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.
The current teams average age is the lowest it's been since 2011.
The current team? Ramseys preferred 11 is Green 35 Konchesky 34 Angella 26 Onohua 28 Perch 30 Henry 32 Toszer 30 Chery 27 Phillips 24 Luongo 22 and Austin 26.
This is absolutely not a 'young team trying to find its way'
Time will make this team worse not better so it is not an excuse. The young players you speak of are rotting away on the bench.
Do you honestly think that people are against Ramsey because of his love of young players or his insistence with playing old players? He's just used the young player smokescreen to deflect how awful he is at his job.
The current team? Ramseys preferred 11 is Green 35 Konchesky 34 Angella 26 Onohua 28 Perch 30 Henry 32 Toszer 30 Chery 27 Phillips 24 Luongo 22 and Austin 26.
This is absolutely not a 'young team trying to find its way'
Time will make this team worse not better so it is not an excuse. The young players you speak of are rotting away on the bench.
Do you honestly think that people are against Ramsey because of his love of young players or his insistence with playing old players? He's just used the young player smokescreen to deflect how awful he is at his job.
Like I said on the other thread, if we were picking Doughty, Furlong, Kpekawa, Gladwin etc and leaving senior players out then every time we lost he'd be hammered for going on some crusade with young players, damaging our chances by not picking senior players etc. Simple thing is, you and lots of others don't like him and will hammer him whatever he does unless we win every single game in an entertaining style while not conceding any goals.
Like I said on the other thread, if we were picking Doughty, Furlong, Kpekawa, Gladwin etc and leaving senior players out then every time we lost he'd be hammered for going on some crusade with young players, damaging our chances by not picking senior players etc. Simple thing is, you and lots of others don't like him and will hammer him whatever he does unless we win every single game in an entertaining style while not conceding any goals.
If we were picking them and losing then the excuses given would have merit. You don't get to use excuses that aren't applicable. Perhaps we would hammer him but that's a consistent position. We aren't asking him to do that, we're asking him to stop acting as if he was doing that. There's a little nuance here.
Every single game is a slippery slope fallacy with no bearing in reality. It's never been about results or position. It's about the unjustified rewarding of abject failure which has been a theme of the club of the past few years. It's about employees hiring mates consistently throughout the club rather than holding the clubs interests and awarding through merit. It's about us hiring a man on a three year contract that no other club would ever consider. This man was had been unemployed for seven months even looking for work as a youth coach.
The simple thing is me and lots of other don't believe he is capable of doing the job because every piece of evidence screams it and nobody even attempts to justify it, they just ask to 'give him a chance, everyone deserves a chance' which is patently untrue.
The evidence screams it.
P.S I think you'd struggle to find anyone complaining that Doughty and Gladwin have replaced Henry and/or Tozser or that Furlong replaced Perch. Personally I think Kpekawa is the best of the lot from the little I've seen and would have no problem with him playing.
Like I said on the other thread, if we were picking Doughty, Furlong, Kpekawa, Gladwin etc and leaving senior players out then every time we lost he'd be hammered for going on some crusade with young players, damaging our chances by not picking senior players etc. Simple thing is, you and lots of others don't like him and will hammer him whatever he does unless we win every single game in an entertaining style while not conceding any goals.
Maybe he would change some minds if only we were not letting in so many goals, he stopped picking Henry and Perch, had some form of tactical nous, took some blame himself.. the list goes on.
Yep I want him gone, fed up with the excuses for him, he is not half as good as some people think.. Him mostly.
Maybe he would change some minds if only we were not letting in so many goals, he stopped picking Henry and Perch, had some form of tactical nous, took some blame himself.. the list goes on.
Yep I want him gone, fed up with the excuses for him, he is not half as good as some people think.. Him mostly.
Oh well Tim Sherwood will be available in a few weeks time.
Maybe he would change some minds if only we were not letting in so many goals, he stopped picking Henry and Perch, had some form of tactical nous, took some blame himself.. the list goes on.
Yep I want him gone, fed up with the excuses for him, he is not half as good as some people think.. Him mostly.
If we were picking them and losing then the excuses given would have merit. You don't get to use excuses that aren't applicable. Perhaps we would hammer him but that's a consistent position. We aren't asking him to do that, we're asking him to stop acting as if he was doing that. There's a little nuance here.
Every single game is a slippery slope fallacy with no bearing in reality. It's never been about results or position. It's about the unjustified rewarding of abject failure which has been a theme of the club of the past few years. It's about employees hiring mates consistently throughout the club rather than holding the clubs interests and awarding through merit. It's about us hiring a man on a three year contract that no other club would ever consider. This man was had been unemployed for seven months even looking for work as a youth coach.
