| Three-game weeks 10:59 - Jan 25 with 4351 views | Wegerles_Stairs |
One of the reasons Nourry supposedly appointed Stephan was his ability to manage the dreaded three-game weeks.
I included the Plymouth week even though it wasn't a league game and Stephan was told who to play but it's not great, is it? We average just over three points from three-game weeks.
Preston/Plymouth/Watford 1 point*
Sheffield Wed/Oxford/Bristol City 5 points
Millwall/Swansea/Derby 3 points
Ipswich/Southampton/Sheffield United 1 point
Hull/Blackburn/Norwich 6 points
WBA/Birmingham/Boro 6 points
Portsmouth/WBA/Norwich 1 point
Stoke/Oxford/Wrexham 2 points
Average: 3.125 points
|  | | |  |
| Three-game weeks on 21:06 - Jan 27 with 832 views | Rsole |
| Three-game weeks on 20:04 - Jan 27 by stainrods_elbow |
It's very relevant, in my opinion, and in fact your opening claim effectively does a volte-face with your final sentence.
It's speculation with hindsight that the team's hit the buffers solely, or even mostly, because we've got a handful of players out. The salient difference with QPR is that the management team leans it into as an excuse (when it isn't whining about 3 day weeks, long trips to Norwich on the bus (!), the wind, or whatever else is on the agenda this week), thereby deliberately instantiate a culture of mediocrity and tolerance of low standards via downwardly managed expectations. It's frankly embarrassing.
The shocking way we performed at Stoke in parking aforesaid bus (once the poor lambs had blearily staggered off it) has far less to do with missing a winger or two, or even our top scorer, and everything to do with a depressing, defeatist, and indeed cynical/cheating mindset. We were missing Burrell and one or two others at West Ham too, but we managed not to play like spoiling jerks there - mainly because Nourry/JS realised, I suggest, that we had 9,000 fans there, most of whom wouldn't have stood for it.
The question is, for me, whether being a supporter means you support that culture come what may, or instead demand the club throw off its 'mind-forg'd manacles' and try to become the best it can be. [Post edited 27 Jan 20:06]
|
But you’d rather lose to Wrectum than draw at Stoke ?
Because that’s how you frame things - before you change your view or try and deflect again.
To be clear, we’d all like to win every game like Brazil but we are not Brazil and we need to learn a few things about game management.
We could be more like Alan Brazil, if we want to be, mind you. |  |
| Those possessed by devils, try and keep them under control a bit, can't you ?
|
| |
| Three-game weeks on 21:34 - Jan 27 with 773 views | KensalT |
| Three-game weeks on 21:05 - Jan 27 by Hunterhoop |
So you don’t think it’s possible to have fewer injuries at this stage of a season? You think the Performance function is doing as good a job as is possible?
That is effectively what that post is saying, isn’t it?
Fair play if you believe that. It’s quite depressing and defeatist, imo.
But also, no matter how well you do at something in a professional capacity, you should always be striving to do better, shouldn’t you? That is the job. And it is also the whole point of competitive sport. So surely the rhetoric should be about aiming to do better next season, by doing something different. Not arguing there isn’t a problem.
As an aside, I think we are one of the only clubs in the land whose performance function is led by a guy whose entire career background was in cycling, and who came in and said he was going to bring principles from that world into football as he believed it would give us an edge. Call me a lunatic, but perhaps he’s wrong and it’s disadvantaging us.
And, further to that, why not put it to the test and hire someone who’s spent their career in football to lead that aspect of the club and see if it improves it? Give them 3 seasons like Ben Williams will have had. Then we’ll know for sure. Agree? You might be proven correct! |
I agree with what you say.
However, something that has been mentioned in Clive's match reports and on other threads is the way JS uses (or doesn't use) his subs. And I think that has to play into this discussion of player fitness.
Back in the days of Warbs Warburton he would often take players off after an hour or so and explain afterwards that this was on the advice of the physios that the particular player could only play a certain number of minutes and no more than that.
We don't seem to be seeing this under JS, even though the experts seem to agree that the game has become more intense and players are running and sprinting a lot more in recent seasons.
I think this raises some questions about what is going on behind the scenes.
Are the medical team not assessing/protecting the players in the same way as previous years?
Are they giving the same advice about player durability to the coaches?
Or are the coaches getting the guidance from the medics but not putting it into practice?
