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.
I realise I may get a few pelters for this but it’s true.
Look at Luton v Sunderland last night in the play off. Luton 37% possession win the game 2 - 0 tbf quite comfortably. They had more total shots 16 - 11 More on target 5 - 1 Committed more fouls 12 - 9 Had more corners 7 - 5 Yet nearly 200 less completed passes 283 - 479.
Proof if needed that hard work, solid grit and determination can and more often than the purists would like to admit does result in winning football matches.
You need a certain type of player to achieve this and yes it’s usually the teams with the lighter budgets who adopt these tactics but does that make them less of a player. So called flair players can sometimes lack the drive, the mentality and the total commitment required to get you out of a situation. Going 1 -0 down with these type of players normally results in a defeat. However with the more industrial type of player they have the belief and hunger to get back into these games and dig themselves out.
Look at some of our video training clips for example. And these are only short clips. Certain players strutting around, posing, giving it large. These same players who give so little on a match day if it doesn’t go to plan from the outset. The same players constantly talking behind their hands giving out side eye.
No club in our position can afford to have too many of these types around. One or two yes maybe as you certainly do need match winners as well, however any more and that’s where you see the little cliques appearing trying to disrupt.
Maybe as GA has stated this week that it is time for a reset and a realisation of where QPR actually sit right now. But give me results over substance any day of the week.
I wonder who the happier supporters are this morning Luton or Sunderland
[Post edited 17 May 2023 5:43]
3
Possession doesn’t necessarily win football matches on 07:31 - May 17 with 5877 views
The fundamental difference between Luton and QPR all season long is energy and desire. They pressed and hounded Sunderland out of possession relentless for the 90. Even late on when up by one goal, they pressed with FIVE players in Sunderland's half instead of sitting back passively in their own half, which is what QPR would have done. Look at their second goal and how Lockyear attacked that ball from the cross. For all the moaning on here for how few crosses we launch into the pen area, the bigger criticism is that when one does come, no-one, neither Striker OR centre back attacks the ball by throwing themselves at it. Dykes and Martin are reasonable in the air, but only if unchallenged and that is rarely the case from corners.
So, yes, that style of play can work, but we need players who can make it work and this seasons squad does not contain the personnel for it and unfortunately, I think that it would require a couple of widows to get right with some money available and it'll be too late by then.
Hope I'm really, really wrong on that, but time will tell...
I agree wholeheartedly. I couldnt care less about 'possession football'. I want to see QPR win matches. Give me effort, blood and thunder with committed players, over tippy tippy flashy cants who couldn't care less, all day long.
Looking forward to the blood and thunder team GA produces
3
Possession doesn’t necessarily win football matches on 08:13 - May 17 with 5782 views
There are also a lot of teams who don't bother with possession and they are rubbish
Of course it can work if you have a team with a lot of energy, likes of Barnsley and Luton shown that in recent years although Luton can also keep the ball if they need to
I don't think it's a black and white thing, you need a style to suit the players you have, if you look at our squad and think playing like Luton will get results I'd beg to differ but if that's the way we are going to play from now on we'll need a very different squad
1
Possession doesn’t necessarily win football matches on 08:29 - May 17 with 5753 views
There’s quite a big difference between playing as Luton do and camping out on your own eighteen yard line praying the other team’s 27 shots and 237 crosses don’t end up in your goal.
Obviously I hope GA produces something akin to this Luton team but if Burnley and Stoke are the template for success we are aiming for it’ll be a disaster.
0
Possession doesn’t necessarily win football matches on 08:41 - May 17 with 5707 views
GA, for next season, is still stuck with a lot of players under contract who are simply not good enough at this level, irrespective of whatever style we play.
Luton was a real eye opener. I was trying to picture Martin closing down up front with that intensity. Even Dykes, he does occupy defenders better but again he’s rarely winning balls off defenders. Had a chuckle trying to picture Dozzell (or Amos) winning so many duels. Our full backs stepping in knowing that if they did get done, someone would tuck in behind at speed.
90 minutes and still bossing the park. You can barely get 60 minutes out of our lot at half that intensity.
