goal too. His efforts at trying to cut out crosses for example are almost amateurish/lax looking. I do think there is a player there, maybe he should have concentrated on midfield earlier in his career because he certainly doesn't look like a defender who's main attribute is defensive strength. Will do as a squad player, but cannot be trusted with anything more than that unfortunately. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Debut 4 Posted March 18 Share Posted March 18 33 minutes ago, No Idle Talk said: Sibbick wasn't good on Saturday. I won't attempt to say otherwise. But being sandwiched in between Atkinson and Rowles is a tough shift. They are both crap. Atkinson especially. I still think if Toby Sibbick has a future at Hearts it is as a defensive midfielder, not a centre back. He gets caught ball watching too often to be a centre back. Maybe that part of his game will improve as he gets older. But for now it is a visible flaw in his game. Even the second goal was chronic. No reaction to get out tighter, then the response is a powder puff half turn away from the moment the ball was being played across. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tiger Rudi Posted March 18 Share Posted March 18 2 minutes ago, Debut 4 said: Even the second goal was chronic. No reaction to get out tighter, then the response is a powder puff half turn away from the moment the ball was being played across. Yep, I noticed that too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Debut 4 Posted March 18 Share Posted March 18 9 minutes ago, tiger Rudi said: Yep that about sums it up. I have a lot of time for Toby but we simply can't put up with the frequency of costly errors from him that lead to goals conceded and lost points. In his defence, I would ask the question, who was screaming at him "man on, empty it" or whatever. Would a Kent, Halkett or Gordon have "allowed" that to happen? Another CB in the Kent mould is needed. For me, Toby just doesn't look like a defender at times, his body shape just isnt right prior to tackling. Look at the 2nd goal too. His efforts at trying to cut out crosses for example are almost amateurish/lax looking. I do think there is a player there, maybe he should have concentrated on midfield earlier in his career because he certainly doesn't look like a defender who's main attribute is defensive strength. Will do as a squad player, but cannot be trusted with anything more than that unfortunately. The problem (if it is such) with squad players is you may be turning to them for 7,8 games, maybe longer, not just a couple. Maybe our strategy should change in that respect, esp regards defenders. Where’s the out and out defenders who maybe lack in other aspects but can come in and do the basics? Who actually are natural defenders not jumped up ball players hoping to defend well? If you go through our defenders, who would you say can actually defend with a degree of control and balance? I think we’d all agree on the same names but it’s not top heavy on the good side out of the numbers. We arguably had 3 of our weakest playing on Sat and that’s basically our cover. While a good player you can chuck in Lembikisa too. Kent and Kingsley hold it together centrally but we are missing one for now and there’s also Halkett who we aren’t sure about when he’ll be back. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tiger Rudi Posted March 18 Share Posted March 18 19 minutes ago, Debut 4 said: The problem (if it is such) with squad players is you may be turning to them for 7,8 games, maybe longer, not just a couple. Maybe our strategy should change in that respect, esp regards defenders. Where’s the out and out defenders who maybe lack in other aspects but can come in and do the basics? Who actually are natural defenders not jumped up ball players hoping to defend well? If you go through our defenders, who would you say can actually defend with a degree of control and balance? I think we’d all agree on the same names but it’s not top heavy on the good side out of the numbers. We arguably had 3 of our weakest playing on Sat and that’s basically our cover. While a good player you can chuck in Lembikisa too. Kent and Kingsley hold it together centrally but we are missing one for now and there’s also Halkett who we aren’t sure about when he’ll be back. I agree with all of that, I will also add, we don't actually have a proper right back in our squad. I get called out a few times when I mention it, and have done so frequently. We have never replaced Smith with a like for like. Smith was actually done long before he left, so its been a problem for a long long time. How many times are we caught out down the right side? We juggle about between Atty and Dexter, use Sibbick and even Kingsley on that side. It's not good enough. Better teams exploit our preference for wing backs. One away win against Celtic doesn't change that, before anybody jumps in 😁 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Debut 4 Posted March 18 Share Posted March 18 2 minutes ago, tiger Rudi said: I agree with all of that, I will also add, we don't actually have a proper right back in our squad. I get called out a few times when I mention it, and have done so frequently. We have never replaced Smith with a like for like. Smith was actually done long before he left, so its been a problem for a long long time. How many times are we caught out down the right side? We juggle about between Atty and Dexter, use Sibbick and even Kingsley on that side. It's not good enough. Better teams exploit our preference for wing backs. One away win against Celtic doesn't change that, before anybody jumps in 😁 👍🏻 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shaggy2 Posted March 18 Share Posted March 18 (edited) Just watched snippets of the game back. Boy, did that ref no despise Shankland? Had left prior to injury time but just watched it to see Shankland being pulled back resulting in him being a split second late to a challenge which made it go from 80/20 in his favour to about 50/50. The County guy goes to ground and there’s a coming together from which they got a free kick. It goes our way and Kingsley wins us a point! Edited March 18 by Shaggy2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
