It’s become almost automatic at Rangers: if we’re not scoring enough, the striker gets it in the neck. And look, nobody’s pretending our forwards have been flawless. But if you actually step back and look at where the shots are coming from and what we’re doing with them, it’s hard to argue the strikers are the only, or even the main, culprits.

What xG is actually useful for

I’m not here to convert anyone into an xG evangelist. If you hate it, fair enough. But the simple value of it, to me, is pretty basic: it gives you a quick sense of how many big chances a team created, especially when you’ve had loads of the ball.

That matters for Rangers because we so often dominate possession in Scotland. When you’ve got that much territory, the key question becomes: did we turn it into proper chances, or just harmless circulation and hopeful crosses?

And even if you bin the numbers entirely and just “use your eyes”, you still know a big chance when you see one. Late spells where we fashion a handful of good openings count, whether a model agrees or not. xG, at its best, is just a tidy way of backing up what you watched.

The shot count doesn’t mean much without end product

Here’s the bit that gets missed in the striker debate. When you look at shots compared to goals, you start to see a pattern that’s not comfortable for the rest of the team.

If certain midfielders and wide players are racking up attempts but not converting, that’s a massive drag on the side. Those efforts might feel like pressure in the moment, but if they’re repeatedly snatched at, blocked, or rolled straight at the keeper, they become wasted attacks. Over a run of games, that adds up.

From what I’ve seen, players like Gassama, Raskin and, to an extent, Barron have been guilty of plenty efforts with not enough return. It doesn’t make them bad players, but it does highlight a problem: we’re taking shots without the composure or quality in the final action.

Why the striker still matters, but doesn’t carry it alone

Strikers live and die on chances. If they’re getting one decent look per match, you’ll never get consistent numbers. And even when they do get service, we all know they need to be sharper.

But this is the point: our forwards can be more productive on a per-shot basis than some around them, even if the overall tally still isn’t where Rangers need it. So when we’re talking about “finishing problems”, we should be honest about it being a squad issue, not just a number nine issue.

In games where Rangers have loads of the ball, the difference is often a midfielder arriving with calmness, or a wide player picking the right option, not another week of pretending the striker is the only one who has to contribute.

Written by Angus1812: 1 January 2026

Tags: squad