The numbers that help his case

When you look at the raw stats there's a reason he's still in the side. 0.17 assists per 90 and 0.12 expected assists per 90 show he can produce the odd end product. An 83% pass succession rate suggests he's reliable on the ball. Defensively he wins a lot of ground duels — 6.97 per 90 with about a 57% success — and averages over three tackles a game, so he puts his body on the line and competes. Four assists last year isn’t terrible, especially when three of those came in one game; moments of quality do pop up.

Where he actually lets us down

But the negatives are plain to see. He's poor at intercepting passes and doesn't make that many overall defensive contributions beyond the basics, so the reading of the game isn't elite. Crossing is a real weakness; we need better deliveries from our wide players to stretch defences. He struggles to create chances — averaging about one chance created per 90 — is a poor dribbler and offers little in the air. The long ball quality is inconsistent, which matters when we want quick transitions or relief under pressure.

Do we need to move on?

Short answer: maybe. I get why he's been relied on; he's dependable in certain areas. But modern full-backs are expected to do more than tidy passing and tackle stats. We should be looking for someone who keeps the defensive grit but adds better crossing, more creativity in the final third, a reliable long pass and a stronger aerial presence. If that player is out there, then yes, it's worth upgrading. If not, Tav still does a job — just not the full package I'd want going forward.

Been there before

Look around and you see it. Some lads who later became top class had rough starts. That doesn’t make the final product any less impressive. You can list Amoruso, Gough, Butcher, Moore, even Frank de Boer as players who had clear faults early on. Rio Ferdinand had spells at West Ham and Leeds that worried people, and then he tightened up and became the defender everyone feared. Names like Carragher, Hyypia and Ledley King didn’t suddenly appear fully formed. Justice arrives with experience.

Why defenders bloom late

Defending is as much about reading and positioning as it is about speed and strength. Young centre-backs make big mistakes because they haven’t yet learned when to step, when to sit, when to smash a tackle and when to shepherd play wide. Between 20 and 27 players are still finding their role. Once they get a consistent run at centre half, the harder edges get sanded off. Confidence grows, the body settles, and the eye for danger improves.

Why Djiga looks different

Djiga feels like one of those raw prospects who already has the right tools — size, aggression, and a willingness to learn. He’s not flawless, far from it, but that’s fine. We’ve seen players move from awkward youngsters to monsters. Woodgate, Johnny Evans, Kompany — all had phases where they were erratic or played out of position in their teens and early twenties. The important thing is progression. If Djiga keeps improving, by 25 plus he could be the kind of centre-half you build a team around.

Truth is, patience pays. Fans want instant perfect centre-backs, but development doesn’t work like that. Back the kid, watch him learn, and enjoy the ride when the inevitable solidity arrives. I’ve put my name on Djiga — like I did once with Chermiti — because I’ve seen this pattern before and I see the signs now.

Why he feels like an old-school eight

There’s something proper box-to-box about him. He keeps the ball moving with short combinations, finds 1-2s even when crowded, and doesn’t hang back waiting to be the specialist. That kind of all-round midfield play used to be common, but these days most youngsters are pigeonholed as a 6, an 8 or a 10. Dahl gives you a bit of everything — link-up play, carrying the ball, and a presence in both halves.

Yaya vibes, with a defensive edge

Comparing him to Yaya Touré isn’t daft — not a carbon copy, but you can see the combination of drive and attacking intent. Defensively he’s not one-dimensional either; there are moments that remind me of a more mobile, ball-oriented defensive midfielder, the sort who can close gaps and cover ground. So you get Yaya-like attacking bursts with a touch of defensive solidity too. Declan Rice is the modern shorthand for that mixed profile, but the user hit the nail on the head by saying Yaya is a closer match stylistically.

Where he might fit and what to expect

I don’t really see him as a full-time number 10. In tougher games, especially in Europe, he might be asked to press higher and slot in ahead of two holding midfielders to disrupt opposition build-up. That pressing instinct stood out in the clips — he likes to close spaces and force turnovers high up the pitch. Whether his team structure is Klopp-style or just aggressive in nature, the result is the same: he looks comfortable carrying out a high work-rate role.

All that said, this is based on a few highlights. Still, for fans who miss the old-school eight, Dahl is a refreshing sight. Worth bringing it up on Rangers News Views and seeing what others spotted.

Why double figures matter

Double figures are the currency of interest. It’s not just raw numbers either — who scores, how they score, and when they score matters. Are the goals tap-ins from penalties? Are they coming against the big teams? Do they arrive in big moments, or in empty fixtures late in the season? Clubs watching will factor all that in, but regular league goals from a young forward will still turn heads.

Chermiti and the bigger-picture route

We’ve been talking about Chermiti because he represents the profile that moves on. The claim I heard was that if he keeps chipping in with a dozen or so league goals and adds a decent European showing, the bigger leagues will come knocking. Add in international recognition — the sort of full Portugal call-up people mentioned — and it becomes even harder for Rangers to hold on. That doesn’t mean it will happen, but you can see why the expectation is there.

What the market values

Look at the market over the last few seasons: clubs are prepared to pay for forwards who show they can finish consistently at a young age. The average goals return in many top leagues doesn’t always hit huge totals, so scouts focus on 10–15 league goals as a sign of real potential. Penalties help the totals, sure, but scouts will sift through the numbers and the footage.

Truth is, the fans’ 20-goal ideal is understandable — it’s a nice headline. But from a club-building and scouting angle, regular double figures plus a bit of European pedigree is often the trigger for a sale. If Chermiti keeps doing that, don’t be surprised if interest follows.

Why 4-4-2 makes sense

With two up front you get clearer channels and more natural overloads down the flanks. It asks our wide players to work the touchline and lets midfielders arrive late into the box. We look sharper in transition with that shape — quicker from back to front and harder to isolate when defending. To be fair, it isn’t a cure-all but it plays to our strengths: directness, work-rate and a simple supply line for the forwards.

Picking the midfield and attacking three

Raskin comes out of this discussion well. I agree he’s our best attacking midfielder right now — his movement and link play feel more effective than Diomande’s, and, put bluntly, Diomande hasn’t convinced enough lately. Skov? If he’s been indifferent on the pitch, that’s a worry. We need energy and application in that midfield sector for 4-4-2 to function properly.

How I’d set us up for the run-in

Your proposed eleven makes sense. Butland in goal, a back four with pace and physicality, a midfield double that can protect the backline and feed Raskin, plus two forwards who can finish and press. Miovski and Chermiti as the front two gives different priorities — one to hold and one to run in behind — which is exactly what a simple 4-4-2 should give us.

Look, criticism of Rohl is fine when decisions don’t work. But managers adapt and that HT tweak showed he can. Now we need consistency from the manager and the players. Stick to the 4-4-2, pick the right lads, and make sure everyone runs their channels. That’s our best chance for a strong finish.

The preseason story

That sequence matters. Being told you can leave and then suddenly being recalled leaves you in an odd place mentally and physically. It’s not an excuse, more an explanation of context. He’d been preparing alone, trying to look after himself away from the structured sessions at Ibrox. When he returned he wasn’t carrying extra weight; he’d done a decent job on his own, which surprised a few of us in a good way.

Fitness: a few weeks behind, not ruined

To be fair, he was a few weeks behind the squad in sharpness. That’s obvious — you can’t replicate team sessions and intensity entirely solo. Martin called that out repeatedly, and rightly so from a manager’s point of view. But being behind in fitness and being overweight are not the same thing. He needed time to catch up; that’s what preseason is for. I saw the work he was doing, and it wasn’t the picture some people painted.

On the substitute incident and how it reads

We’ve gone over the reasons why he refused to come on as a sub. I personally think there was an element of orchestration there from Martin, but that’s my view from inside. Others will disagree, and they’re entitled to. The important point is this: the simple claim that he turned up late and out of shape? That isn’t how I saw it. He came back when recalled and, for someone who’d been training alone, he was in reasonable condition.

Ultimately this isn’t about piling in on individuals. It’s about being honest about what actually happened and giving the lad — and the manager’s methods — a fair crack of the whip when assessing the situation.

Respect, dressing rooms and reality

To be fair, the dressing-room dynamic at elite clubs is its own animal. The Old Firm, Premier League, La Liga, Bundesliga — they all have enormous egos, big personalities and a media spotlight that never lets up. People argue that a head coach needs absolute authority and the players' buy-in from day one. Some fans believe a female head coach would struggle to command that respect in a men's environment, and they find that prospect hard to accept.

