FAO Doom n' Gloomers: Rodgers terrible signings

127 posts
Gordons Cumming
Hob Nob Addict
Posts: 5300
Joined: 15 Apr 2004 10:52
Location: All Good Things Come To An End

Re: FAO Doom n' Gloomers: Rodgers terrible signings

by Gordons Cumming » 03 Nov 2009 17:58

willz_royal
Royal Lady Little boys of about 12 who can only post emoticons, however, aren't worth fussing over. :roll:

:shock:

Royalee
Hob Nob Addict
Posts: 6470
Joined: 14 Apr 2004 12:58
Location: Reading, hazar

Re: FAO Doom n' Gloomers: Rodgers terrible signings

by Royalee » 03 Nov 2009 18:01

Royal Lady
Hoop Blah RL, you, Ideal and Ian Royal are three that I've noticed being most vocal in their displeasure with Rodgers over the last month or so.

You seemed particularily keen to jump on him because he wasn't Steve Coppell and, the impression I got, was that you were going to hold that against him to somehow show your loyalty to Coppell or prove that we should've kept him on after last season.

I know there were plenty of others who also gave Rodgers plenty of stick, and I can understand why, but as more regular posters and, for want of a better term, 'higher profile nobbers' you have to accept that if you're going to dish it out some of it's going to come back your way at some point.

You do seem to throw more of a hissy fit than others when your opinions are challenged...maybe that has something to do with why you supposedly get singled out.
Hmm, maybe I haven't made myself clear in the past, I knew that Coppell would be wrong for us this season - it doesn't stop me wishing he was still here, but I'm under no illusions that he SHOULD be here. I haven't been impressed with Rodgers, and yes I have been vocal about it, to counteract the likes of Royalee who was pontificating the other side! I just failed to see why this thread had to be for my attention solely - it's much better now he's changed it - it encompasses more than just myself. I sincerely hope I'm proved wrong with my thoughts on Rodgers and the team - I really do - we all want the same thing at heart and that's our club to do well and not suffer monetarily or on the pitch. It's the idiots who jump on bandwagons just to have a go at the likes of me and Ideal that I object to and this thread was only going to help their cause. Little boys of about 12 who can only post emoticons, however, aren't worth fussing over.


You knew Coppell would be wrong but you still want him here? Make your mind up, which one is it?

What haven't you been impressed with Rodgers and what would you do differently if you were in charge?

Jumping on bandwagons? Some of us wanted the change to happen 12 months before and are hardly jumping on any bandwagons in doing so - surely if anyone is guilty of that it's Ideal given that he doesn't get to games due to the distance he lives away?

If you responded to these questions and made yourself clearer with more credible reasoning used to back up your arguments as opposed to flying off the handle then people might take you more seriously.

readingbedding
Hob Nob Regular
Posts: 4396
Joined: 06 Dec 2005 21:10
Location: cutting them all away for four runs

Re: FAO Doom n' Gloomers: Rodgers terrible signings

by readingbedding » 03 Nov 2009 18:05

oh do shut up.

PEARCEY
Hob Nob Addict
Posts: 5970
Joined: 29 Jun 2007 23:44

Re: FAO Doom n' Gloomers: Rodgers terrible signings

by PEARCEY » 03 Nov 2009 18:06

I think being 4th from bottom puts a very big question-mark against Rodgers and his signings so lets not get too carried away with one win(on the trot).
We all know where we would have been had we lost last Saturday.

Now Rodgers has a great chance to get this team well up the table. The next six fixtures offer that opportunity. However it has to start with Ipswich and a win in that game. Otherwise those fixtures start looking trickier.

Gordons Cumming
Hob Nob Addict
Posts: 5300
Joined: 15 Apr 2004 10:52
Location: All Good Things Come To An End

Re: FAO Doom n' Gloomers: Rodgers terrible signings

by Gordons Cumming » 03 Nov 2009 18:08

Royalee
What haven't you been impressed with Rodgers ...........................?




2 points off the bottom after 15 games.

Need I say more?


Royalee
Hob Nob Addict
Posts: 6470
Joined: 14 Apr 2004 12:58
Location: Reading, hazar

Re: FAO Doom n' Gloomers: Rodgers terrible signings

by Royalee » 03 Nov 2009 18:09

Gordons Cumming
Royalee
What haven't you been impressed with Rodgers ...........................?




