| Liability Lumley 12:05 - Jan 11 with 17705 views | thairanger |
Hope I am wrong was surprised to see him on the team sheet today.Hope he does not cost us the points again.
UUUUUUUURRRRRRRRRRSSSSSSSS |  | | |  |
| Liability Lumley on 17:53 - Jan 11 with 2317 views | paulparker |
Funny how Matt Ingram got tons of grief last year who didn’t make half the errors that Lumley has who on every other thread was being told he needed to go yet the same fans are making every excuse under the sun for Lumley ( the wind being the best one ) and how we should stick with him
Totally bizarre |  |
| 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
|
| |
| Liability Lumley on 17:56 - Jan 11 with 2306 views | RangersDave |
be nice if Cardiff will take him in direct swap for their bench warmer! |  |
| |
| Liability Lumley on 17:59 - Jan 11 with 2287 views | Match82 |
| Liability Lumley on 17:53 - Jan 11 by paulparker |
Funny how Matt Ingram got tons of grief last year who didn’t make half the errors that Lumley has who on every other thread was being told he needed to go yet the same fans are making every excuse under the sun for Lumley ( the wind being the best one ) and how we should stick with him
Totally bizarre |
Honestly, I think the difference is that Lumley projected confidence, Ingram didn't.
Which made you feel like Lumley could figure the mental side of the game out if he went through a rough patch. That doesn't seem to have happened though. |  | | |
| Liability Lumley on 19:52 - Jan 11 with 2160 views | QPR_Jim |
| Liability Lumley on 16:02 - Jan 11 by stevec |
The kick started it and despite Cameron’s header a good keeper would have been on his toes and rushing that ball. Their forward took not one but two looks at Lumley before it came down, don’t think he could believe his luck he was still rooted in the six yard box. |
I thought the pass from Amos started it, no need to play it back to Manning he wasn't even in space so he goes straight back to Lumley. So I'd say that 4 of our players were involved in that goal.
What exactly Wells was doing for the other two goals is beyond me but it's clear he shouldn't be marking at set pieces. Not his fault but not what he should be worrying about when he's on the pitch.
Sure Lumley could have done better but by no means the only player that can be accused of that. Thought Hall was on a suicide mission for most of the second half making poor decisions and putting his teammates under pressure. |  | | |
| Liability Lumley on 19:56 - Jan 11 with 2138 views | QPR_John |
| Liability Lumley on 19:52 - Jan 11 by QPR_Jim |
I thought the pass from Amos started it, no need to play it back to Manning he wasn't even in space so he goes straight back to Lumley. So I'd say that 4 of our players were involved in that goal.
What exactly Wells was doing for the other two goals is beyond me but it's clear he shouldn't be marking at set pieces. Not his fault but not what he should be worrying about when he's on the pitch.
Sure Lumley could have done better but by no means the only player that can be accused of that. Thought Hall was on a suicide mission for most of the second half making poor decisions and putting his teammates under pressure. |
"I thought the pass from Amos started it, no need to play it back to Manning he wasn't even in space so he goes straight back to Lumley. So I'd say that 4 of our players were involved in that goal."
Surely with that logic it can be said the goal would not have happened if the match had not kicked off. How far back do you want to go? |  | | |
| Liability Lumley on 20:02 - Jan 11 with 2122 views | Ned_Kennedys |
| Liability Lumley on 19:52 - Jan 11 by QPR_Jim |
I thought the pass from Amos started it, no need to play it back to Manning he wasn't even in space so he goes straight back to Lumley. So I'd say that 4 of our players were involved in that goal.
What exactly Wells was doing for the other two goals is beyond me but it's clear he shouldn't be marking at set pieces. Not his fault but not what he should be worrying about when he's on the pitch.
Sure Lumley could have done better but by no means the only player that can be accused of that. Thought Hall was on a suicide mission for most of the second half making poor decisions and putting his teammates under pressure. |
Lumley was under no pressure for his kick .
Her also stayed rooted to his line when the ball was in the air in his area: it was up there long enough for the Brentford guy to have the time to look at him twice as he was clearly worried he was going to be cleaned out by the keeper clearing the ball. No chance.
Disingenuous to blame anyone else for that goal. |  | | |
| Liability Lumley on 20:20 - Jan 11 with 2081 views | The_Mole |
No wonder Lumley got the nickname’Dracula’ as a youth team player! Even back then, people could see he was afraid of crosses 🙄 |  | | |
| Liability Lumley on 20:40 - Jan 11 with 2040 views | QPR_Jim |
| Liability Lumley on 19:56 - Jan 11 by QPR_John |
"I thought the pass from Amos started it, no need to play it back to Manning he wasn't even in space so he goes straight back to Lumley. So I'd say that 4 of our players were involved in that goal."
