Positives but no points as Tevez slays new look QPR — full match report Sunday, 2nd Sep 2012 23:12 by Clive Whittingham
QPR showed some signs of potential at Manchester City on Saturday, but still slipped to a 3-1 defeat against the reigning champions who were inspired by striker Carlos Tevez.
Once loan players, a youth team acquisition from Portsmouth, free transfers and cash transactions have been taken into account QPR have signed another 12 players in the transfer window which mercifully slammed shut on Friday evening.
They’ve come from far and wide to sign for Rangers, put their name to a press-release with the word “ambition” in it several times, and then wonder like the rest of us where exactly Mark Hughes sees them playing once he’s decided what formation he’d like to set his team up in.
Rob Green, one of the early arrivals, has already been replaced and started in goal for potentially the final time in his Rangers career on Saturday evening at Manchester City behind a back four of Jose Bosingwa, Ryan Nelsen, Anton Ferdinand and Fabio Da Silva.
Julio Cesar will almost certainly start the next match v Chelsea and remain between the sticks barring injury until QPR draw a lower league team in the cup again. There’s no doubting the quality of Cesar, or the size of the coup that has seen him arrive at Loftus Road, but those of us who like to find things to worry about must be concerned with the affect this chew-them-up-and-spit-them-out approach to man management will have on the attitude of the playing staff. When Hughes is demanding 100% effort and commitment from his players, at the back of their minds will always be that thought that his loyalty to Rob Green stretched to two competitive matches.
While Rangers fans, who travelled to Manchester City on Saturday evening in pretty pitiful numbers, were made to wait for the Brazilian’s debut international clearance was received in time for Esteban Granero to start at the head of a midfield which also included Ji Sung Park on one wing, Shaun Wright-Phillips back at his former club on the other and Alejandro Faurlin continuing with his in-at-the-deep-end recovery strategy from ruptured knee ligaments in the middle.
Granero is from Real Madrid where he is used to winning things – matches and trophies. He is impossibly good looking, speaks better English than anybody else on the playing staff, talks thoughtfully and intelligently about himself and the sport, and still managed to find time on the ball and space on the field to guide QPR around the park here despite them being starved of possession and dominated by the current league champions for long periods. At the end of the game he was the only player to come all the way over to the away fans and hand over his shirt.
QPR had been beaten by that stage – 3-1 in the strange sort of game that could have finished 6-0 or 2-2 – but there was plenty in the team’s performance to enthuse and be positive about. At Real Madrid and Inter Milan Granero and Cesar are used to 3-1 away defeats being met with managerial sackings and cars being turned over by angry mobs rather than applause and a collective dig for positives among the ashes. It will be interesting to see where the high profile signings – which also include Stephane M’Bia from another Champions League regular Marseille – take the mentality at QPR. Will they become disillusioned by the idea that still hasn’t really gone away 14 months since we first returned to this league that we’re just happy to be here and keep games like this respectable? Or will they raise the quality of the football and therefore the expectations so one day we’ll come away from Eastlands disappointed to have lost, rather than pleased not to have been thrashed? Time will tell.
In the meantime Rangers began a tough run of September fixtures with a trip to Manchester City. QPR played on this ground just four competitive games ago – there was a Sergio Aguero goal and some Martin Tyler commentary you may have seen and heard once or twice since – and just three members of the starting 11 here played for Rangers that day. In amongst the carnage of City’s title win QPR survived in the Premier League thanks to Bolton failing to win at Stoke, although Hughes’ team came close to winning the City game and securing their own survival before two goals from the hosts in injury time. Considering the R’s were down to ten men for the final half an hour, completed a Premier League record low total of just 82 passes in 96 minutes, and barely got out of their own penalty area for vast swathes of the game, leading into injury time was a minor miracle. Sadly the pattern of play from that game quickly resumed here despite the new look visiting team.
City forced their first corner after two minutes and Green got a firm punched clearance in to settle any early nerves he may have felt. Another corner followed a moment later after Ferdinand tackled Tevez and Vincent Kompany, who usually attacks City set pieces at the near post but this time arrived late in the centre of the six yard box, glanced a header wide. Ryan Nelsen, impressive despite obvious speed-related limitations at the heart of the defence, survived an eighth minute handball appeal when he blocked a cross from Pablo Zabaletta. Then Yaya Toure, whose withdrawal early in that amazing match in May pre-empted the collapse which almost cost City the league, met the third corner of the afternoon and headed straight at Green.
