Long - Time to go.

[Hoop Blah]

YAWN

One swallow an' all that.

But it ISN'T "one swallow and all that. Shane has played well all season. Hence his regular selection by McDermott

It's one of a few swallows that don't sum up to be quite good enough in my book.

He's been a regular pick by McDermott because he's probably the best we have. That's an indictment of our lack of quality in our squad as opposed to Long being anything better than average.

[Snowball]

I actually think Maguire quite likes Long and was just joking Snowball

Thanks for the help, Zac

You should let him know someone is impersonating him elsewhere on the board

HATE: Shane Long. Useless, overrated, gap-toothed, big-arsed, guitar strumming nothing of a striker. He'll carry on being "the next big thing" until he retires, at which point people will finally go "okay, maybe this won't be Shane's year". Every year someone will claim he has 20 goals a season in him. True. That's if you count all of Reading's training sessions and every game of FIFA 10 he plays against Noel Hunt. Otherwise I reckon it's closer to 20 goals in his career. Why? Because he's shit.

[Snowball]

The one up top role played by Shane is the hardest role for any Centre forward to play, and for the uneducated might appear that he's not fulfilling the requirements of a Centre Foward.

But he is.

BMcs lays his team out that we are tight, and we don't get overrun in Midfield. The outball is always to Shane, and Shane only. Not only does he have to run his ass off down the channels, & win his headers when a highball is lumped upto him, but he also has to be combative against a pair of CB's. whose sole role is stop Shane playing. Its a tough tough role to play for 90 minutes, and I think he's getting better & better.

The downside of that role is that his chances to score are minimised. He's got no-one to play directly off. His role is to bring others into play and they create/score chances.

Measuring Shanes performance vs his goals tally is somewhat shortsighted. Saying that, I'm sure Shane will be champing at the bit to improve his ratio of games to goals.

He's a very good player, certainly at Championship level and no doubt there is more room for him to improve, given he's still learning the role.

Great game on Saturday too.

Well said! Most of the people on this board haven't a clue.

Remember Cummings, worse player EVER, then after 7 decent games he should be picked over the grizzle pro Griffin.


And Kebe, is of course, total gash
And how many millions did we get for "Rubbish Pikey" SHunt?

[PEARCEY]

Has the uselesscunt gone yet?

I hope you read and digested all of the above post. There's a test later.

[Millsy]

But it ISN'T "one swallow and all that. Shane has played well all season. Hence his regular selection by McDermott

No. Still no goal from open play so you're right it's not even one swallow I'm afraid. Even if he had scored a couple in open play it'd still not make up for doing nothing all season. Getting the nod over Church and a returning-to-form Hunt isn't saying much.

Still, I don't think he's a bad player and don't want him to go.

But for the wages we could probably do a LOT better, and no matter how good he is he CAN NOT COPE WITH BEING A LONE STRIKER and we need someone else AS A MATTER OF URGENCY.

[Snowball]

But it ISN'T "one swallow and all that. Shane has played well all season. Hence his regular selection by McDermott

No. Still no goal from open play so you're right it's not even one swallow I'm afraid. Even if he had scored a couple in open play it'd still not make up for doing nothing all season. Getting the nod over Church and a returning-to-form Hunt isn't saying much. Still, I don't think he's a bad player and don't want him to go.

But for the wages we could probably do a LOT better, and no matter how good he is he CAN NOT COPE WITH BEING A LONE STRIKER and we need someone else AS A MATTER OF URGENCY.

2WW, do you mean DROP LONG and bring in someone like Jason Scotland (not that we could afford him)
a player who clearly thrives in 4-5-1, or do you mean play 4-4-2 with Long and a new player alongside
him, or do you mean play 4-4-2 and still drop Long?

Long's record playing 4-4-2 is very, very good in terms of minutes played per goal
up there with Doyle, but IMO although he IS doing a good job for Reading in the 451 spot
I think he is better in 4-4-2 or any system (including 4-5-1) where, instead of having to play
most of the game with his back to goal and NOT using his speed, he is given the chance to use his pace

[Snowball]

The whole of the Burnley game is on the official site.

It's well worth watching. Burnley had plenty of ball but we were so much more positive
when we had the ball. Second half their keeper made some VG saves.


LONG?

Goal 1 is the penalty won by Long and scored by Long.
Goal 2 comes from a Harte free-kick for a foul by Cort on Long
The sending off of Cort is for a foul on Long after a very slick 1-2 between Long and Tabb
Goal 3 comes from a very quick movement by Long and a cross which lays on a tap-in for Antonio



So Long is seriously instrumental in all four goals. Defenders struggle to contain him
if he is played where he can run at them. That was the difference at Burnley.

