| Hitchcock off again..FFS! 12:05 - Jan 10 with 6026 views | qprdan |
Off to Rotherham in an emergency deal |  | | |  |
| Hitchcock off again..FFS! on 17:01 - Jan 10 with 1176 views | qprdan |
| Hitchcock off again..FFS! on 15:53 - Jan 10 by Antti_Heinola |
fernandes and beard running around trying to buy people? where have you got that from? TF said he was coming back to buy a player. Harry's managed to sign 3, pointless, people even outside the transfer window, the last of which clearly took a lot of persuading for TF to give into.
anyway, my point is, whoever makes the decisions is irrelevant - we shouldn't be buying anyone. unfortunately, not a single player has improved under redknapp's leadership IMO. |
I've brought this up on a few occasions recently, this loan out of Hitchcock and all the other ones just smacks of a club that have no faith in the youth and EDS set-up.
We do not seem to be bothered about developing talent but merely buy over aged players who are past their best to get us out of trouble, sadly if we carry on doing this we are doomed and Fernandes cant keep throwing contracts at players for much longer without results.
I think our league position flatters us and covers up a lot of issues.
Who is the last player we bought through the ranks to be a regular player for us?
This isn't merely about Hitchcock, however it is a recent example [Post edited 10 Jan 2014 17:02]
| | | |
| Hitchcock off again..FFS! on 17:10 - Jan 10 with 1159 views | A40Bosh |
| Hitchcock off again..FFS! on 16:51 - Jan 10 by Hunterhoop |
And that's a fair opinion to have. I don't agree with it but I respect it.
You actually seem to be making more of a case for "why" Redknapp may have made that call. I agree with most of them. But the issue for me, isn't "why", it's whether it's right. I understand why Redknapp may have done it. I just don't agree with it. There's nothing wrong with that. You disagree with politicians? Football pundits? Your boss? We all disagree with people throughout are life who have more direc experience in the field we're talking about. But if you can clearly articulate you're reasoning, then that's perfectly reasonable.
It's getting a bit tedious people just saying "Redknapp's the manager. He knows what he's doing. How dare you question him". I know he know's what he's doing. In a lot of cases I agree. Christ, I've also spent 20 minutes in recent games singing "'Arry Redknapp's Blue & White Army" without many joining in! But I am allowed to question his decision making, especially when I can put forward logical, articulated reasons why a different course of action is better, in my opinions. Surely that is what this message board is for. We discuss what happens on the pitch and off it?! |
Hunter, and I respect your reasoned counter argument, because you are coming on here and doing just that, actually having a reasoned argument and that is fine - absolutely spot on.
Nothing wrong with criticizing what Harry or any other manager is doing or the owners.
But my problem is with the criticism and ranting that is done on the basis of unknowns - for example if we were near bottom of the league, getting walloped every week and people were criticizing the fact that he could not recognize that his back 4 were shipping loads of goals every week, his goalie was individually causing a goal every other week and he was doing nothing about it and trying to keep faith with the players he brought in and could not see the wood for the trees. There would be evidence on which to base criticism.
But I see much of this as criticism of him based solely on him apparently refusing to play a young guy who has scored one goal and has bugger all experience at this level and moaning about sending him out on loan time after time, but without first trying to understand the reasons the management team are sending him out on loan. I know at the end of the day it is frustration, but sometimes I just get pissed off with it and respond in kind. |  |
| |
| Hitchcock off again..FFS! on 17:17 - Jan 10 with 1149 views | daveB |
| Hitchcock off again..FFS! on 17:01 - Jan 10 by qprdan |
I've brought this up on a few occasions recently, this loan out of Hitchcock and all the other ones just smacks of a club that have no faith in the youth and EDS set-up.
We do not seem to be bothered about developing talent but merely buy over aged players who are past their best to get us out of trouble, sadly if we carry on doing this we are doomed and Fernandes cant keep throwing contracts at players for much longer without results.
I think our league position flatters us and covers up a lot of issues.
Who is the last player we bought through the ranks to be a regular player for us?
