http://www.gersnetonline.net/newsite/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=648&Itemid=1
After last week�s playing staff report cards, it�s time to move onto some analysis of the management team. Walter Smith is certainly the main man here so, while Ally McCoist and Kenny McDowall have played their part and deserve to share in any praise/criticism, I�ll concentrate on Walter.
First off, I think we have to give praise where praise is due. When Smith took over in January 2007, the club were struggling badly, hadn�t won a trophy in over 2 years and the dressing room appeared split under the disastrous Paul Le Guen reign. The new manager identified the immediate problems and via some important signings begun the task of re-building.
When he took over Smith was always at pains to say this would take time. He wanted to make the team difficult to beat first and foremost then move forward from there. In the latter part of season 2006/07, he did that ââ?¬â?? beating Celtic twice ââ?¬â?? and generally giving the fans something to buy into last summer. Further investment in the playing squad to the tune of Ã?£12million meant the chairman was also buying into this second Smith tenure in a way he didnââ?¬â?¢t with Le Guen.
The signings Smith did make were greeted with conservativeness by the bulk of the support. Thomson and Weir (who arrived in January), followed by Beasley, Darcheville, Cousin, Gow, Broadfoot, Carroll, Whittaker, McCulloch, Cuellar and Naismith were interesting signings but none really captured the imagination of the support. Nonetheless, a large number of players did come in and the squad did look an improved one ââ?¬â?? if lacking in an immediate sense of excitement.
The season started well. Champions� League Group Stage qualification secured meant the risky financial gamble on MIH revolving credit facilities had been a successful one. A strengthening title bid and a decent CL campaign resulting in European football after Xmas suggested the club was back on the right track. What would 2008 bring?
The answer was a European run none of us would have dreamt of, followed by the kind of disappointment that means the fans are once again nursing their depression during the close season. The Scottish Cup and CIS Cup wins were scarce reward for a roller-coaster season.
Is our depression warranted then or should we concentrate on the positives ââ?¬â?? difficult as it may be after such a mentally exhausting season? A bit of both is how Iââ?¬â?¢d like to approach Smithsââ?¬â?¢ rating.
Let�s concentrate on the negatives first. Despite the obvious problems with fixture congestion in the latter part of the season, it was a crushing blow to not win the SPL title. To lose a ten point lead in little over 6 weeks is unacceptable and Walter Smith must share responsibility for that. His inconsistent approach to team selection, personnel rotation and an overly defensive playing style meant while we were securing fine results in Europe, at home we could barely beat teams home or away.
Quite simply because we were so defensive in Europe, we couldn�t switch to a more attacking frame of mind domestically when required. This resulted in the dropping of points which was unsustainable if we were to win the league. Essentially, as we did in Europe, Smith tried to defend his SPL lead as opposed to develop it via a fresh approach in terms of players and system on return from our UEFA Cup duties.
Add in doubtful loyalty to under-performing players such as Broadfoot, Ferguson, McCulloch and Cousin then we had a team that was stumbling from game to game as opposed to striding through them. The style of play was bland, uninspiring, easy for opposition teams to play against and generally not good enough. Walter Smith can�t take the sole blame for losing the title thereafter but neither can he hide from it.
What was obvious as the season went on was the distinct lack of creativity quality in the side. Injuries to our creative players (Beasley, Naismith and Burke) meant our direct style would be the norm despite indications earlier in the season that we could play attractive attacking football. Some fans advocated the return of Buffel or the introduction of Gow, Furman or Fleck to bring back some flair to the side but the fleeting glimpse in the less important games was our lot. We paid with this absence of a creative edge with the loss of the title.
Of course there are mitigating reasons for Smith�s reluctance to be flexible. The number of games was unprecedented and unexpected. The fringe players available were hardly match-sharp, reliable or experienced. Changing the system too often could result in even more problems. We were still getting some positive results so why drop players? All these points are valid and should be considered when one questions the manager.
We can also add in all the positives from the campaign. There are many�.
Walter Smith takes a lot of criticism for not being the type of manager who bloods younger players. I think that last season blew that theory out of the water. While we may not be playing the real youth per se - guys all 24 or under have formed the bulk of the team for large parts of the season. Broadfoot, Hutton, Davis, Whittaker, Thomson, Burke, Adam, Beasley and Naismith all played important parts in the squad while Smith also introduced Furman and Fleck into the first team. Even players like Cuellar, Papac and McGregor still have their best years ahead of them. The future of the squad is bright and I�m confident that if a player is good enough, they�ll play no matter their age.
The next positive is one that has been missed in certain people�s haste to give our team the ridiculous anti-football label. Sure, at times we were too defensive and deserved criticism for that. However, every football team has to play to its strengths and our strength last season was our defence by far. Losing Alan Hutton and Alan McGregor reduced that effectiveness but the manner in which we defended in Europe is worthy of great praise. For many years people have wanted Scottish teams to be more mature, measured and intelligent in their approach to European matches and there�s no doubt we achieved that to a reasonable extent last season.
Add in some of the impressive results we did have last season - wins against the French and German champions, wins against other first class European opposition, wins against Celtic and our domestic cup successes means Smith can deliver in key games. The platform is there.
All in all, I think we have to be measured in our analysis of the manager last season. I certainly don�t blame anyone for being wary for the future. Many of us remember Smith�s stubbornness and loyalty causing friction in his first spell at the club. Smith�s sides will always be more workmanlike than glamorous. Will he really ask difficult questions of Sir David Murray to ensure the club move forward again? Can he recover from the loss of the SPL title?
To conclude, Walter Smith has achieved what he set out to do 18 months ago. Rangers are a difficult side to beat and we are now winning things again.
The next stage is now even more important. Smith must bring genuine quality back to the first XI. Yes, we�ll need a small turnover of squad players (hence Kenny Miller) but we still require 3 top level signings on top of that - another defender, a creative player (wide or central) and a striker.
If Smith can provide those imperative additions to the team then perhaps some of the recent criticism of what was still a decent season will be tempered somewhat. If not, then I doubt many fans will tolerate another season of defensive route one play with no title at the end of it. Neither would I blame them.
Thus, the jury remains out then. It�s up to Walter to show us he is the man to take us forward. We should get behind him to ensure that does happen.
Walter Smith - 7
Pete: He only made his debut for Stavanger in April so the 6 month rule (ala Cousin) would be enforced. Lazy journalism.