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.
Come on then, Samuels; who the else could Ramsey play?
Your mate oldsaggyf**kinuselessc**tofa'manager' sold our Right Back during the summer, the only one we had.
He also insisted on having a squad of Centre Backs with THREE of them over 35. Lo and Behold, the two 'youngsters' had to play yesterday.
His other masterstroke was to buy two midfielders, both of whom were injury prone, one of which he decided to sell in January for a loss.
He never sorted out the strike force this season or any of the previous windows. OK, so we had Remy and then Austin, but no-one else. Everyone knows that you need more than one striker to survive a season; not saggy chops though; he'd rather buy Gary O'Neil, Yossi Benayoun, Rio Ferdinand, Nico Krancjar and others to give them their last pay day.
Taraabt is not fit because Harry 'Oh its a miracle, I didn't need an operation after all' Redknapp didn't play him because he wasn't his 'right sort' (i.e.: not dull, uninspiring and over 35).
"The best players were playing and weren’t good enough. It really was no more complicated than that". No s**t, Sherlock. Remind us, Martin, just who assembled that squad?
Go on then, aside from playing Furlong , wtf could he do? This week, he had a straight choice between Clint Hill (one of the Golden Oldies) or Furlong. HE HAD LITTLE CHOICE THANKS TO REDKNAPP.
..and anyway, smart b***ocks, maybe Fernandes' comment was more about long term than this season? The only reason the kids are in is because the squad is simply not good enough or big enough.
How the hell does this waste of Oxygen make a living spouting this rubbish?
Come on then, Samuels; who the else could Ramsey play?
Your mate oldsaggyf**kinuselessc**tofa'manager' sold our Right Back during the summer, the only one we had.
He also insisted on having a squad of Centre Backs with THREE of them over 35. Lo and Behold, the two 'youngsters' had to play yesterday.
His other masterstroke was to buy two midfielders, both of whom were injury prone, one of which he decided to sell in January for a loss.
He never sorted out the strike force this season or any of the previous windows. OK, so we had Remy and then Austin, but no-one else. Everyone knows that you need more than one striker to survive a season; not saggy chops though; he'd rather buy Gary O'Neil, Yossi Benayoun, Rio Ferdinand, Nico Krancjar and others to give them their last pay day.
Taraabt is not fit because Harry 'Oh its a miracle, I didn't need an operation after all' Redknapp didn't play him because he wasn't his 'right sort' (i.e.: not dull, uninspiring and over 35).
"The best players were playing and weren’t good enough. It really was no more complicated than that". No s**t, Sherlock. Remind us, Martin, just who assembled that squad?
Go on then, aside from playing Furlong , wtf could he do? This week, he had a straight choice between Clint Hill (one of the Golden Oldies) or Furlong. HE HAD LITTLE CHOICE THANKS TO REDKNAPP.
..and anyway, smart b***ocks, maybe Fernandes' comment was more about long term than this season? The only reason the kids are in is because the squad is simply not good enough or big enough.
How the hell does this waste of Oxygen make a living spouting this rubbish?
"if these young players were good enough they would have been picked"....like bollocks would they have been. Furlong has proved himself to be plenty competent enough. He got a roasting from a good winger having been afforded no protection. It was no worse than Mauricio Isla when he came up against Victor Moses earlier in the season and got destroyed by him. We gave him a chance and he adapted reasonably well. The same will happen to Furlong, it was his 3rd senior game. I doubt 'Arry even knew who he was. Theres no way I'm writing any of our youngsters off as not good enough and am feeling a lot more confident for the future knowing that we are at least giving them a chance.A poor 45 minutes from a right back isn't the reason we are going down.
If Redknapp was good enough and considered QPR's future he would have played them and introduced them progressively so they could gain the experience and skill required when we need them. Unfortunately Redknapp lost any ability to develop players if he ever had it.
I'm really cheesed off by pathetic excuses for journalists that recycle every bit of crap that comes out of Redknapp's mouth. If anyone analysed Redknaps season at QPR it is clear he made a complete mess of it and waited until it was too late, so he could leave someone else to take the blame for his disastrous mess
Who's Next?
4
Martin Samuel again on 09:09 - Mar 16 with 7676 views
Come on then, Samuels; who the else could Ramsey play?
Your mate oldsaggyf**kinuselessc**tofa'manager' sold our Right Back during the summer, the only one we had.
He also insisted on having a squad of Centre Backs with THREE of them over 35. Lo and Behold, the two 'youngsters' had to play yesterday.
