By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
How QPR are building for the future - Christian Nourry interview the CEO show on 14:48 - Jun 24 by TK1
But we didn't win any of those last four. We lost them. *If* we'd won any of the 20 games we lost that season, then yes, we would have more points. But we lost them.
"If" should be banned in relation to sporting results.
I don't think this is entirely true: "In three years we have gone from looking like relegation certainties to expecting a playoff push next season.'
We had two calamitous seasons where we finished 20th and 18th. That was preceded by three seasons of 13th, 9th, 11th when we were genuinely play-off hopefuls.
In the three Nourry seasons we have had points totals of 56, 56, 58. League wins 15, 14, 16. League defeats 20, 18, 20.
We feel that progress has been made, we're hopeful for next season based on the squad now plus the endless search for two or three crucial missing playing ingredients. But it's an eye test. "Definite progress" it is not.
Hopeful for next season. But we will need to turn at least six of those defeats into wins to see definite progress.
My point was that in the final analysis a couple of midtable Championship places here or there isn't important.
In the PL every place is worth an extra £3m or so. In the Championship it's like a few grand per place.
The way I see it there are four milestones in the Championship:
1. Don't finish bottom three 2. Hopefully finish in the playoffs 3. Try to finish top two 1. Win the league. Why not, be rude not to
There's a huge gap between 1 and 2. Every season with about six or seven games to go there are several teams with literally nothing to play for. We even have a term for it: "On the beach".
Some players switch off. Some players carrying injuries are rested (except us!) Some youngsters get thrown in for experience. Some players (like Isaac Hayden) know they're not going to be here next season and basically phone it in
So why are we getting so worked up about a few midtable points and places here or there?
If you want to talk about standards then Steve Cook should have played every game in the run-in, on the off chance it might move us up the table a couple of places.
Instead we allowed him a richly deserved big send-off with a landmark 100th appearance to his credit. Something that was well deserved, most of us enjoyed, and have frankly criticised the club for not doing better in the past.
Finally, I'm going to take issue with your rose-tinted recollection of the Warburton era.
We were never in serious contention for a playoff place.
We had some good runs of results and we flirted with the top six a few times but we never sustained that until the business end of the season.
Warburton had an incredible 2021. Unfortunately that straddled two different seasons.
He never managed to get it all together for a sustained run in one season. And lest we forget we broke the bank in his final season, which is what left us in such straitened circumstances the following three seasons.
[Post edited 24 Jun 15:28]
2
How QPR are building for the future - Christian Nourry interview the CEO show on 20:10 - Jun 24 with 2546 views
How QPR are building for the future - Christian Nourry interview the CEO show on 15:18 - Jun 24 by KensalT
My point was that in the final analysis a couple of midtable Championship places here or there isn't important.
In the PL every place is worth an extra £3m or so. In the Championship it's like a few grand per place.
The way I see it there are four milestones in the Championship:
1. Don't finish bottom three 2. Hopefully finish in the playoffs 3. Try to finish top two 1. Win the league. Why not, be rude not to
There's a huge gap between 1 and 2. Every season with about six or seven games to go there are several teams with literally nothing to play for. We even have a term for it: "On the beach".
Some players switch off. Some players carrying injuries are rested (except us!) Some youngsters get thrown in for experience. Some players (like Isaac Hayden) know they're not going to be here next season and basically phone it in
So why are we getting so worked up about a few midtable points and places here or there?
If you want to talk about standards then Steve Cook should have played every game in the run-in, on the off chance it might move us up the table a couple of places.
Instead we allowed him a richly deserved big send-off with a landmark 100th appearance to his credit. Something that was well deserved, most of us enjoyed, and have frankly criticised the club for not doing better in the past.
Finally, I'm going to take issue with your rose-tinted recollection of the Warburton era.
We were never in serious contention for a playoff place.
We had some good runs of results and we flirted with the top six a few times but we never sustained that until the business end of the season.
Warburton had an incredible 2021. Unfortunately that straddled two different seasons.
