Flashback: JFH Appointed - "Hasselbaink Out"

[ingham]

Good point there, Mac. Even those who are - allegedly - on the manager's back from the very first game are simply giving him advance warning of what everyone will soon be saying if he fails to get the required number of wins.

As far as I can see, being patient while a manager goes on losing is not an option for very long. Those who urge patience come, in the end, to the point when they, too, have had enough.

There is nothing unreasonable about this. Once a manager is on a long, losing run, he has nothing to recommend him. We can get any number of other managers who will lose matches for us, and the supporters will feel the Club has little to lose by letting him go. If we appoint another failure, we may be no better off, but we're usually no worse off either.

The only alternative to this scenario is that the manager and the Club show us improvements in performance which, even if they fall short of what we would recognize as sustained success (in the short term), are unmistakably the fruit of enough experience, know-how and talent to convince us that it is worth our while seeing the process out.

What we get all too often, however, is not unmistakable evidence of steady improvement. Just endless talk about it. From the Board, the Manager, and the Players. And as hope of better times to come is far easier to generate than better times themselves, the Club wastes its time trying to convince US that the way we think about their performances is wrong, not that the performances themselves are at fault.

Whether JFH will be given - or will effect for himself - the means to get things right, will remain unknown unless he embarks on a run of good performances more or less from the outset. Or convinces us, through measurable improvements, however gradual, that he knows what he is doing.

The mistake everyone at the Club makes, generally speaking, is to suppose that we must convince ourselves of their ability to do the job, when it is up to them to convince us. And I would suggest that winning is simply the easiest way. Some may say that that is setting the bar too high, but failing to win is why they get the sack. If they want the bar set at a lower level, it is up to them to convince us that they aren't good enough to do any better.

A manager with the talent to convey to us that he IS building things up slowly, and by degrees, will almost certainly find he hasn't the time to finish the job. Not because we're impatient, but because anything other than winning simply doesn't look right. If they want us to believe they aren't winners, they're just guys who build things up with imperceptible slowness, by all means let them try. So far, the long list of discarded QPR managers suggests we like our success obvious enough to notice.

And it isn't just because losing is such a downer. It is because few of us think that our opponents are so good they must be very, very difficult to beat. Okay, they usually are very difficult for US to beat, but that is the problem they must solve, not an excuse for not doing so.

Most of our rivals are fumbling around trying to get something to happen themselves, and for that reason, managers who have what it takes often have an immediate impact - once they've served some kind of apprenticeship, usually in the lower leagues.

So I'm not sure our unwillingness to be patient beyond a few months of struggle indicates we ARE either fickle or excessively demanding. We won't have too long to wait to know whether JFH has what it takes, because we want him to make a noticeable difference. If there is no difference, or if it is hardly noticeable, it isn't our fault. And while it is true that every manager has a bad patch now and then, it is the relative shortness of the bad patches and the relative length of the good ones that matters, and that gives him credibility.

On that basis, we can all afford to be optimistic. Either the new manager will succeed handsomely, or we'll soon have another one for the optimists to believe in, and the critics to run the iron rule of win-or-else over, until he, too - or maybe a she next time round? - is consigned to the land of might-have-been.

Another point worth pondering is why JFH left his last Club. If it is within a manager's capabilities to build QPR up, why wasn't it within his capabilities to build the Club he was at before up? If his efforts came up against the limittions of that Club, how soon will they come up against the limitations of this Club? If he wanted to move on up to a bigger and better Club, is that a good sign, when we aren't a particular good or big Club ourselves?

Managers who've come to QPR after doing well at other Clubs and who subsequently did well at LR often left the Club as soon as they had an offer from a significantly bigger outfit. If we are not to be prisoners of our size, we may need some sort of antidote to this. The means of perpetuating success through several changes of manager.

So what is the mechanism for keeping a successful manager here? Like the idea that we might keep a relatively unsuccessful manager here who is nevertheless making steady improvements which will bear fruit if he is given time, a quality Manager will need to see something impressive enough about the CLUB that is better, maybe MUCH better, than other Clubs he might leave us for.

And as a successful manager is likely to go to a better or bigger or wealthier club, that is a tall order. On the other hand, if we have what it takes to make QPR distinctive enough to attract quality, because we're impressively good at adding value, say, then would that represent the beginnings of the longed-for stability and steady 'building' some advocate?

