Were we really as bad as The Sunday Times suggested ?

[Platypuss]

Only saw the highlights but the marking for their 1st goal was absolutely shocking. Time for the defensive and goal-keeping coaches to earn the pay I think.

Yes, once again our marking was found lacking (as it was for Kanu's goal last week). Wally has got a bit to do with the defence, but as has been pointed out we are somewhat transiant at the moment with Murts being out. On a brighter note, I thought Sam Sodje had a terrific game.

The scoreline really did flatter Liverpool. They might have only been in 'second gear' but I thought, with a little more leniency from Mr Rennie we might had nicked a point. My main worry is the lack of attacks that end with the oppersition 'keeper earning his money. We need Kits back asp.

FOREST G..you say the marking for the 1st goal was shocking...
what marking...think Gunnarrson or Sodje should have been on any danger from our right but Sodje would keep drifting to central defence
and Gunnarsson was switching between defence and midfield..having said that Kuyt is a bit of a class act.......and Corky you say your main worry
etc.

For the first goal Ingimarsson was standing next to Kuyt, then didn't even bother to follow his run!

What have Gunnarsson and Sodje got to do with it?

[spike25]

I don't know how you could say that Liverpool barely got out of 4th gear and could have added more goals any time they wanted. Both of the goals they did score were pretty soft ones. As previously mentioned the marking on the first one was piss poor and on the second, Hahnemann spilled an easily catchable ball right onto Kuyt's foot.

When you compare our performance to Villa's last week, we looked leagues better than Villa. Now, you could ascribe that to Liverpool's midweek match or them not being as sharp as they were last week, but Reading probably had something to do with it as well. Our attacking play was much more fluid and we caused them many more problems than Villa did. That has to be encouraging.

[E. Andrew]

Only saw the highlights but the marking for their 1st goal was absolutely shocking. Time for the defensive and goal-keeping coaches to earn the pay I think.

Yes, once again our marking was found lacking (as it was for Kanu's goal last week). Wally has got a bit to do with the defence, but as has been pointed out we are somewhat transiant at the moment with Murts being out. On a brighter note, I thought Sam Sodje had a terrific game.

The scoreline really did flatter Liverpool. They might have only been in 'second gear' but I thought, with a little more leniency from Mr Rennie we might had nicked a point. My main worry is the lack of attacks that end with the oppersition 'keeper earning his money. We need Kits back asp.

FOREST G..you say the marking for the 1st goal was shocking...
what marking...think Gunnarrson or Sodje should have been on any danger from our right but Sodje would keep drifting to central defence
and Gunnarsson was switching between defence and midfield..having said that Kuyt is a bit of a class act.......and Corky you say your main worry
etc.

For the first goal Ingimarsson was standing next to Kuyt, then didn't even bother to follow his run!

What have Gunnarsson and Sodje got to do with it?

yep, the first thing i remember after the goal is ingamarsson looking quite embarassed

[Victor Meldrew]

Every goal that is scored is a mistake by somebody.
For their first goal I thought Sidwell was at fault in allowing Gerrard time and space to pick out Crouch at the far post and Ivar didn't track Kuyt.
For the second goal Crouch had a free header in the box from a corner which is unforgivable.

I do think that Liverpool were always in control and played the game at half-speed.
Having said that,we came away without being tonked which Coppell can build on for upcoming games-presumably that was the game plan and it worked.
Now we have to show that we can turn the switch on again and play at a high tempo until we play Man Utd and Chelsea away over the Christmas period when we can go back to the defence at all costs approach.

[Arch]

It seemed that every time we appeared to be a threat in the box, Rennie found an infringement which he could award them a free kick for. It was not a dirty game and I don't know where he found these infringments.

Liverpool swarmed the ball with defenders in their own half, unlike us. It was hard for us to get any kind of possession without getting physical, and most refs will tend to favour the defender in that situation. By contrast, they were able to walk the ball well into our half unchallenged. I think the fact that they got more calls from the ref than we got has something to do with those differences in the styles of play.

[cmonurz]

I don't know how you could say that Liverpool barely got out of 4th gear and could have added more goals any time they wanted. Both of the goals they did score were pretty soft ones. As previously mentioned the marking on the first one was piss poor and on the second, Hahnemann spilled an easily catchable ball right onto Kuyt's foot.

When you compare our performance to Villa's last week, we looked leagues better than Villa. Now, you could ascribe that to Liverpool's midweek match or them not being as sharp as they were last week, but Reading probably had something to do with it as well. Our attacking play was much more fluid and we caused them many more problems than Villa did. That has to be encouraging.

Sorry, completely disagree. We had one effort on target and only three other shots on goal. Liverpool owned the pitch, and didn't have to get started playing the way they can. No offence meant but there has to be some element of delusion to believe that we genuinely caused Liverpool problems. Leagues better than Villa? Not at all.

[Whistle]

Liverpool were never really stretched. Our focus was defence and the first goal was down to Sodje and Sonko not knowing how to play 5 at the back.

