lay off TF

[THE CAT]

What makes you conclude that they do not share his commitment? Commitment alone does not ensure good performances. TF's problem is not that of commitment, but of competence - or lack thereof. And the team/manager haven't been that competent either.

You can conclude that from the fact that half of them in the season we went down last time, and to an extent this season, just strolled around, could hardly be bothered to run, and were more than happy to get paid handsomely for it.

Our players are more than competent to compete at this level, they just couldn't be bothered to, same as Hughes and Redknapp could not be bothered to manage them properly.
That, to me shows a complete lack of commitment.

[Kirill]

You can conclude that from the fact that half of them in the season we went down last time, and to an extent this season, just strolled around, could hardly be bothered to run, and were more than happy to get paid handsomely for it.

But they give upbeat interviews. And that basically equates to what TF has been doing as chairman. Talking the talk but not walking the walk. So they do actually have the same level of committment sans competence. And they are all to blame for the sh*t we are in. But the buck ends with the man at the top.

[THE CAT]

But they give upbeat interviews. And that basically equates to what TF has been doing as chairman. Talking the talk but not walking the walk. So they do actually have the same level of committment sans competence. And they are all to blame for the sh*t we are in. But the buck ends with the man at the top.

How has he not walked the walk, you could not have had a chairman that could have given a lot more than he has over the years.

Unfortunately the people he has given the resources to have been incompetent, and have left us in the pickle we find ourselves, but you see that as Tony's fault for some reason. I assume you knew in advance that Hughes and Redknapp were going to be as abysmal as they were before they took over, as I certainly didn't?

There is a strategic element to what he is doing, that I believe will bear fruit in the future, unfortunately a lot of football team followers nowadays want everything to happen straight away, and start whingeing when they do not get what they want immediately. A bit like my 6 year old daughter.

[surrey_hoop]

How has he not walked the walk, you could not have had a chairman that could have given a lot more than he has over the years.

Unfortunately the people he has given the resources to have been incompetent, and have left us in the pickle we find ourselves, but you see that as Tony's fault for some reason. I assume you knew in advance that Hughes and Redknapp were going to be as abysmal as they were before they took over, as I certainly didn't?

There is a strategic element to what he is doing, that I believe will bear fruit in the future, unfortunately a lot of football team followers nowadays want everything to happen straight away, and start whingeing when they do not get what they want immediately. A bit like my 6 year old daughter.

There is an old Turkish proverb - "A fish rots from the head down." I can't think of a better analogy for our football club at present. Whether you want to admit it or not, Fernandes simply has to carry the can for both relegations.

It is not unfortunate that the people he has given the exorbitant finances to have wasted it...indeed, one of them (Mr Redknapp) has a proven track record of buying expensive sh*te and ruining football clubs. If you honestly didn't see this coming with him in charge then you must be myopic. Given the fact that Fernandes had ample time to replace him with a manager who is a) far more frugal and b) far better tactically than Redknapp in Tony Pulis and decided against it suggests to me that actually this is his fault.

Whether people could forsee Hughes and Redknapp being abject disasters is essentially missing the point. The fact of the matter is that even if they had been successes, Fernandes has still gambled with the future of the club in order to satisfy his own ambitions - I don't know about you, but that's a little selfish in my book.

If 2 relegations in 3 seasons is part of some masterplan on Fernandes' part, then I would like him to explain it to the uninitiated.

[THE CAT]

There is an old Turkish proverb - "A fish rots from the head down." I can't think of a better analogy for our football club at present. Whether you want to admit it or not, Fernandes simply has to carry the can for both relegations.

It is not unfortunate that the people he has given the exorbitant finances to have wasted it...indeed, one of them (Mr Redknapp) has a proven track record of buying expensive sh*te and ruining football clubs. If you honestly didn't see this coming with him in charge then you must be myopic. Given the fact that Fernandes had ample time to replace him with a manager who is a) far more frugal and b) far better tactically than Redknapp in Tony Pulis and decided against it suggests to me that actually this is his fault.

Whether people could forsee Hughes and Redknapp being abject disasters is essentially missing the point. The fact of the matter is that even if they had been successes, Fernandes has still gambled with the future of the club in order to satisfy his own ambitions - I don't know about you, but that's a little selfish in my book.

