Not much to say really.

It was cold. Both teams were bang average. Meite had our two best chances and was unlucky with both. Aluko had one of his better games for us today, but it is hardly a high bar! Oh and Paul Cook is a grumpy of**rd!! Roll on Tuesday.......

DW Stadium really is a grim place to visit on a cold afternoon in November - or at any point in a season to be fair.

Positives
- we kept a clean sheet
- Danny Loader made his debut and looked bright
- Rinomhota looks like he’s cemented his place in team
- We finished the game with 3 academy players on pitch
- Meite continues to look a threat
- It didn’t take long to get back onto the M6 after the game

Negatives
- Why drop Yiadom - arguably our player of the season
- No width at all
- Too many backward passes
- No urgency in our play
- Fans sarcastically cheering Aluko sub which was completely unessecary after his performance today which wasn’t that bad, McCleary rightly turned round and gestured to fans to make them stop - just embarrassing
- Wigan were nothing special at all, and still probably deserved to win the game

Summary
I didn’t expect much today, I didn’t get much today.

Many defensive lapses?

Not really.....but Wigan weren’t exactly pounding on the door. Couple of saves by AJ but nothing overly comical in comparison to recent weeks.....

I think there were defensive lapses. We somehow managed to keep a clean sheet but our defending looked poor at times this afternoon. Nothing comical. But poor marking and failing to pick people up resulted in Wigan having far too many chances for a team that were dominated by us particularly in the second half. We manage to dominate games without winning them. We are weak at the fundamentals of football.

Two poor teams. Games against the likes of Wigan are games we should be looking to get a win from. Wigan were the worst home team I've seen this season.

Jaakkola - made some good saves, particularly in the first half and deserved his clean sheet. 7 motm

Gunter - Would have thought after being out of the team that he would have stepped up. Sadly and predictably that was not the case. Deservedly booked for an awful tackle, probably why he doesn't bother to make them usually. 3

Moore - Solid enough. Most of our defensive problems were on the flanks. 6

O'Shea - Someone called him "a toxic influence" on the radio, extremely harsh. Played well. 6

Blackett - Ok going forward but misplaced a fair few passes. Let his winger have too much room. 4

Rinomhota - Did ok. One very good run. Almost got caught out over playing in his own box though. 5

Kelly - One of his better games this season. Tidy in possession. 6

Swift - Hit two terrible corners in a row, he had an age to think about the first one and focus on what he was going to do because a Wigan player was down injured but he managed to hit the first man who was 10 yards away. One good shot but other than that lightweight and doesn't seem to realise the league situation we are in. 4

Aluko - Lightweight as usual. Doesn't go past people, doesn't cross and so undisciplined. 3

McCleary - Best outfield player. Final ball lacking but he at least tries to take people on. 7

Meite - Had the two best chances. Keeper probably had the one that hit the post covered. Thought he could have hit the second with a bit more conviction but he did well to steal the ball off the defender. 6

Subs:

Loader - Finally given his chance and did not look out of place. Tried to find space and take people on. Hope he continues and can get his first goal soon. 6

McNulty - Won a couple of aerial balls and put himself about but didn't have any chances. 5

Sims - Looked to take people on with a couple of decent runs. 6

Interesting that some of the Wigan fans said Aluko was our best player, was he really that bad today or are people just rating him low because he's Aluko?

Can't answer the question but opposition fans will often rate a player who doesn't create a lot in a game but looks like on another day could do the business when his own fans know it's the same story every week.

Can't answer the question but opposition fans will often rate a player who doesn't create a lot in a game but looks like on another day could do the business when his own fans know it's the same story every week.

I still think booing him off is harsh, if you're going to boo someone off because they've had a bad game/season, then you'd be booing off 80% of our subs

Can't answer the question but opposition fans will often rate a player who doesn't create a lot in a game but looks like on another day could do the business when his own fans know it's the same story every week.

I still think booing him off is harsh, if you're going to boo someone off because they've had a bad game/season, then you'd be booing off 80% of our subs
Don't disagree with the sentiment. The stat is nonsense though.

