Tactical awareness

[Super_Ally 0]

Yesterday 'Well scored one good goal and hit the bar with a dipping freekick. Other than that, despite getting in behind Papac a few times I can't really remember any/many other chances were they should've scored.

 

You could argue that the defensive aspects of the game were not our main downfall yesterday. Remember sometimes you just have to accept the opposition will have periods of pressure and create the odd chance.

 

Upfront, early on Boyd linked well with Naismith and we created some early chances. We also hit the woodwork twice during the game. At HT JCD replaced Whittaker with Nasiy moving right. This left Boyd more isolated with JCD quickly going back off.

 

Boyd was most guilty of missing chances although no real sitters. On another day he would have got another goal or two.

 

From the above it is clear our major failings were in creating and taking chances. Based on this can someone explain how a player who sweeps up in front of the back four intercepting the odd pass and playing the ball backwards or sideways would have made any great change to the outcome, because I cannot see it. I would argue what was missing was an inform Fergie or even more so a Thomas Buffel style player who can play the killer pass or find that bit of space to open up the opposition.

 

Genuinely stumped how Hemdani is the savour of Rangers, regardless of the game, the quality of the opposition and how the individual game is going.

 

As people like to point out with Boyd for example, how standards have fallen if he is the answer. Give me a Stuart McCall in midfield any day.

 

(Ps. He should start in the middle 3 in europe as the trio of BF, KT and BH appear to compliment each other well in these games which suit Hemdani's style of play.)

[pete 2,494]

I can't believe this one Ally. Fergie plays bad and Hemdani gets the blame even though he is not playing.

What Hemdani offers is that he is the best we have at reading a game and breaking up attacks, sometimes even before they begin.

If you remember the first few games of the PLG time Rangers played some great football with Hemdani dictating the play. It was in fact only when Fergie came back in the rot started.

As you know you can't say that Hemdani would or would not have made a difference yesterday but i find it unfair to attack him for Fergies poor game.

[ascender 352]

Naisy and Boyd linked well together in the first half, but I think most of his chances were of his own making. Boyd actually had one of his better games I thought yesterday, worked hard and linked up well, but ironically couldn't finish. Having said that, it is a team game and I don't think its unreasonable to look for someone else alongside him to take some chances.

 

Bringing JCD on isolated him and took SN out of the game really. I thought someone like Novo on the wide right could have made a difference yesterday but with so many of our team not really clicking, I'm not sure if it would have made a difference.

 

Unfortunately, it was the same old story, we really lacked an attacking and creative spark from midfield. Hemdani definitely isn't the answer to that and I can see why WS plays Thomson instead of him in the SPL.

 

Fergie is a strange character, quite an enigma really as I can't work him out. He is almost talismanic and definitely influential whether he makes a telling contribution or not. We're definitely not the same when he doesn't play, but I do think we need to find the answer to our lack of creativity and find it quickly.

 

Problem then is that there's just not the room in the first XI to accomodate someone like Gow or Buffel without dropping Fergie or sacrificing a holding midfielder and getting Fergie to play deeper in more of a holding role. Some might say that will nullify him, but he seems to get dragged very deep when things aren't going our way anyway.

 

We've got a much stronger squad with options all over the park, but I really think WS needs to try some things out in reserve games or home games to try and address a couple of the problems that we've had for a few years now.

[Gazza_8 233]

Motherwells goal was far to simply executed for my liking. Thomson should've won the ball in midfield but didn't, when Clarkson came deep no one picked him up and when Davie Weir went to pick up Clarkson he therefore left Potter nearly a free man to score. Way to easy for them. Shouldn't Weir have stayed with Potter and hoped that if Clarkson shot he missed? I don't know, I'm not a centre half.

[ian1964 10,377]

Motherwells goal was far to simply executed for my liking. Thomson should've won the ball in midfield but didn't, when Clarkson came deep no one picked him up and when Davie Weir went to pick up Clarkson he therefore left Potter nearly a free man to score. Way to easy for them. Shouldn't Weir have stayed with Potter and hoped that if Clarkson shot he missed? I don't know, I'm not a centre half.

 

My take on the goal was,it was a good run, a good pass but IMO he was offside,not making excuses with that statement but it was offside,however everybody likes to say ah give the attacking player the benefit of the doubt,well JCD got pulled up for offside in an identical move,albeit he missed anyway,but to be fair I thought we could've / should've won the game,although Motherwell played good I thought we were unlucky,and Boyd was our best player IMO,grafted all day :cheers:

[Super_Ally 0]

I can't believe this one Ally. Fergie plays bad and Hemdani gets the blame even though he is not playing.

What Hemdani offers is that he is the best we have at reading a game and breaking up attacks, sometimes even before they begin.

If you remember the first few games of the PLG time Rangers played some great football with Hemdani dictating the play. It was in fact only when Fergie came back in the rot started.

As you know you can't say that Hemdani would or would not have made a difference yesterday but i find it unfair to attack him for Fergies poor game.

 

It's not an "attack" on Hemdani and I apologise if it comes across that way. I'm simply asking if people can try and explain to me (for about the millionth time) how Hemdani would make a difference. I don't think the defficiences (sp) of Saturday's game would've be rectified by the attributes of a player like Hemdani. And he undoubtedly has attributes, but best utilised against a more cultured opposition.

