I think its fair to say that our haul of 16 points amassed from our opening 13 matches is a very good start. Yesterdays win, though rather dubiously argued by Mr Neil Warnock was another comfortable, routine win. It was an odd team selection by Lambert, one which I certainly doubted, and I'm not really sure it worked. Surman did much better once Hoolahan came on, meaning he could play more intricate passes, and De Laet did fine at full back, though he was clearly struggling with an injury towards the end of the first half. Jackson, sadly, was well off the pace though we never really played to his strengths. QPR offered very little going forward but were organised, as you'd expect. Some brilliant 'tache's from the likes of Shaun Derry on show. Heidar Helguson... not so sure!! Disappointingly, yet again we gifted our opponents a goal through a mistake - we were in total control of the match and offered Rangers a route back into the game. For the next ten minutes they played pretty well without ever truly threatening. The game changed, perhaps unsurprisingly on the introductions of Holt and Hoolahan. I'm not sure we can say it was a masterstroke - it was pretty obvious it was what the team needed to add a bit of flair and tenacity to our forward line. It gave everyone on the field and off it a big lift and from the moment Holt scored the result was never really in doubt and at no point did I ever see anything other than a win for City. With next weeks trip to Manchester City on the horizon, it was imperative we netted all three points against QPR and its a good sign that we seem able to beat the teams we are expected to get results against, West Brom being the only real disappointment. Once again, our passing was sloppy at times, there were a few too many high balls but its definitely a good sign to be winning games in the top flight when only playing at about 60-70% of ourselves. So the pressure is off next week and we can all enjoy watching our team against the masterful likes of Silva and Balotelli. Another win and we're almost halfway to survival and more of the same over the tough, winter months will see us cruise over the line with something to spare. Let's hope it's the case!
To be fair to Leon Barnett, it wasn't a terrible clearance, it's just Mackie's shot was extremely powerful and well hit. It probably should have gone in, but when you consider it hit the post, it could have gone anywhere, but it went straight into the path of Young. Rusty wasn't a million miles away from it on the line. Once after we conceded did we actually look good - we stopped giving the ball away meaning our forward players actually got some time on the ball - hence Surman looked better. If we give away the ball like we have done these last few games against Man City, think how many chances Arsenal/Liverpool had against us, now imagine if they had players who could score them. We could be looking at 6/7 nil, so we have to stop giving the ball away cheaply! It sounds stupid, but if you think about it if we keep the ball we will have more chance of scoring and they'll have less!
I would echo most of what you said there Supers but I do think that you are being a tad harsh on Jackson. I tought that his pace and willingness to get on the end of Morison's flicks kept the Rangers defence honest, especially in the first half when we had them penned in for long periods. It wasn't the prettiest of football, feeding the channels and all that but it was proving to be quite effective at nullifying QPR. If you look at what Jackson did contribute then he had a shot heading for the top corner which their keeper dealt with well, he had another in the second half which went just wide, both efforts from outside the area. He skinned their fullback right near the corner flag, when it looked impossible to do anything worthwhile, right in front of the away fans and put in a terrific cross and had Morison have squared it to him when he got one on one with their keeper he would have had a tap in. I also felt he tracked back well and never let anybody settle on the ball across their backline. It depends on your perception of what his role was and did he fulfill his responsiblilities. Personally I felt he played ten times better than Pilkington who was annonymous for the second week running! Speculation clouding his performances maybe!!!
Agree about Pilkington (see my post on another thread. 16 points is incredible at this stage, particularly when you consider we have already got three of the very hardest (United, Chelsea, Liverpool away) out of the way already. And to make it even better our goal difference is just -2 even after playing those teams already, as well as a bang in form Arsenal which looks like being an extra point come the end of the season as there's load of team with -10 or worse already. Everybody in the squad is chipping in as well and we have no passengers at this stage which again is fantastic and bodes very well for the rest of the season. I'm heading up to Manchester for my first visit to that ground next week and I can't wait! I had a real bad feeling about yesterday, but it was fabulous to be proven wrong and those three points have stopped the rot and shifted a hell of a lot of pressure off us so we can do what we do best, go out and enjoy ourselves with confidence so I really do have a sneaky, sneaky feeling we might just go and nick a point of them - remember where you heard it first
I think you are harsh on Pilkington. He clearly isn't a pacy winger who is going to flash past full backs and pick out his man at the far post. He does howver offer an out ball which he controls well (something that lets Jackson down initially) and he looks to play the intelligent ball. And he is a goal scorer. He was admittedly anonymous for much of the game but when our tactic became Barnet and Martin launching balls forward, he clearly wasn't going to see it much. His substitution was clearly a sign we were pushing up through the middle with Hoolahan. Jackson doesn't need to be facing his own goal when he gets it and too many times he had to control it and turn which isn't his strongpoint. Do we play Holt and Morison together from the start? I assume they don't normally because if Plan A doesn't work there would be no Plan B if they were both on the park. My son thinks Morison is a waste of space whereas I think he has done magnificent against so called defenders in the "best league in the world". Its all a matter of opinion anyway and only one counts and I'm backing his.
