Back from the Watford game...

[papereyes]

...Coppell.

That's where SC gets his ethos from - he's said on a number of occasions that Tommy Doc encouraged precisely the approach described so well above by Ollie Kearns (and others). I think as last season progressed he realised that this is now not enough for the Premier League, so I do wonder whether he'll have the heart to carry on if we get promoted, because he knows that wholesale changes might be required, to personnel and playing style.

In our second season, we didn't play remotely like we did in our first. We were a lot more central and a lot more direct.

We were also pretty bad at it.

Agreed - we were forced to improvise a "Plan B" for various reasons already cited on this forum ad nauseum.

So why did you say in the first post the bit in bold - where you state that the system that had worked didn't as time went on in the second season? That's really not what you've just agreed to in your second.

[CMRoyal]

So why did you say in the first post the bit in bold - where you state that the system that had worked didn't as time went on in the second season? That's really not what you've just agreed to in your second.

What I was trying to say was that in my opinion we started by playing the usual SC way but a combination of a) that style having been sussed out, b) lack of a decent right winger, c) an ageing/slowing defence and d) any other excuse you can think of, we started to lump it a bit. SC realised a bit more craft was needed, hence buying Marek for example. However, the SC way works in the Championship, so he’s kind of back to square one, needing to re-invent the team if we do go up.

[Negative_Jeff]

As a comparison, United have always used wingers/width (Sharpe, Giggs, Kanchelskis

...Coppell.

That's where SC gets his ethos from - he's said on a number of occasions that Tommy Doc encouraged precisely the approach described so well above by Ollie Kearns (and others). I think as last season progressed he realised that this is now not enough for the Premier League, so I do wonder whether he'll have the heart to carry on if we get promoted, because he knows that wholesale changes might be required, to personnel and playing style.

I don`t think Coppell learnt much from Tommy Docherty. The charisma and quick wit used to work with the younger players, but The Doc`s coaching and tactical ideas were naive. In a European tie away to Roma in the sixties the Chelsea captain Terry Venables changed Docherty`s game plan and quickly organised a sweeper system. Chelsea got the result but Venables was soon on his way to Spurs.

[CMRoyal]

As a comparison, United have always used wingers/width (Sharpe, Giggs, Kanchelskis

...Coppell.

That's where SC gets his ethos from - he's said on a number of occasions that Tommy Doc encouraged precisely the approach described so well above by Ollie Kearns (and others). I think as last season progressed he realised that this is now not enough for the Premier League, so I do wonder whether he'll have the heart to carry on if we get promoted, because he knows that wholesale changes might be required, to personnel and playing style.

I don`t think Coppell learnt much from Tommy Docherty.

With all due respect, I'll take SC's opinion about that over anybody else's. I don't doubt the Doc was tactically limited, but even he will have learnt stuff from his Chelsea days that would have carried over to when he managed SC. However, it's the attacking, wide-player ethos that I was talking about rather than individual tactics.

[papereyes]

So why did you say in the first post the bit in bold - where you state that the system that had worked didn't as time went on in the second season? That's really not what you've just agreed to in your second.

What I was trying to say was that in my opinion we started by playing the usual SC way but a combination of a) that style having been sussed out, b) lack of a decent right winger, c) an ageing/slowing defence and d) any other excuse you can think of, we started to lump it a bit. SC realised a bit more craft was needed, hence buying Marek for example. However, the SC way works in the Championship, so he’s kind of back to square one, needing to re-invent the team if we do go up.

Fair enough. I disagree because I don't think we even started playing that way that season because the damage had already been done. With the personnel we had, we would always have been limited at playing that way.

As I pointed out in a previous post, I think the style we have now, had in the first season and had in the promotion season really does work. If we can replace any key players in a like-for-like manner, then I have no fear of having to re-invent the style of the team. Its just a case of making sure we make more right moves than wrong in putting the squad together (and see that other thread on which I've been active today for my thoughts on that).

[Great Knolly]

Good discussion.

I'm quite happy that we have a direct approach. Once we're in the attacking 3rd we do play the ball on the ground. I'd be happy to see the ball hoofed into the opposition half and the then we play football.

I watched the Watford game back and the commentators were saying how Watford had the better of the half, but somehow Reading had gone in 1-0 up. While they were saying this, the stats on the screen said Watford 60% possesion , 1 goal attempt (that header that Inga would have been happy nodding back to Federici). Reading 7 goal attempts.

Doncaster, Swansea, and Watford have all passed the ball well, but they're missing the point. I'd prefer to see a team make the most of the players in their squad. There's not much variation in approach. A lot of managers have little imagination. They take the easy way out and coach from the manual.

[Ian Royal]

However, I do agree that the Prem is a different kettle of fish and we have to be able to mix things up a bit. One of my concerns is that SC has only really ever played one system and struggles with the Plan B bit although he cleary tweaked things a bit last year with the Matejovsky purchase. Albeit too late to make the difference.