Within 60 seconds Samir Nasri had got in behind QPR down the left – City building three on two attacks to isolate and expose Bosingwa and particularly Fabio in the channels was a clear tactic and running theme – and cut a ball back which Nelsen cleared behind. From that corner Edin Dzeko, who scored the equaliser which set up Aguero’s winner on our last visit, planted another header at goal and Fabio cleared from the line as far as Toure whose shot deflected wide. That meant another corner which Kompany headed onto the roof of the net.
Piecing together the numbers so far that’s five corners, four serious attempts on goal, and just nine minutes played. QPR started with Bobby Zamora and Andy Johnson up front – I mention that at this point for housekeeping, rather than because they were having any influence on proceedings.
City may be champions but, as we know from our two meetings with them last season, they do like to give you a chance. In the twelfth minute Jack Rodwell – bought for want of something better to do with their money and time rather than because he’s any good or actually needed – sent a bizarre clearance back towards his own goal that had Hart scrambling back to make sure it was landing on the roof of the net rather than in the back of it.
QPR, typically, wasted the corner. Shaun Wright-Phillips drilled it straight at the defender on the near post in the now time honoured - every bastard corner, every damn week, every fucking game, without fail - QPR fashion. I swear to sweet Jesus Christ it’s taking all my mental strength not to walk out there, take the corner flag and beat these professional footballers to a bloody pulp with it when they do this – and my will power is diminishing. How difficult can it be to take a corner? No, seriously, how difficult can it be?
Anyway, down at the other end City forced corner 786 of the game so far which ended with Fabio blocking the ball behind for number 787 after Ale Faurlin had lost out in an aerial duel with Yaya Toure on the edge of the box. For Faurlin to start two games this week after nine months out is remarkable. His positional sense, passing ability and strength in the tackle remains as good as ever – and Yaya Toure is a veritable giant of a man so I’m not criticising him at all here – but the lack of headers won against Walsall and again here when that used to be a real strong point of his game suggests everything isn’t quite right with him just yet. These things take time and it will be interesting to see whether he gets that aerial ability back or whether it’s gone from his game for good either for physical reasons, or a mental block because of the nature of the injury. He maybe doesn’t trust that knee just yet.
From corner 787 the ball dropped at the back post, Tevez had a scissor kicked blocked by the crowd in the six yard box, and Yaya Toure ended the argument by lashing high into the roof of the net for the opening goal.
When Tevez then played Kolarov into a promising position on the byline and he opted for a needless extra pass rather than a shot or a low cross there was a hint that it was just too easy for City, but Granero quickly reminded them that QPR can score despite having none of the match at all when he hit a low shot at Hart at the midway point of the half. City responded by loading their right wing with numbers again and teeing up the recalled David Silva for a shot on the run that Green did well to block.
The difficulty for teams like QPR in this situation is the attacks they do launch merely leave space for City to exploit on the counter attack. A foul on Park after the half hour set up a promising free kick for the visitors but when Hart punched it clear the R’s needed Silva to delay his shot and Fabio to execute a tremendous recovery tackle to prevent them falling two goals behind. Ten minutes before half time Granero, used to being on the winning team in such situations, was caught in possession and had Ryan Nelsen not deliberately hauled Tevez to the ground in back play (referee Chris Foy rightly played advantage initially) then the Argentinean would have been able to get on the end of a loose ball in the penalty area after Silva saw another shot charged down. As it was Nelsen was free to clear the ball unchallenged, and he escaped a booking as well.
Nelsen chopped Dzeko to the ground five minutes before half time but Foy played on again, and then waved away handball appeals after Nasri’s shot was blocked in the area. Imagine how thrilled the home crowd were when the first yellow card of the game subsequently went to Kolorov in first half stoppage time for fouling Wright-Phillips as he counter attacked down field after another decent tackle from Fabio. Granero shot over the bar in one minute of first half stoppage time.
