Rangers fans always end up back at the same argument: the striker isn’t scoring enough. Fair point on the surface. But if you dig a bit, the more worrying bit isn’t finishing alone, it’s the type and volume of chances being served up in the first place.
Chance creation is the real bottleneck
When people say we need “something upfront”, I’m not even convinced that means another pure finisher. It can just as easily mean a proper creative player nearer the top end of the pitch, someone who can open a game up and make chances look routine.
Because here’s the thing: it’s hard to judge some of our options when they aren’t getting the sort of chances that let you properly evaluate them. Dessers, for all the frustration, at least gets opportunities. Others don’t even get enough touches in the right areas to prove whether they’re clinical or not.
The comparison raised between Chermiti and Dessers is telling. Chermiti: 3 big chance misses from 3.24 xG. Dessers: 12 big chance misses from 13.6 xG. Those gaps are too big, in my opinion, to brush off as “one striker good, one striker bad”. It points back to how the team is supplying them and who is actually benefiting from our patterns of play.
Set pieces, open play, and what the numbers actually say
There’s also a narrative that Rangers live off set pieces. Yet the stats quoted show 53% of our league goals coming from open play, 38% from set pieces, and 8% from penalties. That’s not some set-piece-only outfit.
Put beside Hearts (50% open play, 43% set pieces, 7% penalties) and Rangers actually come out looking slightly more open-play productive. Not by a mile, but enough to challenge the usual fan takeaway.
Tight wins and the “one man” dependency
Another way to look at it is tight games, the sort that decide seasons. Out of 23 matches this season, Rangers have won by a single goal seven times. Hearts have done it nine times. So even with a more obvious focal point, they’re still grinding out more one-goal outcomes.
And while our striker might not be racking up the numbers people want, goals and assists are spread about more widely. Fifteen different scorers for Rangers compared to eleven for Hearts, and 14 assists compared to 12. That matters. It means we’re less reliant on one or two lads staying fit and in form.
Would another contributor help? Of course it would. But the bigger takeaway is that Rangers aren’t hanging everything on one player in the way Hearts do with Shankland, and that can be a strength over a long season when injuries and dips in form inevitably bite.
Related Articles
About Rangers News Views
Rangers News Views offers daily Glasgow Rangers coverage including match reaction, transfer analysis, SPFL context, tactical breakdowns and opinion-led articles written by supporters for supporters.
