BFTG Wednesday

[Hound]

I thought the subs were the right ones , but probably 10-15 mins too late. Esteves could have come on at ht, and Aluko certainly offered more than Rino in the final third.

Ok,

So we were never really troubled defensively so Holmes and Rino seem wasted.

BUT.

Holmes gives us extra height and strength in their box at set pieces. He's also got a decent cross on him.

.

I don't think he has got a decent cross on him and that's his only real weakness playing as right back. Can't recall (m)any of his crosses last night finding one of our players in the box.

He put in quite a nice low one last night. I can't remember any other crosses he has put in tbh. Its not something he does really

[Mid Sussex Royal]

Just heard Pulis's interview - in fairness he admitted we could have had 2 pens, a lot of managers wouldn't have.

He also said we'd spent big on forwards; last night by my calcs starting 11 forwards/offensive players cost £8.5m - is that big for the championship?

Meite and Olise cost nothing

They've spent a fortune on forwards over the last 3 years

[andrew1957]

Just had a look at the Sheffield fans forum and to be fair they are mostly agreeing we should have had three penalties - but most are disputing the fourth (Laurent). Generally agreeing with us that the referee was shocking.

To be fair to Pulis after he reorganised them at half time they did defend pretty well second half, but they would not have got a point if the referee had given two of the penalties.

[lewesroyal]

As well as the obvious poor officials comments I thought we also came across another in form keeper last night.
At the weekend we eventually managed to overcome this against a team coming back at us. Last night he had a wall of 9 bodies in front of him too leaving no space for us to turn them.
The reaction save turning the ball over the bar in particular was superb.

[NewCorkSeth]

Just heard Pulis's interview - in fairness he admitted we could have had 2 pens, a lot of managers wouldn't have.

He also said we'd spent big on forwards; last night by my calcs starting 11 forwards/offensive players cost £8.5m - is that big for the championship?

Meite and Olise cost nothing

They've spent a fortune on forwards over the last 3 years

7 million on Puscas, 5 million on Joao and 2 million on Baldock? Reckon that must be what he meant.

Ironic that he said that when one of the forwards we "spent big" on was a Wednesday player..

[Hound]

Just heard Pulis's interview - in fairness he admitted we could have had 2 pens, a lot of managers wouldn't have.

He also said we'd spent big on forwards; last night by my calcs starting 11 forwards/offensive players cost £8.5m - is that big for the championship?

Meite and Olise cost nothing

They've spent a fortune on forwards over the last 3 years

7 million on Puscas, 5 million on Joao and 2 million on Baldock? Reckon that must be what he meant.

Ironic that he said that when one of the forwards we "spent big" on was a Wednesday player..

3.5 on Ejaria as well. And Aluko if you want to count him.

[Hendo]

As well as the obvious poor officials comments I thought we also came across another in form keeper last night.
At the weekend we eventually managed to overcome this against a team coming back at us. Last night he had a wall of 9 bodies in front of him too leaving no space for us to turn them.
The reaction save turning the ball over the bar in particular was superb.

Was that the one from Semedo in the first half before we scored? That save was brilliant. Great through ball from Ovie, good solid effort from Semedo and a fine save by the 'keeper.

[URZZZZ]

We did lack width at times last night. Ejaria comes inside and Richards underlaps, it makes it hard to really stretch them. That said there were moments where Richards went outside to good effect or where coming inside worked. I think Paunovic could have done more to encourage proper width.

I am also going to offer a tiny defence of Baldock. His strength is getting in behind teams. That wasn’t much use last night but it could be a useful niche in a team that’s a little lacking in pace.

I do agree with Baldock but the issue is that virtually the only time he’s brought in is when chasing a game with 15 minutes to go, I.e when teams play a low block so there’s no space behind

Ultimately just find it a waste of a sub whenever he’s brought on in that context

[Hound]

know this is a terrible justification for a position, but worth noting Ovie is equal third on the whoscored for the Champ along with Joao.

