MATCHWATCH : Queens Park Rangers (a)

278 posts
Hound
Hob Nob Legend
Posts: 24984
Joined: 27 Sep 2016 22:16
Location: Simpleton

Re: MATCHWATCH : Queens Park Rangers (a)

by Hound » 08 Oct 2022 11:48

Honestly couldn’t care what the managers say or do after a game

5 mins after a disappointing finish and result, natural reaction just to pick an obvious excuse to help deflect blame on him or the players

South Coast Royal
Hob Nob Addict
Posts: 5715
Joined: 16 Jan 2020 17:29

Re: MATCHWATCH : Queens Park Rangers (a)

by South Coast Royal » 08 Oct 2022 12:38

Hound Honestly couldn’t care what the managers say or do after a game

5 mins after a disappointing finish and result, natural reaction just to pick an obvious excuse to help deflect blame on him or the players


What about before a game?
It was good to hear the reasoning behind why son Tom wasn't a starter or don't you care about that either?.
What if he had told us that Hutchinson will be out for the season-still wouldn't care about that?

I always want to hear what the manager has to say as I continue to be interested in hearing anything to do with our club.

Royal_jimmy
Hob Nob Regular
Posts: 4998
Joined: 10 Aug 2011 10:44
Location: Planet Earth

Re: MATCHWATCH : Queens Park Rangers (a)

by Royal_jimmy » 08 Oct 2022 15:23

These management complaints about fixture congestion drives me up the wall. All teams are going through the same schedule. They should focus on building the fitness of their squad.

Players are paid an insane amount of money so they should just get on with it.

Hound
Hob Nob Legend
Posts: 24984
Joined: 27 Sep 2016 22:16
Location: Simpleton

Re: MATCHWATCH : Queens Park Rangers (a)

by Hound » 08 Oct 2022 16:10

South Coast Royal
Hound Honestly couldn’t care what the managers say or do after a game

5 mins after a disappointing finish and result, natural reaction just to pick an obvious excuse to help deflect blame on him or the players


What about before a game?
It was good to hear the reasoning behind why son Tom wasn't a starter or don't you care about that either?.
What if he had told us that Hutchinson will be out for the season-still wouldn't care about that?

I always want to hear what the manager has to say as I continue to be interested in hearing anything to do with our club.


You know what I mean Vic. The instant reactions to games and people getting upset by the excuses they make or silly things they say about the ref

Of course I’m interested in injuries and when things have calmed and they talk about decisions they make

Hound
Hob Nob Legend
Posts: 24984
Joined: 27 Sep 2016 22:16
Location: Simpleton

Re: MATCHWATCH : Queens Park Rangers (a)

by Hound » 08 Oct 2022 16:11

Royal_jimmy These management complaints about fixture congestion drives me up the wall. All teams are going through the same schedule. They should focus on building the fitness of their squad.

Players are paid an insane amount of money so they should just get on with it.


Doesn’t matter how much money you have you still get knackered!

No good us moaning about them moaning because they’ll keep doing it regardless so just like them, we should just crack on and get on with it


South Coast Royal
Hob Nob Addict
Posts: 5715
Joined: 16 Jan 2020 17:29

Re: MATCHWATCH : Queens Park Rangers (a)

by South Coast Royal » 08 Oct 2022 17:22

For all the criticism of Joao recently he did win the penalty for us with his quick footwork (good touch for a big man as they say :wink: ).
Unfortunately the pairing of him and Carroll doesn't work too well and as the season goes on and, as always with us subject to fitness, I can see Shane Long playing in a two with either Joao or with Carroll for whole games or parts of games.

A slightly younger Jamie Cureton or a Le Fondre could have performed that role even better.

Notts Royal
Hob Nob Regular
Posts: 1018
Joined: 11 Feb 2018 00:07

Re: MATCHWATCH : Queens Park Rangers (a)

by Notts Royal » 08 Oct 2022 20:32

Went down for this one & have to say it was a great game to watch…high tempo, end to end, gritty, bite between the fans, some cracking tackles.

We have a team of fighters & more than matched them for large periods, although on balance they prob edged it. It was all about the midfield. They bossed it on the whole in the 1st half, but we had control for the majority of the 2nd until Loum made that silly foul.

