Hunt out.

[Snowflake Royal]

Kyeweera has improved? Christ what was he like before?

[Snowflake Royal]

Genuine question. What exactly is it that people are seeing that can be attributed to Hunt’s ineptitude?

This could be my limitations as a spectator, but all I’m seeing that seems to contribute to the impression of a poor performance, are mistakes by players. We are capable of some nice build up play that only fails to translate into a solid chance due to it breaking down towards the end - a poor decision, a wrong pass, a hesitation, a lost ball, a lame shot. I don’t think any of those are tactics Hunt is suggesting.

The only point of contention for me is my argument that Wing seems a bit wasted being played the deepest of the midfield, but I also appreciate there is a reasonable argument for doing so too and it’s not like my preference is anywhere near a consensus among fans and pundits.

So what is it? What are the things you see that make you go “FFS that is a Hunt issue right there”? I get that the manager has some responsibility for player performance, but inconsistency and mistakes are largely a player thing; if Savage delivered a decent corner, or Wing didn’t lose the ball, or Kyerewaa didn’t pass to the opposition, or Lane didn’t miss from 6ft away, or Dorset didn’t double-take at a man running past him… would we be even discussing getting rid of Hunt?

I'd say it's the following:

Several players, the younger ones in particular, have regressed under Hunt. Kelvin, Lane, Abrefa, Savage this season, Elliott. I can't think of any except maybe Kyerewaa that have improved.

The football is boring and turgid.

Other managers work out how to play against us rather than the other way round.

We are relying on the goals of one player to get us out of jail

I mainly go to aways due to location and the atmosphere/mood on the terrace is back to the Ince days

I read a stat at the weekend that we are only side in the EFL that has not scored from a set piece this season

Hunt sounds deluded in his after game comments.....its a shame there are no longer local journos to challenge him more as he's being an easy ride.

Guess you could also add:

Playing players in unfamiliar positions/square pegs in round holes - Fraser being the obvious one but our wingers (Lane, Kyerewaa) have played on both sides however you'd expect them to have as stronger side so play them there

Half time team talks - we often start the second half badly so can that be attributed to what he says

Like for like subs - we rarely make a sub to change the game/change formation to adapt for the opposition (though that may have got better recently thanks to Richie)

Hoofing the ball rather than playing on the ground - we don't have a lump up front or play two strikers so it seems to often be a hit and hope rather than anything more educated

A settled first 11 - I know injuries have affected this but we've all heard 'they need time to gel' however if the starting 11 changes every game this won't happen

How anyone can criticise subs from Hunt when they've regularly changed the game and got us back in things is beyond me.

[South Coast Royal]

Many seem to feel that we have a good squad that Hunt is not getting the best from.
Some feel that it is just a matter of time, it will all come together and it will all gel.

Still early days in the season but my take is that the players really aren't very good and Hunt must have had a say in bringing the likes of MOM, Lane, Burns, Jacob, Fraser,Doyle Brian K etc. to the club so has to take responsibility.
Williams has looked OK , O'Connor who knows?, Ritchie might be ok if he can play a full game and Marriott has done what has been asked of him.

Stevenage have had a big turnover of players and are top of the division and at this level all clubs have major turnovers every year so the better managers cope best with such changes and make it all gel more quickly than others.

My main grouse is that for nearly all games in all competitions we are just a dull watch.
Few players take their opponents on, we create very few chances and we defend at times like amateurs.

Whatever we think I don't reckon that the owners, despite what they say, are very happy with a position just above the relegation places, we are out of the Carabao Cup and we are now depending upon the old enemy Swindon to help us into the next round of the lowest grade competition that we are in apart from the Berks & Bucks Cup (are we even in that one?)

The norm is to change managers as we have seen with Blackpool and Luton already and Couhig's rather naive statement that he doesn't believe in sacking managers might be called into question further if we don't pick up points from the next 2 games v Exeter and Cardiff.
Being Reading I fully expect us to lose at Exeter and win at Cardiff so the manager will probably remain for at least a bit longer.

[South Coast Royal]

I'd say it's the following:

Several players, the younger ones in particular, have regressed under Hunt. Kelvin, Lane, Abrefa, Savage this season, Elliott. I can't think of any except maybe Kyerewaa that have improved.

The football is boring and turgid.

