Jump to content
Note to existing users - password reset is required Read more... ×
Sign in to follow this  
Rogue Baboon

Team for QPR...

Recommended Posts

The good thing about the Championship is that the next game is only ever a few days away...

The first 2 games of the season have both followed a similar pattern - losing, change shape, bring Wes/Oli on, look better as a team, so for me...

Gunn

Pinto Franke Zimmerman Husband

Reed Tettey

Wildschut Hoolahan Maddison

Oliveira

Switch to a back 4, bring Pinto in. Tettey to protect the CBs. Hoolahan and Oliveira in as we are clearly better when they play. Overall a more familiar formation and style of play

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Assuming Klose still not fit.

I would go with same formation. I''m a long term fan of 3 at the back being able to switch at ease to 4 or even 5 if required. I''d like to see it given another go but removing the least effective 3 from today, replacing them with 3 that pose a constant threat to the opposition defence.

Gunn

Martin Zimmerman Franke

Pinto Hoolahan Reed Maddison Husband

Oliviera Jerome

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If Farke doesn''t start Nelson, Wes and Murphy in this one I will begin to lose a little faith. I do not want to see Watkins on the pitch and preferably not Naismith either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Going with Rogue''s XI as well.

Give opponents lots to worry about in the offensive area of the pitch and keep things simple at the back. Which means defenders defend.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3 didn''t work, they played to far apart and were exposed.

As for going forward, having wing backs is supposed to allow width, we had none down our left as every time Husbands got it he had no options in the channels and had to go backwards.

Flat 4 for me with Pinto back in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Agree with Rogue. We need Tettey and Reed in there to support our defenders and break up play.

JM is out of sorts and needs to be benched. Maybe missing his Bro.

Naismith seems to be a bit off too, maybe missing last two games affected him. He has something to prove this season but I''m not convinced he can produce the goods - hope in wrong!

Vrancic hasn''t looked any good as yet and seems off the pace.

We might see the two new boys. I think we will turn it around this week. QPR have been quite good apparently and energised by Holloway but feel we can beat them, hope so as I''m taking the whole family. Villa look awful - must win that one!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Have to agree with the comments above and like the look of Rogue''s line-up.

I''ve lost faith in 3 at the back so would like to see a solid four - husband has been poor so it''s a shame Toffolo and Lewis aren''t fit enough because I think Lewis especially has probably done enough to start ahead of him at the moment.

Tettey in the middle will help solidify things, it was fine dropping Vrancic but bringing in an AM in replacement didn''t really work out.

Oli and Wes have to start, simple as. I''m just not sure who are the best options out of Watkins/Widlschut and Maddison/Naismith to play alongside them

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like the look of Rogue Baboon''s selection, but it''s not always who plays but how we play. All this tippy tappy Football is very good but it doesn''t stop a player just putting the ball in the box and letting the forward fight for it. Also our defence needs to improve or change  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Personally I would persevere with 3 at the back, its clear we are building and if we abandon something after two games we simply wont progress. Injuries and lack of options remain a concern however.

Gunn

Martin Zimmer Franke

Pinto Reed Husband

Wildschut Maddison Wes

Oliveira

Subs

McGovern, Godfrey, Tettey Vrancic, Naismith, Jerome, Steiperman

No Pinto; No Points and we need a win.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="AJ"]Have to agree with the comments above and like the look of Rogue''s line-up.

I''ve lost faith in 3 at the back so would like to see a solid four - husband has been poor so it''s a shame Toffolo and Lewis aren''t fit enough because I think Lewis especially has probably done enough to start ahead of him at the moment.

Tettey in the middle will help solidify things, it was fine dropping Vrancic but bringing in an AM in replacement didn''t really work out.

Oli and Wes have to start, simple as. I''m just not sure who are the best options out of Watkins/Widlschut and Maddison/Naismith to play alongside them[/quote]

Maddison has to play. Bang in form at the moment and there are international breaks coming up where he can have a rest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Think Watkins is a decent player but was not really at the races yesterday - I thought he''d be subbed for Wes early in the second half but what do I know.

Re the 3 at the back, I can''t help but think DF will stick with it if it is his preferred formation. It can work well, and it''s how the players play that creates the issues, not the set-up itself. All formations have pros and cons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DV - At least with Oliveira, Wes and Murphy starting we would have some flair when we are attacking and players who could frighten defenders.

None of those who started yesterday worried the Sunderland defence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can''t believe there''s people on here who would still go with three at the back after yesterdays debacle [*-)] Branston Pickle reckons it''s not the set-up itself and that all formations have pros and cons - true to an extent, but a 3-5-2 formation that fields three at the back is not going to cut the mustard when we only have two ''proper'' centre-backs at the club - a 5-3-2, maybe, but never a 3-5-2.If we consider that all formations have pros & cons, why not go with the tried and trusted 4-4-2? Yes, I realise Farke would never field it, but here''s my suggestion for a 4-4-2 starting eleven:GunnPintoZimmermannFrankeHusbandWildschutNaismithVrancicMurphyOliveiraJerome

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Yellow Wal"]DV - At least with Oliveira, Wes and Murphy starting we would have some flair when we are attacking and players who could frighten defenders.

None of those who started yesterday worried the Sunderland defence.[/quote]Oliveira & Murphy fine, but do you and others on here seriously believe a 35 year old Hoolahan can be relied upon to start every match this season?People need to be a tad more realistic, ffs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Jools"]Can''t believe there''s people on here who would still go with three at the back after yesterdays debacle [*-)] Branston Pickle reckons it''s not the set-up itself and that all formations have pros and cons - true to an extent, but a 3-5-2 formation that fields three at the back is not going to cut the mustard when we only have two ''proper'' centre-backs at the club - a 5-3-2, maybe, but never a 3-5-2.If we consider that all formations have pros & cons, why not go with the tried and trusted 4-4-2? Yes, I realise Farke would never field it, but here''s my suggestion for a 4-4-2 starting eleven:GunnPintoZimmermannFrankeHusbandWildschutNaismithVrancicMurphyOliveiraJerome[/quote]I meant to put Reed where Naismith is there, btw.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
anyone know how much longer klose is supposed to be out for?

id go for                    gunnpinto franke zimmerframe husband                     tettey               reed  vrancic    watkins                  murphy                  oliveira

 its a bit limited on creativity but pretty passing and posession wont get us anywhere in this division, need to win the battle first

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
In the presser Farke said Klose will hopefully be back in team training next week. So I would assume that means he isn''t too far away, but not in contention yet

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×