| M40 pile up Witnail and I edition - Qpr vs Oxford Match Thread 20:10 - Sep 29 with 26819 views | Spaceman_P |
Although dismayed at myself for the draw on Saturday I blame the fact I wore the pink shirt.
True to forum rules a loss means adios.
So I've stretched a bit and ran it off.
QPR 2 Oxford 1
Kone and Saito.
|  | | |  |
| M40 pile up Witnail and I edition - Qpr vs Oxford Match Thread on 08:56 - Oct 2 with 705 views | gazza1 |
| M40 pile up Witnail and I edition - Qpr vs Oxford Match Thread on 08:49 - Oct 2 by Wilkinswatercarrier |
Sorry, no.
He had acres of space to either deliver a top cross or hit the far corner. He did neither and that's because he didn't execute it, not bad luck.
Not good enough. Standards. |
I presume the incident being discussed is the shot that went wide of the far post in the first half.
If it is then 'unlucky' is not a word I would have used......I thought it was a 'fair enough effort'. It wasn't probably good enough but 'harsh' words. |  | | |
| M40 pile up Witnail and I edition - Qpr vs Oxford Match Thread on 09:02 - Oct 2 with 644 views | nix |
| M40 pile up Witnail and I edition - Qpr vs Oxford Match Thread on 08:40 - Oct 2 by BrianMcCarthy |
Thanks for this post, Mart. Lots of detail in there.
"Saw Field doing exactly what some have criticised Madsen for recently ..and that’s stand next to an opponent and point at other R’s players to where the ball should be played . How many times did Jimmy have the ball in the first half and was demanding his midfield 2 show for him …but nothing."
Field has done this a lot, and under different managers as well. I've always wondered if it was instructions ('no, we don't want you on the ball there' - kind of thing) or whether it's him deciding. The reason I wondered is that other centre-mids over the last few years were just as likely to do it. Good that Madsen is breaking clear of that now, and with him missing - hardly a coincidence - we were back to a static, immobile centre-midfield. And when that happens, the entire team follows suit, imo.
I just couldn't figure out our plan on the ball last night. We weren't going through midfield, as no-one was showing or creating angles, we weren't really going long, as we were still taking the short goal kicks, Dunne couldn't find an out ball down his wing, really only RND was making any inroads, and by the time we got the ball to him, Oxford had numbers over there, so we often had to turn back.
Similarly, I couldn't figure out what our plan without the ball was. Frey and Kone were pressing, but not with intensity. And without any support. And without pushing up the back line (or that's how it looked to me - couldn't see on the stream). Maybe they were trying to panic a long ball without committing numbers, but if they were it wasn't working, and the two up front were getting bypassed with ease and Oxford were in amongst us, in space and with numbers. |
I agree Brian. There were not enough options from people making runs so our defence/DM ended up turning back/passing to each other. Cook in desperation ended up making some forays himself.
We missed Madsen making those passes the others don't see and Saito with his energy and constant showing for the ball. If you're going to rotate him then replace Hayden with Varane. Despite people saying Hayden plays on the half turn and gets us up the pitch I haven't really seen that. He's more similar to Field. Definitely don't play those two together. And if you're forced to, play someone who offers for the ball like Morgan or Saito higher up, not Dembele, and don't play two hold up strikers like Kone and Frey together.
But hopefully JS will have learned that and won't repeat that experiment. |  | | |
| M40 pile up Witnail and I edition - Qpr vs Oxford Match Thread on 09:28 - Oct 2 with 554 views | corse |
Ok we need to rotate the players. Fact.
But I definitely do not want to see Field and Frey in the starting XI again unless it is the last option.
Field can only play backwards and have no passing skills nor pace and i ve seen snails move faster than Frey and with more positional awareness. | | | |
| M40 pile up Witnail and I edition - Qpr vs Oxford Match Thread on 09:30 - Oct 2 with 541 views | BrianMcCarthy |
| M40 pile up Witnail and I edition - Qpr vs Oxford Match Thread on 09:02 - Oct 2 by nix |
I agree Brian. There were not enough options from people making runs so our defence/DM ended up turning back/passing to each other. Cook in desperation ended up making some forays himself.
