Why has Martin’s approach not worked at Rangers?

Despite his front-footed attacking style of play, Russell Martin’s Rangers were humiliated by Club Brugge in Champions League qualifying and have yet to win any of their first five Scottish Premiership games.

Fans have protested against Martin before, during and after matches, demanding his removal, and pundits have queried the former Swansea City and Southampton head coach’s approach.

The most recent setback for Martin’s leadership came from Genk’s struggling Belgian side’s defeat on Thursday in the Europa League.

Rangers, Martin’s management team, had a beginning similar to those he’d led. There were some encouraging moments in Motherwell’s league opener.

When Motherwell took their goal-kicks, Rangers ‘ attackers pushed high, applying a full press in a man-to-man fashion.

The ball was kicked out for a corner by Motherwell’s Paul McGinn, who was forced to score from where Rangers went.

Rangers set up in a 4-3-3 formation on the ball. When building out from the back, right-back James Tavernier became a third central defender with left-back Max Aarons holding his wide position.

Martin’s teams aim to attack from the middle of the pitch before finding the wide players in the middle.

The team wanted to isolate themselves against the opposition full-backs, so the wingers were given the task of staying high and wide.

Historically, Martin’s teams have scored through allowing the wingers to express themselves in one-against-one situations, before shooting or cutting the ball back.

Martin’s steadfast preference for quick buildup play was also apparent. Passes were often played in a one-touch, quick-paced manner. When this was executed properly, it allowed them to get up the pitch, bypassing Motherwell’s press.

There were some encouraging signs after the game ended in a draw.

Rangers have suffered three main causes.

The four defenders and holding midfielders frequently played these challenging passes, and the places where they frequently lost the ball were often in the middle of the pitch.

Losing the ball centrally increases the risk of conceding from a dangerous counter-attack. Because the ball is farther away from the goal and there is less room for the opposition to move in, losing the ball in wide areas is less of a threat.

Rangers have suffered as a result of their “rest defence,” a coaching term used to describe how many players are present behind the ball and ready to defend it if they lose it.

When Rangers have tried to force a pass forward, there have been numerous occasions in which they’ve only had three players back ready to defend.

When the ball is lost, the defensive midfielder and the two central defenders become stretched. The Rangers have conceded from this season on consecutive possessions from opponents down the middle right away.

Finally, where and how he used individual players in his squad has been a problem for Martin.

In alternating games, John Souttar has been a center-back at both right and left. Aarons has played at both right-back and left-back.

Mikey Moore and Djeidi Gassama both played on opposite wings. And despite being used alongside a holding midfielder at times for Leeds United last year, Joe Rothwell has only ever played defensive midfield.

Questions can be raised about his tactical decisions, but Martin has found relative success with this approach at points throughout his career.

The quality of the player at the disposal of a manager is frequently the main determining factor in whether a tactical plan is successful or unsuccessful.

Players must be able to carry out the instructions that are given to them. They ideally need to be in familiar roles that get them into zones on the pitch they’re comfortable in, too, and sometimes that requires a manager to tweak his approach.

Only Rangers’ second domestic victory came against Hibernian last Saturday, which showed that this issue was being addressed.

For those who were annihilated by that defeat, Martin switched to a different system for his entire managerial career, playing games against Celtic and Hearts, both of which are currently the top two in the league.

In his first job as manager of MK Dons, he lost his first four games and even then he refused to change.

He stated in an interview with the Coaches’ Voice in 2023 that he had already told the MK Dons players that we weren’t going to be outcome-based. We were going to pay attention to advancing further into the team we wanted to be with each step, each game.

” On all the courses I have done, every manager who came in and spoke said one of the regrets they had was changing or going away from what they thought was important because of the pressure they felt when results weren’t going well.

“I wanted to get fired doing something I believed in if I was going to be fired.”

The fact Martin has moved away from the philosophy he has stuck by for so many years perhaps illustrates just how much pressure he is under at Ibrox.

With Aarons and Rothwell absent from his last two league games, he has changed to a 4-2-4-3 configuration. A more stout and industrial midfield duo is located in front of the defense.

Martin would typically ask his full-backs and attacking midfielders to get up the pitch, overloading the midfield and wide areas in attack, but in recent games there has been a reluctance in committing players to attack.

Tavernier still forms a back three with the center-backs in the build-up, but the midfield receives more central support. Both the keeper and the defenders have been more eager to punt up the pitch.

These appear to be pragmatic changes that stray away from a Martin side.

The impact of the Club Brugge loss on the league’s data before and after the game is obvious.

The quality of the opposition is important, but possession is down by almost 50%, with Rangers defending more heavily and having a longer lead time.

They are also facing fewer shots and the plan appears to have been put in place to solidify the team in the face of conceding big chances.

A recent Jose Mourinho quote touched upon the idea of managers having a set style of play.

Coaches are in a generation where they try to do things that don’t work and end up dying, he said. However, they claim that I died with my idea. My friend, if you died by your ideas, you are stupid”.

This perhaps harsh assessment is probably fair because football is a business that depends on results. However, the best coaches stay true to their general principles rather than completely reject what they believe.

Given the poor results thus far, was there a need for Martin to change things? Of course, and he merits some praise for it.

Although easier said than done, adapting to the quality of his players while preserving his principles might have been a better solution in the long run.

After all, there were genuinely good things about his style of play in a few of the earlier games.

Perhaps it was a last-ditch decision to save more time to make such a drastic and sudden change in his approach.