Now, that is an opinion, not a fact. Plenty of women are brilliant coaches and tactically sharp. My point is about perceived feasibility and human nature in elite men's football, not a blanket statement about ability.

Roles where it does make sense

I’m much more comfortable with women in coaching teams — on the training ground, as specialists, as part of the backroom staff. That's where their expertise can shine without the same level of boardroom and dressing-room politics that come with the top job. Coaching is a team endeavour and diverse perspectives can lift everyone.

And when it comes to the women’s game, absolutely — women should be central. Men and women coaching their respective teams is sensible because the games do have different dynamics and pathways, and experience in one doesn’t automatically translate to instant success in the other.

Broadcasting, inclusivity and standards

There’s a bit of a gripe among fans about broadcasters prioritising diversity over experience at times. I’m fine with more voices being heard — to be honest, I like Alex Scott on screen — but there’s a worry that some appointments feel tokenistic or driven by optics rather than genuine expertise. That breeds resentment and it’s not good for the game.

Truth is, clubs and media should pick the best person for the job. If the best person happens to be female, great. If someone is on merit, people will accept them quicker. The debate shouldn’t be binary; it should be about competence, fit and trust. As a Rangers supporter, I want decisions that make the team stronger and the coverage sharper, not culture points scored for appearance’s sake.

Rangers News Views or no, these are sensible questions fans are asking and they’re worth having properly, without shouting or shutting down the conversation.

Who looks set to leave

The list from the post is stark and simple: Tav (OOC), Rice (OOC), Cornelius (loan), Meghoma (loan), Djiga (loan), Aarons (loan), ASO (loan), Moore (loan) and Wright (OOC). That’s eight first‑team names, and that’s before you even consider the likes of Raskin, Diomande or Fernandez if any of them are sold. The point isn’t to be alarmist, it’s to be realistic — there will be gaps to fill.

Why this isn’t just another window

If we do finish strongly and get into Europe — and if the board want to consolidate rather than paper over cracks — this summer can’t be about quantity. We can’t just sign bodies to make up numbers. The transfer window is always messy, but a World Cup year makes it worse: clubs hold out, valuations shift and negotiations drag. That makes planning and prioritising even more important.

What we should be looking for

First, cover the obvious gaps with quality rather than cheap fixes. A mix of experienced heads and a couple of promising young signings is the sensible route. Second, be honest about who stays and who doesn’t — clarity helps the dressing room and the recruitment team. Finally, stick to structure: identify positions that need long‑term solutions and don’t waste resources chasing stopgaps. Rangers News Views will be watching how smart the business is.

It’s daunting, sure, but it’s also a chance to sharpen the squad. We won’t be bored this summer, that’s for certain. The hope is whoever’s doing the deals remembers that success next season starts with making the right calls now.

Two up top — when it fits. To be fair, it’s not a magic switch. Against a team that sits in and defends deep it would be a different story. The difference on Saturday was that Falkirk were open and we attacked in waves. That let the wide men deliver decent crosses and gave the strikers options to occupy defenders rather than being isolated. The risk, as you say, is whether our midfield can cope. If that engine room gets overrun, the system quickly looks shaky.

Sort the wide positions. Our delivery from wide was a real positive — put the ball into the box and something happens. What we need now is clarity over where players like Gassama fit. His two 45s felt Jekyll and Hyde: one half useful, the other loose. We need to settle players into roles so the supply line is consistent. When the crosses are accurate and the midfield times its runs, the attack looks a lot less frantic and far more effective.

Keep the intensity for the run-in. None of the top three are cruising just now; all look beatable and I still expect points to be dropped. That makes it even more important we keep the level shown in the second half. High intensity, accurate crosses into the area where our strikers are stationed, and midfielders arriving with intent — that’s the blueprint. If we can string together that kind of performance for 450 min or more, we give ourselves a proper shot at lifting the title.

In short: two up top works when the structure behind it is disciplined. Nail the wide delivery, fix positions like Gassama’s, and keep that second-half hunger. Simple to say, hard to do — but you can see why it might be our way forward.

Where to start looking

First stop, the obvious places: YouTube and Facebook. A lot of old supporters' recordings have been uploaded by fans over the years. Try searching with the exact phrase you remember in quotes and include players' names: Souness, Ally, Drinkell and any spellings you recall. eBay and other auction sites sometimes have old cassette tapes and VHS from the eighties and nineties — worth checking every few weeks.

Ask the fan community

Post the snippet you remember in Rangers support groups and forums. Someone's bound to have the tape lying in a loft or know a mate who recorded matchday chants. Local supporters' clubs, old fanzines or Ibrox regulars sometimes keep compilations. Don’t be shy — include a short extract of the lyrics when you ask; that immediately jogs memories.

Other avenues and tips

If you're looking for a physical copy, keep an eye on second-hand shops and online classifieds. Search variations of the names — nicknames, misspellings — because chants were rarely written down formally. If you find any leads, try to get a digital copy; tapes degrade fast. And while you’re digging, share the little gems you find: 'Sandy Sandy', 'Willie Johnston' and 'Will Woodburn' are the kind of songs folk love to hear again. To be fair, half the fun is the chase — but every so often someone surfaces with a box of old tapes and we all win.

If you want, I can help tidy your search text for posting in groups so it’s easy for people to spot. Good luck — hope that Souness chant turns up and the dust finally gets blown off that tape.

What was reported and why it matters

The gist from posts around the place is straightforward — talk of blood alcohol well over the limit, CCTV showing erratic driving, and the car ending up on its side. You don't need me to spell out why that sits badly with supporters. We expect our players to behave better off the park than a random stranger on the street, because they are visible, they have influence, and their actions reflect on the club.

Role model responsibilities aren't optional

To be fair, people make mistakes. The difference is just how public those mistakes are when you're a Rangers player. The standard for a public figure is higher. Young fans see you on the pitch and on social media and, rightly or wrongly, they copy behaviour. So it's reasonable for fans to say they don't want someone they consider a risk or an example of poor choices to be front and centre in the team until things are sorted.

What would make a second chance acceptable?

You're not asking for the impossible. The conditions set out are clear: a public statement if there is a conviction, an apology, owning up and showing genuine remorse. That seems fair. It isn't about witch hunts or career-enders by default. It's about responsibility and accountability. If the player faces legal consequences, showing contrition and accepting responsibility is the minimum you can expect before fans can begin to forgive and move on.

In the end this is about trust. Supporters will always give chances, but they want to know a player understands the damage done and will act to put it right. That is a reasonable demand from anyone proud to wear the badge.

Why this kind of window makes sense

To be fair, we don't need headline-grabbing, big-money names to close gaps. What we do need is depth, competition and players who fit the shape Danny wants to impose. That means two reliable full-backs, creative midfield options and midfielders who can boss transitions and keep the tempo up. These picks tick those boxes and sit in price brackets that feel achievable if the budget allows.

The shortlist and how they fit

Fabio Fehr – 26, right-back (FC Thun) | £2–5m. A fairly seasoned option at club level and the kind of low-risk signing that brings immediate competition to the right side. Adds physicality and know-how without a huge fee.

Elliot Stroud – 23, left-back (Mjällby) | £4–7m. Younger, with room to grow. Covers the left and offers the kind of two-way game we like: solid defensively but able to help the wide play. A sensible buy if we want a long-term option.

Toni Fruk – 25, attacking midfielder (Rijeka) | £9–13m. A proper creator at club level, and the sort who could free up other forwards with clever movement and passing. He fits the profile of a player who can add variety to our attacking patterns.

Luka Stojković – 22, midfielder (Dinamo Zagreb) | £8–15m. Still young but with a higher ceiling. The kind of signing that gives energy in central areas and can be schooled into whatever midfield role is needed — defensive cover or progressive ball-carrier.

Matteo Di Giusto – 25, attacking midfielder (Luzern) | £6–9m. A tidy, presentable option off the front line. Could slot into systems where we need creativity between the lines without having to rebuild the side around him.

Rokas Pukštas – 21, midfielder (Hajduk Split) | £6–8m. Youthful, adaptable and a potential long-term asset. If the scouting team has identified the traits we want, he could be one for the future and for now to provide rotation.

