The Curious Case of Crossing the Ball

BaTmAn

Well-Known Member
A couple of years ago I had the choice of doing a masters in Performance/Data Analysis in Sport and decided, for better or worse, to become a high school teacher instead. But in the months leading up to this decision (as well as the many years working in football coaching) I read as much as I could about what data can tell us about football; things like which type of corner most often resulted in goals (it’s an in-swinger to the near post if you’re interested) etc etc

One thing that struck me hugely is the highly inefficient tactic, used for decades, of crossing the ball from a wide area into the penalty box. According to the data only 1 in 91.92 crosses leads to a goal.

With teams that play 4-3-3, as we do, their crossing will come from the fullback area, meaning these wide forwards can overload the box and give a greater chance of getting on the end of things. Most of the time though chances are created through quick passing and moving between the front three.

In a 4-4-2 formation crossing would come from both full backs (usually overlapping) and both wide forwards. You’d sacrifice midfield superiority for an extra man in the box attempting to get on the end of crosses coming from one or two wide men.

My biggest concern with Gerrard, as much as I love the guy still, isn’t the Worrall/Katic conundrum (which is utterly baffling) it’s that we continuously pump balls into the box, from open play, to one striker (usually the diminutive Morelos). We aren’t playing a fluid 4-3-3 but nor are we playing 4-4-2. We seem to play a very inefficient mix of both. And this isn't just a today problem, this has been the case since the beginning of the season.

We are a great counter attacking team (and a great backs against the wall team, hence the Europa run) but in the SPL we can't counter against teams that have little interest in attacking.

Today Tavernier, Candeias, Middleton, Halliday and Barisic threw cross after cross into the box to absolutely no effect whatsoever. The ball would be passed from centre half to full back, full back to wide forward who would cross either to a Dundee head or their keeper would catch it. It was soul destroying to watch.

Our central midfield area would usually be by-passed, we would very rarely play the ball into Lafferty’s feet and instead we played into their hands (and Livingston’s, Kilmarnock’s, Motherwell’s, Celtic’s etc). Even Hearts last week we got lucky. We made a painfully average centre half in Berra look decent purely because we gave him so much to head away.

It’s a long post and I’m sure there will be those that disagree but………surely Gerrard must realise this right? Do we really think that a new No10 is going to change it all?
 
We must have put in 20 crosses today.

Can't think of any that found our player (Lafferty goal aside).

Dundee allowed us to play it wide and crowded the centre of the pitch.
 
Very interesting post. I agree if we play a 4-3-3 it doesn’t really work to just lump balls in. There should be quick passing between the front men.
 
I did maths and statistics at uni and there was a telling statistic after 57 minutes, since start of 2nd half we had 87% possession and no shots, Dundee 13% and one shot, so not only we can't cross we can't shoot from.distance.

Today was one of thee worst. Murty/Pedro and Ally dross today.


A couple of years ago I had the choice of doing a masters in Performance/Data Analysis in Sport and decided, for better or worse, to become a high school teacher instead. But in the months leading up to this decision (as well as the many years working in football coaching) I read as much as I could about what data can tell us about football; things like which type of corner most often resulted in goals (it’s an in-swinger to the near post if you’re interested) etc etc

One thing that struck me hugely is the highly inefficient tactic, used for decades, of crossing the ball from a wide area into the penalty box. According to the data only 1 in 91.92 crosses leads to a goal.

With teams that play 4-3-3, as we do, their crossing will come from the fullback area, meaning these wide forwards can overload the box and give a greater chance of getting on the end of things. Most of the time though chances are created through quick passing and moving between the front three.

In a 4-4-2 formation crossing would come from both full backs (usually overlapping) and both wide forwards. You’d sacrifice midfield superiority for an extra man in the box attempting to get on the end of crosses coming from one or two wide men.

My biggest concern with Gerrard, as much as I love the guy still, isn’t the Worrall/Katic conundrum (which is utterly baffling) it’s that we continuously pump balls into the box, from open play, to one striker (usually the diminutive Morelos). We aren’t playing a fluid 4-3-3 but nor are we playing 4-4-2. We seem to play a very inefficient mix of both. And this isn't just a today problem, this has been the case since the beginning of the season.

We are a great counter attacking team (and a great backs against the wall team, hence the Europa run) but in the SPL we can't counter against teams that have little interest in attacking.

