Long - Time to go.

2027 posts
User avatar
Hugo Boss
Hob Nob Subscriber
Hob Nob Subscriber
Posts: 2183
Joined: 13 Apr 2004 22:48
Location: Retrieving the FFF ball from the car park.

Long - Time to go.

by Hugo Boss » 21 Oct 2010 06:49

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. :roll:

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.

User avatar
Royal With Cheese
Hob Nob Addict
Posts: 5700
Joined: 15 Apr 2004 07:45
Location: location location

Re: Long - Time to go.

by Royal With Cheese » 21 Oct 2010 07:12

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

User avatar
Harpers So Solid Crew
Hob Nob Addict
Posts: 5229
Joined: 06 Jul 2004 08:39
Location: enjoying the money

Re: Long - Time to go.

by Harpers So Solid Crew » 21 Oct 2010 07:39

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
Hob Nob Addict
Posts: 5560
Joined: 15 May 2007 11:58

Re: Long - Time to go.

by loyalroyal4life » 21 Oct 2010 09:46

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
Hob Nob Addict
Posts: 7791
Joined: 15 Aug 2008 19:50
Location: No more egodome until the daft old coot leaves

Re: Long - Time to go.

by Terminal Boardom » 21 Oct 2010 09:50

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
Member
Posts: 822
Joined: 15 Jan 2010 09:21

Re: Long - Time to go.

by under the tin » 21 Oct 2010 10:15

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
Member
Posts: 693
Joined: 12 Nov 2008 16:02

Re: Long - Time to go.

by Elmer Park » 21 Oct 2010 10:19

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.

User avatar
floyd__streete
Hob Nob Addict
Posts: 8326
Joined: 19 Jan 2005 18:03
Location: ARREST RAY ILSLEY.

Re: Long - Time to go.

by floyd__streete » 21 Oct 2010 10:29

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.

User avatar
Alan Partridge
Hob Nob Subscriber
Hob Nob Subscriber
Posts: 7368
Joined: 14 Apr 2004 13:25
Location: In a daft little ground, watching a silly game so fcuk off

Re: Long - Time to go.

by Alan Partridge » 21 Oct 2010 10:31

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.


User avatar
Hoop Blah
Hob Nob Super-Addict
Posts: 13937
Joined: 14 Apr 2004 09:00
Location: I told you so.....

Re: Long - Time to go.

by Hoop Blah » 21 Oct 2010 10:35

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
Hob Nob Regular
Posts: 1050
Joined: 14 Apr 2004 08:59
Location: I Love Spacecruiser

Re: Long - Time to go.

by Scarface » 21 Oct 2010 10:56

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
Hob Nob Addict
Posts: 7791
Joined: 15 Aug 2008 19:50
Location: No more egodome until the daft old coot leaves

Re: Long - Time to go.

by Terminal Boardom » 21 Oct 2010 11:08

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.


You mean someone like Paul Brayson?

User avatar
Wimb
Hob Nob Regular
Posts: 4397
Joined: 21 Nov 2005 09:43
Location: www.thetilehurstend.com

Re: Long - Time to go.

by Wimb » 21 Oct 2010 11:15

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
Hob Nob Regular
Posts: 3548
Joined: 29 Sep 2006 14:40
Location: Reading

Re: Long - Time to go.

by andrew1957 » 21 Oct 2010 11:19

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.

User avatar
Bandini
Hob Nob Regular
Posts: 3761
Joined: 03 Sep 2010 16:01
Location: No one must know I dropped my glasses in the toilet.

Re: Long - Time to go.

by Bandini » 21 Oct 2010 11:25

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?

sandman
Hob Nob Super-Addict
Posts: 12244
Joined: 01 Oct 2008 18:25
Location: Slaughterhouse soaked in blood and betrayal

Re: Long - Time to go.

by sandman » 21 Oct 2010 11:33

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.


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.
Last edited by sandman on 21 Oct 2010 13:39, edited 2 times in total.

andrew1957
Hob Nob Regular
Posts: 3548
Joined: 29 Sep 2006 14:40
Location: Reading

Re: Long - Time to go.

by andrew1957 » 21 Oct 2010 11:33

Bandini
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.

User avatar
Bandini
Hob Nob Regular
Posts: 3761
Joined: 03 Sep 2010 16:01
Location: No one must know I dropped my glasses in the toilet.

Re: Long - Time to go.

by Bandini » 21 Oct 2010 11:35

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.

User avatar
Hugo Boss
Hob Nob Subscriber
Hob Nob Subscriber
Posts: 2183
Joined: 13 Apr 2004 22:48
Location: Retrieving the FFF ball from the car park.

Re: Long - Time to go.

by Hugo Boss » 21 Oct 2010 12:17

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?


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
Hob Nob Regular
Posts: 3548
Joined: 29 Sep 2006 14:40
Location: Reading

Re: Long - Time to go.

by andrew1957 » 21 Oct 2010 12:25

Hugo Boss
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?


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.

2027 posts

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 54 guests

It is currently 05 Jun 2020 14:01