match thread (image) [FT] Rangers 2 (Tavernier 5' Pen; Morelos 57') - 0 Hibernian

[Sutton_blows_goats 4,206]

1 hour ago, compo said:

Every player has his poor games 

Sasa Papac disagrees. 

[ranger_syntax 3,773]

2 hours ago, stewarty said:

You sound like you're planning your squad for your Football Manager game.

 

...

 

 

[craig 5,199]

5 hours ago, der Berliner said:

Only that he is not used as a winger, but de facto an inside left attacking player in a nominal 4-3-3. And of those I expect a certain goal-return or send him out on the wing and play another striker with an end product. We`ve seen in these last two games two that his shooting is - still - quite erratic. And that is against teams that play quite open. Against the low blocks his pace and trickery has become blunt ... and not just last week. Teams know how to nullify most of his strengths in such games ... he gets frustrated an vanishes from games for 30 to 50 mins. 

While Hearts and Hibs are tough opponents on their own, not least when they are up for it and press our players, they play open football. That is when Kent, Sakala and Co. have their day and hit them with their pace. Those are not the games we toil though. 

 

The moment we get points for having possession, for yards of completed passes and "striking fear into the opposition", we`ll be out of sight before x-mas.

 

In the here and now we create 10 to 30 chances per game, have 5 to 15 shots on target, but fail to score time and again. In the here and now, the 3-0s, 5-0s or even 8-0s are just deviations from the norm - something you can easily verify by looking at the results from this and last season.

 

If you have a Robben, RIbery and Lewandowski or Müller in a 3-man front line and all hammer in 10+ goals ALONG with their wing-/striker-play, fine.

If you play Kent - Morelos - *insert anyone deemed to be a right attacker on the day* time and again and hope that Alfie drags us out with his goal-prowess (if he`s on fire) or Kent actually finds the net or Aribo come up with one of his specials ... and have no-one bar Arfield with some sort of predatory instinct and will to shoot, you essentially hand games and points away with relative ease - or at least make us toil for all points in a way that is not necessary.

 

I am totally at a loss how people can`t get beyond that 4-3-3 against low blocks when we play people up there who hardly score while having regularly 2 strikers on the bench who can actually fill either slot in that front 3. Strikers who are far more lethal in the few minutes they get ... while still keep the likes of Kent on the pitch. We de facto have been playing into the hands of each of the low block teams for the best part of 3 or even 5 seasons, getting away with it ONCE because of the quality we brought in and a defence worthy of its name. Now we again start pointing at certain players in defence or goals and lament their fall from grace, but fail to acknowledge that our main problem is not conceeding goals, but not scoring enough from the chances we create. 

"He is not used as a winger".... did you stop watching us when Gerrard left the club ?  Since GvB took over Kent has clearly been instructed to stay wide and he is hugging the touchline.  Under GvB there is absolutely no way is he playing as an "inside left attacking player" - neither are we playing a 4-3-3 under GvB.  Which teams play "quite open" against us aside from Celtic ?  Hearts only started having a go because they were down early and had no option, likewise Hibs.  His trickery against the low block isnt blunted at all - we will just have to agree to disagree on that front.  You then say "Kent, Sakala and Co will toil" against low block teams.... yet strangely enough it is Sakala you want to see replace Kent - how does that work ?

 

The moment you appreciate that Kent brings space to others when he doesnt have the ball, which allows the team to operate effectively is the moment you will realise that Kent helps bring points to our total whether he has a direct assist, goal or not.  As I said in my previous post, you can devastate teams without even touching the ball, as Kent does because of his pace and the genuine fear of it - your "possession, completed passes" all require the ball - you don't need the ball to be effective.

 

In the here and now, Ryan Kent isnt the sole, or even major, reason we pass up opportunities.  Morelos isnt prolific (on fire just now but if he has time to think he often bows the chance) and neither is Sakala.  The best finisher we have at he club is Roofe.  Ryan Kent doesnt miss a ton of those "5 to 15 shots on target" because he more often than not looks for the pass.  He has, though, been shooting more in the last couple of games and, yes, it has been wayward - but were you not also one of those people wanting shots from outside the box ?  Now you are getting them you bemoan because he misses said chances ??

 

It isnt a 4-3-3 under GvB so not sure why you continue to go there.  The way that GvB plays, even if you consider 3 up top (which it isnt, it is a 4-2-3-1) two of them are wingers, hence why we moved for Diallo - he isn no inside forward, he is a traditional winger.  And GvB is playing Kent wide left, hugging the touchline.  So you bring one of those strikers on and you are either going to have to change formation or ask them to play an unfamiliar role.  Plus, by the way, playing an extra striker against a low block isn't the answer anyway.  A low block with two tight banks of 4 or 5 would find it very comfortable playing against two central strikers for the most part - the way to beat the low block is to play wingers and stretch the pitch across the width, offering more space to the central striker and whoever is expected to be making the late run from deep (seems to be Arfield presently - and he is very good at it).

 

Which striker is "far more lethal" in the few minutes they get ?  Sakala ?  How lethal has he been when he has started games and isnt coming on fresh against a tired defence ?  Roofe ?  By lethal do you include his airshot against Ross County ?  See, this is the problem when you have a whipping boy, you can't accept that other players have their faults too.

 

Haha, you are suggesting we are "pointing at players in defence" whilst pointing your finger at Kent - hopefully you see both the irony and the hypocrisy in that ??

