Match Thread [FT] Rangers 1 (Tillman 66') - 0 Hearts

[Gonzo79 15,293]

 

5 minutes ago, Bill said:

Wright should start more games. IMO he’s a ar better player than either Sakala or Tamundo

I don't think any of them are good enough. 

 

If they're all fit, I'd be starting Sakala though.

[Frankie 8,562]

1 minute ago, Gonzo79 said:

 

I don't think any of them are good enough. 

 

If they're all fit, I'd be starting Sakala though.

I think all three and Kent for that matter have been largely appalling this season.  Wright was unusually poor recently in terms of his touch but I was glad to see him offer improvement last night.

 

We need a radical overhaul of attacking areas next summer as, as much as we've been poor defensively, we've not scored anywhere near enough goals this season or last.

[der Berliner 3,744]

Wright, much like Sakala, offers something e.g. Kent doesn't. He is always willing to run at people or harass them abandon, tries the unorthodox every now and then, as well as having a pop if there is a clear sight of the target. There is some enthusiasm in their game that drives others on and gives the opposition more to think about. Yet, the most obvious problem is that we have too few finishers in the box time and again.

Edited November 10, 2022 by der Berliner

[Whosthedado 1,685]

Scott Wright couldnt get in the Aberdeen team half the time before we signed him, I think that says it all

[onevision 1,569]

Scott Wright will always be a bit part player. Play him from the start you get next to nothing but he seems more at home coming on for the last 20mins or so and when the opposition are tiring.

[Malangsob 1,264]

1 hour ago, Bill said:

Tamundo

Is terrible. 

 

 

[Whosthedado 1,685]

@Frankie just saw the clip of Neilson moaning about injury time! You honestly couldnt make that up! How many times have we watched Craig G come and take an age to take goal kicks! The irony is lost on Neilson completely!

[craig 5,199]

3 hours ago, der Berliner said:

Wright, much like Sakala, offers something e.g. Kent doesn't. He is always willing to run at people or harass them abandon, tries the unorthodox every now and then, as well as having a pop if there is a clear sight of the target. There is some enthusiasm in their game that drives others on and gives the opposition more to think about. Yet, the most obvious problem is that we have too few finishers in the box time and again.

Which part of ANY of this does Kent not offer ?

[craig 5,199]

4 hours ago, Sutton_blows_goats said:

Big 3 points. Get the floaty out swinging corners in the bin ASAP please. They dont work.

Those corners are soul destroying.  It is so abundantly clear they dont work, yet we persist.  Try some short ones, try some to the edge of the box, try some inswingers on top of the keeper.... Nope, lets float those outswingers miles up in the air and make it easy to defend against.  Amateur is the only way to describe our set pieces

[Bill 13,717]

44 minutes ago, craig said:

Those corners are soul destroying.  It is so abundantly clear they dont work, yet we persist.  Try some short ones, try some to the edge of the box, try some inswingers on top of the keeper.... Nope, lets float those outswingers miles up in the air and make it easy to defend against.  Amateur is the only way to describe our set pieces

First change I'd make is to stop Tavernier from taking corners altogether.