If 2 relegations in 3 seasons is part of some masterplan on Fernandes' part, then I would like him to explain it to the uninitiated.

Yes and there is the saying that "you can take a saggy faced bulldog to water but you cannot make it drink".

I guess I must have been very short-sighted to have thought that a manager who had just taken Spurs to Champs league qualification twice(well fourth place) and seen them go on a fantastic run in the same competition, would have been a success and not the disaster that he turned out to be.

Are you honestly saying that you were adamant that you didn't want Harry to come? If so, then you are a better man than both me and Tony. Same could be said for Hughes to be honest. I do not recall hardly anyone being opposed to either of their appointments at the time.

As for the gambling part, in business you have to take gambles sometimes to succeed, and it doesn't always work straight away, people just need to be patient.

I know some detractors are trying to say that if he leaves then what will happen, "we will do a Portsmouth etc" but that makes no sense at all. If that was his "strategy" why would they have just pumped another £60m into the club a few months ago?

[qprted]

i am

I am 100 per cent behind the cat here tony in mark hughes and harry redknapp gave two very experienced managers
millions of pounds,and both just seemed to really underr perform

BUT YOU CANT BLAME TONY FERNADES WHAT DO YOU EXPECT HIM TO DO EMPLOY TWO MANAGERS THEN MAKE ALL
THERE DECISIONS FOR THEM

[West London is Rss]

Probably isnt a nicer chairman around than TF but jeeez his made a hash of us since he has come in and its cost him!!

[surrey_hoop]

Yes and there is the saying that "you can take a saggy faced bulldog to water but you cannot make it drink".

I guess I must have been very short-sighted to have thought that a manager who had just taken Spurs to Champs league qualification twice(well fourth place) and seen them go on a fantastic run in the same competition, would have been a success and not the disaster that he turned out to be.

Are you honestly saying that you were adamant that you didn't want Harry to come? If so, then you are a better man than both me and Tony. Same could be said for Hughes to be honest. I do not recall hardly anyone being opposed to either of their appointments at the time.

As for the gambling part, in business you have to take gambles sometimes to succeed, and it doesn't always work straight away, people just need to be patient.

I know some detractors are trying to say that if he leaves then what will happen, "we will do a Portsmouth etc" but that makes no sense at all. If that was his "strategy" why would they have just pumped another £60m into the club a few months ago?

Not really sure what Redknapp doing a good job with Spurs has to do with us. If anything, the red flag for me was that Redknapp achieved all that he did that final season at Spurs....and then got the tin tack. His reputation with clubs at the other end of the league is iffy at best. Ruined Portsmouth, virtually destroyed Southampton for 5-6 years. Anyone thinking he was going to walk in and turn us around is short sighted in my opinion. He was brought in to fight some fires that first season, and should've been let go after we went down the first time. Although I didn't think he would be quite as bad as he was, I did worry in the sense that we were combining an owner who gives money like it's going out of fashion to a manager who spends money like its going out of fashion...for club's our size, that is almost always a recipe for disaster.

Am I honestly saying that I was adamant that I didn't want Harry to come? Not quite. In the situation we were in, I could understand Fernandes' reasons for bringing him in. What I didn't understand is a) why he was given so long, when it was evident that he had absolutely no enthusiasm whatsoever for the job and b) why he remained in his post when there were better candidates for the position out of work and ready to take over. Ditto Hughes. Sorry, but I don't think I need to be a better man than Tony Fernandes to point that much out.

Taking small risks in business is perfectly acceptable, I agree. I do draw the line at Fernandes gambling with the future of the club though. My question to you though is how long do you support the bloke when not only are we not seeing any progress, but we are actually going BACKWARDS as a football club? After nearly 4 years, we shoulld not still be in the honeymoon phase, with some fans claiming that he is still learning the ropes. If you can give me a coherent plan from Fernandes that doesn't revolve around him banking on Old Oak coming to fruition, then I will gladly retract my statements. As far as I can tell though the squad is still old, ludicrously overpaid and severly lacking in commitment, the number of youth players getting a run in the side is virtually nil, we're not training at Warren Farm (which was supposed to be virtually completed by now), we will be a Championship club once again in a matter of weeks, and FFP could set this club back years. All that sounds worringly similar to the state of the club pre-Fernandes to me. The only thing he's done differently from Briatore or Ecclestone is to not get involved in picking the team.

