Barca Failure for Rangers
Half the problem is the Scottish mentality on the playing field, which at least through playing and managing in England for so long, Gordon Strachan has partially escaped. However, its more than that, its the fine line between ambition/risk/good business. Seville couldnt have just bought Alves, Kanoute, Kersekov (Sp?!), Poulsten, Palop, and Luis Fabiano in one summer and think (a la Peter Risdale at Leeds) right if we do well then it willl pay for all their transfer fees and wages, if not - we'll go bust...
It's a building process. With Rangers and Smith - there isnt an overriding sense of future involved in anything thats happening. To me its even shown in simple things like... bBoyd is young, can score goals at any level, alright so he doesnt have a style thatat the minute suits playing one up front against the top teams int he world. In my eyes there are two options, one, dont play one upfront (particularly if your best striker isnt suited to it), or indeed two - you teach him and give him experience doing it so that he learns and as your team progresses he adds another string to his bow. Another part to that is, has he ever had any number of games playing the lone role or is it as simple as, he doesnt seem to work hard in a two so couldnt possibly do it himself?
Give barcalona the ball for 60-70% of the game against any team in the world and they will win - its sheer folly to even attempt it. The level of possession and pattern of paly was of such that if Rangers had gone 3 upfront then Barca couldnt even have had any more of the ball/game. If you play one upfront in a pitch that size agaisnt players of the Barca level, your two wide midfielders have to get up and support your forwards when you've got the ball - effectively they have to be the fittest, hardworking and bravest players on the park. Beasley doesnt have the bottle to go by SPL players so was never likely to do it at the camp nou. Had Novo and Naismith played the wider areas ten it might have given ranegrs a chance, an outlet even just to take the pressure off from time to time.
But both thos players are just auxillarily strikers, bar Burke (wherever he is these days) do Rangers have any natural width. Charlie Adam being told to get up and down the line, is just plain daft, if he does that for 30 mins he'l be leaving himself open to be run ragged for the rest of the game. I actually thought the occasions he drifted infield he looked rangers best and most composed player. In big games he plays with more bottle than Ferguson, who for huge spells I geniunely thought wasnt playing.
Rangers need to buy players, not just to win the next game, but to help them move to the next level, or even to sustain their position at this levelm or else, what the point of it all.
I dont buy into Barca on that form are unstoppable - Barca werent even on their game anything like to the level they can be. Its easy to say "aye thats a good score agaisnt a team like that", but its not, if you play like that you have to get a 0-0 or its just plain terrible. Its like you have allowed a team to beat you. As a celtic fan Ive seen it too many times also.
As we showed against Benfica, the best form of defence against teams of higher techinque is attack. But you have to pick the players and system to allow your attackers to attack. Two weeks ago we got done by benfica, they had all the pressure and almost all the chances, fast forward two weeks, we have far more chances, far more possesion. Whats the difference, we arent any better and they arent any worse, but we played to let our forwards cause them problems and take the pressure off our (shakey) defence. Playing at hom does give you a boost, but doesnt make bad players good and vice versa.
Thought McGregor, Hutton, and Adam all got pass marks, because they at least looked comfortable at that level.
It's a building process. With Rangers and Smith - there isnt an overriding sense of future involved in anything thats happening. To me its even shown in simple things like... bBoyd is young, can score goals at any level, alright so he doesnt have a style thatat the minute suits playing one up front against the top teams int he world. In my eyes there are two options, one, dont play one upfront (particularly if your best striker isnt suited to it), or indeed two - you teach him and give him experience doing it so that he learns and as your team progresses he adds another string to his bow. Another part to that is, has he ever had any number of games playing the lone role or is it as simple as, he doesnt seem to work hard in a two so couldnt possibly do it himself?
Give barcalona the ball for 60-70% of the game against any team in the world and they will win - its sheer folly to even attempt it. The level of possession and pattern of paly was of such that if Rangers had gone 3 upfront then Barca couldnt even have had any more of the ball/game. If you play one upfront in a pitch that size agaisnt players of the Barca level, your two wide midfielders have to get up and support your forwards when you've got the ball - effectively they have to be the fittest, hardworking and bravest players on the park. Beasley doesnt have the bottle to go by SPL players so was never likely to do it at the camp nou. Had Novo and Naismith played the wider areas ten it might have given ranegrs a chance, an outlet even just to take the pressure off from time to time.
But both thos players are just auxillarily strikers, bar Burke (wherever he is these days) do Rangers have any natural width. Charlie Adam being told to get up and down the line, is just plain daft, if he does that for 30 mins he'l be leaving himself open to be run ragged for the rest of the game. I actually thought the occasions he drifted infield he looked rangers best and most composed player. In big games he plays with more bottle than Ferguson, who for huge spells I geniunely thought wasnt playing.
Rangers need to buy players, not just to win the next game, but to help them move to the next level, or even to sustain their position at this levelm or else, what the point of it all.
I dont buy into Barca on that form are unstoppable - Barca werent even on their game anything like to the level they can be. Its easy to say "aye thats a good score agaisnt a team like that", but its not, if you play like that you have to get a 0-0 or its just plain terrible. Its like you have allowed a team to beat you. As a celtic fan Ive seen it too many times also.
As we showed against Benfica, the best form of defence against teams of higher techinque is attack. But you have to pick the players and system to allow your attackers to attack. Two weeks ago we got done by benfica, they had all the pressure and almost all the chances, fast forward two weeks, we have far more chances, far more possesion. Whats the difference, we arent any better and they arent any worse, but we played to let our forwards cause them problems and take the pressure off our (shakey) defence. Playing at hom does give you a boost, but doesnt make bad players good and vice versa.
Thought McGregor, Hutton, and Adam all got pass marks, because they at least looked comfortable at that level.
posted by Michael__67 at 8:51 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home