[FT] Aberdeen 2 - 1 Rangers (Halliday 79 pen)

[theboyharley 5]

We really need to go on a run of games. We've had no luck lately and it's brutal watching us continue to drop points. I agree we need a change in formation with us going with 2 up top as this 4-3-3 isn't working when we need a goal.

 

 

 

[Rosco999 0]

That happened last season. I don't particularly agree it's such a problem now. The first goal yesterday saw everyone in position but just not tracking. The second was a phenomenal free that should never have been awarded. Neither saw the CBs pulled out of position and didn't think Aberdeen caused them that many defensive problems.

I don't particularly think the formation is an issue, especially without Barton and Krancjar starting, but we too casual in attack.

 

The first goal was a ball over the top and winger gets behind Tav and pulls away from Hill and there was another few times it happened down that side after the goal which yes didn't cause many more problems but it resulted in giving away the free kick at the end with the winger behind Tav again.

 

The formation is fine if the wide players are playing well but atm it's not happening and something has to change, surely?

 

 

 

[JFK-1 1,675]

Strangely enough I thought it was our best performance of the season... but we lack a cutting a edge.

 

I agree, they played well and if not for the Tav brainfart and the foul that wasn't a foul at the end of the day the press would have been saying Aberdeen were lucky to get out of it with a draw which illustrates how very lucky they were to get out of it with a win. Both Garner and Waghorn should have scored and surely our bad luck and the good luck of others just can't continue.

 

I still feel some team aside from QoS is going to get a real hammering in the not too distant future.

[calscot 0]

A lot of people are saying we played well, but personally I don't think we did. We are up against fitter, better teams with more confidence who are pressing us on the ball, giving us a lot less time, and I don't think we are coping or adapting.

 

What struck me most was what looked like a low pass completion rate. Some of that seemed unforced with a lot of stray balls which I put down to the general increase in pressure leading to less composure, and some forced where there seemed to be a bit of hit an hope when being closed down.

 

I still think our long balls are pretty poor (except maybe from Kranjcar) and I have a hunch that's down to lack of practice - but also a bit of doing them more out of desperation than as a deliberate, valid option. This is also reflective of the fact we insist on playing it out of defence but a better team closes us down quickly - now the simple answer to that is to start playing it long, as you bypass all their players who are pressing and can quickly out number them in their own half. That generally would make them wary of committing too far forward and thus allowing the defence more time to play it in our preferred way. But by stubbornly using the same tactic, it means the opposition can press more and more with impunity.

 

I also have a hunch that when we train, we play the vast majority on the floor, which is good for perfecting our technique, but it could mean our defence gets little practice of dealing with high balls - and it seems to be a glaring omission in our skill set, and we seem to lose goals because of it.

 

We get a vast amount of corners but rarely score with a cross and header, but conversely we seem to lose a lot of goals from them or at least look very vulnerable. If I was the opposition manager, I'd make it a tactic against us to force as many corners as possible and then swing them in.

 

I think we might be suffering a bit from having a manager who believes in a formulaic way of winning - he believes if we play in a certain way and do all the right things well we will automatically win the majority of games. It's not something I personally subscribe to. If you think about basic game theory, it would mean all teams could do this and so who would win - the team with the highest budget? But it also means that teams can study your formula and work out their own formula to counter it - and I think that's what's happening.

 

To me, the best managers are the ones who quickly adapt the tactics all the time to the opposition, conditions and situations. They are the ones that outsmart the oppostion manager to start with, or see how things are panning out and change the system in the middle of a game when plan A is obviously not working, and complete turn the game around - even if it's just a judicious substitution, or swapping the role of a player.

 

Their teams are also taught to do this on the fly, and as such have a large repertoire of different skills and tactics (including highly accurate long balls) and due to that they can constantly surprise the opposition.

 

I think a large part of our problem is that we have one dimensional tactics which become predictable and easily countered when you have a reasonably fit team with enough quality. However, when we play well against a much lesser side, we will thump them.

 

I think the SP sides have realised that it's fine to let us have the majority of the possession, as long as they press us and don't let us do much with it, and packing the box when necessary, while they counter quickly on the break and mix it up with hoofing it long. It's similar to what Walter did in our UEFA Cup final run.

 

Remember, if the opposition are going to study a few teams especially, then we are going to be one of them - and it's only going to get worse in that we play them four times a season.

 

I'm now thinking that maybe it worked somewhat for Brentford as they we an unknown, unfancied quantity - a surprise package, coupled with the fact they only played each other twice a season. It would have been useful to see if Warburton could have repeated the success a second time there. Ultimately it didn't work against the better sides in the play-offs.

 

For me, to be the best, there is no one formula, the best tend to do what nobody else is doing - and continually evolving, innovating and being one step ahead - and never predictable.

[Oleg_Mcnoleg 50]

The first goal was a ball over the top and winger gets behind Tav and pulls away from Hill and there was another few times it happened down that side after the goal which yes didn't cause many more problems but it resulted in giving away the free kick at the end with the winger behind Tav again.

 

The formation is fine if the wide players are playing well but atm it's not happening and something has to change, surely?

 

We had people back and in position. Tav just stood and watched as he ran past him so I don't agree with you that it's a formation issue. If players balls up like that there's nothing that chanign the formation will do about it. Considine got some joy down the flanks early but didn't think we were particularly vulnerable there yesterday. Again,the free kick wasn't a formation issue but a moronic refereeing decision. They had the ball, we had cover and it would have worked if the ref hadn't imagined something that didn't happen. For the most part, the defence was ok. It was the attack that was the issue: simply not clinical enough.

