On a day when I should be scribbling down some nice things to say about Doyler as he bids us farewell, my head has been turned by a horrid little article by a QPR fan on Fans’ Network.

Thanks to bertilad on Twitter for bringing to our attention this piece, which is written with such misplaced condescension, and a consistent snarl throughout.

You can’t avoid bias in these sort of articles, and I’ve not got a problem with it. You expect the odd delusional piece. This goes far beyond warranted or accurate criticism though.

It’s clear that he’s been influenced heavily by the media perception of us this season, and decided that instead of taking time to analyse how we actually played on Sunday, would just use every opportunity to preach his footballing morals, because they’re top and he can.

Such a short memory.

I should just say that I haven’t a problem with QPR at all. They’re top and deserve it. I take issue with this article though – no need for it, whatsoever.

Anyway, I shan’t influence your view of it any further. Have a look for yourself:

Late Routledge winner gives Hoofroyd the blues – Fans Network / QPR

19 comments

  1. Coventry were a handful and worried me right up until the final whistle. Westwood and King stood out, but it wasnt hard to see why you’ve had so many positive results this season. Rangers fans seem to sit in two camps at the moment, either certain we are going up and gloating at every opportunity, or convinced we are only moments from meltdown and destined for a mid table finish. We’re so used to be let down, we’re not sure quite how to act. Anyways, i say well played on sunday, more deserving of a point than bristol city were.

  2. AHAHAAA, couldn’t agree more with the article by the qpr fan. For Boothroyd to say the difference between us and you is taarabat is and absolute joke. Warnock has got a system that runs efficiently and the team is working like clockwork at the moment. You coventry fans are jealous and can’t fill your stadium. Probably because you play awful football.

  3. Completely disagree. The piece is written from a firmly QPR perspective, and he doesn’t mince his words when talking about Bothroyd and some of your lads, but a couple of your points are way wide of the mark.Firstly you can’t argue that the guy doesn’t have a point. You did spend a majority of the game hoisting it up to King, which didn’t make for great viewing. We did play the better football and did deserve the win. I’m a QPR fan but come on mate-you can’t argue with this stuff, which was the gist of what the article was getting at.Secondly if you’re going to slate this guy do some research into him. Did you notice how long, detailed and well written the match report was (albeit, as I’ve said, far from complimentary about you guys)? I don’t know about you but I would much rather read an equivalent from a Cov fan than a couple of bland, inoffensive, weak-as-piss paragraphs on BBC sport. And your point about him being influence by the media perception of your side-look at the some of the match previews that are put out before every game. He writes pages on each side in the league, detailing their recent history, who their best players are, where there managers have been etc. It’s all there-delve a bit deeper into the website and see for yourself. This is a committed, knowledgeable fan writing this stuff-certainly not someone to be affected by whatever “media perceptions” of your team happen to be doing the rounds this season. If someone wrote stuff like that about QPR my first inclination, like you, would be to mouth off about it. We’re all fans of our respective clubs it’s impossible not to. However if my team had played poorly, or had clearly been second best, and I could see that the article in question was written by someone who a) knows what they’re writing about and b) knows how to write, then I’d like to think I’d think twice.

  4. I feel let down by the QPR “fan” who wrote that!We are a good bunch and this person doesn’t reperesent many of us.They oftern write bad articals and incorect facks on that site!Coventry are a great team, though your old ground was great and new one a bit dull!

  5. Thanks everyone for the comments. I accept our views of the game are going to differ, and don’t question the guy’s commitment to what he does. He bloody well does know how to write, and the fact that we read what he’s got to say obviously means he’s doing something right. I referred to him as ill-informed, as I genuinely can’t see the basis behind many of his criticisms though (“Coventry a non-league side in style and morals”??)But as you can understand, as a Coventry fan, I’m going to question his scathing assessment and the general contempt shown towards us. I’m a harsh critic myself, and I acknowledge we have played an awful long ball game at points this season. I reckon this and the idea that we’re a dirty team, have been wound up by the media though, which will always influence opinion and focus peoples’ minds but one way. Yes, we played some long balls, but what side doesn’t? And if you ask me, we’re far too soft.It was a mixed performance and at times Taraabt and Routledge made fools of our defenders. But we did take the lead, and as many of the neutrals reporting have said, we contributed to making it an entertaining game of football. I’ve seen teams go to Loftus Road and get destroyed this season. As with most things football-related, there’s never going to be a right or wrong, just a different perspective. I suppose my main grievance was the patronising nature of his perspective, especially given the similarities between our 2 clubs over the last decade.

