Aguero rescues City from jaws of Austin-inspired QPR â report Sunday, 9th Nov 2014 23:50 by Clive Whittingham Champions Manchester City needed two goals from Sergio Aguero to salvage a 2-2 draw against a rampaging Queens Park Rangers side led magnificently by strikers Bobby Zamora and Charlie Austin. It remains to be seen if the adversity and bad luck currently afflicting Queens Park Rangers is a harbinger of doom, or whether the Hoopsâ ability to plough on straight through it regardless will eventually be rewarded under the old football adage of âwhat comes around goes aroundâ. Youâd forgive Rangers for raising their collective arms to the heavens and giving up with a resigned sigh â and anybody unfortunate enough to be in the away end for their gutless 2-0 defeat at West Ham a month ago would expect nothing more of them. To dominate against a Liverpool side that, last season at least, was among the most threatening and exciting in the country only to lose 3-2 to two own goals, and goals scored in the ninetieth and ninety fifth minutes, was disheartening. To then go to this yearâs inevitable champions Chelsea and match them blow for blow only to be beaten by a controversial late penalty intensely annoying. And then there was Saturday nightâs humdinger with Manchester City at Loftus Road⦠Read the rest here.............. http://www.fansnetwork.co.uk/football/queensparkrangers/news/36838/?
Think Clive needs to wake up a bit We did not match Chelsea blow for blow and didn't let City off the hook In short we have made a massive leap towards playing at the required level to compete. Both City and Chelsea will play a lot better this season IMO We play and dominate teams around us only then should any of us start using flowery language to describe our performances . It all tastes of thinking we are clever We aren't
Dave, I think you are a great poster on here but that post suggests you don't normally read Clive's reports. He is one for telling it as it is. Every one I have spoken to today has said how we were by far the best team in that game and should have won it. Of course City are good on the break but we had the better chances in that game and Clive's report reflects that I think.
DT, as col has stated previously, i think you are letting your hatred for Redknapp cloud your judgements. Your posts are normally concise and consistent....the last couple just seem like whinging because Harrys got a couple correct TBH. I accept your view on redknapp, but look at the players on the pitch not the manager. look at the effort they put in and the fact that we actually are starting to grow as a Premiership TEAM. If the fat one doesnt want to be part of it, then deal with it and move on. You cannot slate Redknapp for our poor performance over the past 12 months, then refuse to give him credit when he gets it correct. You have to give credit where due.
So you're knocking a report that is complimentary towards a very spirited team performance (irrespective of the opposition) ??? Considering the abject displays from earlier in the season, I think it is more the turn-around in commitment and passion from the players, over the last 4/5 matches, that has taken most a little by surprise. So it is not at all surprising that Clive will be "using flowery language" to describe the performance.
Not at all lads I give Harold full credit where its due Like a lot of us I have hit a real brick wall with QPR recently and it is refreshing to see us wake up I always read Clive's reports and on this occasion I don't agree in any terms that we matched Chelsea or let City off the hook .. both these teams are quite remarkable at playing football currently. I am for once keeping my feet on the floor and purposely not getting carried away. This report isn't balanced enough IMO as second half we looked far too open in midfield and City carved open a few good chances very quickly … I would say that City were below par as much as I hate the MOTD focussing on City that is nearer the truth. I also hate the fact that Harold is receiving premature credit for what i see as him just doing his job correctly. I noted that he has already started by using pre season excuses again as he worms out. I am not forgetting until he sustains these better performances against teams around us. we have 4 points from 9 and that is much better. We lost against Liverpool because we were daft and naive I simply on this occasion don't agree with his report and I am not keen on how he dresses them up at times with his flowery over extended grammar. Each to their own but I challenge anything I don't think is right … that doesn't make me right. IMO Clive does put flowery into every one of his reports and that puts me off. I see they serve a lot of entertainment to his readers and i respect that but IMO they are too long … I would read Col's or Judo's before his because they seem a lot more real IMO. Overall i see a massive swing with Harold and that has come from the row and we all have no idea what happened behind closed doors but there has been a change i hope we all can agree on … I am not about to let the snakes off the hook as this is our club he is playing with lads but I hope you will consider that i always give credit where and when its due. We have a massive game coming up now against Newcastle and then and only then will i yield because of the rubbish we all watched against Spurs and West Ham Chelsea we had natural passion always but we face 50K at St James Park at a club who have had a real rough time of it. Lets wait i say until after that game. We are 10 games in and I still am not happy for sure after the promises we all got… I was hoping to see bait of that in Clives report and not just jumping on the band wagon about how good we are … we aren't yet IMO but it's getting better and that level is only the normal acceptable level IMO Beat Newcastle away from home then I promise i will be the first to say yes we have turned a corner and thank Harold
It seems that the improvement in performances has coincided with Redknapp actually appearing to give a f**, so he deserves credit for that. Perhaps he was given an ultimatum by TF.
Never!!!!! Anyway I like reading Clive's take on things, I feel they are a bit more balanced than some of the reports that get published in the daily papers, ie in the Sunday Times yesterday it actually said "Rangers resorted to roughhouse tactics...." WTF.....we had 4 players booked in the first half for fouls that were similar to ones Dean had allowed 3 City players to get away with previously, the only booking that was hard to argue with was Dunnes.....yet the press did not mention anything about that and they glossed over the Aguero off-side and handball when he scored.......the same as those on TV.....big club bias.
You could argue that City, Chelsea and Liverpool were 'below par' or you could argue that gutsy performances by QPR pushed them out of their comfort zone and caused them to falter. Having just watched the best QPR performance for several years I know which one I'm going for. And all credit to HR for getting his team up for it.
