three goals in eight games - Harry, your negative tactics cannot go on

[Marshy]

I'm not here to knock Harry, I in fact think he did a good job when he first came in tightening the defence. We were leaking goals all over the place, and the first thing he needed to do was stop this. Not only because leaking goals means you are likely to lose, but it also needed to give the team confidence, and Harry did this. So I was very pleased with that.

However, he seems to be continuing with these negative tactics, and this is not on. Against Chelski and Man City, and to some extent, Spurs, I can understand. The aim is to stop them from scoring and hopefully get one, and it worked brilliant at Stamford Bridge, and we got decent points against Man City and Spurs. Well done Harry.

But he got it dead wrong against West Ham and Norwich. These are the kind of games we need to win, because draws will not keep us up. Hammers came into the game on a bad run, same with Norwich (apart from a decent draw against Spurs). So we really needed to go for the win. Yes, it is true if we opened up in these games, we might have lost. But it is all about CALCULATED risks. And we have to start taking risks. Even if we won one and lost one, we would still have got three points, which is better than drawing two.

So Harry, start going a lot more attack minded, a bit like you did during the last 20 minutes against Norwich. Goals win games, and we need wins.

[SuperHoopNik]

He's been in the game for years, he's been in this position before, he see's the lads play in training and knows everything about them and he knows exactly what he's doing. Going all out attack against West Ham would have been a terrible idea, seeing as they had numerous chances and 42 crosses against us when we were parking the bus, imagine if we hadn't? The way we set up against Norwich was sensible with a solid defence and midfield. If Tarbs scored some of his chances and scored that penalty, and if SWP didn't scuff his shot, or Zamora got that header on target then we would have won by a few goals. You see it's not the line up that's the problem, because that's perfect and we're creating enough chances, it's just down to conversion and better finishing. The sooner this is rectified the better. The system that Harry has in place is perfect, no need to change that.

[Marshy]

He's been in the game for years, he's been in this position before, he see's the lads play in training and knows everything about them and he knows exactly what he's doing. Going all out attack against West Ham would have been a terrible idea, seeing as they had numerous chances and 42 crosses against us when we were parking the bus, imagine if we hadn't? The way we set up against Norwich was sensible with a solid defence and midfield. If Tarbs scored some of his chances and scored that penalty and if Zamora got that header on target then we would have won by a few goals. You see it's not the line up that's the problem, because that's perfect and we're creating enough chances, it's just down to conversion and better finishing. The sooner this is rectified we will see more goals from us.

Try telling that to the Saints fans!

[Marshy]

Going all out attack against West Ham would have been a terrible idea, seeing as they had numerous chances and 42 crosses against us when we were parking the bus, imagine if we hadn't?

Paradoxically, if we went more attacking after scoring against West Ham, they would not have had 42 crosses. The only reason they did is because decided we should sit back and defend a 1-0 lead. Had we continued being attacking, we could have scored another, and at 2-0, I think that would have been game over.

[WeAreQPR12]

agree to an extent. We do need to be more attacking, even all the commentators are questioning the tactics.

We need to get much more bodies in the box if we want to start scoring goals.

I think Samba is probably our best goal threat and that pretty much sum's our season up.

[knocker]

He's been in the game for years, he's been in this position before, he see's the lads play in training and knows everything about them and he knows exactly what he's doing. Going all out attack against West Ham would have been a terrible idea, seeing as they had numerous chances and 42 crosses against us when we were parking the bus, imagine if we hadn't? The way we set up against Norwich was sensible with a solid defence and midfield. If Tarbs scored some of his chances and scored that penalty, and if SWP didn't scuff his shot, or Zamora got that header on target then we would have won by a few goals. You see it's not the line up that's the problem, because that's perfect and we're creating enough chances, it's just down to conversion and better finishing. The sooner this is rectified the better. The system that Harry has in place is perfect, no need to change that.

So are you saying Mackie on his own up front was a success ?

