match thread (image) [FT] Livingston 0 - 0 Rangers

[ranger_syntax 3,795]

A different kind of midfielder might have helped yesterday but it would still be a struggle.

 

I thought Kent was slack whenever he dropped deep. Hagi continued his poor form but we have enough alternatives to try something else.

[ranger_syntax 3,795]

The overreaction from the support is the same as always.

 

To read some of the comments you would think we had fallen far behind in the league already.

 

To win this we need to stay roughly equal with Celtic and beat them head to head. I have no concerns about playing them.

[ranger_syntax 3,795]

12 hours ago, Malangsob said:

What would call a person who continuously doubles down on failed tactics? A genius? A premier tactician? Quality?

How many times you watched this same game over the past three years? How many times has it been the EXACT same thing?

Ask the management and coaching staff.

 

They will tell you that the tactics change all the time.

 

Could it be that it just looks the same to you?

[DMAA 3,603]

Aribo is our most important player and I was immediately worried when I saw he wasn’t playing. We rely on him as a team to break down teams and create goals. It is so unfortunate that we lost him for this game. 
 

I’ve only seen the RTV highlights (10 mins long). A lot of possession and wee half chances but quite worrying that there weren’t really any good chances at all. The best chance was probably the one Kent hit wide from a run. 
 

Hagi & Morelos barely featured, which is a worry. Kent featured quite a bit but nothing came of anything he did, and he seemed to be turning himself into a centre midfielder at times? I don’t want my forward/winger roaming around the middle of the park.
 

In a game in which we have 77% possession the forwards need to be doing better to turn that into chances, I don’t think you can just blame Jack and Kamara. That’s not to say I don’t think the management got tactics wrong though. I think it’s time to try 3-5-2 or something in these games. Celtic used it to great effect in the second half of last season. 
 

Edited August 17, 2020 by DMAA

[ranger_syntax 3,795]

54 minutes ago, DMAA said:

I think it’s time to try 3-5-2 or something in these games.

Why?

[DMAA 3,603]

18 minutes ago, ranger_syntax said:

Why?

I think we need to play a more attacking formation with two strikers. A version of 4-4-2 would be good too. It is very difficult to pass through teams who park the bus on a terrible pitch. With two strikers , if you put the ball in the box often enough, with support from midfielders, you’ll cause them far more trouble. There is no doubt that the formation failed yesterday, and not for the first time in those games. Celtic put this theory to the test last season and proved it.

Edited August 17, 2020 by DMAA

[PoohBear 1,084]

I think, like most, I'm also scratching my head at Barker still getting opportunities. He must be great in training or something because I just don't see what he brings to our team, unfortunately. 

[DMAA 3,603]

1 minute ago, PoohBear said:

I think, like most, I'm also scratching my head at Barker still getting opportunities. He must be great in training or something because I just don't see what he brings to our team, unfortunately. 

Gerrard loves fast and fit attacking midfielders. It’s why Murphy and Stewart can’t get a look in despite being better players than those playing ahead of them. 

[CammyF 6,891]

19 minutes ago, PoohBear said:

I think, like most, I'm also scratching my head at Barker still getting opportunities. He must be great in training or something because I just don't see what he brings to our team, unfortunately. 

To be fair he showed more in his cameo than Hagi, Arfield and others showed. 

[Rousseau 9,494]

10 hours ago, T-1000 said:

Its interesting that in his post-match interview Gerrard seemed to place most of the blame on the forwards not having enough creativity and considered that the defence was fine and that Jack and Kamara controlled the game.  This would seem to suggest he believes Hagi, Kent, Arfield? and Morelos did not do enough.  

I thought Hagi had a quiet game and wonder if he is suited to the type of physical and aggressive game played by Livingston.  Kent was a bit better but, given the fee we paid for him, I would like to see more end product coming from him. 

I've not seen the interview, but this was my feeling.

 

Our defensive control was superb. Kamara was superb, I thought, because he reads the game, covers, creates angles for ball recycling etc - Jack less so, for me, in this particular game. I love the diamond we create, where Kamara creates a situational back three, with jack just in front. We were able to pass out from the back quite easily.

 

Kamara and Jack were guilty of hanging on to the ball, but only because no one was showing for it. I lost count of the number of times we played out, giving it to Jack in space, only for him to dawdle because there's no one to pass to!

 

(I don't subscribe to this 'we don't need 2 DMs' argument - it's a bit of a naive argument, IMO. )

 

And, I still criticised their inability to commit men, as you state above.

 

The forwards are not doing enough. Hagi and Kent especially were receiving the ball back to goal, and then only went back. Is it so difficult to receive side on, so they can swerve out of that first pressure? McCann made that point in the last game. The pass into Kent went backwards, whereas when Morelos received it, he's side on and turns his man to make something happen -- I think he then wins a foul which Barisic scores?  

 

I even thought Barker was better in the few minutes he got! He's not great at all, but he was able to turn and try to take on a man.