Three Rangers 'tweaks' Steven Gerrard can use to ensure tactical blueprint remains unpredictable

Steven Gerrard emphasised in pre-season the need for variation. Three years into the job at Ibrox – the tactical blueprint he and his coaching staff have implemented and evolved took the club to a record-breaking and invincible 55th title.

“Within games, I might have to tweak something or change something. Just to keep people thinking and opposition managers and have the variety to try and adapt within the game," he added.

As the Rangers Review wrote in July, variation is required so that the successful tactical blueprint can remain unpredictable, effective and more challenging to combat.

Clearly, the manager is not proposing a trip back to the drawing board – instead placing priority on the need to tactically adapt and vary approaches in-game. This isn’t the ripping up of a proven plan, but protecting it by enabling other options.

The Rangers Review explained in our long-read on Michael Beale’s coaching philosophy the principles that govern this team.

To ‘own the ball’ in possession and ‘own the pitch’ without it. Beale explained how the team are conditioned to defend as they want to attack and went into great detail about the benefits of the side’s structure in a revealing and educational presentation.

Interestingly, he also explained the vitality of flexibility and variation due to: “the amount of analysis staff the other clubs will have in terms of watching your team.”

This is a squad that boasts impressive depth and can play in a number of different ways. Everything is governed by the in and out of possession principles set out above - after all, the best teams in the world are highly-coached, tactically astute outfits.

Their plan B is not to abandon everything the side is built upon, but to adapt and vary.

Just look at the last three sides to win the Champions League. Jurgen Klopp’s Liverpool, Hansi Flick’s Bayern Munich and Thomas Tuchel’s Chelsea. And their opponents, Mauricio Pochettino’s Tottenham, Tuchel’s PSG and Pep Guardiola's Man City. All teams with modern, forward-thinking coaches possess a definitive style with and without the ball.

The point being, for this team to evolve tactically they don’t need to necessarily abandon the mid-block which has brought so much success or solely deploy inverted full-backs to prevent the predictability of overlaps.

Greater tactical variation will allow a continuation of the upward trajectory this team have been on since 2018.

Have there been signs of variation this season?

The only real peak of an in-game systemic switch so far this term came to accommodate the inclusion of James Tavernier and Nathan Patterson in the same team.

It appeared that two birds may be killed with a single stone in relation to this query and the variation topic but aside from the below example, no other attempts have been forthcoming to include both players in the same team.

In a friendly win over Real Madrid, Rangers switched to a 4-1-4-1 in the second half. This left Cedric Itten isolated on his own as a centre-forward and, although little can be learned from a friendly, led to Los Blancos' best spell in the game.

Tavernier and Patterson played at right midfield and right back in a 4-1-4-1. This in-game tactical tweak fixed a problem by including both players but abandoned principles. The Ibrox side wants to move possession around their shape and press from in to out, shuttling across to always protect central spaces.

This example from an away win in Braga shows a tight 4-3-3 mid-block that demonstrates those ideals perfectly.

 

With two wide midfielders in the trialled 4-1-4-1 system on show against Real, attackers couldn’t stay high and weren’t effective in defence, as the team were open and could be played through.

Scott Arfield and Glen Kamara pressed centrally with Itten but this led to easy balls being played into the half-space, with huge gaps between Steven Davis, Tavernier at right midfield and Glenn Middleton on the left.

The Tavernier and Patterson debate is something that the Rangers Review will revisit within this season. But for now, let’s explore three in-game tactical tweaks that could be used to offer in-game variation.

The positioning of full-backs

Firstly, more variation must be introduced to the positioning of either full-back.

READ MORE: Rangers' full-back options and how Nathan Patterson and Calvin Bassey will fit in 

Most teams nowadays will try to cover areas of the pitch vertically and horizontally, it’s why there is less and less traditional wing-play (think back Tavernier and Daniel Candeias under Pedro Caixinha).

Normally a full-back will occupy the wide area and the ‘winger’ the half-space, or vice versa. As seen below, Ryan Kent is infield as opposed to hugging the highlighted touchline.

Occasionally at Rangers, Tavernier drifts infield and an attacker provides width. A more intentional inverting of either or both full-backs during periods of games would allow another attacking threat to be established.

How do other teams manage this? Let’s look at Liverpool. The reason for comparison is due to the similarities in system and dependence on full-backs for creativity.

Like Rangers, Klopp’s midfield has evolved to provide more creativity on occasion. Harvey Elliot has started as the third midfielder alongside Jordan Henderson and Fabinho this season in a more Joe Aribo like role, for comparison sake.

Michael Cox highlighted in the Athletic the infield role played by Trent Alexander-Arnold in a 2-0 home win over Burnley.

Notice here Alexander-Arnold is central to create and Elliot is wide to offer an overlap and provide a one-on-one threat down the wing.

In the lead up to Liverpool's second goal, Elliot has received wide providing width on the right, freeing up Alexander-Arnold to play through Sadio Mane.

Tavernier, although extremely creative, is not a midfielder and likely would not be quite as comfortable as Alexander-Arnold in this position - who is a world-class player.

However, the captain is his team's main assist threat and if this was an in-possession tactic that didn’t require him to receive with his back to goal but rather float infield during possession, it could work and allow more threatening central positions with which to create from.

Furthermore, say either Aribo or Kent play the Elliot role in the piece above – it would allow for greater trickery and one-on-one ability from wide areas.

This type of tactic is not alien to Rangers, take the build up to Joe Aribo’s goal against Ross County or assist against Celtic from similar positions.

The option to bring Tavernier and Borna Barisic infield and push Hagi and Kamara higher while Kent and Aribo provide the width is a totally different variation that could be achieved with the same starting eleven, while not abandoning attacking principles.