A 15 minute break in proceedings didn’t seem to have done a great deal to change the pattern of play as QPR started the second half by conceding possession from their own throw in and Rob Green saved well from Tevez in the ensuing attack. Five minutes later, with Anton Ferdinand struggling with injury, Rangers’ harassed defence was lucky to escape when Silva played Zabaletta in behind Fabio in the penalty area and the full back curled an unstoppable shot past Green, off the underside of the bar, and somehow away to safety.
But every team in every game, no matter how inferior and dominated they may be, has ten minutes of pressure. The trick is to score when that comes along and luckily Rangers currently have Bobby Zamora looking as fit and motivated as he’s been for years in their attack for just such moments. He signalled his intent with a header over the bar in the fifty sixth minute and then when Andy Johnson cut in from the left and fired a powerful shot on goal that deflected and drew a wonderful save from Hart he was on hand, almost on the goal line, to nod the ball home for an unlikely equaliser.
The ‘typical City’ paranoia around these parts is legendary, but the scoreboard subsequently displaying Man City 1 QPR 2 for a full minute afterwards was excessive even by their standards and only served to raise spirits further in the away end.
QPR had done everything right to this point. They hadn’t been intimidated into picking an overly defensive starting 11, they had defended well enough and rode their luck at other times to keep City within striking distance on the scoreboard despite heavy pressure, and they’d taken their chance to score when it had come along. So far, so text book, and yet within a minute they’d self destructed.
No doubt the equaliser served as a wake up call to City but for QPR to allow first Kolarov the time and space to deliver a cross, then give Tevez the freedom of the penalty area to travel to the byline and cut the ball back, and then leave Dzeko completely unmarked in the six yard box to head home was unforgiveable. That’s basic stuff regardless of circumstance or the quality of the opposition. There was a lot to be pleased and proud about in this QPR performance but the defending for that goal, and the timing of it, was park standard.
Ferdinand’s injury saw him withdrawn and replaced by Nedum Onuoha who was given a warm reception by the City fans he used to play in front of. Then after Faurlin had betrayed his tiredness with a sloppy pass that allowed Dzeko in to shoot wide Hughes sent on Kieron Dyer for the Argentinean who can be pleased with his week’s work overall. Fantastic to see him back, great to see him playing so well, reassuring that Hughes still sees him as a first choice despite the influx of new faces. Faurlin and Granero have the potential to be a dream midfield combination for QPR over the coming months and years.
Chris Foy incurred the wrath of the home faithful again 17 minutes from time when he first failed to award Yaya Toure a free kick for what looked like a foul on the edge of the QPR penalty area, then booked Jack Rodwell for chopping Granero as Rangers broke away down field.
Mancini immediately sent on Kolo Toure for Pablo Zabaletta – ostensibly a like-for-like switch but in reality a defensive move given QPR’s persistent failure to deal with Zabaletta’s forward runs over the past two meetings with him.
Roberto Mancini may have been a flamboyant forward as a player, he may have the best attacking options of any manager in the Premier League, and his City side may be vastly superior to QPR in every department but he is still Italian, and therefore still always likely to make gratuitous defensive substitutions to try and see out a game that shouldn’t really need seeing out at all in such situations.
The change encouraged QPR who quickly worked Johnson in behind the new comer and he won a corner. This time – hold the phone, stop the presses, alert the relevant authorities – the delivery was a good one. Presumably the ability to pick out Nedum Onuoha unmarked at the back post from a set piece will swiftly be coached out of Granero but for now the routine works and on this occasion set up a chance for Ryan Nelsen on the edge of the six yard box but his substantial, ageing frame was never likely to be able to execute the acrobatic scissor kick he attempted and the ball skewed horribly wide. It was a terrific chance; Nelsen had more time than he allowed himself and a more attack minded player probably would have scored.
Rather annoyingly when Kompany fouled Park moments later and Granero delivered another perfect set piece into the back post (be still my beating heart) it came through to Nelsen, of all people, again after Hart missed it completely and the New Zealand international captain failed to make sufficient contact. Curses.
Mancini responded by taking off Silva for the more pragmatic Milner but Tevez showed that attack is the best form of defence in such situations by marauding forward with the ball despite persistent attention, and at least three fouls, from a back tracking Bobby Zamora. The striker was, rightly, retrospectively booked by Foy when the play came to an end.