He never managed to get it all together for a sustained run in one season. And lest we forget we broke the bank in his final season, which is what left us in such straitened circumstances the following three seasons.
[Post edited 24 Jun 15:28]
Agree it doesn't really matter; but I do think it's about standards, it builds a culture and I think first team appearances for QPR should be earned. We often give minutes to players in these games who are not of the level, will never be of the level, or just aren't fit. I don't really enjoy that.
As an aside, I did not enjoy the Steve Cook sendoff, either, as we lost 1-2 at home in an unbelievably meek performance played out in a half empty stadium because of the strike. And Cook in particular was poor. Nice gesture, agree. A big sendoff might be over egging the actual night.
And you are misremembering 21/22. Warburton's QPR were very much in the play-off picture for the majority of the season. QPR started February 22 placed 4th in the table on 51 points, two points off 2nd and six points ahead of 7th, with a game in hand on both. They looked very likely. Sorry, that's a fact that can be proven by a table of results.
Then, even when they totally sht the bed February through April, they could have still got in the playoffs if they'd just beaten Sheffield United away and in the rearranged fixture. Just two games. That word if again. The club viewed that as unacceptable from Warburton, though we haven't been nearly as successful subsequently. And we've spent as much since then. So big season ahead.
2
How QPR are building for the future - Christian Nourry interview the CEO show on 20:18 - Jun 24 with 2524 views
How QPR are building for the future - Christian Nourry interview the CEO show on 00:23 - Jun 24 by Myke
A very interesting debate. I agree we have a decent squad this coming season already with the usual caveat of keeping the big players fit for the majority of the season. I don’t share the view that we need to replace Walsh or Clive’s assertion that failing to do so, implies a lack of ambition. Central midfield remains an issue unless Varane does a ‘Madsen’ and turns his performances (and his body) around next season. We know that ‘on our day’ we are a match for anyone. But we also know that drop that intensity even by ten percent and we struggle to beat bad teams (SW, Oxford (twice) WBA and Charlton) and get hockeyed by good teams (Ipswich (twice) Middlesbrough (twice) Southampton, Coventry etc etc). For me this is attitudinal and unless we resolve this ‘can’t be arsed’ approach to too many games we will be a mid-table team at best . We know in the first five minutes which QPR version will turn up. The one that is ‘up for it’ or the ‘can’t be arsed’ version. The remarkable thing for me is that either attitude permeates through the ENTIRE team.If one is up for it they all are, if one can’t bear arsed, none can be. I am not convinced that Stephan is strong enough to stamp this out. Warnock wouldn’t and didn’t tolerate it (apart from Taarabt on occasion and he was a special case) but not sure about JS. But if we are serious about a play-off tilt, we need to be bang at it for EVERY game.
Agree entirely with your assertion Myke.
The all or nothing approach is infuriating and quite often you know what you’re going to get before they walk out onto the pitch. The last game of the season against Ipswich was a classic example and duly pointed out by Kevin Gallen on his podcast. He/we just knew the team would just roll over for the inevitable straightforward win for the Ipswich promotion party.
For me this is a cultural issue within the club and one that JS has probably recognised, and as such, needs to fix. I would go as far to say that resolving this issue is of equal importance to our progress as is getting and keeping players fit and available.
1
How QPR are building for the future - Christian Nourry interview the CEO show on 20:53 - Jun 24 with 2462 views
Really good thread this. Just a shame our fans don't have more say within the club. We just have the echo chamber of LFW to voice our concerns. (unless some do?) I used to give Nourry the benefit of the doubt , but there are genuine concerns now, especially the lies. Like i said earlier, i think we need to see how this season pans out, but even if we are successful , the lies has already damaged his reputation. I know football business is a shady world, unfortunately, and maybe that's where Nourry thinks he can operate and get away with it, but agree with others , he should be held accountable.
Occasional providers of half decent House music.
1
How QPR are building for the future - Christian Nourry interview the CEO show on 20:58 - Jun 24 with 2455 views
How QPR are building for the future - Christian Nourry interview the CEO show on 20:10 - Jun 24 by TK1
Agree it doesn't really matter; but I do think it's about standards, it builds a culture and I think first team appearances for QPR should be earned. We often give minutes to players in these games who are not of the level, will never be of the level, or just aren't fit. I don't really enjoy that.
