+ These two Blog pieces from couple weeks ago
Oct 1, 2015 at 7:21am
W
Post by Bushman on Oct 1, 2015 at 7:21am
Is Ramsey the right man for the job? It depends what the job is
By David McIntyre 01/10/2015
QPR boss Chris Ramsey
This was always likely to be a difficult season for QPR and it was always likely to be difficult for Chris Ramsey to keep the fans on side.
And after Fridayâs debacle at Fulham, itâs clear that many feel theyâve already seen enough.
âNot the manâ. âNot the right manager for the jobâ. Apparently.
The man for what, though? What is the job?
Thatâs not being facetious. The central issue here is what QPRâs aims are after two expensive, foolhardy and ultimately unsuccessful attempts at the Premier League.
Thereâs also the wider question of what kind of club QPR is or wants to be; what makes it tick, and how it can succeed going forward. Itâs a club with something of an identity crisis.
If, especially given that Charlie Austin and Matt Phillips stayed â an outcome which has undoubtedly undermined the clubâs party line to the fans, that this must be a season of consolidation â the aim for Rangers should be promotion or at least to seriously challenge for it, then Ramseyâs position is arguably untenable even at this early stage of the game.
QPR: Charlie Austin and Matt Phillips
Austin and Phillips staying has increased the pressure on Ramsey
If QPR are looking for a manager to get the best out of an Austin and Phillips-inspired squad, that doesnât really play to Ramseyâs strengths. So in that case, yes, he probably is the wrong man for the job.
But thatâs not the job Ramsey was given.
Brave new world?
With the owners influenced by a change in attitude among the fans, and the realities of Financial Fair Play, the remit became to revert to the QPR of old, to develop youngsters and players from the lower divisions.
In that respect, Ramsey and Les Ferdinand have largely followed the brief.
Out went a number of older players and others would have gone too had it been possible to get rid of them.
In came Massimo Luongo and Ben Gladwin. Both have talent but are far from the finished article, were 22 and came from League One. Gladwin was playing non-League football not long ago.
QPR midfielder Massimo Luongo
Luongo has shown promise since his summer move to Rangers
Grant Hall is 23 and a player Ramsey worked with at Tottenham. His career up to now means, to put it kindly, that QPRâs first team is a step up.
Because Ramseyâs face doesnât fit, Hall playing well and then being taken out while his stock is high are seen as evidence of the managerâs shortcomings. They could be seen as totally the opposite.
Tjaronn Chery, meanwhile, is new to English football and admits he has some developing to do before heâs ready for the ânext stepâ.
Leaving aside the separate issue of the substitution at Fulham, Cheryâs early performances in the most physically demanding of leagues and the managerâs tendency to substitute him, are, again, seen by many as a reason to criticise Ramsey when they could otherwise be seen in a totally different light.
There was also an attempt to bring in Dan Bentley, who is regarded by many good judges as the best young lower-division keeper since Joe Hart, and other players with similar development potential have been and will be targeted.
The desire to build and develop a squad for the long term is there. The clubâs existing youngsters have also been involved much more than previously.
This is the job Ramsey and Ferdinand were brought in for. Itâs what many fans wanted. And many said they were sick of short-termism and wanted to see something sustainable built.
âJust a coach â and not a good oneâ
His face doesnât fit, so cliches about Ramsey being a coach rather than a manager will always be easy to reach for.
For the actual job he was given â the long-term job many wanted to see carried out â his credentials are sound.
In fact, itâd be tough to find many that are better qualified, given the progress of several players he worked with at Spurs and his experience coaching Englandâs Under-20 and Under-16 teams. Many in football regularly get jobs on the basis of much less.
Wanted: Experienced manager with gravitas and a proven track record
Wanted: Experienced manager with gravitas and a proven track record
Itâs just as easy to ignore the progress of the likes of Luongo, Hall and especially Phillips â last season at least â during Ramseyâs short time at QPR and allege that there has been little sign of any coaching ability, despite his reputation.
Thatâs rubbish. Austin too has improved dramatically in terms of his all-round game in a very short period of time.
But Ramseyâs face doesnât fit, so his achievements are glossed over.
âHisâ style of play has also been criticised.
This is the Football Manager era where you can simply switch from long ball to passing football and watch your changes in action, and where managers are seen almost as puppet-masters who control players on the pitch.
Teams lacking in confidence and fluency, which can happen for any number of reasons, tend to not be as brave with the ball as managers and fans would like. Itâs part of the game.
Ramsey, like his predecessor, favours a passing style â and the clubâs signings absolutely reflect that.
But Austin, QPRâs goalscorer and main man, who wasnât expected to still be at the club at this point, has tended to struggle when the team have tried to play more intricately, although he is improving. That will leave any manager with a dilemma.
Fitting the bill
Important steps have been taken in this respect.