If there were such a thing, it might provide a real basis for supporters to be patient. If so, I would urge whoever is responsible not to overdo the subtlety of their improvements, and the time taken for them to register with the Club's support. It won't do for the coaching staff and the players to cultivate qualities intelligible only to themselves.

Maybe the Club really does need something more than a genius at the helm to get one, and to convince future geniuses that might come here, as well as quality players, that QPR is a Club that has what it takes to an unusual extent for a Club of its size.

To get us off the Manager's back for long enough to make a difference, it might be worth asking themselves how they can give him resources which he can't get elsewhere. Because if he is any good, he may soon be giving QPR the 'sack'.

[Lonegunmen]

10 games! Give him 10 games.

Seriously, it will be interesting to compare him with Ramsey - the difference in styles of management and in the style of play. Hopefully we no longer play with just 1 up front. Good luck to JFH. I just want our team to play with heart, passion, desire and entertain if possible.

[dan]

Dec 9, 2015 0:00:50 GMT Lonegunmen said:

10 games! Give him 10 games.

Seriously, it will be interesting to compare him with Ramsey - the difference in styles of management and in the style of play. Hopefully we no longer play with just 1 up front. Good luck to JFH. I just want our team to play with heart, passion, desire and entertain if possible.

Absolutely!

My local basketball team (Memphis Grizzlies) just signed our arch enemy #1 Matt Barnes for the season. What has he done for us? Been everything we could have asked for and more, all wrapped up in the player we have hated the most. Now he is a crowd favorite! Shocker... Bring quality and some victories, and people love you. I'm all behind this hire. I hope he brings a "youthful" approach to a team that has seemed quite old at times.

[kilburnhoop]

Dec 8, 2015 23:15:07 GMT ingham said:

Good point there, Mac. Even those who are - allegedly - on the manager's back from the very first game are simply giving him advance warning of what everyone will soon be saying if he fails to get the required number of wins.

As far as I can see, being patient while a manager goes on losing is not an option for very long. Those who urge patience come, in the end, to the point when they, too, have had enough.

There is nothing unreasonable about this. Once a manager is on a long, losing run, he has nothing to recommend him. We can get any number of other managers who will lose matches for us, and the supporters will feel the Club has little to lose by letting him go. If we appoint another failure, we may be no better off, but we're usually no worse off either.

The only alternative to this scenario is that the manager and the Club show us improvements in performance which, even if they fall short of what we would recognize as sustained success (in the short term), are unmistakably the fruit of enough experience, know-how and talent to convince us that it is worth our while seeing the process out.

What we get all too often, however, is not unmistakable evidence of steady improvement. Just endless talk about it. From the Board, the Manager, and the Players. And as hope of better times to come is far easier to generate than better times themselves, the Club wastes its time trying to convince US that the way we think about their performances is wrong, not that the performances themselves are at fault.

Whether JFH will be given - or will effect for himself - the means to get things right, will remain unknown unless he embarks on a run of good performances more or less from the outset. Or convinces us, through measurable improvements, however gradual, that he knows what he is doing.

The mistake everyone at the Club makes, generally speaking, is to suppose that we must convince ourselves of their ability to do the job, when it is up to them to convince us. And I would suggest that winning is simply the easiest way. Some may say that that is setting the bar too high, but failing to win is why they get the sack. If they want the bar set at a lower level, it is up to them to convince us that they aren't good enough to do any better.

A manager with the talent to convey to us that he IS building things up slowly, and by degrees, will almost certainly find he hasn't the time to finish the job. Not because we're impatient, but because anything other than winning simply doesn't look right. If they want us to believe they aren't winners, they're just guys who build things up with imperceptible slowness, by all means let them try. So far, the long list of discarded QPR managers suggests we like our success obvious enough to notice.

And it isn't just because losing is such a downer. It is because few of us think that our opponents are so good they must be very, very difficult to beat. Okay, they usually are very difficult for US to beat, but that is the problem they must solve, not an excuse for not doing so.

Most of our rivals are fumbling around trying to get something to happen themselves, and for that reason, managers who have what it takes often have an immediate impact - once they've served some kind of apprenticeship, usually in the lower leagues.

So I'm not sure our unwillingness to be patient beyond a few months of struggle indicates we ARE either fickle or excessively demanding. We won't have too long to wait to know whether JFH has what it takes, because we want him to make a noticeable difference. If there is no difference, or if it is hardly noticeable, it isn't our fault. And while it is true that every manager has a bad patch now and then, it is the relative shortness of the bad patches and the relative length of the good ones that matters, and that gives him credibility.