Final thoughts — realistic and useful

None of these are blockbuster names, but that is the point. They are plausible signings who add balance, depth and different options in midfield and full-back. If Champions League money arrives, this sort of recruitment — careful, targeted and affordable — is how we move forward without risking flux. What do others think? Which of these would you prioritise?

Context and fairness

To be fair, not every situation is cut and dried. Owning up matters. Accountability matters more. You said he called the police, and that he didn’t hide — I think that shows a degree of responsibility. That doesn’t erase the mistake, though. It should count when people talk about appropriate sanctions, but it isn’t a get-out-of-jail-free card.

Justice and compassion aren’t opposed. They should thread together. Punishment should be proportionate, and where there are underlying problems we should want the player to get help, not just be written off. You can want both: consequences and a route to put things right.

Double standards and rivalries

Now the hypothetical about a Celtic player — say Callum McGregor — is a useful litmus test. If opinions flip when the badge changes, that’s revealing. Fans will always defend their own more readily. It’s human. But if we’re serious about standards, the club and supporters should be consistent. Same behaviour, same expectation, whoever’s involved.

We all know tribalism colours debates. That doesn’t excuse it. Pointing out double standards isn’t sanctimony; it’s asking for honesty about where our lines are drawn.

Where I stand

I agree with the original point: it was wrong, and the player needs to take ownership of whatever punishment follows. If there are deeper issues, then support should be there — therapy, counselling, time to sort things out. If it was a one-off error of judgment, accept the consequence and move on. Everyone deserves a second chance, but only after they’ve acknowledged the hurt or risk their action caused.

In the end, fans will have their takes. Mine is straightforward: hold players to a standard, be fair and consistent, and don’t throw people away if they show real contrition and are getting the help they need.

Szalai Gábor: calm, left-sided centre-back

On the face of it Gábor is the kind of left-sided centre-back who reads the game well. Timing on challenges stood out, he rarely lunges in and looks comfortable stepping across to cover. You can see why he avoids bookings; positioning mostly does the heavy lifting. He was also involved in set-piece routines, often lingering at the edge of the six-yard area to create movement, and popped up with a composed finish in the fixture against MTK. Hard to compare directly to Luke Graham from a couple of clips, but Gábor felt mature and composed for his age.

Mihály Kata: energetic midfielder with good delivery

Kata is an engine in midfield. Constantly moving, pressing opponents and offering options on the right channels. His delivery is tidy, with neat passes and crosses that give the forwards something to aim at. He has picked up a few yellow cards, but a lot of that reads as committed defending in a team that has struggled this season rather than careless tackling. When MTK are exposed he looks lively, but the broader context matters.

What it might mean for Rangers fans

Short version: both players showed traits worth noting but there’s a gap between watching one or two matches and making firm judgements. Gábor brings positional sense and set-piece value, Kata brings energy and service. Think about adaptation, our tempo, the press and the physical side of the game could be tests. This isn’t transfer talk, just scouting notes from pitchside. If anything, it’s nice to have some fresh names on the radar and a few concrete impressions to pass on.

One thing I noticed is how Gábor organises the back line when opponents sped up play; he stays calm and tries to funnel attacks wide rather than gamble in the middle. Kata, meanwhile, showed the sort of work-rate that helps a midfield press but will need end product improvements to stand out in a more demanding league. Small details like those will decide whether these types can step up.

If anyone else was at either game, I’m keen to hear additional takes, especially on how they cope under sustained pressure. Hopefully useful background at least.

Comparisons that matter

We can learn a lot from recent transfers. Martin Baturina and Peter Sucic moved for 18 and 14 respectively, both younger and with more hype at the time, so it is fair they attracted bigger fees. Going back a season, Sutalo reportedly went to Ajax for a figure around 20. On the flip side, Luka Ivanecic, the same age as Dion, moved for about 7 to Feyenoord in that window. Dion's own history is relevant too: a move to Germany for 3 million, a couple of seasons split between Germany and a loan in Austria, then a transfer to Zagreb for 4 million. Taken together, those numbers point to a step up from his previous fee, but not necessarily into the top tier of youngster sales.

Why the price could move

Transfer values are rarely simple sums. Age, position, perceived ceiling, sell-on clauses and how urgently Dinamo need to sell all influence offers. Performances in big matches and recent form lift prices quickly. The buying club matters too; a suitor from one of the top leagues will typically pay more than a mid-table side elsewhere. Timing also counts, summer windows differ from January. So while 10 million is a fair midpoint, it could be nudged up or down depending on those variables.

What it means for fans

For Rangers fans looking in, the practical point is simple. If Dion goes for around 10 million, that is a decent return relative to his previous fees and to what Dinamo paid. It gives the selling club flexibility to reinvest. To be fair, none of this is guaranteed, but using recent transfers as a yardstick gives a measured estimate rather than wild guesswork. Truth is, the market will do the talking, but thinking of Dion in an 8 to 12 million bracket feels about right.

What this really means on the pitch and in the bank

Let’s be clear: the claim about five decisions and a loss of ten points comes from a fan report and should be treated as that. But even the idea of costly VAR errors cuts to the heart of why supporters care — results shape leagues, and results shape revenue. Missing out on automatic Champions League entry would hit the club hard, not just in pride but in transfer budgets, wages and the sort of long-term planning you need to keep us competitive.

Would new owners take it further?

One of the attractive things about having serious investment is the ability to challenge things that feel wrong. Big sporting businesses don’t tend to tolerate sloppy governance if it affects the bottom line. Of course, this isn’t a guarantee. The owners have options: private discussions with the SPFL and SFA, public statements, or legal avenues if there’s a clear procedural failing. What they do will depend on how clear-cut the evidence is, and whether anyone’s willing to make a formal complaint.

What fans should expect next

Supporters should temper anger with patience. Push for transparency — demand a full explanation of how those VAR mistakes happened and what safeguards will be introduced. Ask questions at trust meetings, read official statements, and expect the board to at least be asking the same uncomfortable questions you are. Ultimately this is about protecting the club’s sporting integrity and financial future. If our owners think the same, then maybe this becomes an issue that’s actually tackled properly.

How the co-efficient tells a story

It’s easy to cherry-pick one awful European run and paint the whole era as collapse. The reality is different. Over the past five seasons Rangers have contributed heavily to Scotland’s co-efficient haul — more than most of the other clubs put together, apart from Celtic. That’s not to big up ourselves for the sake of it, but it is context. Consistent nights in Europe, the draws we took and the ties we won have mattered for the country as well as the club.

Scottish teams have suffered too

Look around the league and you’ll see low points for others as well. Hearts, Aberdeen, Hibs, Dundee United, Kilmarnock, St Mirren, Motherwell and St Johnstone have all had their European struggles in recent seasons. Celtic have also had seasons where Europe has been brutally short. That doesn’t excuse our current failings, but it does show that Scottish clubs generally have fragile European records and the occasional hammerings are widespread.

Pick yourselves up and go again

So where does that leave Rangers? We need to be clear eyed. This campaign was a mess and we’ll be judged for it, but history across five seasons shows we’ve done more good than bad. The job now is to regroup, sort the squad and attitude, and try again. The Champions League might be a step too far next season if the draw and form don’t go our way, but that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t aim high. Truth is, we’ve climbed from worse positions before — we can recover, but it needs steady planning rather than panic.

To be fair, the supporters know what EL nights at Ibrox felt like and why those memories matter. Time to channel that and get back to doing the basics right on the pitch.

Relegation’s long shadow

Don’t underestimate how much a relegation can ripple across a whole league. When our own coefficient points fell it wasn’t just a dent on the club ledger, it altered the routes every Scottish team must take in Europe. Earlier qualifying rounds mean more ties, more travel, and greater chance of being knocked out before the money and momentum of group football arrives. You can see why that would slow down the progress of clubs who might otherwise have pushed on.

Who’s actually pulling their weight?

We’ve had a run of seasons where Rangers have been the club most regularly carrying Scotland’s hopes in Europe. Other teams have benefited from our hard work but haven’t consistently matched it. That’s not boasting, it’s observation, if other clubs stepped up more often the whole league would look healthier in the coefficients and everyone would get easier access to the group stages.

Look beyond blaming the club

Yes, our own board mistakes played a part in the mess we had to clean up, but constantly pointing fingers at Rangers misses the bigger picture. Maybe it’s time the other “big” club in the country actually delivered some points instead of acting surprised when the country’s standing still needs Ranger boots on the ground. As Aphe said earlier, we’ve been carrying the torch; let’s have others carry it too.