Today Tavernier, Candeias, Middleton, Halliday and Barisic threw cross after cross into the box to absolutely no effect whatsoever. The ball would be passed from centre half to full back, full back to wide forward who would cross either to a Dundee head or their keeper would catch it. It was soul destroying to watch.

Our central midfield area would usually be by-passed, we would very rarely play the ball into Lafferty’s feet and instead we played into their hands (and Livingston’s, Kilmarnock’s, Motherwell’s, Celtic’s etc). Even Hearts last week we got lucky. We made a painfully average centre half in Berra look decent purely because we gave him so much to head away.

It’s a long post and I’m sure there will be those that disagree but………surely Gerrard must realise this right? Do we really think that a new No10 is going to change it all?
 
A couple of years ago I had the choice of doing a masters in Performance/Data Analysis in Sport and decided, for better or worse, to become a high school teacher instead. But in the months leading up to this decision (as well as the many years working in football coaching) I read as much as I could about what data can tell us about football; things like which type of corner most often resulted in goals (it’s an in-swinger to the near post if you’re interested) etc etc

One thing that struck me hugely is the highly inefficient tactic, used for decades, of crossing the ball from a wide area into the penalty box. According to the data only 1 in 91.92 crosses leads to a goal.

With teams that play 4-3-3, as we do, their crossing will come from the fullback area, meaning these wide forwards can overload the box and give a greater chance of getting on the end of things. Most of the time though chances are created through quick passing and moving between the front three.

In a 4-4-2 formation crossing would come from both full backs (usually overlapping) and both wide forwards. You’d sacrifice midfield superiority for an extra man in the box attempting to get on the end of crosses coming from one or two wide men.

My biggest concern with Gerrard, as much as I love the guy still, isn’t the Worrall/Katic conundrum (which is utterly baffling) it’s that we continuously pump balls into the box, from open play, to one striker (usually the diminutive Morelos). We aren’t playing a fluid 4-3-3 but nor are we playing 4-4-2. We seem to play a very inefficient mix of both. And this isn't just a today problem, this has been the case since the beginning of the season.

We are a great counter attacking team (and a great backs against the wall team, hence the Europa run) but in the SPL we can't counter against teams that have little interest in attacking.

Today Tavernier, Candeias, Middleton, Halliday and Barisic threw cross after cross into the box to absolutely no effect whatsoever. The ball would be passed from centre half to full back, full back to wide forward who would cross either to a Dundee head or their keeper would catch it. It was soul destroying to watch.

Our central midfield area would usually be by-passed, we would very rarely play the ball into Lafferty’s feet and instead we played into their hands (and Livingston’s, Kilmarnock’s, Motherwell’s, Celtic’s etc). Even Hearts last week we got lucky. We made a painfully average centre half in Berra look decent purely because we gave him so much to head away.

It’s a long post and I’m sure there will be those that disagree but………surely Gerrard must realise this right? Do we really think that a new No10 is going to change it all?

Did you jump into my head LOL.

Been saying it for years, Warburton was same, play, get out wide and cross with little effect.

You score goals by creating space, in order to do that you must drag/move about and do same to opposition. Like you say, playing balls into feet inand around area then creates a scenario whereby the defender must either try win the ball or go with forward/player so they don’t turn. This then creates space. We not utilising Lafferty and his ability to play with back to goal is poor. We need to use this more and today was crying out for it.

Also, whilst on your point - we have created goals from wide areas this season and one today but it’s a certain type of ball and it only works if players create space.

Like the use of stats there and although can be misleading it certainly applies to our play at moment
 
We need to get the balls in the channels behind the defender and turn them. We did that a couple of times in the second half. We are dross at corners and crossing the ball.
 
Why not one-twos through the middle of the opponents defence ? My seat at Ibrox gives me a birds eye view of the interaction between Tavernier and Candeias, and the plethora of crosses, which usually ends in nothing.

At least vary it, Rangers.
 
A couple of years ago I had the choice of doing a masters in Performance/Data Analysis in Sport and decided, for better or worse, to become a high school teacher instead. But in the months leading up to this decision (as well as the many years working in football coaching) I read as much as I could about what data can tell us about football; things like which type of corner most often resulted in goals (it’s an in-swinger to the near post if you’re interested) etc etc

One thing that struck me hugely is the highly inefficient tactic, used for decades, of crossing the ball from a wide area into the penalty box. According to the data only 1 in 91.92 crosses leads to a goal.

