| Three-game weeks 10:59 - Jan 25 with 6271 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 20:07 - Jan 28 with 678 views | KensalT |
| Three-game weeks on 19:50 - Jan 28 by Spaghetti_Hoops |
So the position when he joined us was that he had worked for Ineos in cycling and yatching (Americas Cup), football (Nice) and basketball (NBA). He has now worked for us for two and half years, one year part-time. If with his background he hasn’t learned by now all he needs to do that job to a very high standard I would be surprised.
If you were ever right I don’t think it still applies today. |
I think our shocking injuries record in the last couple of years answers that point.
Even with us giving him two and a half years to learn the sport.
And his one year with Brooklyn Nets also saw a glut of hamstring injuries!
You also completely ignored my main point. We shouldn't have given someone lacking experience in our sport the top job in maintaining our multi-million pound assets.
You mentioned his stint at Nice.
From our own website:
"He consulted with French Ligue 1 outfit OGC Nice during the 2022/23 campaign.
He was a consultant for one season.
Maybe that's the basis on which we should have retained his services!
https://www.qpr.co.uk/players/ [Post edited 28 Jan 20:09]
| | | |
| Three-game weeks on 20:10 - Jan 28 with 665 views | BrianMcCarthy |
| Three-game weeks on 18:17 - Jan 28 by KensalT |
But not knowledge of football, or footballers.........
??
In principle I'm not against bringing in expertise from outside your own industry to give different insights or perspectives. But you wouldn't normally put that outsider in charge of running a whole department unless they had worked in your industry at some point in their career! [Post edited 28 Jan 18:25]
|
Edit - replied to a post that was later edited, so my point was moot. [Post edited 28 Jan 20:16]
|  |
| |
| Three-game weeks on 21:07 - Jan 28 with 577 views | Spaghetti_Hoops |
| Three-game weeks on 20:07 - Jan 28 by KensalT |
I think our shocking injuries record in the last couple of years answers that point.
Even with us giving him two and a half years to learn the sport.
And his one year with Brooklyn Nets also saw a glut of hamstring injuries!
You also completely ignored my main point. We shouldn't have given someone lacking experience in our sport the top job in maintaining our multi-million pound assets.
You mentioned his stint at Nice.
From our own website:
"He consulted with French Ligue 1 outfit OGC Nice during the 2022/23 campaign.
He was a consultant for one season.
Maybe that's the basis on which we should have retained his services!
https://www.qpr.co.uk/players/ [Post edited 28 Jan 20:09]
|
(a) You say our shocking record of injuries. I say our injury record seems typical for professional football. When I ask for hard evidence of a shocking record all that the comes up are anecdotes and “you can see it with your own eyes you don’t need numbers”. For me a sure sign of ignorance of the actual record and perhaps what’s happening in the rest of football.
Also I made the point that with new players we may be accepting a greater risk of injury in order to get better players within our budget and wage limits. Players come with a physiology. Again nobody knows.
(b) Your main point is not ignored it is dealt with in my last sentence. I would suggest that only those that know Ben Williams work, knowledge, ability and character well could answer the point. | | | |
| Three-game weeks on 21:35 - Jan 28 with 520 views | KensalT |
| Three-game weeks on 21:07 - Jan 28 by Spaghetti_Hoops |
(a) You say our shocking record of injuries. I say our injury record seems typical for professional football. When I ask for hard evidence of a shocking record all that the comes up are anecdotes and “you can see it with your own eyes you don’t need numbers”. For me a sure sign of ignorance of the actual record and perhaps what’s happening in the rest of football.
Also I made the point that with new players we may be accepting a greater risk of injury in order to get better players within our budget and wage limits. Players come with a physiology. Again nobody knows.
(b) Your main point is not ignored it is dealt with in my last sentence. I would suggest that only those that know Ben Williams work, knowledge, ability and character well could answer the point. |
With regards to your point (a) I could say that since you are in a minority of one on this thread the onus is on you to provide evidence that shows the rest of us are wrong.
However, I know you won't be able to do that because that data is not publicly available.
I believe that in major American sports all the data is owned by the leagues, which is why they have complete transparency about things like the Brooklyn Nets 'shocking' injury data the year Ben Williams was working for them!
By contrast, in English professional football players data is owned by the clubs. And for that reason (in the absence of transparency by the clubs) the best we can do is the evidence of our own eyes and anecdote.