Quite honestly, I’d only trust Field, Dunne and Paal (maybe Dickie) to perform at that level of intensity and physical strength. So what does GA do with the rest of our piss weak squad?
2
Possession doesn’t necessarily win football matches on 08:53 - May 17 with 5692 views
A couple of points. Yes Luton were very strong last night, particularly on that smaller pitch but Sunderland were weakened in defence and lost to a couple of set pieces. They also beat them on the larger pitch at home.
We have zero players to play that way, its a whole squad replacement for the pace, power and athleticism required
0
Possession doesn’t necessarily win football matches on 08:57 - May 17 with 5682 views
The fallacy that cheaper players can play hoofball is a dangerous one.
As DaveB says there are plenty teams that don't bother with possession and get awful results. Likewise there are plenty teams in every division who prosper playing possession football, relative to their division. And that's the key - relative to their division.
The "we can't afford to play like Man. City" line from Ainsworth is worrrying, and either he's being disingenuous and that he actually does prefer playing hoofball and seeks to justify it, or he has a blind spot. Because Man. City aren't in this division so no team in our division has to play like them.
Instead every team has to figure out what is best for them as they seek to take points off their twenty-three direct opponents. And the other twenty-three are trying it in a myriad of ways, proving that there are endless possibilities, regardless of the various budgets.
Ainsworth will have to do the same, and we await to see what he chooses, but I don't think there will be any mitigation for him to later say that he was forced into it by our budget.
"The opposite of love, after all, is not hate, but indifference."
Possession doesn’t necessarily win football matches on 08:57 - May 17 by BrianMcCarthy
The fallacy that cheaper players can play hoofball is a dangerous one.
As DaveB says there are plenty teams that don't bother with possession and get awful results. Likewise there are plenty teams in every division who prosper playing possession football, relative to their division. And that's the key - relative to their division.
The "we can't afford to play like Man. City" line from Ainsworth is worrrying, and either he's being disingenuous and that he actually does prefer playing hoofball and seeks to justify it, or he has a blind spot. Because Man. City aren't in this division so no team in our division has to play like them.
Instead every team has to figure out what is best for them as they seek to take points off their twenty-three direct opponents. And the other twenty-three are trying it in a myriad of ways, proving that there are endless possibilities, regardless of the various budgets.
Ainsworth will have to do the same, and we await to see what he chooses, but I don't think there will be any mitigation for him to later say that he was forced into it by our budget.
I know what you are saying Brian but we simply wont have the players to go head to head in midfield next season with a big chunk of the division... the relegated Prem teams will have bigger and better squads (particularly in midfield). West Brom, Watford, Norwich all bigger and better. Ipswich will probably do a Sunderland next season as they have rich owners. We have 2 flair players in mid-field and look at how the team faired without a fit Willock. Chair doesn't look quite as good without CW playing along side him. the other problem is the total lack of anything coming from the youth team... I have a Leeds supporting mate who says he is really looking forward to next season if Leeds go down. He says they have a ton of youth players who look really good but cant quite get into the Prem side at the mo... Who do we have champing at the bit to get into the team??? We have to be realistic! If Luton go up we will have the third smallest ground in the division... and probably a similar budget. Maybe Eze gets sold to Newcastle or Man City, and the club will have a bit more wriggle room... maybe!
1
Possession doesn’t necessarily win football matches on 10:22 - May 17 with 5514 views
Possession doesn’t necessarily win football matches on 10:17 - May 17 by Rs_Holy
I know what you are saying Brian but we simply wont have the players to go head to head in midfield next season with a big chunk of the division... the relegated Prem teams will have bigger and better squads (particularly in midfield). West Brom, Watford, Norwich all bigger and better. Ipswich will probably do a Sunderland next season as they have rich owners. We have 2 flair players in mid-field and look at how the team faired without a fit Willock. Chair doesn't look quite as good without CW playing along side him. the other problem is the total lack of anything coming from the youth team... I have a Leeds supporting mate who says he is really looking forward to next season if Leeds go down. He says they have a ton of youth players who look really good but cant quite get into the Prem side at the mo... Who do we have champing at the bit to get into the team??? We have to be realistic! If Luton go up we will have the third smallest ground in the division... and probably a similar budget. Maybe Eze gets sold to Newcastle or Man City, and the club will have a bit more wriggle room... maybe!
