15th September 2025

At the end of May the first act of our new Board was to send out a clear message:  “Our focus is simple: elevate performance, deliver results and bring Rangers back to where it belongs - at the top."

Fast forward three months and our embattled head coach was keen to pass on a further message after a visit from his employer: "[Cavenagh] spoke to the players about this is a process and a plan. We deemed it the right one 90 days ago, with bringing some players in, bringing the management team in, the leadership team. So, it's up to you guys to ignore the noise in the same way that they're going to. We'll do everything we possibly can to win today and just keep winning moving forward”.

Well, we didn’t win that day. But then the transfer window was still open, we were told there was uncertainty looming over some players and that the international break would give us a chance to reset and kick on. Indeed, Thelwell used the break to treatus to a sit down interview stressing that “we all understand what has to happen here” and referring – much like Martin would later do in his press conference before the Hearts game – that we needed to deliver immediate results. Deliver, we did not.

Now we sit tenth in the league, without a win in five league games and – at least at the time of writing – seemingly without any imminent intention to change the coach.

So if we can safely assume that the new owners used their lead in time to formulate a plan to return us to the top, that we then employed peoplepresumably to implement that plan and if we are stillcontent that we do not need to deviate from this plan, might I kindly ask what this plan looks like?

The first part of planning is to understand precisely where you are in the moment. All the harsh realities and painful truths.  

I don't wish to reopen old wounds by talking too much about last season. I think it is generally agreed that our squad was consistently in bad shape (in every sense); that most of our domestic performances bounced between dull and inept and that our fabled rebuild had stalled before it ever got going. I felt sorry for Clement but ultimately agreed that it was time to go after Queens Park.  I found the Ferguson appointment completely baffling but will give him credit for a couple of performances in an otherwise disastrous end to the season. It was perhaps only the prospect of a takeover that stopped the atmosphere from becoming truly toxic.

The new owners entered at a point where our on-field performance was, in my view, back at pre-Gerrard levels.  There have been suggestions of wider issues in the club, a culture which has developed since 55 alongside a comfortable enoughexistence of being domestic also rans.

Against this backdrop, I find it difficult to imagine anyone spending tens of millions on buying the club if the plan was simply going to be “business as usual” on the pitch. Radical change was needed.

The first indication from the owners was that they wanted to build not only a winning team but an entertaining one at that.

I’d go so far as to argue that, out of those two objectives, their primary focus was the style, presumably with the expectation that the right style would naturally lead to winning.  The clearest evidence of this was in the recruitment of a head coach who promised (and we will come back to those promises) bring a particular high energy,possession dominant football, even if other metrics like winning trophies and winning percentages ranged from not applicable to far from encouraging.Other candidates may have offered actual track records of success yet clearly found themselvesshortlisted behind a coach who would be willing to go down fighting with his principles intact.  The strength of this belief really shines through when you consider that said coach had not only become something of a joke figure following his disastrous reign in the EPL but was also (perhaps unfairly) personally stained by an embarrassingly memorablestint as a player here.

So, I think we can safely identify part one of “the plan” - get the guy who believes in the style that we want to define us and that we believe will win.

If that is the case, part two would then be to implement this style and identity through a combination of player trading and coaching. Those perpetuating any poor club culture would go, in would come those able to implement – or at the very least be capable of learning to implement - what the coach has been tasked to do.

Presumably part three would then be to execute the plan and navigate the early challenges which any change is likely to bring.  I’d class this as building momentum.

Of course, any plan of this nature would have to factor in a reasonable amount of patience and understanding while this process was undertaken.As a result, greater allowances might be made for short term results so long as the bones of an identifiable structure and style began to shinethrough.

Therefore, if we proceed on the premise that the above is something close to the actual plan, what can we take from the decision not to deviate from it in spite of the reality that has unfolded?

I think it is worth reflecting on what that reality has been.

If the primary objective is to build an entertaining, winning team then we have almost entirely failed to see evidence that is being met so far. Domestically no winsin our opening five league games and an uncomfortable but ultimately successful cup tie against lower league opposition. In Europe, aside from an excellent sixty minutes against Plzen, it had been dicey material ending in a capitulation that stank of paralysis and unprofessionalism.

If the onus was on a dogmatic coach who would change the culture and execute a defined winning system, why are we continually chopping and changing personnel, tactics and positions as if desperately hoping for a moment of magic? Inverted full backs, disjointedpressing, long throws, excessively wide midfielders, under lapping runners, inverting wingers, high lines at halfway, three at the back – a tombola of approaches and yet most of the time we revert to seeing if John Souttar can build up a head of steam on a solo run without giving the ball away.  Was that really the opening slide of his interview presentation?

If we were fully focused on recruiting the right players, why have we signed players, according to their own coach, look great in training but are too anxious to play in front of us? I happen to think that we’ve made many good individual signings this summer but I’m not sure anyone in the dressing room is thinking the same at the moment. Keeps head down, does the easy stuff, doesn’t show for the ball, tries not to get blamed. Not exactly search criteria terms on Wyscout.

But, as far as we are told, there is no need to deviate from the plan. So why is that?

Is it purely down to time? It’s a factor but every single football job has base expectations that cannot fail to be met.  See Ten Hag and Leverkusen. Had we lost every game in August 5-0 then he’d have been gone. There is always some element of performance within the time consideration. My guess is that reaching the playoff round gave false optimism.

Are they seeing things we are not? Green shoots on the pitch? If so, please do provide examples.  It is not a sustainable model for us to sign players who are competent until the point at which they attend a training session (see Antman, Miovski). Winning games necessitates scoring goals, which in turn requires you to create chances – a rare sight under this regime.

What about general faith? One might ask what we have seen in Martin now or in his track record that suggests he is remotely capable of turning this around.

I will posit the true answer lies somewhere in between time and fear.  To come in with a clear, unambiguouspublic message of the outcome you wish to achieve; to go through an extensive and exhaustive search to fill that first crucial role; to plot and weigh up significant financial investments to get it all off to the right start – and then to have that cold chilling realisation that you’ve made an enormous and immediate error and are going to look so inept and weak at the worst possible moment.  

In such moments you might think time is your ally, that it will right itself and that it won’t be an error so much as a difficult start to a well calculated and ultimately successful decision. But there is no hiding place and time is now moving glacially slowly with every action, inaction, word, body language and attire scrutinised and pulled apart under a suffocating cloud of inevitability.

As things stand, the board for whatever reason appear to be unmoved. But far from assured that we have cold hard-headed businessmen who will not be swayed by emotional decisions, the perception is fast shifting to it being one struck by paralysis after a monumentally poor execution of their original plan.  To paraphrase Mike Tyson, everyone has a plan until they get punched in the face and our new era is at risk of being KO’d before the first round of domestic fixtures has completed.  

 Greg McEwan