By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
Mutch. Palace. Permanent. Confirmed. on 16:26 - Jan 29 by daveB
We don't manage our managers. Hughes was kept under tight control at Fulham, Blackburn and Stoke, all of them were established prem sides when he came in so he continued the work already done and looks good.
With us he had freedom to do as he pleased, sign who he wanted and if they didn't work sign someone else and he made a pigs ear of it. he also had to start with us from scratch and build from next to nothing, not an easy job and one he couldn't do.
That fault of the club not managing our managers has continued with Redknapp who has always been good when kept under control at other clubs.
[Post edited 29 Jan 2015 16:28]
I think that's spot on.
I don't deny that he has achievements to his name. But at QPR he's been allowed to indulge all his worst faults - using cash as a substitute for developing players, while lying through his teeth to try to cover up for his failures.
Can't help noticing that as with Hughes, for all their relative success they each had a major falling out with an owner which in each case was the reason why they were available to come to QPR.
0
Mutch. Palace. Permanent. Confirmed. on 22:14 - Jan 29 with 3048 views
Mutch. Palace. Permanent. Confirmed. on 22:14 - Jan 29 by Marc
He's 'over the moon', which is nice.
Let's be honest, this is a shocking indictment of our club all round. Not just Harry, not just the coaches, not just the strategy. The whole damn thing
Mutch. Palace. Permanent. Confirmed. on 22:58 - Jan 29 by AgedR
He's 'over the moon', which is nice.
Let's be honest, this is a shocking indictment of our club all round. Not just Harry, not just the coaches, not just the strategy. The whole damn thing
well if he starts performing for pardew whats that say about harry and his team
Mutch. Palace. Permanent. Confirmed. on 00:07 - Jan 30 by eghamranger
He came here, was rubbish and he had moved on. Put the money towards someone who can keep us up this season!
He was rubbish,but was injured at the start then formations didn't suit him. I think he was brought in to play 5 midfield with 3 at the back. How many games did we play that formation. He never hit his form.Maybe he hated it here,who knows. Haven't we lost 1 million pounds on this transfer just to get another player in. Crazy. Hopefully we get a natural left sided player that can cross in the mould of Sinton.
Was there anyone on here who would have even picked Mutch based on what he had done on the pitch? So we got £4.75m for a reserve player and got rid of what would have been massive wages. Yes, it would have been great if it had worked out, but it seems that even if we had played a formation that suited him, he would not have been first choice for that role anyway. Better to sell for that now, rather than for £2m in the summer in the event of relegation, having handed him another £1m in wages for not playing. I was sorry to see Simpson go, but Isla has turned out to be our best summer signing.
0
Mutch. Palace. Permanent. Confirmed. on 08:53 - Jan 30 with 2764 views
Mutch. Palace. Permanent. Confirmed. on 22:14 - Jan 29 by Marc
cant watch it mark .
its more painful than watching ed milliband claiming by election victory in heywood , in a manner not seen since emperor Nero opened the games and slaughtered 20,ooo christians in triumph.
nothings changed, theres no plan, their not even being subtle.
just taking the piss, and we let this mothers cnt get away with it
Mutch. Palace. Permanent. Confirmed. on 00:07 - Jan 30 by eghamranger
He came here, was rubbish and he had moved on. Put the money towards someone who can keep us up this season!
Yeah? Last time we went for someone with premiership experience that's English, only 22, scored 7 goals last season from midfield and played at every Intl level up to and including the U21s.
We need someone better than that.
ask Beavis I get nothing Butthead
2
Mutch. Palace. Permanent. Confirmed. on 09:22 - Jan 30 with 2721 views
Mutch. Palace. Permanent. Confirmed. on 08:50 - Jan 30 by gobbles
Was there anyone on here who would have even picked Mutch based on what he had done on the pitch? So we got £4.75m for a reserve player and got rid of what would have been massive wages. Yes, it would have been great if it had worked out, but it seems that even if we had played a formation that suited him, he would not have been first choice for that role anyway. Better to sell for that now, rather than for £2m in the summer in the event of relegation, having handed him another £1m in wages for not playing. I was sorry to see Simpson go, but Isla has turned out to be our best summer signing.
