The Celtic vs Rangers game-changer that gives champions edge

It is not the rhetorical question it might appear to be. Such is the dominance Celtic and Rangers have over the rest of the division, it can be difficult for aggregated data to discern notable differences.

I am not sure whether the current relative weakness of the rest of the league is an all-time low but, if we look at player data from each of the top two, each metric tends to show a player being in the 90th-plus percentile according to StatsBomb.

That’s not useful from an analysis perspective – or a scouting one for that matter – however, intrepid as always, let’s dig in and see what we have…

Defences

The Celtic Way provides access to StatsBomb’s excellent data hub called IQ. They allow direct team comparisons and the first offering looks at key defensive metrics.

As predicted, both clubs are in the 90th percentile or better in nearly all defensive metrics. But there are some differences.

Celtic’s expected goals conceded per 90 minutes is only 0.44 while it is 0.62 for the Ibrox side – a 41 per cent difference. On the park, the Hoops are conceding 0.7 goals per 90 minutes compared to 0.9 for Rangers.

So both clubs are underperforming defensively. Maybe having veteran goalkeepers is to blame?

The post-shot xGs are very similar – these measures the xG value of all the shots that hit the target – essentially what the keepers have to deal with directly.

Celtic’s post-shot xG against is 0.63 and Rangers' is 0.61. On that basis, Celtic are letting in slightly more goals than expected but Rangers are conceding 0.9 compared to 0.61 based on the quality of the on-target shots. A definite area of weakness.

READ MORE: Have Celtic already forced Michael Beale to alter his grand derby plan?

It should be noted Rangers keepers have fewer shots to save with 1.33 per 90 minutes compared to 1.47 for Joe Hart.

Defensive coverage can be inferred from the quality of the shots allowed. Celtic have a clear advantage here with each opposition shot carrying an average xG of 0.07 compared to 0.09 for Rangers. Over a season, that equates to around eight xG conceded.

Indeed, Celtic concede fewer clear shots, fewer shots off opposition counter-attacks and even fewer xG off set-plays (which might surprise some).

Celtic’s pressing is also slightly more effective allowing the opposition 5.96 passes per defensive action compared to 6.11. Such is the possession dominance of both sides there is very little in this.

Another cool StatsBomb offering is to map where on the pitch defensive activity occurs. If we look at Celtic firstly:

Essentially the lighter the blue and darker the red, the more defensive activity occurs. Counterintuitively, Celtic’s map is red in the opposition half due to their level of pressing and counter-pressing. The champions’ defensive third is largely all blue meaning low activity.

The key subtlety is that Celtic’s left defensive zones are lighter meaning this is where more defending is done. Virtually every team in Scotland attacks their left side of defence. This is where they feel the key weaknesses are to exploit. Mainly this is launching long balls on top of Greg Taylor and also testing out Carl Starfelt, who is a very aggressive defender but can be drawn under the ball and is less comfortable on it.

The dark red zone correlates to where Daizen Maeda in particular operates to start the press when the opposition has the ball.

If we now consider the Rangers defensive actions:

Their defensive actions are more evenly distributed and, if anything, sides seem to favour attacking their right side. James Tavernier is probably best known as an attacking full-back and can be exploited in behind.

Related to this, Opta Analyst provides an excellent free resource to assess where on the pitch each side has control versus the opposition.

If we concentrate on the three zones across the 18-yard box as being key areas to defend, the relative control of those areas compared to the opposition is:

Again, dominance over the opposition means the differences are very small with Celtic dominating their own defensive zones outside the box (where most good chances are created from) to a slightly greater extent.

Both sides have a stable and predictable back four in terms of personnel. Celtic’s looks slightly stronger and they will look to exploit the current Rangers weaknesses in goal. The Ibrox men will, as they attempted in the League Cup final, seek to exploit the left flank.

Attacks

Both sides have found it easy to score against the rest of the league. The StatsBomb comparison is:

Celtic are scoring a remarkable 3.17 goals per game and are on course to beat the club record of 116 in a league campaign from 1915-16. However, StatsBomb’s xG model has them averaging a mere 2.25 so perhaps Michael Beale was right and Celtic are ‘lucky’?

His side, as it goes, average a healthy 2.47 goals per game and are also overperforming their xG significantly with 1.97. This could suggest a cumulative impact of such overpowering dominance in most games.

Celtic manage an average shot quality of 0.12 xG compared to Rangers’ 0.10. Over a 38-match season, this equates to the Hoops having 12 more xG (88 to 76). When added to the defensive analysis above, this means they are around +20 on goal difference over a season based on xG.

Rangers have slightly more shots and both generate the same xG from set-plays. The Light Blues also generate more shots from counter-attacking situations.

This may be a hint as to how they will approach Saturday’s match but bear in mind as Celtic have more possession overall so they therefore have less opportunity to counter-attack the opposition meaning this is more likely a quirk in the data.

Indeed, Celtic have scored 12 goals this season after winning a high turnover compared to six by Rangers.

Rangers are successful with around six out of 27 crosses into the box while Celtic manage six from 25 on average. What is different is the nature of the crosses and where they are from. Rangers like to use their full-backs to get crosses from deeper positions into the box whereas Celtic like to try and get the wingers to the byline for lower crosses across the six-yard box.

The differential in xG per shot average may be partly explained by this approach as Celtic tend to get shots away from quite close to goal and central – the Kyogo Furuhashi zone perhaps.

Celtic have registered 17.8 xG from crosses over the season compared to 14.1 for Rangers while both have generated 12 xG from set plays so there is no obvious advantage from corners and free kicks.

If we go back to Opta data to see who has control over the ball in the opposition’s final third and again split the opposition box into three zones just outside the area:

Celtic are controlling the ball just outside the opposing box to a far greater degree than their rivals. Their inherent left-sided bias – given ball controller Callum McGregor tends to float left, Kyogo Furuhashi often pulls left and left-back Taylor is a player who gets on the ball frequently – is again noticeable.

The champions seem to have the edge in terms of their ability to create better-quality chances and in finishing them. They manage to dominate the ball to a greater extent in the opposing final third and getting in behind the opponents for low, firm cutback crosses is particularly effective (as Borna Barisic knows).

Attacking talent

Finally, let’s take a look at the main creative talents on both sides.

This plots the expected goals and assists for the likely midfielders and forwards within the matchday squads. I have also added the full-backs as, especially for Rangers, those are the most dominant creative outlets:

In Antonio Colak and Alfredo Morelos, Rangers have two strikers that come close to Furuhashi’s xG and indeed Morelos’s 90-minute average is higher this season. However, it is behind the strikers where there is a glaring disparity.

Celtic’s attacking creative capabilities across the squad members is significantly more potent. Players like David Turnbull, Sead Haksabanovic and Liel Abada may not be starters but when they come on around the 60-minute mark they provide a depth of creative threat not present on the Ibrox bench.

In that sense, Rangers need to hope Ianis Hagi is available and Todd Cantwell continues to settle well.

Summary

As may be expected from an Ange Postecoglou side, their attacking threat is certainly league-leading. Defensively, however, there is not a lot between the sides.

The real game-changer for Celtic may come from the bench, where the champions have an overwhelming creative advantage to bring on in the second half.