This sums up our recent management (last season) and players, in that Mr. Mackie is freely hitting the target and scoring.

His current management and players around him at QPR allow him to produce his best.

Due to scoring early on in the season and not being frustrated by playing in the position that he suits best, his confidence is high and therefore no doubt 9 out of 10 shots will probably end up in the back of the net and not in the stands like last season.

Mackie's still young for a striker, and given his appetite for application, will keep on improving for the next few years at least.

But you don't suddenly find finishing ability and control from nowhere. The major difference,I believe, is confidence. It seems the support he is receiving from QPR fans is benefitting him.

Mackie is worth a hell of a lot more than £500,000 and it is fitting that he is able to exemplify this by standing out in a team of wealth and big signings.

Jamie Mackie is a good player playing in a good side under a good manager in the Championship something he never had at Argyle.

They've probably got good supporters, who encourage their players rather than call them headless chickens, schyte, or other demotivating crapology. Maybe, just maybe, now he's out from under the critical microscope he's actually—mad as this might sound—enjoying his football.

Damn shame if we only got £125,000 though, that's just embarrassing!

Disagree.
QPR fans are loving him at the moment and that's not disputable. I have spoken to 2 or 3 hardcore fans, in fact i've regularly spoken to them about plymouth/qpr for many years now, with all 3 of them agreeing that Buzsaky was the only player they fancied from our team years back. Anyway they got their wish for a cheap rate then and nothing's now changed.
Back to Mackie what they love is his never say die attitude. No fans generally like your players that just seem to walk around doing nothing (bwp - who btw I feel should be given another chance, 2 of the goals he scored for us were out of nothing.) Whilst behind the goal at West Ham Chelsea last weekend the Chelsea fans were really giving Drogba a hard time because of his lack of running... or effort or whatever you want to call it. It was quite funny I thought.
Mackie is without doubt a hard-working player with some ability as proven recently. Not as fantastic as people are making out, because fantastic players cut the mustard whatever team they are in, bad or good, BUT he is decent, in fact penzance may have a point with regards to him running his legs off for us and then being too tired to find a finishing product.

However at the moment QPR are top, Mackie is full of energy and has scored 6 in 6, EVEN if he had scored 2 goals, or the 1, they would have praised him. IF QPR were lower down the table then the fans reaction would have certainly been different. If he had scored 6 in 6 then probably not, but if QPR were say 17th and he had bagged 1 goal, regardless of the running around what do you think they would be saying? Ah yes headless chicken springs to mind.

The problem I have is that for Argyle he didn't become a hero, just like holloway. They produced the good elsewhere, you can even loosely say it about Buzsaky although I feel he was more effective then people make out when he was here, even when he had a bad game.
I'm not concerned about Mackie anymore, whilst he worked his socks off with us without any shadow of a doubt, and looked our best player, at times he frustrated and lets look at the facts bagged just two more goals than he has now. Poor sides in the past have gone down with their top striker banging in 15-20 goals - proved themselves at their club, justified a move and that's that. For us I feel, he just fell short, as his assists and goalscoring stats suggest AND THAT'S PROBABLY WE LET HIM GO FOR LESS THAN A MILLION. Otherwise if your saying that Mackie was a great player for us then why the hell was he sold for 500k?? Awful awful decision, EVEN if he ended up being "Ok" for rangers - 500k??? An "ok" striker with potential usually costs around a million. Whilst we couldn't predict he would have had an amazing start, he is probably now worth in the region of 2 million, and qpr spent nearly 2 million on Tommy Smith, a player who is 30 and has a similar goalscoring record as Mackie (albeit for the majority of his career in the championship.)

