Rousseau

I'm quite happy that Bassey is getting a run at LB; it's well-deserved. It looks like a 4-2-3-1, with Jack and Lundstram sitting. It looks solid, with either/or having the ability to break forward. Kent will be playing on the left, which leaves Arfield and Aribo for the other spots. Aribo playing wide, maybe? I'm not sure about that, though. Unless it's a completely different formation?

Ramsey a key player for us, in terms of his versatility. He can play as a #6 in a double pivot, but then move forward to play as an #8. This gives us the ability to switch mid-game between 4-2-3-1 and 4-3-3. (Jack can do that, but I'm wary of putting too much pressure on him.)

I was being sarcastic in my post.

Apologies - It wasn't aimed at you, per se. I don't recall you saying we were too narrow, but it was certainly a common complaint.

2021: We're too narrow - we need wingers! 2022: We can't persist with wingers staying so wide.

Against previous managers, to be fair, but yes.

Yes. Even a narrow 4-3-3, zonal defense would have been better: let them buzz about; we'll control the space. But, nope...

Maybe I misinterpreted. Like I said, "[T]heir signings are based on Angie; players that he knows and likes, and that work within his system. When he goes that collapses." I would not swap policies. I think we've got the better, strategic approach.

Oh--we're not back on the 'let's slate everything to do with our club because we lost a game' mentality, are we? I don't think we can criticise our recruitment -- maybe during the summer, as there was a cut-back, but that was caused by financial deficits that have been building, which was/is understandable. I think we are adding value. Bassey and Hagi are good signings. Sakala, Sands, Souttar and Zukowski, most recently, look like good signings. The only difference is the sheer quantity of players they've signed; they've really pushed the boat out. We've not needed to. The only thing I would criticise is the lack of outgoings. We need to sell when our assets are at peak value - it's just that when they are, fans keep saying they're too important. Their signings are based on Angie; players that he knows and likes, and that work within his system. When he goes that collapses.

I don't understand this preoccupation with the same old platitudes; hunger, desire, 'pashun'. That's not why we lost the game. It plays its part, but we would have still lost with those aspects at full-power. Celtic's rotations out wide completely stumped us. The use of inverted fullbacks was just like Pep. Tactically, we couldn't work it out. Our players were dragged all over the place.

Rangers 1 - 0 Hearts FGS Aribo

Rangers vs Hearts

Match analysis from Michael Cox: https://theathletic.com/3109165/2022/02/03/cox-gasperinis-atalanta-would-have-been-proud-of-celtics-devastating-rotations?source=user-shared-article

SG liked the 4-4-2 diamond in those games, with Kent in that hole as you said.

Sands could come into a back-three, too, which is/was a preferred position of his.

The forces of good are taking a battering online. The memes are relentless.

I would prefer we ease Jack into the team, gently.

F*ck...

I would like to say, I think we may be going overboard with the criticisms of GvB. I think we need to be more specific in what we are criticising. He made some changes that improved us. The FB's were played deeper, giving us more protection and solving a major concern at the time. Barisic, at least initially, suited that and performed well. Also, utilising wingers as opposed to two #10s was a good change, providing attacking impetus. I think we were all on board with that, weren't we? The pitchforks are always out after dropped points. I think we were okay against Ross County (after 35 mins, anyway), but three howlers cost us. GvB is not at fault for that. Last night it seems to be the passivity of the plan that was at fault; soak up pressure and counter. That plan did work against Hibs and Hearts, away--although last night is a different animal. I don't think it's a bad plan in itself. The execution of the plan clearly didn't work -- I suppose he thought that himself with the triple subs, or was that a result of the quick-fire goals before half-time? We maybe need to commit to the counter (double pivot etc.), or show more ambition and press, and then get into a possession-based game. This is where my thoughts run out. I don't know the solution.

Yes, I am always a little suspicious of Dutch managers. They often do well with Dutch players and teams, because it's ingrained in them to play a certain way from birth. But then take that manager into a team that are not ingrained to play that way and they don't do so well. It's maybe an exaggerated point, but one that I fall back on regularly. Van Gaal, for example, does exceptionally well at Dutch sides (Netherlands, AZ, Ajax), and Barcelona--who are similar in the sense that those youngsters are ingrained in a way of playing--but then doesn't quite do it at other clubs (Bayern, Man Utd). I was never fully convinced by GvB as an option at the time, but I got on board quickly. My excitement was based on his apprenticeship with Pep, but I've not seen anything of Pep in our games. Surely we have a manager that can impose a possession-based style on the team? We don't have bad players, either.

Ugh... Correct Result (1 pt): - Correct Number of Rangers Goals (1pt): WB91 FGS (2 pts): - Correct Score (3 pts): - Latest Standings:

Bench.

I believe Ramsey is not fit (match fitness) enough for Wednesday. I think I read that he's targeting the game at the weekend.

Newcastle signed a few good, needed players. Everton signing Van de Beek and Alli is interesting, alongside the Lampard appointment.