Rangers 2 : 0 Hamilton (AET) - Player Ratings and MoM Poll

[OnlyOneAmoruso 0]

Thomson and Davis could feasibly play the withdrawn wider roles in a diamond with Edu or McCulloch playing the holding role. Unfortunately, I don't think Thomson or Davis have the work-rate or defensive traits to do this well enough - the former especially lacking in mobility.

 

I think the team as a whole look better using an orthodox 4-4-2 with two wingers. This immediately puts weaker teams on the back-foot instead of sniffing uncertainty in our selection.

 

I couldn't agree on Davis re work rate. He's one of the hardest working we have and very mobile imo.

 

Thomson couldn't play it. Perhaps Novo could.

 

Agree 4-4-2 seems to be the best right now.

[Danny 0]

Miller was clear MOTM for me.

[MoodyBlue 0]

I don't understand the disrespect that people give to lower teams. Just because we spend more money does not mean that we can automatically piss all over lesser teams in the same top flight - we may have a successful history, but when has that ever been the case?

 

In the end it's 11 v 11 and just how much better can a Rangers team be than a team full of some of the best players produced by our country? Players who are in reality, one in a thousand from our towns and cities.

 

Anyone who understands football knows that on the day anyone can win - it just takes a good or lucky day by the lesser team when the better team are not playing so well. If it didn't happen football would be very boring - and in fact would collapse completely due to the lesser teams having no hope and therefore no supporters.

 

Cup games over the world are strewn with upsets including teams being beaten by lower divisions, which is in part due to the one off game scenario which is almost always more important to the lesser side. It's called "the romance of the cup" for those seemingly new to footballs nuances. Does no-one remember the Wee Rangers?

 

Playing the same team 3 times in just over a week doesn't help either and it's no surprise goals have been hard to come by after the initial 3 each draw.

 

The main thing in the cup is to get through to the next round and we've achieved that so I don't know what the fuss is about.

 

Some people seem to think Rangers should stroll through every game from Airdrie to Barcelona but that is a fantasy that doesn't exist - especially in today's environment. You can think what you like but that attitude just must make you the most miserable fans around, as you will rarely be happy and mostly pissed off - which makes football seem less than a healthy hobby.

 

Maybe you should try stepping into the shoes of a Hamilton fan and experience what that is like supporting a smaller club with more modest ambitions and bugger all finances. Then when you re-read your post, you may get angry about how disrespectful a fan of a bigger club can be when you've enjoyed watching your team give them a hard time.

 

i fully respect your point of view mate.

 

However, it's the easy acceptance of mediocrity by some bears that worries me. Come on - we should be all over a team like Hamilton. That's 3 games in a row where we've really struggled to get to grips with it. Not good enough for me. Simpy not good enough. As I've mentioned, I genuinely believe that they are no better than the standard in League 2 in England. Now surely you'd expect Glasgow Rangers to beat a league 2 side fairly comfortably - even with some players missing ??!

 

The sheer lack of cohesion and lack of ideas, pace and creativity is frightening. What ae they doing at Murray Park every day ??

[Frankie 8,830]

I couldn't agree on Davis re work rate. He's one of the hardest working we have and very mobile imo.

 

Thomson couldn't play it. Perhaps Novo could.

 

Agree 4-4-2 seems to be the best right now.

 

Davis goes missing for long spells - even in the middle - and I think his work-rate changes from game to game. Last night it looked to me like he was essentially played up front in the first half and he didn't do enough in that position.

 

Earlier in the season he was also very poor in that regard which is disappointing as he is one of our best and most mobile players when interested.

[MoodyBlue 0]

Davis goes missing for long spells - even in the middle - and I think his work-rate changes from game to game. Last night it looked to me like he was essentially played up front in the first half and he didn't do enough in that position.

 

Earlier in the season he was also very poor in that regard which is disappointing as he is one of our best and most mobile players when interested.

 

this is the big problem with the lad. he does go missing for long spells. he is a decent player and has got some good things to his game - but the frustrating thing is that he simply does not show up enough. He plays like his personality at times - quite withdrawn and a wee bit shy.

 

he's been needing to come fully out his shell for a long time now. He's at an age when he should be far more involved in the game than he his.

[Frankie 8,830]

Agreed MoodyBlue.

 

When commanding a midfield there are few better than Davis but he just doesn't do it often enough. Seems to lack self-belief I think but I guess is another who suffers from being moved around the side along with constant changes in personnel alongside and in front of him.

[chilledbear 16]

I don't think it was a co-incidence, our best spell for a long time [December] we had width and pace. Unfortunately both are injury prone, and with no money, we have to play players who are out of position. I can see WS playing Davis and Whittaker wide this Saturday, and a makeshift strike force will mean we could struggle.

 

I wonder if instead of fitting players into a formation no matter what, it wouldn't be more benificial to set the formation to the players strengths.

[redford 0]

Papac for me, with Davis running him close.