by Royal Ginger » 19 Jan 2014 00:25
by SydenhamRoyal » 19 Jan 2014 00:37
Royal Ginger Obita was great, yes, but he wasn't tested defensively today. Very positive early signals, but I'm reserving judgement.
by leon » 19 Jan 2014 02:23
RoyalBlueMuskrat Great result and performance today. Fairly obvious what has happened, as NA himself has alluded to after the poor performances and results in the first half of the season, he's had to bow to player pressure and abandon his slow keep ball style and revert to the formation and method of playing which brings results in this division - the 4-4-2 with a solid midfield pairing, good wing play and strikers playing off each other.
Shame it's taken him over half a season when we all knew it from the start though...
Absolute nonsense about him having to bow to player pressure. For those watching with their eyes open there was still a lot of passing from us, including several phases of numerous effective short passes. It was just that it was done at a higher tempo (something I'm sure Adkins has always wanted) and in the opponents's half. At least one of the players also clearly stated in the post match interview how Adkins had told the players how he wanted a much higher work rate from them (we have certainly seen that in the past two games) and for the to press the opposition more.
by Very near...far away » 19 Jan 2014 03:15
by melonhead » 19 Jan 2014 04:12
RoyalBluesoggy biscuit Williams MOTM
Guthrie's slow motion play and his Hollywood balls into row Z not being there made a massive difference
Whether or not the team is better off without Guthrie, that is an idiotic, ignorant and factually incorrect comment!
by royalsteve » 19 Jan 2014 04:52
by royalsteve » 19 Jan 2014 04:53
Very near...far away Honestly, I don't believe the game could have been very good - it didn't even get two minutes on the Football League Show. That Steve Claridge knows his onions. How else does he get paid for stating the bleedin' obvious.
by royalsteve » 19 Jan 2014 04:54
ZacNaloen Solid win. Not a bad performance today.
by seahawk10 » 19 Jan 2014 05:59
by windermere_royal » 19 Jan 2014 06:33
royalsteveZacNaloen Solid win. Not a bad performance today.
true, I think Bolton helped though as they were dreadful
by howser » 19 Jan 2014 07:38
by Avon Royal » 19 Jan 2014 08:35
royalsteveVery near...far away Honestly, I don't believe the game could have been very good - it didn't even get two minutes on the Football League Show. That Steve Claridge knows his onions. How else does he get paid for stating the bleedin' obvious.
Claridge is a clueless t**t - 2nd worst pundit after Michael owen
by Franchise FC » 19 Jan 2014 08:40
Avon RoyalroyalsteveVery near...far away Honestly, I don't believe the game could have been very good - it didn't even get two minutes on the Football League Show. That Steve Claridge knows his onions. How else does he get paid for stating the bleedin' obvious.
Claridge is a clueless t**t - 2nd worst pundit after Michael owen
He's ex-Aldershot and openly dislikes Reading.
As a pundit, file alongside Don Goodman.
by Royal Ginger » 19 Jan 2014 09:11
windermere_royal Yep when we win the other team are always dreadful , coincidence?
by peterroyal76 » 19 Jan 2014 09:27
P!ssed Offsandman You're more likely to stay in the PL by signing quality players and using the money you're given. Style of play doesn't matter and quite frankly the PL is not a great league for passing football bar a few exceptions.
Oh and on that "scale" McD was also a 6 mixing short passing and longer passing with pace and wing play. It only went longer when confidence was down.
Don't think so.
We got a large proportion of our goals in the promotion season through counter attacking and set pieces. We rarely dominated games. A CB got PoTS, with GK in 3rd place, which says it all really.
by marcusopp » 19 Jan 2014 09:32
peterroyal76P!ssed Offsandman You're more likely to stay in the PL by signing quality players and using the money you're given. Style of play doesn't matter and quite frankly the PL is not a great league for passing football bar a few exceptions.
Oh and on that "scale" McD was also a 6 mixing short passing and longer passing with pace and wing play. It only went longer when confidence was down.
Don't think so.
We got a large proportion of our goals in the promotion season through counter attacking and set pieces. We rarely dominated games. A CB got PoTS, with GK in 3rd place, which says it all really.
I'm not sure player of the season awards always clearly represent the way a season has played out anyway. Dylan Kerr won it in 94 and as good as he was that year the goals from Quinn and Lovell and goal keeping of Shaka probably made more an impact. I'm not decrying Dylan's performances either, every player obviously has a role to play.
by peterroyal76 » 19 Jan 2014 09:55
by tmesis » 19 Jan 2014 10:13
royalsteve The BBC are run by a bunch of clueless t**ts - why wasn't the Royals on longer and virtually no commentary afterwards
by the taphouse » 19 Jan 2014 10:24
tmesisroyalsteve The BBC are run by a bunch of clueless t**ts - why wasn't the Royals on longer and virtually no commentary afterwards
I used to think the same when I was a kid - wondering why Match of the day would show highlights of three mundane games when there'd been a 4-4 draw the same day. Then someone pointed out that they have to send commentary teams to the matches before they know the score, not after.
by McClearyChops » 19 Jan 2014 11:22
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 233 guests