If you want to believe something different from everyone else that's up to you, but neither of us can categorically prove our point.
With regards to your point (b). You have completely ignored everything I said.
Williams had very little experience of football before we gave him full responsibility for the condition of our players. In any industry that would be seen as a bold/reckless decision - delete as you think appropriate.
Even if Williams did an amazing job at Ineos (and I haven't seen any evidence to support that) the simple fact is that cycling, basketball and football are completely different sports, played in very different environments, and by people of very different physiques.
Just because he might have had some success with one of those sports does not mean he is competent to take on all three. | | | |
| Three-game weeks on 21:48 - Jan 28 with 472 views | Hunterhoop |
| Three-game weeks on 19:50 - Jan 28 by Spaghetti_Hoops |
So the position when he joined us was that he had worked for Ineos in cycling and yatching (Americas Cup), football (Nice) and basketball (NBA). He has now worked for us for two and half years, one year part-time. If with his background he hasn’t learned by now all he needs to do that job to a very high standard I would be surprised.
If you were ever right I don’t think it still applies today. |
But is he learning? Are we improving on the fitness and conditioning front? To use your own words, where is the quantitative evidence? |  | | |
| Three-game weeks on 21:51 - Jan 28 with 461 views | Hunterhoop |
| Three-game weeks on 17:07 - Jan 28 by Spaghetti_Hoops |
Sorry I don't think I do agree Hunter.
I like the idea that knowledge is spread between different sports. It is not as if only one person is analysing performance for QPR. I believe there are four of them? Also there can be few sports, apart from F1, where there has been such a concentration of performance analysis taking every conceivable variable into account as cycling.
On your other points, you can have whatever rhetoric you want. Other people have me down as a realist and I can do without my club talking anything up other than for morale purposes. Some players seem to play better when they are told they are wonderful. That's different.
I don't know if the performance or any other function of the club is doing everything it reasonably can do. I don't expect my club to have a world class manager or any other perfect employee. If they exist the Premier League would have gobbled them up.
As a realist I have to accept that I can come across as depressing and defeatist to some people. Possibly the sort of people who are football fans posting on a forum. However I do believe that the club is edging in the right direction, which makes a change. |
Mr Realist, you haven’t answered my questions? You’ve only answered whether you agree with me about bringing someone in from the football world and giving him 3 years.
What about all those questions at the top?
Please could you answer those and follow them through to reach the conclusion you are pushing?
Happy to discuss in person if you’d prefer. [Post edited 28 Jan 21:54]
| | | |
| Three-game weeks on 23:19 - Jan 28 with 374 views | Spaghetti_Hoops |
| Three-game weeks on 21:35 - Jan 28 by KensalT |
With regards to your point (a) I could say that since you are in a minority of one on this thread the onus is on you to provide evidence that shows the rest of us are wrong.
However, I know you won't be able to do that because that data is not publicly available.
I believe that in major American sports all the data is owned by the leagues, which is why they have complete transparency about things like the Brooklyn Nets 'shocking' injury data the year Ben Williams was working for them!
By contrast, in English professional football players data is owned by the clubs. And for that reason (in the absence of transparency by the clubs) the best we can do is the evidence of our own eyes and anecdote.
If you want to believe something different from everyone else that's up to you, but neither of us can categorically prove our point.
With regards to your point (b). You have completely ignored everything I said.
Williams had very little experience of football before we gave him full responsibility for the condition of our players. In any industry that would be seen as a bold/reckless decision - delete as you think appropriate.
Even if Williams did an amazing job at Ineos (and I haven't seen any evidence to support that) the simple fact is that cycling, basketball and football are completely different sports, played in very different environments, and by people of very different physiques.
Just because he might have had some success with one of those sports does not mean he is competent to take on all three. |
First point I have no problem with being in a minority.
I am making no claims whatsoever. It is for those accusing the club, and particular members of staff, of a shocking record of injuries to justify that claim. IF there are a larger number of injuries than average over a season there might be a number of causes including the characteristics of players we are recruiting. I have no idea why one person is being pointed to by a few posters when the whole thing should be and seems to be a team effort. I have an open mind. I am intrigued to know.
As for putting someone in a leadership position who has limited experience of one, or several, of the functions that are his/her responsibility I am surprised that you seem to think that's unusual these days. He's not a doctor or a physio or a nutritionist either. | | | |
| Three-game weeks on 23:35 - Jan 28 with 346 views | KensalT |
| Three-game weeks on 23:19 - Jan 28 by Spaghetti_Hoops |
First point I have no problem with being in a minority.
