As Fraser Taylor raced clean through on goal last night, splitting the Rangers defence, Derek McInnes rested his head between his hands. At the Broomloan end, where Hibs recently left Ibrox with all three points thanks to a late deflection, his side were probably due some fine margins of their own, certainly based on their own moments in front of that stand squandered earlier in the evening. Step forward Ivor Pandur and, later, Bojan Miovski.
Let's start with the facts: Rangers should have been ahead at the break against St Mirren last night, creating 1.41xG and 12 shots by that point , and finishing with 2xG to 0.8 over the course of the game. McInnes branded it "a crime" that his team didn't trudge in a goal ahead at the break.
However, after the interval, the hosts managed only four shots before Miovski's late winner to a tune of 0.23xG. So what happened?
"I thought between 65 and 85 minutes, St Mirren were the better team. St Mirren stepped on to us; I think they started to press us a bit higher and we were guilty of so many poor decisions ," McInnes said, admitting his switch away from a 4-4-2 to a 4-2-3-1 around the hour mark didn't work.
"The amount of poor decisions we made in those 20 minutes was nowhere near good enough. What we needed to do was something like the goal.
"When the press comes on to them and they start to get a wee bit more aggressive, a wee bit more encouragement that they can upset us, and they go man for man at the back, why not just play forward? We were so... I don't know if we think we're Rangers and we think we're better than that, and we'll still keep playing our little pretty patterns and we'll try and get out.
"It was annoying me that our reluctance and our failure to play forward was killing us, and bringing unnecessary pressure on ourselves. The goal is an example of bypassing the press , playing up to Ryan, a flick on, Bojan timing his run and running through, and a brilliant finish nonetheless."
Every manager has a belief about how a game should be played and, as a result, every system has its upside and its downside. Here was McInnes setting out his stall. Rangers found success in the first half by playing forward directly and early, with numbers at the top of the park. By keeping full-backs and wingers wide and overwhelming the visitors. But as St Mirren started to ask more questions of them on the ball after the break and take some risks of their own, the control needed to launch those attacks started to dissipate.
Here's a good example of Rangers' principles, played out in the GIF below. Notice first that the hosts have an extra man in defence, with St Mirren not pressing man for man. Dan Neil points for the ball to go wide as that's how and where McInnes wants to progress forward , vacating the middle to flood wide areas and the forward line. The speed at which Rangers attack means there's space behind the defence to hit and stretch St Mirren, with bodies high and wide to capitalise.
The main point to remember is this: Rangers want to attack with width and numbers high up the park directly. This GIF, taken before an excellent chance for Ryan Naderi at the back post, is very descriptive. Note the risks and rewards here. If Naderi loses this flick-on, or Raskin doesn't spray the ball wide perfectly, St Mirren have numbers in the centre to pounce and progress forward in the most dangerous zone at pace. But because Rangers do get it wide, they can make use of their two-vs-one.
After the break, that risk-reward balance started to tip in the visitors' favour.
Rangers dictated the tempo of the first half and forced St Mirren to play on their terms but, after the break, it was Craig McLeish's side who controlled things. Why? They pressed more aggressively, meaning Rangers didn't often have a free centre-back to progress the ball and couldn't gain a foothold up the park.
But while McInnes was justified by the late goal in his frustration at his side not testing that aggressive approach from the visitors, it was also direct play, which had been his side's strength before the break, that worked against Rangers.
The Rangers boss wants to keep bodies high up the park to bypass the press directly, as seen for Miovski's goal. However, that arguably left his team too reliant on direct play when they needed to take the sting out of the game and gain a foothold, to progress up the pitch with some control before playing vertical and direct.
Rangers had 58 successful passes into the final third before the break. That dropped to 43 after the interval. St Mirren had 23, a number which then rose to 44 .
The risk of McInnes' 4-4-2 is twofold; one, it can grant the opposition too much control of the centre of the pitch, while Rangers themselves can lack control when build-up becomes too direct. Indeed, that off-ball tendency to press man for man was what ultimately caused the two big chances to win the game, first for Fraser Taylor and then Miovski.
Remember how well stock St Mirren were in the first half if they won the ball in the centre? That's how Taylor's chance originated.
As stated, every system has its weaknesses and risks. The reason teams take risks playing out from the back, for example, is to create space they can arrive into higher up the park in a controlled manner.
And it was St Mirren's own man-to-man marking at the back that allowed Miovski and Naderi to create the late winner.
McInnes was growing more irate at his team as the half wore on and switched back to a 4-4-2 for the final minutes to match up against St Mirren's man-for-man press, a decision vindicated by the late goal. Why?
"It was annoying me that our reluctance and our failure to play forward was killing us, and bringing unnecessary pressure on ourselves," he said, having criticised individuals, presumably his centre-backs, for slowing the game down too often.
For much of the second half, Rangers' direct routes forward invited pressure instead of applying it, though. McInnes was incensed at Manny Fernandez for not playing forward at an angle in the example below, instead circulating the ball.
As shown by the body shape of the St Mirren attack, from potentially defending a diagonal on their heels, they were suddenly pressing on their toes.
There was an irony that the direct play that seemed to epitomise Rangers' losing control created their winner and, although the home side deserved this win over the course of the match, St Mirren also went so close to seeing a Declan John cross diverted into the net from close range.
McInnes was right to ensure his team eventually went back to an approach that served them well before the break. However, you can't ignore the risks of this approach. Modern football, although becoming more transitional, obsesses over territorial control for this very reason; risks and rewards are always delicately poised.
In some ways, Miovski neatly summarises the benefits and risks of the approach; he's so effective in the position to win the game, but how do you get him the ball there? Because in operating with two strikers, you can effectively sacrifice your ability to build through the pitch. You can be well stocked to take a chance structurally, but what do you trade off to have those bodies high up the pitch?
This win will do wonders for the team's confidence and the supporters', proving that games can be won late on. It was merited over the course. However, such a drop-off between this approach working and hampering Rangers can't become a common feature.
Read more:
- The Derek McInnes foretelling that came true in late and dramatic St Mirren win
- The new reason that Derek McInnes can finally unleash favoured Rangers template
The desire to attack with speed and width made Rangers dangerous before the break and vulnerable after it. It's up to McInnes to bring the ceiling and the floor closer together.
Share