Csaba, Benitez and the Glory of 4-5-1

[mattyw_1874]

I have been pondering about writing this for about a week now but I can no longer keep this on my chest.

 

I would first like to point out that this is not a stab at Csaba Lazlo as I am fully aware of how far he has taken this club with its distinctly poor squad.

 

As we all know from watching Heart of Midlothian Football Club from August 08 to January 09, Mr Lazlo has set out his stall in a 4-5-1 formation or if you analyse it 4-2-3-1. Although this is not every ones cup of tea as supporters of our great club many of us (well at least the sane ones) have accepted that although the football we are playing is not overly exciting, it is working and we are picking up points.

 

Many of us are also aware this is the preferred choice for Liverpool FC and Rafael Ben?tez. Now i am not directly comparing Hearts to Liverpool, just using a comparison but i am fully aware that the tactical situation is very similar, with the two sitting midfielders with two wide men and one man just of the front.

 

--Alsonso Lucas-----------------Karipidis Stewart

-Kuyt Gerrard Riera-------------Obua Aguiar Driver

------Torres------------------------ Nade

 

Both teams are very compact, very disciplined and rely on either individual brilliance from one of their star players or a set piece to unlock the door. Now in the 60-70% of the time that this works as planned nobody beaks the side down then you can either get ahead and slowly grind the team down and maybe grab a second maybe a third, but when this does not happen it is when the major problem arises.

 

The problem is of course the days like today?s fixture against Hamilton were we go 2 down and it just is not working, we can?t break the opposition down and are needing to change it, implement plan B so to say. Wait there is no plan B. The are major questions that need answered

 

1. Is it stubbornness?

 

2. Is it lack of ability?

 

Or

 

3. Is it lack of experience?

 

This is majorly worrying from a Hearts perspective, as we have just lost the captain and regardless to what anyone says, one of the main reasons for the shoring up of the defence this season.

 

As far as I am concerned plan B should be 4-4-2, take of one of the holding midfielders (Stewart) and bring on a 2nd striker (Geln). We ended the game with a fullback at centre half (Eggart) a Centre half at full back (Zal) and Karipidis had no idea whether to play DM or CB, in a sort of 3-1-2-1-2 thing.

[Dave Ross]

Csaba's trying to put square pegs into round holes. Let's see what he does when he has the necessay tools.

[Drylaw Hearts]

4-5-1 SUCKS.

[Charlie-Brown]

We scored 3 goals last week, 2 goals at Killie, 2 goals at Fester but crucially none today - same formation & players used in all these games - like the Motherwell game we played poorly today nothing more nothing less.

[Rust Cohle]

I despise the 4-5-1, regardless of who plays it.

[mattyw_1874]

We scored 3 goals last week, 2 goals at Killie, 2 goals at Fester but crucially none today - same formation & players used in all these games - like the Motherwell game we played poorly today nothing more nothing less.

 

Which is exactly what i said its the other 30% of the time when there is distinct lack of any form of plan B.

[Charlie-Brown]

Which is exactly what i said its the other 30% of the time when there is distinct lack of any form of plan B.

 

Matty no amount of plan B thru to plan Z will make much difference if the players & team are playing CRAP on any given day.....our players aren't good enough or consistent enough to play well every week - we will lose some games like today & Motherwell etc until we either get better players or the existing players can improve their consistency & performance levels.

[mattyw_1874]

Matty no amount of plan B thru to plan Z will make much difference if the players & team are playing CRAP on any given day.....our players aren't good enough or consistent enough to play well every week - we will lose some games like today & Motherwell etc until we either get better players or the existing players can improve their consinstency & performance levels.

 

So what you are telling me is that sitting with the same players who were playing that bad in a system in which was just cluttering a cluttered midfield was a smart idea??

 

Larry put on the wing for Driver who was shocking.

 

Glen up front and sacrifice a holding midfielder the moment the pen was given the players should have been warming up an ready to go on to at least TRY and change the game.

 

Might not have worked but surely worth a go?

[Gigolo-Aunt]

451 changes to a 433 when attacking.

 

[Charlie-Brown]

If you want to talk about Liverpool then regardless of formation they are far too reliant on Gerrard & Torres & if they are missing or injured or not performing or closed out by oppenents the Liverpool are far less effective and don't always have the ammunition to unlock tight defences.....

