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

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

Against that backdrop – and with Rangers sitting a staggering 11th in the Scottish top flight – BBC Sport have reviewed the opening matches of the season to try and analyse what Martin has been trying to do, why it hasn’t worked yet and how he is changing his style for the first time in his career.

Martin’s Rangers began looking like previous teams he’d managed. The league opener at Motherwell was a good example, with glimpses of impressive play.

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

This approach forced Motherwell captain Paul McGinn to kick the ball out for a corner, from which Rangers’ ended up scoring.

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

As the ball moved up the pitch, the full-backs began taking inverted positions in midfield. The midfield three became a single defensive midfielder, and the two attacking midfielders were encouraged to move up the pitch.

Martin’s sides aim to play through the middle of the pitch before finding the wide players in space to attack.

The wingers, as a result, were tasked with staying high and wide, with the team looking to find them isolated against the opposition full-backs.

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 insistence on short build-up play was seen, too. Passes were played at a quick pace, often in a one-touch manner. When this was executed properly, it allowed them to get up the pitch, bypassing Motherwell’s press.

Although the game ended in a draw, there were some promising signs.

The small weaknesses seen in this game were typical of Martin’s sides in the past, however, and have been amplified against better opposition.

Rangers have suffered for three main reasons.

The areas in which they’ve lost the ball have often been in the middle of the pitch, with the four defenders and holding midfielder often responsible for playing these difficult passes.

Losing the ball centrally increases the risk of conceding from a dangerous counter attack. Losing the ball in wide areas is less of a threat as the ball is further away from the goal and there is less space for opponents to operate in.

A second reason Rangers have suffered has been because of their ‘rest defence,’ a coaching term used to describe the number of players the team in possession has behind the ball, ready to defend 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.

The two central defenders and the defensive midfielder become stretched when the ball is lost and direct passes from opponents, down the middle, immediately create scenarios that Rangers have conceded from this season.

The central defenders have looked shaky at times defending one-against-one here but this is partly understandable given the situations they’ve found themselves in.

The final thing Martin has struggled with is where and how he has used individual players in his squad.

John Souttar has been deployed at both right and left centre back in alternating games. Aarons has played both right and left back.

Djeidi Gassama and Mikey Moore have both played on both wings. And Joe Rothwell has played as a single defensive midfielder despite being deployed next to a holding midfielder at times for Leeds United last season.

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

The main factor that results in a tactical plan succeeding or failing is often the quality of player at a manager’s disposal.

Players need to be able to execute the instructions being asked of 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.

Signs of this being addressed were seen in last Saturday’s game against Hibernian – only Rangers’ second domestic win.

The full-backs played wider, Gassama and Moore were used as wingers that could move inside and Nicolas Raskin was responsible for playing some of those more difficult central passes.

The 6-0 defeat by Club Brugge was a significant turning moment.

That annihilation was followed by games against Celtic and Hearts, currently the top two in the league, and for those Martin changed his system for the first time in his entire managerial career.

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

In an interview with the Coaches’ Voice in 2023, he said: “I’d said to the [MK Dons] players from the off that we weren’t going to be outcome-based. We were going to focus on each step, each game, getting closer to the team we wanted to be.

“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.

“If I was going to get sacked, I wanted to get sacked doing something I believed in.”

These are telling quotes from a coach who has stuck by them throughout even periods that have led to sackings.

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.

In the last two league games, he has adopted a 4-2-3-1 shape with summer signings Aarons and Rothwell left out. In front of the defence sits a more positionally-strict and industrial midfield duo.

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.

In build-up, Tavernier still forms a back three with the centre backs but there is more support centrally from the midfield. The keeper and defenders have been more willing to punt it up the pitch, too.

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

And looking at the league data before and after the Club Brugge loss highlights how stark the change in style has been.

You have to take into account the quality of the opposition but possession is down from 70% to almost 50%, with Rangers spending longer defending deeper and there has been an increase in how often they have gone long.

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

It is however hindering their attacking play, with the amount of shots they are taking per game almost half of what they were previously.

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

“We’re in a generation where we see coaches trying to do things that just don’t work and they die,” he said. “But they say, ‘I died, but I died with my idea.’ My friend, if you died by your ideas, you are stupid.”

With football being a business based on results, this perhaps harsh assessment is probably fair. The best coaches however adapt within their general framework rather than scrapping what they believe in altogether.

Given the poor results thus far, was there a need for Martin to change things? Of course, and he deserves some credit for doing so.

But adapting to the quality of his players whilst retaining his principles – although easier said than done – might have been a more ideal fix in the short term.

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

Such a drastic and sudden change in his approach is likely a last-ditch move in order to salvage more time.

It has worked for coaches in the past but this more pragmatic style of play has to deliver wins now or there are neither short nor long-term benefits to it.

