Match Reaction vs QPR

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Letters

Why was that the key one? They're all key ones aren't they?

We're not going to win every single game, strangely it's the two games we've played best in - Utd and Everton - that we've not won. We've rather stumbled through the rest and won them all.

---

The key games have been the ones where we've dropped points all season, in particular the ones where a more clinical striker (*cough* RVP) may have managed to secure us the three points. It still amazes me that we can sell RVP for "footballing" or even financial reasons when not having in the team may cost us 25 million+ from not being in the CL next year.

Some people seem to retrospectively declaring a game 'key' because we dropped points.
Agree if we had a proper striker we'd have beaten Everton, that was a good performance.
But on Saturday Spurs leapfrogged us, we played later in the day knowing we had to win. Had we not done so people would have said we bottled it. Right now they're all key games.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Where's my username gone?

That was our game in hand, so it came with some psychological baggage. I think an argument can be made that because of that, it was the one that came with the most pressure and the one that we cracked in.

---

We didn't crack, it was one of our best performances in the recent run. We just don't have a clinical striker. If we had one we'd have won that game.
Is it not a key game on Saturday when we've just seen Spurs leapfrog and know we have to win to keep in the hunt for 4th?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Power_n_Glory

20 goals and 14 assists is a decent return for an ordinary player. We've had better players but some haven't even come close to those sort of numbers and they played alongside better players. If this is a shit season for Theo, what's he going to be like if he's really in form and carries it through for a whole season?

The contract situation is a funny one. It makes no sense bitching about the players wanting competitive wages and then bitching about the penny pinching, asset stripping Board. We can't have it both ways and I hope as a club we're now willing to pay competitive wages otherwise we'll continue to fall behind. He wanted a better contract like all players do and he got it. It would have been senseless to dig our heels in because you know we'd never have spent to replace him because we're looking at spending £20+m and over £100k a week on a winger that can get that many goals and assists plus scare the defenders senseless. I hope we've now passed that threshold and we're now willing to spend.

---

I still think your comparison point is meaningless - different players, eras, roles and competitions as past first teamers were rotated heavily if played at all in Cup games and they played in teams where loads were more evenly and widely spread.

But your point in bold is what I have issue with here. Why Theo? What was the fricken point in letting genuine superstars, world class superstars go, but then decide to make a financial outlay on him? This isn't about having it both ways or indeed the best of both worlds, it is the worst of everything. A masterclass in fucking up what incredibly was in our very recent history, a world class football club - with the best of all worlds in almost every position, and players on the bench we can only dream about being in todays first team.

And we make a stand with Theo? Really?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Letters

We didn't crack, it was one of our best performances in the recent run. We just don't have a clinical striker. If we had one we'd have won that game.
Is it not a key game on Saturday when we've just seen Spurs leapfrog and know we have to win to keep in the hunt for 4th?

---

Yes, it is. All of them are, as you say. But the reason everyone points to the Everton one is because it was our game in hand, which comes along with certain connotations. And fair enough, I didn't see it given that I think it kicked off at 4:45am here.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GB.

I still think your comparison point is meaningless - different players, eras, roles and competitions as past first teamers were rotated heavily if played at all in Cup games and they played in teams where loads were more evenly and widely spread.

But your point in bold is what I have issue with here. Why Theo? What was the fricken point in letting genuine superstars, world class superstars go, but then decide to make a financial outlay on him? This isn't about having it both ways or indeed the best of both worlds, it is the worst of everything. A masterclass in fucking up what incredibly was in our very recent history, a world class football club - with the best of all worlds in almost every position, and players on the bench we can only dream about being in todays first team.

And we make a stand with Theo? Really?

---

It's far from a meaningless comparison in light of all the criticism he's getting and that shouldn't be that hard to work out. If he's that useless he wouldn't be able to rack up those sort of numbers. It makes no difference about rotation and the era they played in because it's not as if other wingers we've had like Arshavin and Gervinho have come close to matching those numbers. We always refer back to the Invincible period as the gold standard so why should this be ignored when no other winger has scored 20 in one season for us? It's obvious he's not better than them and that's not what I'm driving at. Just look at some the deluded comments and think about his contribution this season and it's obvious there is a middle ground here. He has to work on his game but to get so many goals in a squad like this and when he's so flawed is something to think about.

As for the contract situation, you have to start somewhere. Maybe the backlash against the RVP sale woke them up and they finally saw how deflated the players and fans were. Theo was the next player in line for major contract talks and it would have been another kick in the teeth to let him go. They made two massive blunders in the summer and third would have been crazy. You just have to hope this change in approach doesn't stop with Theo.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Where's my username gone?

Yes, it is. All of them are, as you say. But the reason everyone points to the Everton one is because it was our game in hand, which comes along with certain connotations. And fair enough, I didn't see it given that I think it kicked off at 4:45am here.

---

I never really understand people pointing to a game and saying that was the game in hand. Yes, it was originally the game which was postponed but things then get so muddled up it becomes meaningless. In fact, when we played Everton we'd played the same number of games as Spurs, after we played them they then had a game in hand over us.

There have been plenty of shitty draws (Sunderland, Stoke) and defeats (Swansea, Norwich!!!) so it seems odd to point to the everton game as the key.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Grimandi's Perm

There have been plenty of shitty draws (Sunderland, Stoke) and defeats (Swansea, Norwich!!!) so it seems odd to point to the everton game as the key.

---

It was key in that we went into it knowing what it meant. That said, I haven't got an issue with our performance in that particular match. I thought we played really well, and even though it was scoreless, it was entertaining - one of the better matches this season imo.

We went into Saturday's knowing what it meant too, especially as Spurs had already won.