Most of us wanted Mutch picked but in his best position in a 4-3-3 not as a defensive midfielder in a 4-4-2 , that was a waste of time its like starting a new job in IT but they put you in sales for 6 months , you have no training in sales but just told to get on with it , then surprise, surprise you haven't passed your probation BTW how would we know if it would have worked out, 10 games is all he had and he was injured in the early part of the season , the whole point of buying young players is your buying for the future , you nurture talent not destroy it & you certainly don't flog him off to your rivals , as for isla, he isn't a right back , he is a wing back or a right midfielder , really and truly all of our signings this year have been average , and who's fault is that BTW ???
And Bowles is onside, Swinburne has come rushing out of his goal , what can Bowles do here , onto the left foot no, on to the right foot
That’s there that’s two, and that’s Bowles
Brian Moore
5
Mutch. Palace. Permanent. Confirmed. on 09:43 - Jan 30 with 2687 views
Mutch. Palace. Permanent. Confirmed. on 08:50 - Jan 30 by gobbles
Was there anyone on here who would have even picked Mutch based on what he had done on the pitch? So we got £4.75m for a reserve player and got rid of what would have been massive wages. Yes, it would have been great if it had worked out, but it seems that even if we had played a formation that suited him, he would not have been first choice for that role anyway. Better to sell for that now, rather than for £2m in the summer in the event of relegation, having handed him another £1m in wages for not playing. I was sorry to see Simpson go, but Isla has turned out to be our best summer signing.
Everybody keeps talking about what Mutch did or didn't do over the course of 11 fckin games. A new signing, coming to a new city, still very young, integrating into an existing group, being asked to shoe horn into a system and formation that changed week by week where away from home we don't know what we're doing and at LR the CM's are redundant barring defensive duties and looking for direct passes to Bobby.
He could have found his feet 2nd half of the season, he could have been a mainstay in our championship team next season, he could have achieved some of his potential under a new manager and coaching staff that justified the amount we and now Palace paid for him. His last few years have shown us that he's more than likely going to do that.
Instead of going back, looking at the reasons we signed him in the first place, concentrating on the things he did in the previous seasons that saw him stand out above his team mates, we ask him to adapt or die. But without actually giving him suitable time to adapt. Then we sell him first chance we get, more than likely because he's a player we could get money for, so Redknapp can keep the money moving. I don't understand how some fans can support this kind of situation when it's so detrimental to the perception of the club and it's medium to long term standing.
Also regarding Isla, he is turning into a decent RB, but we have no natural back up for him when he's injured, out of form or knocking up his mrs. Simpson would have been perfect back up to challenge him for a 1st team spot and provide support if we ever wanted to push Isla further up the pitch, etc. He was brilliantly consistent for us in the Championship and a key reason we made the playoffs, we were not the same team without him. He also seemed to really appreciate being at the club, was genuine in the ambassador work QPR are affiliated to and seemed a popular member of the dressing room. Isn't that what we should be looking to retain, if they can do it on the pitch too?
Lastly, Isla is a loan, he's not a QPR player. Next season we will have to buy a RB, maybe more than one. To sell permanent members of the playing staff to replace them with short term loans is utterly short sighted. That's what I think sums up this current QPR, short sighted and lookng for a quick fix, regardless of the consequences. The problem I have with that is I will still be here in 5-10 years time, if you will too then you should be concerned.
[Post edited 30 Jan 2015 9:45]
ask Beavis I get nothing Butthead
9
Mutch. Palace. Permanent. Confirmed. on 09:50 - Jan 30 with 2668 views
Mutch. Palace. Permanent. Confirmed. on 09:43 - Jan 30 by simmo
Everybody keeps talking about what Mutch did or didn't do over the course of 11 fckin games. A new signing, coming to a new city, still very young, integrating into an existing group, being asked to shoe horn into a system and formation that changed week by week where away from home we don't know what we're doing and at LR the CM's are redundant barring defensive duties and looking for direct passes to Bobby.
He could have found his feet 2nd half of the season, he could have been a mainstay in our championship team next season, he could have achieved some of his potential under a new manager and coaching staff that justified the amount we and now Palace paid for him. His last few years have shown us that he's more than likely going to do that.
