By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
There was an end of season debrief with the CEO at Loftus Road last night which I attended. We've whacked the audio on the Patreon, no pay wall on this so you should all be able to listen whether you've got a sub or not - please let me know if that's not the case.
I'll perhaps type the minutes up physically over the weekend if I've got enough in the tank...
Fan sites meeting with Christian Nourry on 08:44 - May 18 by GaryBannister86
Agree with these latter posts. As much as I vehemently disagree with the kids' views, I understand where they come from. When I was their age I didn't care for the inner workings of the management much, it was all about the football and getting behind (admittedly, a much better one..) the team. My views in the long-run were proven to be drivel. I thought Bardsley was no good and Chris Wright the messiah, for lord's sake.
The most obvious thing for how it works was the Marti thing. Both age groups loved him, if you followed the management of the club with scrutiny like we all do it seemed fairly clear he was stitched up. If you don't because you are too busy being young and having fun rather than being old and worrying on this message board / groaning to get out of a chair, then why not take the club / Nourry at face value and see Marti as a snake?
OK we didn't have a social media platform to batter the oldies who may have disagreed, but probably would have done that too :-).
I wonder if other clubs have this age split? I bet they do. It would be nice if the two age groups could respectfully disagree without abuse, however. I am uncomfortable with them capturing things off this board and sticking it on social media to their followers to laugh at. We're all Rangers, and quite clearly they are the club's future and we are not.
[Post edited 18 May 8:50]
I’m sure other clubs do. Bigger clubs it gets a bit lost amongst the millions of random accounts from all over the world but I can’t believe Watford, Charlton etc. don’t have a similar situation.
One thing that is a tad odd though is, as you say, when you were young it was all about the results and all the stuff in the background was either uninteresting or unknown entirely. We have access to a lot more now which may or may not be a good thing. But some people seem to go to great lengths to excuse what’s happening on the pitch because it’s apparently going to be great in the future, which I’m not sure there’s enough to suggest it is.
Don’t moan about getting slapped about by Southampton because we’re cooking. The ballers will be balling next season and if they don’t it’ll be the season after.
0
Fan sites meeting with Christian Nourry on 09:01 - May 18 with 2304 views
Fan sites meeting with Christian Nourry on 08:44 - May 18 by GaryBannister86
Agree with these latter posts. As much as I vehemently disagree with the kids' views, I understand where they come from. When I was their age I didn't care for the inner workings of the management much, it was all about the football and getting behind (admittedly, a much better one..) the team. My views in the long-run were proven to be drivel. I thought Bardsley was no good and Chris Wright the messiah, for lord's sake.
The most obvious thing for how it works was the Marti thing. Both age groups loved him, if you followed the management of the club with scrutiny like we all do it seemed fairly clear he was stitched up. If you don't because you are too busy being young and having fun rather than being old and worrying on this message board / groaning to get out of a chair, then why not take the club / Nourry at face value and see Marti as a snake?
OK we didn't have a social media platform to batter the oldies who may have disagreed, but probably would have done that too :-).
I wonder if other clubs have this age split? I bet they do. It would be nice if the two age groups could respectfully disagree without abuse, however. I am uncomfortable with them capturing things off this board and sticking it on social media to their followers to laugh at. We're all Rangers, and quite clearly they are the club's future and we are not.
[Post edited 18 May 8:50]
Not on thread, but likewise i didnt appreciate Bardsley and Simon Barker also. Think, at the time they were the two that the boo boys decided weren't up to the job. Myself as an impressionable teen, was the sheep that followed the crowd.
Fan sites meeting with Christian Nourry on 09:01 - May 18 by numptydumpty
Not on thread, but likewise i didnt appreciate Bardsley and Simon Barker also. Think, at the time they were the two that the boo boys decided weren't up to the job. Myself as an impressionable teen, was the sheep that followed the crowd.
If only i knew then what I knew now !!
