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.
To be honest, I think he makes his point fairly well.
We rarely have enough players in the box and tend to resort to shots from outside the 18 yard area. If we could get players forward and nick goals we wouldn't be in this mess.
Most QPR fans agree that we lack a striker or two and that Hughes made a daft decision in selling Helgusson, loaning out DJ Campbell and having excessive midfielders in the 25 man squad by including Hogan Ephraim.
Whilst Savage does not add that detail, he is bang on the money that it is our inability to score that will cost us.
0
It's official. We will survive .... on 08:07 - Jan 4 with 3609 views
It seems a totally pointless article which says nothing at all, written by a somewhat unintelligent and average former midfielder. So he thinks we'll go down. Well nick my old boots. We don't have a prolific striker? Blimey. Redknapp was a motivational genius for turning it around compared to the Liverpool game? Well why were we so bad in the first place if he's so good at motivation? A nothing article by a nothing bloke.
0
It's official. We will survive .... on 08:36 - Jan 4 with 3539 views
Hang on a minute. First he said we would definitely survive because we had too many good players. Then he said we wouldn't survive because the players weren't good enough (just after we sacked his mate Mark Hughes incidentally), and now he's saying we will survive again?
Can he just fck off already?
0
It's official. We will survive .... on 08:50 - Jan 4 with 3500 views
deserves a nobel prize for literature; the guy is a genius and you lot are just jealous of his flair for writing, dancing and his lovely long hair.....
crikey; this writing bollox is easier than I thought; can I have a column in the Mirror too?
0
It's official. We will survive .... on 08:55 - Jan 4 with 3489 views
It's official. We will survive .... on 08:36 - Jan 4 by Northernr
Hang on a minute. First he said we would definitely survive because we had too many good players. Then he said we wouldn't survive because the players weren't good enough (just after we sacked his mate Mark Hughes incidentally), and now he's saying we will survive again?
Can he just fck off already?
Err, surely he's saying that we won't survive?
TBH, he's writing pointless, low brow articles for a rubbish publication with the sort of readers that don't demand anything too taxing. Given that it is for Sky viewing Daily Mirror readers I think he articulates his point sufficiently well.
Whether he's ultimately proved right remains to be seen, but at least he rationalises his view by explaining that it is the strikers that let us down. He even makes the point that (in his view) Cisse is not mobile enough.
Time will tell if he's right, but I actually have no problem with this reasoned article, pointless though it may be.
0
It's official. We will survive .... on 08:59 - Jan 4 with 3473 views
It's official. We will survive .... on 08:55 - Jan 4 by Lofthope
Err, surely he's saying that we won't survive?
TBH, he's writing pointless, low brow articles for a rubbish publication with the sort of readers that don't demand anything too taxing. Given that it is for Sky viewing Daily Mirror readers I think he articulates his point sufficiently well.
Whether he's ultimately proved right remains to be seen, but at least he rationalises his view by explaining that it is the strikers that let us down. He even makes the point that (in his view) Cisse is not mobile enough.
Time will tell if he's right, but I actually have no problem with this reasoned article, pointless though it may be.
But we beat Chelsea by playing WITHOUT a striker, or at least without a recognised one. If playing Taarabt up front continues to work out for us, then why does it matter how many strikers we've got? Why couldn't he have made that point?
0
It's official. We will survive .... on 09:01 - Jan 4 with 3468 views
It's official. We will survive .... on 08:59 - Jan 4 by ElHoop
But we beat Chelsea by playing WITHOUT a striker, or at least without a recognised one. If playing Taarabt up front continues to work out for us, then why does it matter how many strikers we've got? Why couldn't he have made that point?
We beat Chelsea with a shot from outside the box. We lack the knack of nicking goals in the 6 yard box. We won't survive with goals from outside the 18 yard box alone ......it's only opinion, but I think it is a problem we have.
0
It's official. We will survive .... on 09:13 - Jan 4 with 3438 views
It's official. We will survive .... on 08:55 - Jan 4 by Lofthope
Err, surely he's saying that we won't survive?
TBH, he's writing pointless, low brow articles for a rubbish publication with the sort of readers that don't demand anything too taxing. Given that it is for Sky viewing Daily Mirror readers I think he articulates his point sufficiently well.
Whether he's ultimately proved right remains to be seen, but at least he rationalises his view by explaining that it is the strikers that let us down. He even makes the point that (in his view) Cisse is not mobile enough.
Time will tell if he's right, but I actually have no problem with this reasoned article, pointless though it may be.
I think you are suffering from the disease "lack of irony" that quite a few posters here suffer from.
To explain further, whatever Savage says is bollox, and the alternative view point is correct.
First example: "Mark Hughes is a great manager who gets the best out of his players"
Second example: "How can a player of SWP’s pace and "ability"....... (ability? FMG - the ultimate statement in irony) go 54 games without scoring?
Third example (the very next sentence) :"That’s an unbelievable statistic."
Not if you've watched any of his last 54 games it ain't!
As Tommy Cooper said when he put his suitcase on a bench: "I rest my case"
[Post edited 1 Jan 1970 1:00]
Why does it feel like R'SWiPe is still on the books? Yer Couldn't Make It Up.Well Done Me!
0
It's official. We will survive .... on 10:12 - Jan 4 with 3290 views
It's official. We will survive .... on 09:49 - Jan 4 by ShotKneesHoop
I think you are suffering from the disease "lack of irony" that quite a few posters here suffer from.
To explain further, whatever Savage says is bollox, and the alternative view point is correct.
First example: "Mark Hughes is a great manager who gets the best out of his players"
Second example: "How can a player of SWP’s pace and "ability"....... (ability? FMG - the ultimate statement in irony) go 54 games without scoring?
Third example (the very next sentence) :"That’s an unbelievable statistic."
Not if you've watched any of his last 54 games it ain't!
As Tommy Cooper said when he put his suitcase on a bench: "I rest my case"
[Post edited 1 Jan 1970 1:00]
No, I get the irony, but I still think we have a striking problem.
Of course Savage's generally writes blx, it's the Daily Mirror FFS! The Daily Mirror is designed to be blx, they don't write articles for the 'thinking man' do they?
But, I think Savage may be on the right lines on this occasion. It can happen you know.....ironically (of course).
0
It's official. We will survive .... on 11:38 - Jan 4 with 3110 views
Putting aside the question of whether Savage is right or wrong about the strikers and to give some context...
After Hughes was sacked there was a discussion about Hughes on Five Live. Savage kept blindly insisting that Hughes was a good manager, although the only evidence he could really cling to was the good run at the end of last season. Some of the other panelists were trying to discuss things with him in a rational way, as it was so obvious that this season had been a disaster, and just gave up in exasperation.
Air hostess clique
0
It's official. We will survive .... on 11:54 - Jan 4 with 3084 views
I never listen to anything that hairy doormat says, even if it is in favour of QPR.
Why he is a 'golden boy' football pundit on the BBC is beyond me. They have stooped to a very low level in promoting him as a frontline football reporter. His so called reputation as a hard man in the past, never allowing anyone an opinion but his own and him often referring to dumping in a refs room, have mysteriously endeared him to them. Why? What a great role model he is to young and aspiring football fans.
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