So to sum up - good luck to the bloke but he isn't ours anymore, all I care about is the fee we got and that was totally and utterly pathetic. I don't really blame Neil "so much love for argyle" warnock, but someone from our club has got it totally wrong. In fact the only time we've got rid of someone for a decent price was Peter Halmosi... but at least he totally cut the mustard with us in the championship and left for the PL. Ebanks (yes I know about the small print in the conetract) Buzz, Mackie, Gosling all argyle prices and i'm waiting for Mason to leave us (probably in january when he has been our bright spark whilst banging in just 5 goals for us) for 275k plus add-ons which we end up losing.

You disagree, fine, I have no problem with that, it's what a message board is all about.

However I still maintain that a player who gives his 100% on Saturday and then logs on here to see the reaction is bound to feel disheartened and demotivated if he sees comments like headless chicken, shiite, league 2 standard at best and so on, those comments are damming and soul destroying and whilst I'm sure some players have a thick skin, others haven't. Now I'm not saying criticism is unwarranted, but imagine someone saying you're useless at your job, it's hardly going to motivate you to perform at your best is it?

All I'm saying lets be aware that our words can and do affect the players moral and confidence, constructive criticism is fine but lets be wise in what we say about individual members of our squad if we want them to perform to their best ability next game.

Just seen that mackie scored twice tonight making it i think 6 goals so far this season.
At Argyle he usually couldnt hit a barn door ,do you think it is our set up that is wrong and do you think we should have held on for more cash seems 500,000 in a undervaluation of him as it seems right now .

The Sun today said we sold him for £100,000

You wouldn't believe the pee-taking I'm getting from my Rangers supporting work-mate He reckons we must be really s**t if someone like him couldn't do anything and says that paying 125K for him is the biggest robbery since the Brinks-Matt.

Now he's winding me up about Mackie in an England shirt!!! UNBELIEVABLE!!!!!!

You disagree, fine, I have no problem with that, it's what a message board is all about.

However I still maintain that a player who gives his 100% on Saturday and then logs on here to see the reaction is bound to feel disheartened and demotivated if he sees comments like headless chicken, shiite, league 2 standard at best and so on, those comments are damming and soul destroying and whilst I'm sure some players have a thick skin, others haven't. Now I'm not saying criticism is unwarranted, but imagine someone saying you're useless at your job, it's hardly going to motivate you to perform at your best is it?

All I'm saying lets be aware that our words can and do affect the players moral and confidence, constructive criticism is fine but lets be wise in what we say about individual members of our squad if we want them to perform to their best ability next game.

I agree with your summary, I really do, but does this apply to every player? Karl Duguid gives it 100% but because he has less ability does that mean he is allowed to be criticised? The point is that you can blame the midfield for a lack of creativity to a certain extent, but Mackie like it or not didn't score enough goals or create enough. There is no doubt about his work-rate for us, and for quite a few games he was certainly our MOM. You could see his potential, you could see his frustration at times, but out of all our players I think he probably got the least abuse, even if you had the odd fan shouting out "headless chicken" or "shoot" or whatever. Does this mean that we need to feel sympathy for Duguid, Clark, *Summerfield, because they give it their all but because of a so-called lack of ability they warrant abuse? (I know your not saying this.)

Mackie clearly fell short at times with us which was frustrating as we knew of his ability, even so you could tell he looked like he could improve, that's why half a million is a silly fee, EVEN taking into account his below par goalscoring ratio for us.
As i've mentioned earlier, good luck to him, not too suprised about his goalscoring exploits so far this season, especially with the balance and quality of the qpr squad at the moment, combine that with his early goals, the crowd behind him, and the confidence (that he already had according to people that know him) = a striker in hot form and one that will be talked about, for now anyway...

*Actually in some respects Summerfield probably falls into the Mackie bracket. Many fans can't wait for him to actually produce the goods elsewhere, to then post on these boards "i told you so." To be fair on him, he has had to put up with a lot of unwarranted abuse (at home) and I don't think he has the belief that Mackie has in his own ability even last season.

I don't think Jamie ever let us down... it was just our bad fortune that he was playing in a woeful team for his 2 years here - one completely devoid of any midfield creativity.