 

In Hearts case when we lose generally it's cos more of the team played below par than those who played well - most SPL teams are of approx similar standard and below par performances usually mean dropped points.

[Charlie-Brown]

So what you are telling me is that sitting with the same players who were playing that bad in a system in which was just cluttering a cluttered midfield was a smart idea??

 

Larry put on the wing for Driver who was shocking.

 

Glen up front and sacrifice a holding midfielder the moment the pen was given the players should have been warming up an ready to go on to at least TRY and change the game.

 

Might not have worked but surely worth a go?

 

When we played 4-4-2 under Ivanauskas / Rix etc we lost games & dropped points when we didn't play well...under Csaba / Frail etc when we play poor we drop points - it isn't the formations and tactics that is losing us games it is a lower level of performance throughout the team from week to week - when we play well we are capable of winning runs & 7 games undefeated but when we are in bad form we can go 4 or 5 games without a win.

[Mr Romanov Saviour of HMFC]

451 changes to a 433 when attacking.

 

 

Aye, that's a favorite of mine.

 

Thing is you would need 3 attack minded players on the pitch for it to work!

[Gigolo-Aunt]

Charlie, do you think Hearts would profit if we were a little more flexible with the formation we play?

[mattyw_1874]

If you want to talk about Liverpool then regardless of formation they are far too reliant on Gerrard & Torres & if they are missing or injured or not performing or closed out by oppenents the Liverpool are far less effective and don't always have the ammunition to unlock tight defences.....

 

In Hearts case when we lose generally it's cos more of the team played below par than those who played well - most SPL teams are of approx similar standard and below par performances usually mean dropped points.

 

Disagree

 

Driver(ICT) and Bruno(Kilmarnock) to name a couple

 

But it was more the tactical element of refusal to remove the holding midfielders.

[mattyw_1874]

When we played 4-4-2 under Ivanauskas / Rix etc we lost games & dropped points when we didn't play well...under Csaba / Frail etc when we play poor we drop points - it isn't the formations and tactics that is losing us games it is a lower level of performance throughout the team from week to week - when we play well we are capable of winning runs & 7 games undefeated but when we are in bad form we can go 4 or 5 games without a win.

 

Well again that is not the point i am making. I am happy when the 4-5-1 works.

 

BUT

 

When it doesn't work are you telling me trying something else e.g. 4-4-2 is not beneficial?

[Charlie-Brown]

Disagree

 

Driver(ICT) and Bruno(Kilmarnock) to name a couple

 

But it was more the tactical element of refusal to remove the holding midfielders.

 

I think you are looking for tactical reasons why we didn't win above looking at the more simple and consistent eveidence that we didn't win our tackles, headers, make good passes, get past our opponents, shoot on target etc. Not subbing a midfielder or throwing on extra attackers isn't the primary reason why we drop points...our players don't always give us the same level of performance in terms of the quality from week to week.

[Mr Romanov Saviour of HMFC]

I think you are looking for tactical reasons why we didn't win above looking at the more simple and consistent eveidence that we didn't win our tackles, headers, make good passes, get past our opponents, shoot on target etc. Not subbing a midfielder or throwing on extra attackers isn't the primary reason why we drop points...our players don't always give us the same level of performance in terms of the quality from week to week.

 

Yes that is true but the things you list may be down to the system not working.

 

We went 2-0 down and were basically depending on a bit of magic from Bruno or a scrappy goal from Nade or Driver. Why not just mix it up a bit and try our luck? I would rather lose 3-0 and have a go than lose 2-0 and go out with a whimper.

 

It's a sad state of affairs when you can basically predict the outcome of the game from the first whistle.

[mattyw_1874]

Yes that is true but the things you list may be down to the system not working.

 

We went 2-0 down and were basically depending on a bit of magic from Bruno or a scrappy goal from Nade or Driver. Why not just mix it up a bit and try our luck? I would rather lose 3-0 and have a go than lose 2-0 and go out with a whimper.

 

It's a sad state of affairs when you can basically predict the outcome of the game from the first whistle.

 

What he said.

[Charlie-Brown]

Well again that is not the point i am making. I am happy when the 4-5-1 works.

 

BUT

 

When it doesn't work are you telling me trying something else e.g. 4-4-2 is not beneficial?