The BURNLEY commentators thought Long was awesome for the whole game
and was man of the match. One of those commentators was Clarke Carlisle,
Burnley player

[Millsy]

But it ISN'T "one swallow and all that. Shane has played well all season. Hence his regular selection by McDermott

No. Still no goal from open play so you're right it's not even one swallow I'm afraid. Even if he had scored a couple in open play it'd still not make up for doing nothing all season. Getting the nod over Church and a returning-to-form Hunt isn't saying much. Still, I don't think he's a bad player and don't want him to go.

But for the wages we could probably do a LOT better, and no matter how good he is he CAN NOT COPE WITH BEING A LONE STRIKER and we need someone else AS A MATTER OF URGENCY.

2WW, do you mean DROP LONG and bring in someone like Jason Scotland (not that we could afford him)
a player who clearly thrives in 4-5-1, or do you mean play 4-4-2 with Long and a new player alongside
him, or do you mean play 4-4-2 and still drop Long?

Long's record playing 4-4-2 is very, very good in terms of minutes played per goal
up there with Doyle, but IMO although he IS doing a good job for Reading in the 451 spot
I think he is better in 4-4-2 or any system (including 4-5-1) where, instead of having to play
most of the game with his back to goal and NOT using his speed, he is given the chance to use his pace

Long isn't an awful player. Don't drop him, just buy a striker we desperately need to play alongside him or give us another option.

Our option at the moment is a very good player doin a good job up front but not being able to score as he clealy doesn't thrive on 4-5-1 in a way that allows him to score. Long can be the best assister in the world but that is NEVER the sole role of a lone striker. Good quality to have but duty number one fo any striker is to score goals - unless perhaps he's up there with someone else.

Not having a striker at the club who can score goals is beyond a joke and the reason wy many of us aren't bothering to go to games anymore.

[Hoop Blah]

The BURNLEY commentators thought Long was awesome for the whole game
and was man of the match. One of those commentators was Clarke Carlisle,
Burnley player

I don't think anyone has doubted that Long had an excellent game at Burnley, or that he can do that every now and again. What is being suggested, and supported by you in many respects, is that he isn't good enough at what we want him to do to be consistently effective in this side.

I think he's probably had 3 good games this season.

The rest have been distinctly average and littered with him failing to hold on to the ball, not being in the right place to get on the end of good work by his teammates, getting caught offside through some pretty typical laziness (he works hard, but then gets lazy at times and so isn't in the right place for a clearance, through ball etc and is often just ambling back and offside), and generally not offering enough of a goal threat.

[Snowball]

2WW, it sounds like you are advocating 4-4-2.

I like 4-4-2, prefer 4-4-2, but do we have good enough midfielders to cope 2 v 3 if we are 4-4-2 and the opps are 4-5-1?

As for goals. Isn't this what matters?

GOAL SUPREMACY

1 13 +21 +1.62 Queens Park Rangers
2 13 +14 +1.08 Cardiff City
3 13 +07 +0.54 Reading

We are third in the table on goal supremacy and if this is repeated for the rest of the season
we'll probably end up third in the points table, too. IMO, we are not currently third because
we screwed up in the opening game v Scunthorpe, and finished with (virtually) 9 men

The 4-5-1 is without doubt cutting down the number of chances we create (more-so GOOD chances)
but it's also making us very, very hard to score against. Seems to me that is what McDermott wants,
to build a future based on solid defensive results. At the moment that is sacrificing the rampaging
forward line that has had so many "big wins" in the last few seasons

[Snowball]

The BURNLEY commentators thought Long was awesome for the whole game
and was man of the match. One of those commentators was Clarke Carlisle,
Burnley player

I don't think anyone has doubted that Long had an excellent game at Burnley, or that he can do that every now and again. What is being suggested, and supported by you in many respects, is that he isn't good enough at what we want him to do to be consistently effective in this side. I think he's probably had 3 good games this season.

The rest have been distinctly average and littered with him failing to hold on to the ball, not being in the right place to get on the end of good work by his teammates, getting caught offside through some pretty typical laziness (he works hard, but then gets lazy at times and so isn't in the right place for a clearance, through ball etc and is often just ambling back and offside), and generally not offering enough of a goal threat.

I simply disagree. I think he has played well all season, all twelve games. I think that's why we are getting so many late goals.
He pulls penalties (3) one sixth of all our goals. He pulls free-kicks which result in goals. He has had two opponents sent off
for repeatedly fouling him. Did those sendings-off not improve our results and GD?

Use the Burnley game as an example. They are a VERY good side. I thought we'd lose 3-0 or 4-0 there.
Prior to the Reading game they were P8 W7 D1 19-4. Long's speed and strength won the first goal, a
penalty, taken VERY well. Going 1-0 up early must have helped us enormously. The Burnley TV states
that he gave the two CBs a torrid time. That is a wearing-down process.

Then he wins yet another free-kick (and Cort is lucky to still be on the pitch) and we score from that.

Then he interplays (great touch BTW) with Tabb and pulls the red-card offence and Cort is off. What's that worth?

