Jump to content

 

 

[FT] Rangers 1 - 0 Hamilton (Candeias 3')


Recommended Posts

Another demonstration of the madness of playing 1 striker against diddy opposition. I understand sacrificing a striker for a centre mid against Celtic but how many times do we need to see that 3 centre mids is a total waste against these teams, and how badly missed the second striker is with the dozens of balls launched into the box. 

 

Also, 22 corners and no headers on target from them by my count. Further proof that we are pathetic in the air and need to recruit players who can turn our corners into goals as well as working on them in training. Has nobody spotted Celtic are very weak in this area too and it’s a clear goalscoring opportunity against them?

Edited by DMAA
Link to post
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Gonzo79 said:

A couple of posters suggested Hamilton players should have been booked and possibly sent off for manhandling Jack.

Meh.. yellows were fair.

 

It was the only way to stop his mazy runs and through-balls... :ninja: 

Link to post
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, DMAA said:

Another demonstration of the madness of playing 1 striker against diddy opposition. I understand sacrificing a striker for a centre mid against Celtic but how many times do we need to see that 3 centre mids is a total waste against these teams, and how badly missed the second striker is with the dozens of balls launched into the box. 

I feel you're implying that the "madness of playing 1 striker" is a failure of the system. It's not. 

 

I agree there should be more players in the box, but there should be more in the 4-3-3. If the winger's crossing, the other winger, the striker and at least 1 midfielder should be in the box. 

 

From what I recall, there were those players in the box for us on Sunday, but only at the start of the game. The longer we went without getting that second they seemed to lose confidence and seemed to stay back, exacerbating the problem. 

 

Moreover, the "centre mids" help add control, and provides a more offensive threat. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

We've reached a stage of the season where for various reasons we're suffering a blip wrt scoring goals.

 

Suspensions

Fatigue

Unhappiness for some individuals

Injuries

Lack of options

Highlight a lack of creativity

etc

 

= No Champagne football or goalfests and the increased probability of dropped points.

 

I predicted 1-0 yesterday for a reason but the only thing that is important from yesterday is the 3 points and we got them.

 

We need to get to the end of this month with as little damage as possible, then regroup.

We need players in the team who will battle for the cause becuase there won't be much in the way of fancy football.

 

McAuley before Worral

McCrorie before Coulibaly

Had Kent been fit, I'd have him in the team.

 

 

 

 

Edited by buster.
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Rousseau said:

I feel you're implying that the "madness of playing 1 striker" is a failure of the system. It's not. 

I think the system a team plays needs to suit the players they have and the style they are used to playing. To me there is a disconnect between those things.

 

In terms of the players; Barcelona play a 4-3-3 as far as I know but they manage to get Rakitic, Coutinho, Messi and Suarez on the pitch. Our Suarez is Lafferty, our Rakitic is Arfield, our Messi in Candeias and our Coutinho is Grezda. We just don't have the technical ability in our side to really do the system justice. The so called 4-3-3 becomes a 4-5-1 in reality.

 

Style is the other issue for me. Barcelona's technical ability is off the scale, Messi plays fast one-twos inside and jinks past players. They are very comfortable playing on the deck and that's their instinct because they're so good at it. Our style is pretty traditional. We try and get the ball wide and whip balls in the box. And we very often play long balls, especially away from home. This style really benefits from two strikers as we've seen over the years with Mccoist-Hately, Novo-Prso etc etc.

 

1 hour ago, Rousseau said:

I agree there should be more players in the box, but there should be more in the 4-3-3. If the winger's crossing, the other winger, the striker and at least 1 midfielder should be in the box. 

A lot of crosses come from deep, especially from the likes of Barisic and Tav, and this just isn't possible/feasible. It's normally Morelos up against two big centre backs. If the ball doesn't fall perfectly it will be hoovered up by the second centre back. 

Edited by DMAA
Link to post
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, DMAA said:

I think the system a team plays needs to suit the players they have and the style they are used to playing. To me there is a disconnect between those things.

 

In terms of the players; Barcelona play a 4-3-3 as far as I know but they manage to get Rakitic, Coutinho, Messi and Suarez on the pitch. Our Suarez is Lafferty, our Rakitic is Arfield, our Messi in Candeias and our Coutinho is Grezda. We just don't have the technical ability in our side to really do the system justice. The so called 4-3-3 becomes a 4-5-1 in reality.

 

Style is the other issue for me. Barcelona's technical ability is off the scale, Messi plays fast one-twos inside and jinks past players. They are very comfortable playing on the deck and that's their instinct because they're so good at it. Our style is pretty traditional. We try and get the ball wide and whip balls in the box. And we very often play long balls, especially away from home. This style really benefits from two strikers as we've seen over the years with Mccoist-Hately, Novo-Prso etc etc.

