by ReadingFlan » 17 Oct 2007 23:05
Top FlightOi Oi SaveloyTop Flight England would have won if Shorey had played against Russia.
Flippin Lescott was at fault for the Russian winner. Shorey would have been first to the ball.
Also that Russian geezer skinned Lescott a couple of times. If Shorey had played England would have defended better on the flank and would have had more attacking flair going forward.
McLaren really FFffd it up this time by leaving Shorey out.
Most subjective RTG comment in the history of hobnob.
Words fail me.
Not really......... Its the truth.
For some strange reason, as soon as it becomes clear one of our players want to leave. The fans suddenly change their opinions immediately. If Shorey was 100% committed to RFC at the moment and he publicly said he was staying then you just wouldn't see all these negative comments about Shorey's performances on this board. The tone would be alot more positive.
I guess Reading fans are psychologically preparing for a future team that doesn't contain our left sided wonder kid. The most cultured left foot ever to have played for Reading!
These types of comments surrounded Sidwell in the lead up to his departure as well.
Sidwell was a great player for RFC but the fans no longer recognise that. Shorey has been fantastic for the Royals as well. But again the fans are starting to stop recognising it. Its sad really.
by The whole year inn » 18 Oct 2007 00:48
Muskrat Player rating taken from Daily Mail for Lestcott:
JOLEON LESCOTT: Everton man took some time to settle on his first start for England. Was often drawn inside, and could perhaps have reacted quicker at second Russia goal - 5.
That was the lowest rating of any of the team, including Robinson
I personally think McClown got it wrong by not playing a specialist left back in that position but what do I know?
To follow the current trend (which is not something I do very often), Shorey>Lescott at left back.
by rabidbee » 18 Oct 2007 02:39
rabidbeerabidbeebrendywendy who was it last week saying he'll never play a competetive game for england?
I did.
He hasn't... yet.
<Ahem...>
by Avon Royal » 18 Oct 2007 07:28
Behindu Having now seen the pen on TV it was a correct decision.
First contact outside the box but also contact inside. Penalty.
by Oi Oi Saveloy » 18 Oct 2007 08:28
Behindu Having now seen the pen on TV it was a correct decision.
First contact outside the box but also contact inside. Penalty.
by Stranded » 18 Oct 2007 08:58
Behindu Having now seen the pen on TV it was a correct decision.
First contact outside the box but also contact inside. Penalty.
by Top Flight » 18 Oct 2007 09:18
StrandedBehindu Having now seen the pen on TV it was a correct decision.
First contact outside the box but also contact inside. Penalty.
And I thought the person claiming Shorey playing would have seen us win had lost it.
It was only a penalty because the ref gave it, the foul was outside the box, the Russian player even began to fall, outside the box. It was marginal though so can see why a pen was given. That's life.
by Huntley & Palmer » 18 Oct 2007 09:24
Top FlightStrandedBehindu Having now seen the pen on TV it was a correct decision.
First contact outside the box but also contact inside. Penalty.
And I thought the person claiming Shorey playing would have seen us win had lost it.
It was only a penalty because the ref gave it, the foul was outside the box, the Russian player even began to fall, outside the box. It was marginal though so can see why a pen was given. That's life.
Oi, Thats me you're talking about. The only thing that I have lost is my marbles. If you see them anywhere please let me know. I want my spotted dick back.
England would have won if Shorey had played. Russia damaged us down the Lescott left hand side. Lescott was at fault for their winner and there were numerous occassions where he was skinned. A specialist left back such as Shorey would not have had those problems and would have given us much better balance across the back 4. It would have given us much more going forward with good link up play with Joe Cole. The only thing we would have lacked would have been danger from set plays. Unless England would have been brave enough to let Shorey take corners instead of Gerrard. Shoreys Set piece delivery is every bit as good as any of the England team apart from Beckham.
by Top Flight » 18 Oct 2007 09:33
by Huntley & Palmer » 18 Oct 2007 10:49
by TFF » 18 Oct 2007 11:28
by Man Friday » 18 Oct 2007 12:43
That Friday Feeling McClown's error was in not playing Shorey for the Estonia game. He took the risk of playing Cole when he could have picked up a booking when Shorey (or Lescott) would not have struggled.
Had Cole been on the pitch yesterday we wouldn't have been under so much pressure.
by Broxroyal » 18 Oct 2007 15:37
by bigmike » 18 Oct 2007 16:24
Broxroyal Interestingly enough Hiddink feels that McClaren lost the tactical battle by playing Lescott too narrowly alongside Campbell, almost as another centre back, leaving lots of room on the outside, instead of playing a "normal" left back (like Shorey )
by Scarface » 18 Oct 2007 17:38
by Top Flight » 18 Oct 2007 19:01
Scarface It seems obvious to me that you play players in their natural position, I simply don't undertsand an international manager doing this when he has 100's of players to pick from.
McClaren is a joke and the fact we may finish 3rd in what is possibly the easiest qualifying group really highlights how poor we've been. He must be sacked.
by Behindu » 18 Oct 2007 19:03
by PEARCEY » 18 Oct 2007 19:23
Scarface It seems obvious to me that you play players in their natural position, I simply don't undertsand an international manager doing this when he has 100's of players to pick from.
McClaren is a joke and the fact we may finish 3rd in what is possibly the easiest qualifying group really highlights how poor we've been. He must be sacked.
Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 284 guests