Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
Poles provide hope, questions remain elsewhere - Knee Jerks
Monday, 26th Sep 2016 11:01 by Antti Heinola

Antti Heinola returns with his reflections on the weekend draw with Birmingham City, where QPR were much improved thanks in part to their two new Polish recruits.

Wszolek

Once I saw the team on Twitter, I mentally noted down the four big kickings the manager would receive from the JFHaters (Hassle-Haters? Jimmy-Jackers? Sorry, I'm not brilliant at coming up with pithy names for people/groups) would receive, probably regardless of result, but certainly if we lost:

1. No Sandro!
2. No Lynch!
3. No 4-4-2!
4. Cousins at right mid!

I was disappointed not to see Lynch start (see below), but the rest I thought were fine. I don't totally go along with the received wisdom that players can only play in one position. The idea that someone who has played football their entire life might be, for example, a liability on one wing but great on the other, or is all at sea in midfield once he's asked to play 10 yards further up the pitch than normal seems a little senseless to me. Not only that, but, rightly or wrongly, most football managers tend to try and get their best 11 players on the pitch (within reason, of course) and if that means a couple play in slightly unfamiliar roles, then they'd rather that than have an inferior player in the side instead. I can see both points of view on it, and obviously it's a case by case thing.

So, I don't really have a huge issue with Ned at right back. He's not my ideal player there, but he is the best we have (as things stand). Perch showed last season how a right footed player can be just as effective, if not more so, on the opposite side. And it's kind of strange that while players playing on the opposite wing to their foot preference will often be given leeway by fans, a centre half playing on the opposite side to his foot preference is rarely offered the same sympathy.

But, I digress. Jordan Cousins just turned 22 in March this year. While centre mid certainly seems his best position (I thought he was very good v Sunderland), at his age Sol Campbell was playing as a striker for Spurs. James Milner was probably still up front then too. At a more comparable level, Martin Rowlands played for years as a flying winger before becoming a midfield general. What I'm saying is, Cousins has much to learn and at this stage I don't have a real issue with him playing right midfield. He has good energy, he's combative, he can pass a ball and on the opening day v Leeds operated very effectively there. Some of the comments about him seem bizarre when you stop and think how young he is. Maybe it's because he carries himself like a much more seasoned professional that he actually is - by way of comparison, Doughty is a year and a half older. Let's try and get behind him a bit wherever he plays, and I suspect he is happy to play anywhere. On Saturday, he started well and actually should have scored when he latched on to Sylla's flick on - that sort of run from our wide players has been rare this season, so it was a good sign that he was getting himself into that position, even if he did fluff the chance.

Still, I agree with many on here, and thought the same at the time, that the early introduction of Wszolek was no terrible thing (apart from the frustrating hamstring injury for Cousins, obviously). From the first minute, Birmingham were happy to sit off us and we found much more space than we did in our last two home games. As a natural right winger, I hoped Wszolek would exploit the space in the way Cousins had already started to.

And he did. He made his debut in just about the worst circumstances possible v Newcastle, and his display was perhaps understandably... not great. But he was much better v Sunderland and then improved even further on Saturday. Here was a case of what Clive has been talking about - an old-fashioned winger playing on his preferred side concentrating on beating his full back and getting a cross in. I don't quite have the same anathema to inverse wingers he does, but here was an example of how dangerous a proper winger can be. He really had the beating of his full back and created probably four presentable chances, two of which were gilt-edged.

He has a trick, he has a decent if not lightning turn of pace, he's square-shouldered and strong and I was particularly impressed with his delivery. The two passes to Chery were not easy, but both were wonderfully timed and perfectly accurate. While we certainly didn't get enough crosses on to Sylla's head (by a long chalk) the decent ones we did manage came from Wszolek's boot. If he keeps improving at this rate, this could be a very good signing. But it's early days. Patience required.

Borysiuk

And at last we can start to see why JFH might have been willing to make the unpopular decision of letting Ale Faurlin go. Finally, a midfielder with vision and an eye for a very decent pass. He looks likely to be our playmaker if he can stay fit (and avoid the yellows) - although, like Ale, he's not exactly the quickest player you'll ever see. Still, this was really encouraging for a full home debut and I thought he and Luongo had a good relationship in the middle of the park. Borysiuk tended to sit, allowing Luongo to be the more all-action midfielder, snapping at heels and trying to break forward and support Chery.

If I was pleased with him before the break, afterwards he just seemed to get better and better. Whether he grew in confidence or just enjoyed the space as Birmingham sat back, I don't know, but as the game wore on I felt more comfortable that when the ball came to his feet if he could spot a pass, he'd play it. A couple of hard, straight, low balls into Chery and Polter in particular were exactly the kind of thing we've been missing this season. And he topped it off with a fine strike that the keeper saved well. Decent full debut. Hopefully more to come.

Chery

For the 4-2-3-1 to work properly, the work load needs to be taken off Chery a little. On Saturday Wszolek did just that, but Chery didn't have the best of games. I heard one fan say he'd let the side down after the game, presumably for his two misses, but that does ignore the fact that he did set up the equaliser with a corner that was every bit as dangerous the three or four he'd already pinged into the box. While there's a bit of an obsession with our inability to score in open play (down to finishing more than chance creation on Saturday), the fact was we looked dangerous from set pieces because of some great delivery from Chery and Bidwell.