As an aside, I did not enjoy the Steve Cook sendoff, either, as we lost 1-2 at home in an unbelievably meek performance played out in a half empty stadium because of the strike. And Cook in particular was poor. Nice gesture, agree. A big sendoff might be over egging the actual night.
And you are misremembering 21/22. Warburton's QPR were very much in the play-off picture for the majority of the season. QPR started February 22 placed 4th in the table on 51 points, two points off 2nd and six points ahead of 7th, with a game in hand on both. They looked very likely. Sorry, that's a fact that can be proven by a table of results.
Then, even when they totally sht the bed February through April, they could have still got in the playoffs if they'd just beaten Sheffield United away and in the rearranged fixture. Just two games. That word if again. The club viewed that as unacceptable from Warburton, though we haven't been nearly as successful subsequently. And we've spent as much since then. So big season ahead.
I did say that Warbs had an incredible 2021.
So I will concede that you are right about us being in the playoff picture for over half of the 2021/22 season.
I take the point that you, Hunter, Clive and others have made about standards being important. But I think it's hard to maintain those standards when we have so much churn in the squad every summer. We need to get to a settled group and we are not there yet.
The other thing you need to impose your standards is a core of experienced leaders in the group.
On that point I think letting our experienced leaders like Cook and Field go does more harm to our standards than a few sub par performances at the end of the season when there is nothing to play for.
Fun fact. This is what Nourry was saying about Sam Field when he extended his contract just over a year ago:
"CEO Christian Nourry said: “I am excited that Sam has committed to the club as he enters a key part in his career.
“He is an ambitious man who is rapidly developing leadership skills which are essential for our playing group."
How QPR are building for the future - Christian Nourry interview the CEO show on 20:58 - Jun 24 by KensalT
I did say that Warbs had an incredible 2021.
So I will concede that you are right about us being in the playoff picture for over half of the 2021/22 season.
I take the point that you, Hunter, Clive and others have made about standards being important. But I think it's hard to maintain those standards when we have so much churn in the squad every summer. We need to get to a settled group and we are not there yet.
The other thing you need to impose your standards is a core of experienced leaders in the group.
On that point I think letting our experienced leaders like Cook and Field go does more harm to our standards than a few sub par performances at the end of the season when there is nothing to play for.
Fun fact. This is what Nourry was saying about Sam Field when he extended his contract just over a year ago:
"CEO Christian Nourry said: “I am excited that Sam has committed to the club as he enters a key part in his career.
“He is an ambitious man who is rapidly developing leadership skills which are essential for our playing group."
If, a year ago, the CEO is talking about Field as “rapidly developing leadership skills which are essential for our playing group”, and now he’s out the door with no real explanation of how that squares with the stated plan, it tells you something about how loose the internal narrative is. It’s not just that “talk is cheap”, it’s that the talk keeps changing without anyone at the club feeling the need to reconcile words and decisions. That’s where standards become impossible, both on the pitch and off it.
For me, even a small set of common principles would help. If you genuinely believe you’re a data‑informed club, then decisions about recruitment, injuries, contracts and coaches ought to be explained in those terms, not just wrapped in whatever story fits this week. If you genuinely believe you’re a supporters‑first club, then you don’t just talk about “pain points” at a fans’ forum; you make it routine to share how you’re defining success and how far you are from it so people can judge for themselves.
I’m not asking for a corporate mission statement. I’d just like to see some consistency: pick a handful of principles , e.g. data‑informed, youth‑focused, financially disciplined, supporter‑respecting , etc and then stick to them in how you talk, who you keep and who you let go.
At the moment, the rhetoric and the decisions feel like they’re being made on different planets, and that’s why trust is so fragile, regardless of where we finish in the table. Publicly articulating a small set of principles is useful because it: a) signals what the club actually stands for (“data‑informed”, “supporters‑first”, “youth‑focused”, “financially disciplined”) rather than just “ambitious” and b) gives staff, players and fans a common frame to judge decisions against: “does this sale / hire / injury policy fit the principles or not?”
