This Weekends Games

[Parklife]

Did warburton complain about Harry forrester not getting sent off vs Dundee? Or the free kick award for the Rangers goal at Killie? 

[sbcmfc]

And on that point, someone had said earlier Rangers were unlucky not to have more points, but that goal v killie was late iirc and their winner v Motherwell was very late (if entirely predictable), the finish v Dundee was nervy, could've been worse had they played most of the 2nd half with 10 men.

So I'd argue they are lucky to have 9 points.

They may dominate possession in most games, but it's possession for the sake of it. Most teams will let them pass sideways or in their own half all day. Be interesting to break down the areas Rangers have possession, I suspect the final 1/3rd would be pretty low.

[Guest BlueGaz]

4 minutes ago, sbcmfc said:

And on that point, someone had said earlier Rangers were unlucky not to have more points, but that goal v killie was late iirc and their winner v Motherwell was very late (if entirely predictable), the finish v Dundee was nervy, could've been worse had they played most of the 2nd half with 10 men.

So I'd argue they are lucky to have 9 points.

They may dominate possession in most games, but it's possession for the sake of it. Most teams will let them pass sideways or in their own half all day. Be interesting to break down the areas Rangers have possession, I suspect the final 1/3rd would be pretty low.

I was one of the ones that mentioned this.

I would disagree with you though that we are lucky to have 9 points.  Bar 1 league game we have dominated possession and generally speaking, some of the football has been very good.  A result of it has been a lot of chances with hardly any taken, which is a major issue at the moment.

I think I mentioned that we should be sat in 2nd at the moment.  IMO, we should have beaten Motherwell and we should have beaten Hamilton.  So that would have put us on 13 points at the moment, I think.
But it is what it is, we are were we are and we could argue this should have happened and that should have happened etc all day.  We are certainly not lucky to have 9 points.  It can only get better 

[theweestevie]

1 minute ago, BlueGaz said:

I was one of the ones that mentioned this.

I would disagree with you though that we are lucky to have 9 points.  Bar 1 league game we have dominated possession and generally speaking, some of the football has been very good.  A result of it has been a lot of chances with hardly any taken, which is a major issue at the moment.

I think I mentioned that we should be sat in 2nd at the moment.  IMO, we should have beaten Motherwell and we should have beaten Hamilton.  So that would have put us on 13 points at the moment, I think.
But it is what it is, we are were we are and we could argue this should have happened and that should have happened etc all day.  We are certainly not lucky to have 9 points.  It can only get better 

We should have won against Ross county as well. We hit the post and the bar, and had 2 cleared of the line with the County keeper making a series of excellent saves.

But it is all about getting the ball into the net which we are having severe difficutly in doing so.

[dipped flake]

On 9/25/2016 at 11:12 PM, RenfrewBlue said:

It's not just about the budget. Warburton had to build a team last season pretty much from scratch.  He got lucky with the way they started the season and rode that wave to the end. He also got lucky with very few injuries. 

He's had to now build a squad this season and that hasn't clicked early like last year. It will eventually but it depends on how long it takes and how patient our board and fans are.

Warburton slagged off Neilsen for bringing in so many players last season, only to do the same himself. We built a new team last year and skooshed 3rd. You have 4/5 times as much money as us so, if you waste it on over the hill players, that is your problem

[Guest BlueGaz]

Just now, theweestevie said:

We should have won against Ross county as well. We hit the post and the bar, and had 2 cleared of the line with the County keeper making a series of excellent saves.

But it is all about getting the ball into the net which we are having severe difficutly in doing so.

Sorry, forgot about that game.  You are right, should have won that game more so than Motherwell or Hamilton.

[Parklife]

3 minutes ago, theweestevie said:

We should have won against Ross county as well. We hit the post and the bar, and had 2 cleared of the line with the County keeper making a series of excellent saves.

But it is all about getting the ball into the net which we are having severe difficutly in doing so.

Excuse my ignorance but can't Waghorn play as a central striker? 

Early indications are that you've bought a £1.5 million lemon in Garner. 

[Guest BlueGaz]

Just now, Parklife said:

Excuse my ignorance but can't Waghorn play as a central striker? 