This isn't merely about Hitchcock, however it is a recent example [Post edited 10 Jan 2014 17:02]
|
The last regular one was probably Stefan Bailey but that was only for a season
I actually think loaning kids out to league one sides is something of a success for the youth department and may end up with our kids playing elsewhere at a reasonable level rather than being out of the game by 23. |  | | |
| Hitchcock off again..FFS! on 17:21 - Jan 10 with 1147 views | A40Bosh |
| Hitchcock off again..FFS! on 17:01 - Jan 10 by qprdan |
I've brought this up on a few occasions recently, this loan out of Hitchcock and all the other ones just smacks of a club that have no faith in the youth and EDS set-up.
We do not seem to be bothered about developing talent but merely buy over aged players who are past their best to get us out of trouble, sadly if we carry on doing this we are doomed and Fernandes cant keep throwing contracts at players for much longer without results.
I think our league position flatters us and covers up a lot of issues.
Who is the last player we bought through the ranks to be a regular player for us?
This isn't merely about Hitchcock, however it is a recent example [Post edited 10 Jan 2014 17:02]
|
Dan you say .............
We do not seem to be bothered about developing talent but merely buy over aged players who are past their best to get us out of trouble, sadly if we carry on doing this we are doomed and Fernandes cant keep throwing contracts at players for much longer without results.
No, I think we are bothered, but be it that we are only recently bothered about it, hence the massive recent investment in Warren Farm and the academy side of the club. But that will take time and during this transitional period, the non footballing side of the business, the one that is concentrating on the return on initial investment for the investors not benefactors who own us, will continue to focus on the promised land of the Premier League and the money it brings in and will do so until such time as the youth set up matures and we start bringing through the talent that who ever is in charge of first team affairs views as good enough to bring through into the first team at a young age.
I think they want to fix things, but you can't change all four engines at the same time on a 747 which is already at 35,000, feet travelling at 800 miles an hour. The plane has to keep flying as it is already up there so you got a do it one piece at a time. | |
| |
| Hitchcock off again..FFS! on 17:42 - Jan 10 with 1119 views | qprdan |
| Hitchcock off again..FFS! on 17:17 - Jan 10 by daveB |
The last regular one was probably Stefan Bailey but that was only for a season
I actually think loaning kids out to league one sides is something of a success for the youth department and may end up with our kids playing elsewhere at a reasonable level rather than being out of the game by 23. |
Yes I agree, but we don't benefit as a club from it anywhere like we should, I get it that we are trying to improve things for the future but it is very frustrating for fans to have no real home grown players to cheer on.
I just look enviously at clubs like Southampton who have been churning out players for what seems like ages now, hopefully we will be doing the same in a few years?! | | | |
| Hitchcock off again..FFS! on 17:50 - Jan 10 with 1106 views | Antti_Heinola |
| Hitchcock off again..FFS! on 15:59 - Jan 10 by daveB |
thats' whats happening, those two are the ones doing the deals to buy players, they are of course players Redknapp wants they are not just buying anybody and I doubt it will be the volume of recent years coming in, probably only 2 at the most but they set the philosophy of the club not Redknapp. I know Harry wants to sign players every 5 minutes but thats one of the reasons we hired him. |
was it? i think the main reason he was hired was his incredible man management skills. That's what everyone said. 'They have a great squad! 'Arry will get them playing!'
I certainly don't think Harry was brought in to sign a load of 30+ players - in fact he AND the board expressly said that was not the way they wanted to go after the previous summer's debacle. Yet Harry's made the very same errors to my mind.
To answer other posters, to me the issue isn't whether TH is good enough. He probably isn't. But in this situation, the vast majority of clubs in this league would use it as a chance to blood youngsters, whether they're 'ready' or not. That's what the squad is about. My issue is that harry tries to solve every problem with a signing - i actually think the board are getting tougher on that. |  |
| |
| Hitchcock off again..FFS! on 18:45 - Jan 10 with 1079 views | R_from_afar |
Perhaps another factor here is the fact that we have shelled out millions for some of these fading stars and that there is pressure - I don't know from where - or a compulsion to use them, almost regardless of their form and contribution, to try and wring at least a small amout of value out of them.