[craig 5,199]

5 hours ago, Gonzo79 said:

The Kent debate rears up every once in a while but no one really changes their mind.

 

I doubt any Bear would disagree that Kent at his best is a terrific asset.  I doubt any Bear would disagree that he's also inconsistent.  

 

It's all about balancing these things up - which the current management team will no doubt be doing, constantly.  

 

 

 

If Kent was consistent he wouldnt be at Rangers.  It is the price you pay for having such a talented player playing in the backwater Scottish league

[ranger_syntax 3,773]

The winger conversation again?!

[der Berliner 3,247]

8 hours ago, stewarty said:

You sound like you're planning your squad for your Football Manager game.

 

Formations are starting points for the structure of the team.  Players naturally will adjust positionally during games to  find and exploit space, to counter opposition tactics, cover for team mates, etc.  

 

We play with a nominal front line of 3 players, but there are a number of considerations for the manager when picking which ones - form, fitness, playin style, training performance, opposition-specific tactical adjustments, etc.  Yes we could pick our best 3 strikers and that might get some results, but some players are better suited to the wider areas and Kent is one of them. 

No problem .. and I said it before. Play him out wide then, behind the strikers or on the wing and have "just" 2 strikers. Sometimes you get the feeling that 4-4-2 is something that simply will no longer work in the game of football ... yet we go on with one striker and toil on against the low-block sides.

[Gonzo79 13,625]

We won't be seeing a traditional front two anytime soon.  It's so unlikely, it is barely worth discussing.  

 

The problem at the Piggery was the wingers and full-backs were all isolated because the wingers weren't tracking back and the full-backs weren't attacking, which suited the yahoo wide tactics down to a tee.

[der Berliner 3,247]

4 hours ago, craig said:

...

 

Which striker is "far more lethal" in the few minutes they get ?  Sakala ?  How lethal has he been when he has started games and isnt coming on fresh against a tired defence ?  Roofe ?  By lethal do you include his airshot against Ross County ?  See, this is the problem when you have a whipping boy, you can't accept that other players have their faults too.

 

Haha, you are suggesting we are "pointing at players in defence" whilst pointing your finger at Kent - hopefully you see both the irony and the hypocrisy in that ??

 

You simply don`t get it, do you? Roofe and Sakala can play alongside another striker or even in a front 3, they have done so before, occasionally at Rangers too. If you look at the goal stats and minutes of play, you might acknowledge that both Sakala and Roofe are more prolific than Kent. The latter plays nigh every game ... and methinks he had 3 good chances to hit the target (not to mention to score) on Wednesday and whipped all shots wide. And we do not get points for missed chances.

 

His goal tally (stats in brackets for league games) stands at 2 (2) in 25 (17) games, having played 1,965 (1,404) mins. Sakala 30 (20) games, 7 (6) goals, 1,209 (803) mins and Roofe 25 (16) games, 10 (6) goals in 1,259 (798) mins. His assists are fine, 8 in the league ... for a winger. He`s played roughly 600 mins more than either Roofe and Sakala in league games, so why even debate that he is not as lethal? Said it before and only a post or two above. As a provider his contributions are admirably. I would not chop him per se, but we need a cutting edge up top and he ain`t providing it, neither does the right flank. As long as we persist with but one striker up front and non-scoring folk either side of him, we`ll toil against the low-block sides, as we have done for years. Play him on the wing and two strikers up top, no problem.

 

 

Edited February 11, 2022 by der Berliner

[ranger_syntax 3,773]

2 hours ago, Gonzo79 said:

We won't be seeing a traditional front two anytime soon.  It's so unlikely, it is barely worth discussing.  

 

...

The same is true for three at the back.

 

Various galaxy brained contributions on the topic will persist regardless.

[der Berliner 3,247]

So asking for a better solution to our apparent lack of converting chances into goals or looking at how better teams than Rangers successfully play in their leagues with three at the back is "galaxy brained"? Some seemingly have set their standards very low indeed.

 

Well, we have hardly evolved* as a team once SG had installed his troops, got our act together once in all his time here, grabbed one of nine trophies available and have some nice Europa League runs to get people excited (and money in the back). I for one do not want my team to stop evolving and getting better. It has been obvious for nearly 5 years that our 4-3-3 (or however you line these chaps up) is de facto easily been countered by the bulk of the low-block teams - and most Scottish sides play against us like that. If we fail, people like you, craig and syntax, go bananas about this or that player, preferrably those being chucked in from the cold, while our darling crew of Kamara, Kent, Goldson, Tavernier and even Morelos can`t do anything wrong - or indeed are worth debating. There is every reason to believe that we will soldier on with our current troops and line-up for the next games, even this season - despite what Gio said when he signed up. And there is every reason to believe that we will have enough dire contests against the low-block teams too. It might well be that Ramsey will give the team a lift and his quality will make us shine a little more and perhaps cut these Scottish teams open. Yet, we would still waste our resources if we don`t put the best we have for any position out there on the park, even in a 4-3-3. Only time will tell ... and I will sure remind you of the above in days to come.

 

*Evolved in terms of tactics against Scottish sides. We bought better players for the same positions ... and a few of our current crop managed to get their (defensive) act together last season, yet reverting back to the norm this time around. The facts don`t lie here.

Edited February 12, 2022 by der Berliner