[bcubed]

no agreed I dont particularly like him taking the ball off the CBs. tried to watch the highlights to see why he did on this one, but doesn't show him losing it sadly

Quite like the fact the highlights basically just show the goals and then the 4 dodgy pen decisions though

He didn't take it off CBs - he received a pass in centre circle. He got closed down tried a drag back and got dispossessed. It's just not the place to be clever and losing it there caught us out badly. Holmes was further forward than normal and couldn't get back.

[Zip]

We were robbed of two points last night. I can’t remember a home team being set up so defensively as Wednesday.
We really needed more width but kept trying to probe through a congested penalty box. Very very frustrating. Two dropped points.

Rafael. 6 A spectator all evening
Holmes 6 Needed to be tighter for that cross. Ok though and one great pass to Olise
Moore 6 Shaky against Patterson early on
Morrison 7 Untroubled most of the time
Richards 8 MoTM fantastic first 60 minutes but we needed more width from him in the latter stages
Laurent 8 A dominant performance but shooting was wayward
Rinomhota 6 A bit subdued I thought
Olise 7 Nice passing, a couple of excellent set pieces and a couple that were very poor
Semedo 6 Unlucky not to score and some nice skill at times but went AWOL
Ejaria 6 Lost possession and we were made to pay. Dwelt on the ball but another assist
Joao 6.5 Scored again, missed a cracking chance, some nice skill at times

Aluko 6 Did ok with some decent crosses
Esteves 6 Did ok
Baldock 4 Why bother?
Ref 1 Cost us two points. Not good enough.

[Millsy]

WE WOZ ROBBED. WE MOVE ON.

I know it's hard to see it when we were expecting a victory and I see this is reflected in some of the player ratings, but the truth is we were hammering them before their goal against the run of play, and in a way it was annoying that they had a man sent off because it took the shine of the incredible performance of our boys afterwards.

We absolutely utterly gangraped that team. I'm sure I'm forgetting stuff, but I don't really have a memory of anything other than us just camping in their half destroying them. How many chances went begging, how many excellent saves did their keeper have to make, or last minute clearance, or hitting the post, not to mention the most obvious penalty shouts I've seen for years.

You can only play the team in front of you and our boys destroyed them on every level. It's not a foregone conclusion that playing 10 men means you're going to annihilate them. We certainly rarely are able to do anything near that. Usually it's a case of "harder to play against ten men", especially 10 men who are already 1-0 up and just need to shut up shop.

Let's make no mistake, we utterly played them off the park, 10 men or not, deserved to win 4-1 and were frankly robbed by bad luck and the sort of officiating that would make even the fiercest critics of VAR feel silly.

What interests me isn't the score necessarily as there are always going to be these sorts of unfair games, it's the performance, so given that I think we gangraped them, you won't be surprised by my ratings.

Rafa: 7 - didn't have much to do. Unlucky with goal really.
Richards - 8 Just brilliant. Unlucky not to have a pen or score. Great in every role.
M&M - 7 each. Again just good solid defending. I watched the replay over and over expecting to scapegoat one of them or the keeper but just couldn't. Great break, great cross, great goal.
Holmes - 8 Yeah I know people say he was caught out of position but he wasn't really. It's not really his fault 7 of our midfielders somehow let them get the ball and counter. He stayed with the man really impressively, quick for such a big lad. The cross was just brilliant, that's not Holmes' fault. I've said he's not a great defender, but to be fair he is ok. Rest of the game he was class in my opinion.
Laurent - 8 IF I was going to scapegoat anyone for the goal it'd be Laurent for just not bothering to keep up with the Paterson for the final 3 yards. I suspect it's because he saw Liam Moore there and so slowed his run thinking Moore would take him. So I'm not going to blame him, especially as the rest of his performance was brilliant. Their goal was to me a mixup between Moore and him, which is probably forgiveable in that situation.
RIno - 8 Just brilliant again, everywhere. Great tackles
Semedo - 7 Actually did ok and filled in well for Meite. I like his aggressive running forward. If we could only merge Ejaria's skill with his bravery and forward drive!
Olise - 7 Good game, two great free kicks, unlucky. I wonder how long we'll hold onto him.
Ejaria - 7 It's always disappointing when you have someone with Ejaria's class and you don't see a flash of brilliance from him, but it doesnt' make him a bad player or suggest he had a bad game.
Joao - 8 As usual, constant hassle all night. Deserved goal. Could've had more. Up there as one of Reading's best strikers for me. Bold statement, but f**kit. He really is.