On that basis, we can all afford to be optimistic. Either the new manager will succeed handsomely, or we'll soon have another one for the optimists to believe in, and the critics to run the iron rule of win-or-else over, until he, too - or maybe a she next time round? - is consigned to the land of might-have-been.

Another point worth pondering is why JFH left his last Club. If it is within a manager's capabilities to build QPR up, why wasn't it within his capabilities to build the Club he was at before up? If his efforts came up against the limittions of that Club, how soon will they come up against the limitations of this Club? If he wanted to move on up to a bigger and better Club, is that a good sign, when we aren't a particular good or big Club ourselves?

Managers who've come to QPR after doing well at other Clubs and who subsequently did well at LR often left the Club as soon as they had an offer from a significantly bigger outfit. If we are not to be prisoners of our size, we may need some sort of antidote to this. The means of perpetuating success through several changes of manager.

So what is the mechanism for keeping a successful manager here? Like the idea that we might keep a relatively unsuccessful manager here who is nevertheless making steady improvements which will bear fruit if he is given time, a quality Manager will need to see something impressive enough about the CLUB that is better, maybe MUCH better, than other Clubs he might leave us for.

And as a successful manager is likely to go to a better or bigger or wealthier club, that is a tall order. On the other hand, if we have what it takes to make QPR distinctive enough to attract quality, because we're impressively good at adding value, say, then would that represent the beginnings of the longed-for stability and steady 'building' some advocate?

If there were such a thing, it might provide a real basis for supporters to be patient. If so, I would urge whoever is responsible not to overdo the subtlety of their improvements, and the time taken for them to register with the Club's support. It won't do for the coaching staff and the players to cultivate qualities intelligible only to themselves.

Maybe the Club really does need something more than a genius at the helm to get one, and to convince future geniuses that might come here, as well as quality players, that QPR is a Club that has what it takes to an unusual extent for a Club of its size.

To get us off the Manager's back for long enough to make a difference, it might be worth asking themselves how they can give him resources which he can't get elsewhere. Because if he is any good, he may soon be giving QPR the 'sack'.

Good read ingham.

When supporters get on the managers back isnt it all about expectation?. Or the individuals expectation of where the club should be?. Are we a Premiership/Div 1 club?, in a nutshell no!. The fact we have spent 40years in the 3rd tier, compared to 26 in the 2nd tier and 23 in the top tier suggest we are a 3rd div club punching above our weight!.

51 full time managers since we began and only the following have won anything:
Cowan
Mangall
Stock
Venables
Warnock

We will never know, if we have a good manager on our hands if we keep sacking them because of the fans (me inc!) wrong expectations!!!!!.

[Dufster]

Dec 8, 2015 23:15:07 GMT ingham said:

Good point there, Mac. Even those who are - allegedly - on the manager's back from the very first game are simply giving him advance warning of what everyone will soon be saying if he fails to get the required number of wins.

As far as I can see, being patient while a manager goes on losing is not an option for very long. Those who urge patience come, in the end, to the point when they, too, have had enough.

There is nothing unreasonable about this. Once a manager is on a long, losing run, he has nothing to recommend him. We can get any number of other managers who will lose matches for us, and the supporters will feel the Club has little to lose by letting him go. If we appoint another failure, we may be no better off, but we're usually no worse off either.

The only alternative to this scenario is that the manager and the Club show us improvements in performance which, even if they fall short of what we would recognize as sustained success (in the short term), are unmistakably the fruit of enough experience, know-how and talent to convince us that it is worth our while seeing the process out.

What we get all too often, however, is not unmistakable evidence of steady improvement. Just endless talk about it. From the Board, the Manager, and the Players. And as hope of better times to come is far easier to generate than better times themselves, the Club wastes its time trying to convince US that the way we think about their performances is wrong, not that the performances themselves are at fault.

Whether JFH will be given - or will effect for himself - the means to get things right, will remain unknown unless he embarks on a run of good performances more or less from the outset. Or convinces us, through measurable improvements, however gradual, that he knows what he is doing.

The mistake everyone at the Club makes, generally speaking, is to suppose that we must convince ourselves of their ability to do the job, when it is up to them to convince us. And I would suggest that winning is simply the easiest way. Some may say that that is setting the bar too high, but failing to win is why they get the sack. If they want the bar set at a lower level, it is up to them to convince us that they aren't good enough to do any better.

