Pauno out

[Brogue]

Sorry SCIAG, you're normally fairly reliable, but how you think standing in a line picking up no one is man marking is beyond me.

Once again, we set up zones and the opposition just go beyond us and hit it back in to be scored whilst we're standing around looking confused and disorganised because no one knows who should be picking up who.

Ady Williams 436 club appearances & 13 international appearances > SCIAG 0&0

Think it’s quite a big mistake to think any ex-pro automatically knows what they are talking about mind you. The games moved on considerably from when Ady played

I would expect any ex-pro defender who played at the level Ady did, for as long as he did to know the difference between zonal and man-marking, even if he stopped playing 10 years ago. And this isn't just any ex-pro making passing comments on us after watching us for a couple of games. He's been watching us for years and years and years.

[Hound]

Ady Williams 436 club appearances & 13 international appearances > SCIAG 0&0

Think it’s quite a big mistake to think any ex-pro automatically knows what they are talking about mind you. The games moved on considerably from when Ady played

I would expect any ex-pro defender who played at the level Ady did, for as long as he did to know the difference between zonal and man-marking, even if he stopped playing 10 years ago. And this isn't just any ex-pro making passing comments on us after watching us for a couple of games. He's been watching us for years and years and years.

he is a media man though now, and often says stuff just for the reaction. I'd quite like it explained to me how that goal is a failure of zonal rather than man marking before I'd accept it in this case

Blaming 'Zonal' and saying it'd be solved by going 'Man-marking' is just a lazy comment of people who want to sound like they know what they are talking about tbh

[Forbury Lion]

What happens if we draw?
The most ridiculous thing about his substitution was that Puscas was having a great game and dragging defenders all over the place. Bonkers.
Personally a draw isn't good enough....the owners may need to pull the trigger....I just hope there is a replacement available/ in mind though first....

A draw may depend on the performance, if it's 0-0 and we look solid at the back and have real bad luck at the other end but look a threat that may buy him some time with me, but not necessarily the owner.
If for example we're winning 3-1 and the manager takes off the one striker we have on the pitch who is playing well and replaces them with a defender and we then draw 3-3 then he's out.

The main worry about sacking another manager is the recruitment process to replace them with someone else. Maybe time to go down a different route, get someone with a proven track record to at least get us on an upwards trajectory in the coming seasons. Whilst not getting promotion may be a disappointment for the owners, relegation will be a disaster.

[South Coast Royal]

Wasn't there Saturday being one of the many injured (the fans are now catching the RFC getting injured malaise as much as the players).
I don't have a strong view on Pauno one way or another but if you are managing a squad with one fit striker and another game due in 4 days' time you might consider taking him off to protect him when 3-1 with not very long left.

I think the fault on Saturday lies more with the players not being able to defend a 2 goal lead and not so much with the manager whether or not zonal or man-for-man was the chosen approach.

On the overall point about substitutions I don't think many managers are very good at making them.

[royalp-we]

I too have been critical of the players but the form speaks for itself now.

The below was posted on Twitter and shows points won in the last 17 games of their tenures before being sacked as Reading manager in the last 24 years.



Fail to win tomorrow there is not going to be much hope of picking up points before the next international break. Can’t grumble too much if Dai Yongge does pull the trigger.

[Millsy]

I too have been critical of the players but the form speaks for itself now.

The below was posted on Twitter and shows points won in the last 17 games of their tenures before being sacked as Reading manager in the last 24 years.



Fail to win tomorrow there is not going to be much hope of picking up points before the next international break. Can’t grumble too much if Dai Yongge does pull the trigger.

Oh but he got those first few honeymoon fluke wins! Where are all the people who were arguing that last season?

Quite shocking that he's even worse than Taxi.

It's a funny one though isn't it, all depends on what we see in those first few games last season.

EITHER they were just a perfect lucky concoction of honeymoon period and players hitting form and actually he's a clueless, which is how he managed to drag us from 7pts clear of 2nd to 7pts off the playoffs. <--this is still what I think, on balance but am desperate to be proven wrong obviously.

OR he has some incredible motivational and tactical ability, did a great job finding a winning formula he was able to instill for some time but has been hit by a long period of unlucky injuries, confidence sapping errors in defence, financial worries affecting player morale, dicks wanting to leave affecint squad unity, the current transfer embargo, O'Shea leaving etc etc.. which have highlighted some areas of naivety (ridiculous substitions for example) and suffocated his ability to show his true potential.

Simple as it may seem to most I'm actually going to be cautious here as one of what felt like only two of us defending Brendan before he was sacked. He could be an unpolished diamond who is learning his naiveties the hard way but clearly knows how to put a fantastic side together when things are going right and might go on to be a Brendan.

The only way to tell is let him have his time with HIS players. That last game really changed me from Pauno Out to feeling he should have a few more games, despite his continued flaws. I just can't see how only TWO games with his own signings (and bear in mind they are freebies/loans, not the luxury of being able to pay) is enough to judge the guy.

