BFTG Wigan.

[Lower West]

I think the tactical shift was ill conceived.

In what way?

[Franchise FC]

Yeah but......apart from that, what has he ever done for us?

Didn't realise Swift was a Roman

[NewCorkSeth]

I think the tactical shift was ill conceived.

In what way?

Wigan were a physical side. They packed the centre of the pitch well and never over committed men either forward or on their defensive flanks.

We lost a huge amount of width with this formation and both Blackett and Gunter were effectively closed down by a single defender (due to the fact Aluko and McCleary were central rather than offering an overlap/pulling another man out of the box with them)

Our regular formation would have been better. The players are more used to it, know their roles better and have been scoring from it.

Wigan have been losing and we have been scoring. We decided to go with a formation that focuses entirely down the centre of the pitch and Wigan were easily holding us off there. This was a game we could have gone 4-4-2 and pumped balls into Meite. Instead we tried to play it through the middle with no outlets on the wings and ended up passing it backwards just to try get it over to the other flank.

[Top Flight]

Clement made the comment in post match interviews that we were in control of the game. This was kind of true and untrue at the same time. Yes we did dominate the play for large parts of that game. Especially in the second half where we really did have the lions share of the possession and the play.

But in terms of the key fundamentals of football of how to win a football match we were poor and Wigan were much better than us. For all our play and possession, apart from one Yakou Meite effort that bounced off the outside of the post and a long ball downfield from Kelly which Meite was able to outmuscle the defender and rifle in a shot, we hardly troubled the Wigan backline. They were dominant and dealt with everything that we could throw at them. Their defense was well organised, solid and comfortably kept us at bay.

Whilst at the other end, when Wigan did have the ball which was not often they were able to fashion several chances that should have won them the game. On another day it would have been 1 or 2 nil to the Latics.

Defensively and offensively we just don't seem to be good enough. We can look good in a game but without ever really having the wherewith-all or know how to actually win the match.

McDermott was a very good manager in terms of finding ways to win football matches. he kept us organised at the back and ensured that we had a serious threat at the other end and were able to win games. The football may not have been pretty. But he knew how to get results.

These are still early days for Clement and I am sure he is aware of all these issues. He is playing the hand that he has been dealt and unfortunately there are not too many aces in his hand. Hopefully, he will be able to improve the situation in January and make sure that we are better equipped for the second half of the season. Then again in the summer, hopefully he can improve things further.

[NewCorkSeth]

Clement made the comment in post match interviews that we were in control of the game. This was kind of true and untrue at the same time. Yes we did dominate the play for large parts of that game. Especially in the second half where we really did have the lions share of the possession and the play.

But in terms of the key fundamentals of football of how to win a football match we were poor and Wigan were much better than us. For all our play and possession, apart from one Yakou Meite effort that bounced off the outside of the post and a long ball downfield from Swift which Meite was able to outmuscle the defender and rifle in a shot, we hardly troubled the Wigan backline. They were dominant and dealt with everything that we could throw at them. Their defense was well organised, solid and comfortably kept us at bay.

Whilst at the other end, when Wigan did have the ball which was not often they were able to fashion several chances that should have won them the game. On another day it would have been 1 or 2 nil to the Latics.

Defensively and offensively we just don't seem to be good enough. We can look good in a game but without ever really having the wherewith-all or know how to actually win the match.

McDermott was a very good manager in terms of finding ways to win football matches. he kept us organised at the back and ensured that we had a serious threat at the other end and were able to win games. The football may not have been pretty. But he knew how to get results.

These are still early days for Clement and I am sure he is aware of all these issues. He is playing the hand that he has been dealt and unfortunately there are not too many aces in his hand. Hopefully, he will be able to improve the situation in January and make sure that we are better equipped for the second half of the season. Then again in the summer, hopefully he can improve things further.

Quick correction for you.

[sandman]

Do you have a stat for how quickly Swift makes a pass, Seth? Does he move the ball quickly, making the pass harder to complete or does he move the ball slower, therefore making the pass easier to place?