 

Yes that is exactly what Iam saying - if we aren't playing well ie making passes, beating players, better crossing & shooting etc then 4-4-2 or 4-5-1 doesn't any difference - the manager has to try to identify which players in the system are resulting in our moves breaking down (assuming it's not a team wide malaise) and then replace that player hoping the new guy plays more effectively than the guy coming off.

 

Going from 4-5-1 to 4-4-2 or 4-3-3 or whatever doesn't make any difference unless the basics of attacking are improved.

 

You will find most SPL managers will ultimately resort to playing long balls in the hope to get a break and nick a goal when games are going against them but it doesn't guarantee anything more productive indeed it can cost further goals conceded as we saw at Fester in the cup when more space was created in Hibs defence for our 2nd goal.

[Mr Romanov Saviour of HMFC]

Yes that is exactly what Iam saying - if we aren't playing well ie making passes, beating players, better crossing & shooting etc then 4-4-2 or 4-5-1 doesn't any difference - the manager has to try to identify which players in the system are resulting in our moves breaking down (assuming it's not a team wide malaise) and then replace that player hoping the new guy plays more effectively than the guy coming off.

 

Going from 4-5-1 to 4-4-2 or 4-3-3 or whatever doesn't make any difference unless the basics of attacking are improved.

You will find most SPL managers will ultimately resort to playing long balls in the hope to get a break and nick a goal when games are going against them but it doesn't guarantee anything more productive indeed it can cost further goals conceded as we saw at Fester in the cup when more space was created in Hibs defence for our 2nd goal.

 

Poor example. Hibs were down to 10 men.

[shaun.lawson]

Liverpool won the Champions League with 4-5-1. Chelsea won two straight league titles with 4-5-1, and only started coming back towards the pack when Mourinho was forced to switch to 4-4-2 to accommodate signings brought in by the owner. Arsenal reached the Champions League final with 4-5-1. France won the World Cup with 4-5-1.

 

This is a transitional, rebuilding season. Stability is far and away the most important requirement at the club, both on and off the pitch - and 4-5-1 the way we play it is ideally suited to at least developing a team who play to a set, reliable pattern, are hard to break down and hard to beat. There'll be setbacks - plenty of them. But most teams throughout the British game go with only one up front nowadays - because football matches are won in midfield, and you can neither afford to be undermanned there, nor to leave your strikers isolated.

 

Jock Stein used to say that national teams wear their work overalls in qualifying, and put the fancy dress on only at the finals. As far as the rebuilding of Hearts goes, I feel much the same applies with us. We're not good enough to play other than 4-5-1 yet: we don't have the midfielders, or two reliable enough centre forwards. If we're still seeing setbacks like today's a year from now, then fair enough; but as it is, I'm happy enough. And one 2-0 defeat away from home isn't going to alter my view.

[Charlie-Brown]

Poor example. Hibs were down to 10 men.

 

Yes they were however there was much more space at the end than there was for most of the 2nd half when Hibs kept more players behind the ball & tried to keep it tight & have defensive solidity.

 

Anyway regardless of the example you clearly understood the point i was making.

[Mr Romanov Saviour of HMFC]

Liverpool won the Champions League with 4-5-1. Chelsea won two straight league titles with 4-5-1, and only started coming back towards the pack when Mourinho was forced to switch to 4-4-2 to accommodate signings brought in by the owner. Arsenal reached the Champions League final with 4-5-1. France won the World Cup with 4-5-1.

 

This is a transitional, rebuilding season. Stability is far and away the most important requirement at the club, both on and off the pitch - and 4-5-1 the way we play it is ideally suited to at least developing a team who play to a set, reliable pattern, are hard to break down and hard to beat. There'll be setbacks - plenty of them. But most teams throughout the British game go with only one up front nowadays - because football matches are won in midfield, and you can neither afford to be undermanned there, nor to leave your strikers isolated.

 

Jock Stein used to say that national teams wear their work overalls in qualifying, and put the fancy dress on only at the finals. As far as the rebuilding of Hearts goes, I feel much the same applies with us. We're not good enough to play other than 4-5-1 yet: we don't have the midfielders, or two reliable enough centre forwards. If we're still seeing setbacks like today's a year from now, then fair enough; but as it is, I'm happy enough. And one 2-0 defeat away from home isn't going to alter my view.