With teams that play 4-3-3, as we do, their crossing will come from the fullback area, meaning these wide forwards can overload the box and give a greater chance of getting on the end of things. Most of the time though chances are created through quick passing and moving between the front three.

In a 4-4-2 formation crossing would come from both full backs (usually overlapping) and both wide forwards. You’d sacrifice midfield superiority for an extra man in the box attempting to get on the end of crosses coming from one or two wide men.

My biggest concern with Gerrard, as much as I love the guy still, isn’t the Worrall/Katic conundrum (which is utterly baffling) it’s that we continuously pump balls into the box, from open play, to one striker (usually the diminutive Morelos). We aren’t playing a fluid 4-3-3 but nor are we playing 4-4-2. We seem to play a very inefficient mix of both. And this isn't just a today problem, this has been the case since the beginning of the season.

We are a great counter attacking team (and a great backs against the wall team, hence the Europa run) but in the SPL we can't counter against teams that have little interest in attacking.

Today Tavernier, Candeias, Middleton, Halliday and Barisic threw cross after cross into the box to absolutely no effect whatsoever. The ball would be passed from centre half to full back, full back to wide forward who would cross either to a Dundee head or their keeper would catch it. It was soul destroying to watch.

Our central midfield area would usually be by-passed, we would very rarely play the ball into Lafferty’s feet and instead we played into their hands (and Livingston’s, Kilmarnock’s, Motherwell’s, Celtic’s etc). Even Hearts last week we got lucky. We made a painfully average centre half in Berra look decent purely because we gave him so much to head away.

It’s a long post and I’m sure there will be those that disagree but………surely Gerrard must realise this right? Do we really think that a new No10 is going to change it all?
I too, am interested in data. Even to my (untrained), it was obvious that our crossing from 40 yards out was ineffectual, as it has been on a number of occasions this year. We really need our wingers and full backs to 'break the lines', beat their man and get defences turning.
 
Bluntly, the Tims play 433 correctly.

Get it wide, wingers drive into the box, flood box with three CMs. It works time and time again, and their wingers and CMs (Sinclair, Forrest, McGregor, Rogic, Christie) will all get ten plus goals per season.

Their form has picked up with Brown out the team, as he’s doesn’t hit the box and stays deep. They risk being countered but the CMs score so many they don’t care.

Conversely, our wide men have what, four goals this season (Kent & Candeais). Our CMs have..... nine? Ten? Majority of that is Arfield. Take him out, nobody has more than two.
 
A couple of years ago I had the choice of doing a masters in Performance/Data Analysis in Sport and decided, for better or worse, to become a high school teacher instead. But in the months leading up to this decision (as well as the many years working in football coaching) I read as much as I could about what data can tell us about football; things like which type of corner most often resulted in goals (it’s an in-swinger to the near post if you’re interested) etc etc

One thing that struck me hugely is the highly inefficient tactic, used for decades, of crossing the ball from a wide area into the penalty box. According to the data only 1 in 91.92 crosses leads to a goal.

With teams that play 4-3-3, as we do, their crossing will come from the fullback area, meaning these wide forwards can overload the box and give a greater chance of getting on the end of things. Most of the time though chances are created through quick passing and moving between the front three.

In a 4-4-2 formation crossing would come from both full backs (usually overlapping) and both wide forwards. You’d sacrifice midfield superiority for an extra man in the box attempting to get on the end of crosses coming from one or two wide men.

My biggest concern with Gerrard, as much as I love the guy still, isn’t the Worrall/Katic conundrum (which is utterly baffling) it’s that we continuously pump balls into the box, from open play, to one striker (usually the diminutive Morelos). We aren’t playing a fluid 4-3-3 but nor are we playing 4-4-2. We seem to play a very inefficient mix of both. And this isn't just a today problem, this has been the case since the beginning of the season.

We are a great counter attacking team (and a great backs against the wall team, hence the Europa run) but in the SPL we can't counter against teams that have little interest in attacking.

Today Tavernier, Candeias, Middleton, Halliday and Barisic threw cross after cross into the box to absolutely no effect whatsoever. The ball would be passed from centre half to full back, full back to wide forward who would cross either to a Dundee head or their keeper would catch it. It was soul destroying to watch.

