| Dom Ball on his new book on 17:37 - Apr 26 with 3598 views | W12Mikey |
I am about half way through the book. Nicely written and gives a great insight into the lives of aspiring pro footballers (often quite lonely and boring, it seems) and into players' psychology. The fear of failure sets in pretty early, which is sad to read about. Certainly makes me feel more reluctant to criticise players, especially young ones, for a poor performance. |  | |  |
| Dom Ball on his new book on 17:59 - Apr 26 with 3529 views | Dorse |
'I think we really should be playing the guy more often...'
No comment, I just like hearing people agree with me.  |  |
| 'What do we want? We don't know! When do we want it? Now!' |
| |
| Dom Ball on his new book on 18:26 - Apr 26 with 3474 views | enfieldargh |
Play Dom over SAm for the last 2 games. Sam then escapes a 3 match ban plus Dom deserves some match time |  |
| |
| Dom Ball on his new book on 21:14 - Apr 26 with 3248 views | Hunterhoop |
What a good bloke! I am glad this man is at our club. Grounded, humble, and clearly thoughtful. A lovely alternative to so many footballers.
Characters like him are important at we club. Maybe we should be giving him more game time to ensure characters like him have more sway and more of a voice in the dressing room. |  | | |
| Dom Ball on his new book on 22:45 - Apr 26 with 3118 views | Myke |
Should play more because he co-wrote a book???? Interesting criteria - I might get a game myself, I've written 3 | | | |
| Dom Ball on his new book on 00:07 - Apr 27 with 3065 views | Antti_Heinola |
| Dom Ball on his new book on 22:45 - Apr 26 by Myke |
Should play more because he co-wrote a book???? Interesting criteria - I might get a game myself, I've written 3 |
Are you also a pro-footballer who played in a mostly winning team for most of 2021? |  |
| |
| Dom Ball on his new book on 00:35 - Apr 27 with 3046 views | DannyPaddox |
Good luck Dom. I hope you’ve learnt from the master. |  | | |
| Dom Ball on his new book on 07:36 - Apr 27 with 2951 views | Hunterhoop |
| Dom Ball on his new book on 22:45 - Apr 26 by Myke |
Should play more because he co-wrote a book???? Interesting criteria - I might get a game myself, I've written 3 |
No, I’m suggesting maybe he should play more because of his character and principles, already being a professional footballer. It’s pretty obvious from my post. I can’t comment on your character. | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Dom Ball on his new book on 10:14 - Apr 27 with 2811 views | RBlock |
Exactly the sort of player we should have around the club. Epitomises the hard work and collective team spirit that make me proud of this QPR team. Looking forward to reading the book |  | | |
| Dom Ball on his new book on 16:26 - Apr 27 with 2613 views | Myke |
| Dom Ball on his new book on 07:36 - Apr 27 by Hunterhoop |
No, I’m suggesting maybe he should play more because of his character and principles, already being a professional footballer. It’s pretty obvious from my post. I can’t comment on your character. |
I was being facetious of course. But on a serious note, we have to recognise that if we are serious about improving the squad, Dom Ball is not the answer. Regardless of how good his character may be, he is a limited enough player - whole hearted, honest etc, but limited. It is always the same, if the team is doing poorly, then the quality of the players who are not getting a game suddenly increases in our minds. For everyone who thinks that Ball would improve us, the same people would rush to condemn the qualities of Tom Carroll. In fact Carroll did fine, in the first half of 2020, was one of the few players (Chair, Dickie and Dieng) that could say they played consistently well. Yet as soon as Jo Jo arrived he was an 'upgrade' and it was good-riddance Carroll ( I know he was injured long term at the time, but even if he hadn't been, there would have been outrage on the message boards f he had been selected in 2021))
So, likewise the general consensus is that Field is an upgrade on Ball, yet suddenly there is a clamour to give Ball more time on the pitch. Where? Are we going to play 2 defensive mid-fielders? Remember at this stage we are building for next year, this year is gone. Again there is a general consensus that we should keep Warburton, yet we are not prepared to trust his judgement that Ball is not good enough. Which is it? Do we trust Warburton or not. Same with Kakay. In Warburton's view - despite bombing Kane out for daring to say so - Kakay is not good enough. Warburton proved that against Stoke, even Clive expected Kakay to start against Stoke.
