| Ollie speaks at last on 15:23 - May 23 with 2372 views | Dando |
Ollie did a great job, and of course he will feel hard done by. But I cant help thinking, that if he didn't keep tinkering with the team, dropping players who had good performances the week before, etc etc then he would still be in a job. It was a guessing game every week as to who would play. If he had stayed more consistent, I think we would have had even more points than we did.
If he had stopped over complicating and over thinking, the board most likely would have given him more time. |  | |  |
| Ollie speaks at last on 15:28 - May 23 with 2353 views | Northernr |
| Ollie speaks at last on 15:23 - May 23 by Dando |
Ollie did a great job, and of course he will feel hard done by. But I cant help thinking, that if he didn't keep tinkering with the team, dropping players who had good performances the week before, etc etc then he would still be in a job. It was a guessing game every week as to who would play. If he had stayed more consistent, I think we would have had even more points than we did.
If he had stopped over complicating and over thinking, the board most likely would have given him more time. |
Yep, that and they really weren't impressed with the outbursts around the Brentford and Millwall games.
All the way through his reign it just seemed like he was over thinking, over analysing and over complicating. He changed as a manager after the Leicester debacle, prior to that he really had been a properly direct, basic manager with balls pumped in behind full backs and hard working, physical teams chasing hard and making it difficult. He changed a lot at Blackpool and it always struck me that he had a bit of a hangup that he was still perceived as Olly the joker, Olly the long ball manager and was constantly trying to prove that he was actually something else entirely.
Even after wins he was talking about what he'd have to change for the next week. One of the home wins towards the back end he was quoted afterwards saying something like "it looks like I'll have to put three of them in one week, take three of them out the next" and I was just shaking my head thinking why? Why does it look like you'll have to do that? |  | | |
| Ollie speaks at last on 15:34 - May 23 with 2327 views | Dando |
| Ollie speaks at last on 15:28 - May 23 by Northernr |
Yep, that and they really weren't impressed with the outbursts around the Brentford and Millwall games.
All the way through his reign it just seemed like he was over thinking, over analysing and over complicating. He changed as a manager after the Leicester debacle, prior to that he really had been a properly direct, basic manager with balls pumped in behind full backs and hard working, physical teams chasing hard and making it difficult. He changed a lot at Blackpool and it always struck me that he had a bit of a hangup that he was still perceived as Olly the joker, Olly the long ball manager and was constantly trying to prove that he was actually something else entirely.
Even after wins he was talking about what he'd have to change for the next week. One of the home wins towards the back end he was quoted afterwards saying something like "it looks like I'll have to put three of them in one week, take three of them out the next" and I was just shaking my head thinking why? Why does it look like you'll have to do that? |
Completely agree. The stubbornness to keep playing Bidwell at left wing back practically all season was frustrating to say the least, and it was no surprise when our results and performances changed when he reverted to a back 4. That wasn't Ollie being a tactical genius, we could all see that literally months and months before.
When we finally found our top form away to Fulham, Villa etc - we went and started changing things dramatically again. I dont understand any logic there, and what sort of message does it give to the younger players if they perform well but then are dropped?
One thing giving the youngsters a chance, but dropping them for no reason, moving them in one position after another etc isnt exactly helping them progress.
As much as we all love Ollie, I do think most people are disappointed sentimental wise more than anything. I don't really see what he backed up to say he was going to take us any further than he did - not if he kept on over complicating and changing things all the time anyway. He shot himself in the foot a bit there | | | |
| Ollie speaks at last on 16:39 - May 23 with 2220 views | CiderwithRsie |
Yeah, it's truly sad to see a Rangers man and one of the genuine nice guys of football getting hurt, and it's true that he wasn't far off where we wanted to be, but that's not he same as saying that he hadn't flaws or that this is the wrong decision.
It's the nature of the flaws that makes me think it's right, not just that he was getting a few things wrong but that they seemed to come from some internal conflict in himself. If he'd stayed I'd have worried that those things were going to get worse, not better.
I thought he was the only choice when he came, I hated some of the grief he got on-line, I was really clear that even if we'd been in the bottom three we needed to give him the whole season, but I'm also sure that we needed to either change now or give him the whole of next season (if not the one after as well) and I just think it's better to have changed. | | | |
| Ollie speaks at last on 16:46 - May 23 with 2207 views | CliveWilsonSaid |
| Ollie speaks at last on 15:34 - May 23 by Dando |
Completely agree. The stubbornness to keep playing Bidwell at left wing back practically all season was frustrating to say the least, and it was no surprise when our results and performances changed when he reverted to a back 4. That wasn't Ollie being a tactical genius, we could all see that literally months and months before.
