An Analysis Of Our Defensive Frailties

[Rousseau 10,664]

There has been many superlatives bandied about when the Rangers defense is discussed: "terrible", "bomb-scare", "lightweight", and even the more blunt but nonetheless correct, "s****!". There is a perception that our offensive philosophy leaves us exposed at the back, most commonly on the counter; add to that poor organisation in certain situations, namely corners, one gets a good impression of our defensive frailties. It has been the most prominent flaw, in what has been a stellar start to Warburton's reign.

 

However, the facts suggest that this is not entirely true; while we do get caught on the counter, we're generally not punished as much as one would expect. In our run to the Scottish Cup final, where we arguably faced our biggest tests, we conceded a total of 7 goals in 6 games. The breakdown of goals conceded makes for interesting, if not too surprising, reading:

 

Corners - 3

Midfield Penetration - 2

Free-kick - 1

Long-Ball - 1

Counter-Attack - 0

 

Over the 6 games, no goals were conceded from counter-attacks, contrary to the general perception. The Free-kick (conceded against Cowdenbeath) can be marked down as a fluke, or a moment of skill if you're that way inclined. Our biggest problems came from Corners and Midfield Penetration (where we are in our defensive structure, but the opposition have managed to get through it).

 

 

The first instance of Midfield Penetration came against Celtic in the Semi-Final. The image above shows an approximation of player positions in the build-up to the goal. Rangers line-up in a 4-3-3, with Celtic in their normal 4-2-3-1. The Rangers 'back-four' were set up zonally -- Tavernier taking a 'benny', aside -- with the midfield taking up man-to-man positions: Wallace, Wilson, Kiernan are lined-up well, structurally, with Tavernier pushing out to close the ball-player, before the ball is passed wide to the LB; Halliday, Zelalem, Holt and McKay are tight-ish to their men, with Law (playing RW, after coming on for Shiels) closing down the LB.

 

Tavernier is out of position, but ironically gets back in time to potentially cover the attack. The Celtic LB, Tierney, runs past Law and Tavernier, beating them one-on-one -- or, embarrassingly, one-on-two -- and cuts the ball back. Halliday doesn't keep tight to his man, Rogic (AM), and the Australian is left open to slot the ball into the net. The issue is poor man-to-man marking and a lack of concentration.

 

 

The second instance of Midfield Penetration was against Hibs in the Final. The image above shows an approximation of player positions in the build-up to the goal. Hibs lined-up with a 3-5-2, with Rangers in the usual 4-3-3. Again, the Rangers 'back-four' line-up zonally, with the midfielders taking up man-to-man positions: again, Wallace, Wilson and Kiernan are solid, structurally, with Tavernier pushing forward to man-mark the LCM (McGinn); Halliday, Zelalem and Holt are very tight to their men.

 

From this throw-in, the Hibs LWB is able to lob a ball to the LCM, who is relatively open as Tavernier is not close enough -- Waghorn is expected to mark the LWB in this instance, but could cover. Again, ironically, Tavernier still gets close enough to snuff out an attack when the LCM receives the ball, but both he and Halliday (who leaves his man) fail to win the ball. From this scrappy situation the ball finds it's way to Stokes (LF) on the left. With Tavernier covering the LCM, Kiernan covers Stokes. Unfortunately, Kiernan doesn't make a tackle, or keep him wide, but allows Stokes to run into the box, scoring a silly goal. Again, the issue is poor man-to-man marking and poor concentration/decision-making.

 

The man-marking from the midfield and Wide-Forwards (the pressing game) works well as it allows us to cover/mark all the potential passing options, and creates the potential to steal the ball. It also forces opponents into mistakes, and allows a greater chance of Rangers recovering the ball -- of course, it requires good execution.

 

There was one instance of a Long-Ball. During the Kilmarnock game, a long ball was lumped up-field by their Goalkeeper, and a 50/50 aerial duel is not won properly by Wilson; the ball falls to McKenzie in-behind our midfield, and he proceeds to utilise the space by curling the ball into the net. Physicality in the air to win aerial duels, and defensive organisation to cover when we don't, is needed in this situation.