It’s not about glory-seeking. It’s about fairness and perspective. Stop rewriting history to suit a narrative that lets everyone else off the hook while we get blamed for something we had to fix.

Real change won't come from social media hot takes. It will come when clubs prioritise Europe, invest sensibly, and managers treat European ties with the same focus as domestic big games. That means fewer late comebacks, better squad rotation, and treating qualifiers as finals. If others step up, the coefficient burden eases and Scottish football benefits.

Why the Martin question carries a shadow

To be fair, the upside case for Martin is obvious: better cohesion, a run of form, belief returning and the points follow. But belief doesn’t appear out of nowhere. When players are frayed, relationships are strained and the air in the dressing room isn’t right, the manager’s job becomes twice as hard. That’s what worries me looking back — there were signs of a malaise and, for all the hypotheticals, I couldn’t honestly picture a neat recovery without changes behind the scenes.

Rohl gave us a reset, not a miracle cure

Equally, starting with Rohl wouldn’t have guaranteed a straight line to success. We dropped points under him against the likes of Motherwell, Livi and Celtic, so you can’t simply flip every draw into a win and pretend the season sorts itself. Rohl’s arrival offered a reset — a chance to change the tone, to try different ideas and to lift standards. That matters. It doesn’t erase the mistakes or the dropped points, but it does give a platform.

What matters now: focus on the last six

The important bit now is the final six games. Tiny margins decide how the season reads in the end. It’s about tempo, focus, pressing for 90 minutes and unity off the pitch as much as on it. We should keep expectations realistic — nothing is fixed — but there’s a clear opportunity to finish stronger than where we were. I’d rather be watching these next fixtures with a chance than wondering where we’d have ended up stuck in the same malaise. Let’s see how the group responds.

What's the backdoor spot?

There’s a reserved entry for the previous season’s Champions League winner to defend the trophy. If that winner already qualifies through their domestic league, that reserved slot doesn’t vanish — it gets reallocated. The slot can pass to the highest coefficient-ranked champion from leagues that don’t have direct Champions League group stage places. That’s where clubs from Greece, Serbia, Scotland, Norway, Denmark, Croatia and the like come into play.

Why Olympiacos matter

Olympiacos currently sit ahead of us among those eligible teams. They finished their UCL group strongly and picked up what they needed, while our European campaign added far fewer coefficient points. That combination pushed the Greeks above us in the pecking order, so if they win the Greek title they’d be the obvious candidate to take that reallocated slot — which is the outcome we must avoid.

Why Shakhtar are still dangerous

Shakhtar may be behind Rangers in the coefficients for now, but they’re still playing in the Conference League and can add points via wins, draws and progressing rounds. It would take a decent run for them to overtake us this season, but it’s not impossible. That’s why many of us want them knocked out as soon as possible: to reduce the number of clubs who can mathematically leapfrog us.

What we want — and why Celtic and Hearts aren’t a worry

Put simply: keep it between us and Olympiacos. Celtic and Hearts are well behind in the coefficients, so even if one of them wins the league they wouldn’t be the beneficiaries of this particular reallocation. It’s a bit of a numbers game rather than passion — but the outcome matters. We should be watching other countries’ leagues and European ties with the same interest we watch our own fixtures.

To be fair, it’s a dull sort of hope — wanting another side out of Europe — but that’s football maths for you. Keep an eye on Shakhtar’s progress and the Greek title race; both could decide whether Rangers get that very useful backdoor into next season’s Champions League.

Why the timing is daft

The split schedule is odd enough, but putting those three post-split meetings so late — when titles and European places are still in the balance — invites awkward scenarios. If those ties had been in the first three rounds after the split, teams would be playing with clearer motives and less chance of someone else’s fate being decided by a match between two sides with nothing to play for.

How it could affect Rangers

Imagine the simple possibility: Celtic have no chance of catching us, but Hearts do, or the opposite where Hearts can still finish top. If Hearts go into the game needing points and Celtic can’t move up, motivation will be all on one side. That can leave Rangers in the strange position of benefiting — or being disadvantaged — from a result we had no hand in. The integrity of the final table feels like it should be beyond that sort of influence.

What fans expect and why it matters

To be fair, these fixtures are never going to be perfect for every fan. But the leagues should try to avoid creating a situation where one club’s match effectively hands another a Champions League lifeline. The truth is European money matters to clubs and to the competition as a whole; scheduling that risks the perception of unfairness is poor planning. If the roles were reversed, I’d be gutted to see a fixture handed to us on a plate because of someone else’s game. I’d also be honest — plenty of fans say they’d want our lot to do whatever it took to stop Celtic getting that money. That conversation’s for another day. For now, the simple ask is this: let’s try to plan the post-split calendar so the end of season isn’t left hanging on one strangely timed game.

Context matters more than raw numbers

Stats can be useful, but they don't live by themselves. If a full back is being compared to a midfielder you have to ask why those numbers are alike. Is the full back tucking in, getting on the ball in the middle, or helping the build from deep? In our case the point about Raskin picking the ball up in the middle of the back three and doing similar things to a centre half matters. His position in the shape changes the expectation of his passing and involvement.

Don't forget role and team shape

To be fair, fans are right to question performances. But criticism loses credibility when it ignores context. A player who is asked to step into midfield for build up is going to post different passing numbers to a winger who stays high and wide. You can see why comparisons without that context feel off.

Criticism is fine. Pick a consistent yardstick.

We are a Rangers fanbase and people will have different takes. That is healthy. My point is simply this: use the same standards across the team. If you will question one player's defensive or attacking work, be prepared to call out similar errors from others. Otherwise it looks like a narrative is being pushed rather than an honest assessment.

Truth is, debate is what keeps the site lively. But make it fair, grounded in role and shape, and less about scoring points after the final whistle. That would keep more people coming back to argue the toss.

AEK’s win shifted the balance

To be fair, the Greek result isn’t decisive on its own. But AEK going five clear with five to play—as mentioned—does tilt things. If Olympiacos slip up or fail to take the title, one of the big obstacles to our coefficient push falls away. You can see why every Greek result now feels relevant to us. Next up for Olympiacos is an away trip to Panathinaikos, and with Cyriel Dessers on their books, there’s a little Rangers interest in how that goes.

Shakhtar’s European run matters just as much

Equally important is what happens with Shakhtar Donetsk. If they keep progressing in the Conference League or win the Ukrainian title, they can still affect the coefficient table and our seeding. We don’t want them racking up Europe points that edge past us. So their tie with AZ Alkmaar is one to watch closely—hopefully AZ make life hard for them and do us a favour.

What this means before the Falkirk trip

So yes, a few foreign results could decide whether we need two qualifying rounds or go straight into the group stage. It’s a slightly odd feeling—your fate partly set in Athens and Alkmaar while we head to Falkirk for another must-win cup tie. As I mentioned earlier on Rangers News Views, these permutations matter, even if they feel a bit remote. For now, all we can do is keep winning and hope the rest falls kindly.

Why the split feels unfair

To be fair, the fixture maths is dry but it matters. If we took the simple approach — home to Motherwell, Hibs and Falkirk; away to Celtic and Hearts — we'd finish with a 20:18 home:away split. The league insists on parity over the season, so someone ends up with that extra away trip. Unfortunately for us, the draw looks like it hands that to Rangers.

Where we've dropped points

That stings because these aren't hypothetical tough grounds. We've already dropped points at Fir Park (1-1 in the opening game, and that Welsh last-minute equaliser more recently), at Easter Road (0-0, and I remember a harsh Mikey Moore disallowed goal), and at Falkirk Stadium (1-1 with a deflected late equaliser). Those results linger — you can see why going back to any of them feels like walking into a trap.

What it means for the run-in

Truth is, the fixture list won't win or lose the season on its own. But playing one of those sides away an extra time shrinks margins. Away trips are tougher, momentum gets dented, and confidence in tight games matters. With so many big matches still to come — as the post rightly calls them, six cup finals — we need to be sharper, mentally and tactically, in places we've already shown vulnerability.

So yes, it's frustrating and feels unfair. But it's also a clear reminder: these away fixtures are must-not-lose games. Get the road results right and the fixture quirk becomes a non-issue. Fail, and it won't forgive you.