Instead of going back, looking at the reasons we signed him in the first place, concentrating on the things he did in the previous seasons that saw him stand out above his team mates, we ask him to adapt or die. But without actually giving him suitable time to adapt. Then we sell him first chance we get, more than likely because he's a player we could get money for, so Redknapp can keep the money moving. I don't understand how some fans can support this kind of situation when it's so detrimental to the perception of the club and it's medium to long term standing.
Also regarding Isla, he is turning into a decent RB, but we have no natural back up for him when he's injured, out of form or knocking up his mrs. Simpson would have been perfect back up to challenge him for a 1st team spot and provide support if we ever wanted to push Isla further up the pitch, etc. He was brilliantly consistent for us in the Championship and a key reason we made the playoffs, we were not the same team without him. He also seemed to really appreciate being at the club, was genuine in the ambassador work QPR are affiliated to and seemed a popular member of the dressing room. Isn't that what we should be looking to retain, if they can do it on the pitch too?
Lastly, Isla is a loan, he's not a QPR player. Next season we will have to buy a RB, maybe more than one. To sell permanent members of the playing staff to replace them with short term loans is utterly short sighted. That's what I think sums up this current QPR, short sighted and lookng for a quick fix, regardless of the consequences. The problem I have with that is I will still be here in 5-10 years time, if you will too then you should be concerned.
Mutch. Palace. Permanent. Confirmed. on 09:43 - Jan 30 by simmo
Everybody keeps talking about what Mutch did or didn't do over the course of 11 fckin games. A new signing, coming to a new city, still very young, integrating into an existing group, being asked to shoe horn into a system and formation that changed week by week where away from home we don't know what we're doing and at LR the CM's are redundant barring defensive duties and looking for direct passes to Bobby.
He could have found his feet 2nd half of the season, he could have been a mainstay in our championship team next season, he could have achieved some of his potential under a new manager and coaching staff that justified the amount we and now Palace paid for him. His last few years have shown us that he's more than likely going to do that.
Instead of going back, looking at the reasons we signed him in the first place, concentrating on the things he did in the previous seasons that saw him stand out above his team mates, we ask him to adapt or die. But without actually giving him suitable time to adapt. Then we sell him first chance we get, more than likely because he's a player we could get money for, so Redknapp can keep the money moving. I don't understand how some fans can support this kind of situation when it's so detrimental to the perception of the club and it's medium to long term standing.
Also regarding Isla, he is turning into a decent RB, but we have no natural back up for him when he's injured, out of form or knocking up his mrs. Simpson would have been perfect back up to challenge him for a 1st team spot and provide support if we ever wanted to push Isla further up the pitch, etc. He was brilliantly consistent for us in the Championship and a key reason we made the playoffs, we were not the same team without him. He also seemed to really appreciate being at the club, was genuine in the ambassador work QPR are affiliated to and seemed a popular member of the dressing room. Isn't that what we should be looking to retain, if they can do it on the pitch too?
Lastly, Isla is a loan, he's not a QPR player. Next season we will have to buy a RB, maybe more than one. To sell permanent members of the playing staff to replace them with short term loans is utterly short sighted. That's what I think sums up this current QPR, short sighted and lookng for a quick fix, regardless of the consequences. The problem I have with that is I will still be here in 5-10 years time, if you will too then you should be concerned.
Mutch. Palace. Permanent. Confirmed. on 09:43 - Jan 30 by simmo
Everybody keeps talking about what Mutch did or didn't do over the course of 11 fckin games. A new signing, coming to a new city, still very young, integrating into an existing group, being asked to shoe horn into a system and formation that changed week by week where away from home we don't know what we're doing and at LR the CM's are redundant barring defensive duties and looking for direct passes to Bobby.
He could have found his feet 2nd half of the season, he could have been a mainstay in our championship team next season, he could have achieved some of his potential under a new manager and coaching staff that justified the amount we and now Palace paid for him. His last few years have shown us that he's more than likely going to do that.
Instead of going back, looking at the reasons we signed him in the first place, concentrating on the things he did in the previous seasons that saw him stand out above his team mates, we ask him to adapt or die. But without actually giving him suitable time to adapt. Then we sell him first chance we get, more than likely because he's a player we could get money for, so Redknapp can keep the money moving. I don't understand how some fans can support this kind of situation when it's so detrimental to the perception of the club and it's medium to long term standing.
