On Saturday at Dens Park, Steven Naismith did something as Heart of Midlothian head coach he hadn't done since a previous August visit to Dens Park. Something managers do when they are clearly unhappy with what they have witnessed in the first half.

The dreaded triple change.

Twelve months ago it was Odel Offiah, Yutaro Oda and Toby Sibbick that made way. On Saturday, off went Daniel Oyegoke, Jorge Grant and Barrie McKay.

The triple change and switch in formation perhaps demonstrated that Naismith was aware the game plan hadn't worked. Hearts had been heading toward the half-time interval lucky to be only 1-0 down. They then unravelled within a couple of minutes to see that score increase to 3-0, all but ending the game as a contest. They ultimately fell to a 3-1 loss to Dundee.

The post-match discussion, on social media, supporters' buses, pubs, fans' forums and podcasts, centred around Naismith's decision to tweak his team, both personnel and system.

What is perhaps most surprising was the surprise itself and the indignation around the decision to make such tweaks. After all, it is something Naismith did throughout last season. Only once did he keep the same XI in back-to-back matches. He used a variety of formations, going between a back three and a back four.

Only this month, he explained why he was "very much against the favoured XI".

"It is not so much about 11 players," he said. "There is much more tactical emphasis on football matches now, gone are the days of, 'We won last week so throw the same XI out this week'. The game is moving away from that, I certainly don't see the game that way.

"And we've recruited good quality players. We've now got real good competition. I've been there as a player. Players take dips, it can be from what is happening in their home life to maybe a niggle they are carrying. It helps with all that having a competitive squad."

Having such a deep and competitive squad with the added demand of Europe could see the changes from game to game increase. Underperforming players will be easier to replace but at the same time, it becomes harder to work through a drop in form the way Lawrence Shankland did at the start of last season when he went eight games without a goal.

Then there is the question of integrating the new signings and building relationships across the pitch, especially important in the final third and the centre of defence. It becomes trickier to get that intuition when players are not getting a consistent run of games together. 

Read more

Yet, rotation and tweaking the team and system is part of Naismith's management philosophy. So does it work?

On the evidence of the past 12 months, yes.

Frankie Kent noted as much when asked about the change in shape after the Dundee game.

"We would play really well one week in a [back] four, then change to a three and play well again and get another good result," he said. "We would win games doing it. I think we changed a lot last season and that was probably a big strength of ours."

Being able to move between a back three and a back four should be viewed as a strength. There will be those who take the view of, 'We are Hearts, we shouldn't be changing shape for games against Dundee. We should play our way'. In an ideal world, yes. But different teams have different strengths and weaknesses that can be nullified or exploited in different ways.

Another way to view it is, 'We are Hearts, we should be able to have success with any formation against Dundee'.

Naismith favoured the back four as soon as he took interim charge at the end of the 2022/23 campaign. Of his first 22 games in all competitions, he opted for a four-man backline 20 times. The 4-1 defeat at home to Celtic in October proved to be a turning point. A back three was used in the next 13 league games, with Hearts winning nine.

Over the course of last season's Premiership campaign, Hearts started with a back four on 16 occasions winning seven (43-per-cent win ratio). They lined up in a back three on 22 occasions and won 13 (59-per-cent win ratio).

That is an overly simplistic way of looking at it but it's designed to illustrate that there is merit in the back three. That's not to say it should be the go-to system but one that is rightly part of the team's arsenal in certain games.

One of those games was Saturday. Or more accurately, seemed to be Saturday.

Under Tony Docherty Dundee have predominantly played a 3-5-2 with a dynamic midfield and a mobile and physical strike pairing. It is a different challenge compared to Rangers' 4-3-3. Hearts have, at times, struggled against a front two when playing a back four, especially when the opposition are happy to go direct. A third centre-back provides, as Naismith noted, "a bit more security at the back".

In the end, Dundee didn't go with their usual system.

A valid question would be, why did Naismith wait until half-time to make a significant change, whether it was with the formation or personnel? It wasn't until the interval he did both.

He has experience of making an alteration at half-time to fall back on. Last season, the team were notoriously slow starters and scored just 20 first-half goals (compared to 34 after the break). Over the course of the campaign, Naismith proved adept at making changes at the break or during the second half.

He was partial to a substitution between the 55th and 65th minute - a common time for managers switching things up. In 27 of the 38 league games, he made at least one change during that time. On 11 occasions he made a half-time change. Nine of those were when the team were drawing or losing. Hearts would go on to win four of those nine, making up a chunk of the 13 points the team won from losing positions.

Hearts fans were disgruntled during the team's 3-1 defeat to DundeeHearts fans were disgruntled during the team's 3-1 defeat to Dundee (Image: Craig Foy - SNS Group)

The discussion around the decision to change the team from Rangers to Dundee is valid. The discussion around the merits of the three or four at the back and what works best is valid. Football fans are much more attuned to such elements of the game.

But perhaps the most important point from Saturday, and one Hearts need to demonstrate a clear improvement in across the season compared to last, is starting slowly, being off the pace for large periods of the game and then having to cram a good performance or comeback into 45 minutes. To their credit, Hearts are strong finishers in games.

Does the rotation play a part in the above? Perhaps.

Fans are keen on continuity, providing it is the players they rate/like the most. As mentioned, there is merit in keeping a settled team, allowing partnerships to blossom. But as everyone is aware, the squad at Naismith's disposal is a strong one. The answer may well be somewhere in between. A spine of between seven or eight regulars with moving parts around them. 

What is certain is the need to ensure Saturday's slow first half doesn't become a regular occurrence in the way it did last season. Not only are the team going to be playing bigger games, coming up against better opposition this season in Europe but, as alluded to by Kent, league rivals will see Hearts as a scalp.

The expectation is greater. With greater expectation comes even greater scrutiny.