Leaderboard

It's already been a few days since Saturday's defeat and I don't mind admitting I'm still smarting from the loss of another three points at Ibrox. First and foremost though, I don't think we played as badly as some have since suggested. Yes, Hibs were certainly the better team for much of the first half but we grew into the game and dominated after half-time. Problem was - and has been the case for most of this season at home - we couldn't break them down and, when we finally did, we conceded a cheap goal to shoot ourselves in the foot. That's the main source of frustration for me. As such, I don't blame fans for being annoyed. Our troubles on Saturday weren't new and to drop another three points isn't good enough. Yet, I think we have to be positive. Unfortunately a few players didn't play well (especially our primary creators of Tav and Candeias) so we just didn't make enough good chances. And, when we did, guys like Windass and Morelos - both fairly reliable goalscorers - fluffed their lines. To only score one goal was a very poor reflection of our play. Ultimately, with just one player up front, we're often predictable and regularly profligate. That has to change. With that in mind, I wonder if Graeme Murty will be tempted to move to a front two at Firhill tonight. He's favoured a 4-2-3-1 of late and it has been reasonably effective in terms of results but it seems to me Morleos lacks support at times and as he becomes increasingly (and understandably) jaded, we're not quite able to keep the ball in the final third for long enough. As such, although Jason Cummings hasn't looked quite fully fit yet himself, I'd be starting both together tonight. We do have other options in Dodoo, O'Halloran, Herrera and perhaps even Kenny Miller but all four lack the game-time to feature from kick-off. If Murty does indeed opt for a front two that means a likely return to the diamond he used to good effect before the new year. It also means he can bring in another fresh face in Greg Docherty who can offer us a bit more drive from midfield. The young signing from Hamilton is no creative silver bullet but I think we'll need his combative strength in deeper areas this evening. Jason Holt should keep his position on the other side of the diamond whilst Sean Goss can again sit that wee bit deeper and allow us to get forward efficiently from the back. That leaves the tip of the diamond and we have another few options there. Do we persevere with Windass in a more withdrawn role or opt for Jamie Murphy's experience? Personally I'd go with the latter as the on-loan attacker looked bright on Saturday. Having more options in attack should help him as well and with Docherty able to get up alongside him too, Murphy can drift into the channels if required. Deploying a diamond does mean the onus increases once more on our full-backs. In that sense, Tavernier has rarely shirked from his responsibilities this season and one (albeit schoolboy) error on Saturday shouldn't stop him from being an important player again across the Clyde tonight. Similarly, at left back Declan John has - in my view - been steadily improving on the other flank and linked well with Murphy against Hibs. As such both can supply any necessary width tonight. I do think it is worth pointing out we did struggle initially at the back on Saturday. John did leave too much space in behind early on whilst Russell Martin was dragged out of position too easily as well early on. Ironically though Hibs opened the scoring when David Bates failed to close down John McGinn. However, as a unit, they did fine after half-time and will be keen to get a clean sheet tonight. As will Foderingham in goal who I felt didn't look all that convincing at McGinn's opener. As has been the case for a lot of this season, we took another step or two back at the weekend but have to react well tonight. Despite Saturday's loss, we had a good January window and the signings of Murphy, Cummings and Docherty were brought in to address our attacking deficiencies so I hope to see all three given the chance to do that tonight. In closing, the one position we have failed to fill is that of manager. In that sense, Graeme Murty perhaps remains an unlikely candidate for the permanent position and I think not replacing Pedro Caixinha before now remains bizarre at best. Yet, if we had come out of Saturday with even a draw, I doubt fans would be too upset. As such, we need to continue to back the team and manager and help deliver the improvements we need to restore our club to the pinnacle of Scottish football. That won't happen overnight and even the best Rangers teams lost occasionally. However, neither should that make any defeat acceptable so a win this evening must be delivered. No more excuses, no more bad luck stories and no more wastefulness. As we move into February and the business end of the season, the pressure is on and it's now time this Rangers squad starting dealing with it. Possible team (4-4-2 Diamond):

Feel free to share the attached image on your social media pages for anyone interested in following the game tonight on the forum.

