Röhl's decision to stick with a 4-4-2 felt safe at first, and to be fair it worked for a spell. But when the opposition went more expansive and pushed their full-backs higher, the shape was found wanting. This isn't nitpicking—it's about recognising when the game asks for a tweak.
Where it started to creak
The 4-4-2 is brilliant when you’re facing a low block and want to be compact. It lets you play off second balls and attack in two banks. Trouble is, once the full-backs pushed up we had our wingers pinned deep and our two holding men stretched. Celtic were able to dictate the tempo, find space between the lines and deliver crosses into the box. Suddenly our front two were isolated and the midfield overload we needed didn’t exist.
What I would have done differently
Was a change obvious? Not necessarily, but I would have liked to see a switch to a 3-5-2 or a 3-4-1-2 to shore up the middle and deal with crosses better. An extra centre-half gives you a clearer route to defend wide deliveries and lets the wingbacks push on to pin their full-backs. Matching their midfield numerically would have made it harder for Celtic to control the ball, and lifting our defensive line a touch would have reduced the space they were exploiting between our defence and midfield.
Still plenty to play for
It stings as a result, but this isn’t season-ending. We’re still in the race and there’s long to go. Small tactical fixes, clearer midfield balance and a bit more control in transition will be enough on another day. It’s frustrating, yes, but this title race going to the wire is more nerve-wracking and brilliant in equal measure. What do you all think?
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.