When we finally found our top form away to Fulham, Villa etc - we went and started changing things dramatically again. I dont understand any logic there, and what sort of message does it give to the younger players if they perform well but then are dropped?
One thing giving the youngsters a chance, but dropping them for no reason, moving them in one position after another etc isnt exactly helping them progress.
As much as we all love Ollie, I do think most people are disappointed sentimental wise more than anything. I don't really see what he backed up to say he was going to take us any further than he did - not if he kept on over complicating and changing things all the time anyway. He shot himself in the foot a bit there |
Will be interesting to see whether things drastically change under Mcclaren in this respect. I’d imagine he’ll have mostly the same injury prone average championship squad to pick from as Ollie had.
What do you hope to get from Mcclaren? |  |
| |
| Ollie speaks at last on 16:51 - May 23 with 2186 views | Northernr |
| Ollie speaks at last on 16:46 - May 23 by CliveWilsonSaid |
Will be interesting to see whether things drastically change under Mcclaren in this respect. I’d imagine he’ll have mostly the same injury prone average championship squad to pick from as Ollie had.
What do you hope to get from Mcclaren? |
Well there will still have to be changes, because we've got ten players for six positions, and they've all got positives and reasons they should be picked - Freeman, Luongo, Scowen, Samuel, Manning, Wszolek, Eze, Smyth, Smith, Sylla.
But there doesn't need to be changes every game, there doesn't need to be so many changes, and there certainly shouldn't be any more dropping of players regardless of form or how they played in the previous game. | | | |
| Ollie speaks at last on 17:29 - May 23 with 2145 views | Dando |
| Ollie speaks at last on 16:46 - May 23 by CliveWilsonSaid |
Will be interesting to see whether things drastically change under Mcclaren in this respect. I’d imagine he’ll have mostly the same injury prone average championship squad to pick from as Ollie had.
What do you hope to get from Mcclaren? |
I think its difficult to say if Mcclaren will improve results massively, as I am still expecting that we will lose our key players like Smithies, Luongo and maybe even Freeman. We have already lost our Captain as well, who clearly had a positive impact on results. Im sure a lot of fans wont recognise this, and will be on his back straight away.
I hope from Mcclaren that not only will he coach our young players fantastically, but will actually play a consistent side, and play people in their correct positions. Not over concentrating on how the opponents play, rather than on our own strengths like I felt Ollie did. I think if the Mcclaren will also attract better players and may even persuade some of our better players to stay if we are lucky.
Also to reward our players who are on form, by giving them a run in the side and showing faith. Not letting them score, get man of the match - then dropping them or playing them in a different role next game [Post edited 23 May 2018 17:30]
| | | |
| Ollie speaks at last on 17:50 - May 23 with 2117 views | Dorse |
| Ollie speaks at last on 16:51 - May 23 by Northernr |
Well there will still have to be changes, because we've got ten players for six positions, and they've all got positives and reasons they should be picked - Freeman, Luongo, Scowen, Samuel, Manning, Wszolek, Eze, Smyth, Smith, Sylla.
But there doesn't need to be changes every game, there doesn't need to be so many changes, and there certainly shouldn't be any more dropping of players regardless of form or how they played in the previous game. |
Upcoming headlines on GetWestLondon / HITC:
'Whittingham's Washington Wash-Out!'
'Washington Slams Club After Being Dropped Via LFW'
'Whittingham's Ten Players To Watch - Number Six Will SHOCK You'
'Under Pressure McLaren Must DROP Four' |  |
| 'What do we want? We don't know! When do we want it? Now!' |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Ollie speaks at last on 18:11 - May 23 with 2090 views | Northernr |
| Ollie speaks at last on 17:50 - May 23 by Dorse |
Upcoming headlines on GetWestLondon / HITC:
'Whittingham's Washington Wash-Out!'
'Washington Slams Club After Being Dropped Via LFW'
'Whittingham's Ten Players To Watch - Number Six Will SHOCK You'
'Under Pressure McLaren Must DROP Four' |
Ha ha, well I don't think anybody would say he should be starting. That's my point, a lot of the people who slated Holloway for making changes (and he did make too many) also think nine or ten players should be starting in five positions. | | | |
| Ollie speaks at last on 19:21 - May 23 with 2003 views | CliveWilsonSaid |
| Ollie speaks at last on 17:29 - May 23 by Dando |
I think its difficult to say if Mcclaren will improve results massively, as I am still expecting that we will lose our key players like Smithies, Luongo and maybe even Freeman. We have already lost our Captain as well, who clearly had a positive impact on results. Im sure a lot of fans wont recognise this, and will be on his back straight away.