Well done to Jamie. If he keeps it up, Scotland anyone??

Mikel Arteta is more English than Jamie is Scottish.

I don't think Jamie ever let us down... it was just our bad fortune that he was playing in a woeful team for his 2 years here - one completely devoid of any midfield creativity.

Does this then excuse the other strikers that have played with this midfield: BWP, MacLean, Mason, Barnes, Fallon, Sheridan?

Gallagher scored 13 and didn't always play as a striker. Clark, Summerfield, Duguid, Fletcher were our midfielders for the majority of the games. I'm not disputing how bad our midfield have been ever since the exit of Buzsaky, but it can't be solely their fault? Or can it?

Mackie had plenty of chances with us in the last last campaign, BUT as i've mentioned before the only reason must be Penzance's theory. He generally created his own openings, not always, because he would need to be given a lay-off at some point, but a lot of the times he would come deep and by the time he executed his strike he was too tired. How else can you explain misses?? I suppose it's then indirectly the fault of the midfield because they should have done some of the running for him.
I think we have to face facts - Mackie for us gave it his all, he was a threat for us in the majority of the games he played, he was exciting and frustrating at the same time, a bundle of energy, and because of his age could improve, yet he didn't score enough, partly because of the midfield, but partly because of his finishing. The last part is the part that people are having problems with because penzance aside we just have no answer and because of his flying start at rangers it's got to be down to our other players.

I partly blame the full-backs, No seriously I do. Vital position for spreading play and we haven't had a decent RB for years. Even LB.

Mackie's strike rate for us is a red herring.

For the majority of away games, for example, he was our sole outlet - our one man counter attacking force (Mariner tried to change this to a degree on occasions). This would often mean taking on the home side's entire defence, many times breaking from the half way line, and being expected to fashion a goalscoring chance - generally for himself as there'd be too few other options.

At home, he would be a marked man (too few other threats for opposition to worry about - similar to Rooney for England in the World Cup) and as we know, we have found it hard as a collective unit to break down away defences for a long time now. Way before Mackie arrived at the club at least.

At QPR they are rich and lucky enough to have a lot more attacking options on the pitch, alleviating both the issues above, and allowing Mackie to be only one part of a genuine counter attacking unit when reverting to that system, and one of many players dangerous enough to merit close attention form opposition defenders.. you can't man mark them all... thus enabling him to focus more on scoring goals.

Hi Mazza

Do you think a collective sense of fear could have also been partly responsible. A goal scorer who's reluctant to shoot, looking for a pass in front of goal is not likely to score, nor often is the recipient of the pass, whereas a striker in form looking to bury it inevitably will find the net.

I personally think the reason the whole team often fails to live up to their potential—and I think we are potentially a good team in this division, is fear of making a bad pass, shot, tackle etc., particularly when played out of position. Confidence is shot by week in week out defeats, which will take time to overcome, but I'm sure given a settled side we will overcome this.

Only my opinion of course, and to be honest I haven't been to a game this season yet, so what do I know? but looking at the Southampton game we were twice the team second half as we were the first.

Hi Mazza

Do you think a collective sense of fear could have also been partly responsible. A goal scorer who's reluctant to shoot, looking for a pass in front of goal is not likely to score, nor often is the recipient of the pass, whereas a striker in form looking to bury it inevitably will find the net.

I personally think the reason the whole team often fails to live up to their potential—and I think we are potentially a good team in this division, is fear of making a bad pass, shot, tackle etc., particularly when played out of position. Confidence is shot by week in week out defeats, which will take time to overcome, but I'm sure given a settled side we will overcome this.

Only my opinion of course, and to be honest I haven't been to a game this season yet, so what do I know? but looking at the Southampton game we were twice the team second half as we were the first.

I think you make some fair points and maybe it does stem back to your original point about abuse and fear. Justin's last two paragraphs make interesting reading.