Early indications are that you've bought a £1.5 million lemon in Garner. 

I would play him in the middle.  He scored 3 good goals against QotS last week.  Granted, they weren't at their best but 3 good goals all the same.  

Garner yet to prove himself to me, and not sure Waghorn is 100% yet, but he would be my first choice through the middle.

[Fairbairn]

8 minutes ago, Parklife said:

Excuse my ignorance but can't Waghorn play as a central striker? 

Early indications are that you've bought a £1.5 million lemon in Garner. 

I'd agree on Garner. On top of not looking particularly good (so far), he seems to be a Grade A khunt as well.  Constantly whinging and getting involved in spats for absolutely no reason.  On the surface of it he seems like a really, really, really shite Diego Costa.

[Parklife]

7 minutes ago, BlueGaz said:

I would play him in the middle.  He scored 3 good goals against QotS last week.  Granted, they weren't at their best but 3 good goals all the same.  

Garner yet to prove himself to me, and not sure Waghorn is 100% yet, but he would be my first choice through the middle.

I heard on Sportsound last night that Waghorn might be slightly unhappy also, as he is one of the only senior players not to have received a wage rise after promotion.

Garner doesn't seem to fit the way Rangers want to play. He seems like a powerful, battering ram type striker. Where as Rangers want to pass through teams.  

[Fairbairn]

Just now, Parklife said:

I heard on Sportsound last night that Waghorn might be slightly unhappy also, as he is one of the only senior players not to have received a wage rise after promotion.

Garner doesn't seem to fit the way Rangers want to play. He seems like a powerful, battering ram type striker. Where as Rangers want to pass through teams.  

Waghorn was offered a new deal but so far they've not been able to reach an agreement.  It was the same with Taverier although he eventually signed is.  The rumour I heard was that Waghorn was after £16K-£18K per week.

[Parklife]

3 minutes ago, Fairbairn said:

Waghorn was offered a new deal but so far they've not been able to reach an agreement.  It was the same with Taverier although he eventually signed is.  The rumour I heard was that Waghorn was after £16K-£18K per week.

 

I can see why he has not been given it. That's outrageous. 

[Guest BlueGaz]

15 minutes ago, Parklife said:

I heard on Sportsound last night that Waghorn might be slightly unhappy also, as he is one of the only senior players not to have received a wage rise after promotion.

Garner doesn't seem to fit the way Rangers want to play. He seems like a powerful, battering ram type striker. Where as Rangers want to pass through teams.  

Not sure about the contract with Waghorn.  I thought he had been offered a new one but not sure what it was and where they are with it.

I agree on Garner.  The amount of chance we have had to whip the ball into the box which is the natural thing to do, and we don't.  We have this stupid plan of almost wanting to walk the ball into the net at the moment and it is not working.  It has worked in the cup games, because with all due respect we have played against teams that allow us the room to play that type of tight football through the edge of the box, but its not working in the league against better opposition.

I am still convinced it will come.  He is slowly changing things.  We now get corners into the box rather than the almost 100% short corner tactic last season, which is a small example.  Time will tell if he can change it for the better.  I'm still behind him at the moment.

I think he is learning about scottish football slowly but surely.  he was spoilt last season because we were head and shoulders above the rest - and you could almost get away with anything due to the gap - different this year though, hence my top 6 prediction.

 

Edited September 27, 2016 by BlueGaz

[Return of Yermaw]

25 minutes ago, Parklife said:

Excuse my ignorance but can't Waghorn play as a central striker? 

Early indications are that you've bought a £1.5 million lemon in Garner. 

they needed a Nacho Novo/Lafferty type character and Garner at this early stage offers all the qualities both those players had in abundance. All about preserving the identity and traditions of the club. 

[Barney Rubble]

35 minutes ago, BlueGaz said:

I think I mentioned that we should be sat in 2nd at the moment.  IMO, we should have beaten Motherwell and we should have beaten Hamilton.  So that would have put us on 13 points at the moment, I think.
But it is what it is, we are were we are and we could argue this should have happened and that should have happened etc all day.  We are certainly not lucky to have 9 points.  It can only get better 

I thought you did beat Motherwell??

[Guest BlueGaz]

Just now, Barney Rubble said:

I thought you did beat Motherwell??