I hope from Mcclaren that not only will he coach our young players fantastically, but will actually play a consistent side, and play people in their correct positions. Not over concentrating on how the opponents play, rather than on our own strengths like I felt Ollie did. I think if the Mcclaren will also attract better players and may even persuade some of our better players to stay if we are lucky.
Also to reward our players who are on form, by giving them a run in the side and showing faith. Not letting them score, get man of the match - then dropping them or playing them in a different role next game [Post edited 23 May 2018 17:30]
|
Well that's all fair enough although as you say difficult to say if results will improve as a result of the changes. I'm not sure we'll attract a better calibre of player with Mcclaren. I thought a lot of the signings under Holloway were pretty good personally. Can't think of too many flops. Wheeler perhaps but he may yet come good. The kid from Man U. Also it tended to be more peripheral/injury prone players that floated in and out of the side or weren't given a run of games. Smithies/Scowen/Luongo/Freeman/Bidwell played a huge amount of games. Onuoha played whenever fit/not suspended. Lynch played when he felt like it. Baptiste played when needed. Someone had to play right back first half of the season and I thought Wszolek did alright defensively on the whole in the games I saw. Furlong had a good run there second half of the season. I can't think of too many other players I'd have had playing regularly or who were capable of being played regulartly.
One thing that I do worry about is the lack of credit given to Holloway for instilling a bit of fight into this team. Not letting the players heads drop when going a goal behind. I think we were one of the top point earners in the league from games that we went behind in?
There's too much focus on the things Holloway did not quite so well IMO, none of which seemed that bad to me at the time or now. Whereas the the things that he actually did quite well, which arguably kept us in this league seem to have been forgotten/discarded. [Post edited 23 May 2018 19:24]
| |
| |
| Ollie speaks at last on 23:22 - May 23 with 1878 views | CiderwithRsie |
| Ollie speaks at last on 17:50 - May 23 by Dorse |
Upcoming headlines on GetWestLondon / HITC:
'Whittingham's Washington Wash-Out!'
'Washington Slams Club After Being Dropped Via LFW'
'Whittingham's Ten Players To Watch - Number Six Will SHOCK You'
'Under Pressure McLaren Must DROP Four' |
"You won't believe what Karl Ready looks like now" | | | |
| Ollie speaks at last on 01:54 - May 24 with 1813 views | mylot50years |
| Ollie speaks at last on 15:28 - May 23 by Northernr |
Yep, that and they really weren't impressed with the outbursts around the Brentford and Millwall games.
All the way through his reign it just seemed like he was over thinking, over analysing and over complicating. He changed as a manager after the Leicester debacle, prior to that he really had been a properly direct, basic manager with balls pumped in behind full backs and hard working, physical teams chasing hard and making it difficult. He changed a lot at Blackpool and it always struck me that he had a bit of a hangup that he was still perceived as Olly the joker, Olly the long ball manager and was constantly trying to prove that he was actually something else entirely.
Even after wins he was talking about what he'd have to change for the next week. One of the home wins towards the back end he was quoted afterwards saying something like "it looks like I'll have to put three of them in one week, take three of them out the next" and I was just shaking my head thinking why? Why does it look like you'll have to do that? |
Spot on Clive. Time now for us all to move on and back the Rs in what will be a challenging and hopefully exciting period, and if QPR mean as much to IH as he has always led us to believe, he will resist from any critical comments regarding his release, and as a fellow fan support Rs and enjoy any successful times that may be in our future campaigns. | | | |
| Ollie speaks at last on 09:34 - May 24 with 1682 views | TheChef |
| Ollie speaks at last on 01:54 - May 24 by mylot50years |
Spot on Clive. Time now for us all to move on and back the Rs in what will be a challenging and hopefully exciting period, and if QPR mean as much to IH as he has always led us to believe, he will resist from any critical comments regarding his release, and as a fellow fan support Rs and enjoy any successful times that may be in our future campaigns. |
Downvoted by 2Thomas2Bowles.