Do you consider Swift and Kelly to have the same role in the team? I assume so as it was Kelly you compared him to.

Or is there another reason why you compare him with Kelly? Maybe something to do with the rejection of a call up from a certain national team.

[NewCorkSeth]

Do you have a stat for how quickly Swift makes a pass, Seth? Does he move the ball quickly, making the pass harder to complete or does he move the ball slower, therefore making the pass easier to place?

Do you consider Swift and Kelly to have the same role in the team? I assume so as it was Kelly you compared him to.

Or is there another reason why you compare him with Kelly? Maybe something to do with the rejection of a call up from a certain national team.

I think they had the same role in this game certainly. Just comparing the 2 as you said Kelly had one of his better games and Swift was shite. Swift was good. He played well. Kelly was decent at best. They made the same number of tackles despite Kelly attempting more and as I pointed out Swift was by far our most influential player.

It's getting far too easy to blame Swift on here and I won't stand for it.

[Top Flight]

Swift was excellent at Wigan.

He can definitely be part of a successful Reading team. But we need a better balanced side and squad. We need better quality all over the pitch.

[Top Flight]

Gunter was dissapointing at Wigan. Pre Stam, he was a very good player. But he has been radicalised by Stams poisonous, total possession football ideology.

He just refuses to go forward. He keeps taking us back and back and back. He needs to enter a rehabilitation programme and be completely de-radicalised.

I think back to that game under McDermott's stewardship at home to Forest where we played some lovely football. Won the game three - one, I think, and it was Gunter marauding down the right flank with McCleary, causing all kinds of problems and even getting on the scoresheet himself.

He is now a shadow of that player. He is not the only player that needs to be put on a rehabilition programme but he seems to be one of the worst affected by Stams evil total passing football, keep the ball at all costs, ideology.

[Snowflake Royal]

I suggest that using words like radicalised and poisonous to describe a way of playing football badly is offensive, insensitive, inappropriate and ignorant.

[sandman]

Do you have a stat for how quickly Swift makes a pass, Seth? Does he move the ball quickly, making the pass harder to complete or does he move the ball slower, therefore making the pass easier to place?

Do you consider Swift and Kelly to have the same role in the team? I assume so as it was Kelly you compared him to.

Or is there another reason why you compare him with Kelly? Maybe something to do with the rejection of a call up from a certain national team.

I think they had the same role in this game certainly. Just comparing the 2 as you said Kelly had one of his better games and Swift was shite. Swift was good. He played well. Kelly was decent at best. They made the same number of tackles despite Kelly attempting more and as I pointed out Swift was by far our most influential player.

It's getting far too easy to blame Swift on here and I won't stand for it.

I actually said it was one of Kelly's better games this season, which isn't exactly a high bar. I'm not a massive fan of him these days but I feel your judgement of him is coloured by his refusal to play for your country.

I haven't seen Swift getting much blame for anything on here. I actually said in my rating that he had "one good shot" so I noted part of your defence of his performance yesterday.

[Top Flight]

I explained my point in that way because in my opinion, that is the best way to describe the reason that Gunter plays the way he plays.

Gunter is actually an excellent player. He is very good. He has been a fantastic player for us in the past. But I think the way he performs nowadays is because of how he has been coached by Stam. He has it in his head that he must keep the ball. He has become so cautious. He does not want to take any risks. He will not try to move forward or try penetrating passes or put balls into the box that might be headed clear. He just plays it safe over and over again. I think that is because of Stam's ideology. He cannot get it out of his head.

Chris, I don't mind you losing the ball. I want to see you try to harm the opposition. Even if that means losing the ball. Push the opponent. Put them under pressure. Take them on. Try to beat them. Try and hurt them. Whip balls into the box. Don't worry if it gets headed away. Give them something to think about. Give them something to defend. Aim for somewhere in the region of Meite. If it doesn't work out, I don't mind. I will love you for trying it. Take risks.

