Back from the game - Barnsley (h)

[Terminal Boardom]

I just laughed at them as I walked past. Complete neanderthaals! And people on here ask why there is no standing allowed in football grounds any more. I would hazard a guess and say that they were the cocks who were congregated towards the front of the South Stand.

And what difference does that make to the point you're attempting to get across?

You need an answer?

[Zammo]

LOL at the standard of football i've just witnessed. I can't remember a game where two sides were so bad. How are barnsley 13th? The standard of passing was embarrassing at times but 3 points is 3 points. We need to build on it.

Couldn't agree more with the above. I honestly could not believe what I was watching. This must be the poorest RFC side in ten years. I know we've been served up a treat over the last decade, but how have things got this bad. Other than three points, there was no plus side to this game whatsoever. We may stay up, but what would be the point if this is all we can afford to put out on the pitch. RolLOL on next season

[SHORT AND CURLY]

Must just be me then!
I thought we did OK after some of the rubbish served up under Brenda.

No pleasing some people

[SHORT AND CURLY]

And for all you doom mongers
Taken from a Barnsley match report
http://barnsleyfc.wordpress.com/2010/01 ... -barnsley/

"It beggars belief that those Reading players were second bottom. They were universally skillful lively and committed. Sure, they were less than clinical around the box, but when we let them pin us so, so deep for the whole game, do they need to be? If that is how the Royals play, the bottom of the table is not where they will finish this season."

[westendgirl]

As someone on here said though, it's something to build on.

Surely the point is that we have been creating chances but not putting them away, maybe a few scrappy 1-0 wins will take the tension out of the strikers and let them play more as they have in the cup games. I don't agree that the performance was woeful just the finishing and maybe I'm just an optimist but I can't help feeliogn we could see a few much bigger wins once they gain more confidence as it seems to me the team spirit is coming back.

[Schards#2]

LOL at the standard of football i've just witnessed. I can't remember a game where two sides were so bad. How are barnsley 13th? The standard of passing was embarrassing at times but 3 points is 3 points. We need to build on it.

Couldn't agree more with the above. I honestly could not believe what I was watching. This must be the poorest RFC side in ten years. I know we've been served up a treat over the last decade, but how have things got this bad. Other than three points, there was no plus side to this game whatsoever. We may stay up, but what would be the point if this is all we can afford to put out on the pitch. RolLOL on next season :roll:

What do you mean, what's the point? It's football, other than for the giants of the game, it ebbs and flows. You have to experience the bad times to really enjoy the good, it's what supporting a team is all about .

Which is why I sympathise with newbie Man Utd and Chelsea fans, they will never experience the joy of an unexpected massive achievement the way we did for a couple of years because no achievement will be that remarkable given their circumstances.

[westendgirl]

What do you mean, what's the point? It's football, other than for the giants of the game, it ebbs and flows. You have to experience the bad times to really enjoy the good, it's what supporting a team is all about .

Which is why I sympathise with newbie Man Utd and Chelsea fans, they will never experience the joy of an unexpected massive achievement the way we did for a couple of years because no achievement will be that remarkable given their circumstances.

Couldn't agree with you more, it is a lesson to the newbie RFC fans as the numbers have increased so much over the last decade of success.

[Hoop Blah]

Anyone who thought we played well on Sunday was watching a different game to me.

We got a great result from what was quite an open game between two sides who couldn't keep the ball if their lives depended on it.

To those who said the performance doesn't matter it's all about the result. I agree to a certain extent, but that's what everyone said before last Christmas when I said we were winning games but not playing well. In the long run you'll get the results your performances deserve and we have to play better than that if we're going to stay up as we won't be playing many more teams as poor as Barnsley were.

[andrew1957]

I cannot believe how negative some are being regarding this match.

IMO McD did a fantastic job. Because of results elsewhere we had drifted well below the pack in the survival stakes. The Barnsley game was, therefore, MUST WIN. I expected a very nervous RFC side and thought we may struggle but instead we took the game to them for 90 minutes - totally dominated and restricted them to 0 - yes zero shots on target. Really cannot recall any opposition being restricted to 0 shots on target before (official stats confirm 0).