Olly, is that you?
 |  |
| |
| Ollie speaks at last on 09:56 - May 24 with 1651 views | ingeminate |
| Ollie speaks at last on 19:21 - May 23 by CliveWilsonSaid |
Well that's all fair enough although as you say difficult to say if results will improve as a result of the changes. I'm not sure we'll attract a better calibre of player with Mcclaren. I thought a lot of the signings under Holloway were pretty good personally. Can't think of too many flops. Wheeler perhaps but he may yet come good. The kid from Man U. Also it tended to be more peripheral/injury prone players that floated in and out of the side or weren't given a run of games. Smithies/Scowen/Luongo/Freeman/Bidwell played a huge amount of games. Onuoha played whenever fit/not suspended. Lynch played when he felt like it. Baptiste played when needed. Someone had to play right back first half of the season and I thought Wszolek did alright defensively on the whole in the games I saw. Furlong had a good run there second half of the season. I can't think of too many other players I'd have had playing regularly or who were capable of being played regulartly.
One thing that I do worry about is the lack of credit given to Holloway for instilling a bit of fight into this team. Not letting the players heads drop when going a goal behind. I think we were one of the top point earners in the league from games that we went behind in?
There's too much focus on the things Holloway did not quite so well IMO, none of which seemed that bad to me at the time or now. Whereas the the things that he actually did quite well, which arguably kept us in this league seem to have been forgotten/discarded. [Post edited 23 May 2018 19:24]
|
Agreed.
I also have a suspicion that Holloway's changes were driven by his belief that he was up against a stacked deck with a small transfer kitty and a relatively young squad. The equalizer was his experience and ability to set up teams to counter whoever they were playing next week. This meant he needed to regularly change the personnel.
Whereas supporters see X play really well on Tuesday night and are mystified when he's dropped for Saturday.
I think it is premature to decide whether Holloway was wrong/right - proof will be in the pudding. |  |
| |
| Ollie speaks at last on 12:38 - May 24 with 1555 views | daveB |
| Ollie speaks at last on 16:51 - May 23 by Northernr |
Well there will still have to be changes, because we've got ten players for six positions, and they've all got positives and reasons they should be picked - Freeman, Luongo, Scowen, Samuel, Manning, Wszolek, Eze, Smyth, Smith, Sylla.
But there doesn't need to be changes every game, there doesn't need to be so many changes, and there certainly shouldn't be any more dropping of players regardless of form or how they played in the previous game. |
If he doesn't make changes he'll be accused on here of having his favorites and never trying anything.
It's comical some of the stick Holloways gets, he's apparently too stubborn to make changes to the system but then makes too many changes to the starting 11. Seems some fans wanted changes made but only when it suited.
Holloway picked a pretty consistent bulk of his team all season. When fit Smithies, Onouha, Robinson, Bidwell, Luongo, Freeman, Scowen all started every game. He'd rotate the forwards depending on the opposition with Mackie/Washington used when he wanted to press or Smith when he went more direct. Pawel was usually the right wing back until he switched formation.
if he didn't make changes then the likes of Smyth, Eze, Manning, Bright Samuel and Chair wouldn't have got a look in. Of course again he made too many changes towards the end of the season but still won 6 of his last 9 home games so results were not bad
It's not unusual really when you have young players to put them in one week then give them a rest, when he gave Oteh a run rather than dip him in and out of the side it seemed to do more harm than good to him
Any manager at QPR has no bloody chance really from some fans. We want change but not too much, stick with a formation but not that one, play the kids but don't drop the good players who play in the same position, Good Luck McClaren, you'll need it |  | | |
| Ollie speaks at last on 12:45 - May 24 with 1549 views | Dando |
| Ollie speaks at last on 19:21 - May 23 by CliveWilsonSaid |
Well that's all fair enough although as you say difficult to say if results will improve as a result of the changes. I'm not sure we'll attract a better calibre of player with Mcclaren. I thought a lot of the signings under Holloway were pretty good personally. Can't think of too many flops. Wheeler perhaps but he may yet come good. The kid from Man U. Also it tended to be more peripheral/injury prone players that floated in and out of the side or weren't given a run of games. Smithies/Scowen/Luongo/Freeman/Bidwell played a huge amount of games. Onuoha played whenever fit/not suspended. Lynch played when he felt like it. Baptiste played when needed. Someone had to play right back first half of the season and I thought Wszolek did alright defensively on the whole in the games I saw. Furlong had a good run there second half of the season. I can't think of too many other players I'd have had playing regularly or who were capable of being played regulartly.
One thing that I do worry about is the lack of credit given to Holloway for instilling a bit of fight into this team. Not letting the players heads drop when going a goal behind. I think we were one of the top point earners in the league from games that we went behind in?