Its a shame because Gunter has all the qualities to be an outstanding player. He was an outstanding player before and he can be again. I think he is held back by wanting to play a certain way according to the principles of a former manager.

[Zip]

I explained my point in that way because in my opinion, that is the best way to describe the reason that Gunter plays the way he plays.

Gunter is actually an excellent player. He is very good. He has been a fantastic player for us in the past. But I think the way he performs nowadays is because of how he has been coached by Stam. He has it in his head that he must keep the ball. He has become so cautious. He does not want to take any risks. He will not try to move forward or try penetrating passes or put balls into the box that might be headed clear. He just plays it safe over and over again. I think that is because of Stam's ideology. He cannot get it out of his head.

Chris, I don't mind you losing the ball. I want to see you try to harm the opposition. Even if that means losing the ball. Push the opponent. Put them under pressure. Take them on. Try to beat them. Try and hurt them. Whip balls into the box. Don't worry if it gets headed away. Give them something to think about. Give them something to defend. Aim for somewhere in the region of Meite. If it doesn't work out, I don't mind. I will love you for trying it. Take risks.

Its a shame because Gunter has all the qualities to be an outstanding player. He was an outstanding player before and he can be again. I think he is held back by wanting to play a certain way according to the principles of a former manager.

I agree about Gunts. I have seen him play many times for both Reading and Wales. He had never looked out of place at international level. Now I just don’t want to see him play for Wales because I just know he will move forward with the ball, stop, check back and pass either sideways or backwards. Even his throw ins will be either backwards or sideways. He really never used to be like this and he has become a very frustrating player to watch. It’s a shame because technically he is very capable.

[NewCorkSeth]

Do you have a stat for how quickly Swift makes a pass, Seth? Does he move the ball quickly, making the pass harder to complete or does he move the ball slower, therefore making the pass easier to place?

Do you consider Swift and Kelly to have the same role in the team? I assume so as it was Kelly you compared him to.

Or is there another reason why you compare him with Kelly? Maybe something to do with the rejection of a call up from a certain national team.

I think they had the same role in this game certainly. Just comparing the 2 as you said Kelly had one of his better games and Swift was shite. Swift was good. He played well. Kelly was decent at best. They made the same number of tackles despite Kelly attempting more and as I pointed out Swift was by far our most influential player.

It's getting far too easy to blame Swift on here and I won't stand for it.

I actually said it was one of Kelly's better games this season, which isn't exactly a high bar. I'm not a massive fan of him these days but I feel your judgement of him is coloured by his refusal to play for your country.

I haven't seen Swift getting much blame for anything on here. I actually said in my rating that he had "one good shot" so I noted part of your defence of his performance yesterday.

I can assure you all my bitterness about Kelly has long gone along with his performance level. I judge him solely on his contributions on the pitch. When he plays well I dont deny it and when he plays poorly i don't exaggerate.

Swift is often marginalised on here because of his apparent "weaknesses". He's criticised too easily. What he adds to our team far outweigh what he takes away. It's not his fault his strengths are not played to. He can only do what he's asked to. It's like when Germany played Ozil deep during the world cup. Was he shit? No. Was he much, much less effective? Yes.

[RichTea94]

Finally a BFTG I can contribute to!

Blackett could have personally been at fault for two Wigan goals near the end of the first half- didn't mark Powell(?) who got a shot off from the centre of the box and forced a save from Jaakola; and left their RB with a free header. He improved second half though.

Lack of width was noted- many times the ball would be switched to Gunter in loads of space, who proceeded to do nothing with it.

Rimonhota did a good job of keeping the ball, thought he was our best midfielder.

Loader played on both wings, interchanging with Meite and McCleary and looked willing to run at defenders. Decent enough debut.

[oldebiscuit]

Gunter was dissapointing at Wigan. Pre Stam, he was a very good player. But he has been radicalised by Stams poisonous, total possession football ideology.