If you stood somewhere on the pitch and did nothing to get in the way, I'd still prefer you to Miller.

I'm fairly certain I know how this works out, it has been the same throughout his career. He will come on as a sub, play well and probably score, thus making it easy for the manager to select him as a starter next time out, followed by several weeks of utter dross. What I will say for Miller is he has always been supremely fit and this enables him to come back quickly from any injury he gets, not that he is injured very often either. If he could pass that attitude on to other players at the club I would be most grateful.

Really good preview as usual! just one thing I wanted to draw out is this point about only one player up front. Just because it's a 4-2-3-1 doesn't mean that we only have one forward. In this formation, we have at least 3 forwards, if not 4. I've opined before that our problem is not the number of forwards, it's the speed and accuracy of our play in midfield that's the problem. We either take too long to move the ball when switching play, or we do it too quickly (I.e. Our players don't have the technique/habits to get it done properly and quickly) and give the ball away in dangerous areas when's we're overexposed (mainly because we are overloading the wings). Goss can do it well, but few others can get the ball switched. A switch needs to be done within 5 seconds because that's the length of time it takes for a professional player to cover the 30-40 yards he needs to get back into position when the ball is moved to the opposite side of the park. It's been shown that a switch inside 4 seconds can create a golden chance. I've looked at our switch of play and it often takes 6-7 seconds. This is almost useless because it serves only to retain the ball and can't create a chance if the opposition works reasonably hard to close down. Equally, it introduces more opportunities for our midfield to make a mistake and hence creates a chance for our opponents. This is why we lose goals, and in fact you'll see the majority of our goals are lost from this phase of play. During a switch of play, both teams are 'out of position', but the team with the ball has the advantage of course. Murty needs to get the three central midfielders (the two centre mids and the attacking mid) to move the ball quickly and accurately out to the wing, but he has different problems to solve depending on who it is. Windass receives the ball during a switch of play and has not moved early enough to create the space to play the ball quickly, so he then has to hold off the opponent for a step or two before he can release the pass. Around 3-4 seconds are wasted. Holt gathers the ball and his first touch moves it away from the opponent so he is doing well at creating the space, but he then takes more touches before looking up to find his pass. Again, these seconds are being wasted. Goss is excellent at creating the space for himself and playing an almost instant pass, however his positioning (which I think is intentional) means he is required to play a long diagonal ball directly out to Candeias or Murphy. Teams like Hibs are drilled well in this tactic because you can see their fullbacks sprint towards our wingers as soon as the ball goes anywhere near Goss. They know that if they cut off that pass, he isn't as effective. If the other midfielders can contribute to the threat, it means their defence has more doubt about what threat to cover. Jack, McCrorie and Dorrans all move the ball quickly and we need them back fit asap. Until they do, we need to address the habits of the current players or we will struggle every time we play a Hibs or Celtic (who can take advantage of errors in the midfield), or against a lower team which is even reasonably well organised in defence.

I can't even beIieve we are having a debate about this. I'm not Windass' biggest fan. He disappears for at least 30 minutes in every game, however the 60 minutes he plays is still more productive than Miller could ever be. Miller is a hard working player and a I wish Windass had his level of desire and effort, but beyond that, Miller offers nothing - at least nothing I can see. If Miller comes back into the team, I'll drive TB to see his psychologist and we can attend those sessions together, because I'll have my head in my hands until the end of the season when he is put out to pasture (surely!).

Some people are so sensitive. If he keeps it below a get it up ye gesture I have no problems with him.

I'd give Bates his new contract now. One of a few Rangers players who is strong enough to win the ball in a 50-50 challenge.

Goss really looks a player, strong, good on the ball and picks out great passes.

Well, somehow we're winning but that was really, really poor. Thistle seemed to out number and out-muscle all over the pitch and we're struggling to get forward. However, we did score one excellent goal after a fine three pass move but got very lucky in the final minute of the half when our defence switched off and Connor Sammon's shot came back off the post. All in all, this just isn't good enough and we need to improve all over the pitch.

"Lone striker" is a bit of a misleading term I think. Especially with Candias and Murphy wide and cutting in, and Windass right there. Windass will almost be his partner. He won't be very lonely.

