Back From the Game

[Stranded]

All I can see is the game played at the ground must have been different to the one Sky showed in my front room.

We weren't superb last night but were a class above Charlton and forced them into playing like an away side, on the break in an attempt to nick what would have been a vital 3 pts.

Most of the 2nd half was played in their half and the only thing that was missing was either a bit of composure or a cutting edge.

To say that the team didn't care is laughable IMHO on last night's performance. A team that didn't care would have got turned over last night.

As someone else has said, if we'd turned all our dominance into a goal last night, we'd have people on here applauding a job well done and pronouncing that the UEFA Cup charge is back on. It's a big jump from that to some of the posts made here.

[PieEater]

After seeing the bizarre team selection I was happy with a point, particularly when we didn't really get going in the first half and Poll seemed to have it in for us. I half expected him to award a dodgy penalty.

As for the cheating git el Karkouri, I lost count of the number of times he rolled around on the floor, then committed such an obvious foul on Long that only Poll could have missed it.

[southbank1871]

All I can see is the game played at the ground must have been different to the one Sky showed in my front room.

We weren't superb last night but were a class above Charlton and forced them into playing like an away side, on the break in an attempt to nick what would have been a vital 3 pts.

Most of the 2nd half was played in their half and the only thing that was missing was either a bit of composure or a cutting edge.

To say that the team didn't care is laughable IMHO on last night's performance. A team that didn't care would have got turned over last night.

As someone else has said, if we'd turned all our dominance into a goal last night, we'd have people on here applauding a job well done and pronouncing that the UEFA Cup charge is back on. It's a big jump from that to some of the posts made here.

Can't argue you with anything you've said there Stranders.

I was also a bit confused as to why Coppell didn't bring on any subs, but I'd imagine his thinking was that we were well on top in the second half and were the team that looked like scoring.

Regarding the team selection, Coppell is just using his squad after a tough game only 48 hours prior to this one, really don't see the problem with that.

[Royal Lady]

Kitson and Doyle both back from injury - needing games - we've not played in ages and then get 2 games in 3 days - that's not saying much about our fitness levels. Do you think that if were in a relegation battle, we would have put that team out last night? Of course we wouldn't. Coppell had no intention of winning that game.

[southbank1871]

Coppell had no intention of winning that game.

I just can't comprehend this point of view RL. If this was the case, Reading would have sat back in the second half and invited pressure from Charlton. What actually happened is that they pressed on looking for the winner and put Charlton on the back foot for pretty much the whole of the second half.

[Royal Lady]

Coppell had no intention of winning that game.

I just can't comprehend this point of view RL. If this was the case, Reading would have sat back in the second half and invited pressure from Charlton. What actually happened is that they pressed on looking for the winner and put Charlton on the back foot for pretty much the whole of the second half.

Coppell was happy with the draw. He wouldn't invite pressure from Charlton, or they might score and then he'd have to put a sub on and change his tactics. If we wanted to win that game, we'd have put Kitson and/or Doyle and/or Gunnarsson on imvho.

[zac naloen]

Right at the end, Long got shoved but didn't go to ground, and the Fox Soccer Channel commentators said that we might have well got a penalty had he did. Did anyone else see the incident? They didn't replay it, so I only got one look at it.

Sky noticed it and thought El Karkourai was lucky not to have given away a penalty as he had no intention of getting to the ball from his face. The reverse angle showed him very fortunate and very stupid for doing such a thing.

That Moroccan bloke should have been sent off. Two moments of blatantly bringing the game into disrepute. I do believe those warrant a yellow card each.

I think that the other incedent you are thinking of was by Song.

Actually I was thinking about the two times he was rolling around on the floor in faux agony. I'm pretty sure there is something in the rule books about that.

[southbank1871]

Coppell had no intention of winning that game.

I just can't comprehend this point of view RL. If this was the case, Reading would have sat back in the second half and invited pressure from Charlton. What actually happened is that they pressed on looking for the winner and put Charlton on the back foot for pretty much the whole of the second half.

Coppell was happy with the draw. He wouldn't invite pressure from Charlton, or they might score and then he'd have to put a sub on and change his tactics. If we wanted to win that game, we'd have put Kitson and/or Doyle and/or Gunnarsson on imvho.

Maybe he was happy with the draw, but that doesn't mean he didn't also want to win the game. Maybe he remembered making a late change in the Liverpool game and then conceding a late goal?

[Stranded]

Kitson and Doyle both back from injury - needing games - we've not played in ages and then get 2 games in 3 days - that's not saying much about our fitness levels. Do you think that if were in a relegation battle, we would have put that team out last night? Of course we wouldn't. Coppell had no intention of winning that game.

That is a very strong accusation to make. Could turn that round and say playing Kitson and Doyle would be not trying to win the game as we're using it to get them back to fitness.

Looking at the changes. Bikey in for the injured Duberry no brainer.

Seol in for Oster - Oster didn't set the world on fire against Liverpool but was OK, can see why a change was made. IMO Seol played well and proved the worth of his start.