So we are being wildly inconsistent with our wishes. Another example is Lumley. We think Ball should play because he is 'the right sort'. Nobody can question Lumley's character - he was the club's most vocal supporter during lockdown,- but very few on here lamented his departure and some still coat him off despite the fact he is playing for another club now.
We are being completely inconsistent with our views is the point I am making. Should players be used for their 'character' or their ability? If it's the former, then along with Ball, Kakay, Carroll and Lumley should all be playing regularly for us - all 'the right sort. Do the majority want Warburton to stay? If so then why question why he leaves out players that he clearly believes are not good enough to start on a regular basis? [Post edited 27 Apr 2022 16:29]
| | | |
| Dom Ball on his new book on 16:43 - Apr 27 with 2572 views | Antti_Heinola |
| Dom Ball on his new book on 16:26 - Apr 27 by Myke |
I was being facetious of course. But on a serious note, we have to recognise that if we are serious about improving the squad, Dom Ball is not the answer. Regardless of how good his character may be, he is a limited enough player - whole hearted, honest etc, but limited. It is always the same, if the team is doing poorly, then the quality of the players who are not getting a game suddenly increases in our minds. For everyone who thinks that Ball would improve us, the same people would rush to condemn the qualities of Tom Carroll. In fact Carroll did fine, in the first half of 2020, was one of the few players (Chair, Dickie and Dieng) that could say they played consistently well. Yet as soon as Jo Jo arrived he was an 'upgrade' and it was good-riddance Carroll ( I know he was injured long term at the time, but even if he hadn't been, there would have been outrage on the message boards f he had been selected in 2021))
So, likewise the general consensus is that Field is an upgrade on Ball, yet suddenly there is a clamour to give Ball more time on the pitch. Where? Are we going to play 2 defensive mid-fielders? Remember at this stage we are building for next year, this year is gone. Again there is a general consensus that we should keep Warburton, yet we are not prepared to trust his judgement that Ball is not good enough. Which is it? Do we trust Warburton or not. Same with Kakay. In Warburton's view - despite bombing Kane out for daring to say so - Kakay is not good enough. Warburton proved that against Stoke, even Clive expected Kakay to start against Stoke.
So we are being wildly inconsistent with our wishes. Another example is Lumley. We think Ball should play because he is 'the right sort'. Nobody can question Lumley's character - he was the club's most vocal supporter during lockdown,- but very few on here lamented his departure and some still coat him off despite the fact he is playing for another club now.
We are being completely inconsistent with our views is the point I am making. Should players be used for their 'character' or their ability? If it's the former, then along with Ball, Kakay, Carroll and Lumley should all be playing regularly for us - all 'the right sort. Do the majority want Warburton to stay? If so then why question why he leaves out players that he clearly believes are not good enough to start on a regular basis? [Post edited 27 Apr 2022 16:29]
|
A lot of use of 'we' there, without acknowledging that no fanbase is ever completely united on all subjects, as this board attests in spades.
So it's perfectly consistent for Hunter to hold his view, as it probably fits with many of his others. What you're doing is taking two separate opinions from different groups and saying: 'why can't you be consistent?' That makes no sense. | |
| |
| Dom Ball on his new book on 16:53 - Apr 27 with 2559 views | Dorse |
Dom Ball: bringing people together if only so they can argue. Genius. | |
| 'What do we want? We don't know! When do we want it? Now!' |
| |
| Dom Ball on his new book on 17:06 - Apr 27 with 2533 views | TacticalR |
Didn't we have this discussion the other day?
To be completely consistent (or completely egotistical), I will quote myself from that discussion:
'During our recent bad run it feels like nobody is stepping up to change games. Earlier in the season we had Dickie, Barbet, Johansen etc. who managed to come up with something to get us over the line (e.g. Barbet's last minute goal at Bristol City). I would have hoped that Ball could have given us a bit of oomph, especially against the lower table physical sides.'