Unless the guys have someone definitely lined up (they must be looking surely) I'd give him a few more games. Perhaps he just needs to be ruthless. Remember when Parj was utter dogshite and was ruthless enough to make a change and bring in Mad Dog. He might just need to make some ruthless big decisions (eg/ coach change, scrap zonal, drop Moore etc etc).

[Snowflake Royal]

Think it’s quite a big mistake to think any ex-pro automatically knows what they are talking about mind you. The games moved on considerably from when Ady played

I would expect any ex-pro defender who played at the level Ady did, for as long as he did to know the difference between zonal and man-marking, even if he stopped playing 10 years ago. And this isn't just any ex-pro making passing comments on us after watching us for a couple of games. He's been watching us for years and years and years.

he is a media man though now, and often says stuff just for the reaction. I'd quite like it explained to me how that goal is a failure of zonal rather than man marking before I'd accept it in this case

Blaming 'Zonal' and saying it'd be solved by going 'Man-marking' is just a lazy comment of people who want to sound like they know what they are talking about tbh

To be clear, I don't have a problem with zonal per se, and I don't think saying going man to man is a panacea, it's just easy short hand for the tripe we serve up where the defence is constantly caught in no man's land with attackers getting a free run at the ball.

[Hound]

thats just shite defending. And can fully agree we are defending set pieces terribly, regardless of what system we are or aren't using

[Millsy]

Think it’s quite a big mistake to think any ex-pro automatically knows what they are talking about mind you. The games moved on considerably from when Ady played

I would expect any ex-pro defender who played at the level Ady did, for as long as he did to know the difference between zonal and man-marking, even if he stopped playing 10 years ago. And this isn't just any ex-pro making passing comments on us after watching us for a couple of games. He's been watching us for years and years and years.

he is a media man though now, and often says stuff just for the reaction. I'd quite like it explained to me how that goal is a failure of zonal rather than man marking before I'd accept it in this case

Blaming 'Zonal' and saying it'd be solved by going 'Man-marking' is just a lazy comment of people who want to sound like they know what they are talking about tbh

I definitely put my hands up to not beign a pro. I've only ever played amatuer/uni college level footy and man-marking was the done thing. But that was 20+ yers ago so wtf would I know compared to others here who may have coached/ played at a higher level etc.. And this is precisely why I humbly asked the Q months back and those who clearly know more gave some pretty solid answers re: zonal v man-marking which cleared up a lot of things for the likes of me, but still left me feeling vindicated in my view that it's not the best form of defending for most teams especially at set pieces, especially the likes of Reading. I'm more than happy to be schooled by those who know more though.

Speaking of which, there's Ady, who you say is just trying to get a reaction. I don't buy that at all. That fella has the ability get a reaction out of nothing if he wants to. When he talks about it it's pretty obvious he's livid about it and really believes it. Gooding the same. If the only two ex-pros I know (one personally) and listen to week in week out give their genuine opinion that it's not a good idea, and it fits with what most of us have always been taught (at whichever level) and common sense, I think it's a fair basis on which to form an opinion and isn't just a lazy comment, unless they can't actually tell the difference and see it with their own eyes. It's not exactly hard to see though.

[Millsy]

thats just shite defending. And can fully agree we are defending set pieces terribly, regardless of what system we are or aren't using

Yes but that's exactly the point that's being made!

The point is if you're shite at defending, which we are, man-marking is the safer thing to do. You don't dick around persevering with zonal if you're shite. It's not that zonal is shit, it's that we're too shit to do it.

[morganb]

I don't have a strong view on Pauno one way or another but if you are managing a squad with one fit striker and another game due in 4 days' time you might consider taking him off to protect him when 3-1 with not very long left.

I wondered that as well, if he was trying to protect our one fit senior striker as there is a game on Tuesday and we'd not need to score more goals v QPR as we were ahead at the time.

Perhaps bringing on Holmes was the issue - should he have brought on Clarke instead, a positionally like-for-like replacement rather than affecting the defence?

[Hound]

thats just shite defending. And can fully agree we are defending set pieces terribly, regardless of what system we are or aren't using

Yes but that's exactly the point that's being made!

The point is if you're shite at defending, which we are, man-marking is the safer thing to do. You don't dick around persevering with zonal if you're shite. It's not that zonal is shit, it's that we're too shit to do it.

We're not playing pure zonal. And why would man-marking be any safer? why would we do it better than zonal?

we're just defending poorly. Its really best just to leave it at

[Hendo]

I don't have a strong view on Pauno one way or another but if you are managing a squad with one fit striker and another game due in 4 days' time you might consider taking him off to protect him when 3-1 with not very long left.

I wondered that as well, if he was trying to protect our one fit senior striker as there is a game on Tuesday and we'd not need to score more goals v QPR as we were ahead at the time.

