|
|
Post by Macmoish on May 3, 2022 9:13:21 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by rickyqpr on May 3, 2022 9:19:51 GMT
A Club Statement - oh no sorry it is Dave McIntyre!
Behind-the-scenes tensions meant Warburton was finished at QPR once results went against him
By David McIntyre 03/05/2022
QPR manager Mark Warburton
Not since 2005 has there been such a disparity between the perception of QPR and the day-to-day reality.
Back then, Rangers fans had been relentlessly fed a tale of a happy, united club, embarking on a fresh start with new directors in place after the Chris Wright era.
So I understood why my reporting of the fact that these people were actually at each other’s throats, and that a bitter power struggle was taking place, was greeted with incredulity.
Seventeen years later and the level of acrimony behind the scenes hasn’t in any way been comparable.
But there have been problems. A disconnect which belied the popular perception of a club with a common purpose and its house finally in order.
As a consequence, Mark Warburton needed to deliver at least a play-off place in order to keep his job.
Communication problems
It was not a case of particularly bad relationships as such, but weak relationships, or in some cases no real relationship at all.
For starters, the relationship between Warburton and director of football Les Ferdinand has not been particularly close. It certainly hasn’t been like the one Warburton enjoyed with Uwe Rosler at Brentford when they held the positions of sporting director and manager respectively.
While Warburton’s communication with Ferdinand and the board has been limited, communication with Under-23s boss Paul Hall and his staff has been virtually non-existent.
That’s a problem when the mission is supposed to be the development of youngsters into first-team players and saleable assets.
Part of Warburton’s brief was to embrace the academy QPR are very keen to portray as a roaring success. With his background in youth development, it seemed like an obvious fit.
The fly in the ointment was that he wasn’t at all impressed with what he found.
He demonstrated this with a host of choices he made. But nothing encapsulated the situation more than Warburton turning to Lee Wallace and later Moses Odubajo – two seasoned pros he had worked with before – while overlooking Niko Hamaleinen and Osman Kakay, who had both been given four-year contracts by the club.
The likes of Faysal Bettache and Stephen Duke-McKenna were similarly felt to not be equipped for Championship football, and Conor Masterson for a promotion challenge. The manager wanted alternatives brought in.
He was backed in doing so, but not unconditionally.
Out on a limb
Quite simply, he needed promotion, or to at least go close, in order to weather the storm brewing as a result of his negative judgement of the set-up Ferdinand, Tony Fernandes and technical director Chris Ramsey have been so keen to extol the virtues of.
The average age of the side was going up, not down. The pathway to the first team, which Ferdinand and Ramsey have been determined to widen, was narrowing again. This was not how it was supposed to be.
But Rangers were playing good football and challenging for promotion. Needless to say the attitude was one of ‘long may it continue’. But if it didn’t continue, Warburton was always going to be on very thin ice.
Naming just six substitutes rather than including an academy product on the bench against Stoke in December was also significant. It underlined the them-and-us divide between the management team and others.
Again, Warburton was making it clear that, despite the club’s rhetoric, he did not believe youngsters of sufficient ability were in the system.
And in doing so, he was marking his own card.
When results spectacularly declined, in large part because of horrific luck with injuries, there was only going to be one outcome.
His dismissal of suggestions he might consider giving teenage striker Sinclair Armstrong a try didn’t go down well either.
On West London Sport’s QPR podcast, Kevin Gallen, himself a product of Rangers’ youth system, argued that Warburton’s stance was spot on and that young players should have to earn the right to be in the squad.
QPR manager Mark Warburton and coach Neil Banfield
Warburton brought in Neil Banfield as first-team coach
Warburton could argue that players, albeit not homegrown ones, have been developed on his watch.
With Ebere Eze having moved on after making great strides, Chris Willock – picked up largely because of first-team coach Neil Banfield, who worked with him at Arsenal – has been the talisman, while Seny Dieng, Ilias Chair, Rob Dickie and others have progressed.
But it wasn’t enough to keep Warburton in the job.