 

Fair points.

 

However, all of the above does not prevent Laszlo from changing tactics DURING the game.

 

He seems to be incapable of adapting to in game conditions. It's quite concerning.

[Gigolo-Aunt]

Fair points.

 

However, all of the above does not prevent Laszlo from changing tactics DURING the game.

 

He seems to be incapable of adapting to in game conditions. It's quite concerning.

 

Yup.

[shaun.lawson]

Fair points.

 

However, all of the above does not prevent Laszlo from changing tactics DURING the game.

 

He seems to be incapable of adapting to in game conditions. It's quite concerning.

 

I dunno. You have preparation managers like Laszlo (note how we all start calling him by his surname again in the aftermath of a defeat) or Eriksson; or brilliant, game-changing managers like Mourinho. The flexibility to adapt and change course mid-match will only come with time: hence why I'd be concerned if we're watching action replays of today a year from now.

 

For whatever reason, we seem to have become a team who, for a good three years now, have been generally good at seeing a lead out, and generally hopeless when losing the first goal. I don't know if this is a 4-5-1 by-product or not: it'll take time for it to change though.

[Charlie-Brown]

If the wingers are not beating fullbacks or if our passing is slack or we are being out-muscled in challenges etc how is putting on 2 or 3 forwards going to change anything?

 

Players coming on have to play better than players going off if you are looking for the team performance to improve - as well as combine better with the other players in the hope they too do better ....

[Mr Romanov Saviour of HMFC]

I dunno. You have preparation managers like Laszlo (note how we all start calling him by his surname again in the aftermath of a defeat) or Eriksson; or brilliant, game-changing managers like Mourinho. The flexibility to adapt and change course mid-match will only come with time: hence why I'd be concerned if we're watching action replays of today a year from now.

 

For whatever reason, we seem to have become a team who, for a good three years now, have been generally good at seeing a lead out, and generally hopeless when losing the first goal. I don't know if this is a 4-5-1 by-product or not: it'll take time for it to change though.

 

Not sure I agree with that.

 

He's a moderately experienced manager who has won titles so at the very least he should be able to make some game changing subs/tactics. It's not as if this is his first year of management.

 

Csaba has definitely done us the world of good but it is worth noting his faults which are becoming quite clear. He get's loads of praise so I don't see it as a bad thing.

 

You can call him a preparation manager but then perhaps he prepared in the wrong manner today (which leads to the question is 4-5-1 the be all and end all) then seeing as we never even put up a fight against (let's face it) a shocking outfit.

[Dia Liom]

Liverpool won the Champions League with 4-5-1. Chelsea won two straight league titles with 4-5-1, and only started coming back towards the pack when Mourinho was forced to switch to 4-4-2 to accommodate signings brought in by the owner. Arsenal reached the Champions League final with 4-5-1. France won the World Cup with 4-5-1.

 

This is a transitional, rebuilding season. Stability is far and away the most important requirement at the club, both on and off the pitch - and 4-5-1 the way we play it is ideally suited to at least developing a team who play to a set, reliable pattern, are hard to break down and hard to beat. There'll be setbacks - plenty of them. But most teams throughout the British game go with only one up front nowadays - because football matches are won in midfield, and you can neither afford to be undermanned there, nor to leave your strikers isolated.

 

Jock Stein used to say that national teams wear their work overalls in qualifying, and put the fancy dress on only at the finals. As far as the rebuilding of Hearts goes, I feel much the same applies with us. We're not good enough to play other than 4-5-1 yet: we don't have the midfielders, or two reliable enough centre forwards. If we're still seeing setbacks like today's a year from now, then fair enough; but as it is, I'm happy enough. And one 2-0 defeat away from home isn't going to alter my view.

 

 

This is basically what I feel, but worded in a much better way than I ever could. I also really dont understand anyone who says they hate 4-5-1 in any circumstance, this seems like a very odd mindset. The football we are playing at the moment is not great but we do not have great players.

[shaun.lawson]

Not sure I agree with that.

 

He's a moderately experienced manager who has won titles so at the very least he should be able to make some game changing subs/tactics. It's not as if this is his first year of management.