They should also have been hammered for causing a refs strike!

Last night, on BBC Radio Scotland's Sportsound, a rustbucket more than a flagship, Tom Sellick -a Yahoo, from beyond the Pale, 26th of Foot; from Limerick, I believe, as it happens site of the last pogrom against jews on British (sic) soil- was on message. Tom would not countenance even the suggestion that Walter Smith be considered as Manager of the National XI, far less appointed. Far from a balanced assessment of pros versus contras, Tom gave the listeners (us, the paymasters) naught but a rather partisan rubbishing of the very idea. I have no axe to grind for WS, and have frequently criticised him for several, serial, failures in European campaigns in the 1990s, but I believe that the Grand Old Man of Scottish Football may have something to offer the National side. Tom Sellick offered only the suggestions that WS had been retired for some time, had declared on his retiral that he was retiring for good, had had no hands on experience since then , that, the old canard, football had changed, and that, therefore he should in no way be considered for the position. The fact that he left the Scotland post for higher duty, and thus alienated a significant proportion of the Tablecloths and Timberlands may have received mention, also. I should have thought that in WS's favour would be, rather obviously, the following: He is the most experienced and successful manager of Scottish provenance, likely to be available; he is, in fact, the most experienced and successful manager likely to be available; the post is far from that of a full time, day to day club manager; WS has managed successfully players of considerably greater ability/pedigree than those he is likely to encounter with the National team; the new manager has, I think four (4) International Challenge Matches over the next 5/6 months to assess playing staff, and get his hand in before a competitive fixture need be played; he seems willing to at least consider taking the position. As I indicated, I am not advocating WS for the post (although I see no one on the horizon). I am concerned that the national broadcaster's Chief Sports Reporter (or whatever) is permitted to so blatantly peddle a line, and to dispense with even the merest suggestion of objectivity. I am, of course, unsurprised by this. Sometimes, one just knows.

I wonder if it means something that he was the first player that came to mind... ?

I'm just disappointed that you have me down after Pete and Rousseau - it feels like being the little fat kid who always gets picked last

I think it means that Mack would prefer a headless chicken (Miller) over someone with a lack of courage. Me ? I take Windass every day of the week - he is pacy, direct, decent passing and has a number of both goals and assists this season. Miller, on the other hand, finds himself constantly running towards his own goal (usually because his 1st touch is 10 yards away from himself) and, as an "attacker" hardly ever finds himself in areas of danger. Anyone who would prefer Miller to Windass , IMHO, clearly has an anti-Windass bias.

I don't need to catch up with the last photo pete. As I have said multiple times, I agree that he looks offside. My previous point is that the linesman, if he has any doubt as you posted, has to benefit the striker. My major point being, I suppose, is that the linesman must have had no doubt at all... and, from the above pictures, I think it proves sufficient visual evidence as to why the linesman would raise his flag. He is fully a yard offside there.

This part makes it sound to me as if the bank did their job but simply weren't listened to. What else can the bank do? Send up a heavy to break his fingers?

The only thing I couldn't work out was why Wattereus was preferred to Klos long term. OK SK was coming back from an injury but Klos was one of the best keepers In Europe.

Yeah, a bit better after half-time and we strolled to victory really as Thistle fell out the game. It's a good three points but as much as there were some good passages of play, generally the performance was unimpressive and we're still no way near clinical enough when we dominate possession. We move onto Somerset Park on Sunday and that's likely to be another similar game with a stuffy team who'll work hard and be physical. We better make sure to turn up.

Ffs what a plank, so someone might have been dyslexic, i can't spell Holt with referring to the spell checker.

Harsh on Morelos.

Journalists in Scotland are too busy putting 2 and 2 together and blaming Rangers.

Is that not 7 paedophiles at Celtic now? And that’s only the ones that have been caught. Strange how no-one in the press ever mentions this remarkably high number over the years.

Is it surprising when the Vatican has set the example?