That Ball might have made a difference against Cardiff and Peterborough was only a hope, but given the all-encompassing nature of our loss of form, probably a forlorn one. |  |
| |
| Dom Ball on his new book on 17:15 - Apr 27 with 2511 views | PunteR |
| Dom Ball on his new book on 16:26 - Apr 27 by Myke |
I was being facetious of course. But on a serious note, we have to recognise that if we are serious about improving the squad, Dom Ball is not the answer. Regardless of how good his character may be, he is a limited enough player - whole hearted, honest etc, but limited. It is always the same, if the team is doing poorly, then the quality of the players who are not getting a game suddenly increases in our minds. For everyone who thinks that Ball would improve us, the same people would rush to condemn the qualities of Tom Carroll. In fact Carroll did fine, in the first half of 2020, was one of the few players (Chair, Dickie and Dieng) that could say they played consistently well. Yet as soon as Jo Jo arrived he was an 'upgrade' and it was good-riddance Carroll ( I know he was injured long term at the time, but even if he hadn't been, there would have been outrage on the message boards f he had been selected in 2021))
So, likewise the general consensus is that Field is an upgrade on Ball, yet suddenly there is a clamour to give Ball more time on the pitch. Where? Are we going to play 2 defensive mid-fielders? Remember at this stage we are building for next year, this year is gone. Again there is a general consensus that we should keep Warburton, yet we are not prepared to trust his judgement that Ball is not good enough. Which is it? Do we trust Warburton or not. Same with Kakay. In Warburton's view - despite bombing Kane out for daring to say so - Kakay is not good enough. Warburton proved that against Stoke, even Clive expected Kakay to start against Stoke.
So we are being wildly inconsistent with our wishes. Another example is Lumley. We think Ball should play because he is 'the right sort'. Nobody can question Lumley's character - he was the club's most vocal supporter during lockdown,- but very few on here lamented his departure and some still coat him off despite the fact he is playing for another club now.
We are being completely inconsistent with our views is the point I am making. Should players be used for their 'character' or their ability? If it's the former, then along with Ball, Kakay, Carroll and Lumley should all be playing regularly for us - all 'the right sort. Do the majority want Warburton to stay? If so then why question why he leaves out players that he clearly believes are not good enough to start on a regular basis? [Post edited 27 Apr 2022 16:29]
|
Four books now..  |  |
| Occasional providers of half decent House music. |
| |
| Dom Ball on his new book on 19:06 - Apr 27 with 2391 views | eastside_r |
@Myke (to save space.)
You make some good points, but I think Ball’s value is / was as an impact sub destructor in certain game situations. His best performances were from the bench, perhaps because he reads the game well even if this quality is not matched by his footballing ability.
Have to disagree, LTC did not ‘do fine’ in that half season. He was one of the main reasons we were sh*t and persistence with him as the midfield general nearly got MW the sack ( in my opinion, obvs.) |  | | |
| Dom Ball on his new book on 19:16 - Apr 27 with 2368 views | distortR |
| Dom Ball on his new book on 19:06 - Apr 27 by eastside_r |
@Myke (to save space.)
You make some good points, but I think Ball’s value is / was as an impact sub destructor in certain game situations. His best performances were from the bench, perhaps because he reads the game well even if this quality is not matched by his footballing ability.
Have to disagree, LTC did not ‘do fine’ in that half season. He was one of the main reasons we were sh*t and persistence with him as the midfield general nearly got MW the sack ( in my opinion, obvs.) |
f'king LTC | | | |
| Dom Ball on his new book on 22:49 - Apr 27 with 2199 views | Myke |
| Dom Ball on his new book on 16:43 - Apr 27 by Antti_Heinola |
A lot of use of 'we' there, without acknowledging that no fanbase is ever completely united on all subjects, as this board attests in spades.
So it's perfectly consistent for Hunter to hold his view, as it probably fits with many of his others. What you're doing is taking two separate opinions from different groups and saying: 'why can't you be consistent?' That makes no sense. |
So firstly, Antti, my reply was to Hunter not to you. Secondly, I deliberately used 'we' to indicate I wasn't having a go at Hunter, as 'we' are all capable of being inconsistent with our hopes for the club. Thirdly, I was using many more than 'two separate opinions from different groups' which was exactly my point, which is why it makes perfect sense. But my over-riding point regarding Ball remains the same. Would I like to see him get a contract extension and make the match day squad most games - absolutely. If we are serious about promotion next year, then do I want to see him start regularly - not so much | | | |
| Dom Ball on his new book on 08:31 - Apr 28 with 2035 views | TheChef |
Tom Carroll played for us in 2020??
