‘The Hibs Way’

Dub

Hibernian, Hibernian Ra Ra Radge
A term I’ve heard a lot lately on social media and before our games is ‘The Hibs Way’ when describing the style of football supposedly synonymous with the style of football regularly displayed at Easter Road. However, at least in my life time, I cannot remember Hibs playing a consistent brand of football that you could associate with being ingrained within the club culture.

Maybe the term hails from a bygone era, with the likes of the Famous Five churning out an exciting style of play that became expected of a Hibs side, but what actually is ‘The Hibs Way?’
Well young Dudge, me and your auld man can remember when Hibs were warrior poets playing with a style and panache that could sometimes take your breath away but at the same time somehow contriving to win nowt.
 

moathibby

Legendary Radge
The referee in the 0-7 game wasn't Bill Mullan. He had been hurt in a car crash and damaged his eye and so a replacement referee was brought in, (JP) Gordon of Newport-on-Tay. I spoke to Bill Mullan many years after at a Refs Convention and it was a regret of his that he hadn't handled the game.
That's why I asked did Mullan recover, because the commentator mentions at the start he's in hospital.
 

Bobby_Combe

Just A Radge
Ah the glory days eh! But I’m far too young to have seen it, and grainy old YouTube footage doesn’t do it just

'The Hibs Way' is a myth. I've seen some cracking games, I've seen some dross. Sometimes under the same manager. Ian Colquhoun reminded me we were playing some cracking stuff under Duffy. We played some cracking stuff under Miller and we also came up with some dross. I went during the Turnbull era, it wasn't always consistent. My highlight was probably Sporting Lisbon when we played some cracking fitba' but these nights are few and far between. I'd like us to play well; but that level only comes with a steady team, a fit team and a confident team. I don't know how you get any of that if your team is made up of players who aren't going to be around for much more than a season. There's a list of players stretching from before Agathe whom you don't see staying for much more then a season, I doubt we'll see Irvine or Nisbet for much longer not to mention Porteous. Year after year it's a case of 'rebuild and start again' you can't build Turnbull's Tornadoes when your teams more fleeting than the weather.
:50: Couldn't have put it better. And as for the Tornadoes ... How long did it take for that team to be scattered to the four winds?

Following Hibs is a matter of lots of disappointment with a load of real pain mixed in, but every now and again - but at very, very long intervals - some of the best football you'll ever see. I started in 1965 watching . Stein left for Stein's team (Hamilton, Quinn, McNamee, Stevenson, Stanton, etc). Stein left for Celtc, Shankly had us playing good football but brittle, Willie MacFarlane looked as if he was going to get us somewhere but he fell out with Tom Hart (or rather, Tom Hart wanted him gone?) and Turnbull arrived, promised great things, and then he and Hart transferred the entire team except Arthur Duncan (see above). and so on and so on. (BTW, this is the period I think of as "The Good Old days".)

Right now the three most promising young players at ER (Porteous, Nisbet, and Doig) are all subjects of transfer rumours and we'll be lucky if they're still with us in August.

"The Hibs' Way"? Built you up, let you down. I dunno why I've followed them for 56 bloody years. I guess I'm the Eternal Optimist. Or off my bleepin head ...

Cheery soul I am ... :angry:
 
Last edited:

Greenmachine

Aulder Than The Internet This Radge
Every club in the world would love to play, open, attacking skilful football at all times and then claim that type of football was somehow exclusive to them. The reality is that Hibs play in a dog eat dog league where you are either fighting for Europe or fighting to avoid relegation. Any Hibs manager has to prioritise winning matches otherwise he is out of a job. Therefore he will implement a style of play with the squad of players he has, which he feels is the most likely to win matches and keep him in a job. It's about getting the most out of what you have. It's a results based business and the managers job is to win football matches.