There's too much focus on the things Holloway did not quite so well IMO, none of which seemed that bad to me at the time or now. Whereas the the things that he actually did quite well, which arguably kept us in this league seem to have been forgotten/discarded. [Post edited 23 May 2018 19:24]
|
Fair point, they were good signings etc, not questioning that. I'm trying not to be too hard on Holloway as like I say, he did do his job and did bring a lot of fight into the side. But for me, he wasnt get the best out of the players who were at disposal and the chopping and changing from one week to another was having a huge impact on our results, especially away from home. If he kept it simple, I imagine the board would have given him more time. For me, I just saw signs that we were in for the same things next year. I also got the sense from the players that they were fed of of being in the wrong position. Robinson and Bidwell for examples clearly said the 4 at the back was more suited to them and the team itself. It was crazy to leave it that long to change it
I think the board recognise the good he did, but in football unfortunately theres no room for sentiment and they clearly see Mcclaren as a step forward [Post edited 24 May 2018 12:46]
| | | |
| Ollie speaks at last on 13:06 - May 24 with 1506 views | daveB |
| Ollie speaks at last on 12:45 - May 24 by Dando |
Fair point, they were good signings etc, not questioning that. I'm trying not to be too hard on Holloway as like I say, he did do his job and did bring a lot of fight into the side. But for me, he wasnt get the best out of the players who were at disposal and the chopping and changing from one week to another was having a huge impact on our results, especially away from home. If he kept it simple, I imagine the board would have given him more time. For me, I just saw signs that we were in for the same things next year. I also got the sense from the players that they were fed of of being in the wrong position. Robinson and Bidwell for examples clearly said the 4 at the back was more suited to them and the team itself. It was crazy to leave it that long to change it
I think the board recognise the good he did, but in football unfortunately theres no room for sentiment and they clearly see Mcclaren as a step forward [Post edited 24 May 2018 12:46]
|
Which players was he not getting the best out of?
For me he got more out of Robinson,Luongo and Freeman than previous managers had, also Matt Smith was far more consistent for us than at his previous clubs.
Even Bidwell performed fine as a wing back and looked a lot better this season than he did the previous one.
This whole thing about it being crazy to leave it so long to change the system is all a bit mad as well and re writing what happened. We played 11 games at the end of the season with a back 4 and won 5, lost 4 drew 2 getting 17 points. In the 11 games before with a back 3/5 we won 4 lost 6 and drew 1 so won 13 points. Slightly better with a back 4 although should be taken into account we played the top two with a back 5 and did pretty well against them.
With the younger players coming in Holloway was justified in changing to a back 4 but all this about it being season changing is just all nonsense, the team was likely to finish around 16th with a back 5 and did the same with a back 4 | | | |
| Ollie speaks at last on 14:01 - May 24 with 1449 views | SimonJames |
| Ollie speaks at last on 13:06 - May 24 by daveB |
Which players was he not getting the best out of?
For me he got more out of Robinson,Luongo and Freeman than previous managers had, also Matt Smith was far more consistent for us than at his previous clubs.
Even Bidwell performed fine as a wing back and looked a lot better this season than he did the previous one.
This whole thing about it being crazy to leave it so long to change the system is all a bit mad as well and re writing what happened. We played 11 games at the end of the season with a back 4 and won 5, lost 4 drew 2 getting 17 points. In the 11 games before with a back 3/5 we won 4 lost 6 and drew 1 so won 13 points. Slightly better with a back 4 although should be taken into account we played the top two with a back 5 and did pretty well against them.
With the younger players coming in Holloway was justified in changing to a back 4 but all this about it being season changing is just all nonsense, the team was likely to finish around 16th with a back 5 and did the same with a back 4 |
"...the team was likely to finish around 16th ..."
So what positions were newly promoted Millwall and Sheffield Utd likely to finish in?
Do you think they had better squads, rather than IH not getting the best out of ours?
All the teams that finished below us last season finished below us again this season.
Only two teams that finished above us (Reading - total meltdown, Barnsley - probably manager not happy) in the Championship last season finished below us this time. The others were newly promoted Bolton and the basket cases of Sunderland and Hull.
So relative to the remainder of last year's Championship teams I don't think he made that much progress. |  |
| 100% of people who drink water will die. |
| |
| Ollie speaks at last on 14:14 - May 24 with 1424 views | Northernr |
| Ollie speaks at last on 14:01 - May 24 by SimonJames |
"...the team was likely to finish around 16th ..."
So what positions were newly promoted Millwall and Sheffield Utd likely to finish in?
Do you think they had better squads, rather than IH not getting the best out of ours?
All the teams that finished below us last season finished below us again this season.
