Rousseau

Interesting tweet/video about the ramblings of the "crazy foreigner".

 

[tweet]910507783484788736[/tweet]

You can see how it relates to both defense and attack: in defense, we are not compact enough, which allows teams to play through us; and in attack, the support players are too far away to... support the forwards. I think we'll be a lot more effective when we get this right.

Interesting tweet/video about the ramblings of the "crazy foreigner".

[tweet]910507783484788736[/tweet]

I am bamboozled by these high ratings for John. I must have been watching a different match!

I didn't think he was anything special in the game, but he was better than most others. I gave him a 7.

Alnwick 9

Tavernier 6

Cardoso 6

Alves 6

John 7

Candeias 7

Jack 7

Dorrans 6

Windass 5

Pena 8

Morelos 8

Subs :

Hodson 5

Holt 5

Herrera 7

McCrorie 8

Partick Thistle manager Alan Archibald believes referee Steven McLean was "affected" by Rangers manager Pedro Caixinha's comments ahead of their League Cup quarter-final tie.

 

Caixinha said teams are more aggressive against Rangers after they drew 2-2 with 10-man Thistle in the league.

 

"You could see that Pedro's comments affected the officials," Archibald said after Rangers won 3-1 in the cup tie.

 

"Every 50-50 went their way. I'm so disappointed."

 

Rangers opened the scoring in the second half at Firhill through midfielder Carlos Pena, who was one of three changes to the visitors' line-up, four days after the teams had met in the Premiership.

 

Archibald made two changes to his side, replacing the cup-tied Miles Storey and the suspended Chris Erskine, who had been sent off against Rangers in the league.

 

After Rangers were forced to replace defenders Bruno Alves and Declan John through injury, Thistle's push for an equaliser gathered momentum and they were rewarded through substitute Kris Doolan's 90th-minute strike.

 

Thistle were subdued in extra-time, though, with Rangers establishing a two-goal lead through Daniel Candeias and Eduardo Herrera in the opening period.

 

"It was a fantastic game to watch, just disappointing [to lose]," said Archibald.

 

"I thought the boys put so much in, we were in the ascendancy when we scored, and it's hard to put your finger on extra time, and why we dropped off.

 

"We changed our shape in the second half, we felt the lad No 27 [Pena] was causing a problem in the hole.

 

"We were just about to bring Kris Doolan on and they scored. We gave Rangers a lot of chances, which was disappointing, they came from a slack pass or dwelling on the ball.

 

"We deserved our goal when we got it, just disappointed with the reaction in extra-time, because I didn't see it coming."

What a shame. Nothing about their assaults in the other tie?

I actually thought we dealt with their physicality better last night. We were ready for it and tended draw the fouls more, which I liked. I think it was that rather than referee's giving us more 50/50 - the majority weren't 50/50's anyway!

So pleased that PC has at last played the system he (and many of us) prefers. Last night's game did however show us why he's been trying other systems though.

 

Firstly, it was a boost to see Pena from the start, and he looks great in that role. He found space, and played those one-twos he is so good at. The team needs to recognise those runs he makes though, because too often he played the pass and made the run, only for his team-mate (normally Morelos) to pass elsewhere. When the partnership develops, these two could be lethal together.

 

Candeias was clearly enjoying that system too. He's a good winger, but he's so good when cutting inside too, so this suits him and he could have had a few more goals last night. He is so fit too and was up and down that side of the pitch all game. He seems to have settled really well and will be competing for player of the season without a doubt.

 

Jack played well, but he's got to be more disciplined in his positioning. This system is very different from what he's played before and he needs to sit deeper between Alves and Cardoso. We gave away too many chances to them because we left big gaps. Against Celtic this would be a problem, but perhaps the manager opted to play it this way. Only he knows. Either way, if we're committing to this system, Jack needs to recognise when he has to sit that 10 yards deeper. And that brings me on to Dorrans. Dorrans is a really good leader and I rate him very highly, but in this fluid system, I feel he's out of position a lot. He likes to get forward, but he has to be the link between Jack and the front 4 and this didn't work for some reason. There were too many times when there were wide open spaces in the middle of the park and that's where he should have been. It also meant when we lost possession that Jack then pushed further forward to press the player. This causes the shape at the back to crumble. Almost every single break away they had was as a result of us being overloaded initially in that area. That shouldn't happen, and I hope they see that in the analysis session tomorrow. Dorrans will have competition from Holt in that role.