His other masterstroke was to buy two midfielders, both of whom were injury prone, one of which he decided to sell in January for a loss.
He never sorted out the strike force this season or any of the previous windows. OK, so we had Remy and then Austin, but no-one else. Everyone knows that you need more than one striker to survive a season; not saggy chops though; he'd rather buy Gary O'Neil, Yossi Benayoun, Rio Ferdinand, Nico Krancjar and others to give them their last pay day.
Taraabt is not fit because Harry 'Oh its a miracle, I didn't need an operation after all' Redknapp didn't play him because he wasn't his 'right sort' (i.e.: not dull, uninspiring and over 35).
"The best players were playing and weren’t good enough. It really was no more complicated than that". No s**t, Sherlock. Remind us, Martin, just who assembled that squad?
Go on then, aside from playing Furlong , wtf could he do? This week, he had a straight choice between Clint Hill (one of the Golden Oldies) or Furlong. HE HAD LITTLE CHOICE THANKS TO REDKNAPP.
..and anyway, smart b***ocks, maybe Fernandes' comment was more about long term than this season? The only reason the kids are in is because the squad is simply not good enough or big enough.
How the hell does this waste of Oxygen make a living spouting this rubbish?
[Post edited 16 Mar 2015 8:12]
Excellent. Put that in an email and send it to Samuel
[Post edited 16 Mar 2015 9:10]
0
Martin Samuel again on 10:01 - Mar 16 with 7577 views
Its not as if they are being picked for a laugh, we have no fit right back so Furlong played, the rest of the team is the same one redknapp was picking
0
Martin Samuel again on 10:22 - Mar 16 with 7535 views
Its not as if they are being picked for a laugh, we have no fit right back so Furlong played, the rest of the team is the same one redknapp was picking
He could have picked onuoha at rb with hill at cb.
0
Martin Samuel again on 10:26 - Mar 16 with 7520 views
Because when the youth weren't being picked, we were winning every week and well clear of relegation... oh wait.
The teenagers are absolutely, positively, the least of our worries in this profoundly lop-sided squad. Samuels might notice that if he took his head out of Harry's hairy arse for more than a few seconds to breathe every few minutes. A mini-human centipede, only fatter and uglier.
[Post edited 16 Mar 2015 11:18]
Bare bones.
1
Martin Samuel again on 10:40 - Mar 16 with 7475 views
He could have done but would it have made much difference? Furlong wasn't why we lost on Saturday
*Edit* I should say, he was a major reason why we lost, not the only reason.
He has talent but he’s played no league football as far as I’m aware. People like Harriman, Doughty and the kid at Huddersfield, have tasted regular football, albeit at a level or 2 below the premier league. You cannot underestimate how important lower league experience is to a young player. Furlong hasn’t had that experience yet and so positionally he’s struggling.
Anybody thrown into a level or 2 above will show glimpses of talent, but it’s familiarity with certain game situations and experience of knowing where they should be on the football pitch that you learn via lower league experience. We’ve just thrown a kid into the frying pan.
I find it funny that we’ve been the club that loans out every young player it develops at the earliest opportunity, but when needed, we still have to throw in a youngster that's got no league experience. But that’s QPR all over.
Onouha should have played on Saturday at full back and against Everton possibly Karl Henry with Barton restored to the team.
[Post edited 16 Mar 2015 17:00]
0
Martin Samuel again on 17:29 - Mar 16 with 6948 views
*Edit* I should say, he was a major reason why we lost, not the only reason.
He has talent but he’s played no league football as far as I’m aware. People like Harriman, Doughty and the kid at Huddersfield, have tasted regular football, albeit at a level or 2 below the premier league. You cannot underestimate how important lower league experience is to a young player. Furlong hasn’t had that experience yet and so positionally he’s struggling.
Anybody thrown into a level or 2 above will show glimpses of talent, but it’s familiarity with certain game situations and experience of knowing where they should be on the football pitch that you learn via lower league experience. We’ve just thrown a kid into the frying pan.
I find it funny that we’ve been the club that loans out every young player it develops at the earliest opportunity, but when needed, we still have to throw in a youngster that's got no league experience. But that’s QPR all over.
Onouha should have played on Saturday at full back and against Everton possibly Karl Henry with Barton restored to the team.