 

These issues are even more prevalent at corners. Three goals were conceded at corners over the 6 matches; one against Celtic and the other two against Hibs in the Final. A inability to track runners, and failures to win aerial battles when we do, have allowed opponents back into games when they have not even had a sniff of ball.

 

We've long been crying out for defensive acquisitions, both to add competition to a thread-bare defense -- no cover at full-back was a real issue throughout -- and to add quality. The names of potential targets and players signed thus far (Joey Barton and Jordan Rossiter aside) have been met with ambivalence, and downright scorn. But, it can be argued that our defensive targets are perfectly suited to solving many of the defensive frailties laid bare last season.

 

The issues outlined in the examples above are: a failure to man-mark effectively, a lack of concentration, an inability to track runners consistently, a failure to win our fair share of aerial duels and a lack of defensive organisation. These issues will only get more pronounced in the Premiership if they are not corrected.

 

Right away, the acquisition of Barton solves many of those problems. Will Barton lose many man-marking situations? No. Will he allow others to shirk responsibility and lose concentration? No. Will he lose an aerial duel? No. He's not going to win every one-on-one or aerial duel, but it appears Barton will go a long way to solving most of these these issues; most importantly, it looks like he will take charge of any organisational duties.

 

Even the more "disappointing" acquisition, Clint Hill, looks to strengthening our defensive frailties. At 37 he comes with bags of experience, and is strong in the air. His age may be a issue, but he has been a consistent performer at Premier League and Championship level. Again, he doesn't look likely to lose aerial battles, nor does it look like he'll shirk responsibility at corners etc.. We have two leaders, which can only be a good thing for our younger, more inexperienced players.

 

Even Oguchi Onyewu potentially solves our problems. A name that few are excited about, but he could do a job. At 6ft 4ins, he's not going to lose many aerial duels, and at 34 he has bags of experience. It is unlikely that Warburton would ever (hypothetically, for Onyewu has not signed and it's not known if he will) line up with Hill and Onyewu, as he likes a ball-playing centre-back; from that, it's easy to imagine them coming in and out of the team, easing themselves, and us, through the long, hard season. If they can be purchased on favourable deals, then they can surely play their part?

 

Our defensive frailties are clear for all to see: defensively unorganised at times, a lack concentration and an inability to win the majority of aerial duels. While it's easy to be dismissive of some of our signings thus far, or any potential signings, it is clear that Warburton knows what he needs to improve in our team. It's easy to forget that our team is still very young, with the majority under 25; even one of our most experienced players, Wallace, is only 28. Barton and Hill bring experience and leadership, qualities that will go a long way to solving our defensive frailties.

[Tannochsidebear 2,420]

For all the tactical analysis is very well prepared and written, a blind man could see our problems last year were that our two centre halfs had really poor seasons, and Halliday cannot defend as a defensive midfielder supposedly giving the two bombscares much-needed protection.

 

While I would agree that most of our signings have not got anyone excited, I am far more pleased at the signing of Hill than Rossiter, who has 5 first team games under his belt at 19yo, and who Klopp didnt think enough of to try to keep, even to loan out.

 

If Barton can play the DM role successfully, and we bring in another CH to play alongside Hill, our defensive capabilities will be improved beyond all recognition, even with the same two full backs as while both are more adept at attacking than defending, I have faith that they will do the job fine this year.

[Rousseau 10,664]

For all the tactical analysis is very well prepared and written, a blind man could see our problems last year were that our two centre halfs had really poor seasons, and Halliday cannot defend as a defensive midfielder supposedly giving the two bombscares much-needed protection.

 

While I would agree that most of our signings have not got anyone excited, I am far more pleased at the signing of Hill than Rossiter, who has 5 first team games under his belt at 19yo, and who Klopp didnt think enough of to try to keep, even to loan out.

 

If Barton can play the DM role successfully, and we bring in another CH to play alongside Hill, our defensive capabilities will be improved beyond all recognition, even with the same two full backs as while both are more adept at attacking than defending, I have faith that they will do the job fine this year.

