Warburton never studied opposition

[KeyserSoze 14,604]

Why are folks surprised by all these revelations about his tactics 

  It's what he always said, many a time. We could see it transpire on the pitch and in his team selection and predictable nature of our game plan. 

Stop having faux outrage, it was always there ffs. 

[K.A.I 36,183]

4 minutes ago, graeme_4 said:

I'm heading out to the game now, but my thoughts are this. 

He was building a new team with a new philosophy, and it worked well in the Championship with a team of free transfers and very low cost players.

We were excellent in the first 6 months. It was extremely entertaining, and exactly what we needed after McCoist. We beat and outplayed Celtic, when in previous games we couldn't get a shot on goal. 

The summer activity was the key. Celtic got a good manager in, and added real quality to their team, we didn't. Ultimately his style / philosophy only works when our players are superior to the opposition. I'd suggest technically they are still superior, but can't compete physically. 

He has flaws and bad points, but so does any manager. Can call it deluded, or call it being steadfast in his beliefs. 

He conducted himself like a thoroughly decent, honest man and participated in many things over and about his remit. But then he fucked it acting like a snake along with Weir. Spat in the face of the fans that supported him. As I said in another thread, I was wrong about him. 

Its easy in hindsight to point out that he was full of shit, or an inadequate manager, or to tell everyone how you knew better. Ultimately, almost every manager at Rangers leaves after a period of success and then failure. If you're negative in the extreme about everything (not just aimed at you) then you'll always be 'correct' eventually. 

A lot of that I agree with. 

I had a lot of good sentiment with Advocaat left and Le Guen too... obviously Smith ... McCall to a smaller extent even though he fucked it against Motherwell but I knew he had the club at heart and wasn't a snake. 

For me personally the writing was on the wall after the Scottish Cup final against Hibs as our preparations in the build-up then tactics on the day were a disgrace but was happy to roll with it and give him the benefit of the doubt.

It was after the first game at Tynecastle (the 2-0 defeat) I personally thought he has to go his times up. Until then had absolutely no issue with anyone who seen something and wanted to persevere with him ... it's more in the recent weeks when people were still thinking something massive was getting built. 

[raging blue 1972 894]

This was obvious - I made this point a good while ago

[TEFTONG 60,274]

How any footballer can accept that his Manager/Coach will not do anything to counter an oppositions strengths or exploit their weaknesses defies belief with me..

He should be forced to pay back half his wages if this is true..

[Courtyard Bear 41,357]

The rat was a youth academy coach no more no less. 

 

[Bluepeter9 5,167]

3 hours ago, .Williamson. said:

@Bluepeter9

How do you feel about his long term project now?

 

 

Gutted. Do you feel good now? 

[Bruno's Manbun 2,631]

3 hours ago, ritchieshearercaldow said:

Article in TMOS quoting Senderos, saying Warburton never studied the opposition, he said no preparatory work had been done on the merits or tatics of Morton, he went on to say that it was normal to overlook the opposition in favour of the teams own game plan.

We don't really look at the opposition that much, We concentrate on ourselves.

 

This is something I always wondered about, most managers will have some sort of facts on the strengths or weaknesses of the opposition, but it seems Warburton was only interested in plan A.

Hopefully any new manager will play to to the strengths of his players and the weaknesses of the opposition.

Genuinely said I thought this was the case since the start of this season. Clueless. 

[.Williamson. 82,733]

4 minutes ago, Bluepeter9 said:

Gutted. Do you feel good now? 

That he's gone? Absolutely.

[Tenerife Bear 1,748]

1 hour ago, Reformation Bear said:

I certainly do recall it being said by him and reported about him that he didn't go to opposition grounds to watch them play.   

I'm only guessing here, and its not looking to justify his approach, but maybe he figured (or was told by DW) that there was no great benefit in going to look at the opposition as they'd change the way the play against Rangers anyway (everyone behind the ball) and regardless of whether it was home or away.  

I get that and it's probably right but the man calling the shots still has to see who danger men are, how players play,  signature moves and passes, runs certain players make, goals certain teams score regardless of how that particular team set up on the day. 

[bombaybadboy08 15,660]

Do you think he's like that everywhere in his life?

Journo -"Mark, you bit your wife's clitoris last night during cunnilingus, how do you plan on sorting that tonight?"

Mark -"I'm not interested in my wife or what threats are posed, I just worry about myself and stick to plan A."

Journo- "But Mark, obviously your wife is involved in intercourse and it's clearly a problem you have?"

Mark- "Problem? What problem? Look at the stats, I have children, I've trained well, I'm in great shape and my bed geography is getting better every week. 

 

[cushynumber 25,178]

Not studying the opposition means every game can and will through up surprises that he hasn't thought of. 

 

[Jack The Flipper 5,936]

4 hours ago, K.A.I said:

Ask him when he's back his walk. (probably back down about 5pm this afternoon)

he's a dug?

[pcbear 10,924]

If that was the case it is outrageous/disrespectful/and downright stupid, I am sure this would have come out before now if true.