Burrell is a case in point. He was looking cooked several games before he finally snapped. And in the recent WLS podcast Kevin Gallen was saying he though Kone also looked like he was suffering from fatigue and might not have enough left in the tank to effectively lead the line for the rest of the season.
This doesn't just affect our league position. Injuries to our sellable young prospects will reduce their future sale value. Something we sadly saw with Chris Willock but don't appear to have learned from.
I know I have made this point on other threads but we have more sports science than ever before and we also have more (avoidable) injuries than ever before.
Something doesn't seem to add up. Is the science wrong or is the practice wrong?
Or are clubs just using the sports science to squeeze every last bit of effort from the players (hopefully) without breaking them? | | | |
| Three-game weeks on 21:55 - Jan 27 with 730 views | Hunterhoop |
| Three-game weeks on 21:34 - Jan 27 by KensalT |
I agree with what you say.
However, something that has been mentioned in Clive's match reports and on other threads is the way JS uses (or doesn't use) his subs. And I think that has to play into this discussion of player fitness.
Back in the days of Warbs Warburton he would often take players off after an hour or so and explain afterwards that this was on the advice of the physios that the particular player could only play a certain number of minutes and no more than that.
We don't seem to be seeing this under JS, even though the experts seem to agree that the game has become more intense and players are running and sprinting a lot more in recent seasons.
I think this raises some questions about what is going on behind the scenes.
Are the medical team not assessing/protecting the players in the same way as previous years?
Are they giving the same advice about player durability to the coaches?
Or are the coaches getting the guidance from the medics but not putting it into practice?
Burrell is a case in point. He was looking cooked several games before he finally snapped. And in the recent WLS podcast Kevin Gallen was saying he though Kone also looked like he was suffering from fatigue and might not have enough left in the tank to effectively lead the line for the rest of the season.
This doesn't just affect our league position. Injuries to our sellable young prospects will reduce their future sale value. Something we sadly saw with Chris Willock but don't appear to have learned from.
I know I have made this point on other threads but we have more sports science than ever before and we also have more (avoidable) injuries than ever before.
Something doesn't seem to add up. Is the science wrong or is the practice wrong?
Or are clubs just using the sports science to squeeze every last bit of effort from the players (hopefully) without breaking them? |
Good question.
Is Stephan ignoring the advice of the Performance function or is that function not giving the type of advice previous managers/head coaches received?
I don’t know.
But I absolutely agree that Burrell’s injury was coming. I was exasperated that he wasn’t taken off at HT against Leicester. Perfect moment to rest him.
Agree that Kone, and Madsen, are ticking time bombs regards injuries unless they get a break soon. Feels inevitable. Varane was the same, but that’s already happened.
Dunne is another. Widely known to be playing through a hip problem. Worry he could aggravate it and be out for a while.
But like I said, no idea what the answer to that question above is.
What I would say is, if Stephan is ignoring Ben Williams, I would imagine BW is in Nourry’s ear fairly regularly about it, and it could shorten Stephan’s reign… |  | | |
| Three-game weeks on 22:06 - Jan 27 with 710 views | KensalT |
| Three-game weeks on 21:55 - Jan 27 by Hunterhoop |
Good question.
Is Stephan ignoring the advice of the Performance function or is that function not giving the type of advice previous managers/head coaches received?
I don’t know.
But I absolutely agree that Burrell’s injury was coming. I was exasperated that he wasn’t taken off at HT against Leicester. Perfect moment to rest him.
Agree that Kone, and Madsen, are ticking time bombs regards injuries unless they get a break soon. Feels inevitable. Varane was the same, but that’s already happened.
Dunne is another. Widely known to be playing through a hip problem. Worry he could aggravate it and be out for a while.
But like I said, no idea what the answer to that question above is.
What I would say is, if Stephan is ignoring Ben Williams, I would imagine BW is in Nourry’s ear fairly regularly about it, and it could shorten Stephan’s reign… |
But it's not just under Stephan that we have had these injury problems.
It was the same story last season under Cifuentes - The big difference being that Williams was working remotely from Dubai last season.
Whatever the explanation we can't keep going like this or the development/trading model will never get off the ground. The club should be making it a priority to fix this issue. | | | |
| Three-game weeks on 22:19 - Jan 27 with 678 views | BrianMcCarthy |
It's the third year we've had fitness problems.