A manager with the talent to convey to us that he IS building things up slowly, and by degrees, will almost certainly find he hasn't the time to finish the job. Not because we're impatient, but because anything other than winning simply doesn't look right. If they want us to believe they aren't winners, they're just guys who build things up with imperceptible slowness, by all means let them try. So far, the long list of discarded QPR managers suggests we like our success obvious enough to notice.

And it isn't just because losing is such a downer. It is because few of us think that our opponents are so good they must be very, very difficult to beat. Okay, they usually are very difficult for US to beat, but that is the problem they must solve, not an excuse for not doing so.

Most of our rivals are fumbling around trying to get something to happen themselves, and for that reason, managers who have what it takes often have an immediate impact - once they've served some kind of apprenticeship, usually in the lower leagues.

So I'm not sure our unwillingness to be patient beyond a few months of struggle indicates we ARE either fickle or excessively demanding. We won't have too long to wait to know whether JFH has what it takes, because we want him to make a noticeable difference. If there is no difference, or if it is hardly noticeable, it isn't our fault. And while it is true that every manager has a bad patch now and then, it is the relative shortness of the bad patches and the relative length of the good ones that matters, and that gives him credibility.

On that basis, we can all afford to be optimistic. Either the new manager will succeed handsomely, or we'll soon have another one for the optimists to believe in, and the critics to run the iron rule of win-or-else over, until he, too - or maybe a she next time round? - is consigned to the land of might-have-been.

Another point worth pondering is why JFH left his last Club. If it is within a manager's capabilities to build QPR up, why wasn't it within his capabilities to build the Club he was at before up? If his efforts came up against the limittions of that Club, how soon will they come up against the limitations of this Club? If he wanted to move on up to a bigger and better Club, is that a good sign, when we aren't a particular good or big Club ourselves?

Managers who've come to QPR after doing well at other Clubs and who subsequently did well at LR often left the Club as soon as they had an offer from a significantly bigger outfit. If we are not to be prisoners of our size, we may need some sort of antidote to this. The means of perpetuating success through several changes of manager.

So what is the mechanism for keeping a successful manager here? Like the idea that we might keep a relatively unsuccessful manager here who is nevertheless making steady improvements which will bear fruit if he is given time, a quality Manager will need to see something impressive enough about the CLUB that is better, maybe MUCH better, than other Clubs he might leave us for.

And as a successful manager is likely to go to a better or bigger or wealthier club, that is a tall order. On the other hand, if we have what it takes to make QPR distinctive enough to attract quality, because we're impressively good at adding value, say, then would that represent the beginnings of the longed-for stability and steady 'building' some advocate?

If there were such a thing, it might provide a real basis for supporters to be patient. If so, I would urge whoever is responsible not to overdo the subtlety of their improvements, and the time taken for them to register with the Club's support. It won't do for the coaching staff and the players to cultivate qualities intelligible only to themselves.

Maybe the Club really does need something more than a genius at the helm to get one, and to convince future geniuses that might come here, as well as quality players, that QPR is a Club that has what it takes to an unusual extent for a Club of its size.

To get us off the Manager's back for long enough to make a difference, it might be worth asking themselves how they can give him resources which he can't get elsewhere. Because if he is any good, he may soon be giving QPR the 'sack'.

What a great read through the fog of my hangover this morning....really appreciate Mac highlighting this point and getting it out there...so thanks Mac and Ingham you have validated it beautifully...IMO this board can only lose currency as a forum of free speech and opinion on OUR club if some individuals who are obtuse in their thinking continue to emasculate anyone who refuses to accept theirs..I note how this excellent board is losing patronage because of certain members who's panacea of OUR club is small minded and limited in their thought.....and THE Ramsey debate is a good example of that!!

Come back Mason I say...he's a perfect example of where the small minded bully boys have won and IMO the substance of this board has diminished...Not directing this at Rory BTW his contribution is mighty and I hope University will develop that sharp mind even more!

Sincerely wishing everyone on this board a super dooper Xmas!

[Marc]

Dec 9, 2015 11:52:37 GMT Dufster said:

Dec 8, 2015 23:15:07 GMT ingham said:

Good point there, Mac. Even those who are - allegedly - on the manager's back from the very first game are simply giving him advance warning of what everyone will soon be saying if he fails to get the required number of wins.

As far as I can see, being patient while a manager goes on losing is not an option for very long. Those who urge patience come, in the end, to the point when they, too, have had enough.