2 points off the bottom after 15 games.

Need I say more?


...And the reasons for the slow start would be? It's all very well saying we're 2 points off the bottom, but what could be done to change it?

User avatar
Ian Royal
Hob Nob Super-Addict
Posts: 35156
Joined: 15 Apr 2004 13:43
Location: Playing spot the pc*nt on HNA?

Re: FAO RL: Rodgers terrible signings

by Ian Royal » 03 Nov 2009 18:12

Royal Lady Aren't people allowed to have opinions now? :|


Of course you're allowed to have an opinion. But that doesn't mean other people have to like it or agree with it. If you don't like it when your opinions are challenged keep them to yourself.

In support of RL ,from the games I've seen we were comprehensively outplayed by QPR and P'boro (second half) It certainly sounded like we were comprehensively out played by West Brom and Newcastle from everything I've heard and again it sounded to me from what people were saying that we'd been out played quite easily by Sheffield Utd after the first 30 minutes or so.

That's two definites and three maybes out of 15 games. Or one third of them. Comparatively we've outplayed fairly few teams, especially if you consider winning a prerequisite. Barnsley and Coventry being the only ones that spring to mind.

Then again I'm on record saying I think his signings are all fair to good ones and that the players are quite capable of keeping us up and finishing mid-table.

User avatar
Ian Royal
Hob Nob Super-Addict
Posts: 35156
Joined: 15 Apr 2004 13:43
Location: Playing spot the pc*nt on HNA?

Re: FAO Doom n' Gloomers: Rodgers terrible signings

by Ian Royal » 03 Nov 2009 18:14

Royalee
Gordons Cumming
Royalee
What haven't you been impressed with Rodgers ...........................?




2 points off the bottom after 15 games.

Need I say more?


...And the reasons for the slow start would be? It's all very well saying we're 2 points off the bottom, but what could be done to change it?


I dunno, we could have come out trying to win from the kick off of the first game, picked and eleven and formation and stuck with it for 3 games at a time. Recognised the weaknesses in our squad early on and played a formation that played more to our strengths. Not dropped players for no reason after they'd had decent games in th elast match.

How's that for starters?

User avatar
Royal Lady
Hob Nob Subscriber
Hob Nob Subscriber
Posts: 13748
Joined: 14 Apr 2004 10:17
Location: Don't mess with "my sort". Cheers then.

Re: FAO Doom n' Gloomers: Rodgers terrible signings

by Royal Lady » 03 Nov 2009 18:18

Royalee
Royal Lady
Hoop Blah RL, you, Ideal and Ian Royal are three that I've noticed being most vocal in their displeasure with Rodgers over the last month or so.

You seemed particularily keen to jump on him because he wasn't Steve Coppell and, the impression I got, was that you were going to hold that against him to somehow show your loyalty to Coppell or prove that we should've kept him on after last season.

I know there were plenty of others who also gave Rodgers plenty of stick, and I can understand why, but as more regular posters and, for want of a better term, 'higher profile nobbers' you have to accept that if you're going to dish it out some of it's going to come back your way at some point.

You do seem to throw more of a hissy fit than others when your opinions are challenged...maybe that has something to do with why you supposedly get singled out.
Hmm, maybe I haven't made myself clear in the past, I knew that Coppell would be wrong for us this season - it doesn't stop me wishing he was still here, but I'm under no illusions that he SHOULD be here. I haven't been impressed with Rodgers, and yes I have been vocal about it, to counteract the likes of Royalee who was pontificating the other side! I just failed to see why this thread had to be for my attention solely - it's much better now he's changed it - it encompasses more than just myself. I sincerely hope I'm proved wrong with my thoughts on Rodgers and the team - I really do - we all want the same thing at heart and that's our club to do well and not suffer monetarily or on the pitch. It's the idiots who jump on bandwagons just to have a go at the likes of me and Ideal that I object to and this thread was only going to help their cause. Little boys of about 12 who can only post emoticons, however, aren't worth fussing over.


You knew Coppell would be wrong but you still want him here? Make your mind up, which one is it?It would have been wrong for Coppell to stay, imo, because I think we all know that he'd taken us as far as he could and I don't think his heart was in it 100%, even during his last season. But, I sometimes wish he was still here and we were like the team of 2006 - but I don't believe we'll see anything like that for a very long time, if ever again.