Only two teams that finished above us (Reading - total meltdown, Barnsley - probably manager not happy) in the Championship last season finished below us this time. The others were newly promoted Bolton and the basket cases of Sunderland and Hull.
So relative to the remainder of last year's Championship teams I don't think he made that much progress. |
It's a good question that.
Millwall are just really, really, really difficult to play against. Physical, unashamed, direct, turn you round. Basic but effective, but most crucially they've had Harris for a few years now and he's had time to build that team and get it playing the way he wants with a clear identity - twice as long as Holloway got here. And they had a hot run, with no injuries. Very interested to see how they go next season. Don't underestimate the momentum from a promotion as well.
Likewise Sheff Utd. Chris Wilder, I think, is absolutely exceptional, and his record speaks to that. I don't think even Holloway's biggest fans would describe him as exceptional so would Wilder have done better with our squad? I think so yeh, a bit, but he had promotion momentum, he had longer to build his team than Holloway, he faded in the second half of the season, he didn't have all his centre backs injured for any length of time and he had Leon Clarke having a weird outer body experience. Matt Smith did that once, sadly it was for Bristol City. | | | |
| Ollie speaks at last on 14:23 - May 24 with 1404 views | daveB |
| Ollie speaks at last on 14:01 - May 24 by SimonJames |
"...the team was likely to finish around 16th ..."
So what positions were newly promoted Millwall and Sheffield Utd likely to finish in?
Do you think they had better squads, rather than IH not getting the best out of ours?
All the teams that finished below us last season finished below us again this season.
Only two teams that finished above us (Reading - total meltdown, Barnsley - probably manager not happy) in the Championship last season finished below us this time. The others were newly promoted Bolton and the basket cases of Sunderland and Hull.
So relative to the remainder of last year's Championship teams I don't think he made that much progress. |
being pedantic Huill and Sunderland may be basket cases but they did finish higher than us the previous season.
I felt a year ago the squad was good enough for 14th - 18th, the lack of goals in the team was the main reason for that. Looking at us now for next season I still think the same, we'll do well to finish higher than 14th.
I think Sheff Utd have a better squad than us but the main difference between them and us was goals, they had a lot more goals in attack than we did, same with Millwall which was a far bigger factor than the managers. Also a lot less pressure on promoted sides with less expectations so usually when you go up to the Championship you fare well the first year then struggle after that.
If you only look at the league table then I'd agree he didn't make massive progress but that's why stats never really tell the whole story. If you look a where the club was a year ago compared to where we are now I think progress has been made, some players have improved and the squad looks a lot stronger now than it did a year ago despite it still needing improving in some areas.
Hopefully McClaren can build on that and progress further next season but it won't be easy to replicate this season let alone improve on it without several new players that we can't afford. | | | |
| Ollie speaks at last on 14:28 - May 24 with 1393 views | Dando |
| Ollie speaks at last on 13:06 - May 24 by daveB |
Which players was he not getting the best out of?
For me he got more out of Robinson,Luongo and Freeman than previous managers had, also Matt Smith was far more consistent for us than at his previous clubs.
Even Bidwell performed fine as a wing back and looked a lot better this season than he did the previous one.
This whole thing about it being crazy to leave it so long to change the system is all a bit mad as well and re writing what happened. We played 11 games at the end of the season with a back 4 and won 5, lost 4 drew 2 getting 17 points. In the 11 games before with a back 3/5 we won 4 lost 6 and drew 1 so won 13 points. Slightly better with a back 4 although should be taken into account we played the top two with a back 5 and did pretty well against them.
With the younger players coming in Holloway was justified in changing to a back 4 but all this about it being season changing is just all nonsense, the team was likely to finish around 16th with a back 5 and did the same with a back 4 |
Pav was one of our players of the season last year, and earnt a contract. He was wasted at right wing back. Despite playing ok every week, we lost out on his attacking threat.
I think you must be on your own with the Bidwell at left wing back thing. He looked extremely uncomfortable and slowed down many of our attacks. it was no coincidence that when moved to left back he started putting in some of the best performances he has done for us.
You could even argue with Sylla - did he really get the game time he deserved? Clearly our most natural goalscorer although not to everyones liking understandably, he probably didnt get as many starts as he should have done
Freeman Luongo and Scowen of course were excellent, but it started to go stale and we became very easy to defend against eventually. I think this could have been changed earlier on thats all.
Of course we got great use out of Smith, but as a team - I think we could have got more points if we stuck to the team that had momentum when we were on good form, not dropping and changing players to try and out think/trick our opponents.