[SPWF 8,296]

9 hours ago, jbm26896 said:

No problem  with his opinion at all , just stating I find it odd that people who slaughtered him on here are now using him as a tool to slaughter MW.

We will have a new manager soon and all will be good hopefully. 

The fact that he's a terrible football player doesn't make his insight invalid. 

[AlCapone 7,678]

11 hours ago, ritchieshearercaldow said:

Article in TMOS quoting Senderos, saying Warburton never studied the opposition, he said no preparatory work had been done on the merits or tatics of Morton, he went on to say that it was normal to overlook the opposition in favour of the teams own game plan.

We don't really look at the opposition that much, We concentrate on ourselves.

 

This is something I always wondered about, most managers will have some sort of facts on the strengths or weaknesses of the opposition, but it seems Warburton was only interested in plan A.

Hopefully any new manager will play to to the strengths of his players and the weaknesses of the opposition.

Oh well, must be true....

[ritchieshearercaldow 22,190]

23 minutes ago, AlCapone said:

Oh well, must be true....

Aye the guy's a liar as well as a shite footballer, they were his quotes, it was an interview.

[showtime69 514]

http://info.scout7.com/en/

i know for a fact we use this mob

one of my mates scouts games for them and he said a few times when hes went to whatever game he assigned to his ticket is in an envelope with his name and "Rangers FC" written on it.

he basically watches the game and types up a report type thing online after the game.

bit of a joke i think that we are using something like this and cant do it all in house ourselves

[MasterD 7,436]

No surprise since he said as much himself ages ago.

I'm sure we have a video analysis guy that spent a short time looking at opponents and gave him a bit of info. Makes no difference if you don't actually use it to counter anything the video guy sees right enough.

[loyalfollower 1,543]

In all fairness going to watch Aberdeen vs Dundee wouldn't tell the manager anything about how they will set up against us.. his biggest downfall was underestimating how much the others raise their game against us and he never brought players with ability to raise our game higher.

 

[kyleh1872 87]

scary...really scary. What i want to know is what the fuck were they doing during their "analysis" they seemed to spend most their time sitting watching past games and the "opposition" apparently. 

[williamcarvel9 87]

This was obvious from the Hibs match after the semi final. Stubbs had changed to 3 at the back against us. It left the midfield flooded and left 2 up top v our essentially 2 centre halves as Stubbs knew we would leave them exposed. This was him preparing for the cup final. Did Warburton take note? Did he fuck.

Then in the final he makes a sub at his usual timing, takes Zelalem off who, was actually our best player that day. Sometimes in games you just have to leave things the way they are and don't upset the rythymn. Then as we know the last 10 minutes was criminal to not shut up shop and keep it tight and see the game through. That's where the warning signs were there for all to see.

Then for me, when I was done with Warburton was the 5-1 defeat. You have to react to games. 2-1 down and 10 men, Smith (for example) would have kept it compact and looked to score an equaliser on the break, if we lost it would have been 2-1, 3-1. He would never have let it get to 5.

What was Warburtons reaction after the game, was it not something like "it isn't the end of the world" Therein sat a man who wasn't fit to manage us and didn't know what it takes to manage us.

[KeyserSoze 14,604]

21 minutes ago, kyleh1872 said:

scary...really scary. What i want to know is what the fuck were they doing during their "analysis" they seemed to spend most their time sitting watching past games and the "opposition" apparently. 

MW always said it was about us not them. His analysis was about OUR football no one else. His tactics, game plan and set up was about US, not the opposition.  Everything he did was about US  

He commented on it several times. 

Why are people now thinking this is a revelation- it's not, it's always been his way. 

Folks probably weren't listening that's all. 

He was wrong btw. No one can afford to not study what we are up against week to week. 

But he never once alluded to watching other teams or having them watched. 

[govanblue 16,847]

2 minutes ago, KeyserSoze said:

MW always said it was about us not them. His analysis was about OUR football no one else. His tactics, game plan and set up was about US, not the opposition.  Everything he did was about US  

He commented on it several times. 

Why are people now thinking this is a revelation- it's not, it's always been his way. 

Folks probably weren't listening that's all. 

He was wrong btw. No one can afford to not study what we are up against week to week. 

But he never once alluded to watching other teams or having them watched. 

Most managers say this or something like it.  It's a throwaway cliche at the end of the day.

In most cases it's not usually true.

I expect in this case it's not strictly true either - except by degree.

 

 

 

 

[JRodgA2k8 542]

It was fairly obvious from his various interviews, always "it's about what we do not the opposition...with respect...it has to be this way". 

After games we'd go away and learn from it and work on it but if we did the ground work prior to the games by working out the opposition then both the learning and working would have been done already.

It's no wonder everyone got tired of his rhetoric this season.

[KeyserSoze 14,604]

19 minutes ago, govanblue said:

Most managers say this or something like it.  It's a throwaway cliche at the end of the day.

In most cases it's not usually true.

I expect in this case it's not strictly true either - except by degree.

I accept that. The way he pulled Tav into midfield when we played that lot was evident he had some notion about countering their attack.