What haven't you been impressed with Rodgers and what would you do differently if you were in charge?I haven't been impressed with any of his soundbites in the media, if I were in charge, I'd be a little more humble - far better to play things down and then surprise people with results, than big yourself up and set yourself up for a fall, which, imo, he has done so far. I haven't been impressed with Rodgers handling of the team - trying out loads of different permutations well into the start of the season. If I had been in charge, I would have played who I thought showed the most promise in training and if after a few games, I had new players to choose from or others were showing more promise in training, I'd change a few at a time. I haven't been impressed with his almost steadfast refusal to go 442 and insist on playing one up front - no matter who the opposition were. If I were in charge, I'd adapt the tactics to suit the team we were playing against.

Jumping on bandwagons? Some of us wanted the change to happen 12 months before and are hardly jumping on any bandwagons in doing so - surely if anyone is guilty of that it's Ideal given that he doesn't get to games due to the distance he lives away?I was referring to the bandwagon of knocking certain posters, no matter what their thoughts and how those thoughts were put across. This thread is a prime example I'm afraid. What is Readingbedding bringing to this debate other than to mock? What has Willz Royal brought to the table, other than his usual stupid emoticon, because he's made it perfectly plain in other threads that he doesn't particularly like me? I'm not here to win a popularity contest, I really don't care if people disagree with me, that is what debate is all about - but it seems to me that some people would argue with me and mock me if I said the sky was blue and trees are green, such is their dislike.

If you responded to these questions and made yourself clearer with more credible reasoning used to back up your arguments as opposed to flying off the handle then people might take you more seriously.

I haven't "flown off the handle" I've been trying to find out why I should have been singled out for attention in this thread when many others had the very same opinions as me and some still do. Whatever your thoughts on BR and our results, you have to acknowledge that some people have differing views, as I have acknowledged.


User avatar
Ian Royal
Hob Nob Super-Addict
Posts: 35156
Joined: 15 Apr 2004 13:43
Location: Playing spot the pc*nt on HNA?

Re: FAO Doom n' Gloomers: Rodgers terrible signings

by Ian Royal » 03 Nov 2009 18:22

Probably because you're so bloody easy to get a reaction out of.

You're like Sharpy a few years ago. Post something less than brilliant, get the piss taken out of you and then throw a tantrum.

User avatar
Royal Lady
Hob Nob Subscriber
Hob Nob Subscriber
Posts: 13748
Joined: 14 Apr 2004 10:17
Location: Don't mess with "my sort". Cheers then.

Re: FAO Doom n' Gloomers: Rodgers terrible signings

by Royal Lady » 03 Nov 2009 18:32

I haven't thrown a tantrum! All I can do in this sort of situation is say I'm completely wrong then and everybody else is correct! Which is what I did - but that's wrong too. I don't really know what I can do? There was, imo, no reason at all for SKB to make this thread for my attention other than to mock me. Had I been the only person on here with my views, I could have understood it, but I wasn't. :roll:

Seems to me, no-one will be happy unless I either agree with everybody, or I don't make my own feelings on matters known - which is hardly healthy debate is it?!

PEARCEY
Hob Nob Addict
Posts: 5970
Joined: 29 Jun 2007 23:44

Re: FAO Doom n' Gloomers: Rodgers terrible signings

by PEARCEY » 03 Nov 2009 18:35

Royal Lady I haven't thrown a tantrum! All I can do in this sort of situation is say I'm completely wrong then and everybody else is correct! Which is what I did - but that's wrong too. I don't really know what I can do? There was, imo, no reason at all for SKB to make this thread for my attention other than to mock me. Had I been the only person on here with my views, I could have understood it, but I wasn't. :roll:

Seems to me, no-one will be happy unless I either agree with everybody, or I don't make my own feelings on matters known - which is hardly healthy debate is it?!



Stick to your guns on Reading FC....RL. You argue your views just as passionately as anyone else on here.

User avatar
Ian Royal
Hob Nob Super-Addict
Posts: 35156
Joined: 15 Apr 2004 13:43
Location: Playing spot the pc*nt on HNA?