Our central midfield area would usually be by-passed, we would very rarely play the ball into Lafferty’s feet and instead we played into their hands (and Livingston’s, Kilmarnock’s, Motherwell’s, Celtic’s etc). Even Hearts last week we got lucky. We made a painfully average centre half in Berra look decent purely because we gave him so much to head away.

It’s a long post and I’m sure there will be those that disagree but………surely Gerrard must realise this right? Do we really think that a new No10 is going to change it all?
Good post op. This is our 4th season playing this way. Einstein's definition of insanity springs to mind.
 
If 433

If should have 3 regular goal scorers

It should have 3 midfielders who can challenge, make runs, hold the ball, have great vision and can make a killer pass .


For the first part we have 1 out of 3
The second part we have 0 out of 3

We are reliant on one player up front because our wide players are all pretty average.

Our midfield is very poor and have no creativity or quality to their game what so ever.

4231 won’t work because like today we will play 3 wingers instead of 3 attacking mids like other teams who play it.

Walter was so successful with us due to always having a combative midfield and a wee bit of creativity.
If he had to he would overload midfield with 5 players because you need to win the battle to win the game.
For the last 3 years we have relied on wide players who aren’t particularly that good to create everything and each year we struggle.
 
If 433

If should have 3 regular goal scorers

It should have 3 midfielders who can challenge, make runs, hold the ball, have great vision and can make a killer pass .


For the first part we have 1 out of 3
The second part we have 0 out of 3

We are reliant on one player up front because our wide players are all pretty average.

Our midfield is very poor and have no creativity or quality to their game what so ever.

4231 won’t work because like today we will play 3 wingers instead of 3 attacking mids like other teams who play it.

Walter was so successful with us due to always having a combative midfield and a wee bit of creativity.
If he had to he would overload midfield with 5 players because you need to win the battle to win the game.
For the last 3 years we have relied on wide players who aren’t particularly that good to create everything and each year we struggle.

I felt we abandoned 3-5-2 too quickly after the Motherwell game. It leaves little to no place for Candeias and Middleton (neither of which I can see playing centrally) and it certainly wouldn't be easy on the eye but it may well get results, particularly away from home, until we sign the players to play 4-3-3 effectively or develop them ourselves. We'd HAVE to sign another striker though.
 
The crosses into the box today were dreadful. We must have had over 20 attempts in the second half alone. Most of them hit the first defender. Many were headed away or caught by the keeper. It was so easy for their defenders. I cant recall any that went to a Rangers player. This happens in many of our games.
 
I felt we abandoned 3-5-2 too quickly after the Motherwell game. It leaves little to no place for Candeias and Middleton (neither of which I can see playing centrally) and it certainly wouldn't be easy on the eye but it may well get results, particularly away from home, until we sign the players to play 4-3-3 effectively or develop them ourselves. We'd HAVE to sign another striker though.

I honestly think Middleton would be good at supporting for strikers.....late runs, striking from edge of box......he has that. What he doesn’t have just now is a skill level to get in behind packed defences......could be good from further out
 
We have wingers who can't cross a ball,its borderline pathetic.

As odd as it sounds I actually don't think that's the case. It's just that they SHOULDN'T be crossing most of the time.

There were a few crosses today that were technically "good" crosses but Lafferty's movement was poor or none of the THREE central midfielders were in the box ready to attack it. If there is only one striker in the box, with no space between the goalie and the last defender to run into and the opposing team have 3 or 4 huge defenders in the box what is the point in crossing it? There is none. You might get extremely lucky 1 out of 100 times but it's usually pointless.

We are so keen to "whip it in" when a more patient approach on the edge of the opponent's box should be taken. That keenness must come from the coaching staff I guess?
 
Your average CB in Scotland will love defending against crosses could do it all day long we just play into the hands of these guys.

Usually when teams play 3 up front it's a fluid front three who all score goals currently we only have Morelos that's scoring Candieas, Middleton, Kent and Grezda don't look like they are likely to chip in with 10-15 goals a game
 
Your average CB in Scotland will love defending against crosses could do it all day long we just play into the hands of these guys.

Usually when teams play 3 up front it's a fluid front three who all score goals currently we only have Morelos that's scoring Candieas, Middleton, Kent and Grezda don't look like they are likely to chip in with 10-15 goals a game

Your first part is infuriatingly true. We make utterly average Scottish CB plodders look good by playing to their strengths. Berra, McKenna, Halkett, Kusungu, Broadfoot to name a few. Cross comes in, they head it as far as they can, they take the applause from their fans and to the untrained eye (and stupid pundits) they look great. Most of them must be laughing their asses off after games. And frankly it's doing my nut in.
 