Surely with that logic it can be said the goal would not have happened if the match had not kicked off. How far back do you want to go? |
Just as far as the point we unnecessarily put pressure on ourselves. Said it was a poor choice of pass at the time then within a minute we're picking the ball out of the net. | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Liability Lumley on 20:48 - Jan 11 with 2017 views | QPR_Jim |
| Liability Lumley on 20:02 - Jan 11 by Ned_Kennedys |
Lumley was under no pressure for his kick .
Her also stayed rooted to his line when the ball was in the air in his area: it was up there long enough for the Brentford guy to have the time to look at him twice as he was clearly worried he was going to be cleaned out by the keeper clearing the ball. No chance.
Disingenuous to blame anyone else for that goal. |
I didn't say Lumley wasn't to blame but I think there were a number of bad choices, as goalkeeper he ended up being the deciding factor, if he'd cleared the ball better or claimed it when it was in the air then it wouldn't have been a goal but it doesn't mean other people couldn't have helped avoid the situation. We always seemed to be going back to the keeper, as a team we were not coping with the pressure Brentford were applying. | | | |
| Liability Lumley on 00:09 - Jan 12 with 1870 views | aston_hoop |
Bloke has deleted his twitter account. don't blame him, some absolute cuunts on there |  |
| |
| Liability Lumley on 00:11 - Jan 12 with 1859 views | MedwayR |
| Liability Lumley on 17:53 - Jan 11 by paulparker |
Funny how Matt Ingram got tons of grief last year who didn’t make half the errors that Lumley has who on every other thread was being told he needed to go yet the same fans are making every excuse under the sun for Lumley ( the wind being the best one ) and how we should stick with him
Totally bizarre |
This is what I don’t get either, Kelly is getting similar treatment to Ingram too, utterly bizarre. |  |
| |
| Liability Lumley on 00:19 - Jan 12 with 1844 views | BrianMcCarthy |
| Liability Lumley on 20:02 - Jan 11 by Ned_Kennedys |
Lumley was under no pressure for his kick .
Her also stayed rooted to his line when the ball was in the air in his area: it was up there long enough for the Brentford guy to have the time to look at him twice as he was clearly worried he was going to be cleaned out by the keeper clearing the ball. No chance.
Disingenuous to blame anyone else for that goal. |
Ned,
I just watched it again as I know we saw it differently at the time.
I'm still not sure that any keeper would have got there quick enough when it's seen from the side angle. What I would say looking at it again is that his starting point is maybe too close to his goal line which doesn't help. |  |
| |
| Liability Lumley on 01:31 - Jan 12 with 1786 views | lifer |
I'm always in two minds about criticising our players, but Joe Lumley has proved time and time again that, for whatever reason, he is not currently good enough for a Championship side. I've been a season ticket holder at the Rs for decades, and I don't remember a less reliable keeper. I'm sure the guy tries his best, but his best just isn't good enough. I'm not over-confident in Kelly either. It does my head in to see Dieng playing well for Doncaster and Smithies sitting on the bench at Cardiff while Alex McCarthy plays out of his skin in the Premiership! It's clear to me that the defence are all too well aware of Lumley's shortcomings, which is why they tend to make rash decisions. I've got no problem with our attack or midfield, but the defence is so fragile, largely because they are constantly put under pressure by having no faith in the keeper. We need a decent keeper asap. Until that happens we're never getting anywhere. | | | |
| Liability Lumley on 01:41 - Jan 12 with 1775 views | Hooparoo |
Poor old Joe. His confidence is shot so time to give him a rest. I would also recall Dieng. |  |
| |
| Liability Lumley on 06:40 - Jan 12 with 1682 views | nix |
| Liability Lumley on 01:41 - Jan 12 by Hooparoo |
Poor old Joe. His confidence is shot so time to give him a rest. I would also recall Dieng. |
I'm afraid I agree with this. Wouldn't dig him out in matches or message him on twitter but we have to face facts, trying to help him play through it isn't working and is even a bit counter productive now as each time he makes a mistake he starts second guessing himself more. That seems to be the main problem, he's thinking through several possibilities for each situation, which means he ends up not reacting at all, which looks like a mistake anyway. Goalkeepers need to just react instinctively as there's no time to think things through. That's why he looks better as a shot stopper I think as there's no decision to make, you just try and save it. |  | | |
| Liability Lumley on 08:36 - Jan 12 with 1557 views | Lblock |
I wasn’t behind the goal yesterday, sat elsewhere in the ground, but people who were tell me Lumley was turning around and digging out fans and interacting with the away end. I dare say he was getting stick but even so this demonstrates a lack of professionalism and underlines his biggest issue - concentration.
You can call it confidence if you like but for me that’s not his issue, it’s just his lack of ability to be calm or, you could even say he’s over confident!!!