Other managers work out how to play against us rather than the other way round.

We are relying on the goals of one player to get us out of jail

I mainly go to aways due to location and the atmosphere/mood on the terrace is back to the Ince days

I read a stat at the weekend that we are only side in the EFL that has not scored from a set piece this season

Hunt sounds deluded in his after game comments.....its a shame there are no longer local journos to challenge him more as he's being an easy ride.

Guess you could also add:

Playing players in unfamiliar positions/square pegs in round holes - Fraser being the obvious one but our wingers (Lane, Kyerewaa) have played on both sides however you'd expect them to have as stronger side so play them there

Half time team talks - we often start the second half badly so can that be attributed to what he says

Like for like subs - we rarely make a sub to change the game/change formation to adapt for the opposition (though that may have got better recently thanks to Richie)

Hoofing the ball rather than playing on the ground - we don't have a lump up front or play two strikers so it seems to often be a hit and hope rather than anything more educated

A settled first 11 - I know injuries have affected this but we've all heard 'they need time to gel' however if the starting 11 changes every game this won't happen

How anyone can criticise subs from Hunt when they've regularly changed the game and got us back in things is beyond me.

The obvious criticism is why weren't those players starting?

[Snowflake Royal]

Guess you could also add:

Playing players in unfamiliar positions/square pegs in round holes - Fraser being the obvious one but our wingers (Lane, Kyerewaa) have played on both sides however you'd expect them to have as stronger side so play them there

Half time team talks - we often start the second half badly so can that be attributed to what he says

Like for like subs - we rarely make a sub to change the game/change formation to adapt for the opposition (though that may have got better recently thanks to Richie)

Hoofing the ball rather than playing on the ground - we don't have a lump up front or play two strikers so it seems to often be a hit and hope rather than anything more educated

A settled first 11 - I know injuries have affected this but we've all heard 'they need time to gel' however if the starting 11 changes every game this won't happen

How anyone can criticise subs from Hunt when they've regularly changed the game and got us back in things is beyond me.

The obvious criticism is why weren't those players starting?

Which is not a criticism of the substitutions.

[morganb]

How anyone can criticise subs from Hunt when they've regularly changed the game and got us back in things is beyond me.

The obvious criticism is why weren't those players starting?

Which is not a criticism of the substitutions.

I did wonder that about Richie. Recently it has been: Reading concede an early goal, we chase the game/the opposition park the bus, bring Richie on, he assists Marriott, we get a draw

Why can't we start with Richie then perhaps we'd be the ones scoring the early goal and making the opposition chase the game? He should be fit enough for more than a 20 minute cameo by now

[Whore Jackie]

The question, assuming Ritchie hasn't got 90 minutes in him, is he more valuable at the beginning or end of the game? The team seem to benefit from his presence, he's brilliant at encouraging others and isn't afraid to bollock Wing etc. Think he'd bring out the best in Ahmed's game too, always feels a waste that Abrefa has been subbed on before Ritchie gets the nod.

[Snowflake Royal]

The obvious criticism is why weren't those players starting?

Which is not a criticism of the substitutions.

I did wonder that about Richie. Recently it has been: Reading concede an early goal, we chase the game/the opposition park the bus, bring Richie on, he assists Marriott, we get a draw

Why can't we start with Richie then perhaps we'd be the ones scoring the early goal and making the opposition chase the game? He should be fit enough for more than a 20 minute cameo by now

Yeah, discussed this with Hound a bit.

To me Ritchie hasn't actually created a lot, and at 36 hasn't convinced me he has the legs to start.

Yes, he's go two assists, but to me those were all about experience and touch, making the best of someone else's creativity, rather than him creating something.

And I can't get away from our game plan being a high intensity, high energy, high press. I doubt he can do that for 65 minutes.

[Hound]

I’ve had no issues with the subs Hunt has made generally. Regularly changed the game

I would argue as SCR that sometimes those subs should have started and I wouldn’t mind seeing them made a bit earlier sometimes but in the whole they’ve been pretty good

[South Coast Royal]

I’ve had no issues with the subs Hunt has made generally. Regularly changed the game

I would argue as SCR that sometimes those subs should have started and I wouldn’t mind seeing them made a bit earlier sometimes but in the whole they’ve been pretty good

I have always thought that about substitutions.
The manager always gets praised when subs change a game but nobody ever says wtf didn't you start them.?

