Briatore Interview on Offish

[swanleyhoop]

What a load of old tosh

that was hardly an interview more a prepared statement

if he is so concerned about the one pay day in the earlybird period is he going to sack whover came up with that plan, if so concerned about prices is he going to sack whoever came up with the price structure.

It is not a FACT that the club would have dissapeared if he had not come in, it is supposition.

he doesnt interfere in the team selection but makes the manager "promise" to play 442

Having read what everyone has had to say, including the statement, I have to say that I think we need to be guarded on what we believe, and not just believe it out of hand. We know that this board has not been entirely upfront in recent years, and that the amount of spin that comes flying our way has been substantial -- so why suddenly start fawning over this particular statement?

Like Peter G., for me the statement makes as many questions pop into my head as it answers.

WHAT REALLY BOTHERS ME MOST??
4-5-1 can be very attacking OR very defensive -- depends whether your midfield is full of Mahons and Legs, or full of Routledges, Cooks and Ephraims. Even if you've never done a coaching badge (which I actually have), you would know from games like FIFA that 4-5-1 can mean SO MANY THINGS -- as can 4-4-2, which can actually be a very defensive formation -- and there have been times this season where we have lost miserably playing 4-4-2. And they aren't the only 2 formations -- there are LOADS!
The fact that FB doesn't seem to realise that is, for me, the reason why he shouldn't be demading even the formation -- so much depends on players availabe, opposition strengths and weaknesses, even conditions on the day.
It's no good moaning that we played 4-5-1 when we had three strikers available, because, if there is no understanding between those strikers, 4-4-2 is a waste of time and you're better off running an attacking 4-5-1 or 4-4-1-1 (which is nearer to what PS was playing) -- and SDC seems to have no understanding, whoever he's played with.

ANOTHER THING WHICH REALLY BOTHERS ME...
Why are people, who, only a year ago, were roundly condemning FB and the board for the season ticket increase, and repeated the exercise only weeks ago when the prices for next season were announced, suddenly hailing him as some new Messiah? I'm not saying he isn't, but there are too many elements of doubt running round in my head, especially over the issues of interference with the manager, and the ticket prices.

I think we need to be a little more consistent -- it's just as fickle to condemn the board over season tickets, and then to "hero-worship" FB (which is what it's come across as in some posts), as it is to boo the team and then cheer when they score.

Sorry for playing devil's advocate here, but I'm really trying to understand everyone's point of view, and it just worries me that this may well be a PR bit of spin or it may be genuine -- who can say?
Not me, nor any of you -- and THAT'S my point.

We all want what's best for the club, I just don't feel that ANY of us really have enough evidence to know what that is (and if you do, then someone needs the sack for divulging sensitive and confidential info...)


(Oh, memo to whoever is in charge of the PR/spin, if that's what it is -- I think the use of the words project and hobby are very ill-advised -- they offer an immediate target for criticism -- would advise the board to find acceptable alternatives.)

[hermitage10]

Nothing in that is too much of a surprise, at least he has answered some questions.

However this point bugs me 'This is a very expensive hobby for us'

[abbeylands]

Interesting points on stats:
Season won drew lost gf ga pts
04/05 17 10 18 54 58 62
05/06 12 14 18 50 65 50
06/07 14 11 21 54 68 53
07/08 14 15 16 60 66 58
08/09 15 15 13 41 41 60 (with 3 games to play)

Less goals conceded this year (although scored a lot less as well), hopefully more points gained and overall less matches lost. So not a disaster and a good foundation for next year. Perhaps we just wanted too mauch too soon?

[davegee]

Interesting to note that he classes it as a "HOBBY" and not a total commitment!!!!

[qprjames]

Excellent interview and fair play to him. Fans are fickle and we forget that with all that has happened since they came in, it is easy to forget that this is their first full season.... Patience is the key, along with the right managerial appointment in the summer.

Agree Del

[PeterG]

What a load of old tosh

that was hardly an interview more a prepared statement

if he is so concerned about the one pay day in the earlybird period is he going to sack whover came up with that plan, if so concerned about prices is he going to sack whoever came up with the price structure.

It is not a FACT that the club would have dissapeared if he had not come in, it is supposition.

he doesnt interfere in the team selection but makes the manager "promise" to play 442

[Del]

Excellent interview and fair play to him. Fans are fickle and we forget that with all that has happened since they came in, it is easy to forget that this is their first full season.... Patience is the key, along with the right managerial appointment in the summer.

[sirpiechucker]

I dissagree mate.
Burnley was last chance saloon.

Beating Ipswich was important because it would have gotten us back to winning ways, and it was at home.

That said, I also dissagree Ipswich was the most important.

For me, the defining part of our demise was the following 4 game sequence...

Norwich (home) 0-1 loss
Sheff Utd (home) 0-0 draw
Doncaster (away) 0-2 loss
Southampton (away) 0-0 draw.

We got 2 points, when in reality we should have won both home games and also away to Southampton which would have gotten us in and around the playoffs. In fact, we'd be level points right now...maybe even 3 clear of 7th as we'd surely have beaten Palace seeing as it would have meant more. Instead, during those 4 games we get 2 loss's and 2 draws without even scoring.

