BlackSocksRedTops

7 hours ago, trueblue 64 said:

Still no getting my license fee, started doing return to sender with their correspondence recently so they sent one of their goons round, couldn't get back in his car quick enough when I asked to see his business insurance. 

Don't bother. Get an official exemption letter from the TV licence people. It's easy. Don't watch or listen to any output from the BBC. Simple.

7 hours ago, Waltersgotstyle said:

Kilmarnock like Livingston last week had no intention of playing football. The fact that their defender was trying to waste time midway through the first half just confirmed it.

 

I can’t ever remember teams being this negative during the 90s or early 00s. 

 

Domestic games are quickly becoming horrible to watch.

Did he get booked for blatant time wasting? Typical McInnes tactics. 

I feel that Davies and Ridvan need to start so we can cement a steady back 4 as soon as possible. 

Hopefully Colak/Matondo/Lawrence/Tillman will show well if played. 

42? Jesus. That's horrible. What an awful illness that is. 

1 hour ago, compo said:

We need a commanding centre half to rule the penalty box not one of the present lot pass muster .

How do you know that Davies can't be that player?

14 minutes ago, Rousseau said:

You bring up an interesting comparison, which perhaps highlights our problem. 

 

Both Liverpool and Man City morph into a 2-3-5 in attack (or 3-2-5). Essentially, they always want wide players hugging the touchline, two players in the half-spaces, and a forward (the 5). 

 

Whereas Liverpool create this with wide FBs and inside forwards (Liverpool has quite a rigid midfield three), Man City have touchline-hugging wingers and free 8s in the half-space (Man City's FBs are inverted and play quite deep). 

 

We're caught in the middle: Wingers hugging the touchline, getting in the FBs way, and no free 8s. It's like Man City's wingers and Liverpool's rigid midfield-three. It doesn't create the ideal 2-3-5 line-up. 

 

We need to keep the rigid midfield-three and get our wingers playing in the half-spaces, and high FBs; or keep the wingers wide and get some free 8s (which we technically have, in Tillman, Hagi, Lawrence, Jack at a push) to support the forward more closely. 

Brilliant post. Was going crazy on Tuesday shouting for Matondo to tuck inside slightly to give Tav an angled option as opposed to simply hugging the touchline Tav was already hugging...

5 minutes ago, Bill said:

I don't believe it's something that anyone "knows". Seems to me it's something a manager learns on the training field and, more importantly, in competitive games. Right now what GvB needs to be searching for is to understand why so many players in Belgium simply didn't switch on. Until he can fix that it won't matter what formation or which players take the field. 

A desired starting XI can grow organically or should that be accidentally?? Look at the development of Lundstrum and Bassey through the course of last season. No-one would have charted their particular trajectories in the starting XI.

15 minutes ago, buster. said:

Manchester City and Liverpool might as well be playing a different sport.

I hear you but ultimately it's all relevant. They play with XI players who can control and pass a football. They don't like to go long. We need to work out a way to utilise our midfielders to:

1. Aid McLaughlin when playing from the back.

2. Provide momentum and forward thinking passes.

7 minutes ago, Sutton_blows_goats said:

Still time yet for bodies to go. Would happily see Barisic go. I still think we could do with another forward but would have to move on Roofe first. 

Maybe a wee bargain from the lower leagues in England? Or the Balkan leagues? Preferably a speedy and skillfull goalscoring machine for a million bucks? I don't ask for much...🤣🤣

6 minutes ago, Bill said:

I thought by now we would have seen some more players leaving .... the likes of Barisic, Kamara, Simpson, Helander, Roofe.

Would be sad to see Roofe go. I like him a lot as a player but we knew he had a glass body when we signed him.

6 minutes ago, Rousseau said:

Fabinho.

Or Fabinho. They do change it sometimes. 

36 minutes ago, Frankie said:

I think the idea is that all three are capable of stepping into the midfield and/or having that three man platform allows the wing-backs to stay high up the pitch more often than not.

 

I'm sure Rousseau, Patrick or DMAA could explain it better than me...  