Also regarding Isla, he is turning into a decent RB, but we have no natural back up for him when he's injured, out of form or knocking up his mrs. Simpson would have been perfect back up to challenge him for a 1st team spot and provide support if we ever wanted to push Isla further up the pitch, etc. He was brilliantly consistent for us in the Championship and a key reason we made the playoffs, we were not the same team without him. He also seemed to really appreciate being at the club, was genuine in the ambassador work QPR are affiliated to and seemed a popular member of the dressing room. Isn't that what we should be looking to retain, if they can do it on the pitch too?
Lastly, Isla is a loan, he's not a QPR player. Next season we will have to buy a RB, maybe more than one. To sell permanent members of the playing staff to replace them with short term loans is utterly short sighted. That's what I think sums up this current QPR, short sighted and lookng for a quick fix, regardless of the consequences. The problem I have with that is I will still be here in 5-10 years time, if you will too then you should be concerned.
[Post edited 30 Jan 2015 9:45]
Could have been a contender!
0
Mutch. Palace. Permanent. Confirmed. on 11:16 - Jan 30 with 2596 views
Mutch. Palace. Permanent. Confirmed. on 09:43 - Jan 30 by simmo
Everybody keeps talking about what Mutch did or didn't do over the course of 11 fckin games. A new signing, coming to a new city, still very young, integrating into an existing group, being asked to shoe horn into a system and formation that changed week by week where away from home we don't know what we're doing and at LR the CM's are redundant barring defensive duties and looking for direct passes to Bobby.
He could have found his feet 2nd half of the season, he could have been a mainstay in our championship team next season, he could have achieved some of his potential under a new manager and coaching staff that justified the amount we and now Palace paid for him. His last few years have shown us that he's more than likely going to do that.
Instead of going back, looking at the reasons we signed him in the first place, concentrating on the things he did in the previous seasons that saw him stand out above his team mates, we ask him to adapt or die. But without actually giving him suitable time to adapt. Then we sell him first chance we get, more than likely because he's a player we could get money for, so Redknapp can keep the money moving. I don't understand how some fans can support this kind of situation when it's so detrimental to the perception of the club and it's medium to long term standing.
Also regarding Isla, he is turning into a decent RB, but we have no natural back up for him when he's injured, out of form or knocking up his mrs. Simpson would have been perfect back up to challenge him for a 1st team spot and provide support if we ever wanted to push Isla further up the pitch, etc. He was brilliantly consistent for us in the Championship and a key reason we made the playoffs, we were not the same team without him. He also seemed to really appreciate being at the club, was genuine in the ambassador work QPR are affiliated to and seemed a popular member of the dressing room. Isn't that what we should be looking to retain, if they can do it on the pitch too?
Lastly, Isla is a loan, he's not a QPR player. Next season we will have to buy a RB, maybe more than one. To sell permanent members of the playing staff to replace them with short term loans is utterly short sighted. That's what I think sums up this current QPR, short sighted and lookng for a quick fix, regardless of the consequences. The problem I have with that is I will still be here in 5-10 years time, if you will too then you should be concerned.
[Post edited 30 Jan 2015 9:45]
Simmo, the nail has been hit truly on the head; and i almost want to cry and the sadness and anger it has caused in me....
...and here endeth the sermon.
see if we can get Arry knocked out and have this post tattoo'd on his body as a constant reminder of what a fukk up he has made of this season for the rest of his natural.
0
Mutch. Palace. Permanent. Confirmed. on 11:20 - Jan 30 with 2580 views
Mutch. Palace. Permanent. Confirmed. on 11:20 - Jan 30 by robith
Don't want to quote it again clogging up the thread, but thank you simmo for summing it up so succinctly
Agree completely.
I'd have been interested to see if we were more better and more solid with Simpson at right back, Isla on the right wing and Vargas upfront with Austin.
0
Mutch. Palace. Permanent. Confirmed. on 11:30 - Jan 30 with 2544 views
Mutch. Palace. Permanent. Confirmed. on 09:43 - Jan 30 by simmo
Everybody keeps talking about what Mutch did or didn't do over the course of 11 fckin games. A new signing, coming to a new city, still very young, integrating into an existing group, being asked to shoe horn into a system and formation that changed week by week where away from home we don't know what we're doing and at LR the CM's are redundant barring defensive duties and looking for direct passes to Bobby.