Aluko should be nowhere near this team.

He’s shit and lazy.

Wigan fans we spoke to said the same thing. I don’t think he was our best player, but I’ve seen him play much worse than he did today. Then again I don’t really think anyone had a bad game. Both teams were so average it hurt.

Do “average” teams finish mid-table?

You tell me what you want me to write and I will.

This game doesn't seem to have attracted much interest and that doesn't surprise me. There were quite a few interesting elements for me.

I think the tactical shift was ill conceived. I am fairly certain the clean sheet was down to poor finishing from Wigan (along with a few good/lucky saves from Jaakkola) and I am absolutely certain our lack of goal threat was because of the formation.

There were several times we made a break and got it out to either Gunter or Blackett out wide and in a good position to attack but nobody was available for the overlap. With 3 players in the box for most of these scenarios you would have expected an early cross to fight over but nope. Too much deliberating on the ball. I think that was due to the lack of options the full backs had other than cross or pass backwards.

This formation also forced Meite out wide to cover full backs which was not ideal. Bodvarson can do it well but I feel asking too much of Meite when he's showing such instinctive finishing is a mistake.

The midfield 3 I thought (controversially) did quite well. They recycled possession well and tracked back well. Rinomhota was very good at using his upper body strength to hold up players (it was a shame the ref was so trigger happy on fouls) and Swift pulled off some great passes. I think he only failed with 2? So I'm not sure about the ratings from others on here. He was much better than Kelly.

Great to see Loader get his debut.

Jaakkola - 7
Gunter - 5
O'Shea - 6
Moore - 6
Blackett - 5
Kelly - 5
Rinomhota - 6
Swift - 6
McCleary - 5
Aluko - 5
Meite - 6

Swift does "pull off some great passes". Only problem is none of them seem to be in meaningful areas of the pitch.

Swift made 81 passes. The next highest was Kelly with 58. Swift made 3 key passes. Kelly made 0. Swifts pass success rate was 95%. Kelly's was 88%.

We only had 2 shots on target. 1 was from Swift. The other was assisted by Swift.

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

Swift made 81 passes. The next highest was Kelly with 58. Swift made 3 key passes. Kelly made 0. Swifts pass success rate was 95%. Kelly's was 88%.

We only had 2 shots on target. 1 was from Swift. The other was assisted by Swift.

Yep.

I guess I hold him to a higher standard because as those stats show he can do it. As they also show he just doesn't do it enough.

By the way, out of interest, which one was it that he assisted? I remember the Meite chance in the second half but if it was that you are referring to as an assist then Swift actually over hit the pass and Meite had to tackle the defender to win the ball back. Do the stats you quoted account for a player winning the ball from an overhit pass?

Swift made 81 passes. The next highest was Kelly with 58. Swift made 3 key passes. Kelly made 0. Swifts pass success rate was 95%. Kelly's was 88%.

We only had 2 shots on target. 1 was from Swift. The other was assisted by Swift.

Yep.

I guess I hold him to a higher standard because as those stats show he can do it. As they also show he just doesn't do it enough.

By the way, out of interest, which one was it that he assisted? I remember the Meite chance in the second half but if it was that you are referring to as an assist then Swift actually over hit the pass and Meite had to tackle the defender to win the ball back. Do the stats you quoted account for a player winning the ball from an overhit pass?
They do. I need to watch it again but on first viewing I thought it was a very well weighted pass that their defender did a good job tracking initially.

You're holding him to a standard, I would argue, he cannot reach with the tactical instructions given to other players around him and frequent formation changes. The position he played in the last game was much deeper than he's often asked to play. I think we would have seen much more of an impact from him if he was played in Alukos place. Not that I thought the 4-3-2-1 Christmas tree was a good idea.

It might work against stronger opposition with:
Bacuna---Ezatolahi---Rinomhota
-----------Swift----Baldock*
---------------Meite**

*or McCleary
**or Bodvarson

In what way?

Didn't realise Swift was a Roman

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.

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.

Quick correction for you.

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.

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.

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.

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