[Post edited 18 May 9:03]
I don't remember Bards copping much, but Barker was seriously underrated and over criticised
1
Fan sites meeting with Christian Nourry on 09:41 - May 18 with 2154 views
Fan sites meeting with Christian Nourry on 08:44 - May 18 by GaryBannister86
Agree with these latter posts. As much as I vehemently disagree with the kids' views, I understand where they come from. When I was their age I didn't care for the inner workings of the management much, it was all about the football and getting behind (admittedly, a much better one..) the team. My views in the long-run were proven to be drivel. I thought Bardsley was no good and Chris Wright the messiah, for lord's sake.
The most obvious thing for how it works was the Marti thing. Both age groups loved him, if you followed the management of the club with scrutiny like we all do it seemed fairly clear he was stitched up. If you don't because you are too busy being young and having fun rather than being old and worrying on this message board / groaning to get out of a chair, then why not take the club / Nourry at face value and see Marti as a snake?
OK we didn't have a social media platform to batter the oldies who may have disagreed, but probably would have done that too :-).
I wonder if other clubs have this age split? I bet they do. It would be nice if the two age groups could respectfully disagree without abuse, however. I am uncomfortable with them capturing things off this board and sticking it on social media to their followers to laugh at. We're all Rangers, and quite clearly they are the club's future and we are not.
[Post edited 18 May 8:50]
Interesting experiment.
I wouldn't go as far as saying 'Richard Thompson is cooking' in 1993 or 1994 but I do remember thinking at the time that those fans protesting against him for the temerity of allowing QPR to finish 5th, then 9th, and 'not pushing on', for selling star players we'd bought low for vastly greater sums were expressing an unbelievable amount of hubris. So it proved, and continues to do so.
Were those protesting Thompson older than me? Not sure. I was early 20s. I definitely thought them daft and wrong, the board more sensible. Thompson was a similar age to Nourry. He didn't pretend to be some kind of football savant, but for a few years he did a very good job in difficult circumstances against a backdrop of harsh vocal fan mistrust.
There are echoes of that now. Of course, Thompson inherited (literally) a far better club than Nourry has. But he succeeded doing exactly what the club is attempting to do now. And during that 95/96 season when it finally collapsed by not replacing Ferdinand properly, he still left a second tier squad which would beat any we've subsequently had and I feel sure if he hadn't sold up, he'd have helped engineer a quicker, perhaps instant return.
But Chris Wright I recognised as a blowhard buffoon from the off, and I have felt that about pretty much every other board subsequently. In many ways, I think Nourry is closer to being the right man than all that have followed Thompson and I hope he succeeds because it'll be more fun.
What they both have as an achilles heel is an inability to bring all with them. Perhaps that is the age divide culture war between fans: there is a vacuum.
But we all broadly agree that there are a few glaring holes in the squad to be filled, a few backstage issues too: fix those this summer and all this washes away. Nothing brings beefing fans together quicker than winning.
0
Fan sites meeting with Christian Nourry on 10:00 - May 18 with 2072 views
Fan sites meeting with Christian Nourry on 08:56 - May 18 by dmm
Some interesting thoughts there, GaryBannister86. I think what's likely to happen to this divergence of views on Nourry is that the finishing position and cup performances over the next few seasons will largely settle whether or not he's a good CEO. It's difficult to argue with reality.
Yes and no.
An important part of assessing someone is not just what they do/achieve but *how* they do it. The best organisations in the world tend to focus on this over the “what” because it’s a better indicator of long term success.
The “how” is what you control. It’s the behaviours you display, the decisions you make, the words you use, it’s how you treat people, how you carry yourself, how trustworthy and honest you are. I want QPR to be led by people who care about the “how” and who try to be good people. Chelsea have always been the sc*m in this area. The ones who’ll do anything for a bit of success, who are nasty and self-centred. QPR and all other clubs have, at times, been led by people with questionable morals, of course. But whenever possible, I’d like the club to be led by people with values, who try to things in the honourable way, whenever possible. Part of my defence of Ferdinand was because he cared, how he carried himself, and the values he tried to instill in the youth set up.
I’ve said elsewhere, I can just about hold my nose on this topic, if it delivers success. The end justifies the mean to some degree.
But whilst the end isn’t yet justifying that, and we haven’t materially progressed, the “how” is so important, more so than the “what”.
Good people are being burnt by the club’s leadership, others are fed up with how they’ve been treated, and the fan base is fracturing, which has been a deliberate social media ploy by the club’s leadership. The leadership is sowing unity, it’s sowing division.
