Heading into today’s showdown, it is hard to muster much excitement for what should be a pulsating derby. With two of the club’s key first-team players conspicuously absent from the squad list, the fixture suddenly feels hollow — stripped of much of its eagerly-anticipated bite. For fans of Rangers, the decision by head coach Danny Röhl to leave these names out of his starting group reeks of either over-boldness or misjudgement — and the reaction from the terraces has been fierce.
The Setting
Rangers arrive at one of their biggest fixtures of the season — an encounter that has all the usual screams of “must-win”, rivalry intensity and bragging rights — but the mood feels deflated. Supporters who had been gearing up for a high-stakes roller-coaster now look bewildered. The absence of two influential players alters the narrative: instead of “which side shows up”, it now becomes, “what version of the side will we get?” When the feeling is that you’re not getting your first-choice XI, you lose some of the confidence and expectation that underpin these occasions.
Röhl, the German coach installed with a mandate to stabilise and re-energise the squad, has made some bold tactical moves since his arrival. He is clearly trying to stamp his vision on the team. But on a day when the atmosphere demands both stability and star power, his decision to exclude these names feels risky — maybe too risky. The club’s supporters have made clear their frustration: they believe the omission of two stalwarts undercuts the matchday spectacle and undermines the chance to go toe-to-toe with rivals with full teeth.
What the decision means
Excluding key players from the first squad for a major derby sends out several signals — some positive, some alarming. On one hand, it suggests Röhl is unafraid to make difficult choices. He is showing that nobody has a guaranteed spot, that performance, fitness and training counts. It is a modern coach’s mantra: club before individual, system before star. That approach can pay dividends in the medium to long term.
On the other hand, when the missing players are among your most influential performers, excluding them for such a fixture invites questions: Are they injured? Out of form? Not trusted? Or simply surplus under the new regime? For fans expecting a full-tilt battle, the sight of a weakened or at least changed side is deflating.
When two first-choice names are missing, the chemistry on the pitch shifts. Tactical cohesion may falter, the leadership in key areas may be absent, match-winners may be missing. Against a keen opponent, that can be the difference between a gritty fight and a limp performance.
The Players & Context
The two players in question are Mohamed Diomande and Djeidi Gassama — both of whom have been regarded as central to the squad’s ambitions this season.
Diomande, the Ivorian midfielder, has been earmarked for a major role in the middle of the park. In analysis ahead of this fixture, he was cited as “almost guaranteed to start” and an integral part of the midfield axis. His dynamism, ability to break up play and push forward have been key underwriting factors for the system. Gassama, the winger-turned-attacker, has likewise been a bright spark since joining the club. He boasts serious potential and a flair that excites supporters.
That gives you the context: two players of importance, two players whom supporters had hoped to see today, yet neither is in the first squad. The decision to omit them (for whatever reason) is therefore a shock to many.
Why the Outing Has Sparked Fury Among Fans
From the supporter’s vantage point the reaction is understandable. Here’s why:
- Expectation of a full-force contest: In a derby against a fierce rival, the instinct is to bring out your best weapons – to field your strongest eleven. When the side is changed, even if for valid reasons, fans interpret it as a lack of commitment or a tilt toward a lesser version of the team.
- Loss of perceived value: When players invested in over the summer or touted as key pieces are left out, supporters feel the investment is being downgraded. It feels like a diminishment of ambition.
- Friability of belief: Football at this level thrives on confidence and momentum. Leaving two key figures out shifts the dynamic from “we are at full strength” to “something is missing”. That subtle change can erode belief in the playing squad and the manager.
- Communication vacuum: Often when such decisions are made, the club needs to communicate clearly. Are the players injured? Suspended? Tactically rested? If the reason is opaque, supporters default to the worst interpretation: “They are not trusted, so we are weaker.”
- Derby significance: In normal circumstances, the old-firm style clash is more than just three points. It carries legacy, psyche, momentum. Fielding anything less than your strongest hand is hence a major statement — whether intentional or not.
Assessing Röhl’s Rationale (and Risks)
From Röhl’s perspective, there could be legitimate strategic reasons behind the decision. Perhaps one or both players are not fully fit. Perhaps their recent performances have dipped and the coach wants to make a statement of accountability. Perhaps he wants to invoke competition for places and push the collective rather than relying on individuals. These are valid managerial tools.
But the risk is significant. In high-pressure fixtures, you want experience, cohesion and reliability. If the duo in question bring all three — and they are omitted — then the margin for error is reduced. Also, opponents will exploit that perceived weakness: they will sense that the side is less settled, less predictable, less robust.
If the decision works — if the team responds, the replacements perform, the gamble pays off — then Röhl will earn massive credit. But if the team falters, the backlash will be huge. Supporters will attribute the loss not necessarily to the opposing team, but to the decision to weaken the side. And with the scrutiny on Röhl already high (given the club’s current trajectory and the fact he is still stamping his authority), failure in this fixture could amplify pressure.
What It Means for Today’s Game
With those two absent from the first squad, the game is no longer simply “a big derby” — it becomes a litmus test for the squad and the manager. Will this version of the team respond under pressure? Will the replacements elevate their performance? Will the tactical shape hold up even without the missing stars?
For fans who arrived with high hopes of grandeur and intensity, the missing names may drain some of the spectacle. It’s no longer just about the bragging rights; it’s about “are we really going full tilt or holding something back?” The sense of dampened expectation is tangible.
In practical terms, the manager may have to rely more on collective energy, defensive solidity and game-management rather than individual moments of brilliance from his top players. The midfield may look different. The attacking patterns may shift. Opponents will sense this change and adjust accordingly.
And for supporters, it may feel like the ticket they hold (metaphorically) is less valuable — “we aren’t seeing our best team for one of our biggest games”, they may think. That sense of loss affects moods, confidence and ultimately atmosphere.
The Bigger Picture
This decision also speaks to larger issues at the club. The fact that key players are not automatically included – even for big matches – signals a coach who wants to reset culture, demand performance and deny entitlement. That can be healthy. But it also raises the question of squad depth and resilience. Are the alternatives good enough? Without the key men, does the team still look like itself?
For a club of Rangers’ stature and with the expectations that come with it, the margin for mis-calculation is thin. One misstep – especially in a marquee fixture – can shift narrative, fan sentiment and confidence.
Final Thoughts
It is absolutely fair for fans to feel charged up, perhaps unforgivingly so, by today’s selection. When you exclude two well-regarded first-team players ahead of a major derby, you invite criticism — and today is no exception. From today’s viewpoint: “tear up your ticket” may feel melodramatic, but it encapsulates the sense of being short-changed on what should have been a full-blooded contest.
The good news for the club is that this decision also offers upside. If the side performs and wins convincingly, the narrative will flip: the manager made a bold statement, the squad depth is validated, the missing stars were rested or managed and the momentum builds. But if the performance falls flat, the absence of those stars will loom large, and the decision will be remembered as a costly omission.
For today, supporters will watch with more caution than excitement. They will wonder which version of the team is turning up: the one with the full arsenal or the one missing key pieces. Either way, Röhl’s decision means the outcome will feel like more than just a result — it will feel like a judgement on his management, the club’s identity, and the squad’s readiness for the challenge ahead.