Yes Barnsley were poor but so have many of the other sides been who have visited the Mad stad this season. In reality RFC are a good side playing good football but with one major problem, - we don't take our chances. If we start doing that very important part of the game, we will survive comfortably.

I think Saturday's performance was extremely encouraging.

[CMRoyal]

Anyone who thought we played well on Sunday was watching a different game to me.

We got a great result from what was quite an open game between two sides who couldn't keep the ball if their lives depended on it.

To those who said the performance doesn't matter it's all about the result. I agree to a certain extent, but that's what everyone said before last Christmas when I said we were winning games but not playing well. In the long run you'll get the results your performances deserve and we have to play better than that if we're going to stay up as we won't be playing many more teams as poor as Barnsley were.

Agreed, Barnsley were rotten but we did what we had to do. And it was a good selection by MaccyD because although we lacked pace in central midfield, they key thing he'd clearly sussed beforehand was that Barnsley were going to involuntarily give up possession a lot anyway, and god bless Gunnar he can still be very effective in an open midfield when he doesn't actually have to work that hard to see lots of the ball (I'm doing his performance a disservice, but you know what I mean).

My worry is that once again we squandered chances and I'm just relieved at how well Griffin and Mills have gelled because we really are going to have to grind out some 0-0s and 1-0s with our lack of firepower.

[Stranded]

Anyone who thought we played well on Sunday was watching a different game to me.

We got a great result from what was quite an open game between two sides who couldn't keep the ball if their lives depended on it.

To those who said the performance doesn't matter it's all about the result. I agree to a certain extent, but that's what everyone said before last Christmas when I said we were winning games but not playing well. In the long run you'll get the results your performances deserve and we have to play better than that if we're going to stay up as we won't be playing many more teams as poor as Barnsley were.

Agreed, but if you take our position pre Barnsley as a starting point then the most important thing is getting the 3 points and then building the performance over time. That's all we could do on Saturday, we did it - lets see what Donny brings.

[CMRoyal]

I forgot about Bryn's challenge. Yes, he'll always do that and that's why he should only ever be a horse for certain courses.

[Murts-is-Lej]

Anyone who thought we played well on Sunday was watching a different game to me.
We got a great result from what was quite an open game between two sides who couldn't keep the ball if their lives depended on it.

To those who said the performance doesn't matter it's all about the result. I agree to a certain extent, but that's what everyone said before last Christmas when I said we were winning games but not playing well. In the long run you'll get the results your performances deserve and we have to play better than that if we're going to stay up as we won't be playing many more teams as poor as Barnsley were.

I was one of those watching the "other" game then - I thought we played fairly well without being outstanding for most of the match. Of course Barnsley threw everything they had at us in the last 10 minutes and it got a bit nervy - big surprise. However, for the remainder of the match we were comfortably on top. If we can play like that CONSISTENTLY for the rest of the season we stand a chance of escape...

Siggy and Jobi didn't have one of their better days but still managed to create all the best chances. The Gun and Jem were easily a notch above the Barnsley midfield. The whole back four + Fed looked pretty competent although they do start to panic when the ball gets in the penalty box (fortunately they were good enough on Saturday that it almost never did!). As everyone else has mentioned our strikers only played as well as they usually do - their movement and pace looks as good as Earnshaw's without the finishing...!

[Hoop Blah]

Has nobody linked Sigurdsson and McAnuff having quieter games with the lack of quality and consistent possession they were provided with by their team mates?

Some of it can be put down to the pitch, but our passing was at times woeful and the wingers were generally working off of scraps so did OK considering.

It was exactly what we needed in terms of grinding out a result, and we will be in for some nervy and tense finishes to games in the next couple of months, but I just don't get how anyway can think that was actually a 'good performance.' A great result yes, and a big improvement on the way we defended (against by far the tamest attacking threat we've seen this season), and yet again we should've won by more, but to say it was a good performance considering the lack of passing and quality around their box just surprises me.

I wonder what the reaction from some would've been if Rodgers were in charge of that performance...