Occasionally there are impact subs, e.g. a flying winger taking on a tired full-back.
In the case of Ritchie it could be argued that by coming on after 70 minutes walking football suits him.

I'm with Ian on this-I want more from a player than 20 minutes and if our game is about intensity and pressing I don't feel that Ritchie is the answer nor do I expect him to beat the defender with pace.
In fact the same goes for Lane as he doesn't appear to be very quick so we are relying on the rather erratic Brian K to bring some pace out wide and sometimes from the full-backs.

[Armadillo Roadkill]

The thing is, you can only start eleven players. So you can't start all the players you think have a role to play. So you may have to bring them on a substitutes.

Ritchie is already worth his weight in gold to us. A super sub with his sort of impact is invaluable. But he probably can't play a full 90 minutes. So Hunt's management of him is smart.

For all of the problems we're seeing, Hunt's use of substitutes really is not one of them.

I was thinking about some of the comments made about the franchise FC game. It was a very interesting speculation that Hunt's "by the book" coaching may be restricting players spontaneity and ability to express themselves. This seems plausible. In which case, it's the sort of thing somebody like Gibbs would have had the authority within the coaching set-up to address. This may another way we are feeling his loss.

[Hound]

Ritchie should be able to play 90 mins or else don’t think we should have signed him (though he is obvs doing a job as sub)

Again he’s only 36. England have picked a 35 year old midfielder in their latest squad (alright he’s rubbish but still). 36 isn’t THAT old…

[Armadillo Roadkill]

Ritchie should be able to play 90 mins or else don’t think we should have signed him (though he is obvs doing a job as sub)

Again he’s only 36. England have picked a 35 year old midfielder in their latest squad (alright he’s rubbish but still). 36 isn’t THAT old…

Riche gives us something we don't have. It has already won us several points. Turning a loss into a draw or a draw into a win is so important, and his abilities are incontestable in doing that.

He's a bit like a Rolls Royce with only a small amount of fuel in the tank. It's not a good use of that fuel driving to Dundee in bare feet eating Toblerone; save it for when it counts most, like on a date with someone easily impressed but desirable.

And I know Jordan Henderson is older than Richie and he can still blunder around a football pitch. Ronaldo is over 40. But others players have been finished by 32. I don't think you can generalise too much.

[South Coast Royal]

Ritchie should be able to play 90 mins or else don’t think we should have signed him (though he is obvs doing a job as sub)

Again he’s only 36. England have picked a 35 year old midfielder in their latest squad (alright he’s rubbish but still). 36 isn’t THAT old…

Riche gives us something we don't have. It has already won us several points. Turning a loss into a draw or a draw into a win is so important, and his abilities are incontestable in doing that.

He's a bit like a Rolls Royce with only a small amount of fuel in the tank. It's not a good use of that fuel driving to Dundee in bare feet eating Toblerone; save it for when it counts most, like on a date with someone easily impressed but desirable.

And I know Jordan Henderson is older than Richie and he can still blunder around a football pitch. Ronaldo is over 40. But others players have been finished by 32. I don't think you can generalise too much.

I have watched Henderson twice recently for Brentford and each time he has lasted about 75 minutes having made an impact on the games as well as showing that he can still run and tackle.
So far (and I would hope that in time he plays more than 20 minutes per game as he clearly retains some ability) Ritchie looks more suited to walking football and I don't think I have seen him run yet.

Our problems are much bigger than Ritchie-I want to see much more from the rest of the many Summer signings and for Hunt to work the oracle with Kelvin E-we can't have a successful team with bit part players who so infrequently add value to the line-up.

BTW much as I like Elliott I don't see him as the Messiah nor do I see that in Ritchie.

[Snowflake Royal]

Ritchie should be able to play 90 mins or else don’t think we should have signed him (though he is obvs doing a job as sub)

Again he’s only 36. England have picked a 35 year old midfielder in their latest squad (alright he’s rubbish but still). 36 isn’t THAT old…

I think you're massively overstating this, how many 36 year olds, outside the exceptional elite, are playing regularly in the top 3 divisions. When was the last time we were regularly picking a 36 year old? Jimmy Quinn?