 

We agree that you cannot get a definitive answer as to whether things would've been different had he started, so it is all hypothetical. However, my opinion is his inclusion at, say, KT's expense would not have gained a positive outcome.

 

Ps. Quite often I read/hear things elsewhere, but vent my spleen on Gersnet where there seems to be more cultured debate from those with a different view to my own. What I had written here was a reaction largely to my frustrations from reading "pish" elsewhere online, but where I don't feel sensible debate would be as well practiced. A thousand replies of your a fud would not really satisfy my search for a decent response.

[Super_Ally 0]

Motherwells goal was far to simply executed for my liking. Thomson should've won the ball in midfield but didn't, when Clarkson came deep no one picked him up and when Davie Weir went to pick up Clarkson he therefore left Potter nearly a free man to score. Way to easy for them. Shouldn't Weir have stayed with Potter and hoped that if Clarkson shot he missed? I don't know, I'm not a centre half.

 

Agreed it all looked to easy. I said to a mate I was watching the game with that that is the easiest i've seen us cut apart. As you say, it looked like Weir was, at least in part, at fault. However was this due to the failings of other players? It's hard to judge sometimes. Can we just put it down to good play from the opposition, or as the mighty Rangers can we never accept that that is the case with a Motherwell goal? Ideally every goal is preventable, realistically they are not. One of the few times I'm not sure who to blame, or even if there is someone definitely at fault. Not watched a replay of it since teh match and have no desire to, but often that helps sort it out.

[Gribz 743]

I'm simply asking if people can try and explain to me (for about the millionth time) how Hemdani would make a difference. .

 

Its about opinions mate but Id say he is one of our best players therefore its simple logic that if you play better players it improves your team regardless where he plays.

 

If Petr Cech was available for to be in goal for us on Saturday would you take him despite knowing he wasnt going to score our winner?? You'd have him because he is better than McGregor.

 

Hemdani is better than Thomson and whilst Hemdani may not have ran 50 yards to get the winner, his ability to break up play, play a good pass and keep a cool head may have prevented Motherwell scoring. I also think Hemdani could be getting more forward in games and start shooting more - he has ability to do it as we have seen once or twice.

 

I agree with Pete and Ascender above.

 

Ascender's spot on about not being able to put a Gow or Buffel in the team simple because it means dropping Ferguson or moving into a defensive role. This goes back to what Pete says, when BF wasnt in the team we were playing great stuff and it wasnt just in PLGs era, I remember a number of games in Ecks reign aswell.

 

BF is an enigma at times, he plays 5 superb games and most fans says he is the best Gers player in 20 years but yet he then goes and has the same amount of poor games. Ive always said its a consistancy thing with BF.

 

I wold be interested to see Hemdani and Thomson play together but my preference would be to have Buffel or Gow playing behind the frontmen and Hemdani and / or Ferguson behind him. Its not impossible! We have Hutton who will provide width on the right and we play McCulloch left.

[R.B. 0]

Its about opinions mate but Id say he is one of our best players therefore its simple logic that if you play better players it improves your team regardless where he plays.

 

If Petr Cech was available for to be in goal for us on Saturday would you take him despite knowing he wasnt going to score our winner?? You'd have him because he is better than McGregor.

 

Hemdani is better than Thomson and whilst Hemdani may not have ran 50 yards to get the winner, his ability to break up play, play a good pass and keep a cool head may have prevented Motherwell scoring. I also think Hemdani could be getting more forward in games and start shooting more - he has ability to do it as we have seen once or twice.

 

I agree with Pete and Ascender above.

 

Ascender's spot on about not being able to put a Gow or Buffel in the team simple because it means dropping Ferguson or moving into a defensive role. This goes back to what Pete says, when BF wasnt in the team we were playing great stuff and it wasnt just in PLGs era, I remember a number of games in Ecks reign aswell.

 

BF is an enigma at times, he plays 5 superb games and most fans says he is the best Gers player in 20 years but yet he then goes and has the same amount of poor games. Ive always said its a consistancy thing with BF.

 

I wold be interested to see Hemdani and Thomson play together but my preference would be to have Buffel or Gow playing behind the frontmen and Hemdani and / or Ferguson behind him. Its not impossible! We have Hutton who will provide width on the right and we play McCulloch left.

 

I think what SA is meaning is, if we draw with a team 0-0 and they dont have a single effort on goal then it wouldnt make a difference if we had Cech, McGreggor or Stevie Wonder in goals because obviously that isnt the problem, its the fact we arent creating/scoring.

 

On Saturday, i think our main problem was not creating enough chances, IMO Hemdani would not have changed that, if anything he would have made matters worse (again this is just my opinion) because he would have taken away a more "forward thinking" midfielder.

 

Our defence isnt struggling badly enough to warrant having Hemdni sitting in front of them for protection.

[ascender 352]

I think Hemdani is one of our most technically gifted players. But he really doesn't give us much in an attacking/creating sense. In fact, he does tend to slow the game down more than Thomson, which is I think why he does so well in Europe. But as I've said before, as he is clearly talented, could he be asked to do more in an attacking sense for the team, or is that just the way he plays?

 

I don't think he'd have made much of a difference to the result on Saturday, but being one of our best players, maybe he should be in there on merit ahead of Thomson? For what its worth, I don't think it will solve the problem we had on Saturday.