I agree there are challenges, Holy. I just don't agree that it means that we have to play a certain way to be effective and/or within budget.
"The opposite of love, after all, is not hate, but indifference."
Possession doesn’t necessarily win football matches on 10:17 - May 17 by Rs_Holy
I know what you are saying Brian but we simply wont have the players to go head to head in midfield next season with a big chunk of the division... the relegated Prem teams will have bigger and better squads (particularly in midfield). West Brom, Watford, Norwich all bigger and better. Ipswich will probably do a Sunderland next season as they have rich owners. We have 2 flair players in mid-field and look at how the team faired without a fit Willock. Chair doesn't look quite as good without CW playing along side him. the other problem is the total lack of anything coming from the youth team... I have a Leeds supporting mate who says he is really looking forward to next season if Leeds go down. He says they have a ton of youth players who look really good but cant quite get into the Prem side at the mo... Who do we have champing at the bit to get into the team??? We have to be realistic! If Luton go up we will have the third smallest ground in the division... and probably a similar budget. Maybe Eze gets sold to Newcastle or Man City, and the club will have a bit more wriggle room... maybe!
"Ipswich will probably do a Sunderland next season as they have rich owners."
Slightly off topic but what has that got to do with a team being successful. Remember FFP
0
Possession doesn’t necessarily win football matches on 10:35 - May 17 with 5454 views
Possession doesn’t necessarily win football matches on 10:26 - May 17 by QPR_John
"Ipswich will probably do a Sunderland next season as they have rich owners."
Slightly off topic but what has that got to do with a team being successful. Remember FFP
Portman Road Capacity: 30,311 (all seated)
Loftus Road Capacity: 18,439 (all seated)
I wouldn't mind betting that most of Ipswich's games will be near capacity next season??? (We will be getting around 1/2 of the gate receipts Ipswich will be getting I reckon).
1
Possession doesn’t necessarily win football matches on 10:46 - May 17 with 5406 views
What a load of bloody tripe, what wins football matches Is putting the ball in the oppositions net. Every bleeding thing nowadays has to be over-complicated, football Managers and trainers are walking about statisting themselves to death, flowcharts-I-pads-pie charts, equation and formulas. Here's a good formula to try give It a go, kick off get the ball out wide to your winger, get down to the goal line and cross the ball into the oppositions goal mouth and with a bit of luck one of your overweight and overpaid and half asleep forwards should be able to head the ball in the general direction of the oppositions goal.
You don’t need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows.
My Father had a profound influence on me, he was a lunatic.
1
Possession doesn’t necessarily win football matches on 10:49 - May 17 with 5399 views
Everything else is a means to achieve that and subject to the players you have. Whatever system you play requires hard work, solid grit and determination, the Luddites forget that.
0
Possession doesn’t necessarily win football matches on 10:52 - May 17 with 5385 views
There are many ways to skin a cat. What's right or wrong depends on how good you are at it, whether it suits the players you have, and whether it works against what your opponents are doing (rock, paper, scissors). e.g., Dominate posession, out-pass, and wear down. Low block and counter + set pieces. High press, high energy, win on turnovers. Direct, turn the defence, fight for second ball, and play from there.
[Post edited 17 May 2023 11:25]
0
Possession doesn’t necessarily win football matches on 10:58 - May 17 with 5338 views
Possession doesn’t necessarily win football matches on 10:46 - May 17 by ted_hendrix
What a load of bloody tripe, what wins football matches Is putting the ball in the oppositions net. Every bleeding thing nowadays has to be over-complicated, football Managers and trainers are walking about statisting themselves to death, flowcharts-I-pads-pie charts, equation and formulas. Here's a good formula to try give It a go, kick off get the ball out wide to your winger, get down to the goal line and cross the ball into the oppositions goal mouth and with a bit of luck one of your overweight and overpaid and half asleep forwards should be able to head the ball in the general direction of the oppositions goal.
You don’t need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows.
love it Ted ... Your reaction reminded me of Mel Smith on the After Dark sketches from a few years back ...