The risk is turning it into glossy marketing (“values” posters, empty slogans). What would help at QPR is something much plainer:
A short, written statement from board/CEO: two or three principles and one or two practical implications each (“data‑informed means X in recruitment and Y in injuries; supporters‑first means Z in comms and pricing”).
Then, every time Nourry or the club communicates a big decision - a manager change, player sale, academy move, or stadium question - they explicitly link it back to those principles.
It’s the combination that matters: clear principles, publicly stated once, and then consistently used to explain choices. That’s what starts to rebuild trust.
How QPR are building for the future - Christian Nourry interview the CEO show on 22:06 - Jun 24 by E17hoop
And this is a perfect example of the problem.
If, a year ago, the CEO is talking about Field as “rapidly developing leadership skills which are essential for our playing group”, and now he’s out the door with no real explanation of how that squares with the stated plan, it tells you something about how loose the internal narrative is. It’s not just that “talk is cheap”, it’s that the talk keeps changing without anyone at the club feeling the need to reconcile words and decisions. That’s where standards become impossible, both on the pitch and off it.
For me, even a small set of common principles would help. If you genuinely believe you’re a data‑informed club, then decisions about recruitment, injuries, contracts and coaches ought to be explained in those terms, not just wrapped in whatever story fits this week. If you genuinely believe you’re a supporters‑first club, then you don’t just talk about “pain points” at a fans’ forum; you make it routine to share how you’re defining success and how far you are from it so people can judge for themselves.
I’m not asking for a corporate mission statement. I’d just like to see some consistency: pick a handful of principles , e.g. data‑informed, youth‑focused, financially disciplined, supporter‑respecting , etc and then stick to them in how you talk, who you keep and who you let go.
At the moment, the rhetoric and the decisions feel like they’re being made on different planets, and that’s why trust is so fragile, regardless of where we finish in the table. Publicly articulating a small set of principles is useful because it: a) signals what the club actually stands for (“data‑informed”, “supporters‑first”, “youth‑focused”, “financially disciplined”) rather than just “ambitious” and b) gives staff, players and fans a common frame to judge decisions against: “does this sale / hire / injury policy fit the principles or not?”
The risk is turning it into glossy marketing (“values” posters, empty slogans). What would help at QPR is something much plainer:
A short, written statement from board/CEO: two or three principles and one or two practical implications each (“data‑informed means X in recruitment and Y in injuries; supporters‑first means Z in comms and pricing”).
Then, every time Nourry or the club communicates a big decision - a manager change, player sale, academy move, or stadium question - they explicitly link it back to those principles.
It’s the combination that matters: clear principles, publicly stated once, and then consistently used to explain choices. That’s what starts to rebuild trust.
All fair.
But stated principles mean very little unless you also put them into practice in an honest and meaningful way.
Injuries ought to be very easy to provide data on, but whenever pressed they throw out meaningless figures like "90% availability" which can't be verified because it's the club's internal data and they don't even explain how that particular metric is calculated.
And when it comes to injuries they hide behind GDPR and player confidentiality. OK, maybe that one is a problem with the game as a whole rather than individual clubs but it speaks to how our club applies its data driven principles.
Our club doesn't use data to explain and enlighten the fans. Instead it uses it to muddy the waters and hide behind.
Actions are more important than words.
[Post edited 24 Jun 22:27]
4
How QPR are building for the future - Christian Nourry interview the CEO show on 23:09 - Jun 24 with 2268 views
How QPR are building for the future - Christian Nourry interview the CEO show on 22:23 - Jun 24 by KensalT
All fair.
But stated principles mean very little unless you also put them into practice in an honest and meaningful way.
Injuries ought to be very easy to provide data on, but whenever pressed they throw out meaningless figures like "90% availability" which can't be verified because it's the club's internal data and they don't even explain how that particular metric is calculated.
