You're the manager - what would you do?

[dariusz]

I'd probably just continue doing what I'm doing, continue training the team towards the style of football I want them to play, continue to turn out performances that are rarely second best to our opposition, and take some measure of relief when the team starts to get some positive results.

Oh and play Kebe more coz he's skillz.

Post of the month!!!

[Negative_Jeff]

Then turn to more important issues.... such as getting rid of our cretin of a PA announcer.

I cannot believe that anyone who has actually been to any games wouldn't realise that the place to start is getting rid of that sodding drummer.

Agreed, include the drummer as well, lets make a list. This could remain "on topic" as I seem to recall Jack Mansell involving himself in all aspects of running the club.

[Dirk Gently]

Then turn to more important issues.... such as getting rid of our cretin of a PA announcer.

I cannot believe that anyone who has actually been to any games wouldn't realise that the place to start is getting rid of that sodding drummer.

Perhaps we ought to put in a bid for Peterborough's drummer .....

[I was there at Elm Park]

I thought I sensed a change in BR's temperament in the post match interview on Saturday. Although still seemingly calm on the surface you could feel there was some real anger simmering underneath. For the first time he did not totally praise his players and expressions like "not good enough" and "they'll need to learn quickly" we don't normally hear. I would expect training to be slightly more unpleasant than it normally is this week and would hope for a reaction next Saturday.

I thought the same. For the first time on Saturday I think the players have to take the blame. You can criticise the manager all you want but the players have to take individual and collective responsibility at some point. They let Brendan down on Saturday and owe him big time.

Someone on here made a good point about Coppell saying that it's not formations that win you games not players. It's true but unfortunately I think Rodgers is trying to find a formation that will allow the players to win a game which is a criticism of the players as much if not more than of Rodgers. The problem with Saturday was that in the second half we had three attacking midfielders who didn't offer any support to the defence. People have suggested we go back to 4-4-2 but that doesn't solve the problem. If we play two natural wingers then who do we play in the middle? I think we'd all agree that two from Tabb, Cisse, Gunnarsson and Karacan would be too negative and lack creativity. But if we play a pair from one of those just mentioned and one from Howard, Matejovsky or Sigurdsson then we're back to the potential problem from Saturday of having three inconsistent attacking midfielders who may not support the defence.

[No Fixed Abode]

If I was BR, I head back to Chelsea.

[M U R T Y]

The only reason people are clammering for a return to 4-4-2 is because they don't understand any other system. Rodgers has abandoned 4-4-2 because he has realised that most of the top european teams who play good football have moved on from the out-dated 4-4-2 and are bearing the fruition.

Coppell pre-premiership used 4-4-2 very effectively in the championship - because teams and players were not sophisticated or good enough to handle us.

In the premiership we had a season's grace as clubs didn't know what we were about - 2nd season teams knew how we would play, and we got found out.

Coppell didn't have an effective plan B. Last season 4-4-2 worked again to begin with, but once the rot set in (for many different reasons) results disappeared and Coppell again didn't have a plan B.

Rodgers has used 3 different formations that i've seen so far - he already has flexibility in his approach - however most of the players will take time to adjust from playing their whole career in a 4-4-2 formation.

[Dirk Gently]

The only reason people are clammering for a return to 4-4-2 is because they don't understand any other system. Rodgers has abandoned 4-4-2 because he has realised that most of the top european teams who play good football have moved on from the out-dated 4-4-2 and are bearing the fruition.

Coppell pre-premiership used 4-4-2 very effectively in the championship - because teams and players were not sophisticated or good enough to handle us.

In the premiership we had a season's grace as clubs didn't know what we were about - 2nd season teams knew how we would play, and we got found out.

Coppell didn't have an effective plan B. Last season 4-4-2 worked again to begin with, but once the rot set in (for many different reasons) results disappeared and Coppell again didn't have a plan B.

Rodgers has used 3 different formations that i've seen so far - he already has flexibility in his approach - however most of the players will take time to adjust from playing their whole career in a 4-4-2 formation.

That sums things up pretty well.

For more background for those who can't think past the idea of 4-4-2 that everyone in England has grown up with, I'd reeommend "Inverting The Pyramid: A History Of Football Tactics" by Jonathan Wilson and also "Why England Lose: And Other Curious Phenomena Explained" by Simon Kuper & Stefan Szymanski.

[Alan Partridge]

Find a bigger watch, ask Jose for a new coat, check page 6 of my bumper book of soccer tactics, and try and say 'So Err' more than 20 times in the next interview. That'd do it.