There had been rumblings of discontent with the manager for some time, but the dismal home defeat against Peterborough in March took matters to the point of no return. The club hierarchy were furious. It seemed Rangers would not make the play-offs. Warburton was going at the end of the season.
QPR in freefall
Rangers’ season had totally disintegrated. As well as the obvious effect of injuries, there were other factors in the decline.
The playing squad generally believe the lack of clarity – or any discussion at all – about the futures of players soon to be out of contract had an unsettling effect. It was perceived as a failure to do the right thing by solid pros who had served the club well.
One player has had most of his belongings in storage for some time while waiting for an indication of where his future might lie.
There was tension over the future of Yoann Barbet in particular.
Warburton regards Barbet, a fixture of the team during a sustained period of good results, as a key player. But some of the top brass don’t see it that way and there has been no attempt to extend his contract.
Some of the club’s transfer dealings also contributed to the slump.
It was suggested to Warburton in January that signing a striker would be a good idea. He felt a number 10 should be more of a priority as Rangers played with just one up front but two number 10s, Chair and Willock, whose importance was obvious. Warburton was worried about what might happen if one of them suffered an injury.
Both camps clearly had a point. A lack of vibrancy up front has certainly been costly, while Willock tore a hamstring and his absence was a hammer blow.
With the budget having already been stretched to bring in Warburton’s number one summer target, Stefan Johansen, and Fernandes’ target, Charlie Austin, it was not possible to bring in either Derby’s Tom Lawrence or Swansea’s Jamie Paterson.
While a move for Lawrence was always somewhat audacious, it seemed until 48 hours or so before the transfer deadline that a deal could be done to sign Paterson. But it didn’t happen. How well he could have compensated for the loss of Willock, we’ll never know.
Andre Gray played under Warburton at Brentford and Ferdinand recommended him to QPR’s owners straight after being brought in. Both men were keen to get him on loan from Watford. He hasn’t delivered.
Austin’s second spell at the club has been a disappointment and his name can be added to the list of ill-advised deals pursued by the vice-chairman.
And with Lyndon Dykes having not recaptured the form he showed towards the end of last season, Rangers simply didn’t have enough, especially without Willock.
The parachuting in of Dion Sanderson and Jeff Hendrick to play ahead of existing QPR players was also a bad move and backfired.
There were solid reasons behind it.
Conor Masterson’s limited game time and Jordy de Wijs’ injury record meant Warburton wanted an experienced, reliable centre-back for the run-in. A deal was agreed to sign Steve Cook from Bournemouth but he opted to join Nottingham Forest.
QPR defender Jordy De Wijs
De Wijs was loaned out to Fortuna Düsseldorf
Even so, Sanderson’s performances on loan at Birmingham suggested the Wolves defender, although not the old head Warburton ideally wanted, would be more reliable than the fragile De Wijs. He wasn’t.
Warburton also felt inexperience cost Brentford when they lost in the play-offs under him. So when the opportunity unexpectedly arose in the final hours of the window to bring in a vastly experienced player in Hendrick, there was a thumbs-up despite there having been no previous interest in signing a midfielder of his type.
Regardless of the reasons for the slump, long-standing tensions behind the scenes meant there was no inclination to stand by the manager when the tide of results turned against him.
Competing narratives
Warburton being jettisoned after tangible progress during his tenure will be seen by many as surprising. It is certainly a bold decision and one which will inevitably come under real scrutiny in the months and possibly years ahead.
But with a move to a new training ground, there will be a high emphasis on the management team and academy staff being together, both figuratively and soon literally. So the nature of the divide between Warburton and other key figures means it’s perhaps not surprising at all that the club’s tone is one of seeking a fresh start.
This is largely about two competing narratives.
One, nurtured by Ferdinand and Ramsey, is that the set-up at QPR is primed to succeed, with an emphasis on developing players through a successful academy by ensuring a pathway to the first team.
The other is that there is an awful lot of hot air around the subject of the academy, that it is not producing players, that the real success of the Ferdinand/Ramsey era has been the signing and development of players from elsewhere, and that the club should hone in on this rather than continue to perpetuate a myth of a strong set-up and successful academy.
