Back from the game: It was better...

194 posts
User avatar
winchester_royal
Hob Nob Super-Addict
Posts: 11128
Joined: 28 Aug 2007 21:32
Location: How many Spaniards does it take to change a bulb? Just Juan.

Re: Back from the game: It was better...

by winchester_royal » 08 Nov 2009 16:05

rhroyal The difference for me now is that we're bemoaning all our missed chances. Earlier in the season we were barely making any chances at all - our goals were largely from set pieces. When the team had no real cohesion and didn't know what to do with the ball I was worried. Now that we're making chances and missing them, I somehow feel it's only a matter of time until they start going in and it could be a confidence issue. Maybe I'm overly optimistic.

We're certainly making more chances than we were in the back end of last season.

User avatar
Schards#2
Hob Nob Regular
Posts: 4109
Joined: 14 Apr 2004 13:46
Location: Lower Earlers

Re: Back from the game: It was better...

by Schards#2 » 08 Nov 2009 16:11

rhroyal The difference for me now is that we're bemoaning all our missed chances. Earlier in the season we were barely making any chances at all - our goals were largely from set pieces. When the team had no real cohesion and didn't know what to do with the ball I was worried. Now that we're making chances and missing them, I somehow feel it's only a matter of time until they start going in and it could be a confidence issue. Maybe I'm overly optimistic.


I agree with all but the last sentance.

We are getting better but it's from a very low base and I don't see the quality up front to turn chances into goals regurlarly enough.

rotherwick_royal
Member
Posts: 660
Joined: 21 Sep 2006 15:08
Location: In a field in Hampshire

Re: Back from the game: It was better...

by rotherwick_royal » 08 Nov 2009 16:56

Thought the first 45 mins was one of the worst I've seen, however the second 45 was the most exciting of the season, we actually went for it and were unlucky not to win.

I'm one of Marek's biggest fans, I thought it was his worst game for us.

Terrible goal to give away, schoolboy defending (why does Jon Stead always score against us?)

For the first itme though I thought Rodger's subs actually changed the game for the better. Long was the obvious choice to put pressure on the Ipswich back four who I thought looked very shakey. Kebe it seems can only make an impact from the subs bench, but did well. Until Cisse came on Ipswich were running through our midfield so that substitution made sense too.

Lastly, I can't understand why on earth we let Rosenior play against us? He's still a Reading player, I don't get 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: Back from the game: It was better...

by Terminal Boardom » 08 Nov 2009 17:07

rotherwick_royal Thought the first 45 mins was one of the worst I've seen, however the second 45 was the most exciting of the season, we actually went for it and were unlucky not to win.


You make a very interesting point there RR. If the first half great and the second half poor, the initial reaction is one of disappointment. Whereas, a poor first half follwed by a much improved second half leaves a better taste in the mouth. Reality being that there has been 2 halves of shit and 2 halves of decent stuff.


This explains why so many people are getting carried away by a performance NO BETTER OR WORSE than what we have already seen this season!

User avatar
facaldaqui
Hob Nob Regular
Posts: 1934
Joined: 17 Dec 2004 05:10

Re: Back from the game: It was better...

by facaldaqui » 08 Nov 2009 17:08

My guess is that Rosenior played because we were paid a substantial loan fee, for which this was one of the conditions. Since he is out of contract at the end of the season, this is the equivalent of selling him.


The Quiet Man
Member
Posts: 250
Joined: 14 Apr 2004 13:09
Location: Following RFC

Re: Back from the game: It was better...

by The Quiet Man » 08 Nov 2009 17:13

Poor game haven't seen much to suggest from this game that we are not a relegation side - when we play well we fail to put away chances and for the third home game in a row we gift the opposition a goal from poor defensive organisation at a corner. Ipswich would have been happy with an away point and would seem to be following the Pardew method of trying to avoid relegation, grind out games and if you can't win then get a draw.