Minutes and why they distort totals

To be fair, playing almost 500 minutes more than anyone else — roughly 20% extra — will push a player up the totals charts. Totals are fine when you want to show aggregate contribution, but they don’t normalise for opportunity. That’s where per-90 numbers are handy: they give context to what a player does when he’s on the pitch. Still, per-90 isn’t perfect either. Fatigue, game state and role within the team will all influence those rates.

What the key stat lines tell us

You laid out the numbers neatly: Raskin with 2.5 tackles per 90 and Tavernier 2.2, Raskin 56 passes per 90 versus Tavernier’s 50, and Tavernier with 62 big chances to Raskin’s 51 despite the minutes gap. Assist totals were noted as 6 to 4 in Raskin’s favour, and accurate passes per 90 put Raskin behind Souttar and Djiga. Those comparisons show different strengths. Raskin looks busier defensively and in general passing volume. Tavernier, with fewer minutes, still contributes more big chances, which flags his creative value.

So who comes out on top?

Truth is, both points are valid. If you prize per-90 chance creation, Tavernier’s numbers are impressive given the minutes. If you value sustained influence and higher total involvement, Raskin’s extra minutes and tackling/pass rates stand out. Context matters: position, when each player is used, and set-piece or crossing responsibilities will all change the picture. I’m not trying to split hairs — just saying stats are a tool, not the whole argument. Fans saying one is clearly better are simplifying things. Look at both measures and you get a fairer sense of contribution.

At the end of the day it’s about what you value: consistency and work-rate, or creativity and chance creation per minute. Both players have roles that the numbers reflect, and both deserve the credit those stats show.

The courage gap

To be blunt, he looks frightened at times. Not disinterested — that’s an easy criticism to lob — but actually fearful. You see it in the way he clings to the touchline, stays tight to his defender and rarely ventures into those nastier pockets where the game is won or lost. There’s a tentative quality about him, like he’s waiting permission to get stuck in. When the crowd roars and the heat goes up, he seems to shrink back rather than rise to the challenge.

Why coaching won’t fix everything

I’ve coached youngsters for years and I’ve seen this exact pattern. You can give a kid all the drills in the world; you can teach bravery in practice until you’re blue in the face, but the actual decision to step into contact under pressure is something else. Some players have it naturally. Others don’t. A few will flatter — they have talent, decent positional sense, the odd good cross — and that’s enough to get them noticed for a while. But without that core physical courage, their progress stalls.

A familiar, sad outcome

It’s not about malice or laziness. It’s about temperament. And temperament is sticky. The sad truth is that many decent youngsters fade because they lack that edge. Olsen looks like one of them. He’s got qualities, but if he can’t summon that willingness to be in the thick of it, then you can see why it fizzles. I’d like to be proven wrong, but as a long-time watcher and coach the pattern is familiar and the outcome sadly predictable.

The problem on the terraces

We’ve always had idiots in the crowd. To be fair, plenty of incidents used to be alcohol-fuelled and spontaneous. This isn’t that. There’s a sense now of planning, of people hiding their faces and turning matchdays into theatre for trouble. That change is what shakes you. It’s not just about shouting or a shove; it’s organised disruption wearing club colours and that makes it feel personal to supporters who’ve nothing to do with it.

Why families are staying away

Honestly, you can see why parents won’t bring kids to away ends any more. I wouldn’t risk my family in a situation where a small flare-up can spiral because there are people who seem set on violence. Even at home, you expect safety. The idea of matchday turning into a battleground is frightening. That’s a loss for the club, a loss for the game and a loss for ordinary fans who just want a night out.

What now? Tougher controls or something else?

There aren’t easy answers. Some argue that subscription or broadcast-only access could be the only way to shut down flare-ups, others call for tighter stewarding, smarter policing and firmer sanctions against those who spoil it for everyone. Whatever happens, it needs to protect decent supporters and make clear we won’t tolerate thuggery in our colours. I grew up around Glasgow schemes and saw gangs long before I knew football properly — I never wanted to see that mix with our game. If keeping families safe means changes we don’t like, so be it. Football should be for people, not a stage for hate.

Confidence shapes how a player acts on the pitch

To be fair, confidence isn't a vague idea. When a player believes in themselves they take more risks, they press harder and they run that extra yard. You can see the difference in training and matches. Rohl's comments about encouraging Skov Olsen to take more risks suggest that's exactly what the manager thinks — it's not just about tactics, it's about mindset.

Different players handle pressure in different ways

Fernandez is mentioned as the polar opposite: someone clearly riding a wave of belief and discipline. That's the dream scenario for any manager. But history shows some players wilt under pressure. Skov Olsen having been dropped by Wolfsburg, sent out on loan and dropped out of the Danish squad — those are the kind of blows that unsettle some lads and toughen others up. I don't want to be doom-mongering, but mental resilience is as important as fitness here.

Where that leaves us at Ibrox

I'm not absolving Skov Olsen of responsibility or saying he's beyond criticism. What I am saying is we've been guilty of writing players off too quickly this season. If he can recover his confidence and sharpness, fine. If not, we need to accept that not every player has the stomach for the noise at Rangers. Ultimately the hard part of management is getting the psychology right; coaching the shape and the pressing is the easier half.

Happiness matters

To be fair, you can see why someone would want to return home. The Bodo manager example comes up for a reason: contentment and stability are huge. Sometimes happiness matters more than money or trophies. If Olsen is missing home and isn't thriving, maybe the best thing for him — and for us — is to let him go back and rediscover his form where he's comfortable.

We're not their caretakers

There's also the cold reality. We're not Olsen's parent club and we don't carry the long‑term duty of care they do. We sign players to help the team now. If a player's head isn't right for Ibrox, that affects the squad. Fans sympathise with mental health struggles, absolutely, but that doesn't change the financial and footballing facts. Paying a large sum for uncertainty isn't sensible business.

Is it a gamble worth taking?

People will always compare risks — some say give players time, others point out past big buys that didn't work. I just can't picture investing heavily on someone who just doesn't seem right in so many ways. You could argue anyone can turn it round. You could argue the opposite. For me, spending that kind of money on a player who might be better off back home is a bigger gamble than I'm willing to back. Simple as that.

We want signings who hit the ground running and lift the place. If Olsen isn't that player, let him go and find his feet. Rangers should be picking the bets that improve the squad, not taking on unnecessary risks.]]> Rangers News Views https://www.rangersnewsviews.co.uk/rangers-news/a-lifetime-of-rangers-memories/ https://www.rangersnewsviews.co.uk/rangers-news/a-lifetime-of-rangers-memories/ Fri, 05 Jun 2026 09:58:17 +0100 I’ve been lucky enough to see Rangers through so many different chapters, and some nights still make my heart race. From a 17-year-old at the Nou Camp in 1972 to sitting quietly confident now in 2026, you get the whole rollercoaster: the silverware, the heartbreak, the rebuilds and the nights you never forget.

Early nights and big names

There’s nothing like being at big games as a youngster. Easter Road in 1975 when Colin Stein stopped the run — you remember it forever. I watched the John Greig years, then the Souness revolution, and later Walter Smith’s side grabbing nine in a row. Players like Gazza, McCoist and Laudrup — brilliant to watch. Then came that Dutch influence under Wee Dick: De Boers, Numan, Van Bronkhorst and others who brought a different flavour. Big Eck’s era gave us those last-day hits too. All of it stitched together a lifetime of memories.

Days you’re still buzzing from

For me, nothing tops being at Easter Road on 22 May 2005. I was fifty and when wee Novo scored I went proper AWOL — celebrated for days. Ended up in a taxi and then out with Dado Prso and Soti Kyriakos. Mad times. Manchester 2008 under Walter Smith felt like punching above our weight; heartbreaking but proud. Those nights remind you what supporting this club is about: the highs and the camaraderie.

The 2012 fall and the comeback that meant everything

Then 2012 and the drop to League Two. I followed every step. Fifty thousand at the bottom tier — imagine that. There’s no other club quite like us. We rebuilt, we grafted, and we found our way back. Fast forward to 2021: Stevie G, the Let’s Go chant and that unbeaten season when Celtic were chasing ten. Stopping that run, especially after what we’d been through, meant more than words can say. You can see why I still get proper goosebumps thinking about it.