But, and it's inevitable, what we'll remember from this game is Chery's misses. Twice Wszolek did brilliantly to get to the byeline. Twice Chery pulled away from his defender. Twice Wszolek looked up and found his man. And twice Chery was denied. First time he beat the keeper (with a very similar strike to the one Austin scored with on Sunday for Southampton) but was denied by a covering defender, once he was denied by the keeper after taking a touch and looking certain to score. It's a cliche, but if there's one player on our team you'd want those chances to fall to and it's him. Sadly, it wasn't to be.

I do however disagree with the idea that we got better when we switched to a 4-4-2 (if indeed it was such a formation - Polter played quite deep). Our best football came after half time but before the Polter sub in my opinion, and should've seen us take the lead. Polter and Sylla certainly caused trouble, but I felt we looked more incisive before the switch. Still, it's undoubtedly a decent option for games when we're looking to equalise or grab a winner.

Sylla

His first 90 minutes, and it appears like we may have snagged a decent one here - he's certainly the extra target man that we needed so we weren't completely reliant on Polter. As with the Sunderland game, I thought he did really well with his back to goal, shielding the ball, using his body and in particular his chest to great effect. I think he'll enjoy Championship football and if we can sling some half decent crosses in to him he'll get some goals. Neither he or Polti will ever be Austin, but between them, if we use them cleverly, they could get 16+ goals a season. Not a bad return.

The downside was his relationship with the ref, who spent one period constantly giving handball against him (I assume it was handball). One in particular was ridiculous, as he missed the high ball and the header by the defender hit the back of his arm. How that could possibly be classed as deliberate was baffling and if the ref did believe three handballs to be deliberate, where was the yellow card? While QPR had a far better second half, the ref had a much worse one.

Hall

Coming back to perception again here. Caulker is a big name and because he's a big name with a big transfer fee attached huge things are expected. One poster this week criticised him for not being an England regular. But I've never really seen the evidence Caulker should ever be on the England fringes, let alone a regular. Where's that come from? Well, it comes from one short period playing well in Spurs' first team - a very good first team - before he was moved on to Cardiff, where he was relegated and then us, where he was relegated again. Now, I'm not denying that he's had problems, nor am I denying that we've overpaid him massively, but I do think he suffers in some fans' eyes because of a perceived reputation of being a 'top, top' centre back. He is a good player, but people expect him to be on a par with... well, a centre back people think is actually good. I'm not sure who that is anymore. Like managers these days, no centre back on earth seems quite good enough for some.

The inverse is true with Hall. Unheralded, on low wages, never made that breakthrough at a Prem club, never been on the fringes of the England team. In fact, he was immediately dismissed by many when he was signed by Les and Ramsey. And so, people were patient. And patience was rewarded with a fine centre back. But in my view, his form dipped badly in the second half of last season, and hasn't much improved this. Caulker, however, is the one many would like to see dropped.

JFH is not one of them. Just one player played 90 minutes in the week and started on Saturday: Caulker. He was also captain v Sunderland. When people ask why Wszolek didn't start - well, he played 90 on Wednesday. Rightly or wrongly, JFH is trying to keep his squad as fresh as possible. That may be wrong when we're yet to find the winning formula, but, when we're playing seven in 21 days, that's his plan. I suspect he knew Saturday's team before the game on Wednesday and nothing that happened on Wednesday, save injuries, would've changed it.

Which is a shame, because for me Hall should be taken out the team for a while. Lynch's experience and strength feels like what we need right now, and I think JFH needs to pick his two CBs and stick with them. Hall was badly at fault for the first goal, he isn't quite strong or aggressive enough and he doesn't win enough in the air - and when he does, the headers away are often not great clearances. I like him, I think he' decent, but for me he's number three out of the three options we have. He did do well in physical tussles after the break (the ref giving him nothing even when his shirt was almost ripped from his back), but he and Caulker together don't quite have the presence needed.

Luongo

He tired before the end, but it was another decent performance from Mass. He wins a surprising amount of the ball, he's creative and calm. Although he did play in the Preston debacle, I felt we really missed him in the games since. He's not quick, but he has some pace and he reads the game very well, often knitting the play together too. He does need to add another dimension - the killer pass, the odd goal - but that (hopefully) should come soon.

He gets accused of being lightweight and yes he did get knocked off the ball conspicuously at one late stage - but moments before he'd muscled two Birmingham players out the way to get it in the first place. Again, he can help that 4-2-3-1 work because he does have the ability to get up and near Chery. A big season for him, but from when JFH first arrived and seemed not to quite have him in his first team plans he seems to me now to be one of our most important players. If only he didn't have to keep flying to bloody Australia ever few weeks.

What was frustrating for me in both halves was the propensity of both him and Borysiuk to sit so deep. Often Onuoha or Caulker or Hall would step up with the ball and instead of making an angle beyond the centre circle, they both dropped to fill the gap left by the defender. It was clearly under instruction, but it was overkill. They don't both need to do it. One of them needs to gamble, to get in front of the ball, and give us more numbers in the opposition half. If we are going to play this formation, this is how it works.

Pictures — Action Images

Action Images



Please report offensive, libellous or inappropriate posts by using the links provided.



Myke added 15:33 - Sep 26
Thanks Antti. it's a bit worrying that neither Borysiuk or Luongo are particularly quick considering JFH prefers a high-tempo pressing style. Perhaps that is why they both dropped so deep. Personally I would like to pair Cousins with Borysiuk in the middle of the park and see how that goes. I agree it's time to give Lynch a run and would probably have happened before now only for his injuries
0


You need to login in order to post your comments

Queens Park Rangers Polls

About Us Contact Us Terms & Conditions Privacy Cookies Advertising
© FansNetwork 2024