It would be a reasonable expectation that sides in the bottom half of this division will, like Ipswich, look to get 10/11 men behind the ball at every opportunity when they visit the Madstad, and that unless our world class manager and his world class coaches can prevent our goal giving generosity, we will still struggle at home to gain the necessary points to pull away from the drop zone. There isn't much gap between the bottom 10 clubs and there are other teams that may get sucked in but we won't go anywhere until we can beat them on our own ground.

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: Back from the game: It was better...

by Ian Royal » 08 Nov 2009 17:43

Sarah Star
facaldaqui It's becoming accepted on this thread that the goal went in off Church fortuitously. Both the commentator and Claridge didn't give him much credit for it. But I've just rewatched it several times on iPlayer, and I think it's definitely a shot, however instinctive. In which case, I'd say it's an excellent goal by Church, resulting from instinctive reaction.

I thought that from the replays at the stadium, but whether he knew much about it or not, he was there in the right place at the right time.


Church definitely knew about that and was trying to hit it in. He put himself in an excellent positionfor a ball coming across the goal and whilst his reaction was as the ball was hitting him and a bit after, I'd call that a definite shot.

Saying it hit him and went in without him know anything about it is much less accurate a description.

Absolute stone wall penalty. Long wins the ball and touches it away from the byline only to be kicked and knocked over. There was no way anyone else was getting to that ball after his touch other than him. One of the worst decisions I've seen. Not a red card. Definitely a penalty.

Oh and their goal definitely wasn't Fed's ball. It should have been dealt with outside the six yard box as it was coming in, but went over (Tabb & McAnuff?). By the time it went over them it's too late for Fed to come. Ivar was stood in no man's land marking no one and gave the tamest of clearance headers straight to Stead.

We are not clearing our lines with any sort of conviction this season. Headers rarely go far enough and fall to the opposition. Kicked clearances tend to be mishit, low and across the box. Not high and straight out of the box as they should be.

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

Re: Back from the game: It was better...

by PEARCEY » 08 Nov 2009 17:55

Ian Royal
Sarah Star
facaldaqui It's becoming accepted on this thread that the goal went in off Church fortuitously. Both the commentator and Claridge didn't give him much credit for it. But I've just rewatched it several times on iPlayer, and I think it's definitely a shot, however instinctive. In which case, I'd say it's an excellent goal by Church, resulting from instinctive reaction.

I thought that from the replays at the stadium, but whether he knew much about it or not, he was there in the right place at the right time.


Church definitely knew about that and was trying to hit it in. He put himself in an excellent positionfor a ball coming across the goal and whilst his reaction was as the ball was hitting him and a bit after, I'd call that a definite shot.

Saying it hit him and went in without him know anything about it is much less accurate a description.

Absolute stone wall penalty. Long wins the ball and touches it away from the byline only to be kicked and knocked over. There was no way anyone else was getting to that ball after his touch other than him. One of the worst decisions I've seen. Not a red card. Definitely a penalty.

Oh and their goal definitely wasn't Fed's ball. It should have been dealt with outside the six yard box as it was coming in, but went over (Tabb & McAnuff?). By the time it went over them it's too late for Fed to come. Ivar was stood in no man's land marking no one and gave the tamest of clearance headers straight to Stead.

We are not clearing our lines with any sort of conviction this season. Headers rarely go far enough and fall to the opposition. Kicked clearances tend to be mishit, low and across the box. Not high and straight out of the box as they should be.



Agree with you Ian. Definite penalty.
As for their goal it was terrible. Ingi got no power on his clearing header and it was for the defence to clear and not Feds.

