As Rangers look for their new manager, what really matters?
Should Ibrox board appoint a tactical guru? Or an old- school disciplinarian?
WHAT makes a Rangers manager? Well, it depends who you ask. Apparent criteria for replacing Giovanni van Bronckhorst, if the virtual terraces of social media are a gauge, range from any prior association with Ibrox to being Jose Mourinho. That’s being flippant, of course, but it’s often portrayed that there are two distinct camps when it comes to debating the departed Dutchman’s dugout successor.
The first is those who allegedly pine for the archetypal ‘ good Rangers man’. Ideally a figurehead disciplinarian with a resplendent collection of brown brogues, they must have history at the club and be able to instil a not inconsiderable degree of fear into this underperforming squad.
Alternatively, there are those who apparently crave someone who is a coach, first and foremost. A pure tactician with a clear footballing philosophy, and preferably a track record in making it work on the pitch.
It’s clear why fans might butt heads if these were indeed the two camps. After all, there will be some far less concerned about the half space than with the half windsor knot in the new man’s impeccably ironed club tie, and vice- versa.
The truth with most supporters, as it usually does, probably lies somewhere in the middle.
Rangers do badly need an injection of fresh ideas on the pitch, that much is painfully obvious. Long before Van Bronckhorst paid the price with his job, his team appeared almost completely devoid of ideas and inspiration.
Of course, a seemingly neverending queue for the treatment table did not help his cause, nor did some less- than- stellar business in the summer transfer market. Sporting director Ross Wilson has copped his share of flak, as have the board, despite their insistence that financial rewards from reaching the Champions League group stage had been grossly inflated.
But the simple fact was Van Bronckhorst could no longer get a tune from a group of players still vastly superior to all but one domestic opponent. It did not take a managerial genius to conclude that setting up to frustrate Rangers with a low block before being aggressive when the ball turned over was the way to get results against them.
Van Bronckhorst won deserved praise for his tactical flexibility in last season’s run to the Europa League final, adjusting his approach in- game to outfox highly- regarded coaches such as Marco Rose and Domenico Tedesco as their Borussia Dortmund and RB Leipzig sides were swept up by the swell of momentum that carried Rangers all the way to Seville. However, he just could not crack the domestic code and that, ultimately, is the primary challenge facing whoever replaces him. Michael Beale, former assistant to Steven Gerrard, has emerged as frontrunner to do so.
It is no secret the current Queens Park Rangers manager was the leading tactical influence behind that Premiership title- winning regime. Indeed, there was almost as much fan disappointment in Beale leaving for Aston Villa as there was Gerrard.
‘ Beale- ball’ was the phrase coined during the 2020/ 21 campaign as Rangers became league winners for the first time in a decade without losing a single fixture. They did so with a style and efficiency that hasn’t been replicated since, even in Gerrard’s final few months in charge the following season.
The hope may be that Beale can re- inject that winning formula into a group of players, many of whom played their best football with it. Mind you, that the core squad has not significantly moved on in two seasons’ time is an issue in itself for Rangers.
But you can, at least, understand why the Ibrox board may feel this is a sensible appointment. There is, though, another side to the coin.
It’s a point that can often get lost in caricatures of the aforementioned ‘ good Rangers man’, and lazy assertions that any consideration of a manager’s strength of character amounts to pining for the return of Graeme Souness to raise the xB ( expected bollockings) level.
It really shouldn’t be controversial to suggest that any individual who occupies the Rangers dugout understands the, erm, uniqueness of the world they are about to enter. The ‘ Glasgow goldfish bowl’ is another groan- inducer but like most cliches, there is usually an element of truth in there.
The next Rangers manager must not only be able to inspire the players, but also a gargantuan fanbase.
Nobody ever doubted that Van Bronckhorst had a suitable CV and while he was well- liked, he was unable to galvanise the club when times got hard.
Contrast this with how Ange Postecoglou, against the odds, swept into a rudderless Celtic and immediately dragged everyone else with him. He isn’t doing too badly now. The greatest Rangers bosses, such as Walter Smith and Souness, had these characteristics in abundance.
The puzzle for Rangers is where they find someone who encompasses the best of both worlds. They need someone who can produce effective, attacking football while also carrying a crushing weight of expectation.
Could it be Beale? It would be unfair to judge him on the latter front considering how little time he has spent as a first- team boss.
But as he seemingly closes in on becoming Rangers’ 18th permanent manager, we could be about to find out.