The previous year we were stuck to the ground for the first half of the season. |  |
| |
| Three-game weeks on 22:25 - Jan 27 with 665 views | KensalT |
| Three-game weeks on 22:19 - Jan 27 by BrianMcCarthy |
It's the third year we've had fitness problems.
The previous year we were stuck to the ground for the first half of the season. |
I think that was partly down to Beale bringing back Willock and Amos before they were ready and seriously aggravating existing problems. And how have the careers of those two young players gone since then?
And without naming names I think we can say that some of those 'injured' players from the Beale/Critchley/Ainsworth season might have had a few motivation problems. | | | |
| Three-game weeks on 22:34 - Jan 27 with 658 views | BrianMcCarthy |
| Three-game weeks on 22:25 - Jan 27 by KensalT |
I think that was partly down to Beale bringing back Willock and Amos before they were ready and seriously aggravating existing problems. And how have the careers of those two young players gone since then?
And without naming names I think we can say that some of those 'injured' players from the Beale/Critchley/Ainsworth season might have had a few motivation problems. |
I'm talking about the 23-24 season, Kensal. Under Ainsworth. Williams was appointed in July 03.
That season, we lacked fitness - stamina, strength and pace - for the first half of the season.
Last season, we had a similar slow start in terms of fitness.
This season, we've lacked fitness all the way through.
I take your point about Beale and I agree about his treatment of Willock completely, but Beale was gone by Nov 22. | |
| |
| Three-game weeks on 22:44 - Jan 27 with 642 views | KensalT |
| Three-game weeks on 22:34 - Jan 27 by BrianMcCarthy |
I'm talking about the 23-24 season, Kensal. Under Ainsworth. Williams was appointed in July 03.
That season, we lacked fitness - stamina, strength and pace - for the first half of the season.
Last season, we had a similar slow start in terms of fitness.
This season, we've lacked fitness all the way through.
I take your point about Beale and I agree about his treatment of Willock completely, but Beale was gone by Nov 22. |
Apologies Brian, I mis-read your post.
And yes, Ben Williams was appointed in July 2023:
https://www.qpr.co.uk/players/
I suppose Williams might say that he deliberately prepped the players to start slow and hit peak fitness in the second half of the season.
But I can remember Paolo di Canio trying that approach when he was Sunderland manager, and he was sacked long before his players began to feel the benefit!
Personally I don't subscribe to the slow burn approach. The Championship is fiercely competitive and I don't believe we can afford to start the season slowly and let other clubs get away from us. | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Three-game weeks on 22:47 - Jan 27 with 636 views | BrianMcCarthy |
| Three-game weeks on 22:44 - Jan 27 by KensalT |
Apologies Brian, I mis-read your post.
And yes, Ben Williams was appointed in July 2023:
https://www.qpr.co.uk/players/
I suppose Williams might say that he deliberately prepped the players to start slow and hit peak fitness in the second half of the season.
But I can remember Paolo di Canio trying that approach when he was Sunderland manager, and he was sacked long before his players began to feel the benefit!
Personally I don't subscribe to the slow burn approach. The Championship is fiercely competitive and I don't believe we can afford to start the season slowly and let other clubs get away from us. |
Sorry, Kensal - my first post was really poorly worded.
"Personally I don't subscribe to the slow burn approach. The Championship is fiercely competitive and I don't believe we can afford to start the season slowly and let other clubs get away from us."
Agreed. | |
| |
| Three-game weeks on 23:23 - Jan 27 with 590 views | Spaghetti_Hoops |
| Three-game weeks on 21:04 - Jan 27 by Northernr |
And yet in our least challenging, least competitive game of the season, the worst team that’s going to play in this league for years - 4 first team players off injured by half time including the top scorer and most sellable asset out until March. |
Well the argument goes round and round.
Your argument is that injuries and fitness are a particular problem for us and we should be doing better. I say there are always a lot of injuries in football, giving some evidence from the Premier League. What hard evidence have you got other than anecdote and a feeling in the water?
As for the minutes we give players that is a matter of judgement and compromise based on the feedback you are getting from the performance guys and medics and what you think you need to win. What can you reasonably get out of the best players? What risks can you reasonably take? How should you manage the squad players?
There are no absolutes here, just judgement, whether it is the medics, performance guys, coaches or the manager.