Particularly when trying to break a team down, Gerrard could at times be more intentional in instructing his best one-on-one players to stay wide where they can partake in individual battles.

This is what a traditional shape may look like in a home game under Gerrard with full-backs high and inside-forwards occupying the half-space.

A varied approach could allow inside-forwards to draw wide and provide a one-on-one threat in-game.

Equally, full-backs could still stay wide when attempting to create against a deep-lying team and use the skill-set of a Kent or Aribo, as seen in the Ross County example, to double up and create avenues out wide.

Variation in build-up could be further attained by instructing Kent to stay high instead of dropping to progress the ball as Barisic goes beyond. This is an issue that so often hamstrings Rangers, Kent dropping to get on the ball in ineffective areas.

Take these examples against Dundee United and Malmo.

On both occasions, the whole opposing team is in front of him. Although occasionally this allows the 24-year-old to make untracked runs from deep beyond the defence, there is rarely any benefit to getting on the ball in such areas.

Below, is a perfect example of when inverting a full-back in the half-space and allowing Kent to isolate out wide would be impactful. The ability to vary this approach would make either tactic harder to combat due to the unpredictable nature of how Rangers may attack.

This is a subtle, in-game variation that would force the opposition to respond and keep the opposition manager guessing - as opposed to Kent dropping to receive in what is a comfortable area for the defence.

More alarming are two examples that showcase again on occasion how guilty this side can be of playing in front of teams instead of stretching them when chasing leads.

There is space here for Barisic and Kent to combine high up the pitch while Aribo, in possession, drives forward.

Kent instead is guilty of being sucked towards the ball and recycling harmless, sterile possession and the home side close their own potential avenue to goal.

STOP THE CROSS

Rangers are at their worst when playing from side to side, in front of teams, and seeking avenues to goal through crosses from deep. If the tempo drops and central overloads are not taken advantage of, Gerrard’s side can look stale in possession.

The below exerts from a StatsBomb module illustrates the small percentile of crosses from deep areas that translate into chances. 

That's not to say they never assist or increase pressure, but teams are far more comfortable defending open play crosses from the top image than the bottom.

Looking at matches from last season, the Ibrox side tended to resort to crosses in games where they were unable to break a team down.

In all competitions last season, they averaged 18.86 attempted crosses per game – against St Johnstone in a Scottish Cup defeat, 32 were made.

In a 1-1 draw with Motherwell who backed off Barisic and Tavernier and intentionally allowed the side to cross, 46 were attempted. During a 0-0 draw with Livingston near the start of the season, that number stood at 33.

This trend has continued through to this season. The 1-0 defeat to Dundee United saw 33 crosses swung in, during the home loss to Malmo that rose to 38.

This is arguably the area in which variation is most required, and as noted above greater options regarding the positioning of full-backs could help. Chasing a game, the Ibrox side have a tendency to revert to speculative crosses that have a low probability of chance creation.

This ties into the above point, perhaps doubling up out wide would drag an opposition player out of a congested penalty box and also offer the potential of working a better crossing angle.

This could help create crossing opportunities that are in more advantageous areas and closer to the goal. Slavia Prague and Malmo have both employed this tactic against Gerrard's men.

When these game states occur, Rangers need to find the space and exploit it. If that's down the flanks, double up to go around teams. If it's in behind a slightly higher block, go over the top. Against a side defending wide, find central overloads.

Variation is a necessity in these areas. Teams must know they won't only have to face crosses if they earn a lead against Rangers.

Out of possession

Finally, attention should not only be focused on offensive play but rather the prevention of opposition chances.

READ MORE: Inside Rangers' Bermuda triangle and why the right flank has been a problem - Adam Thornton

The 4-3-3 narrow mid-block that has been in place under Gerrard and Beale has garnered great success. Equally, there have been signs in Europe that teams are recognising the strength Rangers possess and targeting vulnerabilities within their system.

Slavia Prague managed to switch play quickly, overload wide areas and pick up attractive crossing positions in a Europa League tie.

The build-up to their opener at Ibrox in a 2-0 win saw deliberate positioning of two players out wide to take advantage of the space Rangers vacate when protecting central areas. 

Malmo's first goal in Sweden saw them intentionally vacate the centre of the pitch altogether. In this example – Oscar Lewicki draws wide from centre-midfield which allows Jo Inge Berget to act as a winger, as per the example above this leads to a two-on-one in which a goal is created.

Another area of weakness within this mid-block is the ability to overload the defence through vertical runs. Again, this has reared its head this season, against Malmo and Ross County.

To use the opener in Sweden as an example, Anders Christiansen runs off the back of John Lundstrum and along with the team's two forwards, makes a vertical run in behind.

As both centre-backs are occupied by this, Tavernier is dragged across which eventually leads to Rieks firing home free in space at the back post.

A similar theme was evident against Ross County. A run off the back of the midfield sees Leon Balogun face a two-on-one scenario, as Connor Goldson does not come across to support his teammate on this occasion.

A look at the home side's heat map from the game displays an obvious intention to overload the left side of Rangers' defence.

There are a number of variations to solve this problem.

In the former examples, the block could be slightly wider so that crosses can be closed down more easily. In-game, an attacker could supplement the midfield to allow better protection of wide areas.

In regards to the overloading of the defence, a midfielder could drop into the backline and go with a runner to prevent the defence from becoming dragged apart. In the above example, if Lundstrum travels with Christiansen, Tavernier can retain the team's defensive depth.

In summation, Rangers remain on an upward trajectory. They are a tactically astute team, adept at managing games and deploying numerous game plans.

The outlined tweaks are some of the tactics that Gerrard and Beale may attempt to implement in a bid to ensure their setup is ever-evolving and difficult to overcome.

The best teams evolve while on top to remain there. By the manager's own admission, this is a vital step he and his coaching staff must make this season.