Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
Zach Mitchell - Sept 2025 on a season long loan to Hibernian (p22)
Comments
-
A player only gets a chance to prove themselves by playing but you're suggesting, without any knowledge whatsoever, that Mitchell wasn't doing enough in training to justify even a place on the bench let alone a starting spot. Were those judgement calls on Bonne, Holmes and Taylor made in training?Radostanradical said:
As said if you read my post properly, the sentence literally says in response to a previous poster who said about knowing how good he was at youth level.Addick Addict said:
You doubted he was good enough to play for Hibs despite being brilliant for his loan club at this level last season. What has playing at being good at "youth level" got the hell to do with that?Radostanradical said:Well done to the young man, hopefully now he can get some momentum and start playing up there.
In response to a previous post I cant be bothered to reply to, no one was doubting how good he was at youth level, he just needs to show it more at senior level far more consistently. However of course I hope he does not just from a club level but for the young man himself.
As said good performance yesterday and hopefully this will be the catalyst for him to kick on, perhaps now Hibs manager will see he can be an asset and give him real consideration which should encourage Zach in confidence which he can bring in to matches and training.
However you are right i did "doubt" that he was good enough for Hibs as I logically pointed out managers are paid to win games so I very much doubt he has been training and manager has thought "Wow thisnlad is incredible, best defender at the club, lets leave him out the starting 11 though".
I dont really understand your point about him being brilliamtnat St Johnstone? What does that have to do wih anything? A player can be good enough for one club but not another right? Bonne, Taylor, Holmes etc.
If he carries on and pushes on and has a good rest of the season with Hibs, I will be the first to clap my hands and say well done for proving those with doubts wrong, including myself. I (like others) have never "written him off" just pointed out what should be obvious to most football fans if you remove bias.
Now lastly ill leave it with 2 points -
1) if you are going to take issue with my posts l, please read them and respond to what ive actually said not what you want me to have said.
2) Well done Zach, a good first match after half a season not playing is not an easy achievement. Lets hope he carries on.
The actual issue is that Hibs have too many CBs and when that happens it isn't the 20 year-old loan player that's going to get preference because he isn't the one on a permanent contract. This was a panic, last minute loan to a club by us following the signing of Bree on deadline day, that had an eye on him coming in for Afcon or when they had a spate of injuries. That isn't a level playing field. There were some very early alarm bells here, as evidenced comments on the Hibs forum, that they had too many for Mitchell's position:
"Interesting move with Hanley already in the building."
"That will give us Rocky, O'Hora, Hanley, Iredale and Mitchell. Then there is Megwa of course."
Of those, prior to yesterday, the appearances made by those were Rocky (13), Hanley (13), Iredale (17), O'Hara (12) and Megwa (3).
Six players competing for a maximum of three starting places, one of which, Hanley, with 66 international caps, was always going to occupy, when available, with the rest all established players at the club. So Mitchell was fifth in line for two places, so much so that he couldn't even get a place on the bench. It's the equivalent of us signing a 20 year-old on loan and not telling them that Jones is a fixture and he would have to usurp as, a result of his performances in training, not just Jones but also Ramsay, Bell, Bree, Burke and Gillesphey.
One final point. Please stop insulting posters on here by saying that they have "home bias". The only reason we are commenting so much about Mitchell is because he is one of ours AND he is proven as good enough to play at that level. You arrogantly declare that you know professional sport but some of us that have been in and around it for decades and wouldn't dare to write someone off because they didn't like what they say in one match. Equally, we're not going to wax lyrically about a player who is, on ALL known evidence, simply not good enough. Unfortunately I've seen enough of them.