I really dislike the “how” and the end needs to be very very good to justify it.
6
Fan sites meeting with Christian Nourry on 10:15 - May 18 with 2011 views
Fan sites meeting with Christian Nourry on 10:00 - May 18 by Hunterhoop
Yes and no.
An important part of assessing someone is not just what they do/achieve but *how* they do it. The best organisations in the world tend to focus on this over the “what” because it’s a better indicator of long term success.
The “how” is what you control. It’s the behaviours you display, the decisions you make, the words you use, it’s how you treat people, how you carry yourself, how trustworthy and honest you are. I want QPR to be led by people who care about the “how” and who try to be good people. Chelsea have always been the sc*m in this area. The ones who’ll do anything for a bit of success, who are nasty and self-centred. QPR and all other clubs have, at times, been led by people with questionable morals, of course. But whenever possible, I’d like the club to be led by people with values, who try to things in the honourable way, whenever possible. Part of my defence of Ferdinand was because he cared, how he carried himself, and the values he tried to instill in the youth set up.
I’ve said elsewhere, I can just about hold my nose on this topic, if it delivers success. The end justifies the mean to some degree.
But whilst the end isn’t yet justifying that, and we haven’t materially progressed, the “how” is so important, more so than the “what”.
Good people are being burnt by the club’s leadership, others are fed up with how they’ve been treated, and the fan base is fracturing, which has been a deliberate social media ploy by the club’s leadership. The leadership is sowing unity, it’s sowing division.
I really dislike the “how” and the end needs to be very very good to justify it.
I agree with this. It makes me want to downvote my own post above it.
I did really back Ferdinand because he clearly cared for the club, was doing his best - often far better than he was given for credit for - in much harder financial and more volatile leadership circumstances than we have now. I wonder if he'd stayed and, say, Hoos had left instead whether we'd be in a worse shape than currently. I bet the squad would look quite similar as Belk would still be doing the recruitment.
If Ferdinand had stayed, we'd recruited many of the same players, and were finishing 15th still, would the anti-LF campaign many of those kids waged still be raging? Another interesting thought experiment. Because other than the age of the squad - which was inflated mostly by Ainsworth - nothing materially has changed.
0
Fan sites meeting with Christian Nourry on 10:18 - May 18 with 2003 views
Fan sites meeting with Christian Nourry on 09:41 - May 18 by TK1
Interesting experiment.
I wouldn't go as far as saying 'Richard Thompson is cooking' in 1993 or 1994 but I do remember thinking at the time that those fans protesting against him for the temerity of allowing QPR to finish 5th, then 9th, and 'not pushing on', for selling star players we'd bought low for vastly greater sums were expressing an unbelievable amount of hubris. So it proved, and continues to do so.
Were those protesting Thompson older than me? Not sure. I was early 20s. I definitely thought them daft and wrong, the board more sensible. Thompson was a similar age to Nourry. He didn't pretend to be some kind of football savant, but for a few years he did a very good job in difficult circumstances against a backdrop of harsh vocal fan mistrust.
There are echoes of that now. Of course, Thompson inherited (literally) a far better club than Nourry has. But he succeeded doing exactly what the club is attempting to do now. And during that 95/96 season when it finally collapsed by not replacing Ferdinand properly, he still left a second tier squad which would beat any we've subsequently had and I feel sure if he hadn't sold up, he'd have helped engineer a quicker, perhaps instant return.
But Chris Wright I recognised as a blowhard buffoon from the off, and I have felt that about pretty much every other board subsequently. In many ways, I think Nourry is closer to being the right man than all that have followed Thompson and I hope he succeeds because it'll be more fun.
What they both have as an achilles heel is an inability to bring all with them. Perhaps that is the age divide culture war between fans: there is a vacuum.
But we all broadly agree that there are a few glaring holes in the squad to be filled, a few backstage issues too: fix those this summer and all this washes away. Nothing brings beefing fans together quicker than winning.
Thing with Thompson was that we could have won the league or at least got into Europe but instead he decided to sell our best players whilst telling us he supports Arsenal and is more interested in horse racing than QPR.
We were a couple of players away from really competing at the top table and as per usual we missed the opportunity.