Then he wins a great tussle to set up Church for a free shot which was saved.

Then he breaks into the box, great awareness, excellent control at speed and sets up Antonio for a tap-in.

And did we get our fourth goal (Church) because Burnley had ten-men and were tiring?


He also tackles back, clears off the line etc.

The MANAGER says he's an unsung hero. The manager picks him week-in, week-out over Church and Hunt and Bignall

Against Scunthorpe he was kicked up in the air countless times and needed to go off, could barely move. They stuck him on the wing
and he still managed some very good crosses. (He's a good crosser of the ball.)

Most of the people on this list simply dislike Long, never give him the credit he deserves. They live in the past and confuse
appearances with starts and forget that so many of his sub appearances (dozens of them) were for 2-3-4-5-6-7-8 minutes.

He is still way up there in terms of goals per minutes played.

As for "What is being suggested, and supported by you in many respects" I simply mean that for a lot of the time
in a 4-5-1 he is being used in a way which doesn't use his best attributes. That doesn't make him bad in any way.
The manager thinks it's worth doing that.

We saw a glimmer of hope at Burnley, nothing really to do with Long, but to do with how the midfield
creates chances. And YES, if Tabb can play that well, with that much vision, game after game and avoid
injury, we WILL break into the top six, playing 4-5-1, and Long will be seen as more and more valuable.

[BR2]

It might be my imagination but isn't Shane often substituted when we score our late goals?

[Stranded]

It might be my imagination but isn't Shane often substituted when we score our late goals?

I make it 8 goals scored in the last 15 mins of games - Long was on the pitch for the 2 on Saturday and the Mills goal direct from a corner against Leicester.

It could be argued that his tireless work have caused the defenders to be knackered and make mistakes causing those goals but nigh on impossible to prove I'd suggest.

[Hoop Blah]

Like I said, he's had a few games where he's done all that, but far too often he doesn't do enough of it for me.

You can give as many examples of his good play against Burnley as you like, it doesn't change the way I've seen him play for the rest of his games (bar the one I can remember him playing well, but I've forgotten which game it was).

Of course the manager praises him, it's part of his job to build the players up and he's a positive kind of guy. He wouldn't get much out of his players by picking up on their failings with the media would he?

Perhaps I've just got higher expectations of a Championship forward and want more for my team than mediocrity. We can make do with Long upfront, as we have been, but personally I think we can do better, and should be looking to do better.

[Hoop Blah]

It might be my imagination but isn't Shane often substituted when we score our late goals?

I make it 8 goals scored in the last 15 mins of games - Long was on the pitch for the 2 on Saturday and the Mills goal direct from a corner against Leicester.

It could be argued that his tireless work have caused the defenders to be knackered and make mistakes causing those goals but nigh on impossible to prove I'd suggest.

Pretty sure that idea was totally dismissed by snowball when it was suggested as a reason for Long doing well coming off the bench.

In the same vein, a hell of a lot of goals are scored by a lot of teams in the last 20 or so minutes of a game. It's just the time when teams are going for goals and games get stretched.

[brendywendy]

i think he usually plays well. works hard, and i dont remember huge numbers of chances he should have scored.
occasionally hes up against two massive lumps, and never gets a header, but thats hardly his fault

[Hoop Blah]

Is just working hard and flicking on a few headers* enough then?

* He's good in the air in a similar way to Forster used to be, he'll often nick infront of the defender at the last minute and make the most of his very good spring.

[brendywendy]

its enough in a 2.
not in a one. but if he continues to have an affect on games like he did in burnley, i wont be inclined to complain too much

[RobRoyal]

Is just working hard and flicking on a few headers* enough then?

* He's good in the air in a similar way to Forster used to be, he'll often nick infront of the defender at the last minute and make the most of his very good spring.

Sigh. Despite Long's very decent performance against Burnley I spent much of the game thinking how good we would be if we had Forster, in his prime, up front instead.

Chuck in Andy Hughes in the hole and we'd be certs to go up....

[Millsy]

Is just working hard and flicking on a few headers* enough then?

* He's good in the air in a similar way to Forster used to be, he'll often nick infront of the defender at the last minute and make the most of his very good spring.

Sigh. Despite Long's very decent performance against Burnley I spent much of the game thinking how good we would be if we had Forster, in his prime, up front instead.

Chuck in Andy Hughes in the hole and we'd be certs to go up....

As I've been saying LONG IS NO FORSTER.

When you think of a single striker system you think of the likes of the ball greedy Forster who would hang around the box and then with blistering pace and with only one thing on his mind would race towards the goal, ball or not, and score.

Playing Long up front on his own will AT BEST give us "oh well he worked hard" "he got into the wings well and provided an assist or two" "he won the penalty so you can kind of say it's like scoring" "he didnt score in open play but he worked so hard it makes up for it" etcetcetcetcetc.....