One of the biggest frustrations watching Rangers at times isn’t even the finishing. It’s the disconnect between what our striker is trying to do and what we’re actually putting into the box. If your centre-forward is making the same front-post run over and over, then the creative players have to meet him halfway and deliver it where he’s going.

Too often we swing it to the back post, or we clip it into an area where nobody’s attacking with conviction. Then we moan the forward “never scores” or “doesn’t get on the end of things”. Truth is, he’s not going to score many if the service keeps landing in the wrong place. It becomes predictable as well. The defender knows the ball is heading over the striker’s run, and the whole move fizzles out.

McCoist had a point, but it’s not the only answer

Ally McCoist has spoken before about the classic striker’s habit of going front post. Most goals at this level are scruffy, quick, and in that corridor where the goalkeeper doesn’t want to commit and the defender can’t see both man and ball. Fair enough. That run is valuable.

But it can’t be the only option. If everything is front post, teams adjust. If everything is back post, it’s just as easy to defend. The best attacks have variety: a drilled ball across the six-yard line, a cut-back to the penalty spot, the odd early cross before the defence is set. Rangers need that mix, and the players delivering have to recognise what’s on rather than hitting the same area out of habit.

The striker numbers argument is more complicated than it sounds

I’m all for giving a forward a proper run, something like 50 games, before deciding he’s a dud. Rangers have chopped and changed enough over the years, and it rarely helps. At the same time, it’s telling when you look at how goals can be spread around. If three forwards are sharing the load, you can still end up around the same totals as a side leaning heavily on one main scorer.

That’s why the Shankland comparison is interesting. If a team relies on one player for a big chunk of their output, what happens when he’s out? It becomes a double-edged sword. You want a talisman, of course you do, but you also want goals from everywhere.

We can’t pretend 25-goal strikers grow on trees

This is where the debate around Dessers always makes me shake my head. I didn’t want rid of him, and it’s hard not to notice some of the same voices who wanted him gone are now lamenting that Rangers don’t have a 25-goal striker. Well, that kind of return is rare. It’s not something you just pick up because you fancy a change.

Part of me would rather have three strikers chipping in with 10 to 15 each, especially if it means the overall attack is healthier. But the big issue for Rangers, for me, is still the same: we’ve not had enough goals coming from midfield. Until that changes, every striker we sign is going to be judged like he’s meant to do it all himself.

Written by Angus1812: 23 January 2026

Tags: transfers