They could quite easily have pumped the money into the club in order to make us a more attractive proposition for potential buyers. If he wants to get rid badly enough, he will write off any personal loses.

[qprted]

surrey hoop

surrey hoop ive always found you a very intelligent person and have always looked forward to your inovative

coments and i know you love your rangers but i am totally shocked that you dont feel that tony ferdinand has been a positive influence
in our club,look at wigan they are dropping two divisions and fulham also nearly dropped

an yet under tony we were favourrites and yes we came up

SO I DONT KNOW WHAT TO SAY SURREY IT BREAKS MY HEART WHEN A MAN OF YOUR INTELLIGENCE
WOULD SAY THAT THE 60 MILLION THAT OUR DIRECTORS GAVE US WAS NOT ENOUGH

[Northolt_Rs]

Agree Woton

In terms of signings don't think he done much wrong this time round. Rio and Niko aside we done what so many wanted and the bulk signings were younger players but its not worked again. So many last relegation blamed old players and foreign players well what we going to blame this time as we folwoed their wishes and still failed (no French Africans to get your teeth into)

For me all Tony can do is give his manager the strategy and then rely on him to identify the players which he does every transfer window.

He's clearly a very very good and astute business man and for all his amicable and happy persona below the surface there has to be a ruthless streak to get where he has so for me he now needs to let that streak rule him going forwards if he is going to remain the key decision maker at the club as for me when big decisions have been needed at key times there has been to much hesitation. All I would ask is he now runs us the same way he runs one of his other businesses which are successful

Like Caterham Racing you mean?

[surrey_hoop]

surrey hoop ive always found you a very intelligent person and have always looked forward to your inovative

coments and i know you love your rangers but i am totally shocked that you dont feel that tony ferdinand has been a positive influence
in our club,look at wigan they are dropping two divisions and fulham also nearly dropped

an yet under tony we were favourrites and yes we came up

SO I DONT KNOW WHAT TO SAY SURREY IT BREAKS MY HEART WHEN A MAN OF YOUR INTELLIGENCE
WOULD SAY THAT THE 60 MILLION THAT OUR DIRECTORS GAVE US WAS NOT ENOUGH

Ted, Firstly I'm glad that you (as a rule) enjoy or even agree with some of my comments, and you are right in your assertion that (against my better judgement) I love this football club. With that said, you have made a few comments there that I either a) cannot agree with or b) didn't make in the first place.

My view of Fernandes is nothing against him as a person. Truth be told, in interviews he strikes me as an affable (albeit deluded) character, who does have the best interests of the club at heart. Sadly, when you OWN the club, that isn't nearly enough. To this day I am baffled as to how someone as intelligent and successful as he is in every other aspect of his life can be so naive and have the wool pulled over his eyes as much as he does in the world of football. Whether he is a positive influence on the football club is a moot point quite frankly; he should be judged on the decisions that HE has been responsible for - in the cold light of day, his ownership has been a failure. It really is as simple as that.

The Wigan and Fulham comparisons seem quite appropriate, as I can envisage a similar scenario unfolding in our future once the Football League have thrown the book at us. I can predict with a fair degree of confidence that we will be a Championship club at best for a long time to come after this summer.

Nowhere did I state that the £60million that Fernandes injected into the club "wasn't enough". My point was that it is entirely possible that this decision has been implemented as a first step in the selling process. He sold Caterham whilst they were still in debt and under-performing, and I see no reason why he will not follow suit with QPR in the near future. He does however need to get the debt within the realms of acceptability for this to become a possibility. The stadium and training ground plans are faltering at best, he has poured tens of millions of his money into a financial black hole, and the club is (in league terms at least) worse off then when he took over.

I guess what I'm trying to get at is this - I am thankful that we have finally had a chairman who has been prepared to spend his own personal wealth to improve the football club.....but ultimately, his naivety as a non-football man has totally negated this largesse. If and when he finally does remove himself from the chairmanship or even sell his share in the club, I think hindsight will show Fernandes' reign as a man who meant well, but who was also extremely stubborn in his decision making, egotistical and (most pertinently of all) deluded in his ambitions for the football club.