Let's hope for a good game and a Rangers win Mon the gers

My Christian and surnames (both Scottish) are often spelt incorrectly by friends and colleagues....I hope it's not intentional! I agree with Uilleam and expect the DR to report on an out of date packet of Golden Wonder being sold at Ibrox in 1996/97 and a man in a Rangers shirt stealing a wheelie bin in Darlington back in 2009 in amongst next week's exclusives.

Had the pleasure of meeting the guy three times, a very intelligent and easy going guy. I guess the base level of respect you can show someone is getting their name right. If you're not willing to do that then it says a lot.

Or when they decide which club legend's deaths are worthy of calling a match off. Phil O'Donnell - aye. Tommy Burns - naw.

Presumably has no recollection of being on the bus, carrying the device on to the bus, or any recollection of his purpose in carrying the device on to the bus. Doesn't everyone walk around with a smoke bomb and no idea of why they are carrying it?

I think going with 2 up top would be worth a shot, even just to mix up the tactics a wee bit & not become too predictable. I would also include Windass sitting just behind the 2 strikers - he has generally done well in a central position. I've not see anything from Murphy to suggest that he's be better in that role than Windass. For me, the key thing is to get started at a high, attacking tempo - put Thistle under pressure from the 1st whistle.

On line betting killed that for you.......

Welcome to Gif club!

I had chosen players that weren't injured, so yes, McCrorie would come in; Dorrans and Jack come close too. When we play a back-four at home, it's actually a back-two: Tavernier and John are high and wide. Having three at the back would actually leave more players back. For me, you can't just put wingers into a wing-back slot. Just because they track-back doesn't mean they are defenders. They're good when they are tracking-back, but they need full-backs to help them. I could see one natural winger playing there, but not two; it would need to be one of Murphy or Candeias, with a full-back (probably Tavernier, because he can't be dropped!). I'd like to see a front two. However, I think it needs to be John and Tavernier as wing-backs. The reason the 4-2-3-1 is not working is because we're not playing it quite right. The three should be narrower, both supporting the forward and supporting the defensive screen. We really shouldn't be getting overrun in the middle. The average positions against Hibs had Murphy, Windass, Morelos and Cadeias all in a front four, with Holt and Goss miles behind on their own. That shouldn't happen. The 5 in midfield have to work together in a pentagon, to press and screen. I'd like to see a back-three trialled, but I don't think we can put natural wingers there; that's my issue. A 3-4-2-1 or 3-4-1-2 may suit us better. The former would allow natural wingers, but only one striker; the latter would allow two strikers with no wingers. However I think about it, I can't fit in natural wingers and two strikers -- unless we go 4-4-2, or 4-2-4, which doesn't solve any of our issues!

He's an attacking player who is best suited to playing the number 10 role. Why does that role require aggression ?

I would suggest Frankie, Pete, Rousseau, Craig, Compo, Bill, you, or me before Miller!

Haha, no I did notice that but I thought I better correct just in case...

My ironic miss-spelling of his name in the title was a wee bit too ironic it seems.

I give up I have lost it twice now. It happens on preview post for some reason.

Don't bother I threw it away somehow.

Oh, come on? Miller over Windass? What era are you from? Miller has 2 goals this season, Windass has 6; Miller has 2 Assists, Windass has 7. But no, play Miller because Windass is 'spineless', and has 'nae heart'. What does that even mean?

I'm posting this because I think it's funny. I usually just call them Tims....hope no one is offended....

This is just before the ball is kicked and a little clearer. you can also see the cut of the grass.

Social media is oddly (given it's name) detrimental to society.

He had an off day today but I'd suggest he's been having a good season.

Our players need to learn how to play alongside Murphy. When he goes past players they need to make runs in behind defenders to allow him to slip the ball thro. Instead they are all congregating in the penalty box surrounded by defenders hoping he'll deliver an inch perfect cross. Murphy is an intelligent, skillful & creative player but he needs players on the same wavelength alongside him.

Allen and McGeouch were waltzing through us in the first half and our defensive midfielders weren't up to the job. Something should have been changed midway through the first half but I said to my mates that Murty would wait until 70 minutes and I was proven correct. Yet again his inability to make tactical adjustments has cost us. The fact that Hibs sat back made it appear better in the second half but they always had the ability to cause us problems if they wanted.