I am not saying that is the right thing to do but if you are on the board or in the management team and have BZ on wages which would make even the CEO of a major bank blush, you must feel a lot of pressure to use him. That's without factoring in the cost of nursing players back from injury (of course, we should be nursing them back from injury, we have a responsibility to do that). I personally helped the fitness team apply the rubber coating to AJ's knee joints.
RFA |  |
| "Things had started becoming increasingly desperate at Loftus Road but QPR have been handed a massive lifeline and the place has absolutely erupted. it's carnage. It's bedlam. It's 1-1." |
| |
| Hitchcock off again..FFS! on 19:14 - Jan 10 with 1070 views | DylanP |
| Hitchcock off again..FFS! on 14:02 - Jan 10 by A40Bosh |
I rely on the fact that 'Arry, Joe and Kev have been in the business a few years and probably know a thing or two about managing players, so therefore what is the bleedin' obvious situation to some on here, i.e. that we don't have enough fit strikers and therefore we should continue to blood a youngster who came on for 5 mins and scored a tap in that I would have put away, might not be the bleedin' obvious to an experienced management team with more miles on the management clock that the accumulative experience of all those posters on here.
If they are still sending him out on loan at a time when we are short of striker,s then those in charge that see Hitchcock 4-5 days a week on a training pitch out near Heathrow obviously believe he is not ready to be thrown in to a championship team, but of course a lot of people on here really do know better, it's just they never quite got around getting their badges and breaking into the game. Shame really. |
You could of said the same thing about Mark Hughes and his management team. Even very smart, very experienced people do stupid things at times.
I cannot understand how anyone can say that Zamora is a better option than Hitch. That is madness. He is finished. He played on Boxing day and was a complete liability. Likewise, calling Hoilett or Niko possible replacement strikers doesn't make much sense. Between the two of them they have 36 appearances and three goals. What's more, neither has shown any inclination to lead the line and play that most forward position. Both show, from their actual play, that they are most comfortable playing from midfield -- Hoilett likes to pick the ball up wide or deep and run into a forward position and Niko likes to pick the ball up deep and pass it into forward positions. Playing with either as a striker would leave nobody at all up top. |  |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Hitchcock off again..FFS! on 19:50 - Jan 10 with 1052 views | Match82 |
| Hitchcock off again..FFS! on 19:14 - Jan 10 by DylanP |
You could of said the same thing about Mark Hughes and his management team. Even very smart, very experienced people do stupid things at times.
I cannot understand how anyone can say that Zamora is a better option than Hitch. That is madness. He is finished. He played on Boxing day and was a complete liability. Likewise, calling Hoilett or Niko possible replacement strikers doesn't make much sense. Between the two of them they have 36 appearances and three goals. What's more, neither has shown any inclination to lead the line and play that most forward position. Both show, from their actual play, that they are most comfortable playing from midfield -- Hoilett likes to pick the ball up wide or deep and run into a forward position and Niko likes to pick the ball up deep and pass it into forward positions. Playing with either as a striker would leave nobody at all up top. |
Seeing as they've been playing as midfielders, I'm not sure that their lack of goals this season is really a valid argument.
Playing with either as a lone striker would seem to be a problem. But as a second striker/way of changing formation then I don't see the issue.
For me, we've looked most dangerous this season whenever Johnson and Austin has played together. I don't pretend to know much about our youngsters, Hitchcock included. But is he the kind of small forward with pace who can hit the channels and stretch the defence like AJ? If so, I'd be more in favour of giving him a shot (if/when AJ gets injured). |  | | |
| Hitchcock off again..FFS! on 20:19 - Jan 10 with 1036 views | daveB |
| Hitchcock off again..FFS! on 17:50 - Jan 10 by Antti_Heinola |
was it? i think the main reason he was hired was his incredible man management skills. That's what everyone said. 'They have a great squad! 'Arry will get them playing!'
I certainly don't think Harry was brought in to sign a load of 30+ players - in fact he AND the board expressly said that was not the way they wanted to go after the previous summer's debacle. Yet Harry's made the very same errors to my mind.