And when it comes to injuries they hide behind GDPR and player confidentiality. OK, maybe that one is a problem with the game as a whole rather than individual clubs but it speaks to how our club applies its data driven principles.
Our club doesn't use data to explain and enlighten the fans. Instead it uses it to muddy the waters and hide behind.
Actions are more important than words.
[Post edited 24 Jun 22:27]
Which is what I've been saying, otherwise in relative terms CN is achieving but in absolute terms making almost no difference.
How QPR are building for the future - Christian Nourry interview the CEO show on 20:58 - Jun 24 by KensalT
I did say that Warbs had an incredible 2021.
So I will concede that you are right about us being in the playoff picture for over half of the 2021/22 season.
I take the point that you, Hunter, Clive and others have made about standards being important. But I think it's hard to maintain those standards when we have so much churn in the squad every summer. We need to get to a settled group and we are not there yet.
The other thing you need to impose your standards is a core of experienced leaders in the group.
On that point I think letting our experienced leaders like Cook and Field go does more harm to our standards than a few sub par performances at the end of the season when there is nothing to play for.
Fun fact. This is what Nourry was saying about Sam Field when he extended his contract just over a year ago:
"CEO Christian Nourry said: “I am excited that Sam has committed to the club as he enters a key part in his career.
“He is an ambitious man who is rapidly developing leadership skills which are essential for our playing group."
When Field was renewed he was a key member of the team.
He then had a disastrous dip in form early last season and lost his place.
He was then sold for a decent fee.
The club SHOULD talk up our players - including those we might want to sell. And the status of players in a squad change all the time, its dynamic and the nature of sport.
1
How QPR are building for the future - Christian Nourry interview the CEO show on 12:48 - Jun 25 with 1977 views
How QPR are building for the future - Christian Nourry interview the CEO show on 12:29 - Jun 25 by Stainrod
Can't both those statements be true?
When Field was renewed he was a key member of the team.
He then had a disastrous dip in form early last season and lost his place.
He was then sold for a decent fee.
The club SHOULD talk up our players - including those we might want to sell. And the status of players in a squad change all the time, its dynamic and the nature of sport.
The thing with Field is an interesting one. Disclaimer - I was always a huge Sam fan and I'm sad to see him go.
But that last deal was signed before Stephan arrived, who then pretty quickly dumped Sam out of the team and rarely played him other than when he needed him to fill in somewhere.
Sam therefore now gone from a happy key employee to an unhappy marginalised employee.
Sam sold which Sam is probably now quite happy about.
I do get it. And it does show there is still, transfer policy influenced by a manager's decisions.
1
How QPR are building for the future - Christian Nourry interview the CEO show on 13:09 - Jun 25 with 1929 views
How QPR are building for the future - Christian Nourry interview the CEO show on 13:02 - Jun 25 by slmrstid
The thing with Field is an interesting one. Disclaimer - I was always a huge Sam fan and I'm sad to see him go.
But that last deal was signed before Stephan arrived, who then pretty quickly dumped Sam out of the team and rarely played him other than when he needed him to fill in somewhere.
Sam therefore now gone from a happy key employee to an unhappy marginalised employee.
Sam sold which Sam is probably now quite happy about.
I do get it. And it does show there is still, transfer policy influenced by a manager's decisions.
Yeah it felt like the club had to make the deal to ensure he stayed; and didn't necessarily predict the new manager wouldn't fancy him.
Which I still find odd, given his doe eyes and chunky knitwear.
How QPR are building for the future - Christian Nourry interview the CEO show on 12:29 - Jun 25 by Stainrod
Can't both those statements be true?
When Field was renewed he was a key member of the team.
He then had a disastrous dip in form early last season and lost his place.
He was then sold for a decent fee.
The club SHOULD talk up our players - including those we might want to sell. And the status of players in a squad change all the time, its dynamic and the nature of sport.
An alternative way of spinning what you just said is that it is ok for Nourry to make it up as he goes along.
Field going from an essential leader of the group to fringe player and occasional makeshift left back in the space of a few weeks is quite a turnaround.