Re: FAO Doom n' Gloomers: Rodgers terrible signings

by Ian Royal » 03 Nov 2009 18:38

Royal Lady I haven't thrown a tantrum! All I can do in this sort of situation is say I'm completely wrong then and everybody else is correct! Which is what I did - but that's wrong too. I don't really know what I can do? There was, imo, no reason at all for SKB to make this thread for my attention other than to mock me. Had I been the only person on here with my views, I could have understood it, but I wasn't. :roll:

Seems to me, no-one will be happy unless I either agree with everybody, or I don't make my own feelings on matters known - which is hardly healthy debate is it?!



Try not suggesting that everyone who disagrees with you has a personal vendetta against you. Try making slightly more considered posts, backing them up with evidence & analysis and then justifying and defending them if someone disagrees.

Take on board their points, evaluate and discard them if appropriate. If they convince you you're wrong admit it gracefully. If not stand by your point and agree to disagree.

Or stick the boot in back, kick arse and call names and stop complaining.

Either works.


User avatar
zummerset
Member
Posts: 817
Joined: 29 Feb 2008 18:18
Location: Don't tell I tell ee

Re: FAO Doom n' Gloomers: Rodgers terrible signings

by zummerset » 03 Nov 2009 18:47

reading this thread does show a few nobbers in a poor light - self important 'I am right and know more than you ' twaddle. The new saviour Jammy Dodger has that same self belief/ promotion.

RL just ignore them.

readingbedding
Hob Nob Regular
Posts: 4396
Joined: 06 Dec 2005 21:10
Location: cutting them all away for four runs

Re: FAO Doom n' Gloomers: Rodgers terrible signings

by readingbedding » 03 Nov 2009 19:03

The comment about Marek not being played because he was a Coppell man was, and is very bizarre.
They were 'right' too.
Goes both ways, goes always.

2 world wars, 1 world cup
Hob Nob Addict
Posts: 5034
Joined: 16 Jul 2004 18:36
Location: Shite little island soon to be the sick man of Europe again.

Re: FAO Doom n' Gloomers: Rodgers terrible signings

by 2 world wars, 1 world cup » 03 Nov 2009 19:14

Again, just as I laugh heartily at muppetts who think 14 games is a significant number of games with which to judge Rodgers, I also laugh at the ability to comment either way on our signings at the mo.

It's too soon to tell. But we can speculate all we like. I speculate, based on games started up front versus numbers of goals scored, that if we were to play Mills up front he would get get an infinite number of goals.

Therefore he's an amazing signing.

Therefore [insert your agenda here].

Speculation is fun.

User avatar
strap
Hob Nob Regular
Posts: 2795
Joined: 15 Apr 2004 09:06
Location: Gainsford End

Re: FAO Doom n' Gloomers: Rodgers terrible signings

by strap » 03 Nov 2009 19:16

Super Kevin Bremner! Jobi Macanuff

Played 7
Assists 2
Goals 1

Gregory Rasiak

Played 5 (+4)
Goals 3

Brian Howard

Played 9 (+1)
Assists 1
Goals 1

Sahun Cummings

No comment

No doubt you'll extract whatever point of view you want from those stats but for what it's worth, considering it's a new team and those players are still 'bedding-in' I would suggest that Rodgers has done very nicely indeed in the transfer market thank you very much.

Rasiak's 3 goals came from his 5 starts. That means pro rata from 46 starts he'd be on for 27 goals. Terrible signing.

HTFH


You what?!?! Seriously?? You need help - big time. Using your analytical skills, Shane Long scored 3 goals in 1+10 League games in this division in 2005-05, so ignoring sub apps, he'd be on 138 league goals in a 46 league game season..... :roll:

Go back to the drawing board chap and have another try.

Journeymen panic buys, in an effort to appease the fans. Had there not been a stink kicked up by the fans at the end of the treansfer window, they wouldn't even have been bought!!! Simple as. To say 14 games in is too early to judge them is also ridiculous. They are about 2/3 the way through their careers, and their career stats show them up for exactly what they are!!!

Gordons Cumming
Hob Nob Addict
Posts: 5300
Joined: 15 Apr 2004 10:52
Location: All Good Things Come To An End

Re: FAO Doom n' Gloomers: Rodgers terrible signings

by Gordons Cumming » 03 Nov 2009 19:17

RL

I think you need to go and lie down.

Count to ten and have nice glass of wine.