DLC for Gunna - had no real impact on the team as both have played similar amounts of games. Gunna played well on Sat but DLC played well last night and Halford did OK the game before Gunna came in.

Lita has been our form striker for a while so him coming back in is hardly weaking the side.

The only one you could say is Long who wasn't great last night and should have come off.

Beyond that we were on top and at time all over them. Coppell doesn't make changes (rightly or wrongly) when his team are doing what we were doing last night.

[Schards#2]

Coppell had no intention of winning that game.

I just can't comprehend this point of view RL. If this was the case, Reading would have sat back in the second half and invited pressure from Charlton. What actually happened is that they pressed on looking for the winner and put Charlton on the back foot for pretty much the whole of the second half.

Coppell was happy with the draw. He wouldn't invite pressure from Charlton, or they might score and then he'd have to put a sub on and change his tactics. If we wanted to win that game, we'd have put Kitson and/or Doyle and/or Gunnarsson on imvho.

Maybe he was happy with the draw, but that doesn't mean he didn't also want to win the game. Maybe he remembered making a late change in the Liverpool game and then conceding a late goal?

He could have taken Long off and brought no one on and it wouldn't have weakened the team. To keep two top strikers who are hungry for games and goals after recent injuries on the bench throughout seems very very odd indeed.

[Royal Lady]

Or maybe, as someone said above, he did his pal Pardew a favour. At our expense.

[Adrian's Fool]

Coppell had no intention of winning that game.

I just can't comprehend this point of view RL. If this was the case, Reading would have sat back in the second half and invited pressure from Charlton. What actually happened is that they pressed on looking for the winner and put Charlton on the back foot for pretty much the whole of the second half.

Coppell was happy with the draw. He wouldn't invite pressure from Charlton, or they might score and then he'd have to put a sub on and change his tactics. If we wanted to win that game, we'd have put Kitson and/or Doyle and/or Gunnarsson on imvho.

If we didn't want to win the game, we could easily have time-wasted at the end, which we didn't (despite Charlton fans seeming to think otherwise). I recall we had a couple of corners near the end and I half expected us just to try and keep the ball in the corner, which we didn't. The no-subs approach was frustrating but I suspect Sir Steve held back last night because we were dominating towards the end and he didn't want to upset the rhythm/ intensity of the team.

[southbank1871]

Or maybe, as someone said above, he did his pal Pardew a favour. At our expense.

That is just a ludicrous suggestion.

[Royal Lady]

If that's the case, I don't like Coppell's rhythm!

[Royal Lady]

Kitson and Doyle both back from injury - needing games - we've not played in ages and then get 2 games in 3 days - that's not saying much about our fitness levels. Do you think that if were in a relegation battle, we would have put that team out last night? Of course we wouldn't. Coppell had no intention of winning that game.

That is a very strong accusation to make. Could turn that round and say playing Kitson and Doyle would be not trying to win the game as we're using it to get them back to fitness.

Looking at the changes. Bikey in for the injured Duberry no brainer.

Seol in for Oster - Oster didn't set the world on fire against Liverpool but was OK, can see why a change was made. IMO Seol played well and proved the worth of his start.

DLC for Gunna - had no real impact on the team as both have played similar amounts of games. Gunna played well on Sat but DLC played well last night and Halford did OK the game before Gunna came in.

Lita has been our form striker for a while so him coming back in is hardly weaking the side.

The only one you could say is Long who wasn't great last night and should have come off.

Beyond that we were on top and at time all over them. Coppell doesn't make changes (rightly or wrongly) when his team are doing what we were doing last night.

Do you think that if we were in a relegation battle, we'd have put that team out last night?

[The 17 Bus]

One reason to push on this season is that for some reason ST holders have not been allowed to renew for next season, we know the prices now, but playing out the end of the season like this might put a few off, there are names on this board that are bored of watching, and TBH they are names I would assume would die rather than miss a game, football is about entertainment, or winning, simple, at the moment we are doing neither, IMHO.

[The 17 Bus]

Do you think that if we were in a relegation battle, we'd have put that team out last night?

and there endeth the arguement!! For that is the truth.

[Maguire]

Completely agree, that was a cracking game of football. My eyes were glued from beginning to end.

Sarcasm or not?!

It was fcuking rubbish! I spent the entire second half eyeing up the exit. Wish I'd watched it in the pub and saved a bit of money.

[southbank1871]

Completely agree, that was a cracking game of football. My eyes were glued from beginning to end.

Sarcasm or not?!

It was fcuking rubbish! I spent the entire second half eyeing up the exit. Wish I'd watched it in the pub and saved a bit of money.

Wouldn't say it was cracking, but also wouldn't agree that it was rubbish. I would describe it as a watchable goaless draw myself

[zac naloen]

Completely agree, that was a cracking game of football. My eyes were glued from beginning to end.

Sarcasm or not?!

It was fcuking rubbish! I spent the entire second half eyeing up the exit. Wish I'd watched it in the pub and saved a bit of money.

Should have stayed at home and watched it on Sky then, obviously they were broadcasting another match.