Now I’m 71 and Rangers are still the only team for me. Six games to go and I’m quietly confident. I’ve seen the lows and the highs, and if history tells you anything, it’s to keep believing. Fifty-six is incoming, troop. Keep the faith.

The opening of the game was telling. I don’t mean his passes or that he sometimes chooses the safe option — we’ve all seen that before — I mean his reaction when things got physical. In the first ten to fifteen minutes there were a couple of challenges he seemed to step away from. That’s not nitpicking; Scottish football is competitive and relentless. If you’re avoiding contact, opponents will make you pay.

Talent is there, no question. You can see the technique, the first touch, the moments where he links play and looks like the player we hoped for. But talent without temperament doesn’t cut it over a season. With six games to go, the patience runs thinner and the margin for error shrinks. That appetite, that willingness to scrap for 50/50s, has been missing too often for my liking.

It’s hard not to think about permanence and value. Right now it feels like an expensive gamble to make his loan move permanent. You’d expect a player who had a World Cup to push for his place, especially having missed out on the play-off squad and with Denmark now out. That should sharpen you up. Instead, getting hooked at half-time won’t do much for confidence and it becomes a bit of a spiral.

To be fair, I hope he finds a spark. Players can turn things round quickly — a big tackle, a committed run, an influential touch can change perception overnight. But until we see more physicality and the sort of edge this league needs, I’m not convinced he’s ready to be relied upon long-term. Fingers crossed he shows it in the closing run.

Hearts' shape and where the danger comes from

Mcinnes has that team drilled. Every man seems to understand the job he’s got to do and the passes they play look so precise because players are moving into expected positions. That kind of familiarity breeds confidence: blind passes work when you know a teammate will be there. Their spine — midfield into attack — has been particularly effective, and if they keep most of that group together and add a couple of decent players they’ll be right in the mix again next season.

What that means for Rangers

All of which makes this season more tense, but it doesn’t change where we stand. If we can go on and see it out having only played really well in four or five games, that’s an achievement in itself and gives Danny something to build on. Experience matters; a full season under his belt would be valuable for next year. Yes, that lot could nick something dramatic — a late winner isn’t impossible — but I prefer the fact it’s in our hands. No need to hope for favours. Win our remaining games and we finish top.

Rommen and the squad mood

Rommen’s injury is a proper sickener. You never want to see anyone crocked, especially when every selection matters. That said, these moments test the squad’s depth and character. Whoever steps in must keep the tempo and pressing right, because margins are small in this run-in.

So yes, respect to Hearts — they’ve been excellent — but let’s stay focused. Keep winning, keep the shape, and let’s finish what we started. Simple as that.

What we're actually seeing on the pitch

When you sign a wide attacker you expect directness. Beat your full-back, stretch the defence, force decisions in the final third. With Moore the contrast is obvious — he receives, drives at people and creates chances. With Skov it's more common to see the ball recycled sideways or backwards. That kills tempo and invites pressure rather than destabilising opponents.

Is it confidence, role or something else?

Maybe it's confidence. Maybe it's the role he's been asked to play in the shape. You can forgive some early adjustment — players do need settling — but we've given him minutes and chances. The worry is the pattern: repeated safe options rather than risky, high-reward attempts. That's not a dig at the lad personally; plenty of Reds have been disappointed by players who don't adapt quickly enough.

Where does that leave us as supporters?

I'm not one for knee-jerk calls. I'm not saying sell him tomorrow. But as fans we have to be honest: expectations versus reality matters. If Wolfsburg were indeed content to move him on, that prompts questions we can't ignore. Ultimately we want players who drag opponents out of shape, not invite our midfield to do the work for them. To be fair, time can change impressions — and I'm happy to be proved wrong — but right now his output and style don't match the billing.

Whether it's a tweak in his position, a confidence-boost from the manager, or just more patience from the terraces, Skov needs to show more intent. Fans will back him if he backs himself.

Names we dismissed too soon

Think about it: Manny Fernandez, Nasser Djiga, Mikey Moore and even Youssef Chermiti — all had their doubters when they first arrived or broke into the team. Now people want Moore to stay, Fernandez’s value is being talked up by some, and plenty want Djiga signed permanently. The shift is obvious and a bit embarrassing if we’re honest.

Why Olsen deserves patience

On Olsen specifically, I actually expect us to sign him permanently, not because he’s dazzled from day one but because Rohl clearly likes what he brings. Yes, he’s only played a handful of games and the raw output so far has been modest — he’s played what, eight games with three assists and a goal, by the looks of it. That doesn’t tell the whole story. He’d been out of action for months, looks short on match fitness and confidence, but the effort’s there. I remember him tracking back from their half to our box after giving the ball away — not the sort of player who gives up.

What we should take away

Fans should try to resist instant judgements. Football is messy. Players need time to settle, adapt to the tempo, and for confidence to come back. That doesn’t mean blind loyalty. It means measured expectations and giving the manager a chance to get his ideas across. I won’t be shouting for a quick sale or a kneejerk verdict on Olsen anymore — I jumped early on a few lads and learned the hard way.

In short: patience, a bit of humility, and letting players bed in would save us from backing and then burning our own opinions every few months.

Why so many signings backfire

To be fair, bringing quality in is necessary sometimes. But when transfer activity becomes the default answer to every gap, you lose the sense of progression. Young lads who train with the first team see the door shut because a cheque has been written instead. That doesn't just damage the pathway, it costs us in the long run — in cohesion, atmosphere and wages.

Backup players, not headline grabs

Look at the right wing this season. We've spent on the likes of Antman and Skov while Gassama and McCausland sit in the squad. I'm not saying McCausland is starter material right now; he probably isn't. But that's exactly the point — we need sensible second-choice players who know the club, can step in when needed and keep costs sensible. There's precedent for this: in seasons gone by we had squad players who were never stars but contributed when called upon.

Return to a balanced approach

We should be aiming for a clear hierarchy in each position: a reliable starter, a competent and cheap deputy from our own ranks or close to home, and perhaps one shrewd signing a year who improves the team. Not two or three splashes for the same spot that leave every other area ignored. If we want long-term success, we have to rebuild the pathway and stop strangling it with short-term fixes.

Rant over — but seriously, give the kids a chance and stop buying the squad.

First, the monitoring net

At the top is the monitoring stage. Data platforms and scouts will often be tracking well in excess of a hundred players per position — literally thousands across the board. That’s not a shortlist, it’s a cast of interest. The idea is to spot patterns: age, minutes, position versatility, tendencies. Some platforms even let clubs make their monitoring visible, which can be a quiet signal to players and agents that they’re on the radar.

Then video and in-person checks

From that huge pool a video shortlist emerges. Around twenty per position is a sensible ballpark, more for priority areas. Video scouting isn’t just watching highlights any more — software can extract minutes where a player is pressed, on the ball in tight spaces, or defending set plays. It speeds things up, but it doesn’t replace human judgement. That’s where in-person scouting comes in. Internal or trusted third-party scouts will see perhaps fifty names live, visit training when possible and get a feel for temperament and consistency.

Closing the loop: talks, agents and noise

Finally, a handful — usually two or three per priority slot — move into early recruitment talks. Clubs will quietly test the water with agents and other clubs. This phase is where genuine interest becomes public speculation. Third-party scouts can also surface unexpected names; sometimes a player is spotted while watching someone else, and suddenly we have a new option. To be fair, you can see why supporters start talking once those initial approaches begin.

It’s a layered, sometimes messy process, but it explains a lot of the threads you see. As fans, all we can do is watch how the pipeline tightens and hope the right additions arrive when the time comes.

Why the contract question matters

First off, Sterling isn’t a one-trick player. He brings quality on the ball, pace and a level of composure that you don’t always find. That value is why giving him security makes sense. Equally, you can see why the board and manager would hesitate - fitness niggles mean we need to think longer term about availability and return on investment. A shorter deal with options, or a contract that allows sensible medical review points, seems fair to both parties.

Where does he fit best?

Versatility is Sterling’s ace. He can fill in at right back and left back without looking out of place, and he’s comfortable stepping into a centre-half role when needed. There’s also a case for him sitting in front of the back four as a defensive midfielder in certain games, using his reading of play to shield the defence. As for right wing, it’s not his primary role but he can offer overlapping runs and width when called upon. Pick the role to suit the game and his fitness.

