IN one of Steven Gerrard’s first starts for Liverpool he was told to play right-back, a position utterly foreign to him, and to mark Tottenham’s mercurial winger David Ginola.

“Out of position and out of my depth,” was Gerrard’s honest take years later.

His debut in the Merseyside derby turned out to be a brief affair. It came at Anfield, the 19-year-old was sent on as a substitute for Robbie Fowler, but he was soon back in the dressing room having been sent off

“I could have had three red cards” he said of the thigh-high tackle on Everton’s Kevin Campbell.

But Steven George Gerrard improved as a player after that. Just a bit.

The Liverpool support didn’t have a go back then. They could see this tall and skinny local lad had something about him. He was rawer than uncooked steak, just a kid starting out, and it takes time for even a young man who would go onto become one of the world’s best players to find their feet among the big boys.

Gerrard may well now be 38, with a wealth of football experience, a shrewd mind, and an aura few could hope to possess, but in football managerial terms he’s a child.

This is why much of the criticism aimed in the direction of the Rangers manager following the League Cup semi-final loss to Aberdeen, a team lead by Derek McInnes, so good at his job that Rangers wanted him long before Gerrard was spoken about, perplexed me.

I’ve heard from my bluenose friends loud grumblings about bad substitutions, complaints about substitutes not being used at all or changes taking too long, the decision to start with Umar (Sebo) Sadiq on Sunday and the fact, of course, that’s one winnable trophy gone for another year.

It is closing in on eight years without what this football club should consider a major piece of silverware.

Perhaps my friends have a point. They are legitimate comments to make. But many hailed the arrival of Gerrard as the second coming – and this was the more sceptical ones.

It was exciting, it still is, and who could blame Rangers fans for ignoring reason after so many seasons of misery.

And back then, whenever I mentioned in the pub, or in print, that this was a gamble given Gerrard’s lack of experience, his age, the mammoth task of the job and how far Celtic were in front of them, the nicest piece of abuse I received was that I was Peter Lawwell’s stooge.

Gerrard is a football superstar, no question, and I have looked forward to his press conferences. He’s honest, a touch spiky which I like, is intelligent and has something to say. For someone in my job, this is manna from heaven. But this can’t disguise his rookie status.

He’s going to make rookie mistakes, lots of them, and at Rangers every miss-step is magnified by 100. For those who don’t enjoy such scrutiny, pressure and intensity from people who live and breath their team, there are plenty of other clubs in need of a manager,

Gerrard has actually done well so far. He’s breathed new life into Ibrox, the league form has been okay, he’s got the best out of players such as Alfredo Morelos, and that’s 11 games in Europe in a row without defeat. That is an outstanding record for any Scottish club these days.

Yes, there have been mistakes. There have been wrong team set-ups, he shouldn’t have trusted Sadiq in such a big game, and there will be plenty of other examples along the way.

But Rangers supporters either get an experienced hand such as McInnes or Steve Clarke – which wouldn’t have rung many bells – or the Liverpool under-18 coach with a famous name.

I remain unconvinced Gerrard was the right choice. However, this sceptic has been won over, to an extent, by the way he’s made the team better, helped by a lot of signings, and when they do play are a team worth watching.

Gerrard is learning on the job. Just as he did as that young midfielder told to play at right-back while trying to make his way at Anfield.

An issue was always going to be that he would err when an experienced (middle of the road) manager would not.

The exciting appointment was always fraught with danger.

You can’t have it both ways.