match thread (image) [FT] Livingston 0 - 0 Rangers

[Malangsob 1,264]

32 minutes ago, craig said:

It’s not a cult rule.  It’s called respect or, in your assessment of Gerrard, lack of respect.

Hey Craig man, you're the boss. My bad.

[PoohBear 1,148]

Actually I think Jack is quicker on the ball than Kamara and has a better reading of the game.  That’s just my feeling.  I don’t think Jack has been brilliant either though, but the delay in passing is something that permeates the whole squad. Perhaps with the exception of Ryan Kent, who has another infuriating tendency to cut inside not matter which wing he’s on and over-running the ball.

[T-1000 174]

1 minute ago, BlackSocksRedTops said:

As much as I agree, I think it's unfair to single out Kamara as I feel Jack was equally guilty of this. Jack is very "tidy" but to win the league we need more than tidy. You don't win league titles playing with a central midfield (Davis, Kamara, Jack) that will be lucky to score more than 5 goals between them. They never get behind or beyond the opposition, which frustrates the life out of me

Its interesting that in his post-match interview Gerrard seemed to place most of the blame on the forwards not having enough creativity and considered that the defence was fine and that Jack and Kamara controlled the game.  This would seem to suggest he believes Hagi, Kent, Arfield? and Morelos did not do enough.  

I thought Hagi had a quiet game and wonder if he is suited to the type of physical and aggressive game played by Livingston.  Kent was a bit better but, given the fee we paid for him, I would like to see more end product coming from him. 

[craig 5,199]

31 minutes ago, Malangsob said:

Hey Craig man, you're the boss. My bad.

No worries bud.  We don’t often have to moderate which is why I so enjoy the forum.  We expect respect to each other -ven in rigorous debate it can be done civilly and respectfully.  Thanks mate,.

[bluedan 93]

I thought off the evidence of the Sheep game we were tweeking our game to handle this problem. But it was much the same as last season. 

Glaringly obvious what was the issue today, whenever they turn the ball over, Jack/Kamara or whoever picks up the ball take too many touches and take the safe option. 

Morelos didn't drop deep to receive today like he did in the first match, a simple tactic that creates space in behind. 

As well as being very frustrating to watch it's somewhat amazing to me that we can't work this out. 

You need good movement and quick forward passing to cause disruption but it's very slow and predictable from us. 

Crossing was good today from Tav and Borna but again predictable going through them. 

I'm looking for Jack and Kamara to get involved more. If one of them plays into one of our front 4 then follows the pass and receives back then space has opened from the defender shadowing our attacker. Jack or Kamara then needs to play forward to one of the other 3 attackers who should then play off that 4th attacker who first receives from jack/Kamara and off we go. 

While this happens, depending what side of the pitch it is, Borna or Tav can tuck in for jack/Kamara. 

Got to pull defences around. All we make them do is shuffle side to side and defend crosses. 

[Malangsob 1,264]

15 minutes ago, bluedan said:

I thought off the evidence of the Sheep game we were tweeking our game to handle this problem. But it was much the same as last season. 

Glaringly obvious what was the issue today, whenever they turn the ball over, Jack/Kamara or whoever picks up the ball take too many touches and take the safe option. 

Morelos didn't drop deep to receive today like he did in the first match, a simple tactic that creates space in behind. 

As well as being very frustrating to watch it's somewhat amazing to me that we can't work this out. 

You need good movement and quick forward passing to cause disruption but it's very slow and predictable from us. 

Crossing was good today from Tav and Borna but again predictable going through them. 

I'm looking for Jack and Kamara to get involved more. If one of them plays into one of our front 4 then follows the pass and receives back then space has opened from the defender shadowing our attacker. Jack or Kamara then needs to play forward to one of the other 3 attackers who should then play off that 4th attacker who first receives from jack/Kamara and off we go. 

While this happens, depending what side of the pitch it is, Borna or Tav can tuck in for jack/Kamara. 

Got to pull defences around. All we make them do is shuffle side to side and defend crosses. 

Absolutely NO reason to front the formation we did given the opponents faced. It is not like we didn't know who or what Livi were about.

Why are we lining up four at the back with two CDMs for a team who have no attack? Why?

A formation designed for a team with offensive threats... e.g. NOT Livingston.

Rangers had 78% possession.

Yet they sat...in that same formation the entire GD game trying the same things for 90 straight minutes...AGAIN.

He just kept slapping more speed on his failed plan....he sent in Roofe...and Barker who spun their wheels...

Gerrard is NOT cutting it. This is a tactics problem...this is not about our players...this is a coaching strategy problem.