Ince clearly set out a team to counter QPR but we did lack creativity.

I thought Holmes & TMac were excellent. Holmes has really grown as a player and he looks confident now. TMac’s distribution was very good.

Funny game from Loum. He was excellent in spells but then that was such a blatant penalty to concede & then he lost his head completely after that.

Fornah I was disappointed by, he looked a yard off the pace. I’d have hauled him off at HT for either Ince or Ejaria.

Carroll’s touch is a level about…clear to see he has the brain of a Prem player. Doesn’t really work with Joao though, would’ve been more effective with T Ince & probably even Meite.

QPR are a decent side. Their 1st was a great cross & finish.

Deflating train ride back up to Notts afterwards, but worth the trip overall

Notts Royal
Hob Nob Regular
Posts: 1018
Joined: 11 Feb 2018 00:07

Re: MATCHWATCH : Queens Park Rangers (a)

by Notts Royal » 08 Oct 2022 20:36

Hound
CountryRoyal
Ascotexgunner Loume looks utterly awful.


Who was the player we had at the start of the season?!


He was excellent until he fcuked up for the pen


Agree. Was a level above both Fornah & Hendrick until that last 10. Unfortunately he’s cost us the game with that stupid tackle though

User avatar
Snowflake Royal
Hob Nob Legend
Posts: 39975
Joined: 20 Jun 2017 17:51

Re: MATCHWATCH : Queens Park Rangers (a)

by Snowflake Royal » 08 Oct 2022 21:43

Hound
South Coast Royal
Hound Honestly couldn’t care what the managers say or do after a game

5 mins after a disappointing finish and result, natural reaction just to pick an obvious excuse to help deflect blame on him or the players


What about before a game?
It was good to hear the reasoning behind why son Tom wasn't a starter or don't you care about that either?.
What if he had told us that Hutchinson will be out for the season-still wouldn't care about that?

I always want to hear what the manager has to say as I continue to be interested in hearing anything to do with our club.


You know what I mean Vic. The instant reactions to games and people getting upset by the excuses they make or silly things they say about the ref

Of course I’m interested in injuries and when things have calmed and they talk about decisions they make

Plus 1. It's always the same.

First couple of dozen interviews are refreshing and honest because the manager doesn't have ownership of the issues yet and is learning them.

After that, if things are going well it's the usual cliches praising the players, not getting carried away. If things are going badly its the same cliched blame deflection, looking on the positive side and we go again. There really aren't that many different scenarios to talk about games and the questions are always so predictable. And the immediate aftermath is not the time to get balanced and calm honesty.


User avatar
Snowflake Royal
Hob Nob Legend
Posts: 39975
Joined: 20 Jun 2017 17:51

Re: MATCHWATCH : Queens Park Rangers (a)

by Snowflake Royal » 08 Oct 2022 21:53

South Coast Royal For all the criticism of Joao recently he did win the penalty for us with his quick footwork (good touch for a big man as they say :wink: ).
Unfortunately the pairing of him and Carroll doesn't work too well and as the season goes on and, as always with us subject to fitness, I can see Shane Long playing in a two with either Joao or with Carroll for whole games or parts of games.

A slightly younger Jamie Cureton or a Le Fondre could have performed that role even better.


People seem to be writing off Carroll and Joao as a pairing very early. So far they have played an enormous 147 minutes together. Less than two full games, and not even in consecutive matches. In that time we've scored 3 goals, with Joao winning a penalty and Carroll scoring it. And despite a slightly barren run, Joao is still at a strike rate of about 1 in 3 despite not being at his best and not getting a huge amount of service.

User avatar
Zip
Hob Nob Legend
Posts: 22408
Joined: 30 Dec 2017 16:39

Re: MATCHWATCH : Queens Park Rangers (a)

by Zip » 09 Oct 2022 00:15

Never a pen for the fake hoops. Just seen it again and I just can't see the foul.

JR
Member
Posts: 843
Joined: 03 Apr 2006 12:53

Re: MATCHWATCH : Queens Park Rangers (a)

by JR » 09 Oct 2022 00:26

Zip Never a pen for the fake hoops. Just seen it again and I just can't see the foul.


Clear pen when you see the angle from behind the goal - Loum carelessly smashed in to the QPR player.