[Tannochsidebear 2,315]

Negatives;

2 points out of the last 12

2 wins in last 11 league games

heavy defeat at the piggery

8 goals in 7 league games

conceded 16 goals in 7 league games

After 18% of league games, we are in the bottom half of the league.

brought in 11 players and are mostly not better than what we had last year which wasnt good enough, only 2 of which get picked for yesterday

failed to bring in good central defenders or goalscoring striker, which was on every single Rangers fan wishlist since last Christmas.

 

 

Positives

We beat the opponents on percentage of possession every week

It's better to watch than Ally's team

We are alive!

[craig 5,199]

Negatives;

2 points out of the last 12

2 wins in last 11 league games

heavy defeat at the piggery

8 goals in 7 league games

conceded 16 goals in 7 league games

After 18% of league games, we are in the bottom half of the league.

brought in 11 players and are mostly not better than what we had last year which wasnt good enough, only 2 of which get picked for yesterday

failed to bring in good central defenders or goalscoring striker, which was on every single Rangers fan wishlist since last Christmas.

 

 

Positives

We beat the opponents on percentage of possession every week

It's better to watch than Ally's team

We are alive!

 

And we are Bears is another positive

[der Berliner 3,247]

Point remains: should we embark on a 5 to 10 game winning run, no-one will debate about our current plight. Only that we haven't embarked just yet.

[Uilleam 5,429]

A lot of people are saying we played well, but personally I don't think we did. We are up against fitter, better teams with more confidence who are pressing us on the ball, giving us a lot less time, and I don't think we are coping or adapting.

 

What struck me most was what looked like a low pass completion rate. Some of that seemed unforced with a lot of stray balls which I put down to the general increase in pressure leading to less composure, and some forced where there seemed to be a bit of hit an hope when being closed down.

 

I still think our long balls are pretty poor (except maybe from Kranjcar) and I have a hunch that's down to lack of practice - but also a bit of doing them more out of desperation than as a deliberate, valid option. This is also reflective of the fact we insist on playing it out of defence but a better team closes us down quickly - now the simple answer to that is to start playing it long, as you bypass all their players who are pressing and can quickly out number them in their own half. That generally would make them wary of committing too far forward and thus allowing the defence more time to play it in our preferred way. But by stubbornly using the same tactic, it means the opposition can press more and more with impunity.

 

I also have a hunch that when we train, we play the vast majority on the floor, which is good for perfecting our technique, but it could mean our defence gets little practice of dealing with high balls - and it seems to be a glaring omission in our skill set, and we seem to lose goals because of it.

 

We get a vast amount of corners but rarely score with a cross and header, but conversely we seem to lose a lot of goals from them or at least look very vulnerable. If I was the opposition manager, I'd make it a tactic against us to force as many corners as possible and then swing them in.

 

I think we might be suffering a bit from having a manager who believes in a formulaic way of winning - he believes if we play in a certain way and do all the right things well we will automatically win the majority of games. It's not something I personally subscribe to. If you think about basic game theory, it would mean all teams could do this and so who would win - the team with the highest budget? But it also means that teams can study your formula and work out their own formula to counter it - and I think that's what's happening.

 

To me, the best managers are the ones who quickly adapt the tactics all the time to the opposition, conditions and situations. They are the ones that outsmart the oppostion manager to start with, or see how things are panning out and change the system in the middle of a game when plan A is obviously not working, and complete turn the game around - even if it's just a judicious substitution, or swapping the role of a player.

 

Their teams are also taught to do this on the fly, and as such have a large repertoire of different skills and tactics (including highly accurate long balls) and due to that they can constantly surprise the opposition.

 

I think a large part of our problem is that we have one dimensional tactics which become predictable and easily countered when you have a reasonably fit team with enough quality. However, when we play well against a much lesser side, we will thump them.

 

I think the SP sides have realised that it's fine to let us have the majority of the possession, as long as they press us and don't let us do much with it, and packing the box when necessary, while they counter quickly on the break and mix it up with hoofing it long. It's similar to what Walter did in our UEFA Cup final run.

 

Remember, if the opposition are going to study a few teams especially, then we are going to be one of them - and it's only going to get worse in that we play them four times a season.

 

I'm now thinking that maybe it worked somewhat for Brentford as they we an unknown, unfancied quantity - a surprise package, coupled with the fact they only played each other twice a season. It would have been useful to see if Warburton could have repeated the success a second time there. Ultimately it didn't work against the better sides in the play-offs.

 

For me, to be the best, there is no one formula, the best tend to do what nobody else is doing - and continually evolving, innovating and being one step ahead - and never predictable.

 

Yes, but you have to factor in the ability of the players at the manager's (coaches') disposal.

And that is a whole other debate.

This season, in particular, I have thought, after (during!) every game, 'Not good enough', and that, for me, is, well, not good enough.

Edited September 26, 2016 by Uilleam

[SteveC 150]

Negatives;

2 points out of the last 12

2 wins in last 11 league games

heavy defeat at the piggery

8 goals in 7 league games

conceded 16 goals in 7 league games

After 18% of league games, we are in the bottom half of the league.

brought in 11 players and are mostly not better than what we had last year which wasnt good enough, only 2 of which get picked for yesterday

failed to bring in good central defenders or goalscoring striker, which was on every single Rangers fan wishlist since last Christmas.

 

 

Positives

We beat the opponents on percentage of possession every week

It's better to watch than Ally's team

We are alive!

 

Another positive, I spent last season in despair at Wilson attempting to spread long diagonal passes to players but instead missing them by miles but on Saturday he completed a peach of one.