How I'd manage him

Game time is the issue. You don’t burn him out over a season. Rotate, rest before big fixtures, and use cup matches to rebuild rhythm. Think of him as a high-value squad piece rather than an ever-present starter. On training, tailor workloads and monitor recovery - small measures add up. And don’t forget the psychological side; a player who feels trusted will often deliver when given minutes. That’s how you get the best from someone with a stop-start record.

So, yes, give Sterling a deal - but shape it around his body and the seasons to come. To be fair, a proper discussion with sports science, the manager and the player should settle the details. If ED fancies it, run that poll on his best position - I’d vote right back, but you could make good cases for several spots. Either way, we keep a talented player and try to keep him fit.

Two different profiles, two different reactions

Put Moore and Olsen side by side and you see why comparisons feel unfair. Moore is the young, direct type: takes defenders on, creates chaos, drags the crowd into games and looks every inch the kid who will improve. He brings energy, dribbling intent and a willingness to risk losing the ball to gain territory.

Why the gap stings

Olsen, by contrast, is an experienced internationalist. Fans expected a dependable presence in the team and some real quality. He pulls off assists, yes, but watching him often feels like seeing a player happy to hide on the ball rather than challenge opponents. Rarely attempting to beat his man, opting for safe passes, it’s understandable why supporters are frustrated. Stats only tell part of it — as Kaiser pointed out, they don’t capture body language or the moments that swing a stadium.

Where we go from here

Truth is, patience matters with youngsters. Moore deserves time because his game is built on intent and learning by doing. At the same time, a senior player carries a different burden: if you’re being paid and picked, you must influence games in more than just the assist column. Fans aren’t asking for miracles—just visible effort, willingness to take players on and strong decision-making in the final third.

So keep giving the boy a chance, but expect signs of improvement. And for Olsen, the onus is clear: show you want to be on the pitch. The rest will follow.

Why goals matter

Goals are the blunt instrument of football. You can have the nicest passing sequences, the highest pressing numbers, the best possession, and none of it matters if you do not score. A striker who keeps nicking goals gives the manager and the team breathing space. You can see why supporters cut a bit more slack when the numbers that actually win matches still appear.

Skov Olsen — the upside

Skov Olsen is an interesting case because the potential impact is obvious. When he’s on it, his movement and deliveries lift the team. If he rediscovers the form fans want — and, crucially, the form he wants for himself — his overall contribution should tick up naturally. It’s not just about a flashy run; it’s about turning chances into goals or assists and affecting the scoreline more often.

Moore and the confidence factor

By contrast, Moore’s issue in your post was clear: fewer direct goal contributions. When a player who doesn’t chip in with regular goals or assists hits a confidence slump, the drop-off can feel sharper. It becomes a self-reinforcing loop: poor form dents confidence, confidence dents output, output dents confidence again. That’s why I’m wary — players who supply fewer tangible returns can look more fragile during rough patches.

At the end of the day I’m not saying stats are everything. Context matters. But if you’re choosing which problem to worry about, a goalscorer who’s slightly out of form is generally easier to live with than a player who offers little in the way of clear goal contributions. Simple as that.

Numbers the fan quoted — and how they read

To be clear, the figures the fan mentioned are being kept as presented: Skov Olsen, 8 matches, 5 goal involvements; Mikey Moore, 41 matches, 9 goal involvements. Read plainly, those lines tell different stories. Skov Olsen’s sample is small but the per‑game involvement looks tidy. Moore’s numbers span a lot more minutes and seasons, and that maturity and consistency understandably earns him praise.

Why perception skews reactions

There are a few reasons supporters treat players differently. Familiarity and longevity matter: someone who’s been there week in, week out gets the benefit of the doubt. New signings face a sterner microscope; confidence plays a massive part and fans notice when a player looks hesitant. Then there’s the bandwagon effect — players who hit a purple patch get worshipped and it’s hard to drag them down afterwards.

So what’s fair?

Fair criticism should look at role, minutes played and context. If a lad’s struggling for confidence after a move in January, that’s worth mentioning alongside raw numbers. Equally, you don’t have to crown someone as a superstar purely on sentiment. I’m not saying either player shouldn’t be questioned — just that the discussion ought to be consistent and less personal. To be honest, we’d all benefit from a bit more nuance and a bit less piling on.

At the end of the day, support and critique are two sides of the same coin. You can want better and still give a player time to find it.

Forwards who showed promise

To be fair, the centre-forward who caught the eye looked hungry and composed around the danger area. He didn’t panic and kept working until the ball dropped for him. That kind of persistence is encouraging. Big Chermiti, though, remains a worry. Too often when he’s through he seems to aim for the goalkeeper rather than the corner, and that lack of killer instinct is costly. We need someone who buries those chances.

Midfield — tidy and troubling in equal measure

The Chukiwooki lad was tidy on the ball, and not afraid to get stuck in. Comfortable passing, simple choices, and a willingness to shoulder the physical side — that’s what you want from a midfielder coming through. Olsen, however, had a poor afternoon. My sister nailed it watching him — he looked flat, lost in the middle and was hooked at half-time again. His only positive was the fortunate assist for Sterling’s header, when a miskicked effort fell kindly. Still, being rescued by luck won’t cut it if he’s to keep his shirt.

Looking ahead — patience and selection questions

There’s reason to be optimistic about a couple of youngsters and that unnamed striker, but also a clear reminder that finishing and composure in front of goal remain issues. I’m keen to see the left-back get a run soon and for the striker to build match sharpness. As a few on Rangers News Views have said, these friendlies and early outings are for ironing out the rough edges — and we’ve got a few to sort.

Aasgaard and the number 10 issue

Aasgaard offered more impact yesterday and his goal involvements are obvious, but there’s still a habit of drifting with his back to goal. When he turns and faces defenders he’s a different player — more direct, more incisive. Out of possession he can look a touch anonymous, which is worrying when the team relies on that number 10 to influence the flow. To be fair, not every ten has to press like a midfielder, but we need him starting more matches by showing the consistency and end product that earns that spot.

Strikers: Chermiti’s link play vs Miovski’s finishing

Chermiti does the unattractive but useful work — holds the ball, links play, brings others into it. Trouble is he too often looks like a holding midfielder playing up front: composed in possession but lacking the pace and clinical edge you want from your main striker. I agree with the view that Miovski is our most reliable finisher. If we deploy two up top, Miovski should be the 9 and Chermiti the support runner. Goals win leagues, and selection ought to reflect who actually puts the ball in the net.

Defence, Souttar and the space management

Souttar feels more comfortable in a back three to me. His occasional indecision and lack of recovery speed mean he needs cover behind him; otherwise one mistake can become costly. Moore gets a lot of leeway from fans because of his graft and energy — people forgive the misses when the effort is obvious. The bigger tactical worry is how often we get pinned in our own half. We should be holding territory higher up, easing the defensive load and creating chances. Small tweaks in shape and tempo could help — but the run-in will expose whether those fixes are enough.

Call it realism rather than doom-mongering. There are positives to build on, but we can’t kid ourselves — finishing, shape and who plays where will decide a lot over the next few weeks.

Forwards: promise but a finishing question

You can see why people are excited about Aasgaard and Naderi. They have energy, invention and a hunger to make things happen. Gassama’s glimpses were encouraging too — moments that suggest there’s a real threat when he finds rhythm. Chermiti is a tricky one. His work rate is unquestionable and he presses, chases and links play. Yet his misses stick in the throat and outweigh the good bits. He’s got big games coming; hopefully he can convert that effort into more consistent returns.

Midfield and defence: mostly solid with a few nerves

Midfield looked robust and the return of Barron for the run-in is a timely boost. We’ve got good shape and tempo through the middle. Defensively, though, there are moments that set alarm bells ringing. Soapy sometimes looks hesitant on the ball outside his box — like he’s pausing when we need quicker choices. Meghoma is useful as cover while Rommens is fit, but will likely be a bench option for now. Sterling deserves praise — he’s been immense and should be managed carefully.

Small margins and the six-game test

Big Jack still gets my backing, but that low drive he conceded felt avoidable — keepers all have small weaknesses. Mikey Moore gives us energy and those mazy runs; he must sharpen his final ball to be more effective. Overall, I like the pool of players we’ve got to blood during the run-in. There’s enough quality and some youth coming through to keep things fresh. Bring it on, lads — six games to put it right and plenty to work with.

How did it come to this?