Subs:

None of them really had enough of an impact for me to rate, sorry. I like that I'm excited to see Aluko on now. He's really grown on me and I never thought he would. And Baldock, I know people knock him but to be fair he was responsible for so many last minute goals down to his acceleration and trickery in the recent past that he also excites me when we're chasing a game.

Ref: i Imaginary ref, imaginary talent, imaginary qualifications, imaginery officiating, imaginary brain, hopefully an imaginary pay packet and an imaginary future in the game.

Pauno: 9. He can't get less after that performance. As I say most Reading teams I know in the last several years 1-0 away from home against 10 men would be struggling. We destroyed them and even without the sending off we'd be good for a win I reckon. Baldock on - brilliant. Our favourite Holmes off and our unimpressive Esteves on? Bold move, but totally spot on as we were looking for the win and didn't need the extra defensive ability of Holmes. And his interview, distancing himself from any criticism of the worst ref in the history of the world, just brilliant.

Only 1 point off top 5 mins after a soul-destroying run of form.

URZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Zip]

Paunovic wants VAR and I can only agree. I get there are a lot of problems with it but just in the past two games we have seen the opposition score a goal that was offside, have at least one player that should have seen red whilst we have been denied two stonewall penalties with strong arguments for at least one more.

[loyalroyal4life]

2 points dropped, no thanks to the ref

Wednesday were there for the taking and would have set us up nicely for Saturday's game going in top of the league

Much tougher game ahead on Saturday

[Once upon a time .]

What am I doing wrong ?

[RoyalBlue]

WE WOZ ROBBED. WE MOVE ON.


Let's make no mistake, we utterly played them off the park, 10 men or not, deserved to win 4-1 and were frankly robbed by bad luck and the sort of officiating that would make even the fiercest critics of VAR feel silly.

I'm a fierce critic of VAR and I still don't feel silly because there's no guarantee that the official reviewing VAR won't be equally crap (as has been proven with VAR on plenty of occasions).

I wonder what Langford would have decided had there been a system whereby each team perhaps get a up to a fixed number of review requests per game, and if the captain requests the ref then reviews video of the incident.

I however continue to dread the day when VAR is introduced at Championship level and think VP should be careful what he wishes for. His call for officials to be held accountable is spot on. I'm not so sure about his call for VAR. Maybe he's basing that on his experience in MLS where I think they use it better but IMO it's still not great for the game.

[Millsy]

WE WOZ ROBBED. WE MOVE ON.


Let's make no mistake, we utterly played them off the park, 10 men or not, deserved to win 4-1 and were frankly robbed by bad luck and the sort of officiating that would make even the fiercest critics of VAR feel silly.

I'm a fierce critic of VAR and I still don't feel silly because there's no guarantee that the official reviewing VAR won't be equally crap (as has been proven with VAR on plenty of occasions).

I wonder what Langford would have decided had there been a system whereby each team perhaps get a up to a fixed number of review requests per game, and if the captain requests the ref then reviews video of the incident.

I however continue to dread the day when VAR is introduced at Championship level and think VP should be careful what he wishes for. His call for officials to be held accountable is spot on. I'm not so sure about his call for VAR. Maybe he's basing that on his experience in MLS where I think they use it better but IMO it's still not great for the game.

I am a fierce advocate for VAR, even with its problems.

But I can totally see where you're coming from. The implementation is awful at the moment.

The type of VAR I've always advocated has always been the type you suggest i.e. a strict number of reviews (3 max?) requested by a captain, perhaps if they're vindicated it won't drop the number, or maybe not even as typically you don't get more than 3 really bad BIG decisions per team per game anyway. THat would definitely help.

My friends who watch every Liverpool game complain about goals not given for being mm offside and I take that criticism as no system is perfect. But what we're talking about here is the lesser of two evils. 2 of the pens we had couldn't be more blatant and there's no way one of those wouldn't be given on VAR review.

There are definitely issues with it as it stands but even as it stands it's better than no VAR. But yes it needs to be done better.