We missed Madsen making those passes the others don't see and Saito with his energy and constant showing for the ball. If you're going to rotate him then replace Hayden with Varane. Despite people saying Hayden plays on the half turn and gets us up the pitch I haven't really seen that. He's more similar to Field. Definitely don't play those two together. And if you're forced to, play someone who offers for the ball like Morgan or Saito higher up, not Dembele, and don't play two hold up strikers like Kone and Frey together.
But hopefully JS will have learned that and won't repeat that experiment. |
"Despite people saying Hayden plays on the half turn and gets us up the pitch I haven't really seen that."
Me neither. Good player, but that was the worry when we signed him on a permanent: that he mightn't fix our problem of playing through midfield. |  |
| |
| M40 pile up Witnail and I edition - Qpr vs Oxford Match Thread on 09:35 - Oct 2 with 492 views | Hunterhoop |
I thought our biggest issue last night was how our wingers were inverted all game, both the starters and the subs. It was weird.
When you’re playing a team with a mid-low block, who are crowding the middle of the pitch, you need width to stretch them left to right and make the pitch as big for you to play in. Dembele, Vale, Smyth, Saito spent the entire game inside their full back, and we seemed to be asking Dunne and RND to provide the width. It was infuriating and looked like a deliberate tactic. When Smyth came on, I thought it would change…but no, he never once went wide of his winger. He spent the entire time positioning himself inside him not out wide on the touch line. That meant there was never that out ball to him wide like there often is late in games.
I think he’s made a good start so far, but last night was on Stephen. Weird team selection and weirder tactics. |  | | |
| M40 pile up Witnail and I edition - Qpr vs Oxford Match Thread on 09:41 - Oct 2 with 462 views | CamberleyR |
| M40 pile up Witnail and I edition - Qpr vs Oxford Match Thread on 22:04 - Oct 1 by willesdenr |
Jamie Currie QPR supporter played a blinder at the back, pity it was for the wrong team. |
Jack.
Another who was plying his trade half a dozen miles down the road at Wimbledon a couple of years ago. |  |
| |
| M40 pile up Witnail and I edition - Qpr vs Oxford Match Thread on 09:50 - Oct 2 with 426 views | Wilkinswatercarrier |
| M40 pile up Witnail and I edition - Qpr vs Oxford Match Thread on 09:28 - Oct 2 by corse |
Ok we need to rotate the players. Fact.
But I definitely do not want to see Field and Frey in the starting XI again unless it is the last option.
Field can only play backwards and have no passing skills nor pace and i ve seen snails move faster than Frey and with more positional awareness. |
Problem is, and I've banged on about this for 18 months, we won't improve or challenge for promotion without a good CM.
It was a massive mistake to not go and sign a ball playing CM this summer, so we are now stuck with Field as back up who is clearly not good enough. I really can't see him starting another game.
Ironically, after some on here gave him pelters, we need to hope Madsen stays fit. It's clear he is the difference in the CM between playing forward and that dross last night.
I am surprised Morgan didn't start in CM next to Hayden, but maybe we'll see it instead. | |
| |
| M40 pile up Witnail and I edition - Qpr vs Oxford Match Thread on 09:54 - Oct 2 with 389 views | R_from_afar |
| M40 pile up Witnail and I edition - Qpr vs Oxford Match Thread on 22:39 - Oct 1 by GaryBannister86 |
I think it was a baffling team selection, but considering the subs were on for 30 mins and we didn't trouble the keeper once, I don't agree that we would definitely have won with those starting. |
"...but considering the subs were on for 30 mins and we didn't trouble the keeper once, I don't agree that we would definitely have won with those starting".
Spot on. The subs had plenty of time to make a difference.
It's a long season, with taxing midweek games some weeks, so we are sure to need to call on some of the players who now don't make our strengthened starting eleven. They need some game time, rather than being thrown into the starting line-up having had no proper football.