Oh and shut down the bloody computer!

2 world wars, 1 world cup
Hob Nob Addict
Posts: 5034
Joined: 16 Jul 2004 18:36
Location: Shite little island soon to be the sick man of Europe again.

Re: FAO Doom n' Gloomers: Rodgers terrible signings

by 2 world wars, 1 world cup » 03 Nov 2009 19:19

Royalee
Royal Lady
Hoop Blah RL, you, Ideal and Ian Royal are three that I've noticed being most vocal in their displeasure with Rodgers over the last month or so.

You seemed particularily keen to jump on him because he wasn't Steve Coppell and, the impression I got, was that you were going to hold that against him to somehow show your loyalty to Coppell or prove that we should've kept him on after last season.

I know there were plenty of others who also gave Rodgers plenty of stick, and I can understand why, but as more regular posters and, for want of a better term, 'higher profile nobbers' you have to accept that if you're going to dish it out some of it's going to come back your way at some point.

You do seem to throw more of a hissy fit than others when your opinions are challenged...maybe that has something to do with why you supposedly get singled out.
Hmm, maybe I haven't made myself clear in the past, I knew that Coppell would be wrong for us this season - it doesn't stop me wishing he was still here, but I'm under no illusions that he SHOULD be here. I haven't been impressed with Rodgers, and yes I have been vocal about it, to counteract the likes of Royalee who was pontificating the other side! I just failed to see why this thread had to be for my attention solely - it's much better now he's changed it - it encompasses more than just myself. I sincerely hope I'm proved wrong with my thoughts on Rodgers and the team - I really do - we all want the same thing at heart and that's our club to do well and not suffer monetarily or on the pitch. It's the idiots who jump on bandwagons just to have a go at the likes of me and Ideal that I object to and this thread was only going to help their cause. Little boys of about 12 who can only post emoticons, however, aren't worth fussing over.


You knew Coppell would be wrong but you still want him here? Make your mind up, which one is it?

What haven't you been impressed with Rodgers and what would you do differently if you were in charge?

Jumping on bandwagons? Some of us wanted the change to happen 12 months before and are hardly jumping on any bandwagons in doing so - surely if anyone is guilty of that it's Ideal given that he doesn't get to games due to the distance he lives away?

If you responded to these questions and made yourself clearer with more credible reasoning used to back up your arguments as opposed to flying off the handle then people might take you more seriously.


Dear all,

Coppell is gone. HTH.

Brendan Rodgers' Barmy Army!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

User avatar
Super Kevin Bremner!
Hob Nob Subscriber
Hob Nob Subscriber
Posts: 798
Joined: 10 Jul 2004 18:07
Location: Just oxf*rd OFF!

Re: FAO Doom n' Gloomers: Rodgers terrible signings

by Super Kevin Bremner! » 03 Nov 2009 19:21

Royal Lady I haven't thrown a tantrum! All I can do in this sort of situation is say I'm completely wrong then and everybody else is correct! Which is what I did - but that's wrong too. I don't really know what I can do? There was, imo, no reason at all for SKB to make this thread for my attention other than to mock me. Had I been the only person on here with my views, I could have understood it, but I wasn't. :roll:

Seems to me, no-one will be happy unless I either agree with everybody, or I don't make my own feelings on matters known - which is hardly healthy debate is it?!


I posted on the Rodgers Out thread only. You were the one who highlighted the signings as a major reason why Rodgers is shit.

We debated that over a couple of posts.

You raised the point that you were largely basisng your opinion about Rodgers on his signings.

That's why you got singled out.

Quite fairly so in my opinion as I'm not geeky enough to know who shares your opinion, I only remember our conversation.

Changing the title of the thread was me being gracious enough to see this turned into a pick on RL thread.

Jesus, you'd think I'd pissed on someone's gravestone or something the way you reacted.

And strap, wind your neck in son.

You just got to engage your brain before you respond. I'm making a decent effort at swimming against the tide of morons who keep posting bollocks vitriol about how shit it is to be a Reading supporter. Your Shane Long stat is completely irrelevant, as was everyone bitching about how shite Rodgers and his signings are after 10 games.

127 posts

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: bcubed, CountryRoyal, NewCorkSeth, windermereROYAL and 43 guests

It is currently 18 Jan 2020 09:39