The concern now is that when everyone returns where does that leave Mitchell? Back in the stands for the rest of the season?1 -
Sweet jesus, please actually read my posts. Its very easy to have a debate when you just choose to ignore whats written and propose what you want them to have written. I have never stated selection is only based on training but are you suggesting ut doesnt go some way?Addick Addict said:
A player only gets a chance to prove themselves by playing but you're suggesting, without any knowledge whatsoever, that Mitchell wasn't doing enough in training to justify even a place on the bench let alone a starting spot. Were those judgement calls on Bonne, Holmes and Taylor made in training?Radostanradical said:
As said if you read my post properly, the sentence literally says in response to a previous poster who said about knowing how good he was at youth level.Addick Addict said:
You doubted he was good enough to play for Hibs despite being brilliant for his loan club at this level last season. What has playing at being good at "youth level" got the hell to do with that?Radostanradical said:Well done to the young man, hopefully now he can get some momentum and start playing up there.
In response to a previous post I cant be bothered to reply to, no one was doubting how good he was at youth level, he just needs to show it more at senior level far more consistently. However of course I hope he does not just from a club level but for the young man himself.
As said good performance yesterday and hopefully this will be the catalyst for him to kick on, perhaps now Hibs manager will see he can be an asset and give him real consideration which should encourage Zach in confidence which he can bring in to matches and training.
However you are right i did "doubt" that he was good enough for Hibs as I logically pointed out managers are paid to win games so I very much doubt he has been training and manager has thought "Wow thisnlad is incredible, best defender at the club, lets leave him out the starting 11 though".
I dont really understand your point about him being brilliamtnat St Johnstone? What does that have to do wih anything? A player can be good enough for one club but not another right? Bonne, Taylor, Holmes etc.
If he carries on and pushes on and has a good rest of the season with Hibs, I will be the first to clap my hands and say well done for proving those with doubts wrong, including myself. I (like others) have never "written him off" just pointed out what should be obvious to most football fans if you remove bias.
Now lastly ill leave it with 2 points -
1) if you are going to take issue with my posts l, please read them and respond to what ive actually said not what you want me to have said.
2) Well done Zach, a good first match after half a season not playing is not an easy achievement. Lets hope he carries on.
The actual issue is that Hibs have too many CBs and when that happens it isn't the 20 year-old loan player that's going to get preference because he isn't the one on a permanent contract. This was a panic, last minute loan to a club by us following the signing of Bree on deadline day, that had an eye on him coming in for Afcon or when they had a spate of injuries. That isn't a level playing field. There were some very early alarm bells here, as evidenced comments on the Hibs forum, that they had too many for Mitchell's position:
"Interesting move with Hanley already in the building."
"That will give us Rocky, O'Hora, Hanley, Iredale and Mitchell. Then there is Megwa of course."
Of those, prior to yesterday, the appearances made by those were Rocky (13), Hanley (13), Iredale (17), O'Hara (12) and Megwa (3).
Six players competing for a maximum of three starting places, one of which, Hanley, with 66 international caps, was always going to occupy, when available, with the rest all established players at the club. So Mitchell was fifth in line for two places, so much so that he couldn't even get a place on the bench. It's the equivalent of us signing a 20 year-old on loan and not telling them that Jones is a fixture and he would have to usurp as, a result of his performances in training, not just Jones but also Ramsay, Bell, Bree, Burke and Gillesphey.
One final point. Please stop insulting posters on here by saying that they have "home bias". The only reason we are commenting so much about Mitchell is because he is one of ours AND he is proven as good enough to play at that level. You arrogantly declare that you know professional sport but some of us that have been in and around it for decades and wouldn't dare to write someone off because they didn't like what they say in one match. Equally, we're not going to wax lyrically about a player who is, on ALL known evidence, simply not good enough. Unfortunately I've seen enough of them.
The concern now is that when everyone returns where does that leave Mitchell? Back in the stands for the rest of the season?
Again im going to respond one last time in the hope you can actually follow the thread. How do you know I have zero knowledge? Also are you saying that if Mitchell was playing incredible stuff in training the manager would still refuse to pick him? If thats the case I have to ask do you have some personal connection to him becuase thats just obviously untrue you dont even need to be as smart or knowledgable as myself to understand that. Yes I would agree the same for bonne et al.