[Post edited 16 Mar 2015 17:00]
Isn't that square pegs in round holes, always a senior player and never a youth teamer, exactly what Redknapp was pelted for? (and rightly so)
0
Martin Samuel again on 17:56 - Mar 16 with 6891 views
Martin Samuel again on 17:40 - Mar 16 by Northernr
Isn't that square pegs in round holes, always a senior player and never a youth teamer, exactly what Redknapp was pelted for? (and rightly so)
My problem with Harry was his decision to play talented players out of position — Fer, Vargas, Onouha (when he had options), Clint Hill etc and his refusal to play younger players in the past even when the pressure was off (last relegation from the Prem and when play-offs were confirmed last season).
In pressurised games, I can understand why you would call on experience. Onouha isn’t a right back, but he’s played a hell of a lot more times there than Furlong, a youth teamer that’s not stepped outside the academy until a few weeks ago. At least get young players involved that have football experience.
Sometimes square pegs (or players that have filled in certain positions in the past) are better bets than youngster that don’t have any league football experience. The evidence has been there for the last 2 games now.
0
Martin Samuel again on 18:13 - Mar 16 with 6860 views
My problem with Harry was his decision to play talented players out of position — Fer, Vargas, Onouha (when he had options), Clint Hill etc and his refusal to play younger players in the past even when the pressure was off (last relegation from the Prem and when play-offs were confirmed last season).
In pressurised games, I can understand why you would call on experience. Onouha isn’t a right back, but he’s played a hell of a lot more times there than Furlong, a youth teamer that’s not stepped outside the academy until a few weeks ago. At least get young players involved that have football experience.
Sometimes square pegs (or players that have filled in certain positions in the past) are better bets than youngster that don’t have any league football experience. The evidence has been there for the last 2 games now.
Given Hill's obvious issues with speed I don't see that he'd have done any better with Sanchez, Bolasie, Zaha, Puncheon or anybody else we've been battered by recently. That, and Furlong/Yun weren't the problems on Saturday, it was the total lack of protection up ahead.
0
Martin Samuel again on 20:14 - Mar 16 with 6684 views
Why is it that instead of encouraging a young kid making in his way in the game, people like Samuel, and a few on here, are all too willing to throw Furlong under the bus. All this criticism of the lad could ruin him. In his first game, he was up against possibly, the premier leagues player of he season, in Sanchez. Without much or any support from his team. This Saturday he was up against Bolaise, Probably the prem's most unpredictable player. This is a HUGE learning curve for the kid. There are more experienced full-backs in the league that have been embarrassed by these two. I think we should really get behind the boy. He's going to make mistakes, but you can't expect the finished article at his age. Him, and his mates in the youth teams are the future. Can't be any worse than the over-paid has-beens that Samuels mate filled the team with.
0
Martin Samuel again on 20:29 - Mar 16 with 6648 views
Martin Samuel again on 18:13 - Mar 16 by Northernr
Given Hill's obvious issues with speed I don't see that he'd have done any better with Sanchez, Bolasie, Zaha, Puncheon or anybody else we've been battered by recently. That, and Furlong/Yun weren't the problems on Saturday, it was the total lack of protection up ahead.
Sorry, I feel I should clarify what I meant. I mentioned Clint Hill in the context of being played out of position under Harry . For me Clint plays centre back or not at all. I certainly wouldn't have played him left back against Zaha. I'd have had Onouha and Yun as full backs with Clint sticking to Murray.
Furlong was a major problem on Saturday with his naïve positional play. As I say, it's what you'd expect from someone with no league experience. He regularly got sucked into the middle of the pitch, rarely being tight to his winger.
Did you see Bolaise's comments in the paper today, he openly admitted that it was a tactic to target Furlong because of what Palace thought were his obvious weaknesses, having watched his past couple of games. I find it strange that you think it wasn't a major problem when we openly have opponents stating they were targeting him. That's got to be a concern. We can't carry players, even if they are a youth teamer.
Yes protection was poor on Saturday, but what would the reaction have been on here if every time their wide players got the ball we had our wingers doubling up on them. With a midfield 2 of Sandro and Henry we wouldn't have got out our half. Yes we may have been defensively more solid (which I wouldn't have been against) but not long ago people were moaning on here when we set up in such a way against better sides than Palace. It's ok now to be defensive against Palace but not when we play the top sides?
Regardless of protection given to full backs, there will be occasions in games when you find yourself one-on-one and you need to deal with it as best you can, Furlong failed because he's so inexperienced not just at this level, but at any level. To say he wasn't the problem and it was the protection given suggests you wouldn't be against him continuing, which I think would be a major error.
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
