What do you prefer?

[qpr-buzsaky]

For two examples take cook (well respected and liked) and taarabt (split opinions)

[qpr-buzsaky]

this is followed on from here

[Quaz]

voted good with good attitude...but think with the right manager you could combine the two.

[Receed R]

haven't got much time for players with attitude problems

They earn enough money for doing something they love so they should be thankfull for that

[Quaz]

haven't got much time for players with attitude problems

They earn enough money for doing something they love so they should be thankfull for that

take the attitude out of some players and you could lose the flair etc.

[Robsondinho]

the attitude makes a player what he is IMO as officer quazimodo said....Can you imagine Ronaldinho tracking back? Can you imagine Ronaldo without the arrogance and swagger?? I love it (attitude) in a player.

[Receed R]

take the attitude out of some players and you could lose the flair etc.

its not all about flair mate, your right though combining the 2 is the better option

[Quaz]

the attitude makes a player what he is IMO as officer quazimodo said....Can you imagine Ronaldinho tracking back? Can you imagine Ronaldo without the arrogance and swagger?? I love it (attitude) in a player.

he would make it as a rent boy very easily

[Quaz]

its not all about flair mate, your right though combining the 2 is the better option

never said it was all about flair....but it does help if the right group of players are together......

[qpr-buzsaky]

I like flair players (most of whom have an attitude) and all it takes is a tough manager to get the best out of them (taarabt + warnock). Another example is routledge, good footballer but a complete tool

[W10 RANGER]

Ok/good with good attitude

[stan_bowles]

take the attitude out of some players and you could lose the flair etc.

It's not the arrogance or attitude so much,more of the lack of effort that i hate the most.I don't mind ****y sods as long as they give 100% on the pitch.

And flair players are not on the pitch to defend are they?.

[Fawny]

Its an impossible choice really, it depends on the quality of the player with the "bad attitude" I guess. If someone was a lazy git but scored 45 goals in a season you could probably tolerate the attitude!
Being an old 'un I saw the entire QPR careers of messrs Bowles and Marsh.
Just my personal opinion like, but Stan gave MUCH more in terms of effort and general team play, but you wouldn't exactly say that Rodney was a waste of space, would you?
Thats not to say that RM had a "bad attitude" by the way, just that he was, on occasion, a bit lightweight.

[qpr-buzsaky]

Its an impossible choice really, it depends on the quality of the player with the "bad attitude" I guess. If someone was a lazy git but scored 45 goals in a season you could probably tolerate the attitude!
Being an old 'un I saw the entire QPR careers of messrs Bowles and Marsh.
Just my personal opinion like, but Stan gave MUCH more in terms of effort and general team play, but you wouldn't exactly say that Rodney was a waste of space, would you?
Thats not to say that RM had a "bad attitude" by the way, just that he was, on occasion, a bit lightweight.

Take taarabt and cook as examples