| Hitchcock off again..FFS! 12:05 - Jan 10 with 7014 views | qprdan |
Off to Rotherham in an emergency deal | | | |  |
| Hitchcock off again..FFS! on 13:42 - Jan 10 with 1298 views | Match82 |
If Harry is just going to play the majority of time (like it or not) with 1 striker, then we have 2 options better than Hitchcock who are currently fit. Yes, "currently fit" with Johnson is a day-to-day check.
But assuming that there's a recall clause in here, and/or Harry plans to bring someone in (again, whether you agree with this is a different conversation) then I think loaning him out is the correct move | | | |
| Hitchcock off again..FFS! on 13:52 - Jan 10 with 1279 views | Hunterhoop |
I agree. You're right.
But playing with 1 striker and having 2 fit, one of whom has an awful injury record, is a risk. That can't be denied. We know it's a risk because we were in this position at Watford. We might get away with it. We might not.
If we can recall him, great. If someone is coming in, that explains it (like you, whether I agree we should be signing someone at all is a separate matter - but it would explain this loan move). | | | |
| Hitchcock off again..FFS! on 13:54 - Jan 10 with 1272 views | daveB |
It's a risk but as we only have 2 games in the next 3 weeks it's probably a risk worth taking | | | |
| Hitchcock off again..FFS! on 13:54 - Jan 10 with 1270 views | Match82 |
Oh not denying that it's a risk. I suspect that Harry is banking on either Johnson or Zamora being fit at any given time to be Austin's backup. Which with any two normal players would be a reasonably safe bet. But with those two is... risky | | | |
| Hitchcock off again..FFS! on 13:57 - Jan 10 with 1261 views | simmo |
We have 5 games starting tomorrow. Not 2. | |
| ask Beavis I get nothing Butthead |
| |
| Hitchcock off again..FFS! on 13:58 - Jan 10 with 1258 views | Hunterhoop |
And that's where we disagree, which we're both entitled to.
My view is, if we kept Hitchcock for these 5 (edited, cheers Simmo!) games (providing we haven't signed someone), what's the downside for QPR? His game isn't going to go backwards all of a sudden because he didn't play in L1 for 3 weeks. Who knows, he might gain some confidence and faith in the club in being asked to be a part of the first team squad for a couple of games. You know, as a reward for his perfomances at Crewe. [Post edited 10 Jan 2014 13:59]
| | | |
| Hitchcock off again..FFS! on 13:59 - Jan 10 with 1252 views | whittocksRs |
Can't understand describing Hoilett or Krancjar as second strikers. They're not forwards in any sense as their performances in that role have proven. | | | |
| Hitchcock off again..FFS! on 14:02 - Jan 10 with 1240 views | A40Bosh |
I rely on the fact that 'Arry, Joe and Kev have been in the business a few years and probably know a thing or two about managing players, so therefore what is the bleedin' obvious situation to some on here, i.e. that we don't have enough fit strikers and therefore we should continue to blood a youngster who came on for 5 mins and scored a tap in that I would have put away, might not be the bleedin' obvious to an experienced management team with more miles on the management clock that the accumulative experience of all those posters on here.
If they are still sending him out on loan at a time when we are short of striker,s then those in charge that see Hitchcock 4-5 days a week on a training pitch out near Heathrow obviously believe he is not ready to be thrown in to a championship team, but of course a lot of people on here really do know better, it's just they never quite got around getting their badges and breaking into the game. Shame really. | |
| |
| Hitchcock off again..FFS! on 14:09 - Jan 10 with 1219 views | simmo |
I did start to write a detailed reply to rip this nonsense apart, but I just can't be arsed.
