Time for the good, the bad, & the ugly from yesterday's Celtic vs Rangers game. Non-penalty xG was 1.44 vs 0.62 per Wyscout on 14 vs 8 shots. Lots to unpack here so apologies in advance for the length. npxG before the red card was 1.38 vs 0.41 on 12 vs 4 shots, but that only

tells a very small part of the story, IMO. I've seen a number of people, including several reasonable analytically minded, reference the xG difference as being relatively narrow and using as a rationale as to why the game was closer than a "dominant" characterization.

Good goes to the decision to go with the diamond. As I will document in the next section, the system resulted in a relative orgy of space and sequences of play full of opportunities. I was actually surprised Rangers persisted with the 4-3-3 coming out of halftime.

Only other good and MOTM goes to Ajer. Not going to list stats due to length of this, but he put in an excellent performance, IMO.

Bad will be lengthy and can be summarized by poor decision making by players. Some of this is likely due to inherent player tendencies, some to

coaching, and also some to the fact that 5 months was wasted and these players haven't had much time playing together in this system.

I am going to go through a number of instances where decision making was questionable to outright bad. Having re-watched the first 62 minutes

of the game, the bad decision making in the final 3rd was chronic.

1st is in 6th minute when Turnbull makes a good decision but then Griffiths makes a terrible decision by shooting rather than playing it to Edouard. Griffiths was really bad in the game, IMO.

2nd example begins something similar to my poor wife's 20 years with me- 12 minutes of disappointment.

I highlight this one because it is an example of our players not having the awareness or confidence to play passes central to Soro in space. The 2nd shot here is blurry but

shows the space in front of Soro had Ajer played him in- the 3rd is after Ajer's long ball comes back out and he misses Soro in space again and passes backwards.

Next is not a decision issue (screwed up- so out of order and this is at 9 minute mark), but shows a clear goal scoring chance that would not be quantified by xG- Frimpong has Griffiths open for a back post run and flubs the cross right to McGregor.

Ok- back to my wife's disappointment timeline: three of Laxalt decisions, with 1st in 12th minute when McGregor plays him into space. Tavernier does a good job of closing down but Laxalt makes a decision to attempt a cross rather than take him on to the byline.

Then less than 3 minutes later he again has the ball in space and rather than playing to Edouard, he attempted to go past Tavernier and kicked it out for a throw. Third was then just over a minute later when he passed to Turnbull with much better options available.

Laxalt completed just 12 of 23 forward passes and accurate on 0 of 6 crosses. His pressing was generally good but he was predictably poor in attack.

About a minute later, Christie has a dangerous run going and decides to play wide instead of centrally. All three players then

make back post runs and Frimpong makes a poor cross to the front post to noone.

Tried to do these in chronological order, so forgive me- back to 13th minute and a bad McGregor shot despite passing options.

Next is in the 21st minute where Soro starts the attack with a central line breaking pass. A few seconds later, Frimpong is wide and makes a good decision to pass to Turnbull making a great run, then has an inside lane for a give and go directly at goal in space. Turnbull makes

the wrong decision. Turnbull attempts a cross which is deflected and ends up with Griffiths' decision to shoot with Edouard available in space for a 1vs 1. This leads me to the characterization of McGregor having a great game in goal. This save was a good one but

total post-shot xG he faced was just 0.75 and he dumped the other 2 shots on goal directly in front for potential rebound shots. His other good "save" was after his 1st dumping when Tavernier interceded and Edouard was off side.

Chance creation and questionable decisions

persisted into the 2nd half, despite shots on target not resulting. Here we have Frimpong in 51st minute with Griffiths open in dangerous area and he decides to try and beat 2 men instead.

In the 53rd minute, Christie plays wide instead of through to Edouard, and then Griffiths at 54 minute mark in space deciding to make an aimless cross to noone.

Last example I will show is Frimpong again in the 55th minute again making a bad decision with teammates nearby in dangerous areas.

Any of these on their own could be me being picky, but the bad decisions were chronic, IMO. I haven't even gone over Christie's shooting, etc.

So while Rangers were unsurprisingly organized & often times disciplined in their shape, Celtic's system resulted in a lot of opportunities.

Ugly goes to the reality of the current situation. The attempts to rationalize gross mismanagement and incompetence have been widespread.

I warned in advance & documented them in real time for 5 months.The club's cash reserves have been exhausted backing an incoherent transfer policy & an incompetent manager. We now face a transfer window with 4 of our most valuable players down to 18 months on their contracts, all

while facing a 19 point gap and significant risks.

The latest wave in the pandemic may heighten uncertainties and pressure transfer values this, and perhaps, in the summer window. If players are retained to play out the season, risks of long term injuries could materially

impact transfer values on players within 12 months of contracts expiring. Does the club decide to get what they can in this window? What would that mean for supporter morale in advance of season ticket renewals for next season and potential for CL qualification?

What are the chances the process of long term modernization is competently done under growing supporter anger, and even worse, apathy?

This is a mess, and it was preventable. The people responsible should have little or no role in crafting a vision for the future, IMO. End.