 

Csaba has definitely done us the world of good but it is worth noting his faults which are becoming quite clear. He get's loads of praise so I don't see it as a bad thing.

 

You can call him a preparation manager but then perhaps he prepared in the wrong manner today (which leads to the question is 4-5-1 the be all and end all) then seeing as we never even put up a fight against (let's face it) a shocking outfit.

 

A shocking outfit who have won how many home games on the bounce now? I do agree that constructive criticism is entirely fair, though. As an England fan, life under Eriksson used to have me tearing my hair out: we were reliable and consistent enough under him, but the football was generally awful, there was a glass ceiling we were clearly never going to break through with him in charge, and with all his experience (including winning the world's most tactically demanding league with a non-Big Three club), his inability to make key substitutions was frightening.

 

But then, developing a cool, calm team who went into each game with the right approach was his real strength - as, most of the time, it seems to be with Csaba. Levein is probably good at both - JJ not so, but Hearts under him were more unpredictable and more exciting. You pays yer money and all that...

[mattyw_1874]

If the wingers are not beating fullbacks or if our passing is slack or we are being out-muscled in challenges etc how is putting on 2 or 3 forwards going to change anything?

 

Players coming on have to play better than players going off if you are looking for the team performance to improve - as well as combine better with the other players in the hope they too do better ....

 

Well im sorry but the it is the managers responsibility to take these players off (as many as possible as quickly as possible) and bring on new ones and mix up the formation if need be. Adapting to the game as it unfolds

 

Dundee Utd would have had two strikers on the pitch a lot sooner than we did.

[brux]

We hate 451

it doesny work

it doesney work

we hate 451

its boarin

its boarin

we hate 451

.....

[IMA MAROON]

Aye, that's a favorite of mine.

 

Thing is you would need 3 attack minded players on the pitch for it to work!

 

Obua, Nade and Driver.

 

Or

 

Obua, Glen, Kingston.

[Charlie-Brown]

Can't agree with you on this.

 

1. Despite being down to 10 men, ICT were able to walk through our midfield with ease last week. So much for 'keeping things tight in the middle'.

 

2. I appreciate the point you're trying to make, but football matches are won by putting the ball in the net, which comes from creating chances (whether punts and flicks, quick passing through the middle or crosses from out wide). We're not doing any of those often enough.

 

3. I would contend that we're not good enough to play 4-5-1 yet. Our lone striker is isolated due to his lack of pace, and the inspiration from midfield (Bruno hasn't threatened much in the last two games) is rare. We don't have reliable centre forwards, so playing two would double the chance of one of them having a productive day. As for the midfield, they don't look like they know what they're doing. I doubt having one less cluttering up the middle would make much difference, other than allowing us to attack with two strikers, causing many more problems for SPL defences which, typically, consist of huddies who can mop up high balls to Nade all day.

 

Yesterday showed up our players and system for what they are - inconsistent and uninspiring, respectively.

 

Jonesy - can you tell me how the 4-4-2 we played in 2006-07 season under Ivanauskas & Frail/Korobotchka was obviously superior? Then as now we had good days & bad days ..... sometimes opponents out-numbered or out-muscled or out-played us in midfield and we created very little, sometimes then as now our wingers were fairly anonymous in games and we created not a lot......then & now our players like most in the SPL simply aren't of a high enough standard to produce consistent or higher levels of performance week after week hence most teams from 3rd to 12th have their good spells & bad spells, good results & bad results - the tactical element (4-5-1 / 4-4-2 / 4-3-3) doesn't really matter if the team as a whole or key individuals are playing poorly.

[The Old Tolbooth]

Csaba's trying to put square pegs into round holes. Let's see what he does when he has the necessay tools.

 

Now for me, that's a perfect explanation, the squad of players we had last season looked like they had never seen each other before, they were woeful, and stumbled to 8th place in the league.

 

Csaba has taken that same group of pish and made them work for each other, discovered new roles and positions for certain players, and somehow got teams interested in buying some of the squad, and although some of his tactical decisions leave me bewildered, there's no denying that the man has talent at what he does.

 

I'd love to see him bring in his own players, and reform that side into his own team, with his own style, and I believe that it will happen given time, and that there wont be too many of the current squad still there when it does.