To answer other posters, to me the issue isn't whether TH is good enough. He probably isn't. But in this situation, the vast majority of clubs in this league would use it as a chance to blood youngsters, whether they're 'ready' or not. That's what the squad is about. My issue is that harry tries to solve every problem with a signing - i actually think the board are getting tougher on that. |
well he did sort of get us playing but it didn't last too long last season, he inherited far bigger problems than most thought we had. He certainly hasn't signed 30+ players, he's signed far less than Hughes did and overall has spent less when you take into account the sales under him.
I | | | |
| Hitchcock off again..FFS! on 22:02 - Jan 10 with 1008 views | Antti_Heinola |
| Hitchcock off again..FFS! on 20:19 - Jan 10 by daveB |
well he did sort of get us playing but it didn't last too long last season, he inherited far bigger problems than most thought we had. He certainly hasn't signed 30+ players, he's signed far less than Hughes did and overall has spent less when you take into account the sales under him.
I |
i mean over the age of 30 dave, sorry for confusion. | |
| |
| Hitchcock off again..FFS! on 01:11 - Jan 11 with 989 views | newgolddream |
F**kin incredible. Harry has no faith in our kids at all. |  | | |
| Hitchcock off again..FFS! on 01:40 - Jan 11 with 974 views | Pommyhoop |
| Hitchcock off again..FFS! on 01:11 - Jan 11 by newgolddream |
F**kin incredible. Harry has no faith in our kids at all. |
H does'nt like a lot of our players who were here before his arrival. And I'm not just talking about the mercenary no marks either. It suits his agenda nowto wax lyrical about Faurlin and be moan the fact he is injured but the truth is he never fancied Ale. FFS he seriously thought Henry a better pick. |  |
| |
| Hitchcock off again..FFS! on 06:50 - Jan 11 with 956 views | Loft1979 |
| Hitchcock off again..FFS! on 01:40 - Jan 11 by Pommyhoop |
H does'nt like a lot of our players who were here before his arrival. And I'm not just talking about the mercenary no marks either. It suits his agenda nowto wax lyrical about Faurlin and be moan the fact he is injured but the truth is he never fancied Ale. FFS he seriously thought Henry a better pick. |
Before ale was injured in Jan '12, he was linked with spurs. If not for that last injury he would be playing . |  | | |
| Hitchcock off again..FFS! on 09:47 - Jan 11 with 909 views | Antti_Heinola |
| Hitchcock off again..FFS! on 01:40 - Jan 11 by Pommyhoop |
H does'nt like a lot of our players who were here before his arrival. And I'm not just talking about the mercenary no marks either. It suits his agenda nowto wax lyrical about Faurlin and be moan the fact he is injured but the truth is he never fancied Ale. FFS he seriously thought Henry a better pick. |
spot on. i had a smile about that comment from H as well. | |
| |
| Hitchcock off again..FFS! on 10:12 - Jan 11 with 884 views | Loft1979 |
| Hitchcock off again..FFS! on 09:47 - Jan 11 by Antti_Heinola |
spot on. i had a smile about that comment from H as well. |
Back to Hitch. Still think hitch could come in and help out.
On HR. Double speak.
Today apparently HR is on about coverage for Simpson. Just a few weeks ago Luke young could play if needed. Now he is not fit.
Offloading: Catania are in for Samba, arsenal, spurs and Castle in for Remy', then Sevilla supposedly to get Mbia permanently. Bottom line is HR wants to purge his payroll and bring in new blood in this window and is using the papers for his lobbying. Always interestingly...' He has limited knowledge on the subject....' | | | |
| Hitchcock off again..FFS! on 10:45 - Jan 11 with 875 views | stansleftfoot |
HR has a way of speaking that lends everything he says to multiple interpretations.
The things we know are that we still have about twenty players at the Club, many of the supporters and Harry Redknapp don't want.
The Hitchcock issue is confused by HR having a choice of one or two strikers, coincidently both are currently what " QPR " refer to or measure as " fit "
Harry would keep him at Loftus Road in the Premiership squad if he thought he was good enough. Opinion, both on his behalf and mine, he's probably right.