That was shocking and very costly.


Edit: Mis calculation...

We'd have been 2 points off if we'd won three of those 4.

As I said in my response to Pete all 46 matches are arguably as important as each other. If the season was just about these last few games Wolves wouldn't be top.

[Matt Doherty]

Great interview, fair play to him for coming out and giving that.

Would have been easy to hide in his shell after the last week.

I admit i was not happy with the sacking of sousa and the way it was done, however in the long run it may be the right decision.

[andover66]

What FB has stated on the official web site is good enough for me.

[Bluehoop]

did the two of you physically watch those 9 games? Please don't answer the question with another question.

I'm glad you enjoyed them. I didn't.

But anyway, we move on.

I'm 100% with you on this Pete - and yes I watched all 9 plus all the others too. Incidentally, the only time I have EVER called for a manager to be sacked was Dowie, after the trip to Swansea as it was without doubt one of the most embarrassing performances ever - ok we didn't have any shots at goal and Swansea had the ball for about 80% of the game, but my reasons were based totally on the thuggish tactics applied - I have never seen a Rangers team like that in well over 30 years and never want to again,hence my reaction.
As for Sousa, I wasn't convinced and didn't enjoy the football. I didn't call for his head but was pleased when the announcement came.

[davman]

Go on then, a different perspective for you that I posted on another board...

Just a different **opinion** mind...

As with all the other garbage to come out of the board over the last two weeks, this is pure and simple garbage. There are no lies in there, but so many interpretations, its frankly embarrassing. Some examples:

"Paulo wasn't sacked, he had his contract terminated"
"We terminated the employment of John Gregory"

The difference between a sacking and a terminated contract is...

"As a board, we spoke about wanting to see QPR play a more attacking aggressive brand of football in a 4-4-2 formation and he promised us that he would do that"
Absolutely f**king barking. So, a manager is told to play 4-4-2 by a bunch of cretins who know NOTHING about football. Does this mean that we have to play 4-4-2 no matter what the opposition or whether we are home or away? If we are 2-1 down with ten minutes left, he can't go to 3-3-4 or 3-5-2 or 2-0-8 as needs be? If this isn't influencing the team coach then I don't know what is - keep you f**king nose out, Flab, YOU KNOW NOTHING.

"A few clubs approached me for Dexter including Nottingham Forest. I spoke to Gianni Paladini and he advised me that we needed to clear this with Paulo Sousa. Paulo came bck from Portugal on March 26th at lunchtime. Dexter discussed the situation with Paulo and he didn't say anything to Dexter about the possibility of him staying with QPR"

Right, so Paulo didn't say anything to Dexter, that does NOT mean that he arranged the loan deal. On the contrary, it clearly states that the board had already agreed with Forest. Dex is not suited to one up front, so if Sousa wanted to continue with that, how can he guarantee that Dex would be in his starting line up? Also, maybe he felt that he'd been undermined and couldn't be bothered to fight against the interference any more???

Four year plan - "we are progressing very well" - NO, we are not - muppet, we are back to square one on the management front. A new man will have new ideas that will need new players to implement - you going to fund that, or are we?

"We have invested over £34m in the club"
Fine, does that mean that the club does NOT owe you £34m then? If someone wants to buy it off you, can he pay the same £10-20m you paid for the club. Surely, with £34m **invested** the club is debt free, isn't it?

Give it up on the Sousa baiting, settle with him out of court and SHUT UP. Discrimination is clear when you sack someone for doing something and keep others despite them REPEATEDLY doing the same thing. I doubt you have a case...

Then appoint a new man and for f*ck's sake DO NOT mandate 4-4-2 on him you know nothing, arrogant ******.

Thanks,
davman x

[qblockpete]

Always first with the exclusives;D;D;D;D

[BennyBoyRs]

Sorry I disagree. The most important game of the season was Burnley and we lost. If we had won and with them losing on Monday we would now just be three poinst off the play offs and the season wouldn't be over.

Ipswich were never a play off rival so losing to them didn't give them the impetus.

I dissagree mate.
Burnley was last chance saloon.

Beating Ipswich was important because it would have gotten us back to winning ways, and it was at home.

That said, I also dissagree Ipswich was the most important.

For me, the defining part of our demise was the following 4 game sequence...

Norwich (home) 0-1 loss
Sheff Utd (home) 0-0 draw
Doncaster (away) 0-2 loss
Southampton (away) 0-0 draw.

We got 2 points, when in reality we should have won both home games and also away to Southampton which would have gotten us in and around the playoffs. In fact, we'd be level points right now...maybe even 3 clear of 7th as we'd surely have beaten Palace seeing as it would have meant more. Instead, during those 4 games we get 2 loss's and 2 draws without even scoring.

That was shocking and very costly.


Edit: Mis calculation...

We'd have been 2 points off if we'd won three of those 4.

[MYU]

Quite suprised none of have said that 'it could have been anyone' and Flavio didn't say those things because it was not on video?