The bottom line is that the club’s owners, who ultimately make the decisions, fundamentally accept the Ferdinand/Ramsey narrative.
By not singing from that hymn sheet, Warburton put noses out of joint and needed spectacular success this season in order to be kept on.
|
|
|
|
Post by rickyqpr on May 3, 2022 9:26:03 GMT
The club doing it's best to stop the implosion without saying anything out loud.
There is a lot in the report that was suspected.
The gulf between the first team and the under 23s - and now it seems the coaches.
No yough coming through.
Les's coaching team, as opposed to Warburton's coaches.
The last transfer window - it is all there.
To put an ebd to the speculation.
Makes Eusaace more likely to depart than stay I would think.
|
|
|
|
Post by Macmoish on May 3, 2022 9:31:41 GMT
And Tony Fernandes (as has been suggested elsewhere recently) the impetus behind Austin's return.
(On the other hand I've been wondering whether Warburton would have wanted a striker; but knew not to ask. Nothing in this article suggests that.)
|
|
|
|
Post by robindubois on May 3, 2022 10:42:22 GMT
Nothing like airing your dirty linen in public or kicking a man or the club when they are down. Did the club leak or suggest this article or is it DM making a name for himself? Bit of both probably but hardly encouraging to attract a new manager and if all is true Eustace is gone as well.
So let's accept everything in the article is true and Warburton is the villain of the piece because of a lack of communication. Well I could argue it takes two to tango - and to communicate. So if there has been a communication problem for the last 3 years, the behind the scenes management should have dealt with it much earlier and not have accepted that it would be OK behaviour if we finished in the play-offs.
Interesting comments about Barbet - if I recall DMac months ago was reporting Barbet wanted to leave and return to France and this seems to contradict what he was saying then.
Still what is done is done so let's get Mark Hughes asap as it's a short summer and then not long before the World Cup break so we can always sack him then if results are no good and get a caretaker for the rest of the season. In fact if Warburton's future was dependent on results I would have given him to the end of October and made the change during the World Cup break in November / December if necessary.
Maybe the Luton manager will get the sack and be available after last night if they do not make the play-offs. Stranger things have happened! If they had just lost 2 -0 they would have gone into the last game just needing a draw against Reading to secure a play-off place because of their largely superior goal difference. But after 7-0 they now need the win to deny Boro the chance to snatch the last place.
Funny old world.
|
|
|
|
Post by Macmoish on May 3, 2022 10:57:17 GMT
Not sure that it would be leaked by the Club "Officially" - since it doesnt make them or Ferdinand (or Fernandes or any of them look good in the slightest
|
|
|
|
Post by rickyqpr on May 3, 2022 10:59:18 GMT
Nothing like airing your dirty linen in public or kicking a man or the club when they are down. Did the club leak or suggest this article or is it DM making a name for himself? Bit of both probably but hardly encouraging to attract a new manager and if all is true Eustace is gone as well. So let's accept everything in the article is true and Warburton is the villain of the piece because of a lack of communication. Well I could argue it takes two to tango - and to communicate. So if there has been a communication problem for the last 3 years, the behind the scenes management should have dealt with it much earlier and not have accepted that it would be OK behaviour if we finished in the play-offs. Interesting comments about Barbet - if I recall DMac months ago was reporting Barbet wanted to leave and return to France and this seems to contradict what he was saying then. Still what is done is done so let's get Mark Hughes asap as it's a short summer and then not long before the World Cup break so we can always sack him then if results are no good and get a caretaker for the rest of the season. In fact if Warburton's future was dependent on results I would have given him to the end of October and made the change during the World Cup break in November / December if necessary. Maybe the Luton manager will get the sack and be available after last night if they do not make the play-offs. Stranger things have happened! If they had just lost 2 -0 they would have gone into the last game just needing a draw against Reading to secure a play-off place because of their largely superior goal difference. But after 7-0 they now need the win to deny Boro the chance to snatch the last place. Funny old world. Yes you are correct, but read it a