I would also challenge your "disastrous dip in form"
If you go through the LFW EoT Report for midfielders you see Field had better average rating from LFW and the interactive ratings than Saito, Morgan, and Varane.
Isaac Hayden had even better ratings than Field and he is another experienced player that has been allowed to leave.
What exactly is the plan here?
End of Term Report 25/26 – Midfield2nd Jun 2026 10:19 You don’t win many games while losing midfield, but by God did QPR give that a good go during a season in which they failed to win a single game with more possession than the opponent – still, how about that Nicolas Madsen redemption arc.1
[Post edited 25 Jun 14:17]
2
How QPR are building for the future - Christian Nourry interview the CEO show on 14:26 - Jun 25 with 1779 views
How QPR are building for the future - Christian Nourry interview the CEO show on 13:46 - Jun 25 by BazzaInTheLoft
Warburton was here for a good time not a long time.
9th is commendable but when we talk about standards most of those let slip under his watch.
#LemonJuice #CovidTest
[Post edited 25 Jun 13:46]
Really? My memory is that he raised standards hugely after the abysmal McClaren period. That when Warburton turned up, Eustace told him there were some bad apples who could get him sacked and that he'd need to bring some good characters, which is what he attempted to do immediately with the likes of Barbet, Wallace and Ball.
Is that wrong? Happy to be corrected. But can't remember standards dropping, but do remember incremental raising of standards (and dramatic improved final tables) but that his season-three splurge undid that good work (even if nobody complained about the signing of those players at the time).
I'm asking for examples but not in a disrespectful manner, far from it...
4
How QPR are building for the future - Christian Nourry interview the CEO show on 14:36 - Jun 25 with 1749 views
How QPR are building for the future - Christian Nourry interview the CEO show on 14:26 - Jun 25 by TK1
Really? My memory is that he raised standards hugely after the abysmal McClaren period. That when Warburton turned up, Eustace told him there were some bad apples who could get him sacked and that he'd need to bring some good characters, which is what he attempted to do immediately with the likes of Barbet, Wallace and Ball.
Is that wrong? Happy to be corrected. But can't remember standards dropping, but do remember incremental raising of standards (and dramatic improved final tables) but that his season-three splurge undid that good work (even if nobody complained about the signing of those players at the time).
I'm asking for examples but not in a disrespectful manner, far from it...
And look how badly we treated Barbet towards the end of his time here.
Since leaving QPR Barbet has played 124 league games, more than double what his replacement JCS has managed (60).
As a wise old man once said "youth is no guarantee of innovation"
[Post edited 25 Jun 14:40]
2
How QPR are building for the future - Christian Nourry interview the CEO show on 15:08 - Jun 25 with 1705 views
How QPR are building for the future - Christian Nourry interview the CEO show on 14:36 - Jun 25 by KensalT
And look how badly we treated Barbet towards the end of his time here.
Since leaving QPR Barbet has played 124 league games, more than double what his replacement JCS has managed (60).
As a wise old man once said "youth is no guarantee of innovation"
[Post edited 25 Jun 14:40]
Again, perhaps it's my memory failing me, but how did we mistreat Barbet? Wasn't it just that we weren't able to offer a 29-year-old the length of contract he wanted? He played 40-odd times that season, including the final games so not sure about the mistreatment. Looked quite happy waving goodbye?
Agree, of course, that JCS has not returned his investment but can understand why you'd bet on a 23-year-old with so much potential (then) rather a than 29-year-old. Not sure two seasons in L2 and a couple of years in the Saudi Pro League is quite the miss for a guy who was unable to work for us in a back four. Great in a three though. And definitely the right sort.
0
How QPR are building for the future - Christian Nourry interview the CEO show on 15:13 - Jun 25 with 1681 views
How QPR are building for the future - Christian Nourry interview the CEO show on 15:08 - Jun 25 by TK1
Again, perhaps it's my memory failing me, but how did we mistreat Barbet? Wasn't it just that we weren't able to offer a 29-year-old the length of contract he wanted? He played 40-odd times that season, including the final games so not sure about the mistreatment. Looked quite happy waving goodbye?