[ollyhoops]

Paradoxically, if we went more attacking after scoring against West Ham, they would not have had 42 crosses. The only reason they did is because decided we should sit back and defend a 1-0 lead. Had we continued being attacking, we could have scored another, and at 2-0, I think that would have been game over.

Not that I want to say your wrong, but your wrong! lol The West Ham games was tactically planned and went well. If we have gone 442 we most certainly would had conceded more goals.

Back to Norwich we do lack in strikers, Remy as you are aware is out for 6 weeks, Zamora isn't fit so that leaves DJ Campbell who wasn't well enought to play.

If Tarrabt had scored that penalty we would had won and no more would be said, we was very unlucky in that game but we have definately improved and mark my words we are going to pull a couple of surprise results this month.

[SuperHoopNik]

So are you saying Mackie on his own up front was a success ?

Not really as Remy was injured, otherwise he'd be playing, who else could we have played up front? Bothroyd? or an unfit Zamora? To be fair to Mackie, he did have a couple of good chances. Poor finishing though.

[Marshy]

Not that I want to say your wrong, but your wrong! lol The West Ham games was tactically planned and went well. If we have gone 442 we most certainly would had conceded more goals.

Back to Norwich we do lack in strikers, Remy as you are aware is out for 6 weeks, Zamora isn't fit so that leaves DJ Campbell who wasn't well enought to play.

If Tarrabt had scored that penalty we would had won and no more would be said, we was very unlucky in that game but we have definately improved and mark my words we are going to pull a couple of surprise results this month.

West Ham were totally struggling against Tarbs, Remy and even SWP. We should have gone 4-1-4-1, instead of the 4-2-3-1 that Harry went for. Of course, as you say, West Ham might have scored two, and beaten us. But what if we won that game? We would have two more points. And we need points.

[QPRWEBBIE]

So the way forward is Mbia and Hill as cb's with Diakate or Jenas in midfield and Samba CF

[Marshy]

So the way forward is Mbia and Hill as cb's with Diakate or Jenas in midfield and Samba CF

Mbia, CB? I'd rather have SWP as CB than Mbia!

[QPRWEBBIE]

Mbia, CB? I'd rather have SWP as CB than Mbia!

So you don't think MBia done very well when he played there,considering it was within his first few games for the club and PL football I thought he read the game well and has pace to cover. He can't be that bad as he had many good reviews while playing in that position last season.

[vespa]

I'm not here to knock Harry, I in fact think he did a good job when he first came in tightening the defence. We were leaking goals all over the place, and the first thing he needed to do was stop this. Not only because leaking goals means you are likely to lose, but it also needed to give the team confidence, and Harry did this. So I was very pleased with that.

However, he seems to be continuing with these negative tactics, and this is not on. Against Chelski and Man City, and to some extent, Spurs, I can understand. The aim is to stop them from scoring and hopefully get one, and it worked brilliant at Stamford Bridge, and we got decent points against Man City and Spurs. Well done Harry.

But he got it dead wrong against West Ham and Norwich. These are the kind of games we need to win, because draws will not keep us up. Hammers came into the game on a bad run, same with Norwich (apart from a decent draw against Spurs). So we really needed to go for the win. Yes, it is true if we opened up in these games, we might have lost. But it is all about CALCULATED risks. And we have to start taking risks. Even if we won one and lost one, we would still have got three points, which is better than drawing two.

So Harry, start going a lot more attack minded, a bit like you did during the last 20 minutes against Norwich. Goals win games, and we need wins.

i make you right on this one Marshy, we need the 3 points and if we dont try to play football against the likes of West Ham and Norwich ,we dont deserve out place in the prem

[Marshy]

So you don't think MBia done very well when he played there,considering it was within his first few games for the club and PL football I thought he read the game well and has pace to cover. He can't be that bad as he had many good reviews while playing in that position last season.

He hasn't played badly, just don' trust his temperament.

[acricketer]

Just did the BBC Predictor. Villa Norwich and Fulham all to go down on 34 points. We got 39 points:pleasantsuprise: