Match Thread Aberdeen 1 - 0 Hibernian

[thurso]

47 minutes ago, Ernie McCracken said:

It's almost too easy. 

As alex Ferguson said football is a simple game made difficult by idiots 

[Millertime]

Classic Shinie pre match press conf with Hayes

"Do you get the feeling some players are shirking their responsibility "

Hayes "well I I did, I'm hardly gonna say am I!"

Interesting 

Hayes actually spoke really well

Looks AWFUL though

If that's him in his 30s, imagine at 50

Robert The Bruce Senior

[Betty Swallicks]

14 minutes ago, Millertime said:

Classic Shinie pre match press conf with Hayes

"Do you get the feeling some players are shirking their responsibility "

Hayes "well I I did, I'm hardly gonna say am I!"

Interesting 

Hayes actually spoke really well

Looks AWFUL though

If that's him in his 30s, imagine at 50

Robert The Bruce Senior

By the sounds of it the most interesting part was Hayes saying aye aye.

[Ke1t]

Again, overloading defence to stop pissing away goals seems like we're just going to be playing on the back foot more. 

Although maybe we'll start drawing games instead of losing them, so that's progress in the process. 

I guess. 

 

 

[Guest]

I'll be positive for a change.

Bill Hill have Hibs at 2/1 to win on Saturday, and price Dons @ 6/4 favourites.

Looks like draw territory with these respective odds, via a tight game.

Would take that after the recent miserable form.

[WesthillWanderersFC]

7 minutes ago, Woody21 said:

I'll be positive for a change.

Bill Hill have Hibs at 2/1 to win on Saturday, and price Dons @ 6/4 favourites.

Looks like draw territory with these respective odds, via a tight game.

Would take that after the recent miserable form.

Hibs win, BTTS…. 11/2.

Seems the best bet to me.

Fancy 1-2 

[Guest]

13 minutes ago, WesthillWanderersFC said:

Hibs win, BTTS…. 11/2.

Seems the best bet to me.

Fancy 1-2 

At beginning of week would agree with you but as week has gone on gut feeling is we will not get beat if, in the face of the current widespread criticism, there is a much better, backs to the wall performance.

We are certainly due one!!

[starryfish]

Gusts of wind in excess of 35mph expected during Saturday’s match, that’ll possibly upset our usual free flowing attacking football.

[DD1903]

2 hours ago, WesthillWanderersFC said:

Hibs win, BTTS…. 11/2.

Seems the best bet to me.

Fancy 1-2 

Now now. I was called a hun by the strange guy that obsesses over me, for suggesting we'd be beaten this weekend.

[WesthillWanderersFC]

5 minutes ago, DD1903 said:

Now now. I was called a hun by the strange guy that obsesses over me, for suggesting we'd be beaten this weekend.

To be honest I’ve been thinking 0-2 most of the week.

I cannot believe we’re favourites. 

[Poodler]

36 minutes ago, DD1903 said:

Now now. I was called a hun by the strange guy that obsesses over me, for suggesting we'd be beaten this weekend.

WW has made his feelings quite clear about wishing well the reserve right back of Sevco

its well known 

[DD1903]

1 hour ago, WesthillWanderersFC said:

To be honest I’ve been thinking 0-2 most of the week.

I cannot believe we’re favourites. 

A realist. 
 

i think similar

[muttonhumper]

14 hours ago, thurso said:

As alex Ferguson said football is a simple game made difficult by idiots 

Not sure if I'd trust what he says.

Most of his posts on here have been shite.

[thurso]

1 hour ago, muttonhumper said:

Not sure if I'd trust what he says.

Most of his posts on here have been shite.

Ye he is but I was actually quoting the guy who drinks in the pub 

[muttonhumper]

?

[Don_Corleone]

21 hours ago, thurso said:

Yes Mackenzie seems a very good man marker and I think can do that job again on him 

Problem is that MacKenzie is, along with Ramsay, supposed to be our main attacking threat in the Glass system - so when he's piling forward, all Hibs need to do is put the ball in behind to Boyle or whoever else and we'll get sliced open. 

[afc1903mad]

36 minutes ago, Don_Corleone said:

Problem is that MacKenzie is, along with Ramsay, supposed to be our main attacking threat in the Glass system - so when he's piling forward, all Hibs need to do is put the ball in behind to Boyle or whoever else and we'll get sliced open. 

I fancy MacKenzie nullifying Boyle (again).

I’m more fearful of Nisbet against Gallagher / Bates

[minijc]

2 minutes ago, afc1903mad said:

I fancy MacKenzie nullifying Boyle (again).

I’m more fearful of Nisbet against Gallagher / Bates

I don't.

[Don_Corleone]

33 minutes ago, afc1903mad said:

I fancy MacKenzie nullifying Boyle (again).

I’m more fearful of Nisbet against Gallagher / Bates

I do rate MacKenzie, I think he's been excellent - I do think he gets hung out to dry a little bit with the expectations put on him (similar to Ramsay) to be up in the oppositions third of the park and have to race back to cover when we lose the ball. The central defenders haven't helped them out enough, and the sitting midfielders arguably haven't helped them enough either this season. 

You're right that Gallagher and Bates will need to perform a whole lot better, or it'll be the same old story if we gift chances to a striker like Nisbet.

[fine-n-dandy]

Hibs on a bit of a stuttery run of late.

They must be delighted they’ve got us next. The team that stops everyones bad runs

 

We should change the club name to Imodium fc. 

[Kincardine_Mearns_Red]

Beaten by shitty Dundee last outing so that doesnt bode well for this.

[shooftahmooftah]

12 minutes ago, fine-n-dandy said:

Hibs on a bit of a stuttery run of late.

They must be delighted they’ve got us next. The team that stops everyones bad runs

 

We should change the club name to Imodium fc. 

No. Dia Dons Areeah F. C. 

[Ten Caat]

1 hour ago, Don_Corleone said:

I do rate MacKenzie, I think he's been excellent - I do think he gets hung out to dry a little bit with the expectations put on him (similar to Ramsay) to be up in the oppositions third of the park and have to race back to cover when we lose the ball. The central defenders haven't helped them out enough, and the sitting midfielders arguably haven't helped them enough either this season. 

You're right that Gallagher and Bates will need to perform a whole lot better, or it'll be the same old story if we gift chances to a striker like Nisbet.

There's a reason why you have full backs

If both of them are 40 yards up the field, leaving 2 central defenders to cover the space where 4 are meant to be, is it any wonder they struggle to do so?

Gallagher did show some signs of a bit of a return to form against Dundee but Bates has been a bit of a bombscare to date. I'm still not sure that Griffiths was onside at Dundee's first goal. He got a lot of stick for that and there may be a case for it. But if he had been 10 yards further back he's then playing everyone onside and would have been slaughtered for that too. Griffiths would still have picked the ball up as Bates was covering the whole left hand side and couldn't afford his starting position to be too wide

[thurso]

3 hours ago, Don_Corleone said:

Problem is that MacKenzie is, along with Ramsay, supposed to be our main attacking threat in the Glass system - so when he's piling forward, all Hibs need to do is put the ball in behind to Boyle or whoever else and we'll get sliced open. 

He didn’t bomb forward last time we played them so tell him not to again. 
I know we’ve been defending very craply but Hibs ain’t that good I think we have a good chance if we cut out the stupid defending 

[fine-n-dandy]

1 hour ago, Ten Caat said:

There's a reason why you have full backs

If both of them are 40 yards up the field, leaving 2 central defenders to cover the space where 4 are meant to be, is it any wonder they struggle to do so?

Gallagher did show some signs of a bit of a return to form against Dundee but Bates has been a bit of a bombscare to date. I'm still not sure that Griffiths was onside at Dundee's first goal. He got a lot of stick for that and there may be a case for it. But if he had been 10 yards further back he's then playing everyone onside and would have been slaughtered for that too. Griffiths would still have picked the ball up as Bates was covering the whole left hand side and couldn't afford his starting position to be too wide

They don’t have to both attack at same time, plus when your tactics are to use advanced FB’s/wing backs then the defensive mids are meant to sit back protecting the shite two in central defence that can’t cope.

basically we have signed a load of shite players that cannot handle the tactics Glass wants to play & that is 100% his failure.

We can’t excuse the weaknesses in him & his signings & blame it on our two young FB’s that are only doing what they’ve been told & are (quite honestly) the only good thing about the whole team right now

[Don_Corleone]

3 hours ago, Ten Caat said:

There's a reason why you have full backs

If both of them are 40 yards up the field, leaving 2 central defenders to cover the space where 4 are meant to be, is it any wonder they struggle to do so?

Gallagher did show some signs of a bit of a return to form against Dundee but Bates has been a bit of a bombscare to date. I'm still not sure that Griffiths was onside at Dundee's first goal. He got a lot of stick for that and there may be a case for it. But if he had been 10 yards further back he's then playing everyone onside and would have been slaughtered for that too. Griffiths would still have picked the ball up as Bates was covering the whole left hand side and couldn't afford his starting position to be too wide

Absolutely - but you can't expect them to be your main attacking threat and also expect them to magically be back in their defensive positions whenever we lose the ball. A number of the goals we've lost have been down to that (granted a lot of them and others have also been a result of ridiculously bad defending and goalkeeping).

So if he's expecting the full backs to be so high up the park a lot of the time, he needs to put in place some kind of plan to cover the space they've left vacant. Either that or tell them not to push up so often. Problem is that's about the only means of attack we seem to have.

[Guest]

2 hours ago, Don_Corleone said:

Absolutely - but you can't expect them to be your main attacking threat and also expect them to magically be back in their defensive positions whenever we lose the ball. A number of the goals we've lost have been down to that (granted a lot of them and others have also been a result of ridiculously bad defending and goalkeeping).

So if he's expecting the full backs to be so high up the park a lot of the time, he needs to put in place some kind of plan to cover the space they've left vacant. Either that or tell them not to push up so often. Problem is that's about the only means of attack we seem to have.

This needs addressed pronto otherwise the winless run will continue for a good while yet.

[RED_JOHN]

I genuinely think we will win this match. It will all come good tommorow afternoon. 2-0 The Dons!!

[afc1903mad]

3 hours ago, Don_Corleone said:

Absolutely - but you can't expect them to be your main attacking threat and also expect them to magically be back in their defensive positions whenever we lose the ball. A number of the goals we've lost have been down to that (granted a lot of them and others have also been a result of ridiculously bad defending and goalkeeping).

So if he's expecting the full backs to be so high up the park a lot of the time, he needs to put in place some kind of plan to cover the space they've left vacant. Either that or tell them not to push up so often. Problem is that's about the only means of attack we seem to have.

Against St Johnstone, the two young lads were not bombing forward  as they normally do. They were tasked to track O’Halloran and Middleton, which they did very well.

I’d expect a similar role tomorrow

[afc1903mad]

3 hours ago, Grays Babylon 1875 said:

Sorry to say it brothers but Jack Ross teams don't go on losing streaks. 

They lose one and bounce back - especially away from home.

Get your vaseline ready for a good ass shagging.

Except you’ve just lost two on the bounce