Didn't we, you know, get worse?

No. We got 13 pts from the 10 games (1.3 per game) that he started and 24 (0.85 per game) from the 28 that he didin't start. We also lost the first three that he started which you could argue was a settling in period.
I think he'll not play much of a part this year but may be a crucial player next season, especially if SC makes more use of a 4-5-1 cum 4-3-3 formation away from home. He would truely shine in that formation I reckon.

Given the very intelligent way in which you talk about the midfield and team in general, I am delighted to see you say that as I completely agree and I don't have your previous playing experience and eloquence.

[Ian Royal]

Good discussion.

I'm quite happy that we have a direct approach. Once we're in the attacking 3rd we do play the ball on the ground. I'd be happy to see the ball hoofed into the opposition half and the then we play football.

I watched the Watford game back and the commentators were saying how Watford had the better of the half, but somehow Reading had gone in 1-0 up. While they were saying this, the stats on the screen said Watford 60% possesion , 1 goal attempt (that header that Inga would have been happy nodding back to Federici). Reading 7 goal attempts.

Doncaster, Swansea, and Watford have all passed the ball well, but they're missing the point. I'd prefer to see a team make the most of the players in their squad. There's not much variation in approach. A lot of managers have little imagination. They take the easy way out and coach from the manual.

I think a lot of people fail to realise our defensive style is to defend deep in numbers. This envites the other team onto us and creates space in their half.

When we eventually get the ball back (which is enivitable) we will usually have a good chance of picking out a winger/striker and creating a goalscoring chance.

It's forcing the other team to play to our strengths, when generally they don't have the quality to penetrate a 6-9 man defensive wall. Our pace and fitness allows us to do this, obviously without it we wouldn't be able to swicth fromdefence and attack quickly enough.

[OLLIE KEARNS]

Good discussion.

I'm quite happy that we have a direct approach. Once we're in the attacking 3rd we do play the ball on the ground. I'd be happy to see the ball hoofed into the opposition half and the then we play football.

I watched the Watford game back and the commentators were saying how Watford had the better of the half, but somehow Reading had gone in 1-0 up. While they were saying this, the stats on the screen said Watford 60% possesion , 1 goal attempt (that header that Inga would have been happy nodding back to Federici). Reading 7 goal attempts.

Doncaster, Swansea, and Watford have all passed the ball well, but they're missing the point. I'd prefer to see a team make the most of the players in their squad. There's not much variation in approach. A lot of managers have little imagination. They take the easy way out and coach from the manual.

I think a lot of people fail to realise our defensive style is to defend deep in numbers. This envites the other team onto us and creates space in their half.

When we eventually get the ball back (which is enivitable) we will usually have a good chance of picking out a winger/striker and creating a goalscoring chance.

It's forcing the other team to play to our strengths, when generally they don't have the quality to penetrate a 6-9 man defensive wall. Our pace and fitness allows us to do this, obviously without it we wouldn't be able to swicth fromdefence and attack quickly enough.

It's very important that the two banks of 4 play close together (especially centrally) against 4-5-1 so as not to allow opposing midfielders room to play in the space between the two. If they release players into that area the centre backs then get drawn out to deal with them leaving another gap for players to run in. We only ever look exposed when players get to run at our back four (Brum / Saints A) hence the need to have the midfield set deep.
Now we shouldn't and won't change our pattern of play this year but Marek would suit the 4-5-1 role very well for us. Arsenal are the absolute masters of this because their movement in relation to one another is outstanding. But then not many sides have a Fabergas

[brendywendy]

Jimmy Kebe came within inches of converting a fabulous Stephen Hunt cross seconds into the second half
Rodgers then brought on Polish forward Grzegorz Rasiak in a bid to carry more attacking threat to the Royals but it instantly backfired as Noel Hunt scored Reading's second in the 66th minute.

Armstrong fed Stephen Hunt down the left with a perfectly weighted pass. The Republic of Ireland international swept in a deep cross to the back post where Kebe outjumped Jon Harley to head back across goal.
Noel Hunt was given far too much time and span to lash past Loach from six yards for his 12th goal of the season.

Kebe played in Liam Rosenior down the right and his cross was criminally not cut out by Jack Cork in front of Loach to allow Doyle to flick in his 17th - and easiest - of the campaign from three yards.

can i just point out to sun tzu, and anyone else-this respected newspaper sports journos opinion is that kebe despite not firing properly had a very decent impact on the game, including a header to nhunt
he didnt seem to see it as poor technique as you do.
well done the kebster

[Platypuss]

a deep cross to the back post where Kebe outjumped Jon Harley to head back across goal

Yeah, no mean feat to out-jump Jon Harley when you're 6 foot 2.