second time. Dave McIntyre states the case for both sides. For the first time, he has placed the role of Ferdinand and his team of coaches (as opposed to the senior coaches) firmly under the spotlight. As I wrote on the 24th March (see Youth Development thread) nothing has come through or even close. Is that because Warburton is at fault and disconnected from said coaches and players, or is it because they are not good enough? If they are not good enough, and if Ferdinand is responsible for the next managerial appointment, and if there is still a void, then I think that Ferdinand will be on the slippery slope. That will delight many. I think Dave Mc is not only pointing out the flaws with the manager, but also pointing out the flaws in delivering the agreed strategy. Or put it another way, if you hire a footballing man to the board, then you need to back him if he tells you the manager is not supporting the strategy of developing the youth. Why pay good money to seasoned professionals to finish 16th, play my youngsters instead. But if we are about to appoint a league one manager to develop the youth, failure may well mean the end of Sir Les IMHO More of a Lee Hoos (PR) leak than a Les Ferdinand leak. |
|
|
|
Post by Macmoish on May 3, 2022 11:24:20 GMT
A few extra points by Dave McIntyre post article |
|
|
|
Post by robindubois on May 3, 2022 11:25:57 GMT
Nothing like airing your dirty linen in public or kicking a man or the club when they are down. Did the club leak or suggest this article or is it DM making a name for himself? Bit of both probably but hardly encouraging to attract a new manager and if all is true Eustace is gone as well. So let's accept everything in the article is true and Warburton is the villain of the piece because of a lack of communication. Well I could argue it takes two to tango - and to communicate. So if there has been a communication problem for the last 3 years, the behind the scenes management should have dealt with it much earlier and not have accepted that it would be OK behaviour if we finished in the play-offs. Interesting comments about Barbet - if I recall DMac months ago was reporting Barbet wanted to leave and return to France and this seems to contradict what he was saying then. Still what is done is done so let's get Mark Hughes asap as it's a short summer and then not long before the World Cup break so we can always sack him then if results are no good and get a caretaker for the rest of the season. In fact if Warburton's future was dependent on results I would have given him to the end of October and made the change during the World Cup break in November / December if necessary. Maybe the Luton manager will get the sack and be available after last night if they do not make the play-offs. Stranger things have happened! If they had just lost 2 -0 they would have gone into the last game just needing a draw against Reading to secure a play-off place because of their largely superior goal difference. But after 7-0 they now need the win to deny Boro the chance to snatch the last place. Funny old world. Yes you are correct, but read it a second time. Dave McIntyre states the case for both sides. For the first time, he has placed the role of Ferdinand and his team of coaches (as opposed to the senior coaches) firmly under the spotlight. As I wrote on the 24th March (see Youth Development thread) nothing has come through or even close. Is that because Warburton is at fault and disconnected from said coaches and players, or is it because they are not good enough? If they are not good enough, and if Ferdinand is responsible for the next managerial appointment, and if there is still a void, then I think that Ferdinand will be on the slippery slope. That will delight many. I think Dave Mc is not only pointing out the flaws with the manager, but also pointing out the flaws in delivering the agreed strategy. Or put it another way, if you hire a footballing man to the board, then you need to back him if he tells you the manager is not supporting the strategy of developing the youth. Why pay good money to seasoned professionals to finish 16th, play my youngsters instead. But if we are about to appoint a league one manager to develop the youth, failure may well mean the end of Sir Les IMHO More of a Lee Hoos (PR) leak than a Les Ferdinand leak. I did read it more than twice and agree that the article does state the case for both sides, although I read it as more critical of Warburton than the others. My main take away is exactly what I have highlighted in your comment above. If there have been 2 sides for the last 3 years it should have been dealt with long ago and it seems that it was not dealt with as it appeared the club were making progress on and off the field. If change is needed it is best done when things are on an up cycle rather than waiting for things to turn sour and end up with teh mess we seem to have now. |
