Changes for QPR

[Bill 1,788]

change ?

that ruddy blue kit

haven't we got a fourth or fifth kit we could use ?

or maybe a second half kit instead ?

[Indy_Bones 441]

2 hours ago, Bill said:

change ?

that ruddy blue kit

haven't we got a fourth or fifth kit we could use ?

or maybe a second half kit instead ?

I'd rather they came out shirtless than wear that damn travesty of a shirt again...

[TheGunnShow 6,019]

On 27/12/2020 at 09:29, GJL Mid-Norfolk Canary said:

We're going to dominate most games and have the majority of possession in pretty much every game this season...we need as many attackling players on the pitch to get at the opposition box as we can to break them down. By sacrificing an attacking midfielder for another deeper midfielder would be music to the ears of those clubs who want to come to carrow rd and park the bus

Just because they're lying deep to start with doesn't mean they're defensive. Rupp's hardly defensive and he's willing to get shots off. Our full-backs aren't exactly defensive either.

We dominate because of movement, not because of starting position.

[GJL Mid-Norfolk Canary 1,800]

1 minute ago, TheGunnShow said:

Just because they're lying deep to start with doesn't mean they're defensive. Rupp's hardly defensive and he's willing to get shots off. Our full-backs aren't exactly defensive either.

We dominate because of movement, not because of starting position.

Bodies in the box (and the ball being played to them/falling to them) score goals...not space

[TheGunnShow 6,019]

Just now, GJL Mid-Norfolk Canary said:

Bodies in the box (and the ball being played to them/falling to them) score goals...not space

Sure, and movement from deep (and also wide - we look dangerous when Aarons or Quintilla, or indeed Sorensen, although he doesn't hit a cross or set-piece like Quintilla, get at them with pace down the flanks). Immobility at the top end is easy to defend against. Too much slow-paced side-to-side passing is also easy to defend against.

Rupp and Dowell can hit one from distance. In fact, Rupp's very good at getting into position to hit one, he's just not scored one yet.

Vrancic is particularly dangerous when hitting longer cross-field balls or longer ones into the channels for an attacking midfielder or indeed Pukki to chase. He's not as effective further up as he's not got the same time. Hell, Pirlo's the prime example of a deep-lying player who was primarily attacking.

[Alfie54 76]

On 27/12/2020 at 09:45, Downloads said:

Gibson has to be on for Zimmerman as Zimmerman wasn't great.

Krul back as soon as he is able

Quintilla back as soon as he is able

Give Sorrensen a go in the middle of the park

Agree with all this, would really like to see Sorensen and Skipp together, nice balance Ithink

[The Bristol Nest 517]

I am not sure Skipp would be available to sign permanently as Spurs appeared to rate him highly enough to talk of him as a future captain.

As far as Qpr are concerned, Gibson for Zimmo, Rupp in for McClean, rest Skipp and play Sorenson. Steiperman for Dowell.Vrancic on from the bench. Give Xavi a start.

Edited December 29, 2020 by The Bristol Nest

[Well b back 3,281]

Deep snow up here in the Midlands, but even if it gets to you I guess under soil heating and no crowds would make a postponement unlikely.

[Feedthewolf 4,894]

Krul
Aarons Hanley Gibson Quintilla
Skipp Rupp
Buendia Dowell Cantwell
Pukki

Sorensen's time in midfield will come, but he's earnt a rest if Xavi is fit. We've got two more games and then effectively a two-week break with a heavily rotated FA Cup match in the middle of it, so no need to make wholesale changes; the Watford performance wasn't far off the standard we've set ourselves.

Three changes, then: Gibson for Zimmermann and Rupp for McLean are based on quality rather than tiredness/rotation, and Xavi for Sorensen because the lad needs a rest. If Xavi isn't ready to start then we should stick with Lungi.

Dowell needs more time to dovetail with Emi and Todd, he's first choice at 10 without question.

[Midlands Yellow 4,083]

Kenny on the bench please, Rupp or Vrancic in for creativity against a poor QPR team. 

[pete 320]

Quimtilla and Rupp will not start not fit enough.

[BroadstairsR 2,209]

6 minutes ago, pete said:

Quimtilla and Rupp will not start not fit enough.

Is that a fact or opinion presented as a fact?

Not being funny here, but if it's the former where did that come from and is the source reliable? I assumed there was a chance that Rupp at least might start despite Farke's retiscence with starting previously injured players straight away.

Dowell was given a start. Why not those two?

Edited December 29, 2020 by BroadstairsR

[canarydan23 4,060]

On 27/12/2020 at 10:02, lake district canary said:

Zimmerman made a mistake, as he - and all of them - are prone to do, but overall, he has been huge in the defence wth his presence and interceptions/blocks.  It's no coincidence that our defensive record has been good over the last few games with him in the team. I would keep him in.

Unfortunately Farke agreed with you instead of the majority who expected Gibson back in and it's cost us two points. 

[lake district canary 4,547]

Just now, canarydan23 said:

Unfortunately Farke agreed with you instead of the majority who expected Gibson back in and it's cost us two points. 

Zimbo not at his best at the moment. I suspect Gibson will get back in the next game. 

[canarydan23 4,060]

1 minute ago, lake district canary said:

Zimbo not at his best at the moment. I suspect Gibson will get back in the next game. 

Shoulda been back tonight. 

[Feedthewolf 4,894]

3 minutes ago, canarydan23 said:

Shoulda been back tonight. 

He said, with the benefit of hindsight.

For the record, I also said I thought Gibson should've come in for Zimbo tonight, but why does that then mean we have to zero in on Zimbo's error when we have no idea what would've happened if Gibson had played?

[canarydan23 4,060]

Just now, Feedthewolf said:

He said, with the benefit of hindsight.

For the record, I also said I thought Gibson should've come in for Zimbo tonight, but why does that then mean we have to zero in on Zimbo's error when we have no idea what would've happened if Gibson had played?

Not really the benefit of hindsight is it? Like most fans, I wanted Zimbo dropped for Gibson, precisely because he's less probe to errors like tonight. 

And you zero in because it was a critical moment that cost the game. There kinda the things that get focused on when you're on a.. *checks notes*.. football discussion forum. 

[Feedthewolf 4,894]

11 minutes ago, canarydan23 said:

Not really the benefit of hindsight is it? Like most fans, I wanted Zimbo dropped for Gibson, precisely because he's less probe to errors like tonight. 

And you zero in because it was a critical moment that cost the game. There kinda the things that get focused on when you're on a.. *checks notes*.. football discussion forum. 

Yeah sure, I'm aware it's a discussion forum. I was discussing your point about Zimbo, and saying that we don't know whether it would've been better or worse with Gibson in the team. Just because he made a mistake that cost us tonight, doesn't mean he shouldn't have started, and Farke was wrong and you (and I!) were right. We'll never know how the game would've played out with different players, a different referee... even with the same players and referee.

But yes it was a poor mistake, and yes I think it's likely that Gibbo will come back in for Barnsley. But Farke's record with sticking by his players and not throwing them under the bus is laudable, so if Zimbo plays again on Friday then I expect him to be back to his best.

[Clint 221]

There’s no debate that Gibson is better than Zimbo and if Farke doesn’t bring back the former next match, that’s ridiculous. 
 

Gibson is not only a better defender but also brings the ball out of defence better. Zimbo is a great guy and decent back up but Gibson was signed to play so there’s has to be questions as to why he isn’t if it continues. The same applies to the Quintilla/Sorensen situation. 
 

Two poor results on the spin is sufficient reason to change without looking like Farke’s throwing certain players under the bus.