[General B]

If I were the manager, I would stop wearing tank tops

Nonsense. The Ralph tank top should be a key part of any self-respecting gentleman's cross-seasonal wardrobe.

[Ryn]

The only reason people are clammering for a return to 4-4-2 is because they don't understand any other system. Rodgers has abandoned 4-4-2 because he has realised that most of the top european teams who play good football have moved on from the out-dated 4-4-2 and are bearing the fruition.
.

That would be fine if we were a top european team.

[Maguire]

Find a bigger watch, ask Jose for a new coat, check page 6 of my bumper book of soccer tactics, and try and say 'So Err' more than 20 times in the next interview. That'd do it.

[Dorset-Knob]

The only reason people are clammering for a return to 4-4-2 is because they don't understand any other system. Rodgers has abandoned 4-4-2 because he has realised that most of the top european teams who play good football have moved on from the out-dated 4-4-2 and are bearing the fruition.
.

That would be fine if we were a top european team.

Yeah of course its the fans fault that we don't understand why we're crap! please

[weybridgewanderer]

I'd probably just continue doing what I'm doing, continue training the team towards the style of football I want them to play, continue to turn out performances that are rarely second best to our opposition, and take some measure of relief when the team starts to get some positive results.

Oh and play Kebe more coz he's skillz.

rarely second best? W1 D3 L4

That suggest we have been 2nd best on 4 occasions out of 8

he said performances not results

there are 2 teams on the park

the stats that matters are the goals scored stat

if you lose you were second best

simple really

[ZacNaloen]

Where were all these people in support of the stats without context when Snowball was posting?

[sheshnu]

Except it's not really just about results for Reading at the moment, is it?

[Maguire]

rarely second best? W1 D3 L4

That suggest we have been 2nd best on 4 occasions out of 8

he said performances not results

there are 2 teams on the park

the stats that matters are the goals scored stat

if you lose you were second best

simple really

I don't mean to be rude, but that's a seven year old's view of football.

[Ian Royal]

So Rodgers doesn't know his strongest team yet - do you?
The loan window is open - who would you bring in (realistically)?
What formation would you play?
What style of football would you play?

Lots of people are moaning about Rodgers on here, but in all honestly what would you do - if you were manager?

1) No. But I'd make a guess and unless it was awful stick with it for 2-3 games minimum.
It would be something like Federici, Cummings, Pearce, O'Dea, Bertrand, Davies, Siggurdsson, Karacan, Kebe, Hunt, Church. Subs: Hamer, Mills, Cisse, HRK, Matejovsky, Mooney, Tabb. Until the likes of McAnuff, Ivar, Armstrong & Long are fully fit anyway.

I've cooled off a little so I'm willing to give Pearce another chance, although it very much depends on training and who looks the best and fittest there out of him Ivar and Mills. I think Cummings shows promise and we have no other option.

Davies provides excellent pace but isn't a traditional lightweight winger. He also offers excellent set piece options and has a great long shot. Karacan and Siggurdsson complement each other quite well. They both have energy, Karacan can get stuck in but can also burst forward. Siggurdsson is more creative, but adds a little height in the middle and is capable of putting in a challenge. Kebe is the weak link, but can also be devastating and he offers genuine width.

Church is a hard worker and is more mobile and creative than Rasiak, him and Hunt may work best until Long comes back. Mooney would be ahead of Rasiak as well right now.

2) I'd like to bring Henry back, a striker would be nice. Don't know enough players for this, I'd be giving McDermott & Hammond a brief on what I wanted and see what they bring me.

3)4-4-2. Not as narrow as the diamond, but with more balance across the whole midfield than Coppell's winger orientated version.

4)Direct, attacking, passing football.

[weybridgewanderer]

Where were all these people in support of the stats without context when Snowball was posting?

again the stat that mattered was goals scored

last season snowball used his stats to show how great we were and that we were virtually assured promotion. I disagreed with him, mainly due to our lack of goals.

[ZacNaloen]

But the goals scored doesn't tell the whole story.

That being that they couldn't touch us in the first half and we were utter oxf*rd in the second.

Lots of positives to take from the first half, and a lot of lessons to be learnt from the second.

But I still wouldn't change anything because there is obvious progression happening in the squad.

[weybridgewanderer]

do you avoid relegation because you took more positives from games than other teams?

or is there another rule I am unaware of that you avoid relagtion because you played 5 players under 21?

or perhaps I missed the " getting better over the course of the season" column in the table?

I am sure the stat that matters is scoring more than you concede!