|
|
|
Post by rickyqpr on May 3, 2022 11:41:21 GMT
A few extra points by Dave McIntyre post article
Interesting additions. He admits he has an agenda regarding the academy, or perhaps he is saying the youth development strategy is unduly complicated or too expensive for our means. However, I admit to being confused by the B Team concept, when we seem to rarely arrange such games, and our first team players feature for the under 23s instead. |
|
|
|
Post by rickyqpr on May 3, 2022 11:48:04 GMT
Yes you are correct, but read it a second time. Dave McIntyre states the case for both sides. For the first time, he has placed the role of Ferdinand and his team of coaches (as opposed to the senior coaches) firmly under the spotlight. As I wrote on the 24th March (see Youth Development thread) nothing has come through or even close. Is that because Warburton is at fault and disconnected from said coaches and players, or is it because they are not good enough? If they are not good enough, and if Ferdinand is responsible for the next managerial appointment, and if there is still a void, then I think that Ferdinand will be on the slippery slope. That will delight many. I think Dave Mc is not only pointing out the flaws with the manager, but also pointing out the flaws in delivering the agreed strategy. Or put it another way, if you hire a footballing man to the board, then you need to back him if he tells you the manager is not supporting the strategy of developing the youth. Why pay good money to seasoned professionals to finish 16th, play my youngsters instead. But if we are about to appoint a league one manager to develop the youth, failure may well mean the end of Sir Les IMHO More of a Lee Hoos (PR) leak than a Les Ferdinand leak. I did read it more than twice and agree that the article does state the case for both sides, although I read it as more critical of Warburton than the others. My main take away is exactly what I have highlighted in your comment above. If there have been 2 sides for the last 3 years it should have been dealt with long ago and it seems that it was not dealt with as it appeared the club were making progress on and off the field. If change is needed it is best done when things are on an up cycle rather than waiting for things to turn sour and end up with teh mess we seem to have now. No one is going to sack a coach who has us up on the edge of automatic promotion, but it seems the vultures were circling, just waiting. McIntyre does say that the relationships were not bad, just non-existent in some cases. I read into that, so long as Warburton was delivering, he could tell Ferdinand to go whistle. Post Peterborough, Ferdinand clicked up a gear. The stuff about Barbet is pretty crazy and reflects poorly on the club and Ferdinand. If Warburton selects a group of players who are not scheduled to be hee next season, some who want to be here, then we are being disrespectful. It is a bad message to all our remaining players and those thinking of joining us. Onouha highlighted how poorly he and others were treated when due to leave. |
|
|
|
Post by rangersman on May 3, 2022 17:35:31 GMT
This club has been badly run for years, I am not surprised at all about these backroom bust ups and disregard for each other. LF and MW are both no good for this club, both clueless or deliberately detached from reality. Any one could see we needed to improve on some of the daft decisions MW made. LF probably just wants youngsters to sell on with no thought for the clubs progress in the league. Anyone that's half decent never hangs around to help us out, we are now a nursery for the Prem clubs. All this bickering about blame is total crepe IMO.
|
|
|
|
Post by rickyqpr on May 6, 2022 8:17:26 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Macmoish on May 6, 2022 8:58:40 GMT
Just read it. Yes
|
|
|
|
Post by stylecouncillor on May 6, 2022 19:06:59 GMT
Read it and yes Excellent read. Hard to disagree with most of it. I also find myself going from Pro Warbs to indifferent ( as we dropped out the top 6) to this is now looking for the best as he departs. Which i admit could be wrong but it's one hell of a hatchet job if it's .
|
|
|
|
Post by Lonegunmen on May 8, 2022 19:20:32 GMT
Hmmm after thinking on this for a few days, I've gone the other direction - I think Warburton was shafted. And if Sherwood comes in, then the Spuds circle is complete. The academy and youth are not up to standard doesn't surprise me. I thought Ramsey was meant to be good. Perhaps not good enough. Sir Les has some very serious questions to answer.
|
|
|
|
Post by Macmoish on May 6, 2023 9:15:19 GMT
Makes interesting rereading
|
|
|
|
Post by Macmoish on May 6, 2023 9:15:41 GMT
|
|