 

A Thought.

I may be risking the ban hammer here...but.

Gio van Bronkhorst is sittin in China right now...the guy won the league with Feyenoord (first in 18 years) ...and a League Cup as their manager (4 yrs).  He has played in the SPL, and understands the Scottish game.

And he is managing...in China.

Me doesn't think Rangers would be a hard sell.

If I were upper management at Gers I might give old Gio a call...just to check up on him. See how much he likes China...get that friendly rapport growin.  Ya never know...one never knows...just a thought.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[bluedan 93]

31 minutes ago, Malangsob said:

Absolutely NO reason to front the formation we did given the opponents faced. It is not like we didn't know who or what Livi were about.

Why are we lining up four at the back with two CDMs for a team who have no attack? Why?

A formation designed for a team with offensive threats... e.g. NOT Livingston.

Rangers had 78% possession.

Yet they sat...in that same formation the entire GD game trying the same things for 90 straight minutes...AGAIN.

He just kept slapping more speed on his failed plan....he sent in Roofe...and Barker who spun their wheels...

Gerrard is NOT cutting it. This is a tactics problem...this is not about our players...this is a coaching strategy problem.

 

A Thought.

I may be risking the ban hammer here...but.

Gio van Bronkhorst is sittin in China right now...the guy won the league with Feyenoord (first in 18 years) ...and a League Cup as their manager (4 yrs).  He has played in the SPL, and understands the Scottish game.

And he is managing...in China.

Me doesn't think Rangers would be a hard sell.

If I were upper management at Gers I might give old Gio a call...just to check up on him. See how much he likes China...get that friendly rapport growin.  Ya never know...one never knows...just a thought.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I agree it's a tactical problem. 

I'm asking myself what the epthasis of our attack is? The epthasis or much of our attack is to get the ball wide and then crossed in by our full backs hence us having the 2 DM's with one covering left and the other right to plug gaps left by the full backs. 

The problem with the system is Hagi and Kent don't score headers which leaves Morelos and Aribo or today Arfield. 

We know it works in Europe so why not against Livingston etc? Well it's because they set up to defend and we're not fast enough to hurt them when they turn the ball over. 

I don't think bringing in a new manager is the answer as that'll mean a brand new style of play, players etc. We've invested a lot in Gerrard and I'd like to see him finish building. 

It's completely possible that when Roofe is fit he'll make up one of the front 3 alternating with Kent or Hagi and Roofe is pretty good in the are. Itten is also good in the air. 

Even then though we need more through the middle. 

 

[Malangsob 1,264]

1 hour ago, bluedan said:

we're not fast enough to hurt them when they turn the ball over. 

Right there hoss....right there. Now how long did that take you to figure out? I was grasping it after last season's post X-Mas collapse...It was abundantly clear to me. Not workin.

Conversion time...you need to be able capitalize on your opponents mistakes...Jack...Davis...Kamara...not cutting it...

Actually...with an opponent sitting in a 10 man low block...I think Usain Bolt would have time converting from back there...Why are we not shifting? Why are we not employing a more 'offensive' formation.

You gotta make those team WANT to come out of their shell...you gotta give a sucker hope. Then you tax his ass.

 

Now...Why isn't Gerrard getting that? Brother I am tellin ya...if he ain't graspin this by now...he is not gonna get it.

That is why I always say it...he thinks he is in England. It is NOT gonna work...and the BRUTAL truth is this...these games (Livi, Kili, St Mirren away) are the diff between 55 and starin at the lead dog's balls for another year.

 

Ima let old Hank sing me out.

 

 

 

[JFK-1 1,693]

3 hours ago, bluedan said:

I don't think bringing in a new manager is the answer as that'll mean a brand new style of play, players etc. We've invested a lot in Gerrard and I'd like to see him finish building. 

It's completely possible that when Roofe is fit he'll make up one of the front 3 alternating with Kent or Hagi and Roofe is pretty good in the are. Itten is also good in the air. 

Even then though we need more through the middle. 

I don't want to see another manager at this point or anytime soon. As has been mentioned many times across many forums and topics it took Alex Ferguson 5 years to turn it around at Man U. And he inherited nothing like the dysfunctional mess nor the huge financial disadvantage Gerrard did.

[ranger_syntax 4,329]

Last season we conceded 4 goals in our first four matches and lost one of them.

 

Keeping clean sheets would have earned us an additional 15 points in the matches played last season.

 

We would still have dropped points in a few turgid nil - nil matches but we would also have been top of the league.