[brendywendy]

But thats irelevant plat. I said kebe uses his head to good effect both defensively and offensively in every game.sun decided he never did,and when he attempted to, he failed miserably.im simply pointing out that in the very next game there was clear evidence that i am right that sun still refuses to accept.

[Ian Royal]

But thats irelevant plat. I said kebe uses his head to good effect both defensively and offensively in every game.sun decided he never did,and when he attempted to, he failed miserably.im simply pointing out that in the very next game there was clear evidence that i am right that sun still refuses to accept.

Kebe contributes with his head, but he is not what I'd describe as effective or good with it.

[Mr Angry]

Are you suggesting that if Kebe hadn't bothered attacking the SHunt cross, the ball would still have got to NHunt to score?

[Platypuss]

The phrase "more by luck than judgement" comes into play here!

[Sun Tzu]

Wendy does seem obsessed by this !

Kebe's challenge was superbly effective, it led to a goal. It was barely a header, and there was no control on his part but that matters little.

It's an empty debate really, he could set up goals with his backside for all I care but there's no evidence to support the claim that he's decent in the air and it's a bit bizarre to take an inaccurate statement from a journalist to back up your position rather than the obvious evidence of your own eyes !

I don;t really rank aerial ability as a key requirement of a winger, I'll take whatever Jimmy can offer but it'll be interesting to see what crumbs wendy drags up to defend the indefensible in future games !

Good luck !

[Alan Partridge]

Wendy does seem obsessed by this !

Kebe's challenge was superbly effective, it led to a goal. It was barely a header, and there was no control on his part but that matters little.

It's an empty debate really, he could set up goals with his backside for all I care but there's no evidence to support the claim that he's decent in the air and it's a bit bizarre to take an inaccurate statement from a journalist to back up your position rather than the obvious evidence of your own eyes !

I don;t really rank aerial ability as a key requirement of a winger, I'll take whatever Jimmy can offer but it'll be interesting to see what crumbs wendy drags up to defend the indefensible in future games !

Good luck !

brendywendy as you say really is obsessed with Kebe and you must not criticise him. What you get from Kebe unlike a lot of wingers in effort as well, he knows he's poor defensively and in the air but he challenges, that's often enough as you say it was effective because Reading scored from it. Los of wingers don't challenge, that's in their natural make up in lots of cases. Kebe is quick, he's attacking and he has played a part, a significant part this season, but he's nowhere near the finished article. His final ball isn't particularly great and for a winger he really does have limited skill or trickery. It's about pace, a good fullback could take care of him fairly comfortably I'd say. His touch really lets him down, he'll beat the man but the 2nd touch bounces away and they can recover. Lost count recently how much that's happened.

The counter arguement and it's a valid one is if he was the finished article with little flaws he wouldn't be here anyway. He's done well enough this season, not overly convinced he's as good as some make out, and certainly it's an area of the field that needs looking at in the summer, particularly if Reading go up.

[bcubed]

Wendy does seem obsessed by this !

Kebe's challenge was superbly effective, it led to a goal. It was barely a header, and there was no control on his part but that matters little.

It's an empty debate really, he could set up goals with his backside for all I care but there's no evidence to support the claim that he's decent in the air and it's a bit bizarre to take an inaccurate statement from a journalist to back up your position rather than the obvious evidence of your own eyes !

I don;t really rank aerial ability as a key requirement of a winger, I'll take whatever Jimmy can offer but it'll be interesting to see what crumbs wendy drags up to defend the indefensible in future games !

Good luck !

Spot on
He shows little if any appetite for tackles or headers but otherwise makes a great contribution. No complaints from me but I can't see how anyone can argue that he is good in the air

[Alan Partridge]

Wendy does seem obsessed by this !

Kebe's challenge was superbly effective, it led to a goal. It was barely a header, and there was no control on his part but that matters little.

It's an empty debate really, he could set up goals with his backside for all I care but there's no evidence to support the claim that he's decent in the air and it's a bit bizarre to take an inaccurate statement from a journalist to back up your position rather than the obvious evidence of your own eyes !

I don;t really rank aerial ability as a key requirement of a winger, I'll take whatever Jimmy can offer but it'll be interesting to see what crumbs wendy drags up to defend the indefensible in future games !

Good luck !

Spot on
He shows little if any appetite for tackles or headers but otherwise makes a great contribution. No complaints from me but I can't see how anyone can argue that he is good in the air

Disagree with this to be honest, I don't think he shows little appetite for it, he's just not very good at either. Kebe does challenge though unlike a Seol or even an Oster.

Wingers just generally aren't that sort, the y are taught to stay wide and get crosses in. Wingers like Hunt who are all action, flying into tackles really are the rarer breed than the more flamboyant but often powderpuff wingers.

[papereyes]

Wingers like Hunt who are all action, flying into tackles really are the rarer breed than the more flamboyant but often powderpuff wingers.

But also tend to get drawn inside, to where the action is.