Hughes sent on Djibril Cisse for Granero – I’d have been tempted to put him on for Park ten minutes earlier – and Mancini engaged in clock running by introducing Abdul Razak (number 63 can you believe) for Samir Nasri. The departing City players dragged their departures out to the absolute extreme which irritated Foy into adding five extra minutes at the end of the game but ultimately the time proved more use to the hosts as Tevez got the goal his all round play deserved when he diverted Dzeko’s poor shot into the net after QPR had become overwhelmed by the weight of numbers committed to the attack.
Perversely I saw more in a 1-1 draw at Norwich last week to worry me about QPR than their 5-0 defeat at Swansea the game before before. Here I found more to encourage me in a 3-1 defeat than I did in the shambles at Carrow Road.
Farcically, having basically played three matches while the transfer window was open and clubs were still assembling their teams for 2012/13, the whole division now goes on a two week hiatus. It has all the money, all the best players and all the exposure in the world but the Premier League lacks two brain cells to rub together in its senior management team when it comes to such matters. Either start the season later or end the transfer window earlier for God’s sake.
Annoying though it is, the break may come at a good time for QPR who have a lot to work on and with. Mark Hughes must use his time wisely.
Links >>> Photo Gallery >>> Have Your Say >>> Interactive Player Ratings >>> Message Board Match Thread
Man City: Hart 7, Zabaletta 8 (K Toure 74, 6), Kompany 7, Lescott 6, Kolarov 7, Silva 7 (Milner 81, -), Rodwell 6, Y Toure 8, Nasri 6 (Razak 89, -), Tevez 8, Dzeko 6
Subs: Pantilimon, Clichy, Sinclair, Balotelli
Goals: Y Toure 16 (unassisted), Dzeko 61 (assisted Tevez), Tevez 90+2 (assisted Dzeko)
Yellows: Kolarov 44 (foul), Rodwell 73 (foul)
QPR: Green 6, Bosingwa 6, Nelsen 7, Ferdinand 5 (Onuoha 67, 6), Fabio 6, Park 6, Faurlin 6 (Dyer 72, 6), Granero 7 (Cisse 85, -) Wright-Phillips 5, Johnson 6, Zamora 6
Subs: Murphy, Derry, Mackie, Hoilett
Goals: Zamora 59 (assisted Johnson)
Yellows: Zamora 84 (foul)
QPR Star Man – Esteban Granero 7 Players often do well on their debut so I’m not placing too much stock in this performance but he looked a cut above the other QPR players with his passing, control, positioning and technique. He takes good set pieces as well. Nice to see him come straight to the away end to hand over his shirt at full time, and that he seemed a bit put out that his team mates didn’t do the same. Let’s hope he drags them up to his standards, rather than descending to theirs.
Referee – Chris Foy 7 Not a lot to referee here. Seemed to be rather kind to QPR on a couple of occasions to the audible anger of the home fans but there were few big decisions to get wrong and he allowed the game to flow well with excellent use of the advantage rule throughout. All the bookings were justified but Nelsen can count himself fortunate not to receive on himself for two cynical fouls in the first half, and Kompany was also lucky to escape further punishment for a second half foul on Park.
Attendance – 45, 579 (900 QPR approx) Saturday evening match with only one (expensive) train home, live on the TV, 200 miles from home, against opposition almost certain to beat us, in tough economic times – it’s understandable why only the hardcore QPR support fancied this one. However this is exactly the sort of travelling support, and exactly the same excuses, we’ve been mocking Fulham about for years.
Tweet @loftforwords
Pictures – Action Images
Photo: Action Images
Please report offensive, libellous or inappropriate posts by using the links provided.