There have been times in my life supporting Hibs where we have been able to combine fast, skilful football with some degree of success, but they have been few and far between. Turnbull's team of the early 70's, Miller's team of the early 90's, McLeish's great team of 1999-2001, Mowbray's wonderful young team of 2004-2007, and of the course the legends of May 2016. The common factor with all of those was that we had great players. When you don't have players who can play the type of swashbuckling football we all want to see, then you have to make the most of what you do have and play a style which is most likely to win you matches in a cut-throat league. This is what we are seeing at the moment with Jack Ross. Over time, he will hopefully be able to bring in or develop better players and we will then see a better style of football which is more pleasing to watch. I actually enjoy watching counter-attacking football, when it works it is great to see.

Regarding the term "the Hibs way"; From a personal point of view, I would class this as being a good description of a club which has a major chronic and seemingly never ending big game mentality problem built into it's DNA. It's always been there even when you read the history of our club. We do not deal well with big matches, particularly at Hampden and especially when we are playing a club which is either the same size as us or smaller. Even the great Hibs teams of the past could not deal with this problem, and unless Ron Gordon and his board plus the management team can change this mentality from the top I doubt now that it is ever going to be any different. I'm afraid the whole country saw the latest example of the real "Hibs way" on May 22nd.
 
Last edited:

Dub

Hibernian, Hibernian Ra Ra Radge
Not actually the case.
The Gunts had a couple of decent attempts before we scored....... the first 10 minutes were end to end. Then Jimmy O'Rourke set us on our way.
:49:
I might be mistaken but did they not hit the post in the first five minutes?
 

Hammi

Top radge
Admin
It's crazy to think a team once famed for its 5 attacking players. Has only had 2 recognised strikers for each of the last 4 seasons.

We aren't what we were
 
  • Like
Reactions: Zab
It's crazy to think a team once famed for its 5 attacking players. Has only had 2 recognised strikers for each of the last 4 seasons.

We aren't what we were
The Famous Five were the epitome of that regarding 5 attacking player however virtually all teams had that formation. The sublime to the bleeding ridiculous on seeing Harry Potters no forwards theory. Prof. Brian Cox is having a programme called explaining Potters Thorym
on the BBC shortly. Good luck with that one mate.

BIG G
 

Hammi

Top radge
Admin
The Famous Five were the epitome of that regarding 5 attacking player however virtually all teams had that formation. The sublime to the bleeding ridiculous on seeing Harry Potters no forwards theory. Prof. Brian Cox is having a programme called explaining Potters Thorym
on the BBC shortly. Good luck with that one mate.

BIG G

You know, I've hardly ever got a clue what you're trying to say.

I thought most teams back then played with your standard 442?
Potters no forwards was embarrassing, but, there are teams that play that way... just, much better personnel to make it work.

Either way, the point mainly was that we haven't had any forwards outwith the starting 2 for 4 seasons now.
Which doesn't scream attacking team.
 

MeanwoodHibee

Just A Radge
You know, I've hardly ever got a clue what you're trying to say.

I thought most teams back then played with your standard 442?
Potters no forwards was embarrassing, but, there are teams that play that way... just, much better personnel to make it work.

Either way, the point mainly was that we haven't had any forwards outwith the starting 2 for 4 seasons now.
Which doesn't scream attacking team.
@Hammi Have you ever read Inverting The Pyramid by Jonathan Wilson? It's a history of football tactics. If you haven't read it, I think you would enjoy it.

About Potter's 4-6-0, you are right, didn't Man City win the Premier League this season despite lining up without a recognised 'striker' most of the time.

As for the 1950s teams, although they are listed in programmes as lining up 2-3-5 (which depiction persisted well into the 1960s at least) my understanding is that they actually played more like a 3-4-3 or 3-2-2-3 like this:
Goalie
Right back Centre half Left back
Wing half Wing half
Inside forward Inside forward
Right winger Centre forward Left winger
 
Want to get rid of the ads?
Sign up For a Private Membership!
Click Here
Top