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

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

Against that backdrop – and with Rangers sitting a staggering 11th in the Scottish top flight – BBC Sport have reviewed the opening matches of the season to try and analyse what Martin has been trying to do, why it hasn’t worked yet and how he is changing his style for the first time in his career.

Martin’s Rangers began looking like previous teams he’d managed. The league opener at Motherwell was a good example, with glimpses of impressive play.

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

This approach forced Motherwell captain Paul McGinn to kick the ball out for a corner, from which Rangers’ ended up scoring.

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

As the ball moved up the pitch, the full-backs began taking inverted positions in midfield. The midfield three became a single defensive midfielder, and the two attacking midfielders were encouraged to move up the pitch.

Martin’s sides aim to play through the middle of the pitch before finding the wide players in space to attack.

The wingers, as a result, were tasked with staying high and wide, with the team looking to find them isolated against the opposition full-backs.

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 insistence on short build-up play was seen, too. Passes were played at a quick pace, often in a one-touch manner. When this was executed properly, it allowed them to get up the pitch, bypassing Motherwell’s press.

Although the game ended in a draw, there were some promising signs.

The small weaknesses seen in this game were typical of Martin’s sides in the past, however, and have been amplified against better opposition.

Rangers have suffered for three main reasons.

The areas in which they’ve lost the ball have often been in the middle of the pitch, with the four defenders and holding midfielder often responsible for playing these difficult passes.

Losing the ball centrally increases the risk of conceding from a dangerous counter attack. Losing the ball in wide areas is less of a threat as the ball is further away from the goal and there is less space for opponents to operate in.

A second reason Rangers have suffered has been because of their ‘rest defence,’ a coaching term used to describe the number of players the team in possession has behind the ball, ready to defend 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.

The two central defenders and the defensive midfielder become stretched when the ball is lost and direct passes from opponents, down the middle, immediately create scenarios that Rangers have conceded from this season.

The central defenders have looked shaky at times defending one-against-one here but this is partly understandable given the situations they’ve found themselves in.

The final thing Martin has struggled with is where and how he has used individual players in his squad.

John Souttar has been deployed at both right and left centre back in alternating games. Aarons has played both right and left back.

Djeidi Gassama and Mikey Moore have both played on both wings. And Joe Rothwell has played as a single defensive midfielder despite being deployed next to a holding midfielder at times for Leeds United last season.

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

The main factor that results in a tactical plan succeeding or failing is often the quality of player at a manager’s disposal.

Players need to be able to execute the instructions being asked of 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.

Signs of this being addressed were seen in last Saturday’s game against Hibernian – only Rangers’ second domestic win.

The full-backs played wider, Gassama and Moore were used as wingers that could move inside and Nicolas Raskin was responsible for playing some of those more difficult central passes.

The 6-0 defeat by Club Brugge was a significant turning moment.

That annihilation was followed by games against Celtic and Hearts, currently the top two in the league, and for those Martin changed his system for the first time in his entire managerial career.

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

In an interview with the Coaches’ Voice in 2023, he said: “I’d said to the [MK Dons] players from the off that we weren’t going to be outcome-based. We were going to focus on each step, each game, getting closer to the team we wanted to be.

“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.

“If I was going to get sacked, I wanted to get sacked doing something I believed in.”

These are telling quotes from a coach who has stuck by them throughout even periods that have led to sackings.

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.

In the last two league games, he has adopted a 4-2-3-1 shape with summer signings Aarons and Rothwell left out. In front of the defence sits a more positionally-strict and industrial midfield duo.

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.

In build-up, Tavernier still forms a back three with the centre backs but there is more support centrally from the midfield. The keeper and defenders have been more willing to punt it up the pitch, too.

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

And looking at the league data before and after the Club Brugge loss highlights how stark the change in style has been.

You have to take into account the quality of the opposition but possession is down from 70% to almost 50%, with Rangers spending longer defending deeper and there has been an increase in how often they have gone long.

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

It is however hindering their attacking play, with the amount of shots they are taking per game almost half of what they were previously.

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

“We’re in a generation where we see coaches trying to do things that just don’t work and they die,” he said. “But they say, ‘I died, but I died with my idea.’ My friend, if you died by your ideas, you are stupid.”

With football being a business based on results, this perhaps harsh assessment is probably fair. The best coaches however adapt within their general framework rather than scrapping what they believe in altogether.

Given the poor results thus far, was there a need for Martin to change things? Of course, and he deserves some credit for doing so.

But adapting to the quality of his players whilst retaining his principles – although easier said than done – might have been a more ideal fix in the short term.

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

Such a drastic and sudden change in his approach is likely a last-ditch move in order to salvage more time.

It has worked for coaches in the past but this more pragmatic style of play has to deliver wins now or there are neither short nor long-term benefits to it.