Lofthope added 15:58 - Sep 3
I was in a corporate box on the tunnel side of the ground and thought our away support looked better than you suggest....but may be wrong. Anyway, I went there against Fulham once and they had even less for a non-televised game. | | |
RangerKIK added 16:23 - Sep 3
Take your point on all results last season but I am talking about our results under Hughes. So far none. It doesn't suit us to sit deep Clive, home or away. If it did we wouldn't of needed to rely on Stoke for our survival last season! My point is we are playing in a negative frightened way even though we have strong gifted players. It's two schools of thought. Either you are Boris Becker and think I am 17, b*ll*cks why can't I win Wimbledon or Tim Henman and think I am 26 and still young so hopefully I can improve and maybe win a Grand Slam one day with a bit of luck. If we are going to keep putting MC, MU, CH on pedestals we may as well give up now. Keeping the ball and playing with a confident swagger still might not have beaten Man City but it would have beaten Norwich. However do I think we should believe we can beat MC, then yes I do and if we lose well I think we should beat them next time. Lionhearts is what we need. | | |
Northernr added 16:26 - Sep 3
It does suit us to sit deep. Look at the last five home matches last season - who we played and how we played them. Lionhearts yes, bird brains no. | | |
RangerKIK added 21:38 - Sep 3
Your lack of ambition beggars belief Clive. Let's not attack because they might score!!!!! Honestly. And why is ok to attack in the second half when we won't get caught on the break yet apparently good to sit really deep in the first?! Where is the logic!? So you are are a 'birdbrain' in football if you try and keep posession and try and win. Unbelievable. We were so deep/scared against Man City we did not even have a chance to break because there was not one player left up the pitch. Every 10% of possession we have gives us 10% more chance to score and 10% less time for them to score. 20% and.....you get the picture. The stats in the first half were 85% to 15%. I have never seen stats this bad. Is this really the way you think we should play? My other big passion in life is the New England Patriots and we won the Superbowl the first time when we were deemed to be the worst team in the competition. And why because the coach made us believe we were winners and should be afaid of no one. My team would have gone out Sat believing we were Lions and definately going to cause an 'upset'. Hughes team went out there like sheep having already lost the game walking up the tunnel. We all know we won the final few home games last season because, with the exception of Arsenal, we were lucky. And you still seem to missing the point that if it wasn't for Stoke we would have been relegated due to the lack of away points. You are championing a system and attitude that has, let's see, won us no away games and got us forth from bottom in the premier league.Wow. Come on Clive we can beat these teams, we really can. But we have to play in a way and with an attitude that will at least give us a fighting chance. | | |
Northernr added 21:46 - Sep 3
Like I say, you're being willfully simplistic. | | |
RangerKIK added 22:27 - Sep 3
That statement is ridiculous. I am telling you what it takes to be a winner. Stop ignoring the facts Clive. They speak for themselves. We have really good players who should win a good number of away games but only if they believe it's possible. Let us play the players who can win games (Hoilett, Taarabt). Let them do there thing and express themselves. And no more 10 men behind the ball! | | |
TacticalR added 23:17 - Sep 3
RangerKIK, if I have understood you correctly, you're saying it's all about 'belief'. But if it's all about belief, why do teams buy expensive players? Why not just buy cheap ones and get them to 'believe'? And if it's all about belief, why don't the smallest teams always win cup ties, as they are far more motivated than players from the larger teams? Man is a thinking animal, and as a thinking animal he is most conscious of his own mind. But his mind doesn't explain everything because he is still a physical being. When a player gets cramp his legs stop functioning, whatever he believes. Our performance against Norwich was even worse than our performance against Manchester City, and I doubt that was because the players didn't believe they could win. | | |
Myke added 23:51 - Sep 3
Well it's an interesting debate and one which I think you could engage in more Clive rather than trotting out stats and oneliners like 'overly simplistic' and 'birdbrained'. We all know the former can prove anything, while the latter is disingenuous.For your part, KIK your replies could be more measured and controlled. I have a leaning towards KIK's arguments, as at times aired on this forum, particularly with Neil when discussing tactics. I know you don't like Swansea's style Clive (or didn't under Rodger's at any rate) but the reality is, regardless of their away performances, that shey stayed up very comfortably last season and where (for most people) easy on the eye in doing so. I think KIK's major frustration - and one I certainly share- is our meekness; perhaps not quite a defeatist attitude but certainly a certain air of inevitability about an oucome