QPR post match.

Jonathan Prendergast wrote:

Min Shan wrote:imo, its complacency that crept in. there was no sense of urgency after the equalizer. look at the first 20 mins of second half, they were just passing the ball around without real intent of attacking. maybe this is one of the effect of the many comebacks this season, and the players may feel that they'll somehow win it in the later part of the game.

why did they feel complacent in this game and not any of the previous ones? I here it every time on here. Whenever we lose, it's down to complacency or lack of effort. what about when we lose twice in a row? is it lack of effort in the second game? we were probably 'just passing it around' as QPR were closing down the spaces and blocking off supply to RVP. i think it's too simplistic, and not looking into the game in any depth.

“It is difficult to explain because we prepared as usual,” Wenger told Arsenal Player. “Maybe we sensed it would be easier than usual and once you have that in your heads it is difficult to come back to reality."
"We got a reality check. I just believe that our performance was not at the level we have recently produced."

even the manager himself has said this. and the body language from the players when searching for a winner says alot.

'what about we lose twice in a row?' every game is different, so if we happen to lose again, which i hope not i'll still judge on a game by game basis. it could have been a bad/unlucky day for the team. like i said 'imo', others could have different opinion. the reason why i'm here sharing my view is simply to share and read others opinion. i'll like to know your views on the game too. =)

back to this game, QPR was playing decent football, and nowhere near superb. however credit to QPR, they do deserved the win if you compare the performance from both side. and about 'closing down the spaces and blocking off supply to RVP' isn't that what almost every team tried when playing against arsenal? there are teams that does it better than QPR and arsenal still manage to breakthrough. that's the difference.

Min Shan wrote:

Jonathan Prendergast wrote:

Min Shan wrote:imo, its complacency that crept in. there was no sense of urgency after the equalizer. look at the first 20 mins of second half, they were just passing the ball around without real intent of attacking. maybe this is one of the effect of the many comebacks this season, and the players may feel that they'll somehow win it in the later part of the game.

why did they feel complacent in this game and not any of the previous ones? I here it every time on here. Whenever we lose, it's down to complacency or lack of effort. what about when we lose twice in a row? is it lack of effort in the second game? we were probably 'just passing it around' as QPR were closing down the spaces and blocking off supply to RVP. i think it's too simplistic, and not looking into the game in any depth.

“It is difficult to explain because we prepared as usual,” Wenger told Arsenal Player. “Maybe we sensed it would be easier than usual and once you have that in your heads it is difficult to come back to reality."
"We got a reality check. I just believe that our performance was not at the level we have recently produced."

even the manager himself has said this. and the body language from the players when searching for a winner says alot.

'what about we lose twice in a row?' every game is different, so if we happen to lose again, which i hope not i'll still judge on a game by game basis. it could have been a bad/unlucky day for the team. like i said 'imo', others could have different opinion. the reason why i'm here sharing my view is simply to share and read others opinion. i'll like to know your views on the game too. =)

back to this game, QPR was playing decent football, and nowhere near superb. however credit to QPR, they do deserved the win if you compare the performance from both side. and about 'closing down the spaces and blocking off supply to RVP' isn't that what almost every team tried when playing against arsenal? there are teams that does it better than QPR and arsenal still manage to breakthrough. that's the difference.

I was talking generally, rather than your response particularly. 'I here it every time on here. ' . Every time we lose, it is suggested by the majority on here that it is a lack of effort.

Wenger has tabled this as one of a many possible reasons this time also. But the comments I read congratulated QPR noting they are a team fighting for survival. But more importantly, Wenger is very constrained about what he can say. He can hardly say we lost due to Vermaelen, or give away possible tactical reasons why we lost.

I don't think the performance level was much different to the Villa game. But there, we scored, they pushed forward a bit, and we scored again. In this game, if it weren't for the Taraabt goal from the Vermaelen error, and we took the lead via Walcott, then scored again through RVP's 1-on-1, no doubt, the game would have been very different. We may have even gone on to score a couple more. It's a fine line.

Regarding restricting space and supply to RVP. It is easier said than done. QPR did it successfully, for most of the game. They were assisted by a small pitch.

I agree, lack of commitment is too easy an answer. I think our performance was down to more than just that. It's not like we were outbattled for the whole game. They had a slight physical edge, a large one in the case of Zamora against our CBs, but that's not what won them the game.

We lacked spark, exemplified imo by the lack of impact by Song and Rosicky, two of our best players in recent weeks. We refused to take a shot from the edge of the area, like a Hleb greatest hits compilation all over again. We had too few sources of genuine creativity. Walcott barely counts imo, so much of what he does depends on the service he receives from other people.

John Foxall wrote:I agree, lack of commitment is too easy an answer. I think our performance was down to more than just that. It's not like we were outbattled for the whole game. They had a slight physical edge, a large one in the case of Zamora against our CBs, but that's not what won them the game.

We lacked spark, exemplified imo by the lack of impact by Song and Rosicky, two of our best players in recent weeks. We refused to take a shot from the edge of the area, like a Hleb greatest hits compilation all over again. We had too few sources of genuine creativity. Walcott barely counts imo, so much of what he does depends on the service he receives from other people.

In terms of shots form outside the box, the generally had a couple of players camped at the top of the box. So easier said than done I think.

It's been a few days since the game, but from memory, was their second goal against the run of play? We were playing quite well in the second half until then.