0
Possession doesn’t necessarily win football matches on 11:25 - May 17 with 5268 views
Not so sure about that. It may work against lesser teams, but if Luton go up they will hammered. Fulham, Brentford, Brighton and Bournmouth to a certain degree all try to play with the ball on the floor, rather than 20-30% possession hoof it, and they are all competitive when they went up.
Rangel said the reason Swansea stayed up and QPR didnt was the style of football Swansea played, namely, keep ball. If you want to get promoted and stay there, you need to play good quality football.
2
Possession doesn’t necessarily win football matches on 11:45 - May 17 with 5188 views
Possession doesn’t necessarily win football matches on 08:57 - May 17 by BrianMcCarthy
The fallacy that cheaper players can play hoofball is a dangerous one.
As DaveB says there are plenty teams that don't bother with possession and get awful results. Likewise there are plenty teams in every division who prosper playing possession football, relative to their division. And that's the key - relative to their division.
The "we can't afford to play like Man. City" line from Ainsworth is worrrying, and either he's being disingenuous and that he actually does prefer playing hoofball and seeks to justify it, or he has a blind spot. Because Man. City aren't in this division so no team in our division has to play like them.
Instead every team has to figure out what is best for them as they seek to take points off their twenty-three direct opponents. And the other twenty-three are trying it in a myriad of ways, proving that there are endless possibilities, regardless of the various budgets.
Ainsworth will have to do the same, and we await to see what he chooses, but I don't think there will be any mitigation for him to later say that he was forced into it by our budget.
If you look at the teams that go up and the style of play they use not many direct teams make it in the end and if they do they don't last long in the prem. Fulham, Forest and Bournemouth last season all good footballing sides, Burnley and Sheff Utd this year. Brentford have adapted since going up to be more direct though which has worked for them
It's really all about finding the best style to win gamed with the players you have. I don't expect us to play like Man City they are very unique but the aim for QPR should be that Warnock team, flair and quality in attack and sheer fight at the back
3
Possession doesn’t necessarily win football matches on 11:45 - May 17 with 5190 views
Possession doesn’t necessarily win football matches on 10:46 - May 17 by ted_hendrix
What a load of bloody tripe, what wins football matches Is putting the ball in the oppositions net. Every bleeding thing nowadays has to be over-complicated, football Managers and trainers are walking about statisting themselves to death, flowcharts-I-pads-pie charts, equation and formulas. Here's a good formula to try give It a go, kick off get the ball out wide to your winger, get down to the goal line and cross the ball into the oppositions goal mouth and with a bit of luck one of your overweight and overpaid and half asleep forwards should be able to head the ball in the general direction of the oppositions goal.
You don’t need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows.
When was the last time you saw a winger get to the bye-line and put a cross in, Ted? They don't make them like they used to.. Maybe someone will re-introduce that this season as "The New Thing"
0
Possession doesn’t necessarily win football matches on 11:47 - May 17 with 5183 views
Set pieces/ athleticism and being organised will get you a long way in the championship. Luton are rightly being lauded but last night they pressed like mad, smashed it long to a very physical front two. Sunderland with some lovely players couldn't compete or defend the set pieces.
We have very few players who could play like luton. Maybe Dykes and Field.
0
Possession doesn’t necessarily win football matches on 14:11 - May 17 with 5051 views
Possession doesn’t necessarily win football matches on 11:47 - May 17 by mcqpr10
Set pieces/ athleticism and being organised will get you a long way in the championship. Luton are rightly being lauded but last night they pressed like mad, smashed it long to a very physical front two. Sunderland with some lovely players couldn't compete or defend the set pieces.
We have very few players who could play like luton. Maybe Dykes and Field.
Basically this. If you can't compete physically or even mentally then you're not going to get far in this division.
Even in our Championship season, OK we had a magic man in Taarabt but otherwise we were organised, tough and earned the right to play (basically win the ball and give it to Adel, or Faurlin).
Possession doesn’t necessarily win football matches on 07:58 - May 17 by The_Beast1976
I agree wholeheartedly. I couldnt care less about 'possession football'. I want to see QPR win matches. Give me effort, blood and thunder with committed players, over tippy tippy flashy cants who couldn't care less, all day long.