1
Fan sites meeting with Christian Nourry on 10:20 - May 18 with 1994 views
Fan sites meeting with Christian Nourry on 10:18 - May 18 by Rangersw12
Thing with Thompson was that we could have won the league or at least got into Europe but instead he decided to sell our best players whilst telling us he supports Arsenal and is more interested in horse racing than QPR.
We were a couple of players away from really competing at the top table and as per usual we missed the opportunity.
Yeah they never really backed Francis, we signed virtually no one other than Steve yates and Trev Sinclair for 3 years and sold the likes of Wegerle, Parker, Sinton and Peacock.
When they did start spending money when they sold Ferdinand they messed it up
It remains a massively missed opportunity rather than a pat on the back for the chairman at the time
1
Fan sites meeting with Christian Nourry on 10:45 - May 18 with 1883 views
Fan sites meeting with Christian Nourry on 10:18 - May 18 by Rangersw12
Thing with Thompson was that we could have won the league or at least got into Europe but instead he decided to sell our best players whilst telling us he supports Arsenal and is more interested in horse racing than QPR.
We were a couple of players away from really competing at the top table and as per usual we missed the opportunity.
There was absolutely no way QPR could have won the league at any point in their history other than 1975/76, and certainly not in PL era. It is delusion to still be saying we were "a couple of players away"! I can't believe you still think this.
We were already competing at the top end of the table under him, along with the likes of Norwich and Blackburn. The latter did win the league in that period by having a billionaire sugardaddy dropping 7 figures on multiple internationals over several seasons. Richard Thompson could not be Jack Walker. He had to trade to keep the club viable, ie sell Sinton for £2.75 m, buy Sinclair for £600k. That's the model.
And as for supporting Arsenal...well, replacing him with a diehard QPR season ticket holder in Chris Wright nearly bankrupted the club, relegated us to the third tier and set it back by a decade at least. So swings and roundabouts there. And Chris Wright preferred Genesis to QPR.
2
Fan sites meeting with Christian Nourry on 10:48 - May 18 with 1862 views
Fan sites meeting with Christian Nourry on 10:00 - May 18 by Hunterhoop
Yes and no.
An important part of assessing someone is not just what they do/achieve but *how* they do it. The best organisations in the world tend to focus on this over the “what” because it’s a better indicator of long term success.
The “how” is what you control. It’s the behaviours you display, the decisions you make, the words you use, it’s how you treat people, how you carry yourself, how trustworthy and honest you are. I want QPR to be led by people who care about the “how” and who try to be good people. Chelsea have always been the sc*m in this area. The ones who’ll do anything for a bit of success, who are nasty and self-centred. QPR and all other clubs have, at times, been led by people with questionable morals, of course. But whenever possible, I’d like the club to be led by people with values, who try to things in the honourable way, whenever possible. Part of my defence of Ferdinand was because he cared, how he carried himself, and the values he tried to instill in the youth set up.
I’ve said elsewhere, I can just about hold my nose on this topic, if it delivers success. The end justifies the mean to some degree.
But whilst the end isn’t yet justifying that, and we haven’t materially progressed, the “how” is so important, more so than the “what”.
Good people are being burnt by the club’s leadership, others are fed up with how they’ve been treated, and the fan base is fracturing, which has been a deliberate social media ploy by the club’s leadership. The leadership is sowing unity, it’s sowing division.
I really dislike the “how” and the end needs to be very very good to justify it.
I understand and agree 100%. In fact, I used to give a talk on exactly that theme.
2
Fan sites meeting with Christian Nourry on 10:51 - May 18 with 1850 views
Fan sites meeting with Christian Nourry on 16:12 - May 16 by Northernr
We were asked at the start to state who we were and who we represent - "Clive, LFW. Andrew, Open All R's" etc. Matt said he was there in his own capacity, representing himself.
Cool, so can all QPR fans attend, representing themselves?
Fan sites meeting with Christian Nourry on 10:45 - May 18 by TK1
There was absolutely no way QPR could have won the league at any point in their history other than 1975/76, and certainly not in PL era. It is delusion to still be saying we were "a couple of players away"! I can't believe you still think this.