 

John looked excellent and he's got be pushing for a first team place now. He does however have to improve his awareness and decision making. He always looks to drive forward but he has to recognise when other players are committed forward and just sit back more. Equally though, his team mates need to recognise he's always thinking of attacking and perhaps sit back for him too. But he's a really exciting player and I'm sure we are already starting work on his pre contract for January.

 

The final player I'd pick out for attention is Morelos. Although he clearly has to develop his support for other players (in particular his understanding of how to create space and chances for Pena), I'm more and more impressed with him with every game. We all hoped we could sign someone like him, but I didn't think we'd get someone this good and so young. He's quick, he's strong, he's skilful, and he is so confident. His workrate is top class and I'm sure we all enjoy watching this boy play for us. There were (and probably still are) some doubts as to whether he is ready to play as the lone striker in this system, but I feel he's able to develop quickly into that role and I'd persevere with it, even if it means risking a few more points in the process.

 

Many of us hoped we'd see the manager's preferred system implemented, and last night was the first time. There are some big points of concern to address (as I've mentioned), but he's got to stick with this now. We will drop more points in the process of learning and working out the best 11, but I'm hoping PC gets the support from all players. I said yesterday that Miller and Wallace aren't naturally going to fit into this, and after last night I'd say that Windass is a doubt too. I hope he can develop, but now I see why we wanted Walker, who is a more natural fit for that role.

 

It'll be very interesting to see the approach we now have for the weekend game. Given that he's not under great pressure to win (accepting however we need to compete), I'd hope he'd stick with the same system as last night to see how we can create chances again Celtic. I'd fancy our chances to score a couple, but unless we sort out the shaping and discipline in certain positions we could lose a few too. I'm a risk taker so I'd go for it. I hope PC thinks that way too.

I think Jack coming wide is a tactic: to create a situational back-three, which allows better ball circulation -- and cover for Tav! Which I don't mind, but -- as you pointed out -- it needs Dorrans to be more disciplined in taking up a position centrally, to protect the back 4, or situational back-three, then distribute the ball forward with Dorrans' long passing ability.

Anyhow... some good results this round, with a few picking up Correct Scores!

Everyone who entered gained 1 point (including Ian!), with Mack, gs, coop, BF, Bill, onevision, t-1000, FS, Uilleam, ranger_syntax and JFK gaining another 1 point for the Correct Number of Rangers Goals.

Only Ian gained 2 points for Pena as FGS.

Finally, Mack, coop, BF, onevision, T-1000, FS and Uilleam gained 3 points for the Correct Score!

Latest Standings:

Well... ran into a little issue: turns out I didn't have Ian on the roster! I had to trawl through every prediction thread this season! I figured out it was merely through a quirk of his scores. It turns out Ian had only entered three times, picking up 0 points each time - generally when we didn't win. When we don't win it's a quick 0 for most on the table, so I failed to add him to the table. I apologise Ian - you have now been added to the table.

We had them sussed out, and they rarely got the ball for the majority of the game. They were content to counter us and Cardoso made it easy standing off Salmon -- however, he was tighter second half and dealt with him well, and he seemed to grow in stature when Alves went off. McCrorie was fantastic; at 19 to pretty much dominate the big hatchet man Salmon is really promising, and he's composed in the pass too.

Our decision making in awful: the number of times we get to the byline and cut it back wonderfully only for a player to pull out, or sky it is ridiculous! Candeias is case in point: terrific pressing and pace, rounds the 'keeper and skys it! We missed some sitters. Windass guilty of a few.

We completely disintegrated after we made those first forced subs at the back: no organisation at all, and their goal was coming. It was somewhat understandable, as there were a few subs, an untested back four and our vice captain off.

I was actually pretty content to see us in two banks of four defending; they really didn't look like scoring. We were a little too deep after we scored and then after those subs, but I think sitting deeper and countering was a decent way to go. A little more composure and it would have been out of sight.