Agree, of course, that JCS has not returned his investment but can understand why you'd bet on a 23-year-old with so much potential (then) rather a than 29-year-old. Not sure two seasons in L2 and a couple of years in the Saudi Pro League is quite the miss for a guy who was unable to work for us in a back four. Great in a three though. And definitely the right sort.
Maybe I'm over egging that a bit.
But we did leave him hanging at the end of the season without deciding his fate.
Barbet's departure was announced on 7th June with Barbet saying he wanted to stay but couldn't agree terms:
How QPR are building for the future - Christian Nourry interview the CEO show on 14:26 - Jun 25 by TK1
Really? My memory is that he raised standards hugely after the abysmal McClaren period. That when Warburton turned up, Eustace told him there were some bad apples who could get him sacked and that he'd need to bring some good characters, which is what he attempted to do immediately with the likes of Barbet, Wallace and Ball.
Is that wrong? Happy to be corrected. But can't remember standards dropping, but do remember incremental raising of standards (and dramatic improved final tables) but that his season-three splurge undid that good work (even if nobody complained about the signing of those players at the time).
I'm asking for examples but not in a disrespectful manner, far from it...
On pitch maybe, and for a short time, but as Chef says he (allegedly) backed a player who Les wanted to shift for faking a positive covid test.
That is a major lapse in standards.
Also, made us look tinpot when he left a gap on the bench instead of taking a youngster. That last one unforgivable IMO considering how the whole club's remit was to pivot to youth at the time. Appreciate there may have been no legitimate prospects but still...
[Post edited 25 Jun 15:53]
0
How QPR are building for the future - Christian Nourry interview the CEO show on 20:26 - Jun 25 with 1445 views
How QPR are building for the future - Christian Nourry interview the CEO show on 15:36 - Jun 25 by BazzaInTheLoft
On pitch maybe, and for a short time, but as Chef says he (allegedly) backed a player who Les wanted to shift for faking a positive covid test.
That is a major lapse in standards.
Also, made us look tinpot when he left a gap on the bench instead of taking a youngster. That last one unforgivable IMO considering how the whole club's remit was to pivot to youth at the time. Appreciate there may have been no legitimate prospects but still...
[Post edited 25 Jun 15:53]
Harsh! Maybe my own personal standards are lower than they should be. Will have a word in the mirror.
But coming in a run of rogue, bullshter managers that ran Hughes, Redknapp, JFH (literally caught in a sting over transfers as our manager), Holloway MK2, McClaren and was followed by Beale...I don't know, Nick. I just felt he was a much better representative of QPR than all of them, though not in a disrespectful way, far from it. And he had a better win % than any of them too.
One small pushback: you've described his tenure twice as 'a short time' and "not a long time.' Since 1990, only Holloway MK1 and Francis Mk1 lasted longer in place as QPR manager, and Francis only by a few months. (Which tells its own story about standards)
1
How QPR are building for the future - Christian Nourry interview the CEO show on 20:30 - Jun 25 with 1436 views
How QPR are building for the future - Christian Nourry interview the CEO show on 20:26 - Jun 25 by TK1
Harsh! Maybe my own personal standards are lower than they should be. Will have a word in the mirror.
But coming in a run of rogue, bullshter managers that ran Hughes, Redknapp, JFH (literally caught in a sting over transfers as our manager), Holloway MK2, McClaren and was followed by Beale...I don't know, Nick. I just felt he was a much better representative of QPR than all of them, though not in a disrespectful way, far from it. And he had a better win % than any of them too.
One small pushback: you've described his tenure twice as 'a short time' and "not a long time.' Since 1990, only Holloway MK1 and Francis Mk1 lasted longer in place as QPR manager, and Francis only by a few months. (Which tells its own story about standards)
Sorry to be clear, I mean the time he was succesful rather than his time total.
I reckon it as a calendar year over two season? Take the summer away and we're looking at ten months?
Otherwise, yeah, he did follow a litany of rogues.
0
How QPR are building for the future - Christian Nourry interview the CEO show on 21:39 - Jun 25 with 1341 views
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.