WE had a go for the first part of the second half w/o worrying them much and the second goal killed it. Their fans thought it was an easy dull win.

[PremAddict]

I read a couple of Sundays and we seem to have gone from being this years Wigan to relegation certanties in 4 games. Did anybody really expect much from this set of fixtures? And it won't be any easier on Sunday. I am sure we can turn things around you don't become a bad team overnight and we are by no means a bad team, my only worry is the confidence has tacken a knock in the last couple of weeks and that can be the hardest thing to restore after such a prolonged spell of success.

Thing is we are pretty much doing exactly what Wigan did last year, picking up early points and surprising people before going on a run of defeats against the top clubs. It is how we react NOW that is vital.

I think Sir Steve's comments regarding "coincidence of the fixtures" comes into play here and when you look back at "what Wigan did last year", a similar "coincidence" is there.

Wigan lost their first two, won a number of matches against sides that ended-up bottom or mid-table, and then lost handedly during their "tough stretch". Key is they focused on the teams in "their league" and took points with most of them.

[Rev Algenon Stickleback H]

I don't know how you could say that Liverpool barely got out of 4th gear and could have added more goals any time they wanted. Both of the goals they did score were pretty soft ones. As previously mentioned the marking on the first one was piss poor and on the second, Hahnemann spilled an easily catchable ball right onto Kuyt's foot.

When you compare our performance to Villa's last week, we looked leagues better than Villa. Now, you could ascribe that to Liverpool's midweek match or them not being as sharp as they were last week, but Reading probably had something to do with it as well. Our attacking play was much more fluid and we caused them many more problems than Villa did. That has to be encouraging.

Sorry, completely disagree. We had one effort on target and only three other shots on goal. Liverpool owned the pitch, and didn't have to get started playing the way they can. No offence meant but there has to be some element of delusion to believe that we genuinely caused Liverpool problems. Leagues better than Villa? Not at all.

second half we had a lot of the ball and did a lot of attacking (I still can't believe stats that have possession as 70-30 in Liverpool's favour) but didn't create clear chances. Hardly any of our crosses, in fact probably none of them, found a Reading player. That is terrible. Even allowing for better opposition, we should be creating more chances than we do.

Stats can be misleading though. We've never been a team who shoot on sight, and while Liverpool might have had 20 shots (although that figure does seem rather high) how many of them were any good?

The second goal made it look a lot more comfortable than it really was, but we probably showed Liverpool too much respect. As good as they are, they aren't in the Man Utd/Arsenal/Chelsea bracket, and it was a poor performance by them.

[loyalroyal1]

In truth, having been at Villa, West Ham and Liverpool we've been consistently average on the road (I didn't make Wigan or Portsmouth but all accounts I've seen or heard bear out the same).

Liverpool weren't exactly stretched, neither was it a canter til the second went in - incidentally Hahnemann spilled it, rather than anyone else being at fault, and Kuyt was on hand to put the spill away. The first was scored because Crouch got up for a knock-down and nobody could could get near him. Equally nobody spotted Kuyt, so simple stuff really. However I can't remember Reyna being made to make a save the whole match, other than the disallowed scramble.

That said, we were even more woeful against West Ham, just that they were truly shite on the day as well. As I remember it we had only one shot on goal the whole match and that was for the Seols goal.

However, as depressing as the last month has been, our objective is to be better than 3 other teams over the whole season. Currently there is nothing to suggest Middlesborough or Man City are better than we are. West Ham now look to be improving and showed what can happen if you don't stand around admiring Arsenal like we did. That means we would hope Watford or Sheff U stay below us. Currently I think Watford are good enough to stay up but Sheff U not. Throw Charlton in to the mix and Newcastle and we should be able to finish 5 or 6 from the bottom - which would be all we have to do.

However, a couple of points. Man City will sack Pearce if they are bottom 3 at Christmas, as will Newcastle with Roeder - I predict both these will then get out of trouble as they have enough of a squad each. We've got to get a goal scorer in my view - Kitson hasn't yet played a full season for us and is a big miss, Doyle is brilliant but can't carry us all the time, Lita and Long are both out of their depth. Unless we can find someone who could nail 10 goals for us after the transfer window closes I will worry, but for now, lets look for points against Spurs, Charlton and Fulham. If offered 4 points from those possible 9 I'd take them.

Right now it is the fact that with any one of the first choice 11 missing then we look pretty ordinary and lightweight. The only exception is that Little is a match for Seol on the wing, but without a second striker to match Doyle, both of them can cross it all day long and nobody is on hand to put it away at present.

[spike25]

I don't know how you could say that Liverpool barely got out of 4th gear and could have added more goals any time they wanted. Both of the goals they did score were pretty soft ones. As previously mentioned the marking on the first one was piss poor and on the second, Hahnemann spilled an easily catchable ball right onto Kuyt's foot.

