Match Day Thread QPR v Burnley

  • 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!
But surely the 2nd half performance was down to fitness levels and getting used to playing a high tempo game for 90 minutes.

It will surely take a month or so, till we can maintain that style deep into the second half.

And there will be many weaker teams that will crack earlier. But agree a striker on the pitch creates problems for the opposition, but if Charlie still isn't fully fit, and JET doesn't justify a starting spot over Hoilett/Phillips/Fer, there aren't any other choices ???

totally agree i felt we weren't fit enough to keep up that tempo in the 2nd half. When i say we weren't good i suspect it was just because we were tired. I don't understand why they won't start with JET - he's surely a better bet to start up top as lone striker than phillips.
 
ok - rattled might be pushing it. But on the back foot for most of the first half. We still had decent chances though. We were ok watford honestly.

What decent chances?

Sorry I'm not meaning to sound facetious but I found myself pretty bored for most of the 90 minutes.
 
What decent chances?

Sorry I'm not meaning to sound facetious but I found myself pretty bored for most of the 90 minutes.

well we had one cleared off the line right at the end. henry should have done better with his chance. phillips had a good opening in the first half with the one that hit the keepers legs - if he'd cut inside instead of narrowing his angle by going outside he'd have probably scored. That's 3 right there.
Hoilett was involved in a goalmouth scramble that on another day might have yielded different results (possibly not a really 'decent' chance i suppose). 2nd half was dire i agree.
 
Hasslebank clearly set up not to lose, in fact it was a Warnock line up. Would have been embarrassing to lose his first game, Tuesday's selection will be interesting
 
Hasslebank clearly set up not to lose, in fact it was a Warnock line up. Would have been embarrassing to lose his first game, Tuesday's selection will be interesting
I was thinking a similar thing. Also thought that he wouldn't want to put anyone's backs up, hence the similarity in team from Neil's last game. Also worth noting that Burnley are higher in the table than we are, so a solid midfield was a good idea. Lets see how we are playing once he's had time to train his systems into the players. With two strong teams in his first two games, not the easiest start for him. Let's give him time eh. (The only thing I will add as a caveat to what I've just said is this starting without a proper striker. Can't keep doing that.)
 
Does anyone who actually went to the game have anything to tell us?

Well here was my version of events ...

Good first half which looked promising. The second half reverted to the usual dirge that we're used to and then the substitutions were made and we became even worse.

And here's Clives ... http://www.fansnetwork.co.uk/footba...=#qpr&utm_content=#qpr&utm_source=twitterfeed

Take your pick? ... The Readers Digest very very abbreviated version or the Charles Dickens 'A tale of two cities' read of the game. I said it in one sentence whereas ...
 
  • Like
Reactions: sb_73