 

I for one didn't think we would be challenging for 3rd this season, and have to say I'm happy with the progress, and probably most importantly, the difference a disciplined manager has made.

[Robbo27_22]

451 in our set up is madness.

 

We have a decent defence, above average midfield but have nothing in attack (bar Glen, who must have seriously ****ed some folk off during the summer).

 

The whole point of the set up is flooding the middle so you can get it forward to a striker who can:-

 

1) Hold it up when required

2) Take it a walk on their own

3) Put the vast majority of their chances away

 

Nade has improved his fitness 10 fold but he doesn't have the qualities above. Glen has some of them but the SPL centre halves would have a field day with him playing up top on his own - he doesn't have the stature to play that role (but would flourish with a decent top man beside him).

 

The problem is that we are no better suited to 442 at the moment either. In real terms, I think we have to get another 3 strikers in and bin the ****e that has been floating about for too long.

 

The strikers coming in have to be the right blend though or the rest of this season/next season would be a long drawn out experience again.

[bighusref]

Fair points.

 

However, all of the above does not prevent Laszlo from changing tactics DURING the game.

 

He seems to be incapable of adapting to in game conditions. It's quite concerning.

 

Agreed.

 

Yesterday, Hamilton put a defender on Aguiar, told him to follow him all around the pitch and it nullified our attack. A tactical manager can out-do our formation, we do not have an ounce of flexibility under Laszlo.

 

Two nil down and you still leave four at the back? The formation that "they" pick is short sighted and naive.

 

As for the stupid suggestion that we are not good enough to play any other formation than 4-5-1 Honestly Shaun, you are talking a lot of nonsense.

[blairdin]

I'm in the minority, but I like the 4-5-1 formation and think we will and should stick with it.

 

I think 4-5-1 works best against teams that play 4-4-2 or 4-3-3 against it. We sit back and rely on either the wide midfeilders or the attacking midfielder seeing when the opposition have pushed too far up the park, creating space for us to break quickly into.

 

It's no considence that Hamilton lined up 4-5-1 against us (according to radio, I was in Lyhtam and missed the game) and won. The only suprise is more teams haven't lined up like this against us, it's the best way top beat us. It stifles the stiflers, beats us at our own game. This is where we don't have a plan B. I'll give Csaba the benefit of the doubt for now and put it down to a lack of personnel at his disposal.

 

In the long term, when Csaba has brought in more of his own players, I would expect to see him have the nouse to try to change a game from the bench. In the grand scheme of things, this is a minor quibble when compared with the improvement in individual players, the team, the results and the spirit around the club.

[Charlie-Brown]

I'm in the minority, but I like the 4-5-1 formation and think we will and should stick with it.

 

I think 4-5-1 works best against teams that play 4-4-2 or 4-3-3 against it. We sit back and rely on either the wide midfeilders or the attacking midfielder seeing when the opposition have pushed too far up the park, creating space for us to break quickly into.

 

It's no considence that Hamilton lined up 4-5-1 against us (according to radio, I was in Lyhtam and missed the game) and won. The only suprise is more teams haven't lined up like this against us, it's the best way top beat us. It stifles the stiflers, beats us at our own game. This is where we don't have a plan B. I'll give Csaba the benefit of the doubt for now and put it down to a lack of personnel at his disposal.

 

In the long term, when Csaba has brought in more of his own players, I would expect to see him have the nouse to try to change a game from the bench. In the grand scheme of things, this is a minor quibble when compared with the improvement in individual players, the team, the results and the spirit around the club.

 

Very good post and I agree - i fail to understand how going to 4-4-2 will increase our chances if our players aren't on top of their game or are not winning their individual battles against opponents and if teams are matching up 4-5-1 against us then going to 4-4-2 would leave us a man short in midfield thus weaker in that key area ......in circumstances like those the players as a whole need to up their level of performance and the manager replace those players who are being ineffective or causing our moves to break down - that is why so many managers make like for like substitutions in the hope that the new guy is more effective than the guy going off and the team as a whole then starts to play better.