The simple thing is me and lots of other don't believe he is capable of doing the job because every piece of evidence screams it and nobody even attempts to justify it, they just ask to 'give him a chance, everyone deserves a chance' which is patently untrue.
The evidence screams it.
P.S I think you'd struggle to find anyone complaining that Doughty and Gladwin have replaced Henry and/or Tozser or that Furlong replaced Perch. Personally I think Kpekawa is the best of the lot from the little I've seen and would have no problem with him playing.
Two things "scream out:" at me from this
1) "Its never been about results" - really? We would be the first club in the history of the game if it wasn't and
2)" The evidence screams it" , heres some evidence for you W4 D3 L3 are NOT stats that justify sacking someone in October.
The only thing that 'scrams" are opinions like yours - of course you're entitled to those like everyone else, but lets not call them "evidence"
Like I said on the other thread, if we were picking Doughty, Furlong, Kpekawa, Gladwin etc and leaving senior players out then every time we lost he'd be hammered for going on some crusade with young players, damaging our chances by not picking senior players etc. Simple thing is, you and lots of others don't like him and will hammer him whatever he does unless we win every single game in an entertaining style while not conceding any goals.
Also on that list are that
a) wins can't be "lucky" b) wins that are due to opposition mistakes don't really count c) wins where Charlie Austin scores don't really count either as we wouldn't have won without him d) Any wins against teams outside top 6 don't really count in the Ramsey credit column e) Any wins are really down to the players in any case and nothing to do with Ramsey
If we were picking them and losing then the excuses given would have merit. You don't get to use excuses that aren't applicable. Perhaps we would hammer him but that's a consistent position. We aren't asking him to do that, we're asking him to stop acting as if he was doing that. There's a little nuance here.
Every single game is a slippery slope fallacy with no bearing in reality. It's never been about results or position. It's about the unjustified rewarding of abject failure which has been a theme of the club of the past few years. It's about employees hiring mates consistently throughout the club rather than holding the clubs interests and awarding through merit. It's about us hiring a man on a three year contract that no other club would ever consider. This man was had been unemployed for seven months even looking for work as a youth coach.
The simple thing is me and lots of other don't believe he is capable of doing the job because every piece of evidence screams it and nobody even attempts to justify it, they just ask to 'give him a chance, everyone deserves a chance' which is patently untrue.
The evidence screams it.
P.S I think you'd struggle to find anyone complaining that Doughty and Gladwin have replaced Henry and/or Tozser or that Furlong replaced Perch. Personally I think Kpekawa is the best of the lot from the little I've seen and would have no problem with him playing.
Henry, a player struggling badly and slowly becoming the boo boy. Let’s not forget Henry was one of our better players last season. Yes the fact pass and move was not such a priority back then, but he still performed well in doing what was asked of him. As a player, as a squad, you respect a Manager more if they reward loyalty and past performances, and especially if they give you every chance to regain your form. No player is immune from the axe, and Henry’s clearly a candidate to be dropped but I don’t think people can be too harsh on Ramsey for his managing of Henry.
When you talk about young players and suggest Ramsey’s a con as the age of the team is still high, you’re missing the bigger picture. It’s not just about how many 18 to 25 year olds you can get on the pitch at one time. It’s about your youngsters having a clear pathway to the first team. One that shows them if they work hard they can get game time with the first eleven. Are you telling me that in recent years we’ve had a Manager whose created an opportunity like Ramsey has for the younger players? Doherty, Kpekawa, Furlong, Reece-cox, Sutherland. Do you seriously think any of those kids would have been near the first team under previous regimes? And can you not understand why with a negative atmosphere and crowd ready to turn, Ramsey is shielding them by not throwing them in together? He’s doing the right thing by them.
It’s not a short term fix. Our youngsters aren’t great. But just by giving opportunities to them and keeping them involved you can show that the club does encourage youth and is prepared to play you which wasn’t the case in the past. Our training facilities aren’t great, the league our kids play in is even worse. We don’t have much to offer them in terms of high level coaching. But what we are able to do (and the Manager deserves a lot of praise for this) is pointing to some of our current youngsters and saying they’ve played for the first team, some even in the top flight. You’ll be surprised how much of an appeal that is.
Henry, a player struggling badly and slowly becoming the boo boy. Let’s not forget Henry was one of our better players last season. Yes the fact pass and move was not such a priority back then, but he still performed well in doing what was asked of him. As a player, as a squad, you respect a Manager more if they reward loyalty and past performances, and especially if they give you every chance to regain your form. No player is immune from the axe, and Henry’s clearly a candidate to be dropped but I don’t think people can be too harsh on Ramsey for his managing of Henry.