As for Sheffield Wednesday we were only 1-0 up with 81 minutes gone, Burrell scored the goal but only lasted 21 minutes. If we had lost that match this forum would have gone bonkers.
Hindsight is a beautiful thing. | | | |
| Three-game weeks on 07:29 - Jan 28 with 502 views | Hunterhoop |
| Three-game weeks on 23:23 - Jan 27 by Spaghetti_Hoops |
Well the argument goes round and round.
Your argument is that injuries and fitness are a particular problem for us and we should be doing better. I say there are always a lot of injuries in football, giving some evidence from the Premier League. What hard evidence have you got other than anecdote and a feeling in the water?
As for the minutes we give players that is a matter of judgement and compromise based on the feedback you are getting from the performance guys and medics and what you think you need to win. What can you reasonably get out of the best players? What risks can you reasonably take? How should you manage the squad players?
There are no absolutes here, just judgement, whether it is the medics, performance guys, coaches or the manager.
As for Sheffield Wednesday we were only 1-0 up with 81 minutes gone, Burrell scored the goal but only lasted 21 minutes. If we had lost that match this forum would have gone bonkers.
Hindsight is a beautiful thing. |
What do you think about my post at the bottom of page 2? Do you agree? | | | |
| Three-game weeks on 08:08 - Jan 28 with 444 views | GaryBannister86 |
| Three-game weeks on 07:29 - Jan 28 by Hunterhoop |
What do you think about my post at the bottom of page 2? Do you agree? |
For what it's worth, I agree Hunter.
I know that injuries happen in football, I just thought the point was to try and do it better than 22 other teams in the league and get promoted.
The only hard evidence I have is that we can't go a season without major muscle injuries, that we are certainly not generally fitter than 22 other teams and that we are currently 12th in the league. |  | | |
| Three-game weeks on 08:50 - Jan 28 with 382 views | TK1 |
| Three-game weeks on 08:08 - Jan 28 by GaryBannister86 |
For what it's worth, I agree Hunter.
I know that injuries happen in football, I just thought the point was to try and do it better than 22 other teams in the league and get promoted.
The only hard evidence I have is that we can't go a season without major muscle injuries, that we are certainly not generally fitter than 22 other teams and that we are currently 12th in the league. |
I agree so much I just tried to upvote a second time.
Forgetting all the muscle injuries (sorry, no, that's a three-month 'contact' injury), we just look knackered in every game well before the end. Saturday we came out first half all guns blazing but could not maintain anything like it in the second. By the 60th minute lots of players looked cooked, particularly the wingers and midfielders, by the end we were totally scrambled - exceptions, of course, such as Dunne (who incidentally often posts pics from his insta of post-match work he does away from the club), but overall other teams appear fitter. Certainly, Wrexham grew throughout and were outrunning us in the second.
Remember how the club made a big show of posting on socials the relative running stats in the glorious defeat away at West Ham? I think the fact that's the only time they have posted that post-match tells its own story.
Incidentally, someone made mention of Amos and Willock's careers elsewhere after they left us. Well, watched the highlights of Willock's man-of-the-match performance for Cardiff last night. Ten points clear of third and he looked absolutely back to the player we had under Beale. Two goals and an assist. He's only 27. He certainly looked better than any of the wingers we currently can pick from. We'll be seeing him soon enough to judge, i suppose. | | | |
| Three-game weeks on 09:06 - Jan 28 with 342 views | TheChef |
| Three-game weeks on 21:55 - Jan 27 by Hunterhoop |
Good question.
Is Stephan ignoring the advice of the Performance function or is that function not giving the type of advice previous managers/head coaches received?
I don’t know.
But I absolutely agree that Burrell’s injury was coming. I was exasperated that he wasn’t taken off at HT against Leicester. Perfect moment to rest him.
Agree that Kone, and Madsen, are ticking time bombs regards injuries unless they get a break soon. Feels inevitable. Varane was the same, but that’s already happened.
Dunne is another. Widely known to be playing through a hip problem. Worry he could aggravate it and be out for a while.
But like I said, no idea what the answer to that question above is.
What I would say is, if Stephan is ignoring Ben Williams, I would imagine BW is in Nourry’s ear fairly regularly about it, and it could shorten Stephan’s reign… |
Well it's odd how the manager seems to be making his subs later, especially in winter when fatigue tends to be greater. So either he's ignoring the data from the conditioning team, or that data is wrong (hmmm.......).
