Why did QPR look so c**p?

[lake district canary 0]

Because we made them look c**p.   

 

 

Its going to be a competetive season after all.

 

 

Despite what the doom mongers said last week.  [:)]

 

 

[ImDrunky 0]

Because QPR are the over 30 ''s club with individuals has beens with a very poor arrogant manager.  But yeah we did make them look crap, not sure how Hughes thought it was a very even game. I''m feeling a whole lot more positive this week, although I never really jumped on the gloom and doom bandwagon last week.

[Mister Chops 7]

Interesting though that - if they looked as poor as you say - we couldn''t beat them.They say that great teams can play badly and win.What do they say about teams that can play well and only draw?

[ImDrunky 0]

[quote user="Mister Chops"]Interesting though that - if they looked as poor as you say - we couldn''t beat them.They say that great teams can play badly and win.What do they say about teams that can play well and only draw?[/quote]It was just our finishing in the QPR goal that let us done, other thing else imo we outplayed them.

[Bill 1,788]

"What do they say about teams that can play well and only draw?"

 

not really alot that is important, if it is based on one game only

 

 

[Mister Chops 7]

From all accounts (I was at Drayton Manor Park getting my 2 year old son to "meet" Noddy, Big Ears etc.) we battered them and that sounds great, I''m delighted and having made the trek to Fulham I am pleased we don''t appear to be the worst team ever in the whole of all human history.However, I''m perhaps too familiar with Grant and Roeder-era Norwich to know that when we played well and didn''t win, it was a real blow because we didn''t know when the next good performance would arrive, never mind the next win.Only two games in but Lambert and Villa look poor, and we look poor, and I wonder if this is one of those "a plague on both your houses" scenarios.  I know the Shakespeare thread was *so* last week.

[Highland Canary 76]

QPR did look poor. With the influx of players to that club I suspect it will take a few games for them to gel. But with Hughes at the helm for the whole season and with the quality in their team QPR will finish in a comfortable mid-table slot.

City on the other hand look much improved over the Fulham debacle. However, we still didn''t win the match. Hopefully we''ll see two up front regularly from now. In my opinion, without a quality, quick striker to support Holt we''re in for a long, difficult season. We looked better with Simeon but he also missed good chances which a better striker might - should - convert. Two points lost.  And yes, it does feel like 2004 to me.

[lake district canary 0]

I''m not convinced that mark Hughes is as good a manager as some seem to think.   His buying policy looks suspect and his formations look one dimensional to me - as yesterday showed.    Just spending alot of money and then creating a system isn''t enough.  You need to buy the right personalities to ensure good spirit in the team and to my mind he hasn''t done that.     Time will tell, but I think they will struggle this season.  On paper they should be good and should have caused us more problems - but then as I said at the beginning - they looked poor because we made them look poor.   If that isn''t an encouraging sign, I don''t know what is. 

 

 

[Mister Chops 7]

I''d love it if QPR crashed and burned, I guess I''m just a bit disappointed that for all our possession and our attacking intent, we couldn''t beat them.

[Two penneth 0]

Good performance and a great game but I admit that I was on a bit of a downer as I left the ground, thinking that we need to beat teams as poor as qpr were yesterday. They were rubbish and you need three points from games like that. They are simply a gathering of individuals who struggle witht the concept of team. However they have players that can win games and I too think they will be ok eventually.My concern is that''s 2 points dropped from a team we usually beat. But I''m sure I''m in the minority and that there are on yesterdays individual and team performances, many more reasons to be cheerful.

[Canaries Utd 0]

You can''t polish a turd!

[pete 320]

Why were they so crap easy defence of Traore, Ferdinand and Hill after all the money spent and bring on Boswinga to strengthen.  And worst of all they bring on Derry to shore up midfield, also Zamora is rubbish.  Only 2 signings of note Cisse (lightining fast but doesn''t time runs) and the highly regarded David Hoilett.  Central midfield also poor Park legs gone why Fergie let go and Diakite did not impress.

 

QPR will struggle and Carvakho will not improve this defence.  

[ZLF 274]

several of the sundays have it quite even too; we were in the ascendancy in the first half but failed to capatilise.

QPR were poor because they are poor, yet we failed to get a crucial 3 points and as the game wore on we did look to run out of ideas.

That is a worry, whether its just one game or now two games or more. We wont get many easier games than QPR at home this season.

It was a vastly improved performance, but far from convincing. Further improvement needed.

[Bury Yellow 2]

Whilst I appreciate some of the genuine constructive criticism on this thread, I thought we played well with plenty of movement on and off the ball. Was impressed with the new lads and didn''t think we had a weak link. Simply the only thing lacking was a goal.

It will be great if we can get a decent mobile striker to add to the squad.

Perhaps my opinion and optimism is tarnished/misplaced because of my sense of relief after the debacle last week!

[Drazen Muzinic 1,450]

[quote user="Canaries Utd"]You can''t polish a turd![/quote]

But you can roll it in glitter!

[blahblahblah 2]

Canaries Utd wrote : You can''t polish a turd !