Ridiculous post. | |
| ask Beavis I get nothing Butthead |
| |
| Hitchcock off again..FFS! on 14:13 - Jan 10 with 1206 views | Northernr |
Ahhhh that old Steve Claridge chestnut again. Best close the site altogether then, or forbid posters from giving an opinion on anything other than their chosen careers. | | | |
| Hitchcock off again..FFS! on 14:14 - Jan 10 with 1205 views | qprdan |
opinions opinions.. | | | |
| Hitchcock off again..FFS! on 14:16 - Jan 10 with 1202 views | daveB |
sorry meant 3 weeks from Everton game, Ipswich tomorrow then Huddersfield then a week off as Sheff Wed will be in the cup. | | | |
| Hitchcock off again..FFS! on 14:17 - Jan 10 with 1200 views | daveB |
not out and out forwards but they can play in the hole linking midfield and attack, as I say they are options for us it's not as if we don't have any. | | | |
| Hitchcock off again..FFS! on 14:19 - Jan 10 with 1195 views | qprdan |
 [Post edited 10 Jan 2014 14:19]
| | | |
| Hitchcock off again..FFS! on 14:20 - Jan 10 with 1193 views | simmo |
If Sheff Wens do win their replay wont our game with them be moved to 21st/22nd? The Tues/Wens after will be Bolton away. | |
| ask Beavis I get nothing Butthead |
| |
| Hitchcock off again..FFS! on 14:21 - Jan 10 with 1133 views | daveB |
i doubt it will be moved back, probably be played in February | | | |
| Hitchcock off again..FFS! on 14:45 - Jan 10 with 1099 views | Antti_Heinola |
it doesn't make any sense as AJ is never fit more than 3 games in a row.
we effectively have one and a half strikers at the club. only the other day we had no fit strikers. tell harry no more money being spent and to use what he has. try coaching. | |
| |
| Hitchcock off again..FFS! on 15:13 - Jan 10 with 1068 views | FredManRave |
"I rely on the fact that 'Arry, Joe and Kev have been in the business a few years and probably know a thing or two about managing players, so therefore what is the bleedin' obvious situation to some on here, i.e. that we don't have enough fit strikers and therefore we should continue to blood a youngster who came on for 5 mins and scored a tap in that I would have put away, might not be the bleedin' obvious to an experienced management team with more miles on the management clock that the accumulative experience of all those posters on here".
I've copied and pasted the above to be used should you ever criticise a Redknapp purchase or sale of a player, formation, substitution etc etc.
You can't have it both ways AFB! | |
| |
| Hitchcock off again..FFS! on 15:26 - Jan 10 with 1052 views | daveB |
I agree he should use what he has and he has plenty but it's Fernandes and Beard running around trying to buy people at the moment. They hardly have a history of not buying people either.
We have Austin, Johnson, Zamora who can all play up front and Krancjkar, Hoilett, Benayoon who can play in the hole and at a stretch we could play Phillips up front so plenty of options for him, I don't see how Hitchcock is going to get in the side for the next 2 games when we have that lot so can see the logic of a loan to a side pushing for promotion.
Lets face it he's not going to make it at QPR, we're a club whose philosophy is to buy players and if it doesn't work we buy some more, it's not a Redknapp thing it's a QPR thing but he is a perfect fit for us as that's how he works as well. It's been that way for well over a decade, we used to play Santos up front rather than give a youth team player a go.
Not giving Hitchcock a go could be a mistake similar to Ipswich letting Rhodes go or he might be forgotten like Antonio German within a year. I'd love to see him get a go but thats not QPR anymore | | | |
| Hitchcock off again..FFS! on 15:35 - Jan 10 with 1040 views | Hunterhoop |
You're definitely right in saying it's more than a Redknapp thing, Dave.
Absolutely TF and PB have not grasped the nettle on this front at all either.
In fact, no one at the club has since Thompson left.
Getting into territory of changing the topic here....but regardless of who is to blame for the decision making in this area at present (Redknapp, TF, PB, all of them...), I still do think it's the wrong approach in general.
We need to develop our own young players and buy young players 'low' and sell 'high'. Good young players, at our club and others, need to see QPR, in the way they used to, as the sort of club they want to join as a stepping stone in their career.
West London, Prem/top of championship, play good football, give opportunities, have a young vibrant side, have a history of selling players onto the bigger boys.
That is the image we want. That is the club we should want to be. It will be fun, enjoyable, rewarding and is ultimately the best we can hope for, certainly for the next 10-15 yrs.