That many draws am getting all confused 

[Parklife]

3 minutes ago, Return of Yermaw said:

they needed a Nacho Novo/Lafferty type character and Garner at this early stage offers all the qualities both those players had in abundance. All about preserving the identity and traditions of the club. 

They could've just signed Novo for £0, to be fair  

[Fairbairn]

7 minutes ago, BlueGaz said:

  We now get corners into the box rather than the almost 100% short corner tactic last season, which is a small example.  

 

 

That's all well and good but I don't think we've taken a corner that's beaten the first man since Albertz left in 2001!!

[Fairbairn]

Just now, Parklife said:

They could've just signed Novo for £0, to be fair  

Think he's a bit young for our signings this season.

[sbcmfc]

52 minutes ago, BlueGaz said:

I would disagree with you though that we are lucky to have 9 points.  Bar 1 league game we have dominated possession and generally speaking, some of the football has been very good.  A result of it has been a lot of chances with hardly any taken, which is a major issue at the moment.

I think I mentioned that we should be sat in 2nd at the moment.  IMO, we should have beaten Motherwell and we should have beaten Hamilton.  So that would have put us on 13 points at the moment, I think.
But it is what it is, we are were we are and we could argue this should have happened and that should have happened etc all day.  We are certainly not lucky to have 9 points.  It can only get better 

I don't think you get any points for having possession.

As I said, Rangers do little with their possession.

Rangers had 59% possession v Motherwell and 3 shots on target, Motherwell had 41% and 3 shots on target.

v Hamilton 63% 4 shots on target to Hamilton's 2.

[Guest BlueGaz]

8 minutes ago, sbcmfc said:

I don't think you get any points for having possession.

As I said, Rangers do little with their possession.

Rangers had 59% possession v Motherwell and 3 shots on target, Motherwell had 41% and 3 shots on target.

v Hamilton 63% 4 shots on target to Hamilton's 2.

I made a mistake mentioning the Motherwell game, wasn't a draw.  We should have beat Ross County and we should have beat Hamilton.

My point reference the possession we have had is valid, finishing is the issue.  Possession means nothing in itself, but we should be doing better with the amount we have had is all I am saying.

[sbcmfc]

2 minutes ago, BlueGaz said:

I made a mistake mentioning the Motherwell game, wasn't a draw.  We should have beat Ross County and we should have beat Hamilton.

My point reference the possession we have had is valid, finishing is the issue.  Possession means nothing in itself, but we should be doing better with the amount we have had is all I am saying.

Yeah, we are making much the same point on the possession.

I just disagree that Rangers should have more points.

[Guest BlueGaz]

Just now, sbcmfc said:

Yeah, we are making much the same point on the possession.

I just disagree that Rangers should have more points.

that's cool.  if you had seen the ross county game i think you would disagree.

[ShedTA]

1 hour ago, Parklife said:

 

I can see why he has not been given it. That's outrageous. 

It is but so far he's been head and shoulders above Barton and what's he on? Can understand Waghorns view.

[theweestevie]

1 hour ago, Parklife said:

Excuse my ignorance but can't Waghorn play as a central striker? 

Early indications are that you've bought a £1.5 million lemon in Garner. 

 

1 hour ago, Parklife said:

Garner doesn't seem to fit the way Rangers want to play. He seems like a powerful, battering ram type striker. Where as Rangers want to pass through teams.  

Last year the consensus was Waghorn was better out wide and that we were screaming out for powerful centre forward. Fast forward to this season things seem to have reversed.

Waghorn is struggling for confidence out wide and isn't getting the same oppurtunities as he was last season where he was against weaker defenders and our midfield was playing at a much quicker pace and just much better in general and I think that is hurting us. I don't think 4-3-3 is the way forward for us, I thought it was last season as particularly at the start we were playing superb football and scoring for fun (while still squandering a silly number of chances).

I think playing a 4-4-2 would acutally solve a lot of our problems,it gives us an extra body in midfield which would shelter our defence a little but still provide us with enough width. It would also mean there are 2 strikers as targets and I think Waghorn and Garner could be a good partnership as they are different types of player. Sadly I don't see us changing formation.