Did I watch a different game?

[CroydonCaptainJack]

Don't want to be negative but it the standard of football on display was absolutely woeful.

Both defences were absolute crap, looked like a bunch of school kids. Neither Ramsey nor Sherwood should be managing a team in the top flight, let alone one of the supposed best leagues in the world. It was russian roulette, both teams proper winged it and rode their luck at times... Villa looked decent in the first half because they pressed us and we looked so lost when we did have the ball, but honestly that match was a mess.

No idea how people expect us to challenge Chelsea at LR based on that showing... Still, that point could be pretty useful at the end of the season, I think we really needed those 3 points though.

No, that wasn't negative at all!!

ok, the standard from both teams wasn't great but what a riveting and entertaining second half that was and we are at least showing some character away from home now.

[klonk]

first half villa were very good in midfield and attack and looked much the better team to me, but they still looked poor in defence and had we managed to pull together any decent chances, we could have gone in undeservedly level.

second half, following the change in formation, we nullified the attacking threat and deservedly equalised and took the lead in a 50/50 game. can't do much about a free kick of the quality that villa equalised with.

arguably, our starting line up was too attacking... 4-4-2 with hill and isla is a dangerous ploy - hill is a central defender and isla is a wing-back. on his day (which wasn't tuesday night) krancjar can offer creativity on the flank, but he offers little defensively and leaves hill (who has openly said that he isn't good enough to play left back at premier league level) very exposed. isla can play in a 5-man defence, but is very limited in a back 4. i don't have issues with any of the players mentioned and ramsey doesn't have the luxury of choice in these areas of the pitch - we just need to pick the right players for the right tactics in the right game.

the big positive for me was the substitutions... first time in ages when we turned a game around by switching tactics and adapting our game plan (genuinely can't recall the last time we managed to do this so effectively with 11 men still on the pitch - last time was certainly pre-red chap).

[Kevin Mcleod]

Was a brilliant and totally exciting game of football that nobody on the planet who likes football could not of enjoyed. And was the most battling performance i can remember from a rangers team, they never gave up. Yeah they were better than us, but they were at home, we are better than nearly everyone when we are at home and still lose or draw. Yeah neither team were great, but thats why they are both at the bottom fighting for their lives so what does anyone expect. Ive watched it three times this week cos it was such a thrilling match. Oh and totally agree about the tactical substitutions that got us a point. Just wish it was three.

[Nick]

Villa 1st half- ""brilliant", "excellent", "played like a top 4 side"... Im sure any team in any division could be described like some of the stuff people are describing Villa if they played against a bunch of complete inept players full of school boy errors who insist on giving the ball away at every opportunity.... Villa are not that good, qpr are not that good, it just so happened that the second half we had a manager who was able to make the right changes for us to compete with them. 2 poo sides playing each other, no more no less!!!

Wow proper toys out the pram moment there from me.

[WeAreQPR12]

MATCH STATS
Possession
64%-36%
90mins
Aston Villa
Queens Park Rangers
Shots
21-11
On target
7-5
Corners
7-3
Fouls
8-12

Just checked this and pretty much sums it up, very good point