Kilmarnock 1-0 Rangers. Chronicle of an announced fall

In recent months, my family and work environment has created a routine on Monday and subsequent days, all Ieft wondering how The Rangers? Won? Tied? Lost? When they see my face answer comes without saying anything. A few weeks ago, in the light of victory against Dundee at Ibrox, one of my friend told me “The season is over, you already won”… although I appreciated the support, I tried not to sign that statement, not only by prudence but because there season ahead and the teams are often cyclothymic, go through different stages, which have thousands of explanations (deepening crisis, losing key players, etc, etc).

I am afraid that, our game has become predictable. The rivals met us around. And if we add to our key players (David, Lafferty, Jelavic, etc), which can make a difference, not having a good time. This is what I call a lack of thinking that leads to a generalized disorder.

Recall an attack with the ball. The Rangers tried to enter from different sides. As we did not find space for improvement –Nikica, very marked, sometimes down due to receive the ball- the ball led to Broadfoot and always, always, a center for the goalkeeper to take the ball without opposition. To that, I call it lack of ideas, inability to generate alternatives. The circuit of play, in that part of the field, could be improved with the inclusion of Papac and Wallace. They are complemented very well so far this season.  They have discretion to make the opponent and also inserted in the centers and offensive outbursts.

The problem we have in midfield verges seriously, we have no control of that space. It´s a free pass area… for rivals. Kilmarnock to move the ball, watched us pass. Our pressure was to draw us to rival and we came back to back when the opponent gave the ball to a teammate. We established a clear opposition not consistent. And I think we need a sacrifice to retrieve the ball. There are many ways to retrieve the ball. One is over to the rival, not let it progress, cutting their game. McCulloch cannot fulfill that role. Its lack of dynamics does not allow it. We do not have many players in the group who can play that role, so we always end up opting for McCulloch or Mo Edu. Jamie Ness is not a player to remove the ball, has quality and distribution, McKay, either… I cannot think of other names.

The element of surprise did not finish paying off. If we consider that Sone Aluko was not playing professionally for some time, the Nigerian matching started well, playing right into the center, fighting for the ball, giving the ball to Whittaker and then to Davis. Aluko sinned at times of excessive individual plays, “making more” is the term used for these lands. But he was able to get away from marks and receive the ball. Apparently, Aluko was a good choice for both a lack of creativity in our team. In the first half, I did not know he was going to move to where he was to leave the ball dominated. At other times, he got back to the defenders and was absorbed by the mark. Averaging the first half, the Killie spaces closed his right side and Aluko went on to play on the left to get the ball because Whittaker preferred Davis to look more to create plays.

A move could be seen as the metaphor of performance of our team. The left side, it does Broadfoot, Davis received the ball unmarked sees no one gives a few turns with the ball and try again controlled his footsteps to make a long pass to Broadfoot. The ball goes out of the field. Beyond the metaphor that can contain only one point in the match, because if the shot came Aluko, or shot in solitude Bedoya, the story would have been different. Henceforth, it is necessary to assume the role of matches, take the initiative implicitly suggest that the rival will find stiff opposition.