This is a straight challenge: has Raskin actually been better for us than John Lundstram? Cutting through the international chatter, some supporters genuinely think Raskin has replaced Lundstram's impact. I disagree. Go back to Lundstram's Euro run — he looked like a driver of everything, the sort of midfield presence you notice in tight games. Raskin, for me, hasn't produced that level consistently this season.
The simple comparison
When people make the comparison they mean influence rather than a badge. Lundstram offered energy, simple passing and a bit of bite in midfield. He could clean up loose balls, step into the right channels and make games easier for the forwards. Raskin brings different qualities — perhaps more tactical discipline and a calmer on-the-ball presence. But fans are allowed to ask which of the two raises our level in big moments.
Where the debate gets heated
To be fair, plenty will point to national team nods or a short run of form and say Raskin is the answer. You can see why that matters. The question isn't about international caps though; it's about consistency for Rangers. From what I’ve watched, Raskin has had spells of very neat play but also too many quiet games. That absence of intensity at times is what gets flagged — especially when you remember Lundstram's ability to shift the tempo.
What it means for the title run
If you believe Raskin is a straight upgrade you have to accept the risks of losing that extra spark. The midfield is where games are won and lost, and if we lack the bite or presence in tight fixtures it can cost points. I'm not saying Raskin is useless — he has useful traits — but treating him as an automatic improvement on Lundstram ignores the nuance. Truth is, we need both brains and bite.
There's also a bit of groupthink to watch. When a player becomes the 'favourite' it's easy for poor runs to be downplayed and for critics of them to be shouted down on the message boards. I see that with Raskin sometimes — good spells get amplified, quiet ones skimmed over. That's why debates like this matter. We shouldn't pretend every new signing is unquestionably better than what we had.
Call it stubbornness, call it old eyes, but I'm keeping Lundstram in my head when I watch our midfield. It's a fair debate and one worth having without personal digs. If it goes wrong, don't be surprised if midfield influence is where people point first.
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.
