|
Post by QPR Report on Mar 6, 2009 18:14:08 GMT
Sorry! BBC Barnet sign keeper Cole from QPR Cole will challenge keeper Ran Kadoch for a first-team start Barnet have signed goalkeeper Jake Cole from QPR, initially on a month's loan. The 23-year-old has made eight first-team appearances for Rangers in five seasons, and has had loan spells at AFC Wimbledon, Farnborough and Oxford. Barnet needed back-up with Lee Harrison out for at least a month with a thigh injury and Rob Beckwith quitting Underhill earlier this year. Cole told the club's website: "I jumped at the chance because I want to keep playing league football."
|
|
|
Post by Markqpr on Mar 6, 2009 18:17:24 GMT
Nice of him to go watch Jake play and give him some support. Top bloke that Lee! Now if he could just find his form.....................
|
|
|
Post by londonranger on Mar 6, 2009 18:28:10 GMT
Mike, better change your post. That other topic of insults. The blogsite is getting some nasty stuff. I would take the anonymous off.
|
|
|
Post by QPR Report on Mar 6, 2009 18:29:30 GMT
Thanks I will take a look. Shame.
|
|
|
Post by Zamoraaaah on Mar 6, 2009 18:32:05 GMT
Lee Cook Check the header Report
|
|
|
Post by cpr on Mar 6, 2009 19:09:34 GMT
|
|
|
Post by dylanpresman on Mar 6, 2009 21:06:13 GMT
BBC Barnet sign keeper Cole from QPR it is Jake Cole who is off to Barnet not Lee Cook as the Subject Line says. Very confusing.
|
|
|
Post by QPR Report on Mar 6, 2009 21:12:24 GMT
Yes, I think I will change it. Obviously a Freudian slip
|
|
|
Post by grumpyolde on Mar 6, 2009 21:57:54 GMT
another one off, probably looking for a new club. Is there a pattern developing here?
|
|
|
Post by cpr on Mar 6, 2009 23:18:43 GMT
Yes there is, you're grumpy.
|
|
|
Post by grumpyolde on Mar 7, 2009 0:54:32 GMT
cpr You are right ! Unfortunately it seems to be with good reason. I just don't like what I feel is happening at the club and if briatore is becoming disillusioned with the situation at QPR things can only get worse. I do envy your eternal optimism - hope you live long enough for it to become true
|
|
|
Post by cpr on Mar 7, 2009 1:51:15 GMT
live long enough for what to become true?
My glass is always half full.
Try it.
|
|
|
Post by grumpyolde on Mar 7, 2009 11:08:24 GMT
I meant I hope you get your wish. Just to add a little note of realism. Man Utd. and Liverpool are both extremely well resourced and well run clubs yet each of them have had long spells with no success. I think a club being run by relative amateurs at board and coaching level will probably struggle to fulfill your dreams. If you are looking for success why have both manager and assistant manager with absolutely no experience whatever.Or is this rocket science?
|
|
|
Post by cpr on Mar 7, 2009 13:09:35 GMT
I'm not looking for success though, I'm just like all fans who think there might be something better coming round the corner.
Blimey, you can't have watched Rangers for as long as some of us on here have and expect success, that's for sure.
It's made a nice change to spend this season looking at the top of the table rather than the bottom. Five more points please so I don't have to go into panic mode. ;D
|
|
|
Post by grumpyolde on Mar 7, 2009 16:03:10 GMT
cpr Try if you can to separate two of the identities of the club.The " football club"the thing that you love, - and those who own the shares and decide the policy of the " football club "
These are two different things and what I am questioning are the motives of the later. They gained control of the club for what in relative terms was an insignificant sum of money and instead of nurturing the part of the club you love, played games with its welfare by trying to run it themselves in an unprofessional manner. I admit they have spent a lot of money on players, but are you telling me any good manager would have 16 midfielders in the squad no decent fullbacks and a very limited strike force. Now having spent all that money without success I percieve a change in attitude and I am trying to alert you to the danger that will pose to your beloved REAL QPR.
|
|
|
Post by grumpyolde on Mar 12, 2009 20:33:14 GMT
cpr is this what you are looking for?
|
|
|
Post by cpr on Mar 12, 2009 20:43:13 GMT
I knew there was another one!
|
|
|
Post by cpr on Mar 12, 2009 20:47:26 GMT
cpr Try if you can to separate two of the identities of the club.The " football club"the thing that you love, - and those who own the shares and decide the policy of the " football club " These are two different things and what I am questioning are the motives of the later. They gained control of the club for what in relative terms was an insignificant sum of money and instead of nurturing the part of the club you love, played games with its welfare by trying to run it themselves in an unprofessional manner. I admit they have spent a lot of money on players, but are you telling me any good manager would have 16 midfielders in the squad no decent fullbacks and a very limited strike force. Now having spent all that money without success I percieve a change in attitude and I am trying to alert you to the danger that will pose to your beloved REAL QPR. Echo and agree those sentiments. I'm actually no longer convinced that they are not deliberately trying to alienate the core fan base. Without them, what have they got left eh? Worrying?
|
|
dreamr
Gerry Francis
Posts: 88
|
Post by dreamr on Mar 12, 2009 23:33:44 GMT
Hi. Just saying, Briatore et all are in charge coz they have loads of money. Not because they have a clue what they're doing or anything like that. The bottom line is that we are totally stuck with them. Barring a fan buyout (nice dream?), we can do (and always could do, as per any other club) very little about who runs the club or how they do it, unless we want to get into ugly Newcastle/Liverpool type scenes. And even that doesn't work. I think most of the problems are with the modern football business as opposed to the traditional business, rather than something specific to QPR or it's owners. I'm not saying that we shouldn't criticise the top of the club, but I think that there's no point getting angry/despairing/paranoid about it. It ain't a democracy and never was.
|
|
|
Post by grumpyolde on Mar 13, 2009 23:30:35 GMT
No it's a dictatorship. Fortunately in the wider world where we exist we still have freedom of speech.
|
|