[Franchise FC]

WE WOZ ROBBED. WE MOVE ON.


Let's make no mistake, we utterly played them off the park, 10 men or not, deserved to win 4-1 and were frankly robbed by bad luck and the sort of officiating that would make even the fiercest critics of VAR feel silly.

I'm a fierce critic of VAR and I still don't feel silly because there's no guarantee that the official reviewing VAR won't be equally crap (as has been proven with VAR on plenty of occasions).

I wonder what Langford would have decided had there been a system whereby each team perhaps get a up to a fixed number of review requests per game, and if the captain requests the ref then reviews video of the incident.

I however continue to dread the day when VAR is introduced at Championship level and think VP should be careful what he wishes for. His call for officials to be held accountable is spot on. I'm not so sure about his call for VAR. Maybe he's basing that on his experience in MLS where I think they use it better but IMO it's still not great for the game.

I am a fierce advocate for VAR, even with its problems.

But I can totally see where you're coming from. The implementation is awful at the moment.

The type of VAR I've always advocated has always been the type you suggest i.e. a strict number of reviews (3 max?) requested by a captain, perhaps if they're vindicated it won't drop the number, or maybe not even as typically you don't get more than 3 really bad BIG decisions per team per game anyway. THat would definitely help.

My friends who watch every Liverpool game complain about goals not given for being mm offside and I take that criticism as no system is perfect. But what we're talking about here is the lesser of two evils. 2 of the pens we had couldn't be more blatant and there's no way one of those wouldn't be given on VAR review.

There are definitely issues with it as it stands but even as it stands it's better than no VAR. But yes it needs to be done better.

The offside thing is so easy to resolve though. I suggested a 20 second time window, and think it may have been OMA that suggested 30 seconds, but if you can't tell in that time, it's not offside. Millimetres become much less relevant.

[Snowflake Royal]

Ok,

So we were never really troubled defensively so Holmes and Rino seem wasted.

BUT.

Holmes gives us extra height and strength in their box at set pieces. He's also got a decent cross on him.

.

I don't think he has got a decent cross on him and that's his only real weakness playing as right back. Can't recall (m)any of his crosses last night finding one of our players in the box.

He put in quite a nice low one last night. I can't remember any other crosses he has put in tbh. Its not something he does really

Put in some good ones when he first came into the side.

Esteves is from the Yiadom school of full backs.crossing? No thanks!

[NewCorkSeth]

I'm a fierce critic of VAR and I still don't feel silly because there's no guarantee that the official reviewing VAR won't be equally crap (as has been proven with VAR on plenty of occasions).

I wonder what Langford would have decided had there been a system whereby each team perhaps get a up to a fixed number of review requests per game, and if the captain requests the ref then reviews video of the incident.

I however continue to dread the day when VAR is introduced at Championship level and think VP should be careful what he wishes for. His call for officials to be held accountable is spot on. I'm not so sure about his call for VAR. Maybe he's basing that on his experience in MLS where I think they use it better but IMO it's still not great for the game.

I am a fierce advocate for VAR, even with its problems.

But I can totally see where you're coming from. The implementation is awful at the moment.

The type of VAR I've always advocated has always been the type you suggest i.e. a strict number of reviews (3 max?) requested by a captain, perhaps if they're vindicated it won't drop the number, or maybe not even as typically you don't get more than 3 really bad BIG decisions per team per game anyway. THat would definitely help.

My friends who watch every Liverpool game complain about goals not given for being mm offside and I take that criticism as no system is perfect. But what we're talking about here is the lesser of two evils. 2 of the pens we had couldn't be more blatant and there's no way one of those wouldn't be given on VAR review.

There are definitely issues with it as it stands but even as it stands it's better than no VAR. But yes it needs to be done better.

The offside thing is so easy to resolve though. I suggested a 20 second time window, and think it may have been OMA that suggested 30 seconds, but if you can't tell in that time, it's not offside. Millimetres become much less relevant.

That is actually a good idea. It should only take 20-30 seconds max to tell whether the player is offside enough to have gained an unfair advantage.

A players armpit being marginally offside is not in the spirit of the law.