There is nothing unreasonable about this. Once a manager is on a long, losing run, he has nothing to recommend him. We can get any number of other managers who will lose matches for us, and the supporters will feel the Club has little to lose by letting him go. If we appoint another failure, we may be no better off, but we're usually no worse off either.

The only alternative to this scenario is that the manager and the Club show us improvements in performance which, even if they fall short of what we would recognize as sustained success (in the short term), are unmistakably the fruit of enough experience, know-how and talent to convince us that it is worth our while seeing the process out.

What we get all too often, however, is not unmistakable evidence of steady improvement. Just endless talk about it. From the Board, the Manager, and the Players. And as hope of better times to come is far easier to generate than better times themselves, the Club wastes its time trying to convince US that the way we think about their performances is wrong, not that the performances themselves are at fault.

Whether JFH will be given - or will effect for himself - the means to get things right, will remain unknown unless he embarks on a run of good performances more or less from the outset. Or convinces us, through measurable improvements, however gradual, that he knows what he is doing.

The mistake everyone at the Club makes, generally speaking, is to suppose that we must convince ourselves of their ability to do the job, when it is up to them to convince us. And I would suggest that winning is simply the easiest way. Some may say that that is setting the bar too high, but failing to win is why they get the sack. If they want the bar set at a lower level, it is up to them to convince us that they aren't good enough to do any better.

A manager with the talent to convey to us that he IS building things up slowly, and by degrees, will almost certainly find he hasn't the time to finish the job. Not because we're impatient, but because anything other than winning simply doesn't look right. If they want us to believe they aren't winners, they're just guys who build things up with imperceptible slowness, by all means let them try. So far, the long list of discarded QPR managers suggests we like our success obvious enough to notice.

And it isn't just because losing is such a downer. It is because few of us think that our opponents are so good they must be very, very difficult to beat. Okay, they usually are very difficult for US to beat, but that is the problem they must solve, not an excuse for not doing so.

Most of our rivals are fumbling around trying to get something to happen themselves, and for that reason, managers who have what it takes often have an immediate impact - once they've served some kind of apprenticeship, usually in the lower leagues.

So I'm not sure our unwillingness to be patient beyond a few months of struggle indicates we ARE either fickle or excessively demanding. We won't have too long to wait to know whether JFH has what it takes, because we want him to make a noticeable difference. If there is no difference, or if it is hardly noticeable, it isn't our fault. And while it is true that every manager has a bad patch now and then, it is the relative shortness of the bad patches and the relative length of the good ones that matters, and that gives him credibility.

On that basis, we can all afford to be optimistic. Either the new manager will succeed handsomely, or we'll soon have another one for the optimists to believe in, and the critics to run the iron rule of win-or-else over, until he, too - or maybe a she next time round? - is consigned to the land of might-have-been.

Another point worth pondering is why JFH left his last Club. If it is within a manager's capabilities to build QPR up, why wasn't it within his capabilities to build the Club he was at before up? If his efforts came up against the limittions of that Club, how soon will they come up against the limitations of this Club? If he wanted to move on up to a bigger and better Club, is that a good sign, when we aren't a particular good or big Club ourselves?

Managers who've come to QPR after doing well at other Clubs and who subsequently did well at LR often left the Club as soon as they had an offer from a significantly bigger outfit. If we are not to be prisoners of our size, we may need some sort of antidote to this. The means of perpetuating success through several changes of manager.

So what is the mechanism for keeping a successful manager here? Like the idea that we might keep a relatively unsuccessful manager here who is nevertheless making steady improvements which will bear fruit if he is given time, a quality Manager will need to see something impressive enough about the CLUB that is better, maybe MUCH better, than other Clubs he might leave us for.

And as a successful manager is likely to go to a better or bigger or wealthier club, that is a tall order. On the other hand, if we have what it takes to make QPR distinctive enough to attract quality, because we're impressively good at adding value, say, then would that represent the beginnings of the longed-for stability and steady 'building' some advocate?

If there were such a thing, it might provide a real basis for supporters to be patient. If so, I would urge whoever is responsible not to overdo the subtlety of their improvements, and the time taken for them to register with the Club's support. It won't do for the coaching staff and the players to cultivate qualities intelligible only to themselves.

Maybe the Club really does need something more than a genius at the helm to get one, and to convince future geniuses that might come here, as well as quality players, that QPR is a Club that has what it takes to an unusual extent for a Club of its size.