User avatar
brendywendy
Hob Nob Super-Addict
Posts: 12059
Joined: 04 Aug 2006 15:29
Location: coming straight outa crowthorne

Re: Back from the game: It was better...

by brendywendy » 08 Nov 2009 18:04

Royal Lady People seem to be forgetting that we DREW at HOME to the BOTTOM side. Does no-one else share my view that we are right royally in the poo if we can't beat these sorts of teams? The only good thing to be taken from recent games is that, finally, Rodgers appears to have settled on a team, and we've managed to get 4 points from 2 games in a 2 game run! We're still in trouble at the moment, and the closer it gets to Christmas, the more worried I become...



but you are a nautural worrier aintya


imo the settled side, and switching to 4-4-2 has been the difference, if we can keep up with the improved performances, and a couple of wins over the next 4 games im happy, add a striker ansd well be safe as houses


User avatar
brendywendy
Hob Nob Super-Addict
Posts: 12059
Joined: 04 Aug 2006 15:29
Location: coming straight outa crowthorne

Re: Back from the game: It was better...

by brendywendy » 08 Nov 2009 18:07

Terminal Boardom
Sarah Star
Royal Lady Thank you Victor - this is the hardest thing for many of us to get our heads around, we were capable only a couple of years or so ago of competing with the best teams in this country - some of it was down to tactical genius, some of it was down to the players really gelling as a team, not much of it was down to spending large sums of money on players, although I accept our players were paid relatively well for their troubles. Suddenly, we get found out on tactics, our chairman won't put any more money in and we get relegated. Last season we gave it a real go but towards the end we made the mistake of loaning in Kitson and Little imo, if we'd managed to get in a new striker and another decent winger, we could well have gone up - this season any good that has been done over the last few years has been completely undone. Those of you with RTGs may wish to look upon a win away to Coventry and a draw at home to Ipswich as "on the up", but unless the team starts gelling and playing for each other and helping each other along, unless we put some money (by no means a large amount) into getting in a striker and maybe another one or two players in key positions, we're going to end up fighting for survival in this division. If that's what Mr Madejski wants to happen, so we're "self sufficient" or whatever, I wish he'd just say so. :cry:

I think we've got until Christmas to move up the league or something will be done... barring anything major like losing touch with the teams above us.

Be fair though, the team are starting to gell and performances are better than a few months ago.


I thought that we played really well against Forest with plenty of passing, movement and cohesion. The only thing lacking was a goal. Against Sheff Utd we again played really well until they equalised. Unfortunately, we have not built on this and we have gone in a rapid decline ever since.

Beating a Cov side with 8 or 9 first team players missing is not something to crow about. Neither is drawing 1-1 against a very ordinary Ipswich side. The team is not gelling as there is no team. They are 11 individuals and play like it. The crisp passing has also vanished. We are not playing good football.


played great footy vs leicester, and lost, played gritty pragmatic footy vs cov and ipswich and got 4 points

UpNorth
Member
Posts: 719
Joined: 13 Apr 2004 22:24
Location: Sheffield - too close to Brammal lane

Re: Back from the game: It was better...

by UpNorth » 08 Nov 2009 18:42

What shocked me was just how slow and predictable we were in attack and in defence.

There is zero pace in this side. The two centre backs were easily done for pace and we were lucky not to concede from one of the Ipswich breakaways. Howard and Matey boy spent a lot of time passing backwards al a Harper. Rasiak and Church ain't got much pace either. Kebe looked like a greyhound by comparison when he came on.

Agree with others that we need another forward otherwise we are going down.

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: Back from the game: It was better...

by Ian Royal » 08 Nov 2009 19:29

UpNorth What shocked me was just how slow and predictable we were in attack and in defence.

There is zero pace in this side. The two centre backs were easily done for pace and we were lucky not to concede from one of the Ipswich breakaways. Howard and Matey boy spent a lot of time passing backwards al a Harper. Rasiak and Church ain't got much pace either. Kebe looked like a greyhound by comparison when he came on.

Agree with others that we need another forward otherwise we are going down.


Quality passing sides spend a lot of time passing backwards or sideways. Because the key to a great passing side is the switch of pace between ball retention and an attack. Not constant passing forwards.

handbags_harris
Hob Nob Regular
Posts: 3791
Joined: 10 Jul 2005 12:57

Re: Back from the game: It was better...

by handbags_harris » 08 Nov 2009 21:12

rotherwick_royal ...why does Jon Stead always score against us?


