Issue 12 - September 1999
The Season So Far: "The same old nonsense"

With the season just three games old (this was written after "Fortress Madejski" was breached by the gang of teenagers and loan players from Luton), the noose is already begin to tighten around Tommy Burns' neck. With the chairman now watching every woeful move from the stands, rather than simply hearing about it over the phone, Burns must know that he needs to turn results around and quickly.

So far, instead of a bright new start with a more dynamic, determined team, we've had the same old nonsense as last season: only just scraping a win against ten-man Bristol City, brushed aside by the pace and power of Cambridge and beaten at home by a team with less money than Burns is prepared to fork out for any old Scottish has-been.

And if you really want to get a perspective on just how poor Reading are, read that sentence again with particular emphasis on "the pace and power of Cambridge". It may sound like a contradiction in terms but, in comparison to Burns' Royals, the Berkshire Ladies Crocheting Eleven are a well-drilled pacy unit.

Before the start of the season, Burns claimed (in an interview in the Whiff) that the team would play a more direct style, with the emphasis on playing as a unit rather than the attempted keep-ball tactics we've begun to get used to. He also recognised that the more physical nature of the game in the second division, required players who were prepared to stand up for themselves.

Whilst the games played to date have not descended into the kind of mind-numbing tedium we saw so much of last year, Reading have still patently not learnt how to defend against teams who put them under constant pressure and pile men into the box on the break. Burns has to solve this problem for a decent promotion challenge cannot be mounted with a defence who insist on their right to concede at least two goals a game.

The solution lies in both personnel and tactics. Let's start at the bottom because with this signing, Burns really scrapped the barrel: Andy Gurney.

In the last issue, I said that Gurney could not possibly be as bad as his God-awful performance away at Blackpool last April. I was wrong - he's worse. This man is just possibly the worst player ever to appear in a Reading shirt and, let's face it, that puts him up against some pretty fierce competition.

He has nothing - no pace, no skill, can't head the ball, can't pass. I lay down this challenge to Tommy Burns - put me in the side ahead of Gurney and if I can't do any better, I'll donate my next month's wages to his favourite charity (which is called, believe it or not, Drugs in Glasgow).

Having got that off my chest, let's turn to the other flank. Now, Stuart Gray has a decent left foot and some idea of how to play the game. Unfortunately, he must be the slowest left back in the entire history of the game. Indeed the only forward line in the entire division which may not be able to beat the Royals back four for pace is, er, our own. Perhaps that's the answer - we should just play ourselves each week.

Our collection of centre-halves, on the other hand, is probably up there with the best in the division. Unfortunately, their must a clause in their contracts which insists that at least 50% of them are out injured at any one time. If we could only get them fit, a back four of Primus, Casper, Hunter and Polston might just give us a bit more solidity.

To blame the defence, however, is not entirely fair. Without Parky in midfield, they receive all the protection of a leaky condom. Time and again they're left exposed by a lack of cover from players who seem to think that their sole job is to ponce around at the other end of the pitch, hoping to sneak a consolation goal when we're already three down.

Consequently, the back four needs far more protection, particularly from central midfield. We're just not compact enough as a unit at the moment with opposition forwards allowed far too much space and time to exploit our lack of pace at the back.

Burns himself seems to be losing patience with the attitude of his squad. After the Cambridge defeat, he talked of players lacking the courage to take control of the game and to physically commit themselves in defence. I have some sympathy with this view for, although Burns signed most of these players, when they go out onto the pitch, he can have no control over them. If they don't have the balls or the desire to win necessary at this level, then whatever talent they may have is wasted. Judgement of a player's potential can really only assess his ability on the ball and as part of a team. If that player turns out to lack the necessary will to win, there may be little a manager can do about it.

With the departure of Brebner and the signing of Grant and Smith, Burns seems to be trying to inject some more fighting spirit into the squad. In essence, he's admitting that he's got a lot wrong in his first 18 months in charge, for he's now trying to replace a lot of the players that he himself brought in. A lot of those neat ball-players just haven't performed, leaving Reading with an anonymous looking team struggling to make an impact.

On the tactical front, Burns has simply got it wrong. 4-3-3 may work if you have a strong, confident side who are looking to take the game to the opposition but that description scarcely matches Reading at the moment. Instead, we need to adopt a more defensive approach and stop conceding so many goals.

With the personnel available, 3-5-2 is a better bet. The wing back positions could be filled by Bernal on the right (in the absence of Murty and, let's face it, ANYONE's better than Gurney) and Hodges on the left. Two of the other three midfielders could then sit in front of the back four allowing Caskey to move further forward where he can do more damage. Up front, someone plus Forster.

The appearance and performance of Forster was the only plus from the Luton defeat. He has pace and was willing to run at defenders, something we've lacked for the past few seasons. If he can stay fit (and, given our extraordinary ability to injure players on the training pitch, this is a big "if"), then we may finally have a forward line capable of frightening opposition defences. On the other hand, he may soon start to behave like the rest of the squad and become timid and too terrified of making mistakes to take risks in a game.

Burns knows that he needs results fast. Up the Rs view is that ditching him now would be a big mistake and we have to persevere for some time yet. Although it's been a disappointing start, we've only played three games out of forty-six and there is a huge number of points yet to play for. If panic sets in, we could easily go through the whole Bullivant saga again. Players, management and fans at loggerheads with each other is not likely to produce a winning side and, despite all our different opinions, that is what we're all hoping to see.

Is Andy Gurney the worst player ever to play for Reading? Impossible though it may seem, have you seen someone worse wearing the blue and white? Write to the Whiff and we'll start a "Crappiest Royal in History" poll.