Morelos worked his socks off, and was understandably knackered at the end. Herrera did the job when he came on.

Pena was excellent. He did indeed play No.10 as we wanted, but I think he was positioned deeper, almost like a 8. It was like a 4-5-1, but with Pena having the license to go forward. His late runs and positioning was fantastic. How many times was he free but not picked out!? When he gets the ball he moves it forward, and then follows it with pace. We failed to link up with him as much as I'd like, but that movement at least had the effect of moving defenders away, creating space.

I wouldn't mind seeing Alnwick in goal for Saturday: he's a better shot-stopper than Foderingham, which will perhaps be more important than Fod's distribution?

Yes, the scores will be awarded for the FT result AET, so 1-3.

Scores up shortly...

That's correct TB, he's perfectly suited to that central role in the 3 attacking midfield positions. He's at his best when he can keep moving the ball (i.e.When he can take players on, but he's not so good when having to hold it up) and he needs someone who he can play quick one-twos with (because he's brilliant at breaking through defensive lines with these passes and runs). He would have Candeias and Morelos in particular to work with.

I'm not sure he is a No.10. He's more of an 8, a box-to-box player that likes to ghost in and make late runs; I'm not sure he's ever been the main creator, per se. However, I think in Mexico he was played in a 4-2-3-1, but was one of the 2; deep, but not a DM.

I don't think parking the bus is quite the way to go: how is it any different to what they usually play against, and they have no trouble hitting 3, 4, 5 goals? And that's against teams that are set-up to do so game after game, it's ingrained in them; we're not used to doing it. If we park the bus and get beaten, "Pedro will have some serious tactical questions to answer..."

I loved Pedro's statement in which he said something like I have no problem if you pull him up as long as you do the same for people in the future and the past. He obviously meant Lennon.

Was that a PC compliment... ?

I don't mind people believing that PC is not the answer, but suggesting that every little thing is evidence in support of that belief is incredible. Today PC stated -- presumably answering a question at the press conference -- that Niko, Rossiter and Wallace were out of the next few games, then someone on Twitter suggested that was excuses being made and that PC bottled it in the summer for not getting replacements.

A couple of further points on Friday;

 

Why didnt Nico start? When you consider we have a potential 2 hour cup tie on Tuesday before the OF game, you would think Nico would play the league game, sit out the cup tie, and be ready for the bheasts. Now that Windass failed (again) and Nico will come back in on Tuesday, that is not the best planning for the game that his job may be resting on.

 

Surely now Herrera & Pena must start the game on Tuesday. They are the two big money signings of the last window and we are now well into the season and they aren't ready? Pena looks to me as if there is some talent there, but he is going to need game time to get to know his teammates. It looks like he wants to link up with quick 1-2's and short passes, and if you dont know where your teammates are going to be then everything breaks down. Also his teammates need to support these runs and not stand watching as I have witnessed them do. Herrera is a different type of striker, but Morelos needs a partner and Miller is not it, so it figures that Herrera must be given a chance to build a partnership with Morelos.

 

Windass & Miller have had plenty of chances and have failed. time to ditch them both and try other options. Anything less is pure stubbornness and bad management, and I thought we had seen enough of that with our last 2 managers.

I think Kranjcar had to have been injured, or rested, as he wasn't in the squad at all; he's usually involved.

I think Kranjcar is good, and should be an option in certain games and times, but Windass -- as the squad is now -- is first choice. The stats suggest he brings a lot more to the team in terms of creativity and goals. It's merely your opinion that Windass "has failed". The stats suggest you're wrong. It's good management to be objective.

I think Miller has been poorer this season thus far, and I would like someone else to play his role, but unfortunately we don't have anyone -- personally I would like to see Windass there but I don't think he quite has the close control; another option is Pena, but I think he'd be better running from deep for the 1-2's as you mentioned. Herrera is a different type of player, and so we'd need to play differently with him in the team - we'd get overrun in midfield much more often!

Patrick Thistle 1 - 2 Rangers

FGS Morelos

There does seem to be more 7+ scores this season, which is pleasing - especially considering we didn't win last night.