[dsqpr]

Ted, Firstly I'm glad that you (as a rule) enjoy or even agree with some of my comments, and you are right in your assertion that (against my better judgement) I love this football club. With that said, you have made a few comments there that I either a) cannot agree with or b) didn't make in the first place.

My view of Fernandes is nothing against him as a person. Truth be told, in interviews he strikes me as an affable (albeit deluded) character, who does have the best interests of the club at heart. Sadly, when you OWN the club, that isn't nearly enough. To this day I am baffled as to how someone as intelligent and successful as he is in every other aspect of his life can be so naive and have the wool pulled over his eyes as much as he does in the world of football. Whether he is a positive influence on the football club is a moot point quite frankly; he should be judged on the decisions that HE has been responsible for - in the cold light of day, his ownership has been a failure. It really is as simple as that.

The Wigan and Fulham comparisons seem quite appropriate, as I can envisage a similar scenario unfolding in our future once the Football League have thrown the book at us. I can predict with a fair degree of confidence that we will be a Championship club at best for a long time to come after this summer.

Nowhere did I state that the £60million that Fernandes injected into the club "wasn't enough". My point was that it is entirely possible that this decision has been implemented as a first step in the selling process. He sold Caterham whilst they were still in debt and under-performing, and I see no reason why he will not follow suit with QPR in the near future. He does however need to get the debt within the realms of acceptability for this to become a possibility however. The stadium and training ground plans are faltering at best, he has poured tens of millions of his money into a financial black hole, and the club is (in league terms at least) worse off then when he took over.

I guess what I'm trying to get at is this - I am thankful that we have finally had a chairman who has been prepared to spend his own personal wealth to improve the football club.....but ultimately, his naivety as a non-football man has totally negated this largesse. If and when he finally does remove himself from the chairmanship or even sell his share in the club, I think hindsight will show Fernandes' reign as a man who meant well, but who was also extremely stubborn in his decision making, egotistical and (most pertinently of all) deluded in his ambitions for the football club.

Oh sure, Tony is deluded, that's how he came to own Air Asia and QPR. If you think that then somebody is certainly deluded!

How easy it is to throw ridiculous insults at multi-millionaires from your computer keyboard!

[surrey_hoop]

Oh sure, Tony is deluded, that's how he came to own Air Asia and QPR. If you think that then somebody is certainly deluded!

How easy it is to throw ridiculous insults at multi-millionaires from your computer keyboard!

Little disappointing that you (presumably) read that entire prose, and decided to pick up on a single word. Seeing as you have though, let me say that yes, I do think Fernandes is deluded. Pushing ahead with a 40,000 seater stadium (for a club with a record attendance of 35,000), thinking that both Hughes and Redknapp would turn their fortunes around when there was substantial evidence to the contrary, and making multiple ludicrous comments on Twitter (see his recent "surpremely confident" tweet for just one example of this) suggests that much quite strongly as far as I'm concerned.

If you think that delusion has anything to do with success in business, then I can only assume that you don't actually know the meaning of the word. Simon Cowell thinks quite highly of himself, and I'm reliably informed that he's richer than your average man on the street. Unlike you, I don't worship Fernandes (and consider him absolved of criticism) simply because he is extremely wealthy. If I feel like expressing that on a QPR Forum, then I'll go ahead and do it.

[Kevin Mcleod]

Hughes is flying and i would bet you a pound that saggy chops does really well at his next managers job, like he did at the one before us, so how you can even type the words 'substantial evidence that they would be sh ite at managing us' is amazing and jawdropping actually. Dare i say its even 'deluded'.

[surrey_hoop]

Hughes is flying and i would bet you a pound that saggy chops does really well at his next managers job, like he did at the one before us, so how you can even type the words 'substantial evidence that they would be sh ite at managing us' is amazing and jawdropping actually. Dare i say its even 'deluded'.

Well I didn't type that, so it isn't amazing in the slightest. My point was that it was obvious at certain times of their respective managerial reigns (for Hughes around October 2012, for Redknapp around November 2014) where it was obvious to all that they both had lost the dressing room and were making basic selection and tactical errors. Yet both of them were kept on 2-3 months longer than they should've been. That isn't even up for discussion, it's fact. What I don't understand is why Fernandes gets absolutely no blame for this, presumably because he just happens to be a nice man. That, I'm afraid to say, is b ollocks.