When you compare our performance to Villa's last week, we looked leagues better than Villa. Now, you could ascribe that to Liverpool's midweek match or them not being as sharp as they were last week, but Reading probably had something to do with it as well. Our attacking play was much more fluid and we caused them many more problems than Villa did. That has to be encouraging.

Sorry, completely disagree. We had one effort on target and only three other shots on goal. Liverpool owned the pitch, and didn't have to get started playing the way they can. No offence meant but there has to be some element of delusion to believe that we genuinely caused Liverpool problems. Leagues better than Villa? Not at all.

I guess we'll agree to disagree. Villa had one attack they were lucky enough to score from, but other than that, they barely made it into Liverpool's half until the game was no longer in doubt. I remember thinking as I was watching the match that Villa was just being completely and utterly dominated, especially in the 1st half when it mattered.

In contrast, Liverpool just seemed to be a shade better than us at every position and even when it was still only a one-goal game, we were creating plenty of chances. Granted they didn't turn into shots, but most of Villa's firepower came when they were already trailing by 2 or 3 goals. We had plenty of corners and plenty of crosses into the box and I would imagine plenty of nervous moments for Liverpool until they got their second gift goal from Hahnemann.

[The whole year inn]

I read a couple of Sundays and we seem to have gone from being this years Wigan to relegation certanties in 4 games. Did anybody really expect much from this set of fixtures? And it won't be any easier on Sunday. I am sure we can turn things around you don't become a bad team overnight and we are by no means a bad team, my only worry is the confidence has tacken a knock in the last couple of weeks and that can be the hardest thing to restore after such a prolonged spell of success.

Thing is we are pretty much doing exactly what Wigan did last year, picking up early points and surprising people before going on a run of defeats against the top clubs. It is how we react NOW that is vital.

Exactly.

I was looking forward to the Spurs game after they were lucky to get a point at Watford. Now I'm not as optimistic, going forward they looked very fast and direct and deserved the win against Chelsea.

Sunday should be awesome and I am fully on the 'Bikey to start' bandwagon.

[royals pete]

Anfield on Saturday was supposed to be Lambs to the Slaughter.

IT WAS NOT.

Never mind the newspapers.. have a look at the Reds forum. 'Liverpool had to work hard against a very hard working Reading side.' amongst others. They are equally concerened about there away form now.they're up agains Arsenal next

Some good crosses into box but I agree forward power is very short without Kits. Mind you, seeing Carragher and co. in action I wasn't surprised that Reda do not concede at home.

And as for these wretched stats, shots on goal, yes I'd love to see more buta lot of teams have lean times. eg Bolton no shots on goal..AT HOME !

We're all behind SC, lets get going; and..vome on MURTS, we need you

[SpaceCruiser]

beaten easily? pompey and arsenal are the only teams to have beaten us with ease. we deserved a draw from liverpool, still not seen the replay of our dissallowed goal though it seemed fair enough at the time

We deserved nothing from Liverpool, end of.

I thought we deserved at least a goal.

[Royalee]

beaten easily? pompey and arsenal are the only teams to have beaten us with ease. we deserved a draw from liverpool, still not seen the replay of our dissallowed goal though it seemed fair enough at the time

We deserved nothing from Liverpool, end of.

I thought we deserved at least a goal.

How many shots did we have on target apart from the disallowed goal? Liverpool had plenty of other chances to score, such as Kuyt's header in the first half which went narrowly wide. If we deserved a goal, Liverpool deserved another two or three.

[SpaceCruiser]

beaten easily? pompey and arsenal are the only teams to have beaten us with ease. we deserved a draw from liverpool, still not seen the replay of our dissallowed goal though it seemed fair enough at the time

We deserved nothing from Liverpool, end of.

I thought we deserved at least a goal.

How many shots did we have on target apart from the disallowed goal? Liverpool had plenty of other chances to score, such as Kuyt's header in the first half which went narrowly wide. If we deserved a goal, Liverpool deserved another two or three.

The penalty, where that Liverpool player elbowed the ball. Also I couldn't see much wrong with the disallowed goal. I must add that I didn't have the benefit of seeing a replay of it.

[papereyes]

Major topic of discussion amonngst the other sides at football last night

[Deadlock]

The penalty, where that Liverpool player elbowed the ball. Also I couldn't see much wrong with the disallowed goal. I must add that I didn't have the benefit of seeing a replay of it.

MotD couldn't be bothered showing it at all, but seeing it on Sky I'd have to say it was a foul. Bikey shoulder charged Reina, and that's always going to be punished these days.

[mzungu_royal]

FFS, the ST is just a pile of conservative nonsense that doesn't like new teams because we're threatening the cycle of the premiership. according to BBC Berks we should've scored because of the grest beginning against L'pool in the league match and that also the cup match against L'pool was unlucky. we should've apparently and don't quote me on this 'beaten them because of the revival in the 2nd half of the second half.' i'd BBC Berks over the ST every day of the week.

[LoyalRoyal22]

We really need something against Spurs, would set it up nicely for the Charlton game.