To get us off the Manager's back for long enough to make a difference, it might be worth asking themselves how they can give him resources which he can't get elsewhere. Because if he is any good, he may soon be giving QPR the 'sack'.

What a great read through the fog of my hangover this morning....really appreciate Mac highlighting this point and getting it out there...so thanks Mac and Ingham you have validated it beautifully...IMO this board can only lose currency as a forum of free speech and opinion on OUR club if some individuals who are obtuse in their thinking continue to emasculate anyone who refuses to accept theirs..I note how this excellent board is losing patronage because of certain members who's panacea of OUR club is small minded and limited in their thought.....and THE Ramsey debate is a good example of that!!

Come back Mason I say...he's a perfect example of where the small minded bully boys have won and IMO the substance of this board has diminished...Not directing this at Rory BTW his contribution is mighty and I hope University will develop that sharp mind even more!

Sincerely wishing everyone on this board a super dooper Xmas!

And there's the dig!

by "emasculate anyone who refuses to accept theirs", you obviously mean those who may hold a different opinion to you. Given that you and others are the ones who threw insults and hissy fits at anyone who dared to hold a different opinion, it would appear that you are the one who refuses to accept others' opinions.

And Mason, there's a prime example of someone you want frequenting this messageboard is it? Someone who drove away many a member by throwing insults at anyone who dared to challenge HIS opinion. A prime example of a troll and one who's been banned from other boards.

Quite frankly, to call others small minded bullies purely because they dared to voice a different opinion to your self is childish at best.

Intelligent debate is dead on this board as long as there are members like you, you're a hypocrite!

[Dufster]

Dec 9, 2015 12:42:39 GMT Marc said:

Dec 9, 2015 11:52:37 GMT Dufster said:

What a great read through the fog of my hangover this morning....really appreciate Mac highlighting this point and getting it out there...so thanks Mac and Ingham you have validated it beautifully...IMO this board can only lose currency as a forum of free speech and opinion on OUR club if some individuals who are obtuse in their thinking continue to emasculate anyone who refuses to accept theirs..I note how this excellent board is losing patronage because of certain members who's panacea of OUR club is small minded and limited in their thought.....and THE Ramsey debate is a good example of that!!

Come back Mason I say...he's a perfect example of where the small minded bully boys have won and IMO the substance of this board has diminished...Not directing this at Rory BTW his contribution is mighty and I hope University will develop that sharp mind even more!

Sincerely wishing everyone on this board a super dooper Xmas!

And there's the dig!

by "emasculate anyone who refuses to accept theirs", you obviously mean those who may hold a different opinion to you. Given that you and others are the ones who threw insults and hissy fits at anyone who dared to hold a different opinion, it would appear that you are the one who refuses to accept others' opinions.

And Mason, there's a prime example of someone you want frequenting this messageboard is it? Someone who drove away many a member by throwing insults at anyone who dared to challenge HIS opinion. A prime example of a troll and one who's been banned from other boards.

Quite frankly, to call others small minded bullies purely because they dared to voice a different opinion to your self is childish at best.

Intelligent debate is dead on this board as long as there are members like you, you're a hypocrite!

I rest my case!

[sharky]

I created this thread to be ironic.

Boy has it come back to bite me on the bum!

Lighten up everyone!

[Dufster]

......Sharky Out!!

[Marc]

Dec 9, 2015 12:56:24 GMT Dufster said:

Dec 9, 2015 12:42:39 GMT Marc said:

And there's the dig!

by "emasculate anyone who refuses to accept theirs", you obviously mean those who may hold a different opinion to you. Given that you and others are the ones who threw insults and hissy fits at anyone who dared to hold a different opinion, it would appear that you are the one who refuses to accept others' opinions.

And Mason, there's a prime example of someone you want frequenting this messageboard is it? Someone who drove away many a member by throwing insults at anyone who dared to challenge HIS opinion. A prime example of a troll and one who's been banned from other boards.

Quite frankly, to call others small minded bullies purely because they dared to voice a different opinion to your self is childish at best.

Intelligent debate is dead on this board as long as there are members like you, you're a hypocrite!

I rest my case!

What's up, not got the intelligence to actually respond to the points made? Thought not.

[sharky]

Jeez Fabs lighten up mate!

[Marc]

Dec 9, 2015 13:10:31 GMT sharky said:

Jeez Fabs lighten up mate!

