Rousseau

Nice goal!

It's not often you see a diving header.

6 minutes ago, rbr said:

Great move Rangers , fantastic ball from Windass , great run Murphy , Candeas makes up the two in the box and sets up Cummmings , great team goal 

Delete! He's anonymous. 

22 minutes ago, RANGERRAB said:

Last week was mostly about individual errors which contributed to at least three of their goals.

 

My biggest concern about Murty is he doesn't always seem to take into account how the opposition play. Last week they had four MF players, one wide player & one up front. We were outnumbered in the middle of the park again.

 

Today hertz will likely play one up front & five across the Middle. Our gameplan & tactics must be based on that & ensure we're not chasing shadows in MF. And I'd like to see us go with two up front also.

See, I don't think we were outnumbered in midfield. Yes, they had McGregor wide, but he always came inside. We had a narrow 4-3-3, so we weren't outnumbered per se. It was individual mistakes, and our midfield pushing up and not covering those runners in behind -- McGregor gets the chance because we fluff our clearance, but our midfield is nowhere to be seen. So, IMO, we weren't outnumber per se, it was just our execution of it left too much space. It was really poor.

We were a bit more passive too, which is strange, because most teams that execute a good press do well against them.  

9 hours ago, Herbieb1 said:

I just want Murty gone with his negative attitude to basic tactics and for the record Cummings would wipe the floor with Windass any good Manager can see that of what Murty is not and never will be.

Any good manager -- even a crap one, i.e. Murty -- can see that Windass would "wipe the floor with" Cummings.  

14 hours ago, der Berliner said:

That's a bit bizarre. We've played with one and essentially relied on Morelos to do all the damage, with Murphy and Candeias providing the assists. Windass, despite his goal-spree a few weeks back, has hardly played a decent 10 or shadow striker. That is were Cummings made his mark at Hibs, but perhaps were not that focussed on "tactical positions" and double-6s, DMS, shadow strikers and whatnot, but said 4-4-2 nonetheless.

He did indeed make his mark in a front two; I'm all for it, but I have little confidence in Murty having the tactical nous to implement such a strategy. 

Cummings actually played in a 5-3-2 / 3-5-2 at Hibs. They had a structure behind to make it work. 

Our experiments with 4-4-2 have been poor. 

It works, clearly -- Atletico Madrid play it all the time to great success, but they play a certain way to make it work. We've not got a manager to make it work at the moment. IMO.

I'd keep Cummings around, but we'll need to proper manager to utilise him properly.  

Just now, RANGERRAB said:

I really don’t know why we took him on loan as he’s started so few games.

I’d like to see him & Morrlos up front. I don’t think we’re good enough to play just one striker.

I don't think we're good enough to play with two...!

Is that Clarke ruled out now?  

1 hour ago, SteveC said:

He took umbrage at our "treatment" of Le Guen, iirc

1 hour ago, Gonzo79 said:

We could never afford his wages.  Even if we could, I think he'd struggle to adapt his ideology to Scottish football.

They probably said the same thing when he first arrived in England, just as it was levelled at Guardiola last season too. 

I'm not sure I like agreeing with SBS  but what's so special about Scottish football? It's rubbish.

You're probably right about the wages -- I can dream, though!

I wonder if Wenger would consider a few years at Rangers before he retires? 

F*cking typical.

We just need to do it the hard way.

9 minutes ago, Gonzo79 said:

How did Cathro do again?

 

We can't afford to gamble this time.

I never proffered Cathro as the next Ranges manager. 

(I would like him as an assistant or coach, or youth coach, though.)

Although, I do think a "laptop manager" need not be ruled out because of some draconian view on what it takes to be a manager (I'm not suggesting you hold this view), as it need not be a gamble, or at least not more so than any other appointment, if due diligence is carried out. 

I wonder where Wenger's next step is? Would he take a few years at Rangers?  

1 hour ago, Unicorn said:

A laptop manager is a new one on me.  Is that someone who’s good at Championship Manager?  If so I mind taking Leyton Orient to World Club Champions in about 10 seasons on Champ 01/02.

 

Maybe I should apply for the Rangers job.

It's used as a pejorative term here for those young coaches that have no real playing experience -- like Cathro. 

However, it's actually used positively in Germany for those same young coaches, a few of which are doing remarkable things.

2 hours ago, ranger_syntax said:

Really?

 

Nothing about appointing an MLS manager seems obvious to me.

Perhaps it is too soon for Vieira, but he has done his apprenticeship, or started it at least, and Arsenal have been slowly switching to a DoF model, which Vieira has experience of.

Maybe in the future.

I'm quite happy with this -- although they don't provide any details.

The mock-ups doing the rounds on Twitter look quite nice.

8 minutes ago, Soulsonic5791 said:

Based on man-management??? You been up all night thinking that one up 

 

The 20's play the same system.