Good forwards find the space and get to the ball. Lafferty seems to be 3 yards away from every cross
 
Dangerous crosses come from quick ball at the bye line, turning the defence and giving the attacking players the advantage. Diagonal cross balls are easy to deal with for a good defender.
 
We never have anyone in the box for these crosses either.

Its an easy option just chipping in the box instead of actually playing quick passes and hitting a shot
 
Agree with OP. As I have stated in another thread, I very rarely see our wide players lift their heads before making a cross.

Our wide players are also too quick to get the cross in for my liking, as soon as they get a yard or beat an opponent they cross the ball with out looking up.

When teams sit deep usually the central defenders are in the correct positions and therefore will head away most crosses or are in a good / correct position for lower driven crosses.

I would like to see our wide players take an extra touch or two on the ball to get to the byline, usually when players get to the byline, central defenders lose their positioning and are forced back towards their goal line.
Then we need players to lift their heads and make the right pass / decision.

There is virtually no triangular passing, movement of players to create space, we seem very rigid.

Although Warburton had his issues, we created a lot of movement and used triangular passing with much lesser quality of players.

I would like to see the wide forwards play more on the inside, create the width with the fullbacks and use passing / movement between them two and a central midfield to open up defences. This has to be much quicker in the final third, than it is at present.
 
We looked more dangerous in first half with a few low crosses.

2nd half was appaling.

No variety. Nobody even ttied to do anything different
Looked to br playing to instructions.

Livingston away was the same.
 
A couple of years ago I had the choice of doing a masters in Performance/Data Analysis in Sport and decided, for better or worse, to become a high school teacher instead. But in the months leading up to this decision (as well as the many years working in football coaching) I read as much as I could about what data can tell us about football; things like which type of corner most often resulted in goals (it’s an in-swinger to the near post if you’re interested) etc etc

One thing that struck me hugely is the highly inefficient tactic, used for decades, of crossing the ball from a wide area into the penalty box. According to the data only 1 in 91.92 crosses leads to a goal.

With teams that play 4-3-3, as we do, their crossing will come from the fullback area, meaning these wide forwards can overload the box and give a greater chance of getting on the end of things. Most of the time though chances are created through quick passing and moving between the front three.

In a 4-4-2 formation crossing would come from both full backs (usually overlapping) and both wide forwards. You’d sacrifice midfield superiority for an extra man in the box attempting to get on the end of crosses coming from one or two wide men.

My biggest concern with Gerrard, as much as I love the guy still, isn’t the Worrall/Katic conundrum (which is utterly baffling) it’s that we continuously pump balls into the box, from open play, to one striker (usually the diminutive Morelos). We aren’t playing a fluid 4-3-3 but nor are we playing 4-4-2. We seem to play a very inefficient mix of both. And this isn't just a today problem, this has been the case since the beginning of the season.

We are a great counter attacking team (and a great backs against the wall team, hence the Europa run) but in the SPL we can't counter against teams that have little interest in attacking.

Today Tavernier, Candeias, Middleton, Halliday and Barisic threw cross after cross into the box to absolutely no effect whatsoever. The ball would be passed from centre half to full back, full back to wide forward who would cross either to a Dundee head or their keeper would catch it. It was soul destroying to watch.

Our central midfield area would usually be by-passed, we would very rarely play the ball into Lafferty’s feet and instead we played into their hands (and Livingston’s, Kilmarnock’s, Motherwell’s, Celtic’s etc). Even Hearts last week we got lucky. We made a painfully average centre half in Berra look decent purely because we gave him so much to head away.

It’s a long post and I’m sure there will be those that disagree but………surely Gerrard must realise this right? Do we really think that a new No10 is going to change it all?
Interesting and from using our own eyes very hard to dispute.
What we did do today was get to the byline often and have the chance to put a ball in either driven low or cut back to midfield runners entering the box unmarked.
However, we never did this, instead, we chipped it again into the air where it was ineffective and again defended easily.
As for cutbacks to midfield runners?
What midfield runners?

Too often we failed to have movement in the box, Lafferty as someone pointed out usually found his marker, and our midfield lacks the ability to make blind side runs into the box and of course, our wide players fail to hit balls into dangerous areas that are low and difficult to defend.