I think the manager is also experimenting with different ways to play. We might need to vary things in the course of the season.
My perception is that Oxford were very negative and that their ploy worked.
I don't think we were awful because we did mostly look very solid at the back, but we created so little. I thought Frey brought others into the game well but the downside of having him on is the lack of pace up front. Kone had a quiet game, I thought.
This season's whipping boy Sam Field is getting criticised but I think it was him who executed a crucial last ditch double block, the second time with his face.
It wasn't a great performance but even bringing on all those attacking subs didn't yield any gilt-edged chances plus that is the sort of scenario in which we often lose.
The squad looks the strongest it has been for a long while but I still don't think it will *easily* beat many teams. It's not yet that good and the division is full of determined and very well organised teams. |  |
| "Things had started becoming increasingly desperate at Loftus Road but QPR have been handed a massive lifeline and the place has absolutely erupted. it's carnage. It's bedlam. It's 1-1." |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| M40 pile up Witnail and I edition - Qpr vs Oxford Match Thread on 10:03 - Oct 2 with 352 views | Hunterhoop |
| M40 pile up Witnail and I edition - Qpr vs Oxford Match Thread on 09:54 - Oct 2 by R_from_afar |
"...but considering the subs were on for 30 mins and we didn't trouble the keeper once, I don't agree that we would definitely have won with those starting".
Spot on. The subs had plenty of time to make a difference.
It's a long season, with taxing midweek games some weeks, so we are sure to need to call on some of the players who now don't make our strengthened starting eleven. They need some game time, rather than being thrown into the starting line-up having had no proper football.
I think the manager is also experimenting with different ways to play. We might need to vary things in the course of the season.
My perception is that Oxford were very negative and that their ploy worked.
I don't think we were awful because we did mostly look very solid at the back, but we created so little. I thought Frey brought others into the game well but the downside of having him on is the lack of pace up front. Kone had a quiet game, I thought.
This season's whipping boy Sam Field is getting criticised but I think it was him who executed a crucial last ditch double block, the second time with his face.
It wasn't a great performance but even bringing on all those attacking subs didn't yield any gilt-edged chances plus that is the sort of scenario in which we often lose.
The squad looks the strongest it has been for a long while but I still don't think it will *easily* beat many teams. It's not yet that good and the division is full of determined and very well organised teams. |
The subs arguably made us worse. Varane, in particular, was very poor.
To me it was more an issue of how we were trying to play (against that type of opponent) rather than the personnel. We needed width and we seem to deliberately without out.
Contrary to popular opinion, Frey was better than Kone at holding it up and laying off and Field better than Hayden (more involved in what build up we tried - Hayden was more negative - and made a key last ditch tackle).
The issue wasn’t really them though. It was our wide players. All 4 did next to nothing. [Post edited 2 Oct 10:17]
| | | |
| M40 pile up Witnail and I edition - Qpr vs Oxford Match Thread on 10:05 - Oct 2 with 341 views | R_from_afar |
| M40 pile up Witnail and I edition - Qpr vs Oxford Match Thread on 22:45 - Oct 1 by perpignanR |
Nobody has said we would definitely have won. We were pressed to death first half and we had no pace or creativity to beat it. |
Erm....
"Another 2 points thrown away."
"3 points thrown away with that starting line up."
 | |
| "Things had started becoming increasingly desperate at Loftus Road but QPR have been handed a massive lifeline and the place has absolutely erupted. it's carnage. It's bedlam. It's 1-1." |
| |
| M40 pile up Witnail and I edition - Qpr vs Oxford Match Thread on 11:51 - Oct 2 with 199 views | derbyhoop |
V poor game. Disappointing result.
At HT the guy next to me thought changes for start of 2nd half.
