Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
mickey phelans tash

Scared of the Mighty Reading ?

Recommended Posts

Whatever kind of message does it send out to the opposition when you start the match without a recognised striker in the line up, whilst having two on the bench.  Even if we had drawn 0-0 it would hardly have been a masterstroke. Why can''t Roeder just keep it bloody simple........

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="Rastaman"]Cause he a muppet who doesn''t have clue what he is doing!!  ROEDER OUT[/quote]

As Rastaman said.......... Roeder out[:@]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The message is that we''ve come for one point, which we almost did. Besides, we''ve fielded all our goalscorers from the previous couple of games -- none of whom is striker.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I''d have happily taken a 0-0 at Reading.

Playing on the counter attack, you''re not going to out attack them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Budapest Canary"]

The message is that we''ve come for one point, which we almost did.

[/quote]

And if we almost avoid relegation will you be happy?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Big Ginge"][quote user="Budapest Canary"]

The message is that we''ve come for one point, which we almost did.

[/quote]

And if we almost avoid relegation will you be happy?

[/quote]

Smudger probably will. Don''t forget, however that a) our best lone striker was not available for the game, b) we conceded both goals when we did have a striker onfield, and c) we managed to create chances even without strikers. For me, starting against one of the better sides defensively, on an away game, makes sense: if we let them score early, we would have been in trouble during most of the game, while this way we had a good chance to make something out of the game, even a late winner, which did not happen, but I''m not sure Roeder is to be blamed for this. If we play well, result will come. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So you would have played Carl Cort from the beginning? Or perhaps matched Arturo Lupoli against Ingimarsson and Duberry? Roeder wanted someone able to compete and hold the ball up. Cort isn''t fit enough and Lupoli simply wouldn''t be able to it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just can''t believe that there are people who will defend a decision to start a game with 6 midfielders (two of whom are right wingers and the other 4 holding players) and no strikers. This has got sweet FA to do with wanting Roeder in or out and has everything to with common sense.  If someone can show me a similar team that has done really well with such a line-up then I will stand corrected.....................

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="Saint Canary"]I just can''t believe that there are people who will defend a decision to start a game with 6 midfielders (two of whom are right wingers and the other 4 holding players) and no strikers.

This has got sweet FA to do with wanting Roeder in or out and has everything to with common sense.  If someone can show me a similar team that has done really well with such a line-up then I will stand corrected.....................
[/quote]

 

Sorry i''m generally as critical of our manager as it gets (and when I heard the team on saturday I was critical of the line up) but having been at the game and seen how it went I have to say Roeder got it right. If you can criticise him for anything its that he should perhaps have taken Russell off when he tired in the 2nd half and maybe given Hoolly or Lupoli a run out alongside Cort but in the first half we got it spot on. Russell (aside from his miss when he slipped) put himself about brilliantly despite being battered by their two centre halves. I like Lupoli but it was not his type of pitch/game. The extra man in the midfield allowed us to control that part of the field and if we had put away the 2 absolutely brilliant chances we had then we would (and should) have been two up after 25 minutes. Whilst I agree that we can''t keep on saying "we didn''t deserve to lose" or "we were unlucky" I am genuinely torn about Roeder at the moment because i just don''t know what you can do to legislate for 2 professional footballers failing to score from less than 5 yards with the goal at their mercy!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Jim Smith"]

[quote user="Saint Canary"]I just can''t believe that there are people who will defend a decision to start a game with 6 midfielders (two of whom are right wingers and the other 4 holding players) and no strikers. This has got sweet FA to do with wanting Roeder in or out and has everything to with common sense.  If someone can show me a similar team that has done really well with such a line-up then I will stand corrected.....................[/quote]

 

Sorry i''m generally as critical of our manager as it gets (and when I heard the team on saturday I was critical of the line up) but having been at the game and seen how it went I have to say Roeder got it right. If you can criticise him for anything its that he should perhaps have taken Russell off when he tired in the 2nd half and maybe given Hoolly or Lupoli a run out alongside Cort but in the first half we got it spot on. Russell (aside from his miss when he slipped) put himself about brilliantly despite being battered by their two centre halves. I like Lupoli but it was not his type of pitch/game. The extra man in the midfield allowed us to control that part of the field and if we had put away the 2 absolutely brilliant chances we had then we would (and should) have been two up after 25 minutes. Whilst I agree that we can''t keep on saying "we didn''t deserve to lose" or "we were unlucky" I am genuinely torn about Roeder at the moment because i just don''t know what you can do to legislate for 2 professional footballers failing to score from less than 5 yards with the goal at their mercy!

[/quote]I was there and to be fair we played OK in the first.  Unsuprisingly we retained the ball well in midfield but then you would hope so with 6 in the team.  I agree Russell put himself about really well but when crunch time came for playing as a striker, ie puting a good chance away he was found seriously lacking.I also disagree about Lupoli.  I agree he could not have competed physically against their centre halves but who said he would have had too?  Could we not have played a way to suit us and not a physical game to suit the?.I would again ask you to show me any team that has had success without playing a striker?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...