Of course had Lafferty's good goal stood, I believe we would have gone onto win that game by three or four as Dundee would surely have played a more open game, but that doesn't change the fact that we are not utilising the ball wisely enough or varying our approach to our advantage and too often falling into the one dimensional trap you so coherently describe.
 
The only time we got anywhere today was driving straight at them through the middle.
Candeias fouled, guy sent off, goal from the free kick.
Did we try it again? No. Not even once.
It was back to sideways, backwards, worked out wide, poor cross to their keeper. Repeat.
We didn't even learn from our own bit of success.
Mindnumbing.
 
Usually when teams play 3 up front it's a fluid front three who all score goals currently we only have Morelos that's scoring Candieas, Middleton, Kent and Grezda don't look like they are likely to chip in with 10-15 goals a game

If just one of these guys could contribute 10-15 goals a game we'd be running away with this league :D
 
A couple of years ago I had the choice of doing a masters in Performance/Data Analysis in Sport and decided, for better or worse, to become a high school teacher instead. But in the months leading up to this decision (as well as the many years working in football coaching) I read as much as I could about what data can tell us about football; things like which type of corner most often resulted in goals (it’s an in-swinger to the near post if you’re interested) etc etc

One thing that struck me hugely is the highly inefficient tactic, used for decades, of crossing the ball from a wide area into the penalty box. According to the data only 1 in 91.92 crosses leads to a goal.

With teams that play 4-3-3, as we do, their crossing will come from the fullback area, meaning these wide forwards can overload the box and give a greater chance of getting on the end of things. Most of the time though chances are created through quick passing and moving between the front three.

In a 4-4-2 formation crossing would come from both full backs (usually overlapping) and both wide forwards. You’d sacrifice midfield superiority for an extra man in the box attempting to get on the end of crosses coming from one or two wide men.

My biggest concern with Gerrard, as much as I love the guy still, isn’t the Worrall/Katic conundrum (which is utterly baffling) it’s that we continuously pump balls into the box, from open play, to one striker (usually the diminutive Morelos). We aren’t playing a fluid 4-3-3 but nor are we playing 4-4-2. We seem to play a very inefficient mix of both. And this isn't just a today problem, this has been the case since the beginning of the season.

We are a great counter attacking team (and a great backs against the wall team, hence the Europa run) but in the SPL we can't counter against teams that have little interest in attacking.

Today Tavernier, Candeias, Middleton, Halliday and Barisic threw cross after cross into the box to absolutely no effect whatsoever. The ball would be passed from centre half to full back, full back to wide forward who would cross either to a Dundee head or their keeper would catch it. It was soul destroying to watch.

Our central midfield area would usually be by-passed, we would very rarely play the ball into Lafferty’s feet and instead we played into their hands (and Livingston’s, Kilmarnock’s, Motherwell’s, Celtic’s etc). Even Hearts last week we got lucky. We made a painfully average centre half in Berra look decent purely because we gave him so much to head away.

It’s a long post and I’m sure there will be those that disagree but………surely Gerrard must realise this right? Do we really think that a new No10 is going to change it all?

Well put.

We build from the back.
We shuffle the ball about midfield.
Opposition retreat into their last third of the pitch.
We sbuffle the ball around the oppostion half.
Opposition retreat in and around their box.
We pass the ball out wide.
Ball is then lumped into a packed penalty box with 1 or 2 Rangers players surrounding by 7or 8 opposition players.

Madness. It has to stop and we must start taking shots from distance.
 
Well put.

We build from the back.
We shuffle the ball about midfield.
Opposition retreat into their last third of the pitch.
We sbuffle the ball around the oppostion half.
Opposition retreat in and around their box.
We pass the ball out wide.
Ball is then lumped into a packed penalty box with 1 or 2 Rangers players surrounding by 7or 8 opposition players.

Madness. It has to stop and we must start taking shots from distance.

Exactly, if you don't buy a ticket, then you won't win the lottery. Deflections, rebounds, ball falling to feet.
Considering SG was one of the best midfielders at drilling home a shot from outside the box, I can't believe he hasn't encouraged this from our midfield/wingers.

We need better direct play.
 
Great OP!

The bottom line, in my opinion, is SG does not know what his footballing philosophy is yet!

That sounds wanky but I believe it to be true. It will come though
 
Exactly, if you don't buy a ticket, then you won't win the lottery. Deflections, rebounds, ball falling to feet.
Considering SG was one of the best midfielders at drilling home a shot from outside the box, I can't believe he hasn't encouraged this from our midfield/wingers.

