Zach Mitchell - Sept 2025 on a season long loan to Hibernian (p22)

killerandflash said:

What I don't understand is that if Zach was considered good enough for Hibernian, a decent Scottish PL side, to loan, how he isn't good enough to play for us?

Or flipping it, if he's not good enough for us yet, Hibernian is surely too high a side to be loaned to.

Personally I've felt since the end of the window that we are one defender short, and Zach could have got decent minutes as cover in various positions if he stayed here. 

I think this was a rushed last minute deal once we signed Bree hence the issues with the paperwork with FIFA.

Hanley was sent off tonight so if Mitchell doesn't appear, at the very least, on the bench for the next game then there really is no intention of playing him prior to the window. 

Radostanradical said:

killerandflash said:

What I don't understand is that if Zach was considered good enough for Hibernian, a decent Scottish PL side, to loan, how he isn't good enough to play for us?

Or flipping it, if he's not good enough for us yet, Hibernian is surely too high a side to be loaned to.

Personally I've felt since the end of the window that we are one defender short, and Zach could have got decent minutes as cover in various positions if he stayed here. 

Because if he isnt good enough for Hibs why would he be good enough for us, a championship team.

With exception of a spell at St Johnstone everytime he has had the chance to play senior football he has been found wanting or deemed not good enough. Now of course he is young and he may still make good on his deemed potential (for him and us, i hope he does) but if multiple managers have deemed him not of the required standard logically you have to ask if the problem him (or his current ability) or is it everyone else? You remove any bias and there is one logical conclusion, football managers are paid to win games and more often than not that involves playing your best players.

Much like we saw at Arsenal just because someone is good at a young age doesnt mean they are guarenteed to improve. As said not writing him off yet but all the talk of unfairness etc, is a bit off the mark.

That's simply not true though. He played the first 23 games for Colchester, as a then 18-year-old. The manager was then sacked and Danny Cowley then took over in January and he brought in half a dozen of his own players. He was then stuck in limbo.

The reason Hibs were so desperate to sign him because he was proven at that level when playing for St Johnstone during which time a struggling side kept a clean sheet against Celtic. Their fans were desperate to get him back too.  These are some of the comments after just one of his appearances:

Henri: Zach Mitchell, Makenzie Kirk and Stephen Duke-McKenna all put in an exceptionally good performance. 

Stuart: Mitchell and Daniels Balodis looked composed at the back, Duke-McKenna took his start well.

Paul: Mitchell, for me, was MOTM at centre-half and closely followed by the matchwinner Kirk.

Willie: Mitchell, a man of the match performance and a player who will be on the radar of all the big clubs. 

This is just one of their fans comments pre-season:

Mitchell the same, you'd sign him up in a second. But I think Charlton have plans for him to progress to the first team. Quite rightly, I think he's ready for it.

Mitchell was injured at the beginning of the season and Hibs then found themselves with too many CBs in a side that was sitting third in the table. The jury might be out as to whether Mitchell is good enough for Championship football but based on next to zero starts it's difficult to definitely says either way. Simon Francis was written off at the age of 24 by us and actually had 32 starts. He wasn't good enough for League 1 according to us but went on to have a great career in the PL. Mitchell is proven at SPL level. 

I might be totally wrong but, as I said a couple of weeks ago, I am of the firm belief that we don't want him "club tied". With the sending off of Hanley and the two lads going off to AFCON we will see if that's the case. The one thing that is for sure is that we did not send him on loan to play zero football. He deserves more than that. Why else did NJ give him a three-year contract? For him to miss not one but two halves of seasons, through no fault of his own, is awful. He would have done better playing for our U21s but we wanted him to play at a better level than that. 

Radostanradical said:

Addick Addict said:

Radostanradical said:

killerandflash said:

What I don't understand is that if Zach was considered good enough for Hibernian, a decent Scottish PL side, to loan, how he isn't good enough to play for us?

Or flipping it, if he's not good enough for us yet, Hibernian is surely too high a side to be loaned to.