I am making no claims whatsoever. It is for those accusing the club, and particular members of staff, of a shocking record of injuries to justify that claim. IF there are a larger number of injuries than average over a season there might be a number of causes including the characteristics of players we are recruiting. I have no idea why one person is being pointed to by a few posters when the whole thing should be and seems to be a team effort. I have an open mind. I am intrigued to know.
As for putting someone in a leadership position who has limited experience of one, or several, of the functions that are his/her responsibility I am surprised that you seem to think that's unusual these days. He's not a doctor or a physio or a nutritionist either. |
If he were employed as a doctor, physio, or nutritionist he would be required to prove professional competence and experience in those fields.
We employed Williams into a senior post at a football club when he clearly has very little experience in the sport.
At best it's bold, at worst it's reckless. | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Three-game weeks on 00:26 - Jan 29 with 296 views | Spaghetti_Hoops |
| Three-game weeks on 21:51 - Jan 28 by Hunterhoop |
Mr Realist, you haven’t answered my questions? You’ve only answered whether you agree with me about bringing someone in from the football world and giving him 3 years.
What about all those questions at the top?
Please could you answer those and follow them through to reach the conclusion you are pushing?
Happy to discuss in person if you’d prefer. [Post edited 28 Jan 21:54]
|
Well Mr Pushy I am sure we could have less injuries if we took a lot less risks, plus only recruited players with a hard as nails physique and flawless injury record. I am also fairly sure that strategy would fail badly for other reasons, financial and/or results wise. I don't know if the performance function is doing a good job, a terrible job or something in between. Nobody on here seems to know either. They just think they know. The fact that the club brought back Williams and gave him additional functions suggests that they have faith in their man. They should know, we don't.
If you are already giving 100% just continuing doing that is all that can be asked. I don't believe anybody can give 110% strive as you might. Please see previous answer for whether we are giving 100%. I am all for the club being cleverer. Maybe we are doing a tad better because those making the decisions are cleverer, than has been the case (Warburton excused that criticism).
Some posters distrust data, intelligence, nerdy types. It's all a bit Moneyball. | | | |
| Three-game weeks on 00:38 - Jan 29 with 289 views | Hunterhoop |
| Three-game weeks on 00:26 - Jan 29 by Spaghetti_Hoops |
Well Mr Pushy I am sure we could have less injuries if we took a lot less risks, plus only recruited players with a hard as nails physique and flawless injury record. I am also fairly sure that strategy would fail badly for other reasons, financial and/or results wise. I don't know if the performance function is doing a good job, a terrible job or something in between. Nobody on here seems to know either. They just think they know. The fact that the club brought back Williams and gave him additional functions suggests that they have faith in their man. They should know, we don't.
If you are already giving 100% just continuing doing that is all that can be asked. I don't believe anybody can give 110% strive as you might. Please see previous answer for whether we are giving 100%. I am all for the club being cleverer. Maybe we are doing a tad better because those making the decisions are cleverer, than has been the case (Warburton excused that criticism).
Some posters distrust data, intelligence, nerdy types. It's all a bit Moneyball. |
So, it’s our risk taking that is causing injuries? I wasn’t aware how much more daredevil we were compared to the league.
And, if the club hire someone, we should trust them and not question it at all because they know better. That’s what you’re saying, yes?
And they are giving 100% so what more can we ask?
How about be better at the job, as opposed to the straw man of being asked to try harder? No? Okay.
You’re aware of the personal relationship between the CEO and Williams? | | | |
| Three-game weeks on 07:40 - Jan 29 with 156 views | PlanetHonneywood |
If you buy a JCS type, then your fitness/rehab team really needs to be top notch. If it's not, then buying a JCS type is more fraught with danger than not. For me, it's as simple as that!
Given our concerns about the fitness/rehab situation, with this reliance on rotation for the mythical three-game week, then we're seeing the fitter players having to cover more which, given our model, places them in a position where they're likely to pick up injuries and/or suffer from fatigue.
What is abundantly clear: we didn't look fit from the start of the season - relying on playing-in to fitness - and we still look unable to sustain any sort of intensity for the full duration of a game, in sharp comparison to most teams I see us play against.
For me: this side of QPR is simply not working, and hasn't been for sometime. |  |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