I’ve defended and been a fan of JL in the past but I’m afraid he has to go now. I don’t rate Kelly either but Warbs needs to remove Lumley from the squad from here on in. If he doesn’t then I’m sorry but you’ve got to question the manager. |  |
| Cherish and enjoy life.... this ain't no dress rehearsal |
| |
| Liability Lumley on 08:40 - Jan 12 with 1558 views | ozexile |
| Liability Lumley on 08:36 - Jan 12 by Lblock |
I wasn’t behind the goal yesterday, sat elsewhere in the ground, but people who were tell me Lumley was turning around and digging out fans and interacting with the away end. I dare say he was getting stick but even so this demonstrates a lack of professionalism and underlines his biggest issue - concentration.
You can call it confidence if you like but for me that’s not his issue, it’s just his lack of ability to be calm or, you could even say he’s over confident!!!
I’ve defended and been a fan of JL in the past but I’m afraid he has to go now. I don’t rate Kelly either but Warbs needs to remove Lumley from the squad from here on in. If he doesn’t then I’m sorry but you’ve got to question the manager. |
I'm all in favour of helping and nurturing players but no player is bigger than the club. He needs a break. | | | |
| Liability Lumley on 08:56 - Jan 12 with 1527 views | paulparker |
| Liability Lumley on 00:11 - Jan 12 by MedwayR |
This is what I don’t get either, Kelly is getting similar treatment to Ingram too, utterly bizarre. |
He isn’t one the message board fanboys favourites that’s why, Kelly has done nothing wrong and deserves between now and the end of the season to play | |
| 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
|
| |
| Liability Lumley on 09:09 - Jan 12 with 1484 views | Watford_Ranger |
| Liability Lumley on 08:36 - Jan 12 by Lblock |
I wasn’t behind the goal yesterday, sat elsewhere in the ground, but people who were tell me Lumley was turning around and digging out fans and interacting with the away end. I dare say he was getting stick but even so this demonstrates a lack of professionalism and underlines his biggest issue - concentration.
You can call it confidence if you like but for me that’s not his issue, it’s just his lack of ability to be calm or, you could even say he’s over confident!!!
I’ve defended and been a fan of JL in the past but I’m afraid he has to go now. I don’t rate Kelly either but Warbs needs to remove Lumley from the squad from here on in. If he doesn’t then I’m sorry but you’ve got to question the manager. |
He got a few ironic cheers for catching the ball but was quite tame all things considered. Think the fans at games have been very kind to him over recent months.
Still it’s not really his fault he keeps getting picked. If Warburton can’t see it then that’s his failing. | | | |
| Liability Lumley on 09:16 - Jan 12 with 1468 views | Gloucs_R |
Lumley should be dropped and sent out on loan.
Kelly needs to be number 1
Dieng dropped one last week two, bad mistake, but should be watched very closely by us for a recall
Id honestly let Barnes have a cup game too. [Post edited 12 Jan 2020 9:16]
|  |
| |
| Liability Lumley on 09:50 - Jan 12 with 1400 views | cyprusmel |
| Liability Lumley on 09:16 - Jan 12 by Gloucs_R |
Lumley should be dropped and sent out on loan.
Kelly needs to be number 1
Dieng dropped one last week two, bad mistake, but should be watched very closely by us for a recall
Id honestly let Barnes have a cup game too. [Post edited 12 Jan 2020 9:16]
|
I think I read somewhere that Diengs loan has been extended until the end of the season with Doncaster.
Might be wrong though. | | | |
| Liability Lumley on 10:30 - Jan 12 with 1352 views | Gloucs_R |
Just watched the highlights, anyone blaming Amos for that backpass needs their head testing. Lumley was under no pressure at all and once again fluffed a clearance. To make matters worse he then was completely undecisive va when the ball came back in the box and ended up rooted in one position not able to move his feet.
He simply gives his defence no confidence at all and for me me that must mean he is replaced | |
| |
| Liability Lumley on 10:38 - Jan 12 with 1339 views | smegma |
| Liability Lumley on 09:09 - Jan 12 by Watford_Ranger |
He got a few ironic cheers for catching the ball but was quite tame all things considered. Think the fans at games have been very kind to him over recent months.
Still it’s not really his fault he keeps getting picked. If Warburton can’t see it then that’s his failing. |
Ironic cheers from your own supporters is not 'very kind to him'.
I think its time he was taken out of the firing line so to speak. Put Kelly in goal then wait for the 'ironic cheers' to return once he makes one mistake. | | | |
| Liability Lumley on 10:42 - Jan 12 with 1334 views | francisbowles |
I have been a supporter of Joe but his confidence has greatly diminished and for whatever reason, nerves, trying to find a quick pass etc, he is rushing his kicks when he doesn't need to.
I was surprised he was picked yesterday, sadly it was a mistake. We cannot continue to pick him for his own sake as well as the teams.
I don't think we have seen enough of Kelly to make a judgement. Warburton bought him, has worked with him previously, was on the bench for a full international, was in our team for one or two teams before losing his place to injury and he hasn't made any obvious mistakes in the few games he has played. If he is fully fit, we have to put him in for a run, otherwise we need a keeper from somewhere. | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
