EVER since Steven Gerrard speculated a system that could accommodate Nathan Patterson and James Tavernier, it has been clear that the former’s time as supporting cast was limited.
“They’re two fantastic players, so I can’t have one of them on the bench for every game of the season that’s for sure,” Gerrard said in pre-season.
Tavernier, Rangers’ captain and one of their most influential players remains in his peak years with a long-term contract. Patterson, a generational talent and boyhood fan is already first-choice for his country and way beyond ready for the first team. But both play in the same position.
Giovanni van Bronckhorst has identified ‘quick wins’ successfully this past month. Addressing a long-ball vulnerability, introducing fresh attacking rhythms, helping key players rediscover form. Of all the situations inherited, the Patterson and Tavernier debacle remains unanswered.
That is, of course, entirely reasonable. The ex-Feyenoord manager has hit the ground running in remarkable fashion and adapted while earning big wins. The complexity of fielding both players is underlined by the lack of immediate solutions offered.
Bluntly, rotation is not the answer. That approach has led to Patterson playing far too little this season. Gerrard had also muted that given the load placed on Tavernier in previous years, a reduction in his playing time wouldn’t be all that bad. That always felt like a stop-gap, though. Putting off the inevitability that both must play or one must leave.
Let’s focus on the latter first. The Rangers Review discussed how a three at the back system, not dissimilar to the shape Van Bronckhorst has relied upon in build-up, could solve the issue in the summer. Allowing Patterson to provide width and Tavernier to arrive in the final third when needed.
Van Bronckhorst has, as Gerrard did against St Mirren this season, introduced Patterson to offer greater defensive protection high up the pitch when protecting a lead.
He explained after the win over Sparta Prague: “Their left-back was playing almost like a left-winger. If you have two full-backs defending that space it’s easier. When you have a winger there he’s not used to that.
“Defensive-wise he [Patterson] did really well controlling that space. We know with his drive going forward he could be dangerous in transition moments.”
A successful Rangers team shouldn’t spend too many games holding out. A proactive selection is required.
Perhaps, looking at the full-back alterations and new build-up structure that has been used gives insight as to how that may materialise.
READ MORE: How Rangers' wide transformation derives from Pep Guardiola's 'non-negotiable' tactic
As explained previously, Borna Barisic has tucked in to form a back three in build-up at times. This allows him to ‘arrive instead of occupying’ in the final third, protect the defence in transition and accommodate the forward runners from midfield.
The sliding motion that sees Barisic come infield from his left-back starting spot could be mirrored from the right.
This was seen briefly against Dundee United prior to an early pre-planned system change.
Preferentially, Tavernier wouldn’t have to slot in at centre-back as this rotation would require. However, given that Rangers are lacking a right-winger - someone to consistently provide width and pace from that flank - a problem could become the solution due to Patterson's one-v-one ability.
Zonally, Tavernier’s comfort to come infield would allow Patterson the freedom of the right. Here, the Rangers captain arrives unmarked against St Johnstone due to his deeper starting position.
Later in the same game, he provides an underlap. Again benefitting from the freedom to explore central opportunities.
Similar themes were evident against Livingston. The width on the right provided by Ianis Hagi pinned the opposing defender and allowed for gaps to be opened up that Tavernier could exploit.
Such runs are hard to track and would allow both Tavernier and Patterson to impact the final third with their respective qualities. Whether the defensive balance could be struck would dictate the system's usefulness.
Left-back has been mused as a solution, too. If playing inverted, either Patterson or Tavernier could drive infield and across the pitch. But the former’s forced inclusion in that spot last weekend showed the limitations of such a plan.
READ MORE: Rangers transfer linked Andreas Skov Olsen scouted: A goalscoring winger who 'attacks the posts'
"It’s not ideal to play with Nathan [Patterson] on the left but I think today we also needed our full-backs to support," said Van Bronckhorst.
Patterson’s ‘arriving’ in the final third was made less effective by his preference to use his right foot. The space was normally outside of Kent once the winger had cut inside.
A look at Barisic’s pass and carry final third map from the Premiership games he has played under Van Bronckhorst show that overlaps are more preferable to underlaps.
Striking a balance when Kent is so dangerous driving infield seems unlikely with a right-footer supporting him.
Tavernier, as has been the case with every manager during his spell at the club, appears integral to Van Bronckhorst’s plans. Consideration will be given to the financial surroundings of this situation. Rangers’ captain will have spent nine years at the club when his current contract ends. Everything suggests this will be where he finishes his career.
Everton’s reported interest in Patterson appears to not be shifting. And he could command a relatively high fee. Seamus Coleman is in need of competition. The succession plan on Merseyside could offer a more attainable right-back slot in the immediate future. The Irish defender is three years the senior of Tavernier.
For the temptation of Premiership football to be resisted, more minutes must surely be forthcoming for Patterson in one way or another.
A solution may well be found over the winter break. With sustained periods of time to work on the training pitch, Van Bronckhorst will be able to mould the product that has been offered up to this point. And perhaps find an eventual answer to the question Gerrard posed back in July.
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here