Ibrox has seen some strange nights this season, where events on the pitch have proven secondary to some drama off it. Brugge, Roma, any number of Russell Martin afternoons. Here was another, the latest, to end a season in which the same problems inherited last year by the US ownership remain at large, perhaps even larger, a year on. As another failed campaign concludes, James Tavernier was at Ibrox to wave goodbye after 11 years, but in a suit, not a shirt.
As team news approached for a game Rangers supporters could have done without, suggestions began to creep in that the 34-year-old would not be involved. And so it came to pass. Tavernier would arrive one final time, but only to take part in a pre-match presentation with John Greig. There was no place for him in the starting 11 or indeed the matchday squad. He would not lead out his club at Ibrox one last time. It all felt very strange.
The Rangers Review reported last night that, after being told he was not in the team, Tavernier informed Danny Rohl he would not feature at all, upset at the news. There was even doubt as to whether the right-back would be present for the pre-match events until late on.
As it turned out, Tavernier did report and took in the acclaim of the stadium he has called home for 11 years. Emotional as he applauded all four corners, you could not help but feel, however it came to this, it was not supposed to end like this. A hall-of-fame player who lifted the most coveted title in modern history and led, quite literally, his team to within penalty kicks of European glory a year later. For the moments he provided, this was not a fitting send-off.
There are two sides to the story, of course. Danny Rohl said pre-match that his decision had been motivated by Tavernier reporting an injury on Monday: “I think a little bit the story is that he had a medical issue on Monday, unfortunately. There was a question mark over whether he would be available today," he said pre-match.
“Finally, I made my decision that he would not start today because he was not 100 per cent, and in the end he stayed away from the team.”
Pressed on the matter post-match, Rohl explained that from his perspective Tavernier "did not accept" he wouldn't be in the starting 11 having been an injury doubt earlier in the week. As at his pre-match press conference, the German subtly talked of the need for fresh leadership across the board. "Today, it showed me that we need a strong cut, strong changes to move forward. We cannot accept what we saw in the last four games."
Tavernier, presumably, would have felt hurt having been in Rohl’s starting 11 at Parkhead on Sunday, only to be informed he would not be granted the same privilege here, having declared himself fit, to lead out the team one final time with his family present. There is surely plenty of emotion from his side at how this marriage has ended.
There was some disquiet about the timing of his exit announcement before the split. Tavernier told teammates and staff at the training ground shortly before it went public, with the club visibly reacting to the news rather than leading the announcement. Steven Gerrard told the Rangers Review recently that, like Mohamed Salah’s Liverpool departure, there is never a right time to break such news. Wait, and it becomes a topic, a distraction.
Generally, it was felt that the club believed this was the right time for Tavernier to leave in the summer, but perhaps, if others had their way, it would have been communicated slightly later.
This is likely more a convergence of events than a singular truth. Tavernier has been a continuity figure who has put his body on the line time and again for a club that has hollowed out in recent years. He will have his own version of the events of recent years. Yes, he should have won more, but had Rangers possessed a few more players of his ability, he might have. There is a reason every manager he has worked under has allowed him to retain the armband.
Some will believe this was the manager stamping his authority. Russell Martin called out egos before dropping four players at the start of the season, Tavernier among them. But was this the time for it? Rohl did not need another loss, nor another situation to manage.
Or, does this expose an issue that's long been in the squad and simply needs to be reset? Was this brave leadership from Rohl at a difficult time?
Others will argue this was not the moment to air dirty laundry. With nothing left to play for, the political arguably mattered more than the practical. Exits are hard to get right and very easy to get wrong. This season ends with a sour taste. Quiet boos and a banner outside were an unwelcome return of the division that clouded the autumn.
Attention spans were split all night. Hibs fans cheered as Celtic scored at Fir Park, while some in the home end kept abreast of developments at Tynecastle. The last fixture at this ground had opened with colour, noise, belief; here, all felt disillusioned and bereft of anything approaching it.
Last night spoke to the wider situation, another season ending in apathy. Defeat here means Rangers will finish with a lower points tally than last season, suffering four defeats in a row for the first time since the 1980s. This should have been a dead rubber, a low-pressure performance offering some entertainment. Instead, it was another entry in dysfunction. Dane Scarlett's late winner for Hibs was one more cruel blow in a season full of them.
Read more:
- The 11 most glaring problems facing Rangers and Andrew Cavenagh's biggest decision
- Cyriel Dessers exclusive: The inside story of 52 goals and my confusing Rangers exit
Are Rangers any closer to unity, clarity and vision? Or further away from the constant one-upmanship of chaos that has so often engulfed the club in years gone by? Not really. Not yet, anyway. You cannot question the investment of the new owners, but this season has been a catalogue of errors, ending in third place.
James Tavernier’s exit, in a way, becomes fitting. A complex legacy. Pulled down by those around him at times on the pitch? Undoubtedly. Too culpable in too much failure to signal a new era last summer? Probably. But from either side, this was not the right way to say goodbye.
Share