Perhaps bringing on Holmes was the issue - should he have brought on Clarke instead, a positionally like-for-like replacement rather than affecting the defence?

I think the sub made sense, especially when you only have one fit senior striker. If he had left Puscas on and it had stayed 3-1 but he then pulled up and got injured, Pauno would've got pelters for that with people saying "the game was won, why didn't he look after Puscas".

[Snowflake Royal]

thats just shite defending. And can fully agree we are defending set pieces terribly, regardless of what system we are or aren't using

Absolutely, but a big part is certainly set up.

And now you can see the players all have so little faith in what they're doing they start each set piece jittery which just makes it worse.

It's why the only solution is a change of approach. Got to give them.something different to focus on and a clean break, preferably combined with a bit of a switch up in personnel.

[Snowflake Royal]

thats just shite defending. And can fully agree we are defending set pieces terribly, regardless of what system we are or aren't using

Yes but that's exactly the point that's being made!

The point is if you're shite at defending, which we are, man-marking is the safer thing to do. You don't dick around persevering with zonal if you're shite. It's not that zonal is shit, it's that we're too shit to do it.

We're not playing pure zonal. And why would man-marking be any safer? why would we do it better than zonal?

we're just defending poorly. Its really best just to leave it at

It's simpler for a start. Sadly, Pauno is just leaving it at that.

[Snowflake Royal]

I don't have a strong view on Pauno one way or another but if you are managing a squad with one fit striker and another game due in 4 days' time you might consider taking him off to protect him when 3-1 with not very long left.

I wondered that as well, if he was trying to protect our one fit senior striker as there is a game on Tuesday and we'd not need to score more goals v QPR as we were ahead at the time.

Perhaps bringing on Holmes was the issue - should he have brought on Clarke instead, a positionally like-for-like replacement rather than affecting the defence?

I think the sub made sense, especially when you only have one fit senior striker. If he had left Puscas on and it had stayed 3-1 but he then pulled up and got injured, Pauno would've got pelters for that with people saying "the game was won, why didn't he look after Puscas".

So make two subs. Bring off Puscas for Clarke, an enthusiastic young big lad who can make a nuisance of himself, and Ejaria / Halilovic / Swift (the one we actually must protect) for Holmes.

[morganb]

I wondered that as well, if he was trying to protect our one fit senior striker as there is a game on Tuesday and we'd not need to score more goals v QPR as we were ahead at the time.

Perhaps bringing on Holmes was the issue - should he have brought on Clarke instead, a positionally like-for-like replacement rather than affecting the defence?

I think the sub made sense, especially when you only have one fit senior striker. If he had left Puscas on and it had stayed 3-1 but he then pulled up and got injured, Pauno would've got pelters for that with people saying "the game was won, why didn't he look after Puscas".

So make two subs. Bring off Puscas for Clarke, an enthusiastic young big lad who can make a nuisance of himself, and Ejaria / Halilovic / Swift (the one we actually must protect) for Holmes.

We can make more than one sub? Has anyone told Pauno?

[Hound]

thats just shite defending. And can fully agree we are defending set pieces terribly, regardless of what system we are or aren't using

Absolutely, but a big part is certainly set up.

And now you can see the players all have so little faith in what they're doing they start each set piece jittery which just makes it worse.

It's why the only solution is a change of approach. Got to give them.something different to focus on and a clean break, preferably combined with a bit of a switch up in personnel.

Agreed. Note I’m not advocating not changing whatever system we are using. It’s not working whatever it is. Whoever is doing the set pieces in training needs shooting

Just taking issue with the ‘zonal is the reason go back to man marking’ stuff

[windermereROYAL]

I think we need to look at the next 4 home games as season defining , Peterborough, our bogey team Middlesbrough (we must be due a win) Barnsley and Blackpool , sandwiched in there is two horrible away trips to Fulham Cardiff and Derby.
I will be looking for 12 points from that little lot , 16 points from 13 games wouldn`t be horrendous given our start. but if we are still hovering around the 10-12 mark he could be in trouble.

[Zip]

I don't have a strong view on Pauno one way or another but if you are managing a squad with one fit striker and another game due in 4 days' time you might consider taking him off to protect him when 3-1 with not very long left.

I wondered that as well, if he was trying to protect our one fit senior striker as there is a game on Tuesday and we'd not need to score more goals v QPR as we were ahead at the time.

Perhaps bringing on Holmes was the issue - should he have brought on Clarke instead, a positionally like-for-like replacement rather than affecting the defence?

I think the sub made sense, especially when you only have one fit senior striker. If he had left Puscas on and it had stayed 3-1 but he then pulled up and got injured, Pauno would've got pelters for that with people saying "the game was won, why didn't he look after Puscas".

Then take off Puscas and bring on one of our young strikers. Also bring on Holmes but take off the knackered Ejaria. Why make just the one sub? Why leave us with no one up front to relieve the pressure a bit? We had the same issues with Pauno and subs last season. He really seems clueless.