 

Thanks. I was trying to be a little more specific, regarding our problems; not just "Wilson is pish!" -- not that you said that! I agree with everything you've said, though.

 

I'm frustrated at the ambivalence from some regarding our signings. I agree, that Hill and Barton are what we needed. They -- Barton aside -- may not be the big names we want, but I think they're what we need.

Edited July 6, 2016 by Rousseau

[Tannochsidebear 2,420]

Thanks. I was trying to be a little more specific, regarding our problems; not just "Wilson is pish!" -- not that you said that! I agree with everything you've said, though.

 

I'm frustrated at the ambivalence from some regarding our signings. I agree, that Hill and Barton are what we needed. They -- Barton aside -- may not be the big names we want, but I think they're what we need.

 

I get exactly what you have done and it is very insightful. My point was that you arrived at the only possible logical conclusion anyone who watched us could reach, with or without the tactical and statistical breakdown.

 

I actually had written "Wilson is pish" in my original reply before I tried to be kinder and changed it to "had really poor seasons"!

 

I think the ambivalence comes from our history of being able to attract reasonably big names to the club before our downfall, and a lot of bears thinking that once we were back we have to be able to attract this type of player again to be competitive. In my case I just want to see players who have played at a decent level and proven to be able to bring something to the party, like Hill, Barton etc. I am not enthused by guys in their twenties who havent played higher than English league 1/2, like Crooks & Windass. You might get the odd diamond you can polish, but you are more often than not going to have a player whose level is not going to be of a standard we should be aiming for. The more players you pick from this level, the more you increase the chances of picking inferior players IMO.

 

MW clearly picked players he knew could get us out of the second tier. I doubt he really believed the likes of Kiernan, Halliday, Tav, Waghorn were going to be first team picks in the top tier. Some have done better than expected, others look like we have now passed their level.

[JFK-1 1,693]

That defence no longer exists, i'm eager to see how the new version shapes up. I'm hoping the reshaped midfield alone will form a greater barrier in front of the defence when required.

 

In an ideal world we will hit the ground running like we did last season by giving Hamilton a thrashing while conceding no goals. I think it likely that Hamilton may simply resort to the tried and trusted strategy of packing the box.

 

Be interesting to see if we have become any better at breaking that down. We have different options now.

[jhunter 0]

we conceded the same number of goals over a season as hibs and falkirk

 

that is awful however its analysed

[Rousseau 10,664]

We all know the problems, like TB said. I was trying to illustrate the problems and, hopefully, show how the new signings are geared towards solving those problems. They may not be big signings in themselves, but I believe they are astute, in the sense that they are chosen to fit the puzzle.

[colinstein 294]

It would be good if there were more graphics., and thank you Rousseau for that

[gisabeer 409]

Part of the problem is that Warburton came from a league where teams where playing for the biggest prize in the world and where generally playing to win. Its not the case now now though. i enjoy the attacking free flowing mentality that we now have but mark does need to reconsider his tactics and ajust to the league he is now playing in.

[JFK-1 1,693]

Part of the problem is that Warburton came from a league where teams where playing for the biggest prize in the world and where generally playing to win. Its not the case now now though. i enjoy the attacking free flowing mentality that we now have but mark does need to reconsider his tactics and ajust to the league he is now playing in.

 

I think all leagues are alike in that only a relative handful of teams can realistically hope to win the prizes no matter how big or small the prizes may be.

 

How many can hope to win the SPL which though it may not offer the prize on offer entry to the EPL does it still offers a chance at Champions league football which at this time is the biggest prize anyone in Scotland can hope for. I would argue only two can realistically win it despite claims to be contenders from Aberdeen and Hearts.

 

Decades of only two ever winning it bear that out and even back when it occasionally was won by a team outside the two it was a mere blip not a pattern. So all the rest have to play for league wise are the second and third spots while most are simply hoping to avoid relegation and make the top 6 at best.

 

The English Championship the prize on offer for promotion aside isn't a great deal different from that for most of the teams in it.

 

Aberdeen will never have a better chance to win the SPL than they did last season and fluffed it every time they had an opportunity to gain some ground.