Personally I've felt since the end of the window that we are one defender short, and Zach could have got decent minutes as cover in various positions if he stayed here. 

Because if he isnt good enough for Hibs why would he be good enough for us, a championship team.

With exception of a spell at St Johnstone everytime he has had the chance to play senior football he has been found wanting or deemed not good enough. Now of course he is young and he may still make good on his deemed potential (for him and us, i hope he does) but if multiple managers have deemed him not of the required standard logically you have to ask if the problem him (or his current ability) or is it everyone else? You remove any bias and there is one logical conclusion, football managers are paid to win games and more often than not that involves playing your best players.

Much like we saw at Arsenal just because someone is good at a young age doesnt mean they are guarenteed to improve. As said not writing him off yet but all the talk of unfairness etc, is a bit off the mark.

That's simply not true though. He played the first 23 games for Colchester, as a then 18-year-old. The manager was then sacked and Danny Cowley then took over in January and he brought in half a dozen of his own players. He was then stuck in limbo.

The reason Hibs were so desperate to sign him because he was proven at that level when playing for St Johnstone during which time a struggling side kept a clean sheet against Celtic. Their fans were desperate to get him back too.  This is just one of their fans comments pre-season:

Mitchell the same, you'd sign him up in a second. But I think Charlton have plans for him to progress to the first team. Quite rightly, I think he's ready for it.

Mitchell was injured at the beginning of the season and Hibs then found themselves with too many CBs in a side that was sitting third in the table. The jury might be out as to whether Mitchell is good enough for Championship football but based on next to zero starts it's difficult to definitely says either way. Simon Francis was written off at the age of 24 by us and actually had 32 starts. He wasn't good enough for League 1 according to us but went on to have a great career in the PL. Mitchell is proven at SPL level. 

I might be totally wrong but, as I said a couple of weeks ago, I am of the firm belief that we don't want him "club tied". With the sending off of Hanley and the two lads going off to AFCON we will see if that's the case. The one thing that is for sure is that we did not send him on loan to play zero football. I'd like to think that he is a victim of circumstances and one that we would like to change. Why else did NJ give him a three-year contract? 

So firstly as i state I am not writing him off, just pointing out the logical conclusion if one removes bias. 

Apologies i will amend to apart from 1 season with St Johnstone and half a season with colchester which resulted in the manager being sacked and him not playing under the new manager.

Understand youre point re Francis but there are exceptions to rules not the rule themself also as said we havent written him off.

Bias does work both ways though - some write homegrown players off for that reason because a side hasn't paid millions on a player who they perceive to be better. Scott McTominay was a bit-part player at United but in his first season at Napoli, where they won the title, he was named Serie A Player of the Season.

There have been many young sportsman that I have known personally, especially in the field of cricket and been desperate for them to make it but, in my heart of hearts, have thought that they might not be quite good enough. You would not have found me waxing lyrically about them and Mitchell certainly isn't one of those. I've also witnessed one exceptionally talented other lad where circumstances have meant that they haven't progressed as far in the game as they might have done had those been different. That wasn't their fault but it absolutely destroyed them mentally so much so that they gave the game up.  

I just don't want Mitchell to fall into that latter category because this is none of his fault. He should not, at his age, be prevented from playing football and if we really thought that he wasn't going to be getting a game at Hibs then we should either have sent him where it was almost guaranteed or kept him to play in the U21s. This all appeared to me a loan deal that was arranged at the very last minute. 

As I keep saying, I am desperately hoping that the Club has realised that and a deal has been struck which is why he is not even appearing on the bench for Hibs. Sunday, when Hibs play Celtic, will tell us more because if he can't even make the bench with Hanley is out, against a side where last season he was a major contributor St Johnstone keeping a clean sheet, then I do think that an agreement is in place to bring him back in January. If Mitchell is part of the playing squad then he still has to prove that he is good enough. One's thing certain though - he isn't going to improve sitting in the stand (as he did for six months previously) and a weight of expectation by our fans that he will have done so because "he's been on loan" is somewhat misplaced.   