We were already competing at the top end of the table under him, along with the likes of Norwich and Blackburn. The latter did win the league in that period by having a billionaire sugardaddy dropping 7 figures on multiple internationals over several seasons. Richard Thompson could not be Jack Walker. He had to trade to keep the club viable, ie sell Sinton for £2.75 m, buy Sinclair for £600k. That's the model.
And as for supporting Arsenal...well, replacing him with a diehard QPR season ticket holder in Chris Wright nearly bankrupted the club, relegated us to the third tier and set it back by a decade at least. So swings and roundabouts there. And Chris Wright preferred Genesis to QPR.
We had this debate before, TK, but I still can't believe your revisionism in thinking Thompson was good. You pick out ONE sell high, replace low that worked, the Sinton v Sinclair. Who did he replace Peacock with? Or everyone else that he flogged left, right and centre. We had a quality squad that he ripped apart and we definitely had a chance of a trophy. Maybe not the league, but the FA or League Cup surely. Yes, yes, he kept us afloat, but.....and the Thompson family were hardly paupers, c. £400m net worth which at the time was more than enough for a decent tilt at trophies. He's certainly been able to invest quite a lot in Cheveley Park Stud, loads of racehorses ever since.
THOMPSON OUT
0
Fan sites meeting with Christian Nourry on 11:02 - May 18 with 1810 views
Fan sites meeting with Christian Nourry on 10:26 - May 18 by daveB
Yeah they never really backed Francis, we signed virtually no one other than Steve yates and Trev Sinclair for 3 years and sold the likes of Wegerle, Parker, Sinton and Peacock.
When they did start spending money when they sold Ferdinand they messed it up
It remains a massively missed opportunity rather than a pat on the back for the chairman at the time
This revisionism is giving me PTSD from the time. It’s Gerry Francis propaganda.
Interesting you say those are the players sold and did not replace. Under Thompson's chairmanship, these are some of the players signed (the best being by Howe):
Gerry’s recruitment was not a patch on Howe’s, but it suited him to make it be known he was being held back by Thompson. It was nonsense. We trying to remain financially viable.
We then spent loads of money when Gerry left, but wasted it all. The trading model totally collapsed under Wilkins as we spent £1.5m on Hateley, £1m on Osborn, £1.25m on Zelic, £600k on Sommer…big sums on rubbish at the time. "We never signed anyone" is absolutely not true. Money was given to coaches to recruit then. As much as I loved Ray the player, he blew it as a recruiter.
Under Thompson, QPR finished in the top division: 9th, 12th, 11th, 5th, 9th, 8th, 19th (boo-hoo, but with a contracted team that included Sinclair, Gallen, Bard, Murray, Brevett, Quashie etc). We also won the SE Counties and got to an FA Cup quarter final. Feats we have not achieved subsequently even with billionaire ownership.
-1
Fan sites meeting with Christian Nourry on 11:23 - May 18 with 1701 views
Fan sites meeting with Christian Nourry on 10:56 - May 18 by GaryBannister86
We had this debate before, TK, but I still can't believe your revisionism in thinking Thompson was good. You pick out ONE sell high, replace low that worked, the Sinton v Sinclair. Who did he replace Peacock with? Or everyone else that he flogged left, right and centre. We had a quality squad that he ripped apart and we definitely had a chance of a trophy. Maybe not the league, but the FA or League Cup surely. Yes, yes, he kept us afloat, but.....and the Thompson family were hardly paupers, c. £400m net worth which at the time was more than enough for a decent tilt at trophies. He's certainly been able to invest quite a lot in Cheveley Park Stud, loads of racehorses ever since.
THOMPSON OUT
No need for 'THOMPSON OUT!' in 2026. You won that battle in 1996: you got him out. And you got Chris Wright in. Well done all. Set the club back, what, 30 years?
I have listed the players bought by various coaches under Thompson in reply to Dave B. As we know, coaches recruited then. RT's biggest error was giving a rookie like Wilkins such a big budget, under pressure. But not as big as those errors that followed. And if we hadn't been drawn away to the best, biggest team in land in 1995 in the FA Cup QF, we may well have won a cup or at least made a final. Fine margins.
Thompson was cooking.