Rumour was when he signed that it was with a view to moving into a coaching role with us wasn't it? And he's already proved a good addition and successful signing just as a sub.

There 7 players in League One over the age of 34 who have made more than 4 appearances this season.

[Hound]

Ritchie should be able to play 90 mins or else don’t think we should have signed him (though he is obvs doing a job as sub)

Again he’s only 36. England have picked a 35 year old midfielder in their latest squad (alright he’s rubbish but still). 36 isn’t THAT old…

I think you're massively overstating this, how many 36 year olds, outside the exceptional elite, are playing regularly in the top 3 divisions. When was the last time we were regularly picking a 36 year old? Jimmy Quinn?

Rumour was when he signed that it was with a view to moving into a coaching role with us wasn't it? And he's already proved a good addition and successful signing just as a sub.

There 7 players in League One over the age of 34 who have made more than 4 appearances this season.

Is that due to fitness and ability or motivation though?

As I’ve mentioned he played near 40 games in the champ last year, 29 starts. That doesn’t drop off in a couple of months

He also spent a few years barely playing so maybe doesn’t have the miles on the clock that some players do

SCR - don’t agree that he hasn’t run - he was pretty energetic last game for 30 mins. For me he has to start and see what he can manage. I just don’t believe he can’t do 90 mins regularly

[AthleticoSpizz]

Based on how highly my ST ‘Skate’ work colleagues rated him and what they told me of his qualities and capabilities, I agree with you here Hound.
Either start him, or at least get him on sooner.

[Mid Sussex Royal]

Excellent article on the Tilehurst End site on lack of progress in September and players regressing

https://thetilehurstend.sbnation.com/20 ... -september

[leon]

Which is not a criticism of the substitutions.

I did wonder that about Richie. Recently it has been: Reading concede an early goal, we chase the game/the opposition park the bus, bring Richie on, he assists Marriott, we get a draw

Why can't we start with Richie then perhaps we'd be the ones scoring the early goal and making the opposition chase the game? He should be fit enough for more than a 20 minute cameo by now

Yeah, discussed this with Hound a bit.

To me Ritchie hasn't actually created a lot, and at 36 hasn't convinced me he has the legs to start.

Yes, he's go two assists, but to me those were all about experience and touch, making the best of someone else's creativity, rather than him creating something.

And I can't get away from our game plan being a high intensity, high energy, high press. I doubt he can do that for 65 minutes.

Two assists is two assists and its striking the games where he's come on as sub the "high intensity, high energy, high press" hasn't occurred until AFTER he's come on.

People saying he should be able to play 90 mins otherwise we shouldnt have signed him are missing the point. It's how we effectively use him is the key part. Playing or not. We need more leaders on the pitch on the pitch - you can see how much we miss Williams.

[Snowflake Royal]

I did wonder that about Richie. Recently it has been: Reading concede an early goal, we chase the game/the opposition park the bus, bring Richie on, he assists Marriott, we get a draw

Why can't we start with Richie then perhaps we'd be the ones scoring the early goal and making the opposition chase the game? He should be fit enough for more than a 20 minute cameo by now

Yeah, discussed this with Hound a bit.

To me Ritchie hasn't actually created a lot, and at 36 hasn't convinced me he has the legs to start.

Yes, he's go two assists, but to me those were all about experience and touch, making the best of someone else's creativity, rather than him creating something.

And I can't get away from our game plan being a high intensity, high energy, high press. I doubt he can do that for 65 minutes.

Two assists is two assists and its striking the games where he's come on as sub the "high intensity, high energy, high press" hasn't occurred until AFTER he's come on.

People saying he should be able to play 90 mins otherwise we shouldnt have signed him are missing the point. It's how we effectively use him is the key part. Playing or not. We need more leaders on the pitch on the pitch - you can see how much we miss Williams.

I only disagree that the high press hasn't started until he's come on. It has faded out before he's come on and the changes have helped re-up it, but its certainly been there to start with. To varying degrees of success.

It's why I really wanted to see him get 60 minutes in one of the cup games. Prove his fitness in a low import match, or prove it over 3/4/5 20 - 30 minute sub appearances, fine. I don’t see training, so I want to be convinced he can start before we just chuck him in to the starting line up.

Play a different way, I have less concern. Play him at fullback, I have less concern.