Those stats don't really say much really though do they? We were pretty safe beyond a certain point and the team kept changing week after week after week. Thats exactly my point, if we kept to the back 4 and kept to a consistent side - I personally think we would have got more points. Confidence of the players was clearly up, yet we dented it by dropping them e.g. Smyth, Pav, Eze, Samuel etc. If he had stuck to what was working, then I would have had no problem with Ollie who I have backed from the start
Im not trying to criticize Holloway unnecessarily, its just my observations. I wasn't one who wanted him out, but I dont see why its so terrible that hes left either and obviously the board think the same. If Holloway had stayed, I wouldn't have been disappointed, but I would have been wondering every week who would be playing and going into each away game in particular, expecting that we would most likely lose. [Post edited 24 May 2018 14:35]
| | | |
| Ollie speaks at last on 14:45 - May 24 with 1374 views | Esox_Lucius |
I was mostly happy with what I saw at games last season but last season was the first season in may years I didn't go to any away games due to family circumstances. That said It was quite frustrating at times too, the first home games of the season showed promis but was ended by an utter spanking by Brentford! The following month had an inept display against Millwall, an horrific game against Burton and ended with a defeat against Fulham, when they were still struggling, which had people wanting IH out even then. October contained two excellent wins against the (then) top two teams and two draws away which silenced nearly all IH critics only to be followed by a month of 3 defeats and a draw with the away defeat by Forest being a real low when trying to find positives in IH's managerial skills. December only had our annual win against Birmingham to lift some very drab days watching the team. January brought two good wins against Cardiff at home and Burton away but easy defeats against MK Dons and 'boro chastened the mood from those games. February brought wins against Barnsley & Bolton and a close run game against Wolves away but it was brought crashing down once more by a truly humiliating home defeat against Forest after having looked the best team for the first 15 minutes. Once again much criticism was heaped on IH's shoulders. March onwards and the whole team looked a lot better, especially a cracking comeback from 2-0 down against Fulham and a great away win at Villa with only a poor defeat against the fakes to sour the spirit among the R's fans and keep the critics quiet. April was only spoiled with a humiating 4-0 reversal at Hull and a poor 1-2 at home to PNE. Typically for the season we went down softly in a nothing game against Leeds to finish (for me) a frustrating season.
Following common consensus I found the wingback system hard to watch and it was no wonder we had one of the worst goals against records and it is this overall view of the season that gives me confidence that the club have made the right decision to thank IH for his efforts in achieving the goals of cutting the wages/ squad size and keeping QPR in the Championship and replacing him with someone more likely to improve our away form whilst dealing with further cuts to the experienced side of the playing squad.
The decision has parallels with his playing career at QPR, he would usually only get a start if Simon Barker or Ray Wilkins weren't available/ injured and he would then put in a commendable and workmanlike performance but the crowd would always be happy when the other two were playing. It feels the same with this managerial stint to me; we couldn't get what the club really needed in all departments but he a more than adequate replacement until that person (has hopefully) turned up. Next season will be a difficult one as there are going to be many fans who won't give SMC any backing or support at all, similar to the CR & JFH appointments, and that saddens me, as it will be hard enough with the full backing of the fans without having to endure the utter shoite that will follow on social media after every setback. I openly admit to being constantly hostile to 'arry when he was appointed but SMC, nor ANY other manager we have ever had, has had the same toxic effect that he had on the club, so I am hoping against hope that the fans will get behind SMC for at least the first half of the season to see what he can do. |  |
| The grass is always greener. |
| |
| Ollie speaks at last on 15:37 - May 24 with 1318 views | daveB |
| Ollie speaks at last on 14:28 - May 24 by Dando |
Pav was one of our players of the season last year, and earnt a contract. He was wasted at right wing back. Despite playing ok every week, we lost out on his attacking threat.
I think you must be on your own with the Bidwell at left wing back thing. He looked extremely uncomfortable and slowed down many of our attacks. it was no coincidence that when moved to left back he started putting in some of the best performances he has done for us.
You could even argue with Sylla - did he really get the game time he deserved? Clearly our most natural goalscorer although not to everyones liking understandably, he probably didnt get as many starts as he should have done
Freeman Luongo and Scowen of course were excellent, but it started to go stale and we became very easy to defend against eventually. I think this could have been changed earlier on thats all.
Of course we got great use out of Smith, but as a team - I think we could have got more points if we stuck to the team that had momentum when we were on good form, not dropping and changing players to try and out think/trick our opponents.