-1
Fan sites meeting with Christian Nourry on 11:26 - May 18 with 1673 views
Fan sites meeting with Christian Nourry on 10:15 - May 18 by TK1
I agree with this. It makes me want to downvote my own post above it.
I did really back Ferdinand because he clearly cared for the club, was doing his best - often far better than he was given for credit for - in much harder financial and more volatile leadership circumstances than we have now. I wonder if he'd stayed and, say, Hoos had left instead whether we'd be in a worse shape than currently. I bet the squad would look quite similar as Belk would still be doing the recruitment.
If Ferdinand had stayed, we'd recruited many of the same players, and were finishing 15th still, would the anti-LF campaign many of those kids waged still be raging? Another interesting thought experiment. Because other than the age of the squad - which was inflated mostly by Ainsworth - nothing materially has changed.
I think the Ferdinand era would have been wildly successful apart from the signings. We did spend, but Incredibly poorly. I think that's where the frustration with the fans comes from. Other teams spent less but got far more bang for their buck than we did.
0
Fan sites meeting with Christian Nourry on 11:32 - May 18 with 1647 views
The really big mistake was wasting the money for Les. He was always going to be impossible to replace, we were always going to struggle without him, but you'd do well to sign a bigger load of dross than we did with that money - Zelic, Hateley, Sommer, Osborn and Gregory fcking Goodridge.
There were plenty of Kasey Keller, Alex Rae, Matt Elliott, Kevin Phillips, Clive Mendonca, Andy Booth types around at that point, several of whom had played very well against us in cup games. They got hoovered up by the likes of Sunderland and Leicester who went sailing past us.
Compounded by the decision to only give Clive Wilson a one year deal just as the Bosman ruling came in.
4
Fan sites meeting with Christian Nourry on 11:33 - May 18 with 1642 views
Fan sites meeting with Christian Nourry on 11:23 - May 18 by TK1
No need for 'THOMPSON OUT!' in 2026. You won that battle in 1996: you got him out. And you got Chris Wright in. Well done all. Set the club back, what, 30 years?
I have listed the players bought by various coaches under Thompson in reply to Dave B. As we know, coaches recruited then. RT's biggest error was giving a rookie like Wilkins such a big budget, under pressure. But not as big as those errors that followed. And if we hadn't been drawn away to the best, biggest team in land in 1995 in the FA Cup QF, we may well have won a cup or at least made a final. Fine margins.
Thompson was cooking.
Well I get your points and will respectfully disagree. Not heard anyone use the phrase "Gerry Francis propaganda" since Dave Mc. If you tell me that the excellent 90s side was all down to Don Howe, then I am pretty sure I will never see you and Dave Mc in the same room :-).
1
Fan sites meeting with Christian Nourry on 11:36 - May 18 with 1620 views
Fan sites meeting with Christian Nourry on 11:32 - May 18 by Northernr
The really big mistake was wasting the money for Les. He was always going to be impossible to replace, we were always going to struggle without him, but you'd do well to sign a bigger load of dross than we did with that money - Zelic, Hateley, Sommer, Osborn and Gregory fcking Goodridge.
There were plenty of Kasey Keller, Alex Rae, Matt Elliott, Kevin Phillips, Clive Mendonca, Andy Booth types around at that point, several of whom had played very well against us in cup games. They got hoovered up by the likes of Sunderland and Leicester who went sailing past us.
Compounded by the decision to only give Clive Wilson a one year deal just as the Bosman ruling came in.
Simon Osborn! Forgot about him, which is probably appropriate. Good song though, BOOM BOOM BOOM let me hear you say Simon Osborn, I believe it went. What an ineffectual player he was.
0
Fan sites meeting with Christian Nourry on 11:38 - May 18 with 1592 views
Fan sites meeting with Christian Nourry on 11:33 - May 18 by GaryBannister86
Well I get your points and will respectfully disagree. Not heard anyone use the phrase "Gerry Francis propaganda" since Dave Mc. If you tell me that the excellent 90s side was all down to Don Howe, then I am pretty sure I will never see you and Dave Mc in the same room :-).