Look, nobody’s denying his CV — Brugge, Denmark, around 40 caps and enough to earn a sizeable move to Wolfsburg. That’s why the whole situation feels so odd. Moving between Belgium and Germany isn’t a seismic cultural shift for a pro, yet his form has clearly dropped off in recent seasons. That leaves supporters scratching their heads.

Why the worry about an obligation to buy?

An obligation clause changes everything. A loan is one thing, a guaranteed future transfer is another. If we do end up forced into the purchase, the club could be stuck with an expensive squad member who doesn’t fit, or worse, hasn’t got his head in the game. That’s money that could be used elsewhere — wages, other signings, or giving minutes to lads who are hungry and available.

Where do we go from here?

Fingers crossed he turns it around. Players do rediscover form, and maybe the Rangers environment brings the best out of him. But the sensible view is to be realistic. We need contingency plans: be clear about how he’ll be used, protect the squad balance, and make sure fans aren’t left paying for a costly mistake. As some on Rangers News Views have said, this one needs careful handling — not blind optimism.

Truth is, nobody wants to be negative for the sake of it. But the evidence so far is worrying, and supporters have every right to ask questions about clauses and negotiation when big sums and high wages are involved.

Missed chances, missed context

We can all see the moments that matter. But if you are going to catalogue misses, do it properly. Naderi's near header from close range and Moore's other opportunity were just as glaring, yet they often get buried when the narrative needs a scapegoat. Truth is, chances come and go for a dozen players in a match, not just the one you fancy having a pop at.

Does forum criticism change anything?

Let's be honest, what gets typed here is not going to alter boardroom decisions or the manager's selection. Fans have every right to voice opinions, but pretending our posts will magically reform the side is a stretch. If you believe the club is heading the right way, there's nothing wrong with saying so and enjoying the ride.

Choosing to see the positives

For me, a 4-2 win that puts Rangers at the top of the table after a while is worth celebrating. That is not settling for second best or turning a blind eye to flaws. It is recognising progress. Call it optimism or blue-tinted specs, but I'd rather back the direction the team seems to be going in than pick at individual players every week.

Carry on criticising if you must, but don't expect everyone to accept it without pushback. Healthy debate is fine. Targeted negativity, repeated without context, gets tiring and it does nothing to help the team or the discussion.

Standards don't disappear with three points

To be fair, most fans would swap pretty football for points if it guaranteed silverware. Still, standards have to be demanded. You can applaud the result and also point out where we were sloppy. That's not negativity for its own sake; it's a genuine call for consistency. We have the players on paper to do better in key moments.

Individuals and the system both need to pull their weight

Expecting a CH to do better isn't controversial. Expecting a 3 million striker to bury the easier chances isn't either. When players are mismatched to the system or undercook basic finishing and defending, it's fair to flag it. Criticism becomes constructive when it points to what should change: sharper defending from set plays, cleaner transitions, and forwards making the simple decisions when chances fall their way.

We're in a good place, but complacency bites

Truth is, we're in an excellent position and have shown flashes of really decent football. Consistency has to come from every player and from the manager. You can love the club and still call out where it's going wrong. That's how standards stay high. I'll keep applying constructive criticism because blind optimism doesn't help get the finer details right.

Onwards and upwards .

A workmanlike win

Yesterday wasn’t the finest hour for anyone at Ibrox, but it was a job well done. We didn’t click in the final third, our rhythm was off and there were moments when the composure looked thin. Still, you can see why that result matters. When the pressure piles up, a solid, pragmatic performance that delivers three points is worth its weight in gold.

There’s something satisfying about coming away with the points even when the football ain’t flowing. It steadies the nerves, keeps momentum ticking and forces the chasing pack to worry. At this stage of the campaign you take the points however they come.

Six cup finals to go

Call them cup finals if you like — that phrase seems to fit. Every game feels like one now. The league isn’t decided yet, and the margin for error is tiny. So while I’d rather we dazzled, the truth is that grit and knowing how to win under pressure are just as important.

We’ll need composure, a bit of luck, and the squad to keep its head. If Danny keeps the group focused and everyone chips in, those six matches could define a season. Fans can moan about the performance, and rightly so at times, but moan after we’ve got the medals in the cabinet.

What’s happening at Anfield?

I watched the City v Liverpool tie before the match and it felt telling. City looked sharp, and it’s no surprise people are asking questions about Liverpool’s set-up. I’m with you in thinking it’s now a matter of when, not if, changes come at Anfield. Xabi Alonso’s name gets thrown about a lot — and you can see why, given his stock — but whatever happens, it won’t be simple for them.

All in all, celebrate the three points today. We’ll worry about fine margins and style another time. Right now, it’s about winning the next one, and the next — six finals to go, remember that.

Natural finisher versus all-round forward

To be fair, Chermiti and Naderi bring more to the team out of possession and in build-up. They drop, link play, chase runners and press — the type of forwards who give you structure and variety. But the truth is a natural finisher is about timing, first touch and the razor-edge composure when a chance lands on your boot. In my view, Miovski has that instinct more often than not.

Why the low block matters

It’s no secret many teams sit deep against us. That low block removes the room strikers like Miovski had at previous clubs, when opponents gave him yards to run into. Up against a compact defence, a lone striker can struggle to find the space. That’s not a comment on his quality, just on context. Different systems ask different things of a striker.

Pairing him smartly could be the key

If you pair Miovski with a forward who can create that yard of space — someone who can drag a centre-backs wide or play off him — you give that natural finisher the service he needs. Chermiti or Naderi can do the graft to open lanes; Miovski could finish the chances more consistently with that kind of support. I can’t see inside training or know Rohl’s thinking on selection, but from where I’m standing it’s a combination worth trying more often.

Ultimately, it’s about getting the balance right. We’ve got forwards who offer different strengths. Use them together and you might turn a handful of half-chances into the kind of goals only a natural finisher can bury.

Talent wasted by surrounding weakness

There’s a tendency to judge a player only by medals and nothing else. That isn’t fair. Tav turned up for teams that were a bit hit-and-miss, sometimes poor, sometimes just okay. That affects everything — confidence, service, the way a manager uses you. The point Stevie_G_new makes is simple: if Tav had landed in stronger squads he wouldn’t have struggled for a start or for influence.

Right-back or on the flank — the tactical case

Talk of sticking him at right-back for a big final isn’t fanciful. If he’d been deployed in a system that suited his strengths — pace, directness, overlap, ability to deliver — he’d have offered something different. Fans mention Advocaat’s era and suggest Tav would have pushed past Porrini or Ricksen for a spot. Whether you agree or not, it’s a fair tactical observation: players can look better or worse depending on how they’re used.

Impact beyond the stat sheet

People bring up goals and assists for good reason. Put Tav alongside strikers like Arveladze, Wallace, Big Cousin and Darcheville and you can imagine his end product getting better simply because the team around him is sharper. The wider point is this: you can’t judge a player in isolation. He helped the club in ways that matter, and fans reckon we’d have missed important milestones without him — that includes suggested runs to big games and colours of silverware mentioned by supporters.

So yeah, be critical if you must, but don’t shrug him off. Context matters. Give Tav his due for what he did here, and think for a second how frightening he might have been in a stronger XI. It changes the conversation fast.

Forwards put the graft in

Mo Ross on RTV pointed out something obvious to anyone watching: the forwards worked hard and created the base for the win. Missing chances happens. A striker can miss a sitter and still have a big influence with his movement, pressing and link play. You cannae reduce a whole shift to one clip you found on social. Naderi had an awkward chance early and it went begging too — yet that one gets forgotten when the narrative suits.

Don't nitpick one moment

We need perspective. There is always room for improvement, of course, but criticism should be proportionate. If we’re top after a run of decent results maybe now's the time to enjoy it rather than picking holes in every performance. Fans will always argue about who should have done better, but let’s not let negativity drown out the positives. The team showed shape, tempo and a willingness to press — that’s the sort of foundation you want.

Keep criticism fair

Some folk point at one player to score cheap points in a thread. That’s hypocritical and unhelpful. If we flag a miss, fine. But balance it with the good bits. Support doesn’t mean blind praise and criticism shouldn’t be a wagon to jump on. We’ll criticise properly when it’s deserved — when performances are poor or patterns are worrying. Today wasn’t that day. For now, I’m happy to enjoy the win and keep an eye on the improvements to make.