I wish Zach Mitchell and Alex Mitchell were both here to bolster the squad which is being tested now during this difficult mid season period.

jose said:

I wish Zach Mitchell and Alex Mitchell were both here to bolster the squad which is being tested now during this difficult mid season period.

I can't honestly say either way for certain that either would be good enough. We won't know until they get that chance. What I do believe is that because of the absence of Burke, Edwards and Bell (who wasn't risked from the bench last night despite us being 3-0 down) we are having to play a few who are either carrying injuries or who might otherwise be rested.

jose said:

Addick Addict said:

jose said:

I wish Zach Mitchell and Alex Mitchell were both here to bolster the squad which is being tested now during this difficult mid season period.

I can't honestly say for certain that either would be good enough. We won't know until they get that chance. What I do believe is that because of the absence of Burke, Edwards and Bell (who wasn't risked from the bench last night despite us being 3-0 down) we are having to play a few who are either carrying injuries or who might otherwise be rested.

I can’t say either if they would be good enough, but part of my thinking is what do we do if certain injuries happen, Lloyd Jones for instance.

The belief from some supporters is that he is one of the ones carrying an injury. 

Bailey said:

As a young player, the manner of the last three defeats can affect your development, we already have senior players who are suffering from a crisis of confidence. 

Agreed. But there is far more mental damaged caused by not feeling wanted by anyone whatever your host Club might tell you. The first time it happened we recalled Mitchell to train with us in the second half of the Colchester loan. That said, I'm not even sure that he is still in Scotland for that matter? 

fenaddick said:

LargeAddick said:

Addick Addict said:

Radostanradical said:

Addick Addict said:

Radostanradical said:

killerandflash said:

What I don't understand is that if Zach was considered good enough for Hibernian, a decent Scottish PL side, to loan, how he isn't good enough to play for us?

Or flipping it, if he's not good enough for us yet, Hibernian is surely too high a side to be loaned to.

Personally I've felt since the end of the window that we are one defender short, and Zach could have got decent minutes as cover in various positions if he stayed here. 

Because if he isnt good enough for Hibs why would he be good enough for us, a championship team.

With exception of a spell at St Johnstone everytime he has had the chance to play senior football he has been found wanting or deemed not good enough. Now of course he is young and he may still make good on his deemed potential (for him and us, i hope he does) but if multiple managers have deemed him not of the required standard logically you have to ask if the problem him (or his current ability) or is it everyone else? You remove any bias and there is one logical conclusion, football managers are paid to win games and more often than not that involves playing your best players.

Much like we saw at Arsenal just because someone is good at a young age doesnt mean they are guarenteed to improve. As said not writing him off yet but all the talk of unfairness etc, is a bit off the mark.

That's simply not true though. He played the first 23 games for Colchester, as a then 18-year-old. The manager was then sacked and Danny Cowley then took over in January and he brought in half a dozen of his own players. He was then stuck in limbo.

The reason Hibs were so desperate to sign him because he was proven at that level when playing for St Johnstone during which time a struggling side kept a clean sheet against Celtic. Their fans were desperate to get him back too.  This is just one of their fans comments pre-season:

Mitchell the same, you'd sign him up in a second. But I think Charlton have plans for him to progress to the first team. Quite rightly, I think he's ready for it.

Mitchell was injured at the beginning of the season and Hibs then found themselves with too many CBs in a side that was sitting third in the table. The jury might be out as to whether Mitchell is good enough for Championship football but based on next to zero starts it's difficult to definitely says either way. Simon Francis was written off at the age of 24 by us and actually had 32 starts. He wasn't good enough for League 1 according to us but went on to have a great career in the PL. Mitchell is proven at SPL level. 

I might be totally wrong but, as I said a couple of weeks ago, I am of the firm belief that we don't want him "club tied". With the sending off of Hanley and the two lads going off to AFCON we will see if that's the case. The one thing that is for sure is that we did not send him on loan to play zero football. I'd like to think that he is a victim of circumstances and one that we would like to change. Why else did NJ give him a three-year contract? 

