Match Day Thread Luton vs QPR

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
2nd half seemed allright against a very, very poor opposition. Without a striker this result comes with no suprise. Not enjoying these performances anymore and without the fans this is just nothing else like a very boring waste of time.
 
It's easy to see the negatives but

1. This was a better performance.

2. We didn't lose (although it took a good late save from Lumley to secure a point);

3. We created a lot more chances;

4. There seemed to be more effort and determination;

5. There was less aimless passing across the back and a few more quick, forward passes to players who had found space; and

6. I haven't said this much lately but we were the better side.
 
  • Like
Reactions: daverangers, QPR Oslo, jeffranger and 3 others
Don't let that goal make this seem like a decent game for us.

A team low in the table. The world's shakiest keeper. An absolutely amateur first half.

We picked up a bit in the second half, but mainly because Luton took the pressure off us and went to defend.

The coaching is really poor at QPR... that is the only explanation for the players being highly averse to making passes through gaps to players' feet in advanced positions. Very few runs made. Often second to loose balls.

I get that half our team are youth products from a very average (at best) youth system. But the coaching becomes clear on the pitch and we are no where near ambitious enough.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SARQPR
Rodney said:
It's easy to see the negatives but

1. This was a better performance.

2. We didn't lose (although it took a good late save from Lumley to secure a point);

3. We created a lot more chances;

4. There seemed to be more effort and determination;

5. There was less aimless passing across the back and a few more quick, forward passes to players who had found space; and

6. I haven't said this much lately but we were the better side.
Click to expand...
Agree we were the better side just, but we could have lost it to a poor team because of half asleep defending, and problems with corners all game. Plus we had no proper striker.
 
Good, bad or indifferent, we have to sort out these defensive frailties! We have been dire at the back for most of the season.
 
That was much better. We had nothing to play for but pride and I am not sure we have much of that. Luton had to win.
Normally that guarantees they would...but we got a draw, and played quite well in second half.

True Lumley saved us at 90 minutes with a good save, but we deserved a draw definately

I am more and more convinced that alot of our problems are caused by not having a striker. Our team knows we have no striker, the opposition knows we haven't got a striker. Everyone knows that when the ball goes into a the middle it may be met by a gangly winger or an undersized midfielder, neither of whom are poachers or strong traditionally CFs....So our wingers/wing backs know their crosses have little chances. The clever through balls will not be held up, there is no poacher waiting for a rebound.

We need two natural strikers for next season, Oteh does not appear to be one of them. If Ramkilde is no good...we have to buy/loan them
 
  • Like
Reactions: EscapeGoat, SARQPR, QPRski and 1 other person
Happy enough with the point and the fact that our safety is now mathematically guaranteed.

Also happy that the 4 points we took off Luton this season, leave them struggling.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Turkish" Premier" Hoops
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back