 

A lot of crosses come from deep, especially from the likes of Barisic and Tav, and this just isn't possible/feasible. It's normally Morelos up against two big centre backs. If the ball doesn't fall perfectly it will be hoovered up by the second centre back. 

Just because we don't have Messi is not a reason not to play it -- tell that to every other team that plays a 4-3-3, which is 90% of them. 

 

Arguably, we do have the players for it: loads of central midfielders, loads of wingers, and 1 striker. 

 

Our style is wing-play. This suits a 4-3-3. Man City cross it into the box all the time, and they're playing with either one of Aguero or Jesus, who are tiny! 

 

It's a failure of execution, not a failure of system.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Rousseau said:

Just because we don't have Messi is not a reason not to play it

A bit of an over-simplification of my argument. I think the system works best when you have technically gifted players who're comfortable on the ball, passing quickly on the deck and good at killer passes. I don't think that describes many of our players. They have plenty qualities but they're not the most technically gifted bunch, evidenced by lots of slack passing all season. It's not about being world class, it's about the kind of player you are. For example the system suits a Barrie McKay far more than a Middleton or Candeias.

 

29 minutes ago, Rousseau said:

Our style is wing-play. This suits a 4-3-3. Man City cross it into the box all the time, and they're playing with either one of Aguero or Jesus, who are tiny! 

I confess I haven't seen them recently, but when I watched them last season their style of play was incomparable to ours, a big difference on the style and players type front. Mostly playing on the deck and getting a lot of joy from getting to the byline from smart through balls. And at that time Sterling and and Sane were on the wings and looking far more like wing forwards than just left and right midfielders like ours, and with proper creative players in the middle with both Silvas and De Bruyne.

 

I'm not saying we should never use it but Gerrard claimed he'd be flexible on formation and willing to change things but it seems it's not even up for debate.

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, DMAA said:

A bit of an over-simplification of my argument. I think the system works best when you have technically gifted players who're comfortable on the ball, passing quickly on the deck and good at killer passes. I don't think that describes many of our players. They have plenty qualities but they're not the most technically gifted bunch, evidenced by lots of slack passing all season. It's not about being world class, it's about the kind of player you are. For example the system suits a Barrie McKay far more than a Middleton or Candeias.

 

I confess I haven't seen them recently, but when I watched them last season their style of play was incomparable to ours, a big difference on the style and players type front. Mostly playing on the deck and getting a lot of joy from getting to the byline from smart through balls. And at that time Sterling and and Sane were on the wings and looking far more like wing forwards than just left and right midfielders like ours, and with proper creative players in the middle with both Silvas and De Bruyne.

 

I'm not saying we should never use it but Gerrard claimed he'd be flexible on formation and willing to change things but it seems it's not even up for debate.

That's an oversimplification of what a 4-3-3 needs. 90% of teams play it; not every one of those has superbly technical players. 

 

We're nothing like Man City (most obvious example of a 4-3-3), but the principle is similar: wing play to get crosses into the box. Like I said, it's failure of execution. Yes, our crosses are too deep; we should be hitting the byline more.

 

I think you're seeing how we're playing and trying to fit a system to suit; which is valid. But, I think it's a poor way of playing. I'm seeing that way of playing as a pale imitation of how it should be; we should be doing it much, much better -- I don't want to see us take advantage of a poor way of playing. 

 

I think he's more flexible than you give him credit. We've had 4-3-3, 4-1-4-1, 4-5-1 (variants of the same, granted, but there is a difference), 4-2-3-1, 4-4-2, and even 3 at the back a couple of times. That's dependant on the players we have: loads of central midfielders, loads of wingers, and very few strikers. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Rousseau said:

I think you're seeing how we're playing and trying to fit a system to suit; which is valid. But, I think it's a poor way of playing. I'm seeing that way of playing as a pale imitation of how it should be; we should be doing it much, much better -- I don't want to see us take advantage of a poor way of playing. 

If you mean I'm trying to find a system to suit the way we play when we play poorly then no. I think a 4-4-2 suits the style we've had all season quite well and the players we have and would have helped in games like Livingston, Dundee, Kilmarnock, Hamilton.

Edited by DMAA
Link to post
Share on other sites

It wasn't the system that messed up the final ball, or missed the number of chances we have in the last few games particularly.   It comes down to execution and taking chances.  A bit of extra composure and quality in the final third is needed, so that we can unpick the tight defensive blocks most teams put up against us.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.