A league too far?

[Ser Barristan Selmy 222]

who do you think we should be aiming for then based on the minimal funds rangers have and wages we can current'y offer?

A standard higher than mediocre Scottish players and strikers who scored 6 goals last season in the English Championship. Celtic signed Hooper for not much more than Garner, and he was one of the top scorers in the Championship.

 

But we need to be broadening our horizons and signing foreign players. The English leagues are notorious for having players who are overpaid and often under skilled so it doesn't make much sense to me to focus our entire signing policy there.

 

We're in a pretty difficult position just now because we're going to be skint until we can start turning good profits on players.

Edited August 30, 2016 by Ser Barristan Selmy

[AM89 0]

We're only 4 games into the league but I feel that we really needed to start well if we were to give ourselves a chance this season, something we haven't done. We now go to Parkhead having not strengthened our defence (yet) and not knowing our best midfield or forward line. While I always like to remain optimistic, we're making it very difficult for ourselves even at this early stage, especially given our perceived easier start to the season.

Celtic will have Euro distraction soon so hopefully some ground can be made up if we can find some form and start playing to the standards we expect. But we need to improve significantly, and fast.

[Frankie 8,562]

We're only 4 games into the league but I feel that we really needed to start well if we were to give ourselves a chance this season, something we haven't done. We now go to Parkhead having not strengthened our defence (yet) and not knowing our best midfield or forward line. While I always like to remain optimistic, we're making it very difficult for ourselves even at this early stage, especially given our perceived easier start to the season.

Celtic will have Euro distraction soon so hopefully some ground can be made up if we can find some form and start playing to the standards we expect. But we need to improve significantly, and fast.

 

I think it's fair to say our start has been disappointing and eight points from four games isn't a great return considering the opposition.

 

However, neither is it the end of the world, we're unbeaten and we could easily have won all four games with some better finishing - even accounting for the poor defending at times.

 

Improvement is definitely required but I'd also suggest patience from some fans would also be agreeable.

[AM89 0]

I think it's fair to say our start has been disappointing and eight points from four games isn't a great return considering the opposition.

 

However, neither is it the end of the world, we're unbeaten and we could easily have won all four games with some better finishing - even accounting for the poor defending at times.

 

Improvement is definitely required but I'd also suggest patience from some fans would also be agreeable.

 

Agree, Frankie. I am very happy with the management team we have. Warburton is an excellent coach imo. We just need to get the midfield balance right and, if we manage that, I'm confident the rest will fall into place. Midfield crucial to how we play.

[Frankie 8,562]

Agree, Frankie. I am very happy with the management team we have. Warburton is an excellent coach imo. We just need to get the midfield balance right and, if we manage that, I'm confident the rest will fall into place. Midfield crucial to how we play.

 

Yeah, it's quite interesting how it hasn't worked though.

 

For example, last Friday we had Barton, Rossiter and Forrester which looked a good balance but all three struggled at times - and the defensive players certainly didn't protect the back four as we hoped such a system would. That's worrying as I'd expect two of the same three at Parkhead next week with Halliday most likely to replace Rossiter, who despite an excellent start at Rangers so far, was anonymous last week.

 

For all the criticism of the defence, the midfield and attack have also failed to do the business often enough.

[AM89 0]

Yeah, it's quite interesting how it hasn't worked though.

 

For example, last Friday we had Barton, Rossiter and Forrester which looked a good balance but all three struggled at times - and the defensive players certainly didn't protect the back four as we hoped such a system would. That's worrying as I'd expect two of the same three at Parkhead next week with Halliday most likely to replace Rossiter, who despite an excellent start at Rangers so far, was anonymous last week.

 

For all the criticism of the defence, the midfield and attack have also failed to do the business often enough.

 

Barton and Rossiter best suited to the holding role. Don't think either are capable of playing as one of the two more advanced CM positions in our system as it just doesn't utilise their strengths. So that leaves us with a headache.

 

I had been shouting for Forrester to be in midfield as I think it's his best position. He's more involved and can influence the game better than he can on either wing. But again the balance wasn't quite what we hoped for.

 

Agree Halliday likely to start vs Celtic. Barton probably will get his place.

[Frankie 8,562]

Barton and Rossiter best suited to the holding role. Don't think either are capable of playing as one of the two more advanced CM positions in our system as it just doesn't utilise their strengths. So that leaves us with a headache.

 

I had been shouting for Forrester to be in midfield as I think it's his best position. He's more involved and can influence the game better than he can on either wing. But again the balance wasn't quite what we hoped for.

 

Agree Halliday likely to start vs Celtic. Barton probably will get his place.

 

The thing was on Friday Barton and Rossiter did play deeper (possibly because Killie were swamping us) and it still didn't work.

 

Food for thought for the manager.

[stewarty 2,025]

The worry for me was the physical nature of Kilmarnock's play. From their point of view, an obvious ploy as it helped them combat our possession play. The refereeing has been consistently inconsistent and woeful, so any protection from hammer-thrower tactics is likely to be patchy. A formula that other teams will copy?

[Frankie 8,562]

The worry for me was the physical nature of Kilmarnock's play. From their point of view, an obvious ploy as it helped them combat our possession play. The refereeing has been consistently inconsistent and woeful, so any protection from hammer-thrower tactics is likely to be patchy. A formula that other teams will copy?

 

I think was the case latterly but in the first half they were just the better team. They just seemed quicker, stronger and more comfortable - though I would add the surface looked particularly poor. Apparently it was watered before the match but it dried out quickly and we really struggled to control the ball at times.

Edited August 30, 2016 by Frankie

[stewarty 2,025]

I think was the case latterly but in the first half they were just the better team. They just seemed quicker, stronger and more comfortable - though I would add the surface looked particularly poor. Apparently it was watered before the match but it dried out quickly and we really struggled to control the ball at times.

 

Agreed re the pitch. Though I think also fitness played a part in the second half where the possession play tired Killie out in addition to their red card.