He could have found his feet 2nd half of the season, he could have been a mainstay in our championship team next season, he could have achieved some of his potential under a new manager and coaching staff that justified the amount we and now Palace paid for him. His last few years have shown us that he's more than likely going to do that.
Instead of going back, looking at the reasons we signed him in the first place, concentrating on the things he did in the previous seasons that saw him stand out above his team mates, we ask him to adapt or die. But without actually giving him suitable time to adapt. Then we sell him first chance we get, more than likely because he's a player we could get money for, so Redknapp can keep the money moving. I don't understand how some fans can support this kind of situation when it's so detrimental to the perception of the club and it's medium to long term standing.
Also regarding Isla, he is turning into a decent RB, but we have no natural back up for him when he's injured, out of form or knocking up his mrs. Simpson would have been perfect back up to challenge him for a 1st team spot and provide support if we ever wanted to push Isla further up the pitch, etc. He was brilliantly consistent for us in the Championship and a key reason we made the playoffs, we were not the same team without him. He also seemed to really appreciate being at the club, was genuine in the ambassador work QPR are affiliated to and seemed a popular member of the dressing room. Isn't that what we should be looking to retain, if they can do it on the pitch too?
Lastly, Isla is a loan, he's not a QPR player. Next season we will have to buy a RB, maybe more than one. To sell permanent members of the playing staff to replace them with short term loans is utterly short sighted. That's what I think sums up this current QPR, short sighted and lookng for a quick fix, regardless of the consequences. The problem I have with that is I will still be here in 5-10 years time, if you will too then you should be concerned.
[Post edited 30 Jan 2015 9:45]
I know it's been printed up on here several times but you never know someone may have missed it. Nice one Simmo.
Strong and stable my arse.
0
Mutch. Palace. Permanent. Confirmed. on 13:26 - Jan 30 with 2429 views
Mutch. Palace. Permanent. Confirmed. on 09:43 - Jan 30 by simmo
Everybody keeps talking about what Mutch did or didn't do over the course of 11 fckin games. A new signing, coming to a new city, still very young, integrating into an existing group, being asked to shoe horn into a system and formation that changed week by week where away from home we don't know what we're doing and at LR the CM's are redundant barring defensive duties and looking for direct passes to Bobby.
He could have found his feet 2nd half of the season, he could have been a mainstay in our championship team next season, he could have achieved some of his potential under a new manager and coaching staff that justified the amount we and now Palace paid for him. His last few years have shown us that he's more than likely going to do that.
Instead of going back, looking at the reasons we signed him in the first place, concentrating on the things he did in the previous seasons that saw him stand out above his team mates, we ask him to adapt or die. But without actually giving him suitable time to adapt. Then we sell him first chance we get, more than likely because he's a player we could get money for, so Redknapp can keep the money moving. I don't understand how some fans can support this kind of situation when it's so detrimental to the perception of the club and it's medium to long term standing.
Also regarding Isla, he is turning into a decent RB, but we have no natural back up for him when he's injured, out of form or knocking up his mrs. Simpson would have been perfect back up to challenge him for a 1st team spot and provide support if we ever wanted to push Isla further up the pitch, etc. He was brilliantly consistent for us in the Championship and a key reason we made the playoffs, we were not the same team without him. He also seemed to really appreciate being at the club, was genuine in the ambassador work QPR are affiliated to and seemed a popular member of the dressing room. Isn't that what we should be looking to retain, if they can do it on the pitch too?
Lastly, Isla is a loan, he's not a QPR player. Next season we will have to buy a RB, maybe more than one. To sell permanent members of the playing staff to replace them with short term loans is utterly short sighted. That's what I think sums up this current QPR, short sighted and lookng for a quick fix, regardless of the consequences. The problem I have with that is I will still be here in 5-10 years time, if you will too then you should be concerned.
[Post edited 30 Jan 2015 9:45]
Spot on
0
Mutch. Palace. Permanent. Confirmed. on 16:41 - Jan 30 with 2370 views
Anyone else reckon he'll now go off and be absolutely ridiculously fantastic, and then, in 15 years when he's old and past-it and needs to retire we'll buy him again...
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
oops... Still below us though (clutching at straws) 
Spot on 