[Schards#2]

Has nobody linked Sigurdsson and McAnuff having quieter games with the lack of quality and consistent possession they were provided with by their team mates?

Some of it can be put down to the pitch, but our passing was at times woeful and the wingers were generally working off of scraps so did OK considering.

It was exactly what we needed in terms of grinding out a result, and we will be in for some nervy and tense finishes to games in the next couple of months, but I just don't get how anyway can think that was actually a 'good performance.' A great result yes, and a big improvement on the way we defended (against by far the tamest attacking threat we've seen this season), and yet again we should've won by more, but to say it was a good performance considering the lack of passing and quality around their box just surprises me.

I wonder what the reaction from some would've been if Rodgers were in charge of that performance...

Probably along the lines of "holy shit!! we won a home game and deserved to win"

[Maguire]

Has nobody linked Sigurdsson and McAnuff having quieter games with the lack of quality and consistent possession they were provided with by their team mates?

Some of it can be put down to the pitch, but our passing was at times woeful and the wingers were generally working off of scraps so did OK considering.

It was exactly what we needed in terms of grinding out a result, and we will be in for some nervy and tense finishes to games in the next couple of months, but I just don't get how anyway can think that was actually a 'good performance.' A great result yes, and a big improvement on the way we defended (against by far the tamest attacking threat we've seen this season), and yet again we should've won by more, but to say it was a good performance considering the lack of passing and quality around their box just surprises me.

I wonder what the reaction from some would've been if Rodgers were in charge of that performance...

Probably along the lines of "holy shit!! we won a home game and deserved to win"

That's absolutely not what would've happened and you know it.

I think Hoop Blah's post is bang on the money really. Winning ugly suits me just fine in terms of our league position but it really was a dire spectacle.

We've played better at home and lost this season.

[Wycombe Royal]

We've played better at home and lost this season.

Football isn't just about playing well. It is about playing "effectively" and if that means the football is dire then so be it. At the moment we can't afford to be picky.

Under Rodgers we would probably have conceded a goal on Saturday because he seemed to have no idea on how to build a solid defence and as most people know the best teams are generally built from the back, and that included having a settled back 5. Rodgers never had that.

[andrew1957]

We've played better at home and lost this season.

Football isn't just about playing well. It is about playing "effectively" and if that means the football is dire then so be it. At the moment we can't afford to be picky.

Under Rodgers we would probably have conceded a goal on Saturday because he seemed to have no idea on how to build a solid defence and as most people know the best teams are generally built from the back, and that included having a settled back 5. Rodgers never had that.

Agreed but to be fair to Rodgers he had Ingi long term injured, Mills arrived injured and he lost Rosenior - which I assume was down to finances rather than choice. I think Rodgers was a bit unlucky - although why he did not play Mills more when he regained fitness is a mystery.

[Hoop Blah]

Totally agree on that sentiment WR, but I don't think 'playing effectively' usually aims to constantly misplacing passes, taking the wrong option when in dangerous positions, miscontrolling the ball back to the opposition and knocking it out of play instead of to your team mate!

Coppell's team was an effective and functional team for the majority of the time (and didn't aim to keep the ball and pass the ball for the sake of it) and it was successful for the most part, right up until the players weren't good enough to compete at the level we were playing. What we saw on Saturday wasn't a team playing 'effective football,' it was a team making basic mistakes but got away with it.

I'm chuffed to bits we won, but I won't get carried away with what I saw.

[Wycombe Royal]

Totally agree on that sentiment WR, but I don't think 'playing effectively' usually aims to constantly misplacing passes, taking the wrong option when in dangerous positions, miscontrolling the ball back to the opposition and knocking it out of play instead of to your team mate!

Sounds to me like you are describing Karacan's contribution on Saturday......

But yes I agree. However my comments were more about the effectiveness of the defence. No fancy stuff, just get the ball out and away from the goal and let the midfield and strikers battle to win the ball. Also in their positioning. Many of the goals Rodger's team conceded were due to poor positioning, poor marking and loss of concentration. THat now seems to be getting minimised and they are looking far more organised.