Brendan Rodgers took us inside his Celtic tactical mind to prove Brodgeball IS just like Angeball

First he had to deal with the whole sexism sideshow. The awkward aftermath of a post-match interview gone wrong at Fir Park.

But, as soon as he had got that toe curler out of the way on Tuesday afternoon, Brendan Rodgers rolled out a huge 78in touch screen TV and ran through a tactical tutorial for the benefit of a small band of written press. For half an hour or so, Rodgers replayed clips of various Celtic goals scored over the past two seasons. Four under Ange Postecoglou. Another four from this season, all scored on his watch. And the similarities, it must be said, were really quite striking.

Inverted full-backs creating space for wingers to get down the side, crossing the ball for three runners - one attacking the front post, one at the back and one in the middle. The point the manager was attempting to ram home was that, despite the common consensus, Celtic’s attacking strategy has not changed all that much since Postecoglou took his Angeball with him to Tottenham. If it has changed at all.

Of course, critics of Rodgers could have cobbled together video evidence of their own to counter the argument. But, throughout it all, one thought occurred more than any other. If the system remains more or less the same, then it’s the quality of the individuals within it who ultimately determine its success.

For example, where Postecoglou had Jota and Liel Abada, Rodgers has been juggling the likes of Luis Palma, Mikey Johnston, Nicolas Kuhn and Yang. And where the Aussie had Carl Starfelt and Cameron Carter-Vickers minding the shop at the back, Rodgers has been relying on Liam Scales, Maik Nawrocki, Stephen Welsh or Gustaf Lagerbielke. Which is precisely why the Parkhead boss has been so vocal about the significance of having