briever Posted March 18 Share Posted March 18 4 hours ago, Pans Jambo said: Didn't look like it on Saturday. I agree we will likely finish best of the rest but I don't think we can swing our dicks quite yet! FFS stop getting carried away with one defeat. We are clearly the third best team in the country. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
No Idle Talk Posted March 18 Share Posted March 18 5 hours ago, Debut 4 said: Even the second goal was chronic. No reaction to get out tighter, then the response is a powder puff half turn away from the moment the ball was being played across. Also the fact that he passed the ball out of play to give them the throw in that led to the goal. Just poor all round. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hearts_fan Posted March 18 Share Posted March 18 (edited) 22 hours ago, Debut 4 said: 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. I don’t believe the gk was looking around Shankland when the ball was in play. I don’t know how to load an image here, but in the moment the goalkeeper starts diving, the location of the ball and the location of Shankland is quite telling. The goalkeeper doesn’t start diving until he sees the ball emerge from over his own wall. Shankland is nowhere near blocking the gk’s view, it was the gk’s own wall that blocked his view of the ball. The gk was desperate to find an excuse and blamed Shankland. So many have been taken in by the theatrics. Edited March 18 by Hearts_fan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
No Idle Talk Posted March 18 Share Posted March 18 6 hours ago, Chimp said: Based on what? And don't say his debut against Rangers years ago ha. He's been tried there already this season and was poor. Based on he has the physical tools to be good in that position. We have seen in the past few years how handy it can be having a big guy with some physical presence in that area of the park(Peter Haring). Sibbick has that. He is also athletic and quick, with plenty of stamina(sprinting the length of the pitch to score in the 90th minute at Easter Road). He is good with the ball at his feet and can ping some impressive long passes. Add all of these qualities together and you have a player who has some tools that could make him a good defensive midfielder. The part of his game he really has to work on is his awareness of what is going on around him. At times he gets caught dawdling or gets his body into the wrong position because he hasn't anticipated well enough. Those are skills he would also need to develop to play in midfield but at least if he gets caught out in midfield he would still have the defence behind him to cover. When he gets caught out at centre back it leads to goals. He's not a full back and never will be. That's kinda my analysis of the situation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gundermann Posted March 18 Share Posted March 18 6 hours ago, Chimp said: Based on what? And don't say his debut against Rangers years ago ha. He's been tried there already this season and was poor. Given his performance on Saturday and his exploits against Hibs, maybe he's best as an attacking mid? He's not a defender, certainly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chimp Posted March 18 Share Posted March 18 29 minutes ago, No Idle Talk said: Based on he has the physical tools to be good in that position. We have seen in the past few years how handy it can be having a big guy with some physical presence in that area of the park(Peter Haring). Sibbick has that. He is also athletic and quick, with plenty of stamina(sprinting the length of the pitch to score in the 90th minute at Easter Road). He is good with the ball at his feet and can ping some impressive long passes. Add all of these qualities together and you have a player who has some tools that could make him a good defensive midfielder. The part of his game he really has to work on is his awareness of what is going on around him. At times he gets caught dawdling or gets his body into the wrong position because he hasn't anticipated well enough. Those are skills he would also need to develop to play in midfield but at least if he gets caught out in midfield he would still have the defence behind him to cover. When he gets caught out at centre back it leads to goals. He's not a full back and never will be. That's kinda my analysis of the situation. Again, he was deployed there already and was poor. Not deserving of a place there. Playing in the middle also requires good positional awareness, something he severely lacks. Maybe it’s time we realised he just isn't good enough for us and we stopped trying to shoehorn him into different positions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gjcc Posted March 19 Share Posted March 19 Don’t want to start a thread and get folks hopes up with the title. Anyone have any clue if Shankland appeal to the yellow has been heard or what time it is today? Probably upgraded to a Red for a spurious appeal with the ban to be served the first fixture after 28 days have elapsed regardless of the competition. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Luckies1874 Posted March 19 Share Posted March 19 On 16/03/2024 at 15:39, Watt-Zeefuik said: I'm not saying you can't overcome it. But if you think athletes don't naturally lose a bit of edge when the stakes get lower, I'm not sure what to tell you. Man City v Celtic at Kenan Stadium, Chapel Hill, on 23rd July ……wee treat for you Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RustyRightPeg Posted March 19 Share Posted March 19 2 hours ago, gjcc said: Don’t want to start a thread and get folks hopes up with the title. Anyone have any clue if Shankland appeal to the yellow has been heard or what time it is today? Probably upgraded to a Red for a spurious appeal with the ban to be served the first fixture after 28 days have elapsed regardless of the competition. I think Shanks reaction will save him. He doesn't appeal and bounces straight back up. Ref is too quick to blow. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3,614
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.