When you talk about young players and suggest Ramsey’s a con as the age of the team is still high, you’re missing the bigger picture. It’s not just about how many 18 to 25 year olds you can get on the pitch at one time. It’s about your youngsters having a clear pathway to the first team. One that shows them if they work hard they can get game time with the first eleven. Are you telling me that in recent years we’ve had a Manager whose created an opportunity like Ramsey has for the younger players? Doherty, Kpekawa, Furlong, Reece-cox, Sutherland. Do you seriously think any of those kids would have been near the first team under previous regimes? And can you not understand why with a negative atmosphere and crowd ready to turn, Ramsey is shielding them by not throwing them in together? He’s doing the right thing by them.
It’s not a short term fix. Our youngsters aren’t great. But just by giving opportunities to them and keeping them involved you can show that the club does encourage youth and is prepared to play you which wasn’t the case in the past. Our training facilities aren’t great, the league our kids play in is even worse. We don’t have much to offer them in terms of high level coaching. But what we are able to do (and the Manager deserves a lot of praise for this) is pointing to some of our current youngsters and saying they’ve played for the first team, some even in the top flight. You’ll be surprised how much of an appeal that is.
Sorry, Phil, down arrowed by mistake.
While I think MvPeter is talking bollox, I must give him credit for this particular shriek of hyperbole...
"Every single game is a slippery slope fallacy with no bearing in reality."
Quite simply , I feel the whole club would benefit from Ramfukker wearing a completely shit Homemade Doctor Octopus costume on the touchline .
He can pointlessly order his substitutes to warm up on 94 minutes, slap the ground in despair like Willem Defoe emerging from the jungle in 'Platoon' watching James Perch, Check on his Brilliant Protege Oscar Goberns magnificent career , and gently toss Karl Henry off, all at the same time.
Chris Ramsey.."The power of association football....in the palm of my hand.."
Henry, a player struggling badly and slowly becoming the boo boy. Let’s not forget Henry was one of our better players last season. Yes the fact pass and move was not such a priority back then, but he still performed well in doing what was asked of him. As a player, as a squad, you respect a Manager more if they reward loyalty and past performances, and especially if they give you every chance to regain your form. No player is immune from the axe, and Henry’s clearly a candidate to be dropped but I don’t think people can be too harsh on Ramsey for his managing of Henry.
When you talk about young players and suggest Ramsey’s a con as the age of the team is still high, you’re missing the bigger picture. It’s not just about how many 18 to 25 year olds you can get on the pitch at one time. It’s about your youngsters having a clear pathway to the first team. One that shows them if they work hard they can get game time with the first eleven. Are you telling me that in recent years we’ve had a Manager whose created an opportunity like Ramsey has for the younger players? Doherty, Kpekawa, Furlong, Reece-cox, Sutherland. Do you seriously think any of those kids would have been near the first team under previous regimes? And can you not understand why with a negative atmosphere and crowd ready to turn, Ramsey is shielding them by not throwing them in together? He’s doing the right thing by them.
It’s not a short term fix. Our youngsters aren’t great. But just by giving opportunities to them and keeping them involved you can show that the club does encourage youth and is prepared to play you which wasn’t the case in the past. Our training facilities aren’t great, the league our kids play in is even worse. We don’t have much to offer them in terms of high level coaching. But what we are able to do (and the Manager deserves a lot of praise for this) is pointing to some of our current youngsters and saying they’ve played for the first team, some even in the top flight. You’ll be surprised how much of an appeal that is.
Always the optimist, as I am, but I felt Doughty signing a three year contract spoke volumes about what is happening at the club, let alone his bit on Player. Even listening to Andrew Impey (and I know he is there either working behind the scenes or doing his badges - not sure what) speaks volumes to me about what the youth now have as an opportunity, but also the senior players improving during their tenure with us. I accept he may be biased as he falls into the Kevin Gallen/ Marc Bircham mould of fans who have played for us, but , but when the first ever PoTY three consecutive times says he thinks he would have made the England squad if CR had been at the club, surely it means something.
The debate about whether CR would have been better kept as strictly a coach at the club or tasked with 'managing' and seeing an overhaul from top to bottom of ethos and philosophy, with the aid of Les, will always be one for debate. Whether he should have been allowed to cut his 'managerial' teeth at QPR, is another.
However, given the job that both he and Les are tasked with, and that isnt solely, or even, promotion, I have faith that patience will pay off. Despite Fools and the defense, I see enough green shoots to more than encourage me.
For analogies, QPR are not that different from a bankrupt company, where shareholders/ administrators are investing faith that a new management structure and change of direction will pay off in the long term.
Not your first mention of this "only employing Les Ferdinand's mates" idea. Disgruntled former employee/coach?