You can, and this link tells you how.

http://www.howtocleanstuff.net/how-to-polish-a-turd/

[Bill 1,788]

"Central midfield also poor Park legs gone "

 

or that he is way out of his depth in the PL

 

watched him at Man Utd and he did nothing different yesterday, passing to the nearest player is about his limit but anything else is way beyond his abilities and it showed

 

as to Hughes I don''t doubt he is one of those managers that like to sign players where there are big fees involved, you never know what can ''rub off'', mind you it would be a very ill spirited type of person that would suggest that anyone connected to QPR would in anyway be so minded

 

 

[Sir Digby Chicken Ceasar 0]

[quote user="Mister Chops"]From all accounts (I was at Drayton Manor Park getting my 2 year old son to "meet" Noddy, Big Ears etc.) we battered them and that sounds great, I''m delighted and having made the trek to Fulham I am pleased we don''t appear to be the worst team ever in the whole of all human history.

However, I''m perhaps too familiar with Grant and Roeder-era Norwich to know that when we played well and didn''t win, it was a real blow because we didn''t know when the next good performance would arrive, never mind the next win.

Only two games in but Lambert and Villa look poor, and we look poor, and I wonder if this is one of those "a plague on both your houses" scenarios.  I know the Shakespeare thread was *so* last week.

[/quote]

I also am familiar with those two era''s however there a very few similarities in my book. I agree we shouldn''t get carried away and we need a run of good games. but we look poor? On the Fulham show I agree but yesterday was a different story. All the new signings who played put in a credible shift. The back four was the most composed i''ve seen for sometime (penalty aside). The other heartening thing for me was we produced some very good chances which if we hadn''t i''d be worried. 

I am not viewing the world through yellow and green tinted glasses but QPR appeared to be playing percentages football as they don''t or didn''t seem to be able to do much else. With all the money that has been spent on players if i was a QPR fan i''d be worried, Hughes doesnt seem to be able to get the best out of the riches at his disposal.

Well see over the next few games.

[kingsway 94]

Because they are is the answer to the title of this thread!

 

QPR look like they will be at the wrong end of the table again despite all the money they''ve spent!

[Webbo118 0]

[quote user="Highland Canary"]

QPR did look poor. With the influx of players to that club I suspect it will take a few games for them to gel. But with Hughes at the helm for the whole season and with the quality in their team QPR will finish in a comfortable mid-table slot.

City on the other hand look much improved over the Fulham debacle. However, we still didn''t win the match. Hopefully we''ll see two up front regularly from now. In my opinion, without a quality, quick striker to support Holt we''re in for a long, difficult season. We looked better with Simeon but he also missed good chances which a better striker might - should - convert. Two points lost.  And yes, it does feel like 2004 to me.

[/quote]

Are you someone in disguise?

[Highland Canary 76]

I hope I''m wrong about QPR but we shall see.. As for City - it''s punch up front we need! I''m am not aware that I am anyone in disguise.

[CanaryOne 0]

Qpr just do not travel well , i believe that was the first point gained away from Loftus Road since Hughes took charge , 2 points dropped for City and we can ill afford not to beat the lesser teams at home .

[Katie Borkins 1]

While old Bor''s encouraged by a better home performance, can you show me a home league game this season that we''re more likely to win?  To be honest, it''s all well and good saying QPR were "crap", we played them off the park etc., but if that is the case then we have to see Saturday as two points dropped from a very winnable home game.  Mind you, my second team is Blackpool (wife''s family''s team) so it weren''t the worst weekend of football I''ve ever had.

 

Let''s hope we get a striker in this week to give us that ruthless edge, I don''t want us going back to being "nice little Norwich".

[Bill 1,788]

"can you show me a home league game this season that we''re more likely to win?"

 

Wigan, Reading, S''oton, West Ham ............

 

but then it is not about ''likely'' is it

 

We were not likely to beat Sunderland and Newcastle at home, not likely to take a point at Arsenal and Liverpool and certainly not likely to win AT Spurs,

 

so us City fans will happily take the points where we can, accept that there are games what we should have won and only picked up a point, just as there will be games that we should have drawn or even lost, but still picked up a win

 

that''s what''s being a City fan is about

 

............ you should try it sometime

 

 

[dpit 1]

Agree entirely with your post....but not with how you put your ideas across. Let''s try a little experiment shall we and have a go at making your point in a respectful positive way:

In my opinion there are lots of home game we are more likely to win: Wigan, Reading, Southampton, West Ham. Moreover, last season saw us picking up lots of ''unexpected points''. So let''s just get behind the team, be grateful for the improved performance and look forward to the season as City fans together.

There, easy isn''t it?

[Bill 1,788]

"but not with how you put your ideas across"

 

I wouldn''t overly concern yourself too much

 

I don''t

 

 

[dpit 1]

Clearly

[Bury Yellow 2]

That''s what I admire about you City1st, a real gent.

Always a joy to read your posts

[Mister Chops 7]

[quote user="Bor Bor Bor"]

While old Bor''s encouraged by a better home performance, can you show me a home league game this season that we''re more likely to win?  To be honest, it''s all well and good saying QPR were "crap", we played them off the park etc., but if that is the case then we have to see Saturday as two points dropped from a very winnable home game.  Mind you, my second team is Blackpool (wife''s family''s team) so it weren''t the worst weekend of football I''ve ever had.

 

Let''s hope we get a striker in this week to give us that ruthless edge, I don''t want us going back to being "nice little Norwich".

[/quote]We should certainly treat Reading, Southampton, Fulham (big point to prove), Wigan and West Ham as equally "winnable". I would like to think the manager and squad would see all our games as potentially winnable (let''s pretend Fulham away was a cunning plan to win with a 89th minute smash and grab) even if supporters don''t.