  6. As a QPR fan, got to say its harsh article. Yes Boothroyd is Mr Hoof but can hardly call Coventry non league. As you say you are prob a similar sized club to ourselves and there have been much worse teams at Loftus Rd this season: you had several chances and caused us problems. Whatever you think of the rapist he was the best centre forward on the pitch by a distance. I felt robbed the other week when Bristol City snatched a late equaliser after Rob Hulse missed about half a dozen chances but Saturday wasn’t quite so clear cut: thought we were the better side but I also thought Coventry battled hard and contributed to a good match. Rangers fans need to remember (and the vast majority still do) that we were pants two or three years ago. Equally, didn’t think it was v gracious of Boothroyd to make out our win was down to Taraabt alone because I’m not sure Coventry had a Derry or a Routledge either (imho).Anyway, no hard feelings Coventry fans and good luck for the rest of the season

  7. I’m a QPR fan, and I read the Loft for Words articles on a regular basis.Clive Whittingham is one of the best writers among QPR fans out there, but on this occasion I’ll have to agree with the Coventry fan. There IS a patronising line amongst the match report itself, and it is uncalled for.I remember an Arsenal blogger who incidently happened to watch our win at Palace last autumn. He was patronising to say the least, and was scathed in the QPR forums afterwards.I’d love to go up without having to twist the knife towards a classic team and their followers.You’re time will come Coventry. I’m sure of it.regardsTerje

  8. Goodness me it’s turning into a mini-Andy Gray saga all this.As author of the match report I’ll have a bash at defending it as an honestly held opinion of a match I went to see. That’s all LFW ever is, honestly held opinions mainly from myself about football I’ve sat and watched. I object absolutely to the claim that the report is merely the result of me being influenced by some false media perception of Coventry this season that I have copied for my own benefit. If there is football on I will watch it. I’ll watch QPR, Arsenal, Scunthorpe, Coventry, Corby Town, Rushden and Diamonds. I’ll watch it religiously. I have sat and watched Coventry play this season and the tactic is clear – get it up to King ASAP as soon as you receive it. That’s an observation I have made myself by sitting and watching Coventry play this season, not something I’ve heard Steve Claridge say and copied. If you want to tell me it’s not the case, and that Coventry have actually played lots of free flowing football while I’ve been elsewhere watching my team then by all means do so. Having formed that opinion, and had it enhanced by the way you approached Sunday’s game, should I actually have expressed a different opinion in the match report to the one I hold for fear of upsetting Coventry fans? I’ve heard this criticism that I’m simply having a go because we’re top and I can. Not true. Last season we lost at the Ricoh in the middle of a run of 15 games where we won once. I thought you were bloody awful then and said as much. I have no idea what relevance QPR being top of the league has on me expressing opinions about the team we play. Type ‘full match report’ into the search facility on our site and look back at reports of our home games with Burnley, Watford and Norwich this season. I’m not critical for the sake of it.It’s just a natural reaction when you see criticism of the team you love written by an outsider to try and defend your tribe, I get that and we’ve had the same thing with the Arsenal post mentioned above and various rants from Mick Dennis and Charles Sale. But when I’ve asked the City fans who have commented on it whether they think I’m wrong and in fact their team is good to watch I have had no reply. I’ve had a read down your blog tonight and it seems, particularly after a recent game with Barnsley, you actually agree with large amounts of what I’m saying. And, ultimately, why does anybody at Coventry even care what some QPR fans thinks about them?