[The White Cockade]

4-5-1 is pants

the theory is that you have a stranglehold on the game in midfield so you control the game and don't give many chances away and try and score basically on breakaways

the reality is for us that one up front means that 90% of the time the ball is played forward we lose it therefore the opposition collect it and come back at us

we have done well results wise this season but nobody could say we were in control for many of our wins and practically every game could have gone either way - we haven't bossed a single game all season and won comfortably

we score so few goals that we practically need a cean sheet every week to have a chance of wining

my opinion (and thats all it is) is that we have better players than most teams in the league and if we played aggessive, positive football we'd score more goals and win most weeks

we are winning games against poor teams despite the formation ony because the opposition is so poor - we are not controlling games and preventing the opposition creating scoring chances, we give away chances galore but the opposition are so poor that they miss most of them

4-5-1 at home to Inverness and even against Gretna last season

we totall controlled the games and won easily? err no

you need the second goal to be sure of a lead and kill off the opposition

does anybody remember the feeling on the way home when we beat Hamiton o Dunfermline 7-0

yeah greate stuff it will never happen using this formation - they should half the admission price as enertainment value is zero

we are bringing ourself down to the level of the opposition and thats why we struggle to win - because of the useless formation

[flecktimus]

Ok here goes.

 

At the start of a new season there is a war to fight. To win our war may mean 3rd or 4th place finish, depending on what quality of players we have at our disposal.

 

So we therefore plan our strategy to gain our given targets, in our case it is 4-5-1 and I have no problems with having that strategy in place. But what we have to remember , there are battles to be fought every week and the opposition will soon learn of your battle strategy and if you are inflexible with that strategy you will start to lose battles and therefore not gain your targets.

 

Since the start of December after our 5 wins

Played -8 Possible -24pts

Won ? 2 -6pts

Drawn-3 -3pts

Lost ? 3

 

Since December we have only picked up 9pts out of a possible 24pts which suggest to me we are not winning enough battles and it may be because we are a little bit intransigent to change when required.

 

In Csaba I trust, but I just get the feeling that we are being out thought at the moment.

[Only a Game]

I think the system is only a small part of the problem.

 

A bigger problem that concerns me is the attitude we are sometimes sent out with, especially away from home to supposed lesser teams.

 

We start off games having a look at what the oposition have got, inviting them on to us and handing them the initiative. We've done it countless times this season and we done it again yesterday. By the time we are ready to get a foothold in the game we're sometimes being dominated and the pattern of the game is proving too hard for us to change.

 

I think that any system we settle on will only be a success if we start games a little bit quicker and a lot more determined to take the inititiative. Sitting in against Hamilton Accies and letting them dictate the game FFS thats got to stop !!! This is Hearts FC we are talking about !!! Hamilton Accies and the like should be fearing us and wondering how they can limit the damage, not dominating 2/3rds of the game against us.

[Spellczech]

I think the system is only a small part of the problem.

 

A bigger problem that concerns me is the attitude we are sometimes sent out with, especially away from home to supposed lesser teams.

 

We start off games having a look at what the oposition have got, inviting them on to us and handing them the initiative. We've done it countless times this season and we done it again yesterday. By the time we are ready to get a foothold in the game we're sometimes being dominated and the pattern of the game is proving too hard for us to change.

 

I think that any system we settle on will only be a success if we start games a little bit quicker and a lot more determined to take the inititiative. Sitting in against Hamilton Accies and letting them dictate the game FFS thats got to stop !!! This is Hearts FC we are talking about !!! Hamilton Accies and the like should be fearing us and wondering how they can limit the damage, not dominating 2/3rds of the game against us.

 

I agree with this. Harking back to the Burley run, the reason we did well at that time was that we showed the opposition no respect and attacked them from the off. In most games we got a cushion by half-time and we clung on in the second half for the win.

 

Hamilton have a simple system: the age old Scottish style of "get intae ?em". The worst game I have seen in years was the visit of Hamilton to Tynecastle. We were rank rotten and they were all perspiration. Sounds like it was similar yesterday. The OF can grind out results in such games as their players are taught that losing is inexcusable. Last year our players learned that losing was "not that bad". Csaba has started to correct this, but there are still lapses...I hope the players got a roasting from the coach and owner yesterday.

 

The fact is our creative players are simply not creative enough. We look disjointed at times and give away cheap possession because not only are we lazier than teams like Hamilton when without the ball, we are also lazier when one of our team has the ball. Throw-ins show this most glaringly - the number of times we limply chuck the ball to the opposition because there is no movement from our own players is quite embarassing.