Sorry sharky, but I'm fed up of the constant digs from certain members on here.

[Dufster]

This board in about QPR...Its not all about you Fabs!!

[Marc]

Dec 9, 2015 13:35:36 GMT Dufster said:

This board in about QPR...Its not all about you Fabs!!

2nd time you've said it, didn't make any sense the 1st time.

If you're going to have digs at people, expect a response. It's quite simple.

[Dufster]

Post Hitler, Historians refer to it as over identification!

[RoryTheRanger]

Why was I even mentioned in that post may I ask? Mason threw insults at everyone who disagreed with him and isn't welcome anywhere else in the online QPR world because of how he acts.

I disagreed with him on plenty of things only I actually tried to debate rather than throwing insults in every reply. I stopped posting on here for a while because it just wasn't worth the hassle that came with him.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion which also means that questioning people's views is also okay. Some just don't seem to like their view being questioned, especially when it's someone younger than them doing it

[steptoesson]

Wow this thread, the bloke has not even had a match yet.

So far as I can read his work at Burton seems to be not relevant to QPR as he did not build Burton, how was he supposed to build Burton, is promotion and then getting them to the top of of league 1 not worthy of any compliments. Was he supposed to build a top academy, get the clubs attendances above the capacity mark they already get. Was he supposed to stay at Burton for ten years before he can say he is ready for the step up.

At Brentford they employ on merit a manager in Dean Smith. Birmingham recognised Rowett was the right man and employed him from league 2 Burton not the League 1 club they are now. But at QPR the fans laughingly think JFH is not good enough for our club, they wanted Moyes or Rodgers and were arrogant enough to think these two men would come here. It saddens me to say so but some of our fans are truly naive and deluded, to the point it is quite embarrassing at times.

[Lonegunmen]

Digs? I thought Digs was a place where apprentice footballers lived when not training??

[sharky]

With Blackburn's win overnight, JFH will start his first game in charge with QPR at 13th in the table. 13th, his marker from where he goes, hopefully up!

[timewaster]

still without a win

[timewaster]

bump

[sharky]

That's the problem with new managers. They take time to work out who's who, what they can do and get the players playing to their style.

It doesn't take 4 games, it takes up to 4 months, but knowing us, we'll only allow JFH a couple of months, fire him and the failure cycle will continue!

Let the man experiment. He has to find out who's best for his plans.

[Macmoish]

Id be pretty surprised and shocked and disgusted if JFH was not the manager of QPR a year from now

[harr]

Dec 28, 2015 17:06:47 GMT Macmoish said:

Id be pretty surprised and shocked and disgusted if JFH was not the manager of QPR a year from now

Personally Im starting to question if Les F is picking the team.
The same team is getting picked under every manager, no strikers , too many comparisons.

[sharky]

Dec 28, 2015 17:06:47 GMT Macmoish said:

Id be pretty surprised and shocked and disgusted if JFH was not the manager of QPR a year from now

I'd be totally surprised and shocked if he still was manager in a year's time given the owners' inability to let managers settle in.

[harr]

Controversial ?

[wrenboy61]

Needs time!

Got some poor players and ones who can't be arsed in that squad who need moving on!!!

[harr]

Dec 28, 2015 19:49:41 GMT wrenboy61 said:

Needs time!

Got some poor players and ones who can't be arsed in that squad who need moving on!!!

Isnt it a Managers / DOF job though to realise the ones who cant be arsed?

Then why not stop playing some of the Sh1t / Disinterested ones now (Fer,Tozser etc ) and actually play some tnat did ok when played earlier in the year but barely get a sniff now.

[wrenboy61]

Dec 28, 2015 20:06:26 GMT harr said:

Dec 28, 2015 19:49:41 GMT wrenboy61 said:

Needs time!

Got some poor players and ones who can't be arsed in that squad who need moving on!!!

Isnt it a Managers / DOF job though to realise the ones who cant be arsed?

Then why not stop playing some of the Sh1t / Disinterested ones now (Fer,Tozser etc ) and actually play some tnat did ok when played earlier in the year but barely get a sniff now.

Agree but he's only been there a few weeks and I'm sure some will be moved on next month and with some it can't be soon enough!

Afraid some could be very difficult to move on ie high wages!

[Lonegunmen]

Why are the club persisting with a 4-6-0 formation even at home? Chris Ramsey played it, the new guys is playing it. Is it Sir Les's idea?