The managerâs face doesnât fit, so heâs been criticised for the style of play and yet also for signing several midfield players â the key to making the necessary change.
Daniel Tozser, brought in because Ramsey wanted another passing midfielder in addition to Alejandro Faurlin, isnât fully fit and played earlier than expected because Faurlin picked up an injury.
Ramsey also wanted a ball-playing centre-back â again essential for the style of play many fans say they want. Tim Ream fitted the bill but chose Fulham, so Gabriele Angella was brought in.
That shows consistency and a clear direction when it comes to recruitment, rather than the random nature of Rangersâ previous scattergun approach.
That said, thereâs no doubt that collectively Rangers have been poor, especially at the back. That doesnât reflect well on any coach.
Some might argue that debate over Ramseyâs remit is all well and good, but the minimum requirement has to be at least to have some semblance of effort, cohesion and motivation â all sorely lacking during the horror show at Fulham.
But that kind of disgusting performance isnât unique to the inexperienced and unglamorous âcoach not managerâ Ramsey.
It wasnât uncommon under the most experienced, most showbiz manager of them all, Harry Redknapp.
It happened under Mark Hughes. It also happened under another vastly experienced manager, Neil Warnock, whose team lost 6-0 at Fulham.
Incidentally, those former Rangers managers, and others in recent years, were also reluctant to play 4-4-2, certainly if it involved having Faurlin in a two-man midfield. So what seems to be the most common criticism of Ramseyâs team selections isnât exclusive to him, either.
So the question has to be asked of those who rage at Ramsey: what are you seeing that you havenât seen before, even under the most seasoned and proven managers in the land? And what scrap of evidence do you therefore have that yet another change of manager would improve things?
Rangers fans turned on Ramsey after the debacle at Fulham
Rangers fans turned on Ramsey after the debacle at Fulham
Rangers were a disgrace at Fulham because of a long-standing culture that will take time to change.
And while they are inexperienced and wonât get everything right, Ramsey and Ferdinand probably represent the best, perhaps last, chance for QPR to finally make that change. But itâll take time and wonât be easy.
There does have to be a question mark over Ramseyâs suitability for the job in the longer term. Of course there does.
Coaching kids and managing Championship footballers are very different and this difficult period will certainly be a test of his man-management skills, thatâs for sure.
There is also plenty of room for doubt over whether Ramsey, given his coaching background, is capable of instilling a winning mentality. The signs are not good, but these are still early days.
It may well be that under Ramsey, who was supposed to be rebuilding after a larger exodus than has so far occurred (thereâs still the January transfer window to come), QPR donât do as well this season as they ought to with the players at his disposal.
But Ian Holloway got Rangers up by a squeak at the third attempt, with clubs with much smaller budgets having finished higher.
A couple of years after being tipped for the England job, Redknapp, with a whopping budget, rode his luck in getting Rangers up. At one stage of the season his team were playing abysmally and in danger of missing out on the play-offs.
And of course, QPR spent massively on big-name players, including genuine international stars, yet disgraced themselves in the Premier League.
So we know that having a good squad on paper doesnât guarantee success, in fact it can be problematic, and that Ramsey wonât be the only Rangers manager to underachieve if he falls short this season.
But his face doesnât fit, so he has less breathing space.
Itâs also worth bearing in mind that the current squad contains a number of players with fitness issues: Faurlin, Leroy Fer and Sandro to name three. Itâs not as if all the big names in Ramseyâs squad can be counted on to play 40-plus games.
Someone else might well fare better. Two of Ramseyâs most recent predecessors have done so â in a short-term sense at least.
But where would Rangers be going as a club if that were to happen a third time?
The alternative way
What kind of players would join a newly promoted club with mega-rich owners but a lower-division set-up, a failing youth system and a modest â to put it mildly â training ground?
That question has surely now been answered. Not once but twice.
The alternative might mean QPR finish mid-table this season, possibly lower.
There might be some dismal results and performances, and times when Ramsey, who wonât be persuaded to change his public persona for the sake of his image among fans, looks like he hasnât a clue what heâs doing, and his players as if they donât want to play for him.
But Luongo and others would be a year older and a season wiser. Other players of a similar ilk might be brought in to join them, and next season Rangers might finish in the top eight, perhaps in with a shout for the play-offs.
Beyond then, they might strengthen further, with several players continuing to develop, and seriously push for promotion.
During that time, the club might also restore its battered reputation, finally make some meaningful progress in terms of a new training ground, an academy that produces, and so on.
In other words, Rangers might become better equipped to compete in the Premier League.
There are a few mights there. Those arenât predictions â things could turn out nothing like that.
Rangers might fail â but theyâve been failing anyway.
They might waste time and money, underachieve with the players they have, not deliver on promises to fans, and look foolish â but theyâve been doing that anyway.