As for being proven at that level, I really dont understand how you are being obtuse about this? Grealish was proven at premier league level for Villa then not good enough for City? Thisnis just common sense and cant believe im having to explain this. Also how many times do I have to say I havent written him off, its very tiresome please actually debate the points ive made not what you wish I said. I have literally said several times he can still fulfill his potential. In fact if you can find a post of me "writing him off" sayings he will never be good enough etc I will make a donation to a charity of your choice and post evidence here of the donation. Its very difficult not to be insulting when you continuously show a lack of basic knowledge regarding football, deliberately misread my posts etc.1 -
I simply wish we didn’t rush to judgement regarding our academy products.
Of course there comes a point, but most good senior players were young players somewhere once.
Yesterday Brandon Hanlan scored a goal, Albie Morgan had an assist, Karlan Grant laid on a great chance.
Very few come ready formed like a Yamal, or even a Gomez or Konsa or as Billy Bonds was.
As a long time follower of our youth, Zach is actually one who made a great impression from the off.
We are lacking cover in defence, and it would not worry me if we recalled him to be in the first team squad, Hibernian have had their chance to do the right thing by Zach, so bollocks to them if they don’t like it.
I mean for me would I rather Zach than Hernandez or god forbid Rousillion about the place? No contest.5 -
Delighted Zac got to play yesterday and show his ability, clearly he did very well.
A bit of me can't help thinking though that (per my previous message on here), he may have been better served faking an injury, being recalled in Jan and heading off elsewhere as this loan has been a disaster until yesterday. He seems far too genuine and decent to do that though which is to be applauded.
Hopefully he really kicks on and gets plenty of games now or we recall him in January and he adds to our squad.3 -
Given our injury issues, unless we sign two CBs early in the January window, I would have to assume that one if not both of the Mitchell’s will be recalled for cover. No offense to Keenan but he really was an emergency sub yesterday0
-
A.Mitchell won’t be recalled think we’re trying to build his value up and then sell him next season which is better to do at Plymouth , and Z.Mitchell needs game time more chance after a MOTM to get that at Hibernian rather than us. We do need another CB but I think it makes more sense just to pick up someone on loanBostonaddick said:Given our injury issues, unless we sign two CBs early in the January window, I would have to assume that one if not both of the Mitchell’s will be recalled for cover. No offense to Keenan but he really was an emergency sub yesterday2 -
Thanks for sharing that, jose. Some very encouraging comments again.jose said:
Wishing "Lyle" a Happy Xmas but please wind your chopse in...
1 -
Very informative especially for those who think that training well is the deciding factor in selecting a team. And who can't understand that a loanee may be at the bottom of the pile when a manager wants to stay loyal to the five established CBs in front of that import.jose said:1 -
I hope they don't feel too affronted if we recall him then. Largely been a waste of time for the lad.Addick Addict said:
Very informative especially for those who think that training well is the deciding factor in selecting a team. And who can't understand that a loanee may be at the bottom of the pile when a manager wants to stay loyal to the five established CBs in front of that import.jose said:2 -
Sponsored links:
-
Sorry are you saying training well isnt a deciding factor in selecting a team? Im done now promise.Addick Addict said:
Very informative especially for those who think that training well is the deciding factor in selecting a team. And who can't understand that a loanee may be at the bottom of the pile when a manager wants to stay loyal to the five established CBs in front of that import.jose said:0 -
Certainly not but is isn't the deciding factor and Mitchell would have had to have been horrendous for four solid months if that were the reason. The reasons have been said by me and confirmed by their supporters. They already had five CBs, the manager wanted to stay loyal to them and Mitchell was only likely to be considered if three of those five lost their form, became injured or went to Afcon. That should never have been the basis for sending him there but as this was a "rush job" I do wonder if that was even discussed.Radostanradical said:
Sorry are you saying training well isnt a deciding factor in selecting a team? Im done now promise.Addick Addict said:
Very informative especially for those who think that training well is the deciding factor in selecting a team. And who can't understand that a loanee may be at the bottom of the pile when a manager wants to stay loyal to the five established CBs in front of that import.jose said:0
