Derek McInnes has defended Emmanuel Fernandez after Rangers’ 2-2 draw at Hearts, arguing that the centre-back is receiving disproportionate attention for a performance that exposed shortcomings across the team. With Ben Godfrey available again, however, that public backing does not settle the separate question of who should play in central defence.
According to reports, Fernandez’s display at Tynecastle prompted calls from supporters for him to be dropped. Former Rangers player Ian Ferguson was also sharply critical in his BBC assessment, arguing that a change should have been made before half-time.
McInnes countered by pointing to Fernandez’s contribution to the preceding 4-0 victory over St Johnstone. His argument was that the defender’s weaker performances attract questions while his stronger ones receive comparatively little recognition.
That is a defence of how Fernandez is being judged, rather than a claim that he played well against Hearts. The distinction matters: McInnes acknowledged that individuals could have performed better while resisting the suggestion that one player explained the result.
Individual scrutiny and collective responsibility
The reports present two overlapping concerns. One is the immediate criticism of Fernandez’s work at Tynecastle. The other is a broader perception, described in the reporting, that mistakes have occurred too often during his season alongside Olwethu Makhanya.
McInnes’s reference to St Johnstone addresses the first concern more convincingly than the second. A strong performance in one match is relevant evidence against treating a player as a permanent liability. It cannot, by itself, establish whether his overall level has been sufficiently dependable.
Equally, a disappointing draw does not demonstrate that replacing a centre-back would have corrected everything that went wrong. Neither report provides a detailed breakdown of the goals conceded or separates individual decisions from the protection offered by the rest of the side. There is therefore insufficient evidence here to assign Fernandez sole responsibility, or to absolve him completely.
The strongest part of McInnes’s response is his refusal to let the final score become the entire assessment. Defenders can perform well in matches their teams fail to win, just as a comfortable victory can conceal errors. His case would be stronger still if supported by a clearer account of what Fernandez did well and where improvement is required.
Godfrey changes the selection debate
Godfrey’s return to fitness gives the criticism a practical consequence. Without an available alternative, demands for a change can remain largely theoretical. An experienced replacement makes the manager’s decision more revealing, although fitness alone does not establish that Godfrey is ready to offer a better performance.
McInnes has not publicly guaranteed Fernandez’s place. Instead, he described selection as a wider issue affecting several areas of the team. That leaves room for either continuity or a change without necessarily contradicting his defence of the player.
There is an important distinction between protecting a footballer from excessive blame and making him immune from competition. McInnes can believe Fernandez has been treated unfairly while still deciding that another defender offers the more suitable option. Conversely, retaining him would not automatically mean the concerns raised after Hearts had been ignored.
What remains unanswered is how McInnes weighs Fernandez’s strongest displays against the lapses identified by his critics. His praise establishes belief in the player’s ability; it does not explain the threshold at which inconsistency would cost him his place.
Backing a player without lowering expectations
The wider reporting places this dispute within Rangers’ demand for tangible success. McInnes took charge in June after two seasons without a trophy, and the 3-0 cup victory over Celtic has already provided a significant positive reference point for his tenure.
That context helps explain why an individual defensive display can attract such intense attention. Results are being assessed not simply as isolated outcomes but as evidence of whether Rangers are becoming more reliable under their manager.
Public support can help prevent one difficult evening from defining a player. It is most effective, though, when accompanied by standards that remain clear inside the team. McInnes has challenged the concentration of blame on Fernandez; the unresolved issue is whether he can secure greater consistency without allowing that defence to be mistaken for satisfaction.