They might get a vastly experienced, highly-regarded manager with a cracking CV â but theyâve done that more than once already.
Has the time not now come to draw a line in the sand?
Thereâs always been an alternative. One that was of little interest to many fans amid the understandable euphoria and expectation of having super-rich owners, for whom a well run medium-sized club was of limited appeal until they ended up with a badly run small club.
The harmful actions of those owners, craving popularity, have often been a direct response to exactly the kind of strength of feeling expressed against Ramsey this week; when spending, hiring and firing. And when churning out endless empty rhetoric.
Itâs why Tony Fernandes has enjoyed hero status and then, when itâs all gone wrong, been able to argue that no-one was disagreeing at the time.
That way has been disastrous.
So, whatâs to be lost from at least trying the alternative way for a year or two and just seeing what happens? Itâs surely worth a go.
www.westlondonsport.com/features-comment/is-ramsey-the-right-man-for-the-job-it-depends-what-the-job-isChris Ramsey piece
I thought it was worth posting in response to some of the most common questions/comments about a piece I did for West London Sport about Chris Ramsey. (Link here for anyone who wants to read it)
First of all, thanks for all the comments. Iâm very much a news man and generally prefer to stick to that. Opinion pieces are not really my thing but, whether they agree or not, people are always very kind when I do them. I appreciate it.
Many have asked what I was getting by making the point several times that Chris Ramseyâs face doesnât fit. Several have also argued that his face would fit perfectly fine if he got results.
Thatâs true of course, and there was/is certainly a willingness to give him a chance. But for various reasons, some managers get cut more slack than others.
Because of his lack of managerial experience, the circumstances of his appointment and the fact that he is a friend of the director of football who appointed him, I donât believe Ramsey has as much breathing space as others might.
Iâd compare it to a few years ago, when at various times Rangers were looking for a new manager and Sean OâDriscollâs name was among those being discussed behind the scenes.
I like OâDriscoll and think heâs an excellent manager. But this was not that long after Ian Holloway had made his mark at QPR, so I felt a manager so lacking in charisma in comparison would be up against it from the start. His face wouldnât fit.
I think there are also comparisons to be made with Iain Dowie, who I thought was just what Rangers needed at the time he was appointed and who, by the way, was proved right in everything he said to the owners during his acrimonious time at the club.
Sure, there was a willingness to give him a chance. But the surprise and dubiousness at his appointment meant that he, like Ramsey, needed results quickly.
As for other responses, some have just involved continuing to list the names in the current squad. Thereâs not a lot I can say to that really that I havenât already said.
In a sense it was me asking the question of the fantasy-football players and as I call them, perhaps unfairly. I think itâs they who need to justifying their opinion of what Ramsey should be achieving, given the big-time players and managers QPR have had in recent years and how things panned out.
Plus, I did suggest that Ramsey might not be the right person if the expectation is to get the best out of the squad as it currently looks. The piece was less about his ability to do the job than what the job itself actually is.
In terms of Ramseyâs team selections and his supposed refusal to change things: As I say in the piece, the most popular change would seem to involve 4-4-2 with Alejandro Faurlin in a two-man midfield â something successive managers have been reluctant to go with â and with good reason.
Other players Ramsey has been criticised for not selecting have been injured or at least not fit enough. Ben Gladwin (I think Rangers could do with him at the moment) and Sandro being prime examples.
On Karl Henry. Heâs not playing well at the moment and in the fickle world of football heâs now public enemy number one for some and the root cause of many of Rangersâ problems.
Say what you like about Henry, he has done his best and performed for the last two Rangers managers when others have let them and the club down very badly.
Ramsey knows all about Sandro â he worked with him at Tottenham â and for a number of solid reasons is absolutely right to show Henry as much loyalty as possible and only make a change with a very heavy heart indeed. Heâd go down in my estimation massively if he did otherwise.
Finally, the difference between coaching and management â which I do acknowledge â is an issue many have strong views on.
Hereâs the thing: managers fail and get sacked all the time. They drop like flies every season. If they previously had a background in coaching, though, it can be conveniently filed under âcoach not managerâ.
Also, the changing structure of clubs means the traditional role of the manager is changing too. Rangers have a director of football in Les Ferdinand and Ramsey is head coach. That said, man-management and various other managerial skills are still required in that role.
Can a coach ever succeed as a manager? Some have asked me on Twitter if there are any examples at all of this happening.
Well, Don Howe as head coach did an absolutely brilliant job at QPR.
Iâll stop there before I upset the Gerry Francis fans by attempting to correct his version of Rangers history!
davidmcintyre.wordpress.com/2015/10/01/chris-ramsey-piece/
Read more:
qprreport.proboards.com/thread/41978/david-mcintyre-on-ramsey-follow#ixzz3ofedMoE0