I 100% agree with Dave on this. Howe and very briefly Gould built that 90s team. Just look at the players they signed compared with Francis and then Wilkins. Francis did a great job coaching them, though, especially Les (not that he ever mentioned it, of course).
-1
Fan sites meeting with Christian Nourry on 11:38 - May 18 with 1582 views
Fan sites meeting with Christian Nourry on 11:11 - May 18 by TK1
This revisionism is giving me PTSD from the time. It’s Gerry Francis propaganda.
Interesting you say those are the players sold and did not replace. Under Thompson's chairmanship, these are some of the players signed (the best being by Howe):
Gerry’s recruitment was not a patch on Howe’s, but it suited him to make it be known he was being held back by Thompson. It was nonsense. We trying to remain financially viable.
We then spent loads of money when Gerry left, but wasted it all. The trading model totally collapsed under Wilkins as we spent £1.5m on Hateley, £1m on Osborn, £1.25m on Zelic, £600k on Sommer…big sums on rubbish at the time. "We never signed anyone" is absolutely not true. Money was given to coaches to recruit then. As much as I loved Ray the player, he blew it as a recruiter.
Under Thompson, QPR finished in the top division: 9th, 12th, 11th, 5th, 9th, 8th, 19th (boo-hoo, but with a contracted team that included Sinclair, Gallen, Bard, Murray, Brevett, Quashie etc). We also won the SE Counties and got to an FA Cup quarter final. Feats we have not achieved subsequently even with billionaire ownership.
We finished 5th in 92/93 London's top club and what did we do we sold Sinton to Sheffield fcking Wednesday and then sold Peacock on the last day of the transfer window when we could have potentially got into Europe
It was a massive wasted opportunity at a time when you didn't need to spend ridiculous amounts of money as we already had a very good squad .
To sum it up we had one of the best strikers in the country and then had Devin White as his backup !!
0
Fan sites meeting with Christian Nourry on 11:43 - May 18 with 1536 views
Fan sites meeting with Christian Nourry on 11:32 - May 18 by Northernr
The really big mistake was wasting the money for Les. He was always going to be impossible to replace, we were always going to struggle without him, but you'd do well to sign a bigger load of dross than we did with that money - Zelic, Hateley, Sommer, Osborn and Gregory fcking Goodridge.
There were plenty of Kasey Keller, Alex Rae, Matt Elliott, Kevin Phillips, Clive Mendonca, Andy Booth types around at that point, several of whom had played very well against us in cup games. They got hoovered up by the likes of Sunderland and Leicester who went sailing past us.
Compounded by the decision to only give Clive Wilson a one year deal just as the Bosman ruling came in.
Never understood why in that period of 92-94 we had a great keeper in Stejskal but then kept rotating him with the calamity that is Tony Roberts !
I was young so can't remember why but assume now it was something to do with the back pass rule and Stejskal struggled with his feet !?
Later on also getting Stewart Houston in and then not signing a striker to replace Gallen completely screwed us in the first season after relegation
I'm sure we could have got Curbishley
[Post edited 18 May 11:48]
0
Fan sites meeting with Christian Nourry on 11:46 - May 18 with 1526 views
Fan sites meeting with Christian Nourry on 11:32 - May 18 by Northernr
The really big mistake was wasting the money for Les. He was always going to be impossible to replace, we were always going to struggle without him, but you'd do well to sign a bigger load of dross than we did with that money - Zelic, Hateley, Sommer, Osborn and Gregory fcking Goodridge.
There were plenty of Kasey Keller, Alex Rae, Matt Elliott, Kevin Phillips, Clive Mendonca, Andy Booth types around at that point, several of whom had played very well against us in cup games. They got hoovered up by the likes of Sunderland and Leicester who went sailing past us.
Compounded by the decision to only give Clive Wilson a one year deal just as the Bosman ruling came in.
Wilkins blew it. As a midfielder with such know how to spend £1m on Simon Osborn and £1.25 on Zelic was criminal.
The real sliding doors moment is not appointing Curbishley instead of Wilkins. He would've - and indeed at Charlton - have signed many of those kind of players.
Ironically, we needed a DOF when Gerry left more than anything. Just not Rodney Marsh.
0
Fan sites meeting with Christian Nourry on 11:47 - May 18 with 1518 views
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.