Long - Time to go.

[Hugo Boss]

Another game, another blank. The bloke is f*cking useless. A basic, average striker should be knocking in a goal every 3 games at the least yet our "main" striker has one. From the penalty spot.

Everyone in the crowd can see it, why can't McDermott?? Time for him to be dropped IMO, especially as i've been led to believe a bit of unrest is starting to creep in amongst other strikers at the Club who, like us, are in disbelief at the Managers persistence with him.

[Royal With Cheese]

He's like a poor man's Emile Hesky.

[Harpers So Solid Crew]

Many years ago Schards posted that he was and would remain woeful, I may not have seen him live that much, but never has he looked any real use to me either, time to move on Shane, sorry as you are a nice guy.

[loyalroyal4life]

Admittedly he didnt score BUT he was certainly one of the better players on Tuesday. Least he created a chance. Until we get another striker in (which wont happen until at lease Jan) who would you play instead?

Church has missed 2 sitters in 2 games, doesn't exactly bode well does it?

[Terminal Boardom]

He needs a target man aLONGside him to function effectively. Up front on his own and he struggles. Can't complain about his commitment or workrate but there is more to being a striker than running around a lot.

[under the tin]

Get real.
All strikers miss chances.
To hang all this on Long ignores the lack of creativity within the team, and the poor delivery of ball into areas where the strikers can do their stuff.
Mick Gooding picked up on a stat that Reading have won more corners so far this season than anyone else, over 100.
The moot point is whether that is a result of good defending, or the inability of the crosser to get the ball past the defender, and it being blocked off.
Long, Church, Hunt are certainly not in the class of a Messi, who can create something out of nothing; they need help to do their jobs. I don't think that they're getting enough, because our play is becoming predictable, and if the opposition shuts Kebe/Jobi down, our only "plan B" is for Feds to launch it long, which is not good enough at this level.

[Elmer Park]

With only three recognised strikers at the Club and the Management unwilling or unable to bring anyone in on loan we have to deal with what we have and in my view Shane is currently one of our best two strikers at the moment despite his very poor scoring record although he couldn't complain if Hunt and Church had a run together in the side.

We have to hope he can get a goal or two soon and his confidence lifts as it did for a spell last season when he showed he can be a decent player at this level. I don't think he believes in himself and if someone can get him to do that he will become a better player. I also think he is the sort of guy that doesn't thrive on being the 'number nine' and therefore expected to be the main man up front.

When he won the first penalty against Palace and also when he created but missed that chance very early on at Ashton Gate he did what he can be good at and someone needs to tell him to do this more.

Having said all that I do think he himself would benefit from a move at the end of the season. A new challenge might help and if he went to a Club where he was not expected to be the main goalscorer I think the pressure would ease and he would actually start scoring more goals himself.

[floyd__streete]

Long has started just about every game this season and has managed to score one measly bloody penalty. You'd think even the most incompetent striker would have managed to divert the ball into the net at least once from open play this season off his arse or something. Long's performance at Bristol was typical; hard work, zero quality on the ball and an abject failure to get any shots away. Not good enough, he has been given chance after chance after chance at Reading and apart from rare bursts of goals which are proving the exception and not the rule he rarely shows himself worthy of a regular starting place. He doesn't have the intelligence to get into goalscoring positions, and frankly if he didn't 'work hard' (literally the bare minimum I'd expect from any professional footballer) he wouldn't have anything to his game whatsoever.

[Alan Partridge]

Must be some mistake as Snowball factually proved that Long would score 30 goals in this league if he played every game.

I fully expect him to carry on being average until January, then score 6 in 6 and get a new 3 year deal.

[Hoop Blah]

I think the real problem is that we don't have anyone better.

We don't have anyone worse either, their all very average Championship players who might have the odd good game but won't do enough over a sustained period to carry the burden of being our first choice strike force.

[Scarface]

Snowball will probably dredge up some useless stats proving that we're better off without Rasiak and Sigurdson. Well I'm sorry any clown can see that we're desperately missing their goal threat at the moment, as quite simply Long, Hunt and Church are NOT goal scorers, they are all support strikers for an out and out goal scorer.

Unless McDermott does something about this, we could go down as confidence will soon disappear.

[Terminal Boardom]

Long has started just about every game this season and has managed to score one measly bloody penalty. You'd think even the most incompetent striker would have managed to divert the ball into the net at least once from open play this season off his arse or something. Long's performance at Bristol was typical; hard work, zero quality on the ball and an abject failure to get any shots away. Not good enough, he has been given chance after chance after chance at Reading and apart from rare bursts of goals which are proving the exception and not the rule he rarely shows himself worthy of a regular starting place. He doesn't have the intelligence to get into goalscoring positions, and frankly if he didn't 'work hard' (literally the bare minimum I'd expect from any professional footballer) he wouldn't have anything to his game whatsoever.

You mean someone like Paul Brayson?

[Wimb]

Seems to me a similar situation to 2000 (as another titled thread points out) back then we had the likes of Jimmy Mac, Skittles and Brayson and it was only the signing of Butler and Cureton that turned us from a midtable side into one that was capable of moving forward. The same happened when Kitson signed, then Lita/Doyle etc etc.

It's not all Long's fault, he's proved in the past he's capable of finishing a chance and creating things but right now he's not getting the service or the luck and that coupled with lack of form has meant his goals have dried up. This doesn't mean he gets a free pass for his lack of goals but it means it's worth being patient with him. Perhaps he does need a break though, he's played constant football inbetween slight knocks and he's getting clattered most weeks by Championship defenders which can't be fun. Perhaps after Burnley give him a week or 2 off and see if he comes back recharged alongside Hunt or Church.