Those stats don't really say much really though do they? We were pretty safe beyond a certain point and the team kept changing week after week after week. Thats exactly my point, if we kept to the back 4 and kept to a consistent side - I personally think we would have got more points. Confidence of the players was clearly up, yet we dented it by dropping them e.g. Smyth, Pav, Eze, Samuel etc. If he had stuck to what was working, then I would have had no problem with Ollie who I have backed from the start
Im not trying to criticize Holloway unnecessarily, its just my observations. I wasn't one who wanted him out, but I dont see why its so terrible that hes left either and obviously the board think the same. If Holloway had stayed, I wouldn't have been disappointed, but I would have been wondering every week who would be playing and going into each away game in particular, expecting that we would most likely lose. [Post edited 24 May 2018 14:35]
|
Don't buy that at all about Pawel, in his first year he did OK but nowhere near player of the year. Had 2 good games at the new Year which got him a contract. What we lost with Pawel we gained with Freeman getting more freedom.
With Sylla he had a lot of injuries last season but even when fit was he any better than Smith as the target man? I know he is popular on here but I don't think we'd have been any better off he if had played more.
Things could have been better playing the same team each week but if you play Eze, Pav, Samuel and Smyth each week who gets dropped? Smyth and Pawel both look at their best on the right wing so one of them has to be moved out of position and if you play both where does Samuel fit in? You can't play Mass, Scowen and Freeman as well if those play so arguably dropping your best players. I just don;t think it was particularly easy for holloway to stick to the same side not because he was a maniac but more because most of his better players and most of the young ones are all in similar positions | | | |
| Ollie speaks at last on 16:03 - May 24 with 1285 views | Dando |
| Ollie speaks at last on 15:37 - May 24 by daveB |
Don't buy that at all about Pawel, in his first year he did OK but nowhere near player of the year. Had 2 good games at the new Year which got him a contract. What we lost with Pawel we gained with Freeman getting more freedom.
With Sylla he had a lot of injuries last season but even when fit was he any better than Smith as the target man? I know he is popular on here but I don't think we'd have been any better off he if had played more.
Things could have been better playing the same team each week but if you play Eze, Pav, Samuel and Smyth each week who gets dropped? Smyth and Pawel both look at their best on the right wing so one of them has to be moved out of position and if you play both where does Samuel fit in? You can't play Mass, Scowen and Freeman as well if those play so arguably dropping your best players. I just don;t think it was particularly easy for holloway to stick to the same side not because he was a maniac but more because most of his better players and most of the young ones are all in similar positions |
Pav was very good most of last season, I remember even rival fans raving about how good he looked. Not saying player of the year, but must have done well to earn a contract. He was full of confidence bombing down the wing, yet we held him back from his strengths and dented his confidence to the point he couldnt beat a man anymore.
Freeman had an excellent year, but he was also excellent for the short time we had him last year anyway.
Sylla did have injuries, but when was fit would often get overlooked by Washington who was shocking. I agree wouldnt have maybe done much better than Smith, but Im certain he would have done more than Washington.
I agree that not every one of the players mentioned could play at the same time, but if someone is playing well they should keep their place, simple as that. To me, it felt like Holloway was trying to make everyone happy by giving them all even amounts of game time, yet this is demotivating for those who play well and are then dropped. It was almost like he was trying to prove that players could be dropped but still react well to it. I don't personally think that helped at all.
Samuel was often coming off the bench and playing really well, yet barely got a look in. Once he did, up front alone as far as a I remember. I'm not sure who benefits from that? If anything, it destroys his confidence.
Overall, I just wish he stuck with the team/players who were performing well, and stuck with it - even if that did mean leaving others out. Surely you should earn your way into the team, and once you get there should be rewarded with keeping your place if you perform, not dropping them just to make others happy.
Thats what frustrated me about Holloway, as clearly he could get the team playing some great football when he played to our strengths, but tinkering was where he shot himself in the foot [Post edited 24 May 2018 16:04]
| | | |
| Ollie speaks at last on 16:19 - May 24 with 1239 views | Silverfoxqpr |
Pretty sure I'm right in saying there was just the one change from the Villa away match going into the next at Fulham. As has been well documented on here they were two of the best away performances of the season. Next game however was Reading away where there were five unforced changes to the side, this included the ineffectual Washington who hadn't previously had a look in suddenly finding himself in the starting line up again. Unsurprisingly three of the players dropped for the Reading match who had played against AV and Fulham were subsequently subbed on. I'm sure there are dozens of other examples but THIS is why so many were so frustrated with Oliie at times, myself included. Just plain daft. |  | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