almost from the outset. Yes City have some class players, but they have some pretty ordinary ones too ( Lescott, Rodwell, Dzeko,Milner) and WE have some bloody good players too, which means that 15% possession ( yes I know another meaningless stat) is pretty unnaceptable. Have a go, engage them futher up the field and see what happens, above all when you have the ball, KEEP the bloody thing for more than five seconds. I lost count of the times we simply gave the ball away in the middle of the park either by an unforced mis-placed pass, or an attempt to dribble until they were easily disposessed. Keeping the ball is vital in any game, crucial against the top teams. At home last season we gave City one hell of a game, so what's the big difference in playing away? Even if we lost (which we did anyway comfortably) at least have the satisfaction of making a fight of it. Regards Mike | | |
RangerKIK added 00:02 - Sep 4
Interesting point TacticalR but no that is not what I am saying at all. Just believing it to happen makes it happen!? Now that would be simplistic. That would ignore all the hours of training that's needed to become a professional athelete. What I have been saying from the very start is that when you have good players, which we do, we have to give all that practice,training and natural talent a chance to shine. Not instill fear and clip their wings. Talent without desire and belief is pointless. If we had approached the MC game in a positive way, keeping the ball, probing for weakness, being patient, trusting ourselves, I genuinely think this team would have won the game 3 out of 10 times and maybe have drawn 2. However the way we did approch the game we would definately lose it 9 out of 10 and maybe luckily hold out for a draw on one occassion. We have to start to believe we belong in this league and give the undoubted talent we have the confidence to play. Yes our performance against Norwich was also poor because once again we did not maintain possession, show any patience and impose our will on the game. This is a good squad. Let's try and entertain, have fun even(!) and the results will follow. | | |
parker64 added 08:46 - Sep 4
I think we're better when the tempo's faster, the danger being you lose your shape and get picked off. MH is big on shape and discipline. I can see why he approaches games the way he does but standing off teams, letting them have the ball and watch them pass it around is handing them the initiative. We've done it in every game this season. We spend alot of the time playing in our own half. As has been said we don't maintain possession partly because other teams work hard and close us down. It's not about being gung-ho and going for it. There's a balance. At the moment we play as if we're a non-league club playing a Premiership club in the FA Cup. In the first 20 mins the two banks of four and two up front standing off the other side was pitiful. We've got good players here, let's use them. | | |
THEBUSH added 10:13 - Sep 4
Part of our problem is we're not professional enough, other teams have bullied us in the past. With Nelson and Zamora in the team, we're more professional and hopefully Cesar, M'bia and Granero will be a tougher team to get beat up. | | |
Northernr added 10:14 - Sep 4
Right, here I go, engaging: 1 - How much more positive would you like us to have been exactly? We played with two strikers, two wide players and two central midfielders who can hardly be described as defensive, in fact both Granero and Faurlin would be described by most as offensively thinking ball players. I see mention further up the thread of ten men behind the ball - nonsense, we had Zamora and Johnson up front. Southampton came here on the opening weekend without a centre forward at all for the first 60 minutes of the game, that's ten men behind the ball. I didn't see us as negative at all, we were positive when we could be against the best team in the league with a team of players that have only been playing together for a few weeks. 2 - trotting out stats that can prove anything. Again, nonsense. I was told we should be more like Swansea and retain possession with an arrogant swagger in such games. I merely pointed out that Swansea lost all of their similar games last season very comfortably, scoring only two goals. That's not a statistic being used to prove anything, that's showing that that approach doesn't work either with some facts. May I also say Myke that your "stats being trotted out, we know they can prove anything" comment was proceeded by a totally incorrect and irrelevant 15% possession stat. What's that for, the first ten minutes? If so I'd like to see the possession stats for minutes 47 to 57 please because I'll bet QPR were well into the 70s at that stage. Totally irrelevant also. 3 - Not liking Swansea's style of play. At times I found Swansea boring to watch last season as a neutral. I fully accept that it was very effective and that it's far more preferable to the nonsense we see from Stoke, and the crap we produced for most of last season. I like Swansea very much this season - they've added a cutting edge and attacking attitude which actually makes them good to watch. Seen them in two of their first three games and was very entertained both times. Rodgers' Liverpool on the other hand are dreadful. 