But obviously I'm not a professional manager or club owner, so my opinion clearly is irrelevant. | | | |
| Hitchcock off again..FFS! on 15:53 - Jan 10 with 1029 views | Antti_Heinola |
fernandes and beard running around trying to buy people? where have you got that from? TF said he was coming back to buy a player. Harry's managed to sign 3, pointless, people even outside the transfer window, the last of which clearly took a lot of persuading for TF to give into.
anyway, my point is, whoever makes the decisions is irrelevant - we shouldn't be buying anyone. unfortunately, not a single player has improved under redknapp's leadership IMO. | |
| |
| Hitchcock off again..FFS! on 15:57 - Jan 10 with 1023 views | daveB |
I'd love to see that as well, I completely agree that's the way we should go but sadly those running the club and those who have run the club for a good 2 decades now haven't agreed. | | | |
| Hitchcock off again..FFS! on 15:59 - Jan 10 with 1015 views | daveB |
thats' whats happening, those two are the ones doing the deals to buy players, they are of course players Redknapp wants they are not just buying anybody and I doubt it will be the volume of recent years coming in, probably only 2 at the most but they set the philosophy of the club not Redknapp. I know Harry wants to sign players every 5 minutes but thats one of the reasons we hired him. | | | |
| Hitchcock off again..FFS! on 16:22 - Jan 10 with 982 views | A40Bosh |
It's nothing to do with the site being open or closed Clive, or about people having opinions, and its nothing to do with whether I think in the long run that HR and Co will or will not do a good job here, because the facts will speak for themselves at the end of the season when he will be judged.
This is a simple case of me responding in the same disparaging terms to those people who simply come on here and only rant, without much of an actual opinion along side their rant, people who appear to think they know better about everything to do with football and QPR than those paid to run the footballing side of things.
Another youngster is sent out on loan again by the management team and some people who, having seen VERY little of the guy in real terms, who don't see what he is like on the training pitch day in day out, week in week out, and have seen very little other of his footballing abilities than the odd cameo appearances in this division, start bleating that Harry does not know what he is doing.
If I expand on my opinion I would suggest that Hitchcock is not deemed to either be mentally ready, physically ready, experience wise ready, to throw into the front team on a regular or semi regular basis and have to deal with the big ugly brute centre backs, he would have to come across every week. I suspect they might think it might do him more harm than good and damage his confidence, hence why they ship him out to learn his trade.
The second reason is that if he is thrown in the first team then regardless of how he does in his first couple of matches, TF and PB might be putting their cheque books back in their pockets thinking their isn't the problem that Harry tells them that he has up front and Harry does not want to risk losing out on bolstering the squad with a more experienced player who will come in a "do a job" for us.
If that is the way he operates then that is the way he operates.
So that is my opinion on why I think he has not been playing TH and has sent him out on loan as opposed to those who simply come on and say FFS he has gone out on loan again. [Post edited 10 Jan 2014 16:25]
| |
| |
| Hitchcock off again..FFS! on 16:51 - Jan 10 with 956 views | Hunterhoop |
And that's a fair opinion to have. I don't agree with it but I respect it.
You actually seem to be making more of a case for "why" Redknapp may have made that call. I agree with most of them. But the issue for me, isn't "why", it's whether it's right. I understand why Redknapp may have done it. I just don't agree with it. There's nothing wrong with that. You disagree with politicians? Football pundits? Your boss? We all disagree with people throughout are life who have more direc experience in the field we're talking about. But if you can clearly articulate you're reasoning, then that's perfectly reasonable.
It's getting a bit tedious people just saying "Redknapp's the manager. He knows what he's doing. How dare you question him". I know he know's what he's doing. In a lot of cases I agree. Christ, I've also spent 20 minutes in recent games singing "'Arry Redknapp's Blue & White Army" without many joining in! But I am allowed to question his decision making, especially when I can put forward logical, articulated reasons why a different course of action is better, in my opinions. Surely that is what this message board is for. We discuss what happens on the pitch and off it?! | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