Just because he's screwed it up recently doesn't mean it's not. When he came in he brought in a basic set-up, based on getting the most out of the players at his disposal; he's not good enough to bring anything more -- he's not even very good at that, other than that wee spell in December (?). 

1 hour ago, Soulsonic5791 said:

Gonzo, Buster, Gaffer - Lads, Sunday will reveal a lot. Even if we get a result, we'll get an impression if camp morale is good or not. Personally, I think it's gone past the point of no return where Murty is concerned.

 

The board have, quite deliberately in my view, used Graeme's tenure as an experiment; a toe in the water of a young 'laptop' coach if you will, working in tandem with a technical director. This type of coach is widespread in Europe but the important distinction is that they are usually coming from a background of years of experience working with various teams at their club before promotion to the top job.

 

Our esteemed board have fast-tracked Murty out of necessity, hoping for the best and it has come badly unstuck. It's almost as if Graeme has put the cart before the horse. He projects his philosophy and formation (which is currently en vogue in the coach's bible) in the same manner as he did when tasked with laying down foundations with the kids in his previous capacity at the club. He adheres to it no matter what, tinkering loosely at the edges from time to time. But, importantly, and this is where he and his blueprint fall down, the first team squad is ill equipped to play to the system. Graeme is hell bent on repetition bearing fruit because that is how he has been trained as a coach and the echoes of Warburton and 'plan B is to do plan A better' are there for everyone to see. 

 

All of which is laudable on one hand but doesn't necessarily equate in the art of 'management' where the emphasis is on getting the best out of the tools available to you.

 

The players have obviously reached the end of their tether in listening to this stuff and have had enough culminating in Wallace and Miller blowing up.

 

Can Graeme recover the situation? I don't think so. Any respect for him has long since dwindled away.

I think you've swung your hammer and missed the target altogether!

Murty is not a "laptop manager"; his philosophy is as far removed as it's possible to be, as he doesn't actually have a philosophy. His football is basic, and is actually based on man-management. The 4-2-3-1 formation is old hat.

IMO, he does change his approaches for certain games, but doesn't have the depth of understanding to implement it; He's tried 2-3 different formations, and a couple of different approaches. He's using the set-up to suit the players. They can't play anything other than 4-2-3-1/4-4-2, and Murty -- even if he does tinker (not much, granted) -- doesn't have the depth of understanding to implement it.   

He was appointed out of necessity, but only because there was no one else. If they're using Murty to experiment with a "laptop coach", then the Board have no idea what it is.

Yes, Vieira has done his apprenticeship in the MLS -- for Man City-owned NY City, ironically -- so he looks to be the most obvious option.

1 hour ago, Gonzo79 said:

He is slower than a week in jail and doesn't look remotely interested.  

1 hour ago, Ser Barristan Selmy said:

Alves has been absolutely woeful and needs to leave in the summer. 

I disagree.  

He is slow as stop, though... 

I'd actually like to see this (5-2-3 / 3-4-2-1):

Morelos/Cummings

Murphy - Windass/Candeias

Goss - Docherty

John - (AN Other) - Alves - McCrorie - Tavernier

Foderingham

McCrorie actually provides an enormous amount of versatility: He can play RCB (in a back-three), CB (in a back-four), and DM -- and even RB at times, I think?

He allows us to switch from a back-three to back-four mid-game. 

14 minutes ago, der Berliner said:

 

He shouldn't need protection "from midfield", neither of our CHs should. Though it would have been cool to have Ryan Jack or indeed McCrorie around as a sweeper in front of the CHs.

 

IMHO, our main problem with Alves and Cardoso was that they were used to play in 4-at-the-back formations, where fullbacks are there to defend. In most of our games though, we left and leave our CHs exposed, as our fullbacks are constantly up in midfield or beyond. Teams simply needed to get the ball off us and lump it forward, anywhere between or either flank of our CHs and have two or three players chase the ball.

 

Maybe we trial a three at the back soonish, with Alves, Cardoso and McCrorie the CHs. McCrorie can step out into a sweeper role when we have the ball, while we revert to a 5 at the back when defending. That would also need Tavernier to be alert for the full 90 mins though. Docherty in MF for the donkey work, pending on the opposition Jack for breaking up play. Right now I'd hand Dorrans a rest, as he has shown next to nothing thus far that validates a starting slot. So Goss and/or Murphy in the middle as the creative chap, Cumming and Morelos up front.

Every CH needs protection from the midfield. (A sweeper technically plays behind the CH.)

Every back-four has that problem nowadays (high full-backs); they get their protection from midfield, a DM.

All of our midfield push forward too often and fail to intercept passes, meaning opponents have a free run at our defence (see Dundee). The best CH in the world would have issues in that situation.

I'd love to see a back-three. In Germany you have the 3-4-1-2 or 3-4-2-1, depending on whether you want a two strikers or two wingers. (Full-backs can play higher or deeper as required.) I think I'd prefer for us to use our two wingers, as they are our better performers.