User avatar
Royal Rother
Hob Nob Subscriber
Hob Nob Subscriber
Posts: 21285
Joined: 13 Apr 2004 23:22
Location: The handsome bald fella with the blue eyes

Re: MATCHWATCH : Queens Park Rangers (a)

by Royal Rother » 09 Oct 2022 09:35

Zip Never a pen for the fake hoops. Just seen it again and I just can't see the foul.


Seriously? Clear as day.

Ours was more debatable.


Stranded
Hob Nob Subscriber
Hob Nob Subscriber
Posts: 19700
Joined: 14 Apr 2004 12:42
Location: Propping up the bar in the Nags

Re: MATCHWATCH : Queens Park Rangers (a)

by Stranded » 09 Oct 2022 11:00

Royal Rother
Zip Never a pen for the fake hoops. Just seen it again and I just can't see the foul.


Seriously? Clear as day.

Ours was more debatable.


Both were clear pens. Was however convinced QPR were going to get one as soon as we got away with the handball in the first half. Any little contact in the box was going to be a spot kick which makes the challenge from Loum crazier. More worrying is the fact that he struggled to get over the mistake and was a liability for the last few mins having been excellent up to that point.

User avatar
Zip
Hob Nob Legend
Posts: 22408
Joined: 30 Dec 2017 16:39

Re: MATCHWATCH : Queens Park Rangers (a)

by Zip » 09 Oct 2022 11:04

Royal Rother
Zip Never a pen for the fake hoops. Just seen it again and I just can't see the foul.


Seriously? Clear as day.

Ours was more debatable.


From front on I didn't think there was much contact. Apparently other angles showed it was a clear foul.

User avatar
Snowflake Royal
Hob Nob Legend
Posts: 39975
Joined: 20 Jun 2017 17:51

Re: MATCHWATCH : Queens Park Rangers (a)

by Snowflake Royal » 09 Oct 2022 11:12

Stranded
Royal Rother
Zip Never a pen for the fake hoops. Just seen it again and I just can't see the foul.


Seriously? Clear as day.

Ours was more debatable.


Both were clear pens. Was however convinced QPR were going to get one as soon as we got away with the handball in the first half. Any little contact in the box was going to be a spot kick which makes the challenge from Loum crazier. More worrying is the fact that he struggled to get over the mistake and was a liability for the last few mins having been excellent up to that point.

Both definite pens for sure.

Ours was easier for the ref to miss, I think. Although I've seen teams get away with similar to theirs.

Hound
Hob Nob Legend
Posts: 24984
Joined: 27 Sep 2016 22:16
Location: Simpleton

Re: MATCHWATCH : Queens Park Rangers (a)

by Hound » 09 Oct 2022 21:22

Zip
Royal Rother
Zip Never a pen for the fake hoops. Just seen it again and I just can't see the foul.


Seriously? Clear as day.

Ours was more debatable.


From front on I didn't think there was much contact. Apparently other angles showed it was a clear foul.


Tbf first angle I saw replayed showed little contact and it looked a bit of a dive. From a couple of the other angles you could see significant contact and was undoubtedly the right decision

Ours was also clear as day - only thing for me whether it was in the area, which i think it was - just

User avatar
Royal Rother
Hob Nob Subscriber
Hob Nob Subscriber
Posts: 21285
Joined: 13 Apr 2004 23:22
Location: The handsome bald fella with the blue eyes

Re: MATCHWATCH : Queens Park Rangers (a)

by Royal Rother » 09 Oct 2022 21:26

Hound
Zip
Royal Rother
Seriously? Clear as day.

Ours was more debatable.


From front on I didn't think there was much contact. Apparently other angles showed it was a clear foul.


Tbf first angle I saw replayed showed little contact and it looked a bit of a dive. From a couple of the other angles you could see significant contact and was undoubtedly the right decision

Ours was also clear as day - only thing for me whether it was in the area, which i think it was - just


The issue that I felt made ours more debatable was that Joao’s foot seemed to be on the defender’s foot at the point of impact which is unusual in those circumstances. I agree still a pen though.

278 posts

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Who Moved The Goalposts? and 552 guests

It is currently 28 Apr 2024 08:36