So firstly as i state I am not writing him off, just pointing out the logical conclusion if one removes bias. 

Apologies i will amend to apart from 1 season with St Johnstone and half a season with colchester which resulted in the manager being sacked and him not playing under the new manager.

Understand youre point re Francis but there are exceptions to rules not the rule themself also as said we havent written him off.

Bias does work both ways though - some write homegrown players off for that reason because a side hasn't paid millions on a player who they perceive to be better. Scott McTominay was a bit-part player at United but in his first season at Napoli, where they won the title, he was named Serie A Player of the Season.

There have been many young sportsman that I have known personally, especially in the field of cricket and been desperate for them to make it but, in my heart of hearts, have thought that they might not be quite good enough. You would not have found me waxing lyrically about them and Mitchell certainly isn't one of those. I've also witnessed one exceptionally talented other lad where circumstances have meant that they haven't progressed as far in the game as they might have done had those been different. That wasn't their fault but it absolutely destroyed them mentally so much so that they gave the game up.  

I just don't want Mitchell to fall into that latter category because this is none of his fault. He should not, at his age, be prevented from playing football and if we really thought that he wasn't going to be getting a game at Hibs then we should either have sent him where it was almost guaranteed or kept him to play in the U21s. This all appeared to me a loan deal that was arranged at the very last minute. 

As I keep saying, I am desperately hoping that the Club has realised that and a deal has been struck which is why he is trunot even appearing on the bench for Hibs. Sunday, when Hibs play Celtic, will tell us more because if he can't even make the bench with Hanley is out, against a side where last season he was a major contributor St Johnstone keeping a clean sheet, then I do think that an agreement is in place to bring him back in January. If Mitchell is part of the playing squad then he still has to prove that he is good enough. One's thing certain though - he isn't going to improve sitting in the stand (as he did for six months previously) and a weight of expectation by our fans that he will have done so because "he's been on loan" is somewhat misplaced.   

If, and it’s only an if, a deal has been struck where he doesn’t become as you say ‘club tied’ then is there any reason why he can’t come home now and be training with the squad at Sparrows Lane? Loads of times when players get injured on loan they return to their parent club for treatment/rehab so if it’s really a case of an agreement where he won’t be selected then he may as well be training with us.

If the above isn’t the case then maybe he’s just considered not good enough to get in their matchday squad. Who knows. We will find out either way in due course.

I’ve not seen enough of Zach to judge his abilities or otherwise sufficiently but just judging on what I have seen I’ve not been that impressed. But as I say that’s limited. I do think sometimes there is home grown bias towards some of our youngsters and we of course all want them to succeed but their abilities are on occasion somewhat overstated.

He might be. I'm sure that happened during his Colchester loan but we only found out through whispers and the club kept it secret

That's why I asked whether anyone knew, or not, whether he is still in Scotland. 

Callumcafc said:

Addick Addict said:

jose said:

I wish Zach Mitchell and Alex Mitchell were both here to bolster the squad which is being tested now during this difficult mid season period.

I can't honestly say either way for certain that either would be good enough. We won't know until they get that chance. What I do believe is that because of the absence of Burke, Edwards and Bell (who wasn't risked from the bench last night despite us being 3-0 down) we are having to play a few who are either carrying injuries or who might otherwise be rested.

I can - at this current moment, both would be worse than Gillesphey who is already the weak link currently.

That might be the case. But, in the same way people were saying with absolute certainty that Simon Francis wasn't good enough, no one can say that for certain. More so, perhaps, in the case of Zach who has had so few games in the first team and in his prime position at that. He might well not be but that isn't proven to the extent you are suggesting, any more than the case was proven by those that suggested that NJ should be sacked as they were this time last season.

Which is why I said "I can't honestly say either way for certain".  You might be right but I hope that we can both agree that playing no football whatsoever for two six month periods between the ages of 18 and 20 is not good for the development of a player we have given a three-year contract to. 

Hibs lost 2-1 and made five subs but Mitchell wasn't one of them. Whether this is deliberate or not, he isn't being used and just hope that he will be with Hibs for just another month.