He doesn't, he's only scored 3 goals against us in his last 3 appearances.

First half - dismal. Marek utterly useless in possession, defensively suspect AGAIN, lacking in creativity although Rasiak really should have scored that header. Howard was also very unlucky with his 25 yard belter. Otherwise a half to forget apart from Rosenior getting the stick he deserves (good to see him going missing once again only to despairingly deflect a Sigurdsson effort around the post).

Second half - the goal obviously gave us confidence and there should only have been one winner from then on, but we still gave opportunities to Ipswich with inept defending. Priskin's free header on the 6 yard line, the effort at the end that should have been tucked away. Otherwise it was all us. A better performance, the direct nature of the game clearly suited us better than the hopeless sideays passing of the first half and earlier in the season. An improvement once again on this half's showing, but the result is still despairingly out of reach. I wonder, could we actually go a whole calendar year without a home win? Last time we won at home I had a job!!


AthleticoSpizz
Hob Nob Super-Addict
Posts: 16300
Joined: 15 Apr 2004 19:49
Location: A Hicks Hoof from Coley Park

Re: Back from the game: It was better...

by AthleticoSpizz » 08 Nov 2009 21:32

last time we won at home, I had a fringe

southstand67
Member
Posts: 365
Joined: 06 Apr 2008 22:28
Location: RG4

Re: Back from the game: It was better...

by southstand67 » 08 Nov 2009 21:39

The last time we won at home, we won by an own goal.

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: Back from the game: It was better...

by Ian Royal » 08 Nov 2009 21:45

Last time we won at home... I was there. :shock:

Not seen us lose at home this season. Maybe I should go more often.

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

Re: Back from the game: It was better...

by Royal With Cheese » 08 Nov 2009 22:13

Royal Lady
Royal With Cheese RL, just wondering. Have you been down to the training ground to see Lampard senior's contribution to the training and if so what is so wrong about it?

No, I haven't, but I've read that Rodgers has said they don't do "normal training" and do "fun things" instead or words to that effect and also that Lampard Sr (when he turns up) is a "mentor" for the players. Personally, I think we should get back to basics re training and the players would have been better off with a "mentor" such as Murty if one was needed at all.

So, you've no idea what he actually does then? Some people would see that as being a bit harsh.

User avatar
Mike Hunt
Hob Nob Regular
Posts: 2812
Joined: 01 Jul 2008 08:24
Location: Blue and White

Re: Back from the game: It was better...

by Mike Hunt » 08 Nov 2009 22:44

Having watched the highlights on RW - I can see what people say about Pearce... he looks awful. He looks like I do defending at Indoor. And I have only started playing... I think that I would be faster than him though, and I am 230 pounds.

If I was his coach - I would drop him.

Also loved how the commentator for the RW Highlights called Kebe - Jimmy "Keeb".

old woman
Member
Posts: 354
Joined: 07 Apr 2008 17:38

Re: Back from the game: It was better...

by old woman » 08 Nov 2009 23:43

Listened to second half via BBC suffolk as Reading World was fading in and out. They were stunned to get a point and felt they were hanging on at the end. At least we're making chances- I'm sure we'll get a hatful at some point.

Humanistic
Member
Posts: 213
Joined: 27 Apr 2004 21:43
Location: Bristol

Re: Back from the game: It was better...

by Humanistic » 08 Nov 2009 23:45

handbags_harris
First half - dismal. Marek utterly useless in possession, defensively suspect AGAIN, lacking in creativity although Rasiak really should have scored that header. Howard was also very unlucky with his 25 yard belter. Otherwise a half to forget apart from Rosenior getting the stick he deserves (good to see him going missing once again only to despairingly deflect a Sigurdsson effort around the post).


Good post but could you explain why he 'deserved' the stick he got? He wasn't the greatest player we've had, sure, but I thought he was a perfectly reasonable championship right back and always gave his all.

194 posts

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 91 guests

It is currently 26 Sep 2020 08:55