4 - Being willfully simplistic. It is willfully simplistic to suggest that QPR lost this game because they didn't believe enough, weren't attacking enough etc. The reason QPR lost this game is right down there at the bottom of the report. Compare the teams - even the players Myke describes as ordinary would be the best players in those positions if they played for QPR - Rodwell and Milner are better than SWP and Park, Dzeko is better than Zamora, Lescott is better than Ferdinand. Manchester City have a much better team than QPR, and QPR still could easily have taken a point had Ryan Nelsen converted either of his good chances at the end. All this "we'd win three times out of ten if we were more attacking compared to no times out of ten if we're not" is opinion dressed up as fact and is not supported by any evidence. Man City played 19 teams at home in the league last season, who all went with different players and different approaches, and City won 18 and drew one of those games. Sometimes you're just beaten by a better team. It's also willfully simplistic to say that QPR would do better if they retained possession better - of course they would, but do you think they're giving the ball away deliberately? | | |
Spiritof67 added 11:13 - Sep 4
So many thought provoking comments from all concerned. As an armchair viewer watching our tactics of playing so deep in the first half, it was surprising that we were only one nil down and half time. But it could have been so different if our only attempt at goal, in the first half, Jack Rodwell’s speculative shot had beaten Joe Hart. Tongue firmly in cheek! | | |
dermyqpr added 11:48 - Sep 4
And if he had got fingers to it we might have had a free kick on their goal line!!!! Kolarov got away with murder and a red was most definately missed. No wonder MH was so upset. For me Ferdinand is a worry. A good defender should not come off worse in those situations (Onouhoa to a similar degree). When you are going to be first to the ball -which they both clearly were, then a`la "psycho" clear ball and man in that order. Rio is on borrowed time IMO. | | |
Myke added 12:44 - Sep 4
Hi Clive, well yes you certainly engaged!! Point #1: I agree that the LINE UP and FORMATION were indeed positive, surprisingly so. It's the MINDSET I had a problem with. As I said in a previous post, it was their meekness, not to say defeatist attitude that was so galling, their air of inevitability that City were going to win regardless of what we did so what's the point really. #2 My 15% possession stat was based on KIK's comment and I fully accept was not representitive of the whole game. This in fact was more galling in one way as City completely lost their nerve for a 20 minute spell and we had them pinned on the edge of their own area without creating much bar the Nelson efforts you mentioned. Why did we have to go behind before playing like this, why not from the off? #3 You say they didn't give the ball on purpose, obviously not, but they gave it away far TOO EASILY as I have already stated. Fine to lose the ball as a result of a perfectly executed tackle, or enforced pressure, but to lose it by a careless misdirected pass, an inability to control the ball, or by aimslessly dribbling until losing possession was extremely frustrating, especially as it happened OVER and OVER in the first half. #4 I did point out it was under Rodgers you found Swansea boring and not under Laudrup. #5 I would question (with the exception of Dzeko) whether any of the City players mentioned are superior to their QPR counterparts and I never even mentioned Barry because he wasn't playing or the alsmost extinguished qualities of Kolo and the not surprisingly recently departed Savic. My point being that while City have 3 or 4 world class players like Yaya, De Silva, Kompany, Tevez and Augera (ok that's 5), they are not robots and to get stuck in, rather than standing off and giving them the space to hurt you, may just be more effective - and if it's not, then it would certainly instill a greater sense of pride ( in me anyway) in defeat. | | |
Northernr added 13:07 - Sep 4
I think you and KIK are being far, far too harsh on both teams. Man City are much, much better than either of you give them credit for (18 wins and one draw from 19 home league games last year) and all the players you mention - Dzeko, Milner, Lescott, Barry - would walk into the QPR team and be the best players in it. And QPR were nowhere near as negative as either of you are making out. They were forced to hang on through an early onslaught and then in the second half passed the ball reasonably well, scored once and created two other excellent chances to score. I'll disengage now because there is only so many different ways of saying "I disagree with you". | | |
francisbowles added 13:27 - Sep 4
I think it was a team picked for the day, full of willing runners and tacklers which you need to try and stay in the game away at City. I thought that SWP had his best game for us for some time. I expect some changes for the next game, after two weeks for MH to work with most of them. Hopefully, we will see a slightly more attacking line up but even though we are at home it will be difficult to drop anyone and he will be mindful of their (chel****'s) form and how we succeeded at home at the end of last season. | | |
Myke added 14:08 - Sep 4