He just refuses to go forward. He keeps taking us back and back and back. He needs to enter a rehabilitation programme and be completely de-radicalised.

I think back to that game under McDermott's stewardship at home to Forest where we played some lovely football. Won the game three - one, I think, and it was Gunter marauding down the right flank with McCleary, causing all kinds of problems and even getting on the scoresheet himself.

He is now a shadow of that player. He is not the only player that needs to be put on a rehabilition programme but he seems to be one of the worst affected by Stams evil total passing football, keep the ball at all costs, ideology.

This is an excellent post.
But i feel the whole team have been doctrinally affected by Stams' negativity, and it's even rubbed off on the players that have arrived post Stam. I think we're actually not that bad a team, but the mentality is negative.

[leon]

Gunter was dissapointing at Wigan. Pre Stam, he was a very good player. But he has been radicalised by Stams poisonous, total possession football ideology.

He just refuses to go forward. He keeps taking us back and back and back. He needs to enter a rehabilitation programme and be completely de-radicalised.

I think back to that game under McDermott's stewardship at home to Forest where we played some lovely football. Won the game three - one, I think, and it was Gunter marauding down the right flank with McCleary, causing all kinds of problems and even getting on the scoresheet himself.

He is now a shadow of that player. He is not the only player that needs to be put on a rehabilition programme but he seems to be one of the worst affected by Stams evil total passing football, keep the ball at all costs, ideology.

This is an excellent post.
But i feel the whole team have been doctrinally affected by Stams' negativity, and it's even rubbed off on the players that have arrived post Stam. I think we're actually not that bad a team, but the mentality is negative.

I don’t really know how bad a team this is anymore.

Can’t comment on yesterday but the team does seem fragile.

[Lower West]

I think the tactical shift was ill conceived.

In what way?

Wigan were a physical side. They packed the centre of the pitch well and never over committed men either forward or on their defensive flanks.

We lost a huge amount of width with this formation and both Blackett and Gunter were effectively closed down by a single defender (due to the fact Aluko and McCleary were central rather than offering an overlap/pulling another man out of the box with them)

Our regular formation would have been better. The players are more used to it, know their roles better and have been scoring from it.

Wigan have been losing and we have been scoring. We decided to go with a formation that focuses entirely down the centre of the pitch and Wigan were easily holding us off there. This was a game we could have gone 4-4-2 and pumped balls into Meite. Instead we tried to play it through the middle with no outlets on the wings and ended up passing it backwards just to try get it over to the other flank.

The current formation is born out of who's currently available. As a squad we are far too lightweight in midfield to play a 4-4-2. On reflection losing Evans in the summer was a big mistake. As would have provided alternative options. Bacuna should be back in the team on Tuesday night.

[NewCorkSeth]

In what way?

Wigan were a physical side. They packed the centre of the pitch well and never over committed men either forward or on their defensive flanks.

We lost a huge amount of width with this formation and both Blackett and Gunter were effectively closed down by a single defender (due to the fact Aluko and McCleary were central rather than offering an overlap/pulling another man out of the box with them)

Our regular formation would have been better. The players are more used to it, know their roles better and have been scoring from it.

Wigan have been losing and we have been scoring. We decided to go with a formation that focuses entirely down the centre of the pitch and Wigan were easily holding us off there. This was a game we could have gone 4-4-2 and pumped balls into Meite. Instead we tried to play it through the middle with no outlets on the wings and ended up passing it backwards just to try get it over to the other flank.

The current formation is born out of who's currently available. As a squad we are far too lightweight in midfield to play a 4-4-2. On reflection losing Evans in the summer was a big mistake. As would have provided alternative options. Bacuna should be back in the team on Tuesday night.

Why not continue with the 4-2-3-1?
Sims, McCleary and Aluko were all available for the wing positions.

He made the desicion for a reason other than players available. I can't figure out what it was.

[oldebiscuit]

I suggest that using words like radicalised and poisonous to describe a way of playing football badly is offensive, insensitive, inappropriate and ignorant.

^This !