We need better direct play.

I must have said this about 50 million times on here. You take a shot it gets deflected, it goes out for a corner you get another chance, you tske a shot the goalie fluffs it another player may get a tap in, you take a shot you get a deflection it goes in and that still leaves the bulls eye of you actually score from taking a shot.
 
A couple of years ago I had the choice of doing a masters in Performance/Data Analysis in Sport and decided, for better or worse, to become a high school teacher instead. But in the months leading up to this decision (as well as the many years working in football coaching) I read as much as I could about what data can tell us about football; things like which type of corner most often resulted in goals (it’s an in-swinger to the near post if you’re interested) etc etc

One thing that struck me hugely is the highly inefficient tactic, used for decades, of crossing the ball from a wide area into the penalty box. According to the data only 1 in 91.92 crosses leads to a goal.

With teams that play 4-3-3, as we do, their crossing will come from the fullback area, meaning these wide forwards can overload the box and give a greater chance of getting on the end of things. Most of the time though chances are created through quick passing and moving between the front three.

In a 4-4-2 formation crossing would come from both full backs (usually overlapping) and both wide forwards. You’d sacrifice midfield superiority for an extra man in the box attempting to get on the end of crosses coming from one or two wide men.

My biggest concern with Gerrard, as much as I love the guy still, isn’t the Worrall/Katic conundrum (which is utterly baffling) it’s that we continuously pump balls into the box, from open play, to one striker (usually the diminutive Morelos). We aren’t playing a fluid 4-3-3 but nor are we playing 4-4-2. We seem to play a very inefficient mix of both. And this isn't just a today problem, this has been the case since the beginning of the season.

We are a great counter attacking team (and a great backs against the wall team, hence the Europa run) but in the SPL we can't counter against teams that have little interest in attacking.

Today Tavernier, Candeias, Middleton, Halliday and Barisic threw cross after cross into the box to absolutely no effect whatsoever. The ball would be passed from centre half to full back, full back to wide forward who would cross either to a Dundee head or their keeper would catch it. It was soul destroying to watch.

Our central midfield area would usually be by-passed, we would very rarely play the ball into Lafferty’s feet and instead we played into their hands (and Livingston’s, Kilmarnock’s, Motherwell’s, Celtic’s etc). Even Hearts last week we got lucky. We made a painfully average centre half in Berra look decent purely because we gave him so much to head away.

It’s a long post and I’m sure there will be those that disagree but………surely Gerrard must realise this right? Do we really think that a new No10 is going to change it all?

This is an interesting article from Opta that backs your points up.

https://www.optasportspro.com/about/optapro-blog/posts/2017/blog-the-art-of-crossing/mbuBlogsyPost


This sets off alarm bells...

“Liverpool produced 787 crosses in the 2011-12 season – far more than any other team - for a meagre total of four assisted goals.

As I’ve written here, the problem was likely that the overemphasis on crossing led to crosses being delivered too early; Liverpool’s crosses originated about three metres further up the pitch than other Premier League teams.

Then again, Liverpool’s style might just have been too predictable. It’s much easier to defend if you know how your opponent is going to play, and common sense suggests it’s good to have a variety of attacking options. If you never cross the ball, or never play through the centre, your opponents have a better chance of nullifying you. So although crossing in isolation may not be the most effective way to score goals, I think it’s important to keep it in the mix.“
 
Why not one-twos through the middle of the opponents defence ? My seat at Ibrox gives me a birds eye view of the interaction between Tavernier and Candeias, and the plethora of crosses, which usually ends in nothing.

At least vary it, Rangers.
I might be wrong, but it sometimes seems as if Candeias is predictable to an opposition. He's direct, but predictably so, if I can put it that way; what he doesn't do is vary his play. It's hard to criticise him for being direct, especially when the problem for our team is that it isn't direct enough, but Candeias has no variety to what he does that I can see, and if we have a slender lead his lack of ability in keeping the ball appears to me to put pressure on the midfield at times. I agree with your main point, because we use width too much at times, and again today we looked to be doing that. Jamie Murphy was the perfect wide man for this team, because he can go wide, he can cut inside, and he can play the reverse pass and bring others to the play inside; Candeias is not the player to do those things that I can see. I'd say losing Murphy is perhaps the most frustrating thing to have happened to our team this season.
 