I called it as 60 minutes with Saito for Dembele; Madsen for either Hayden or Field; and Burrell for Frey. This football manager lark is easy. |  |
| "Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry and narrow-mindedness, and many of our people need it sorely on these accounts. Broad, wholesome, charitable views of men and things cannot be acquired by vegetating in one little corner of the Earth all one's lifetime." (Mark Twain)
Find me on twitter @derbyhoop and now on Bluesky |
| |
| M40 pile up Witnail and I edition - Qpr vs Oxford Match Thread on 11:57 - Oct 2 with 174 views | mart_Goblin |
| M40 pile up Witnail and I edition - Qpr vs Oxford Match Thread on 08:40 - Oct 2 by BrianMcCarthy |
Thanks for this post, Mart. Lots of detail in there.
"Saw Field doing exactly what some have criticised Madsen for recently ..and that’s stand next to an opponent and point at other R’s players to where the ball should be played . How many times did Jimmy have the ball in the first half and was demanding his midfield 2 show for him …but nothing."
Field has done this a lot, and under different managers as well. I've always wondered if it was instructions ('no, we don't want you on the ball there' - kind of thing) or whether it's him deciding. The reason I wondered is that other centre-mids over the last few years were just as likely to do it. Good that Madsen is breaking clear of that now, and with him missing - hardly a coincidence - we were back to a static, immobile centre-midfield. And when that happens, the entire team follows suit, imo.
I just couldn't figure out our plan on the ball last night. We weren't going through midfield, as no-one was showing or creating angles, we weren't really going long, as we were still taking the short goal kicks, Dunne couldn't find an out ball down his wing, really only RND was making any inroads, and by the time we got the ball to him, Oxford had numbers over there, so we often had to turn back.
Similarly, I couldn't figure out what our plan without the ball was. Frey and Kone were pressing, but not with intensity. And without any support. And without pushing up the back line (or that's how it looked to me - couldn't see on the stream). Maybe they were trying to panic a long ball without committing numbers, but if they were it wasn't working, and the two up front were getting bypassed with ease and Oxford were in amongst us, in space and with numbers. |
Great post Brian along with another load of interesting and considered posts .
We shouldn’t be too down as it’s 5 unbeaten after all .
I think the quality of the performances in the last 2 games is a concern and it’s ok to pick apart what we all think isn’t quite clicking .
No one going overboard and rightly so .
Regarding Sam Field, I wasn’t picking on him in particular, just used him as an example.
Relating to what you were saying Brian, regarding the press , in that first half there was constant arguing between Field and Frey about who should be dropping into the hole just behind our front 2 when Oxford had the ball . Their way out was play the ball into Brannigan in that little space and they were out . Field was going mad at Frey to drop in and Frey was demanding Field push on ….neither really did anything about it and that’s a worry .
Yes, the coaching staff need to see it and sort it out, but the players on the pitch have to take some responsibility and sort it between them.
Too often in the modern game players want to be lead by the hand instead of taking hold of the situation. Only relatively minor issue but something I noticed . |  | | |
| M40 pile up Witnail and I edition - Qpr vs Oxford Match Thread on 12:53 - Oct 2 with 87 views | BrianMcCarthy |
| M40 pile up Witnail and I edition - Qpr vs Oxford Match Thread on 11:57 - Oct 2 by mart_Goblin |
Great post Brian along with another load of interesting and considered posts .
We shouldn’t be too down as it’s 5 unbeaten after all .
I think the quality of the performances in the last 2 games is a concern and it’s ok to pick apart what we all think isn’t quite clicking .
No one going overboard and rightly so .
Regarding Sam Field, I wasn’t picking on him in particular, just used him as an example.
Relating to what you were saying Brian, regarding the press , in that first half there was constant arguing between Field and Frey about who should be dropping into the hole just behind our front 2 when Oxford had the ball . Their way out was play the ball into Brannigan in that little space and they were out . Field was going mad at Frey to drop in and Frey was demanding Field push on ….neither really did anything about it and that’s a worry .
Yes, the coaching staff need to see it and sort it out, but the players on the pitch have to take some responsibility and sort it between them.
Too often in the modern game players want to be lead by the hand instead of taking hold of the situation. Only relatively minor issue but something I noticed . |
Good info. Thanks Mart.
Agree that the players should sort that out.
Dunne as skipper? | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
