Originally Posted by
The Lone Gunman
City barely managed to string three passes together all night, but in truth they rarely even tried to do that until they were 3-0 up. Overall, the quality of their football was very, very poor.
Smithies did well enough in goal. Peltier played well. Flint was City's man of the match for me, he defended really well and his reading of the game was very good. Morrison was solid enough. Bennett looked dodgy at times, particularly in the first half. Pack was reasonable, although his passing wasn't as good as I expected. Bacuna worked really hard and had a good game overall. Tomlin was a passenger for the most part. Whyte worked his socks off and did well defensively, but didn't do much going forward. Murphy was anonymous. Glatzel looked lost.
Almost all of the team worked hard, defended reasonably solidly and did well in terms of nullifying QPR's main threats, but their football was grim to watch until the last ten minutes or so..
To compare QPR's tactics to Fulham's is inaccurate. QPR were far more adventurous than Fulham. They weren't simply passing it around at the back at all. Indeed, the lad who was at number 10 for them looked far and away the best player on the pitch and the winger on the right looked handy too - those two had a lot of possession in advanced positions. QPR's big problem was they couldn't defend, particularly at set pieces.
Earlier in the thread, someone said QPR had been Warnocked and that just about sums it up for me. Two set pieces, two goals, a 2-0 half time lead that was almost incredible given how little City had created from open play and how poor they had been in possession. The third goal was also very much against the run of play, but we've seen that sort of thing from this side many times before. Usually their football's a bit better, but tonight it was truly awful despite the scoreline.