It would be fine if we still had a Hateley or Derek Johnstone playing with us, but although he is 7 foot Lafferty rarely scores from towering headers from memory most of his headed goals are from stooping down.

All Wednesday I was screaming for us to get McAuley, Goldson or both up top last 15 and hope for a knock down. They were doing nothing with the ball at their feet trying to build from the back. Today was a similar pattern, from the start of the second half I was screaming for us to take short corners. Try something different, get into a position of having a shot.
 
Defenders hate players, especially quick and intelligent players, running directly at them from midfield. It forces defenders into mistakes and fouls. We don't have such a player, so rely on wide men lumping in endless, aimless crosses floating into the opposing keeper's hands.
 
You've went to a lot of trouble to describe our one dimensional play this week. It's well put but the question really is, why didn't we change tactics?

As you say it was soul destroying. It makes no sense either without a target man. AM is a good striker but his heading is poor. As for Lafferty today? Useless in the air and on the deck. We'd have been better keeping Miller if we couldn't sign a backup striker and/or target man.

BTW I will admit I thought Lafferty had improved over the years (when we went after him). I was wrong, he's exactly the same.
 
Last edited:
You've went to a lot of trouble to describe our one dimensional play this week. It's well put but the question really is, why didn't we change tactics?

As you say it was soul destroying. It makes no sense either without a target man. AM is a good striker but his hearing is poor. As for Lafferty today? Useless in the air and on the deck. We'd have been better keeping Miller if we couldn't sign a backup striker and/or target man.

BTW I will admit I thought Lafferty had improved over the years (when we went after him). I was wrong, he's exactly the same.

Miller caused our defenders more problems with his movement today than we caused defenders today and Wednesday night combined.
 
We are so passive when the balls are crossed in. Nobody tho as themselves at balls in the box and seem incapable of winning any second balls from the crosses.
 
Excellent post.

We really have no clue (or ability) to break down poorer teams who are happy to sit in, especially away from home. Off the top of my head Motherwell, Hamilton, Livingston, St Mirren and Dundee we all struggled against.

Its just get it wide and throw it into the box. Time and again. No creativity, no intricate passing, no link up play. Just cross after cross.
 
We must have put in 20 crosses today.

Can't think of any that found our player (Lafferty goal aside).

Dundee allowed us to play it wide and crowded the centre of the pitch.

There’s two sides to that. Some of the crosses were poor, but some of them were excellent and our other attackers didn’t make the correct run or read the situation correctly.

I can think of two where Grezda and Candeias pulled the ball back into a dangerous area, and all our other attackers just ran toward goal. A player like Morelos would have dropped off for the deeper cross.
 
There’s two sides to that. Some of the crosses were poor, but some of them were excellent and our other attackers didn’t make the correct run or read the situation correctly.

I can think of two where Grezda and Candeias pulled the ball back into a dangerous area, and all our other attackers just ran toward goal. A player like Morelos would have dropped off for the deeper cross.

There were also 2 chances to cut the ball back to Grezda in the second half, within seconds of each other, that Tavernier and Jack failed to look up for.

It's interesting to look at our crossing stats. The games in which we've struggled have seen far more crosses than our average. And yet you can easily identify a number of goals we've scored from them this season.
 
Need a target man altho Fredo does get a few headers he aint no Hateley.. at home especially we will have most of the play so a 3-5-2 or 4-4-2 is a must imo away from home again in most games we will have the majority of the play but no point lumping crosses in the box for fun without a target man..
 
Barisic put some excellent balls in yesterday, but we have no-one to get on the end of them, Lafferty is 6ft 4” but about 3ft 0” when going to head a ball.
 
There were also 2 chances to cut the ball back to Grezda in the second half, within seconds of each other, that Tavernier and Jack failed to look up for.

It's interesting to look at our crossing stats. The games in which we've struggled have seen far more crosses than our average. And yet you can easily identify a number of goals we've scored from them this season.

Which smacks of desperation really doesn't it. The players have no plan B when trying to break down stubborn defences. If it's obvious to us watching then you would assume that Gerrard can see it. We've been saying, the boss included, that we struggle to break defensive teams down. But nothing has been done about it! No plan B whatsoever.

In fact, as you've put, when we are experiencing such a struggle we pump MORE balls into the box in some kind of blind hope/panic.
 
Back
Top