Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Will Magilton ever accept some responsibility?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by qblockpete View Post
    They seem intent on having Legiterwood right back..
    GOOD............... he's a fantastic RB

    Comment


    • #17
      It was a terrible substituion and a negative one too. Taarabet gives you an outlet as he can hold the ball and if he had to be taken off surely it had to be Ageymang on again to give an outlet. As soon as Reid came on we went deeper, and the ball was being pinged back at us.

      Having said that I thought Reid looked a real class act and I would be keen to keep him. But IMHO Magilton cost us the game starting with two CB's that are not match fit and an unecessary substitution that made no sense whatsoever and given that he is a manager who will publicly blame his players I do think he should publicly blame himself when he ****s up

      Comment


      • #18
        C'mon.... lets not loose sight of the fact that we lost because we didnt defend two set pieces. Both times the centre halves were non-existent.

        Now, to blame Magilton for that, is probably unfair, because they're probably not doing what he wants them to.

        Comment


        • #19
          Magilton may make a few substitutions that we dont all agree with but ffs we are 5th in the table and playing some of the best football seen at LR in decades. Some people need a reality check.
          WE ARE NOT GOING TO WIN EVERY GAME.

          Comment


          • #20
            The over reaction has been massive - largely because the goal came immediately after the substitution.

            Anyone who really believes the defending would have been any different with Adel on the pitch needs to explain it to me as I just don't see it. OK, with him still on the pitch we may have been able to get a 3rd goal and take the extra 2 points - but you really can't blame the manager for the change and it's effect on what happened some 30 seconds later. If Legs had picked up Wood or Cerny had come for it or any numer of other imponderables, they wouldn't have scored at that time and most likely at any other time in the remaining 10 minutes or so. It happens and it will continue to happen as football as someone once said, is a funny old game!
            #standuptocancer
            #inyourfacecancer

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by qprdad View Post
              C'mon.... lets not loose sight of the fact that we lost because we didnt defend two set pieces. Both times the centre halves were non-existent.

              Now, to blame Magilton for that, is probably unfair, because they're probably not doing what he wants them to.
              It is a managers job to foresee problems and overcome them. He picked two centrebacks who couldn't compete with Best in the air, whilst one who could was sitting on the bench. He (Gorkks) was sitting on the bench because JM had picked a new boy at Doncaster and as a consequence Gorkks and Williams had messed up giving two goals away. His decision.

              Management is about making good decisions and avoiding bad ones. It is also about recognising when you have made a mistake and putting it right. He should know his players inside out and have recognised the fact that Hall and Connolly were going to be vulnerable from set pieces.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by Loftladder View Post
                It is a managers job to foresee problems and overcome them. He picked two centrebacks who couldn't compete with Best in the air, whilst one who could was sitting on the bench. He (Gorkks) was sitting on the bench because JM had picked a new boy at Doncaster and as a consequence Gorkks and Williams had messed up giving two goals away. His decision.

                Management is about making good decisions and avoiding bad ones. It is also about recognising when you have made a mistake and putting it right. He should know his players inside out and have recognised the fact that Hall and Connolly were going to be vulnerable from set pieces.

                Totally agree. The centre halves on Saturday didn't perform well, but he chose them.

                Connolly is still trying to regain his full fitness and sharpness back and Hall has shown time and time again that he is a liability.

                Magilton probably needs to get a statistician in to analayse things for him, so that he can see that when Hall plays, QPR usually conced more than one goal. It isn't all down to coincidence.

                Last season, QPR kept far more clean sheets after Hall lost his place to Gorkss.

                Gorkss is a far better defender and makes very few errors in comparison.

                Magilton subbing Taarabt was clearly wrong. It sent out negative vibes all around and lifted Coventry's hopes.

                It isn't with hindsight that I say this. I said at the time, that if it is to hold onto the lead QPR would be better off with Taarabt becuase he holds the ball up better than anyone else. This alone would have helped kill time, but also would have given the option of continuing to run the defenders ragged. I also siad if QPR conceded an equaliser, the best attacking option available to QPR has now been subbed.

                Lo and behold, Coventry equalised and QPR never looked like retaking the lead.

                My message to Magilton is if you are looking to blame someone, look in the mirror.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by qblockpete View Post
                  .As for Williams another loan, he might be good but really don't see the need for him.


                  Originally posted by qblockpete View Post
                  If we get an injury to either Watson or Faurlin, then we need midfield back-up.
                  Does Quote 2 answer Quote 1. what happens if GB gets a knock or even banned ( cant see that though)
                  God I miss cooke's pie & mash

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    would taarabt have been back there defending? no.
                    when he doesnt want to work he walks into the middle of the park, exposing our left side. does it 3 or 4 times a game because he is lazy. his only interest is going forward and doesnt want to come back, at least buzsaky did.

                    tbh buzsaky had a quiet second half but was coming back into the game after his goal and we all know the moments of magic he can produce.

                    yes he could have been a contender to go off, but so was taarabt

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Trouble is Buzsacky was out on his feet and gave away the free kick. At that time tarrabt was on the right/middle..

                      Your right, though Tarrabt does leave the left back exposed, thats why he does such a good job;D
                      ALL BEST BANTER AND ALL THE LATEST FROM QPR.
                      THE WEST LONDON 90 MINUTE FOOTBALL SHOW EVERY MONDAY FROM 9.30PM http://mixlr.com/the90mfs/

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        he drifted into the middle when borrowdale gets the ball for about 5 or 10 minutes first half showing he clearly didnt want it and just walked around until he realised they were there for the taking. he doesnt help borrowdale out one bit and his work ethic needs to step up for me. its clear sitting at the front of t block.

                        thats why i feel borrowdale was MOM, he played brilliantly saturday.

                        taarabt is so frustrating when im a winger and i know you create an angle for the wing back so they can give it to your feet and he doesnt help borrowdale out, you just want to go grab him and put him in the right place

                        Comment

                        Working...
                        X