Looking forward to the blood and thunder team GA produces
why is it either/or? I never get this. Why is it not possible to play attractive, passing football AND work hard, close down etc etc. Why can you only do the latter if you play caveman football?
Bare bones.
5
Possession doesn’t necessarily win football matches on 15:33 - May 17 with 4907 views
Possession doesn’t necessarily win football matches on 08:57 - May 17 by BrianMcCarthy
The fallacy that cheaper players can play hoofball is a dangerous one.
As DaveB says there are plenty teams that don't bother with possession and get awful results. Likewise there are plenty teams in every division who prosper playing possession football, relative to their division. And that's the key - relative to their division.
The "we can't afford to play like Man. City" line from Ainsworth is worrrying, and either he's being disingenuous and that he actually does prefer playing hoofball and seeks to justify it, or he has a blind spot. Because Man. City aren't in this division so no team in our division has to play like them.
Instead every team has to figure out what is best for them as they seek to take points off their twenty-three direct opponents. And the other twenty-three are trying it in a myriad of ways, proving that there are endless possibilities, regardless of the various budgets.
Ainsworth will have to do the same, and we await to see what he chooses, but I don't think there will be any mitigation for him to later say that he was forced into it by our budget.
Fair points, Brian, but we should not take "We can't afford to play like Man. City" to mean that we will instead play hoofball.
It's not a binary choice between the Man City way - I wish - or hoofball, and you yourself say there are "a myriad of ways" to play.
I'll say again that the many Wycombe games I have seen with Gareth at the helm were not based on hoofball. The ball was usually moved forward quickly, often down the wings, but a lot of the passing was on the deck and there weren't endless long, hopeful balls. There was nearly always, if not, always, a tall targetman, but it was wasn't long punt after long punt and their teams weren't Pulis style land of the giants outfits.
We'll see, though.
"Things had started becoming increasingly desperate at Loftus Road but QPR have been handed a massive lifeline and the place has absolutely erupted. it's carnage. It's bedlam. It's 1-1."
2
Possession doesn’t necessarily win football matches on 15:52 - May 17 with 4871 views
Possession doesn’t necessarily win football matches on 15:00 - May 17 by Antti_Heinola
why is it either/or? I never get this. Why is it not possible to play attractive, passing football AND work hard, close down etc etc. Why can you only do the latter if you play caveman football?
Not only is it possible, I'd suggest that is what makes the most successful teams achieve the results they do. Have a look at how hard Citeh work to get the ball back when they are not in possession.
I've said this before, the idea that the very best players don't work hard, don't have the drive, the "energy and enthusiasm" is ridiculous. It's just a given that they do, and what separates them is the exceptional footballing talent that they have.
There's some who seem to think that energy and enthusiasm and commitment to the cause on it's own is enough, and even at Championship level, it won't be, certainly if you have any ambition for anything more than the safety and cozy comfort of 16th place. It's just a lazy lack of ambition dressed up as achievement, maybe even with some people as "massive achievement".
Having said all that, I do recognise that we do need a bit more steel throughout the spine of the side. The 2010 versions of Shaun Derry and Clint Hill would have transformed us last season in much the way as they helped to do so all those years ago. I just don't want a whole team full of them.
3
Possession doesn’t necessarily win football matches on 16:08 - May 17 with 4841 views
Possession doesn’t necessarily win football matches on 15:00 - May 17 by Antti_Heinola
why is it either/or? I never get this. Why is it not possible to play attractive, passing football AND work hard, close down etc etc. Why can you only do the latter if you play caveman football?
Exactly the point. Only the very best can do both it seems. Winning doesn’t just happen. We all know many a footballer who coulda woulda shoulda made it as a pro and we all know a few that you’d think were never good enough to have been a pro but made a career out of it. It’s the mentality that is the difference. Those who are prepared to go to horrible places in their mind, body and soul to get results no matter what. These are the differences no matter what standard they are playing at. Whether it be non-league or as a pro. Ability will get you to a level. Mental strength and a self drive beyond belief will get you to the level above.
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