I thought Madsen had gone again on Saturday at one point in the first half when a Wrexham player took him out, but he made it through the game. Only a matter of time with him, and clearly he's not going to be rested at any point.
And good points about Williams and cycling, I mean cycling isn't even a contact sport so aside from maybe the aerobic/stamina element it really has very little in common with football, as far as I can tell. |  |
| |
| Three-game weeks on 09:23 - Jan 28 with 323 views | Northernr |
| Three-game weeks on 23:23 - Jan 27 by Spaghetti_Hoops |
Well the argument goes round and round.
Your argument is that injuries and fitness are a particular problem for us and we should be doing better. I say there are always a lot of injuries in football, giving some evidence from the Premier League. What hard evidence have you got other than anecdote and a feeling in the water?
As for the minutes we give players that is a matter of judgement and compromise based on the feedback you are getting from the performance guys and medics and what you think you need to win. What can you reasonably get out of the best players? What risks can you reasonably take? How should you manage the squad players?
There are no absolutes here, just judgement, whether it is the medics, performance guys, coaches or the manager.
As for Sheffield Wednesday we were only 1-0 up with 81 minutes gone, Burrell scored the goal but only lasted 21 minutes. If we had lost that match this forum would have gone bonkers.
Hindsight is a beautiful thing. |
"Your argument is that injuries and fitness are a particular problem for us and we should be doing better. I say there are always a lot of injuries in football, giving some evidence from the Premier League. What hard evidence have you got other than anecdote and a feeling in the water?"
I absolutely agree there are always injuries in football. You're never going to have a perfect season - although notice that when we did have a really good run in 2023/24 and even JCS graced us with his presence for a whopping 30 games they were happy for Ben Williams to appear on 'R Insights' to explain how we'd done it. Now we're back to this situation and it's "well it's nobody's fault really, we're 12th best in the league for non contact injuries, hamstrings are up 36% across the league but only 24% here" etc etc.
I don't care what injuries everybody else has got, we're meant to be trying to beat everybody else so it's no use sitting back and saying "well, it's okay, Portsmouth are missing nine players too". I want the attitude to be "how can QPR be better than that, how can we be the best in this field".
Now anecdotally, I can't ever remember losing four players to muscle injuries in the first half a of a game before. If you want me to up that actual evidence then I'll happily spend Friday going through Soccerbase for the last time we'd lost four players before half time, but I think we both know that's unnecessary - that was abnormal, and concerning. Koki Saito sat down within 15 minutes of the following game too.
But my point is this. Injuries are particularly lethal to our chances in particular because a) we've got a limited budget and therefore a limited squad, and b) our whole reason for being under Nourry is these players are being fattened for market and, as we saw with Willock, nobody wants to buy your winger/striker who's had three hamstring injuries in 18 months.
So it's not we "should" be doing better. It's we "must" do better. Otherwise we're screwed.
So, rather than sit at the fans forum and say "are you ready for some science?" followed by a load of numbers that basically show what a terrific job you're doing and then we get to January and 10 players are missing again I want to know things like...
- Why does our pitch look like this and what are we doing to make sure it doesn't next year? Because that can't be helping. I personally think that was a big part of the reason that Sheff Wed game went as it did.
- What does our pre-season look like and what are we doing about that? Because in each of the last three seasons we've had poor pre-season friendlies have made terrible starts - 2 wins in 17 in each of the last two seasons, a dreadful August including a 7-1 defeat this. Some of our absolute worst performances and results (Watford 4-0, Blackburn 4-0, Coventry 7-1) are coming right at the start of the season when we're supposed to be at our fittest and freshest. We know, because they've told us, that their tactic is to basically ditch the traditional pre-season and instead go for a "slow burn" approach to make sure we're fit for the run in. That worked in 23/24, it definitely didn't work last year, and we'll see this but the signs aren't great. So, is that really the right approach?
- Are we approaching Christmas in the right way? It might not be popular, but would it be worth literally sacking one or two of those games off entirely? Play a complete youth team for West Brom A and Sheff Wed H? Super League used to make the teams play Friday and Monday over Easter, Ian Millward at St Helens said it wasn't safe so for the Easter Monday game would pick the youth team. It caused all sorts of controversy because people were betting on it and they were losing games 80-0, but he thought that was best for his team in the long run and the Saints fans bought into it (probably because they won everything every year). Did we do Christmas right this year? We'll get the same set of fixtures next season so how do we improve?