[andrew1957]

I think that Long is an easy scapegoat personally.

One of the reasons we did so well at the end of last season was that Shane created chances for others - particularly Gylfi to score. He is not a natural goalscorer but he is a good target man. The problem now is that when he wins a flick on or creates space he has no one to pass to most of the time. This makes him look lost and isolated. The alternative is to play 4-4-2 but risk surrendering midfield as I have pointed out before. BUT if we play 4-4-2 Long needs to play off a big striker so we could play Rasiak for that role - oh no we can't we sold him as well.

That is the problem - we have sold our best midfielder and our only true target man and replaced them with no-one.

To blame Long is unfair and I doubt that Hunt, Church or Bignall would have scored many more as lone striker this season - as they would have the same problems.

[Bandini]

I think that Long is an easy scapegoat personally.

One of the reasons we did so well at the end of last season was that Shane created chances for others - particularly Gylfi to score. He is not a natural goalscorer but he is a good target man. The problem now is that when he wins a flick on or creates space he has no one to pass to most of the time. This makes him look lost and isolated. The alternative is to play 4-4-2 but risk surrendering midfield as I have pointed out before. BUT if we play 4-4-2 Long needs to play off a big striker so we could play Rasiak for that role - oh no we can't we sold him as well.

That is the problem - we have sold our best midfielder and our only true target man and replaced them with no-one.

To blame Long is unfair and I doubt that Hunt, Church or Bignall would have scored many more as lone striker this season - as they would have the same problems.

He's a good target man who needs to play off a big striker?

[sandman]

Seems to me a similar situation to 2000 (as another titled thread points out) back then we had the likes of Jimmy Mac, Skittles and Brayson and it was only the signing of Butler and Cureton that turned us from a midtable side into one that was capable of moving forward. The same happened when Kitson signed, then Lita/Doyle etc etc.

It's not all Long's fault, he's proved in the past he's capable of finishing a chance and creating things but right now he's not getting the service or the luck and that coupled with lack of form has meant his goals have dried up. This doesn't mean he gets a free pass for his lack of goals but it means it's worth being patient with him. Perhaps he does need a break though, he's played constant football inbetween slight knocks and he's getting clattered most weeks by Championship defenders which can't be fun. Perhaps after Burnley give him a week or 2 off and see if he comes back recharged alongside Hunt or Church.

What about Forster. Until he and Butler started playing regularly under Pards we werent even a mid table L1 team. If he hadn't got injured it's unlikely Cureton would've been signed.

If only Long was half as good at playing the lone front man as Fozzy was.

[andrew1957]

I think that Long is an easy scapegoat personally.

One of the reasons we did so well at the end of last season was that Shane created chances for others - particularly Gylfi to score. He is not a natural goalscorer but he is a good target man. The problem now is that when he wins a flick on or creates space he has no one to pass to most of the time. This makes him look lost and isolated. The alternative is to play 4-4-2 but risk surrendering midfield as I have pointed out before. BUT if we play 4-4-2 Long needs to play off a big striker so we could play Rasiak for that role - oh no we can't we sold him as well.

That is the problem - we have sold our best midfielder and our only true target man and replaced them with no-one.

To blame Long is unfair and I doubt that Hunt, Church or Bignall would have scored many more as lone striker this season - as they would have the same problems.

He's a good target man who needs to play off a big striker?

He is a "good" target man - the best we have at present - but in my view he would be better off playing off a big striker, so both are true. Church and Hunt are even more lightweight so at the moment we have no choice but to play Long in this role.

[Bandini]

He's not a good target man if he needs to play off a big striker.

You may be right that he is the best target man we have, but that doesn't mean he's any good.

[Hugo Boss]

Admittedly he didnt score BUT he was certainly one of the better players on Tuesday. Least he created a chance. Until we get another striker in (which wont happen until at lease Jan) who would you play instead?

Church has missed 2 sitters in 2 games, doesn't exactly bode well does it?

To answer point 1, Church and Hunt >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Long.

To answer point 2, no it doesn't, however if he was given a run in the starting line up, it would make him sharper and would give him a chance to settle in to the strikers role. If he was given this chance, I have no doubt he will score goals. At least he looks keen and is always looking to snatch a goal, something which sadly can't be said of Long. Long has had his chance and has proven he is NOT a goalscorer.

[andrew1957]

Admittedly he didnt score BUT he was certainly one of the better players on Tuesday. Least he created a chance. Until we get another striker in (which wont happen until at lease Jan) who would you play instead?

Church has missed 2 sitters in 2 games, doesn't exactly bode well does it?

To answer point 1, Church and Hunt >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Long.

To answer point 2, no it doesn't, however if he was given a run in the starting line up, it would make him sharper and would give him a chance to settle in to the strikers role. If he was given this chance, I have no doubt he will score goals. At least he looks keen and is always looking to snatch a goal, something which sadly can't be said of Long. Long has had his chance and has proven he is NOT a goalscorer.

You are assuming that Hunt and Church would have scored more - they have had a fair few chances this season and have a tally of 1 between them. Church looked better off the bench last season but he does not look as sharp this season to me. Hunt probably deserves a run in the side as he needs match fitness and so I would play Hunt and Long when we are 4-4-2.