HR introduced Lampard, Carrick, Cole, Ferndinand, Johnson...Defoe into the West Ham set up so there no evidence he only likes to buy players and won't use youth.
The Academy is unfinished, we are in the new Second Div of the Development group at under 21, we won last year, we play amongst our Peers. Hitchcock was not outstanding in this group and is getting loaned out short term to pick up competitive game time. Unfinished and therefore not quite ready.
The agenda for QPR now is to play football with more conviction, cover the squads shortages, Striker, Attacking Mid left, Right Back.
HR has some parameters within which he must operate; short term contract's for people like the Defoe's, I'd suggest he would go for experienced UK players as they drop into the squad quicker and easier that the Diakite's and Mbia's of this world. His alternative are 24/26 year old players who can be seen as Championship top quality and possibly good enough for the Prem, signed, paid for and contracted for 3/4/5 years.
We've come out of 15 years of buy, sell, give away, buy, sell, the only world TF knows in Football is buying and employing 35 footballers and having to sell 32 of them because they can't do their jobs, at no insignificant personal cost to him and his partners.
The Academy from 8 to 21 year Old now employs full time 60 people, the training ground will get built, we won our development group last year at under 21, we will be seeing our QPR players who we developed in the next three to four years and probably at Loftus Road...betcha!
HR is messing with the media, TF and PB have him under control, Harry Redknapp is addicted to talking... | | | |
| Hitchcock off again..FFS! on 15:39 - Jan 11 with 838 views | derbyhoop |
Hitchcock going on loan - again - could be good for both the player and QPR. But there are a number of provisos.
1. Harry continues to play 4-5-1
2. At least 2 of the 3 main strikers remain fit
3. We sign another striker in the January window
4. Hitchcock's loan deal has a recall clause
Playing for Rotherham at the top end of L1 is better than playing for Crewe; better than a rare 10 minutes in the Championship and better than continuing to play for the EDS team. Better for the club, as a young striker gets valuable experience at a level that helps his development.
Austin should stay fit but AJ and BZ fitness is a relative term. AJ is still a better option than Hitchcock, for now.
I can't believe HR/TF are unaware of the need for another striker. But we have to get one that, as a starting point, is capable of making a decent contribution at the top of the Championship.
Most loans do not allow recalls in the first 28 days.
Hitchcock came on as sub for Rotherham after 61 mins. 7 mins later gets pulled down for a penalty.
And Petrasso laid on Oldham's goal [Post edited 11 Jan 2014 16:33]
|  |
| Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry and narrow-mindedness, and many of our people need it sorely on these accounts. Broad, wholesome, charitable views of men and things cannot be acquired by vegetating in one little corner of the Earth all one’s lifetime. (Mark Twain)
Find me on twitter @derbyhoop |
| |
| Hitchcock off again..FFS! on 07:29 - Jan 12 with 774 views | Loft1979 |
| Hitchcock off again..FFS! on 15:39 - Jan 11 by derbyhoop |
Hitchcock going on loan - again - could be good for both the player and QPR. But there are a number of provisos.
1. Harry continues to play 4-5-1
2. At least 2 of the 3 main strikers remain fit
3. We sign another striker in the January window
4. Hitchcock's loan deal has a recall clause
Playing for Rotherham at the top end of L1 is better than playing for Crewe; better than a rare 10 minutes in the Championship and better than continuing to play for the EDS team. Better for the club, as a young striker gets valuable experience at a level that helps his development.
Austin should stay fit but AJ and BZ fitness is a relative term. AJ is still a better option than Hitchcock, for now.
I can't believe HR/TF are unaware of the need for another striker. But we have to get one that, as a starting point, is capable of making a decent contribution at the top of the Championship.
Most loans do not allow recalls in the first 28 days.
Hitchcock came on as sub for Rotherham after 61 mins. 7 mins later gets pulled down for a penalty.
And Petrasso laid on Oldham's goal [Post edited 11 Jan 2014 16:33]
|
Beat me to it:
Rotherham were down 2-1 before the appearance of hitch. Not only was he hauled down for the penalty to bring it to 2-2, but added the assist for the 4 th goal. | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