- Is our injury treatment good enough? Kwame Poku came with a hamstring problem, repeated that on the first day (we denied that happened and said he'd probably be back by Wrexham away), relapsed immediately after his first come back, relapsed immediately after his second come back. He's meant to be one of our biggest sellable assets and investment. That's not good enough, is it? So, what are we doing about that? If it were any other club bringing a player back from a hamstring injury and having him relapse three times in six months you'd be saying 'what the fck are they doing?'.
- Where's our development squad in all of this? There was all sorts of hype in May when they won that cup final, how many of them have graduated to first team? Kieran Morgan - who was already there. The rest are either still where they were, or out on some pretty mediocre non league loans (Emmerson Sutton has done best, he's on loan at the bottom team in the EFL). It would help if four or five of them were good enough to do minutes to take pressure off, as it stands they're still not. Why not? Can we improve here? We say we're improving, Nourry's very happy with it, but to this point we don't see that on a Saturday.
Long post summed up - I want us to improve. Every time I criticise QPR it's because I love them and I want them to improve. I don't want to go to Stoke and lose with Dembele as a lone striker. I don't want to go to West Brom and lose with Smyth as a lone striker. And I don't want the club to be happy and satisfied with that.
At the fans forum when these issues were raised we were told that, actually, they weren't issues at all if you look at the data and include the U13s etc. And then here we are again, losing games we shouldn't, and slipping down the table because too many first teamers are injured. It felt defensive, designed to protect individuals against criticism, rather than progressive, and interested in how we can improve.
I don't want to hear what a fantastic job you're doing, I want to hear what an even more fantastic job you're going to be doing next season.
This post has been edited by an administrator |  | | |
| Three-game weeks on 09:45 - Jan 28 with 270 views | mart_Goblin |
| Three-game weeks on 09:23 - Jan 28 by Northernr |
"Your argument is that injuries and fitness are a particular problem for us and we should be doing better. I say there are always a lot of injuries in football, giving some evidence from the Premier League. What hard evidence have you got other than anecdote and a feeling in the water?"
I absolutely agree there are always injuries in football. You're never going to have a perfect season - although notice that when we did have a really good run in 2023/24 and even JCS graced us with his presence for a whopping 30 games they were happy for Ben Williams to appear on 'R Insights' to explain how we'd done it. Now we're back to this situation and it's "well it's nobody's fault really, we're 12th best in the league for non contact injuries, hamstrings are up 36% across the league but only 24% here" etc etc.
I don't care what injuries everybody else has got, we're meant to be trying to beat everybody else so it's no use sitting back and saying "well, it's okay, Portsmouth are missing nine players too". I want the attitude to be "how can QPR be better than that, how can we be the best in this field".
Now anecdotally, I can't ever remember losing four players to muscle injuries in the first half a of a game before. If you want me to up that actual evidence then I'll happily spend Friday going through Soccerbase for the last time we'd lost four players before half time, but I think we both know that's unnecessary - that was abnormal, and concerning. Koki Saito sat down within 15 minutes of the following game too.
But my point is this. Injuries are particularly lethal to our chances in particular because a) we've got a limited budget and therefore a limited squad, and b) our whole reason for being under Nourry is these players are being fattened for market and, as we saw with Willock, nobody wants to buy your winger/striker who's had three hamstring injuries in 18 months.
So it's not we "should" be doing better. It's we "must" do better. Otherwise we're screwed.
So, rather than sit at the fans forum and say "are you ready for some science?" followed by a load of numbers that basically show what a terrific job you're doing and then we get to January and 10 players are missing again I want to know things like...
- Why does our pitch look like this and what are we doing to make sure it doesn't next year? Because that can't be helping. I personally think that was a big part of the reason that Sheff Wed game went as it did.
- What does our pre-season look like and what are we doing about that? Because in each of the last three seasons we've had poor pre-season friendlies have made terrible starts - 2 wins in 17 in each of the last two seasons, a dreadful August including a 7-1 defeat this. Some of our absolute worst performances and results (Watford 4-0, Blackburn 4-0, Coventry 7-1) are coming right at the start of the season when we're supposed to be at our fittest and freshest. We know, because they've told us, that their tactic is to basically ditch the traditional pre-season and instead go for a "slow burn" approach to make sure we're fit for the run in. That worked in 23/24, it definitely didn't work last year, and we'll see this but the signs aren't great. So, is that really the right approach?