  9. I think it’s the tone, Clive. We all read criticism of our teams, but having read your article, it wasn’t just a passing comment, but 4500 words packed-full of insults towards Coventry. Like I say, I am a harsh critic of Coventry, and as you’ve read through my blog you’ll see that if things aren’t looking good, I’ll say so. I don’t necessarily think we were brilliant on Sunday, and there were moments when I was tearing my hair out at our play (in the second half)… but that’s not a damning condemnation of our performance as whole. First half especially, I thought we looked dangerous yes, at many points, we were good to watch. It’s too easy to forget these things.So to then read your comments, not only giving our team grief and seemingly forgetting our contribution to the game, but coming up with things like “objectionable Sammy Clingan”, which if you watch him week in week out, seems staggering (he’s a nice lad, is Sammy). There’s just a lot more than having a go at how we play in there.This debate could rage on, but I think what it all boils down to is respect and when you talk about another team, you’ve got to expect a response if what you say crosses a line. I accept you’re writing for a specific audience, but when you produce a piece like you have and send it out to the world, as Coventry fans, chances are we’ll see it and have a slightly different opinion to you.Ta for your response.

  10. signing King has probably got a lot to do with the way QPR and other fans feel about Coventry. Absolutely no justification for it whatsoever. Utter scumbag. Your management has let you down.

  11. Did someone mention the Andy Gray saga. I don’t know why Sky bothered to sack him now, he’s been talking utter S%*t about the game for years.

  12. Having read the report, I can understand where you’re coming from, even as a QPR fan. Normally Clive’s stuff is very good – well written, witty and playful – but this one does cross the line from playful to insulting at points, particularly in the opening paragraphs. That said I agree with his basic point – Coventry were horrible to watch. In his defence Clive is very knowledgeable, if you doubt it look at his coventry preview (ok it insults Bothroyd, but Bothroyds horrible playing style is always going to attract this kind of criticism, just like Warnock’s way of handling himselfs attracts it too – beyond that I think he gives a pretty fair analysis of Coventry in the preview). Strangely enough we’ve had our share of managers with bad football and not much better results (Paul Hart and Mick Harford were two of the worst in recent times) and its not fun, fingers crossed something turns around for you – better results or better football!

  13. Got to say my first reaction to article was that it was VERY HARSH on Coventry, they played some great stuff during the match and i was relieved when the final whistle went. Marlon King was a handful and their keeper kept Coventry in the hunt, although theyre a better side than Bristol City. To call them a non league side is VERY DISRESPECTFUL. Yes us Rangers fans have had so many let downs in the past its not surprising some of us are waiting for the wheels to fall off !!! LASTLY OUR POOR ATTENDANCES ARE DOWN TO THE RIDICULOUS PRICES NOT ONLY HOME FANS HAVE TO PAY BUT THE AWAY FANS TO.

  14. I can see that describing Clive as ill-informed hasn’t gone down well, so just to clarify that: Agreed, the detail he goes into in everything he does is impressive. But unless he’s been down to the Ricoh and watched Coventry regularly this season, I stand by my statement that he’s ill-informed when it comes to writing in that way about us.There’s never going to be an agreement on how well we actually played on Sunday, but it’s good to see some QPR fans understanding my annoyance at the unnecessary tone of the report.

  15. To be fair, it is a bit harsh. It sounds like our chap has a real gripe with Aidy Boothroyd and he’s taking it out on Coventry the club. I myself took umbrage with Boothroyd’s tactics and very much his “without Taarabt they’d be mid-table” comment, so perhaps that helped wind Clive up. Obviously, signing Marlon King adds ammunition. Also, in case you somehow missed it, QPR were going to sign King, but the outcry was so great Rangers backed out and he went to Coventry instead. Clive probably realises that with a quality striker like King, we’d be 10 points clear already, so it’s galling to see him playing for you lot, it feels a bit like you’ve cheated. I’m not blaming you for it of course and to be honest i’d have taken King if i thought it wouldn’t attract too much stick.You must admit, there were a few funny lines though! The bit about taking Freddie Eastwood off for another big ba**ard and the greatest aerial bombardment seen in London since the war started had me chuckling.On balance, he’s a great writer, we think a lot of him, and it would have been a travesty for Rangers not to take the three points, but i’d agree it was a little offensive…Never mind.

Leave a Reply