Hmm almost sounds as if you disaprove of a different opinion to your own - surely that's the whole point of the forum. Obviously you're correct about City's home form last season - that's one stat no-one could argue with, but like already stated previously it's not losing,it's HOW you lose that matters a great deal to me - pride in the shirt and all that. Real pride I mean, not gratutiously kissing the badge in front of the camera. Anyway I guess we will never know if 'having a real go' would make a difference as it's not Hughe's style - bring back olli!! | | |
Northernr added 14:14 - Sep 4
I don't disapprove of a different opinion, but there's only so long I can continue replying saying "I disagree with you". I think a day and a half is enough. And I presume you mean Olly as in Blackpool Olly who has totally changed his style from his previous jobs and now goes for it in every match, as opposed to the QPR Olly who used to shut up the shop at 65 minutes if we were winning and try and hold on resulting in a series of late equalisers and losses against vastly inferior opposition over several seasons - including Notts County, Barnsley and Brentford in the promotion year and Rushden the year before.. | | |
RangerKIK added 14:55 - Sep 4
I totally agree with all of the above Myke and you hit the nail on the head -This defeat was inevitable. We are obviously all on the same page in wanting the R's to do well. I just wish we started to try and win. Start to take the fight to the opposition, worry them, give them something to think about. Pound, pound, pound away until the oppostion bend to our will. Yes the top sides might pick us off on the break, (but they might not!), but if they do we go again and again. If at the end we have lost then at least we know that they beat us rather than us giving it to them. I hope Hughes sorts it out and we can look forward to headlines of 'Another triumphant positive display by the Rangers as they once again take all the points at Old Trafford'. :-) We have got a really good bunch of players here now, let's go show the world! (I actually heard the song 'Jerusalem' in my ears as I typed those last two sentences, LOL) | | |
RangerKIK added 15:20 - Sep 4
Final thing I would like to add to this debate is I am not just talking about this game one game against MC.This game for me was just the straw the broke the camel's back. It's been every away game under Hughes that has followed this timid, incompetent in possesion, scared to lose, defensive tedium. Let's start to go to teams like Stoke, look them in the eye and say 'see if you can deal with us you bar stewards. By the way try not to snivil at the end' and then do the Haka.......................Ok I am getting carried away with the Haka! LOL But you get my point. | | |
Northernr added 16:11 - Sep 4
Without wishing to prove anything with statistics again - we beat Stoke twice last season. | | |
Northernr added 16:17 - Sep 4
I think you're getting carried away full stop to be honest, and being very harsh on the team. Like I say we played two up front which not many teams there and we came close to getting a result at a ground where they won 18 and drew one last season. Yes I'd like to see us retain possession, be more positive, attack inferior teams better, but firstly I think we're a work in progress that is hopefully heading in that direction and secondly I think an away game to the reigning champions that we could easily have drawn is a lousy one to break the camel's back with on your point. If we had gone to Stoke and put ten men behind the ball in a 3-1 defeat ten you'd have a point, but we went to Man City, we didn't put ten men behind the ball, and we gave it the best we had IMO. In time, hopefully the new arrivals will drag our mentality, expectations and ability upwards but at the moment I think some supporters have totally unrealistic expectations of our team and that can be damaging. | | |
newgolddream added 17:44 - Sep 4
Northernr, I have to say you talk a lot of sense and I enjoy your article every week but I don't ever remember losing to Brentford in forty years following the R's. God its bad enough being humilated by Chel** and Ful*** without that shower getting in on the act. | | |
Northernr added 18:00 - Sep 4
In the promotion year we were winning 1-0 at Brentford, Furlong scored at the far end of the ground, and were very comfortable. Rather than push on for more we stuck everybody behind the ball for the last 25 minutes and tried to hold out - ended up drawing 1-1. | | |
You need to login in order to post your comments |
Blogs 31 bloggersKnees-up Mother Brown #19 by wessex_exile February, and the U’s enter the most pivotal month of the season. Six games in just four weeks, with four of them against sides also in the bottom six. By March we should be either well clear of danger, or even deeper in the sh*t. With Danny Cowley’s U’s still unbeaten, and looking stronger game on game, I’m sure it’ll be the former, but first we have to do our bit to consign Steve ‘Sour Grapes’ Cotterill’s FGR back to non-league. After our shambolic 5-0 defeat at New Lawn, nothing would give me greater pleasure, even if it meant losing one of my closest awaydays in the process. What’s the excuse going to be today Steve – shocking pitch, faking head injuries, Mexican banditry or some other bit of sour-grapery bullsh*t? Queens Park Rangers Polls |