I nearly forgot that swords was banned. So no long winded jokes from our resident leprechaun about Clive's work. Anyway here's the latest offering from QPR's fan of the year.... Mr Whittingham.... Defensive horror show leaves QPR floundering â full match report Tue 02nd Apr 2013 23:10 by Clive Whittingham QPR remain seven points adrift of safety with games running out after a kamikaze night of defending saw them crash to a 3-2 defeat against local rivals Fulham on Monday. The self-destructive tendencies of this Queens Park Rangers side apparently know no bounds. In a critically important West London derby with Fulham on Monday night they dominated, as the away team, for almost the entire second half but spurned the opportunity to take points from the game by first missing a penalty â the third spot kick failure of a miserable season so far â and then bizarrely putting the cue on the rack and giving up for the night with ten minutes left for play and the home side down to ten men. Harry Redknapp fumed â angry that French striker Loic Remy grabbed the ball for the fateful penalty which goalkeeper Mark Schwarzer saved with something to spare, and seething that his team had stopped playing prematurely just when they seemed to be well on top and set to go for the jugular. But what happened in the second half at Craven Cottage was almost academic and irrelevant given what had gone on in the first. Read the rest here... http://www.fansnetwork.co.uk/football/queensparkrangers/fb_news.php?storyid=31769 Cheers Clive, great stuff.
A good report from Clive that. I would only add two points: 1) The reason we dominated the midfield in the 2nd half and not the 1st was the substitution of Hill and change of formation. Having Onuoha in the back four enabled them to play a much higher line which restricted the midfield space where Fulham were out-numbering us. Remy playing centrally also gave more presence in the attacking third, as Zamora was hopeless. 2) We created virtually nothing in the last 15 minutes and once they were down to 10 men, the ridiculous decision to take Taarabt off became all too clear. Zamora limped on, whilst Adel could have created the goal we needed given the extra spaces now afforded to us. Harry doesn't like Taarabt, I get that....but that substitution was a terrible footballing decision.
and then we push Samba up top and start lumping...with Remy,Townsend and Hoillett looking for the ball?!
Yes, why didn't we just leave it as it was and keep plugging away. I felt another goal was coming before the changes.
On the money Colin for me and by far a better writer than that Clive bloke The tone of voice is negative IMO and for me we played very well second half As we can and looked like the only winner in that game. A game lasts 90 minutes and results often don't go your way. I have seen enough in the last two away games to fill me with a belief that we can win any of our remaining 7 games It's about time IMO that people understand exactly how long it can take in real match time to obtain that faultless display with a completely new team and squad ... It's a gamble but we are at last seeing a QPR team playing well ... We are beating ourselves lads no one else by gifting the goals and points Wigan should be the only focus now **** the past
I agree re Tarbs in theory Col, but from my (admittedly on screen) perspective he looked out of shape and off the pace for most of the game. Perhaps he just didn't have the legs/lungs to continue. He's a big lad and will never be sylph-like, but he looked almost Holt-esque to me on Monday. Thank god Ned was on the bench (although he wasn't perfect). I thought he was improving game by game before his knock, unlucky not to be playing more regularly. Hill will be back for Wigan though, worrying against Kone.
One of the comments afterwards was especially apt and probably crystallises QPR's unique contribution to the Premier League. "The attitude and motivation of many of our players is simply far from acceptable".
Well, I've read the article now, Clive is obviously an angry man, and understandably so. Not my style but who cares, good luck to him. Why the gratuitous and unnecessary dig at Coventry and Leicester at the end though? He may not like their stadia but branding them 'middle of the road' is just petulant lashing out. If you look at our respective records, the Rs would be just as middle of the road, if not more so. The long suffering supporters of these clubs deserve some respect, especially the Coventry blokes at the moment. Anyway, stadia are just as good as the fans that fill them. The Emirates may be a beautiful morgue, but the Highbury Library earned its nickname decades ago. I've been at Craven Cottage when you could hear a phone ringing two streets away, despite its olde worlde charm. Add sugar Clive, bitter leaves a nasty taste.
Swords actually got a mention in Clive's preview http://www.fansnetwork.co.uk/football/queensparkrangers/fb_news.php?storyid=31752&title=panic_stations_at_the_bottom,_can_qpr_prey_on_the_nerves_full_match_preview Maybe not Swords directly but the 606 lot is mentioned and Swords deserve the credit for that Well done mate, come back soon will ya
Yet he still scored a very good goal and created the penalty with a great bit of skill. Should have been kept on mate....we needed a goal!!
Yeh, of course he should have been kept on Col. I don't know why Harry doesn't try Adel up front in a slightly withdrawn target man role instead of Zamora, after that worked so well around the turn of the year. He also has better players to run off him now in Remy and Townsend, than he did back then.
Art of management mate. Hoilett on, if he had played anything other than complete crap and created something we would not have been having this discussion. Harold took a risk, it failed, but thats what he's paid for.
Probably because he would only work in that role in a defensive set up, like at Chelsea. We're way past that stage now, he needs to be creating and producing behind the attackers, not holding the ball up if he's lucky enough to win it, while the midfield catch up.
I agree. My main point is that I would have taken off the useless Zamora....not Taarabt who, even though looking unfit, had already scored a good goal and won a penalty. Ned...for Hill Mackie ...for Zamora (as Betty wasn't even on the bench) Hoilett...for the injured Traore, playing 3 at the back as we did. And, under no circumstances, stick Samba up front and hoof the ball to him (as we did). I'm afraid Harry is making some crucial errors in my opinion.
Why should it only work in a defensive set up? I'm not talking park the bus with Adel up front alone holding and hoping someone can get forward on the counter, but in an attacking formation with players like Remy and Townsend playing off hm. It also allows an extra midfield player like Granero or maybe Diakite to give us a bit more solidity in midfield, that we lacked at Fulham. Obviously we need to go for 3 points every game now, Harry got that right, but that first half wasn't the right way, to be polite!