I totally forgot about this. |  |
| |
| Dom Ball on his new book on 08:47 - Apr 28 with 2018 views | Myke |
| Dom Ball on his new book on 17:15 - Apr 27 by PunteR |
Four books now.. |
Ha Ha -Trust me this was only an intro - if you really want to get me started... | | | |
| Dom Ball on his new book on 09:12 - Apr 28 with 1970 views | californiahoop |
| Dom Ball on his new book on 16:26 - Apr 27 by Myke |
I was being facetious of course. But on a serious note, we have to recognise that if we are serious about improving the squad, Dom Ball is not the answer. Regardless of how good his character may be, he is a limited enough player - whole hearted, honest etc, but limited. It is always the same, if the team is doing poorly, then the quality of the players who are not getting a game suddenly increases in our minds. For everyone who thinks that Ball would improve us, the same people would rush to condemn the qualities of Tom Carroll. In fact Carroll did fine, in the first half of 2020, was one of the few players (Chair, Dickie and Dieng) that could say they played consistently well. Yet as soon as Jo Jo arrived he was an 'upgrade' and it was good-riddance Carroll ( I know he was injured long term at the time, but even if he hadn't been, there would have been outrage on the message boards f he had been selected in 2021))
So, likewise the general consensus is that Field is an upgrade on Ball, yet suddenly there is a clamour to give Ball more time on the pitch. Where? Are we going to play 2 defensive mid-fielders? Remember at this stage we are building for next year, this year is gone. Again there is a general consensus that we should keep Warburton, yet we are not prepared to trust his judgement that Ball is not good enough. Which is it? Do we trust Warburton or not. Same with Kakay. In Warburton's view - despite bombing Kane out for daring to say so - Kakay is not good enough. Warburton proved that against Stoke, even Clive expected Kakay to start against Stoke.
So we are being wildly inconsistent with our wishes. Another example is Lumley. We think Ball should play because he is 'the right sort'. Nobody can question Lumley's character - he was the club's most vocal supporter during lockdown,- but very few on here lamented his departure and some still coat him off despite the fact he is playing for another club now.
We are being completely inconsistent with our views is the point I am making. Should players be used for their 'character' or their ability? If it's the former, then along with Ball, Kakay, Carroll and Lumley should all be playing regularly for us - all 'the right sort. Do the majority want Warburton to stay? If so then why question why he leaves out players that he clearly believes are not good enough to start on a regular basis? [Post edited 27 Apr 2022 16:29]
|
Yep, I am one of the few that sang Carroll’s praises, I think MW could slot in between Hoos and LF? | | | |
| Dom Ball on his new book on 12:24 - Apr 28 with 1883 views | Myke |
| Dom Ball on his new book on 19:06 - Apr 27 by eastside_r |
@Myke (to save space.)
You make some good points, but I think Ball’s value is / was as an impact sub destructor in certain game situations. His best performances were from the bench, perhaps because he reads the game well even if this quality is not matched by his footballing ability.
Have to disagree, LTC did not ‘do fine’ in that half season. He was one of the main reasons we were sh*t and persistence with him as the midfield general nearly got MW the sack ( in my opinion, obvs.) |
This and Distorts more 'succinct' reaction, make my point perfectly. Don't take my word for it. Look at Clive's ratings for the first half of the 20/21 season. Now remember we were very poor - I think 4 wins all season - but Carroll scored a significant number of '7's' in that time (A couple of 4's too, not saying he was Pirlo). This was often up there with the better performers. He often outscored Ball, but because Ball was popular and Carroll wasn't, it was 'good riddance' to the latter and 'he should get more game time' to the former. So again the question remains; what criteria do we want players selected by? | | | |
| Dom Ball on his new book on 19:51 - Apr 28 with 1744 views | eastside_r |
| Dom Ball on his new book on 12:24 - Apr 28 by Myke |
This and Distorts more 'succinct' reaction, make my point perfectly. Don't take my word for it. Look at Clive's ratings for the first half of the 20/21 season. Now remember we were very poor - I think 4 wins all season - but Carroll scored a significant number of '7's' in that time (A couple of 4's too, not saying he was Pirlo). This was often up there with the better performers. He often outscored Ball, but because Ball was popular and Carroll wasn't, it was 'good riddance' to the latter and 'he should get more game time' to the former. So again the question remains; what criteria do we want players selected by? |
Probably not the best time to dig out my LTC rant (I have it saved for posterity!) but suffice to say, much as I love Clive's work, I did not agree with those 7s.
(i.e. I don't think you can use those scores as FACTS that he was any good - it's all only opinions after all.) | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