Foderingham 7

Tavernier 6

Cardoso 6

Alves 6

Wallace 5

Candeias 7

Jack 8

Dorrans 8

Windass 6

Miller 6

Morelos 8

Subs :

John 6

Herrera 6

Pena 7

I'm disappointed. We were very comfortable for long spells, but couldn't make it count. As someone on Twitter said: it's not major structural problems, it's complacency and profligacy more than anything else.

Alves and Cardoso fail to deal with a bouncing ball, concede a free-kick that the wall fails to stand up to; silly mistake. Then Tavernier fails to push up beyond his CBs to play off-side for the second, and then he and another (can't recall whom) fail to mark the runners at the back post; more complacency than anything else.

I thought John was a tad suspect defensively, giving the ball away etc., but looked OK going forward; but it was his first game.

Herrera did OK when he came on; movement was good etc. I'm not sure I want him and Morelos, though; they both want to play the same zone. As bad as he's been, I think Miller is an acceptable option for now. Maybe Windass could play as a second-striker, but then we'd need a replacement for LM - Kranjcar was missed tonight.

Pena was good! He showed a good burst of pace which I was surprised by, to go along with good movement and eye for goal; he'll be a good player for us. He did have a chance to play in someone on a break which he attempted but didn't get enough on the pass.

I'm disappointed, but in a way that's quite pleasing because it's been a while since we've dominated games, both in terms of possession and physicality. We should have won that game, but we need to come out second half stronger -- I can't recall if Partick changed it, which wouldn't surprise me as Archibald is a good manager -- and cut out those stupid mistakes.

Is that such a bad thing???

 

Whatever "role" Miller is currently playing, it isn't working too well - he's not being very productive. Bring Herrera in and offer the team something different.

Miller is not very productive not because his role is wrong, but because he's been poor - two sitters spring to mind. He's creating chances, receiving chances and pulling players, linking play. The role is good for us, it's just that Miller is not doing it all perfectly. I think PC wants a roaming second-striker, rather than another target-man. According to theGersReport Miller is our second best contributor to goals scored, so he must be doing something well. I do think we'd score many more if we had someone that could play this role but better.

It's the paradox of Miller: he clearly - according to stats - contributes to chances created and our goals, but when you watch it live the number of times he mis-passes, ruines attacks, gives the ball away, misses chances, it's unbelievable!

If Herrera and Morelos play together I think there is a chance they get isolated. They may be able to play and link-up together, but then we lose midfield control.

Has PC actually said he wants McLean? I thought it was mostly press rumour?

Rivals for 2nd but then struggling to hold on to a player if we come in for him? Ha!

The former I reckon with Dorrans perhaps deployed further forward behind Morelos.

I think PC prefers a second-striker, rather than a standard No.10 - a No.10 is rather easy to mark in this league with so many players behind the ball.

It would have been nice for the young guy to show some respect.

I'd stick with the same team that beat Dundee. Miller, as much as I agree that's he been poor and is done as a first-team player, is not easily replaced. Pena could come in eventually, but he's not fit yet, and Herrera is a different type of player. Windass could come in for Miller too, but he's been better wide left. No one really has the movement of Miller.

For me, Kranjcar has not been too bad, and I actually think he's been good for us - it's just that he seems to hit a brick wall at around 60 minutes; which is fair enough at 34 (?). I actually think Windass is better suited to coming on when the opposition is shattered -- hopefully with our constant pressure! -- which is what happened against Dundee; there was more space for him and they couldn't deal with his running power. Of course you could say the same about Kranjcar coming on later when the opposition is fatigued, but he doesn't have that running power.

I just think that for an opponent, the difference in facing Krancjar and Miller, initially, and Windass and Pena towards the end of a game has been important for us in the last few games. The stats suggest Kranjcar is getting some good chances but getting blocked, and Miller has just been tame with his efforts; in contrast Windass and Pena have been efficient with their chances. I wonder if it has something to do with when they come on? And I don't think bringing Miller and Kranjcar on towards the end of games will have the same effect.

It's an interesting problem.