After watching Man City and Liverpool dominate by playing a back 4 with high pressing full backs, 3 CB's seems very outdated.  Would prefer Lundstrum as one holding midfielder to sit in front of the CBs. As Henderson does for Liverpoool.

Rangers 4 Killie 0

FGS Colak 

---------McLaughlin--------

----Goldson-----Davies----

Tav------------------Ridvan

---Lundstrum----Kamara---

-----Tilleman/Lawrence----

Matondo---------------Kent

-------------Alfie-----------

I know it's early days with this raft of new players (so quite hard to assess) but out of interest, what do you guys consider as our best starting XI? Going on the premise that all new players have done well and all established players are fit...

8 hours ago, MacK1950 said:

I normally am but last night rankled as it seemed there was no real effort shown,IMO,and having attended games for nearly sixty years it was a low for me.

 

Regards training it is obvious that all levels at Rangers are coached in same tactic sand individuality is now hard to come by.

 

Roll the returns of Kent/Morelos the two players other teams respect/fear.

 

Anyway I will be there on Tuesday hoping for the big turnaround but unfortunately will miss Saturday due to a family commitment,seat subbed my seat.

I hear you Mack. It was a bitter pill to swallow but like you I've seen a lot of Rangers games. IMO we were always going to have a hangover after last year's amazing run. This was different to 2008 in so many ways as we got to this final by reaching the heights. I just didn't think the come down would be so brutal!

I think we need to focus on what we want this season. The title is THE priority IMO. Europe is a bonus (if it works out). We've brought in some good players that just need time to settle and get used to what is required at Rangers. For me, our immediate aim is maximum points in the league until we head to the cesspit in the east of the city. Hopefully over that period we get established players back and get some new players gaining confidence. Do I want us to pummel the Belgians next week? Of course I bloody do but it is a long season and I don't want to derail it before the first stop because we've not replicated the Euro success from last year. 

Just a wee post script from last night...can anyone tell me why Goldson was booked (after penalty debacle). Surely the "offense" wasn't worthy of a yellow? Or was it for verbals (with good reason tbh) 

14 minutes ago, ranger_syntax said:

The tactics were wrong.

 

The forward line did next to nothing because it was completely cut off from everything behind it.

 

If Morelos was playing then we could just punt it up to him. That wasn't an option.

 

Why didn't the manager play Tillman deeper?

The chasm between the back 5/midfield and our attacking players was like the Grand Canyon.

7 minutes ago, Bill said:

You have to get the ball before you can hold it up. 

This. With bells on.

32 minutes ago, Blue Moon said:

Alfie was overplayed while injured last season.  If we bring him back too soon he could have a setback.  Being deemed fit and match fit are 2 different animals.  Catch 22 situation.

Dare I suggest that it will make little difference until we know how we want to play. Colak literally got no service last night which is a worry. That therefore to me suggests that swapping to Alfie is not going to simply provide the magic bullet to our current predicament. 

21 minutes ago, Sutton_blows_goats said:

Didn't say it was a priority. We have a few issues despite our summers transfer work. But IMO we do need an upgrade at keeper.  

Apologies for picking that up wrong. Reading too quickly!! 

2 minutes ago, Bill said:

Short memories. When John McLaughlin kept all those clean sheets at the beginning of our 55 season he was widely praised as an excellent Rangers keeper. Since then he's hardly started a handful of games. Why are we writing him off like this? It's unseemly.

Agreed. Whatever issues we have as a team, dropping John McLaughlin is not going to solve any of them.

1 minute ago, Sutton_blows_goats said:

We still need an upgrade. McGregor is on the decline and McLaughlin is a career lower league keeper and backup for us.

Possibly but I don't see it being a priority IMO. There are countless more pressing things to sort before we even start to think of changing the goalie. McLaughlin (or whoever) is relying on what's in front of him to offer protection. Last night was a mess on top of another mess.

2 minutes ago, Sutton_blows_goats said:

We 100% do.

There are many things to sort out with our team and set up. A new goalie is not going to make an ounce of difference to how we are actually playing.