LORENZO Amoruso is fast approaching the point of no return after his latest mistake cost Rangers dear against Monaco in midweek, but while criticism of his performances has been wholly justifiable this season, the way he has been made a scapegoat by sections of the media for his club's failure to reach the second phase of the Champions League is deplorable.
The Italian is off form, but by no means is he alone, and to finger him as the sole reason behind the club's struggle leaves a bad taste in the mouth. To buck the trend, I actually believe Amoruso is a very talented defender, with attributes many other centre halves would die for, but his problem is that he has somehow convinced himself that he is better than he actually is and there appears to be no-one around to set him straight.
At Aberdeen, Alex and I had a similar problem with Doug Rougvie, who went on to become a very successful and popular player. However, he would constantly try things that were quite obviously beyond him and we had to continually keep on at him to do what he was good at. To state the obvious here, a defender's job is to defend and anything else is a bonus.
Amoruso's flaw is perhaps more psychological than anything else in that he has forgotten the basic rules of defending and has no leader such as Richard Gough or Terry Butcher beside him to keep him right. You may be thinking that for #4m the club should expect a player who does not require babysitting, but all players are different and just because someone requires guidance on the field does not necessarily make him inferior.
What made my partnership with Alex so successful was that from our first match together we would sit down afterwards, normally in relaxed surroundings over a couple of beers, and discuss how well we had done and what we could do in the next match to improve our understanding. That went on until old age broke up the partnership, and I know that it was also the case under the Walter Smith era, when the likes of Gough would sit down with his team-mates and try to improve harmony and understanding.
The popular consensus would suggest that is not the case at the moment, and the cloaked criticism of Amoruso from some of his team-mates leads me to believe that his career at Ibrox is in grave jeopardy.
His pride will have suffered a battering after being stripped of the captaincy, and, to be honest, I think it would have been very difficult for me to stay at a club after such an ignominy unless I was offered a full explanation. Perhaps the pressure of leading a club like Rangers was too much of a strain for him and Dick Advocaat felt the need for Amoruso to concentrate on his own game without added responsibility.
Although he has endured a horrific last couple of months, it should not be forgotten that he can be a very good defender when he puts his mind to it. He is strong in the air in either penalty box, and while he does not have great pace over short distances, he is quick once he gets motoring. Also, when he is not looking to play the 'World Cup' ball and keep it simple, his distribution is pretty good and despite his often feeble free-kick efforts, he is a clean striker of the ball, but perhaps he should step up only once in a while to provide an alternative to Jorg Albertz and Giovanni van Bronckhorst.
What frustrates the fans and his team-mates more than anything, though, is when he tries to dribble from defence or dally in possession when he should knock the ball long and take some pressure off the defence. However, these are simple things that do not take much to sort out, and while many are baying for his blood, I would not rule out Amoruso silencing his critics.
It is a test of the man's character - I am sure he would not want to walk away without one last fight - and the return of Craig Moore from injury might also bring out the best in him. Of all the partnerships I have seen at Rangers in recent years, that one has looked most solid and the return of the Australian might just remedy the problem.
He is a natural leader and no-nonsense defender who, I would suggest, is the ideal foil for the wayward Amoruso.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article