Nope but please continue trying to attack the character of a relatively anonymous poster rather than the idea. Really strengthens your argument.
The joke was that he would never employ someone who isn't his mate, obviously I cannot know that, however he has yet to consider anyone not his mate for positions. This go's beyond higher profile ones like Ramsey, Suckling, Sherwood and Paul Hall. We've sacked most of our academy staff (by post) and brought in the lads.
Nope but please continue trying to attack the character of a relatively anonymous poster rather than the idea. Really strengthens your argument.
The joke was that he would never employ someone who isn't his mate, obviously I cannot know that, however he has yet to consider anyone not his mate for positions. This go's beyond higher profile ones like Ramsey, Suckling, Sherwood and Paul Hall. We've sacked most of our academy staff (by post) and brought in the lads.
Do you see the irony of your first paragraph when compared to your second?
1) "Its never been about results" - really? We would be the first club in the history of the game if it wasn't and
2)" The evidence screams it" , heres some evidence for you W4 D3 L3 are NOT stats that justify sacking someone in October.
The only thing that 'scrams" are opinions like yours - of course you're entitled to those like everyone else, but lets not call them "evidence"
1) Would we? Please explain how managers get fired after winning trophies?
2) The evidence by definition screams it because there isn't a shred suggesting he can do it. Made up claims about either his role at Tottenham or his success with England. A spell at a lower league US team a decade ago. A 20% win percentage.
'W4 D3 L3 are NOT stats that justify sacking someone in October. '
Who's talking about results? They're poor but they aren't why we want him out. Karl Henry at number 10 and likewise lunatic decision making is.
Nope but please continue trying to attack the character of a relatively anonymous poster rather than the idea. Really strengthens your argument.
The joke was that he would never employ someone who isn't his mate, obviously I cannot know that, however he has yet to consider anyone not his mate for positions. This go's beyond higher profile ones like Ramsey, Suckling, Sherwood and Paul Hall. We've sacked most of our academy staff (by post) and brought in the lads.
One describes an attack on character. One describes the actions of a person.
No the first bit is saying that lazy attacks on a person's character weaken an argument. The second bit is you making an accusation against Les Ferdinand's character while admitting yourself you cannot possibly know if it's true.
No the first bit is saying that lazy attacks on a person's character weaken an argument. The second bit is you making an accusation against Les Ferdinand's character while admitting yourself you cannot possibly know if it's true.
This post has been edited by an administrator
I did not attack Les' character. I attacked his actions. I admitted that I do not know if it will continue or for how long. He has to this point hired almost exclusively hired people he has personal relationships with and they are almost always in positions that they have never performed. Often they are far above where the person has previously performed. Do you deny this?
This would be very strong evidence of selection bias. It is not possible to know anything if you really want to get into the epistemology so instead we judge on whats likely. Random attacks on character are rarely likely. Evidence based conclusions are. The example above has strong evidence. No irony, no comparison.
If you really need a personal vendetta to disapprove of a bloke that plays Karl Henry at number 10 with 2 subs left well....where's Clive gone I ask?
Ok yes that w s odd, but you can't see the lunacy in calling for a manger's head because he has or has not made the correct substitutions?
As posted on here last week Karl Henry joins a very long list of players disliked by fans but picked by the professional in charge.
Like the results, which after a win now become not important I notice, I trust if we lose 3-0 to Birmingham, you'll be sticking to that argument btw?!, playing Karl Henry is hardly grounds to sack the bloke, and the bloke who hired him for good measure.
I did not attack Les' character. I attacked his actions. I admitted that I do not know if it will continue or for how long. He has to this point hired almost exclusively hired people he has personal relationships with and they are almost always in positions that they have never performed. Often they are far above where the person has previously performed. Do you deny this?
This would be very strong evidence of selection bias. It is not possible to know anything if you really want to get into the epistemology so instead we judge on whats likely. Random attacks on character are rarely likely. Evidence based conclusions are. The example above has strong evidence. No irony, no comparison.
If you really need a personal vendetta to disapprove of a bloke that plays Karl Henry at number 10 with 2 subs left well....where's Clive gone I ask?
[Post edited 12 Oct 2015 14:46]
You've attacked Ramsay's character though. You called him a bare faced liar. I guess you judge someone's character by their actions?(rhetorical question) . So trying to dismiss everything Ferdinand and Ramsey are doing and questioning their motives or agendas is sort of an attack on their character. For example... judging by your posts(actions). I have the opinion you think you're a smart arse(character) . I don't know, you could be right afterall(i hope not) but W3 D3 L3 isnt the end of the world. You might have insider knowledge , i dont care . 4-3 the other day and i had a great Saturday night regardless of the rugby result.(i don't care about that either).
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.