- Are we approaching Christmas in the right way? It might not be popular, but would it be worth literally sacking one or two of those games off entirely? Play a complete youth team for West Brom A and Sheff Wed H? Super League used to make the teams play Friday and Monday over Easter, Ian Millward at St Helens said it wasn't safe so for the Easter Monday game would pick the youth team. It caused all sorts of controversy because people were betting on it and they were losing games 80-0, but he thought that was best for his team in the long run and the Saints fans bought into it (probably because they won everything every year). Did we do Christmas right this year? We'll get the same set of fixtures next season so how do we improve?
- Is our injury treatment good enough? Kwame Poku came with a hamstring problem, repeated that on the first day (we denied that happened and said he'd probably be back by Wrexham away), relapsed immediately after his first come back, relapsed immediately after his second come back. He's meant to be one of our biggest sellable assets and investment. That's not good enough, is it? So, what are we doing about that? If it were any other club bringing a player back from a hamstring injury and having him relapse three times in six months you'd be saying 'what the fck are they doing?'.
- Where's our development squad in all of this? There was all sorts of hype in May when they won that cup final, how many of them have graduated to first team? Kieran Morgan - who was already there. The rest are either still where they were, or out on some pretty mediocre non league loans (Emmerson Sutton has done best, he's on loan at the bottom team in the EFL). It would help if four or five of them were good enough to do minutes to take pressure off, as it stands they're still not. Why not? Can we improve here? We say we're improving, Nourry's very happy with it, but to this point we don't see that on a Saturday.
Long post summed up - I want us to improve. Every time I criticise QPR it's because I love them and I want them to improve. I don't want to go to Stoke and lose with Dembele as a lone striker. I don't want to go to West Brom and lose with Smyth as a lone striker. And I don't want the club to be happy and satisfied with that.
At the fans forum when these issues were raised we were told that, actually, they weren't issues at all if you look at the data and include the U13s etc. And then here we are again, losing games we shouldn't, and slipping down the table because too many first teamers are injured. It felt defensive, designed to protect individuals against criticism, rather than progressive, and interested in how we can improve.
I don't want to hear what a fantastic job you're doing, I want to hear what an even more fantastic job you're going to be doing next season.
This post has been edited by an administrator |
Absolutely on the money .
Sometimes people want to get into the weeds with facts, stats and data for ‘evidence’ when the most glaringly obvious evidence is what’s in front of our own eyes.
Fully aware that is the way of the world right now , especially in things like politics , but I can see we are not as fit as pretty much every other team we play . There is no data required.
Seems to be the in ‘thing’ and that’s what was being sold to us at the last fans forum , “you are seeing this …but it’s not real . Here, have some stats that ‘proves’ your eyes are lying to you “
Rule number 1 . Don’t treat the core fan base as idiots .
And all this isn’t new either.
One of the main bullet points for the new training ground was to prevent the ‘current injury crisis of the time’.
It worked for about 6 months.
What’s happened ? |  | | |
| Three-game weeks on 14:55 - Jan 28 with 119 views | BrianMcCarthy |
He's been Williamsed! | |
| |
| Three-game weeks on 15:01 - Jan 28 with 91 views | TheChef |
Yeah yeah yeah but Ronnie is 100% and raring to go!!!
Cheers,
Ben | |
| |
| Three-game weeks on 15:39 - Jan 28 with 60 views | Spaghetti_Hoops |
When the club are recruiting within our limited budget and wages what do they prioritise?
Maybe the choice includes League One level players who will run forever, not tire in the second half, rarely if ever getting injuries or alternatively players of at least Championship ability but having a history of some injuries? You would think that a club in our position has to take risks sometimes. Again it's about judgement, pluses and minuses. Sometimes the risks will pay off and sometimes they won't.
Of course I want the club to get better in every way. I have been supporting it for 60+ years. I have £10,000 invested in the training ground bonds. However I see myself as a supporter, not a critic. Excessive criticism just drags everyone down. I take the view that professional football is about as competitive as it gets and anybody involved on the playing side is a competitive animal likely to be giving it 100%.
Perhaps you being closer to the club know different. These days we live in a low trust society completely different from the society I grew up in. Now nobody seems to trust anybody to do their job properly. I see a lot of that in this and many other threads. | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
