Not enough goals

[Snowball]

Also, does it have to be typed in such a patronisingly large font?

Oh YES!

[Kitson12]

Also, does it have to be typed in such a patronisingly large font?

Oh YES!

It'd be less embarrassing for you if the statistic were actually correct! You PLONKER.

[Snowball]

Hmmm Reading start scoring better and keep a couple of clean sheets and suddenly we've won 6 league games on the bounce.

Looks like the problem was a combination of not scoring more than once regularly enough and conceeding at least one too regularly. Glad we seem to have got at least one of those sorted and improved on the other somewhat.

No. Judge a team or a player over a season

Long. Case Proved.

Harte. Case Proved.

Kebe. Case Proved.

Reading FC without Gylfi. Case Proved.


1 40 37 79 QPR
2 40 18 70 Norwich
3 40 19 69 Cardiff
4 40 19 69 Swansea
5 40 22 66 Reading
6 40 11 64 Leeds
7 40 13 60 Millwall
8 40 9 60 Nott'm Forest

My Goal Difference argument. I said we were better than our league position back when. Case proved.

[Snowball]

A typo, Kitson, my love.

[Kitson12]

A typo, Kitson, my love.

You were still WRONG though.

[Ian Royal]

I'll judge the situation as it is evolving thanks, because things change.

We had a problem and weren't doing well enough to reach the play offs, but were staying in touching distance should we improve. We've now improved and are now absolutely flying. Come season end if we finish second or in the play offs we'll have deserved it, but because we'll have shown phenominal form in the last dozen games or so, not because we've been playing well enough all season.

Otherwise we'd have been in the play off positions, or 7 / 8 all season. When in fact we've been outside the play offs most of the season, and down around 10 / 11 / 12 as much as top 6.

[Snowball]

I'll judge the situation as it is evolving thanks, because things change.

We had a problem and weren't doing well enough to reach the play offs, but were staying in touching distance should we improve. We've now improved and are now absolutely flying. Come season end if we finish second or in the play offs we'll have deserved it, but because we'll have shown phenominal form in the last dozen games or so, not because we've been playing well enough all season.

Otherwise we'd have been in the play off positions, or 7 / 8 all season. When in fact we've been outside the play offs most of the season, and down around 10 / 11 / 12 as much as top 6.

You don't get into the top six game 46 because of game 46, but because of ALL the games.


We WERE doing well enough.

We were staying close enough to contention to make this run at just the right time.

[Snowball]

Not Enough Goals = Second in the league for goals scored before the Norwich game

[Millsy]

Quick question.

How mature is it to bring up peoples' speculative quotes from the past in bold if they end up inaccurate?

Just a question.

[Ian Royal]

Quick question.

How mature is it to bring up peoples' speculative quotes from the past in bold if they end up inaccurate?

Just a question.

Particularly when that was the view of a minority and was rejected by most at the time anyway.

[Snowball]

Quick question.

How mature is it to bring up peoples' speculative quotes from the past in bold if they end up inaccurate?

Just a question.

Starting a thread is NOT "a speculative quote"


A number of people were ADAMANT we could not score enough goals to compete.

A number of people were ADAMANT we drew to may games to make the play-offs

01 42 23 14 05 +38 83 Queens Park Rangers
02 43 21 14 08 +23 77 Norwich City
03 42 22 09 11 +24 75 Cardiff City
04 42 19 15 08 +26 72 Reading
05 42 21 07 14 +18 70 Swansea City
06 42 17 14 11 +10 65 Leeds United
07 42 16 15 11 +10 63 Nottingham Forest
08 42 16 15 11 +06 63 Hull
09 42 17 12 13 +03 63 Burnley
10 42 16 13 13 +12 61 Millwall
11 42 17 09 16 +02 60 Leicester City

So the TOP side has drawn 14 games, so has the second side, so has the side in sixth (BELOW US), so have 7th and 8th.

And Swansea who have "only" drawn 7 games and Leicester (9) are both below us.

[Snowball]

Quick question.

How mature is it to bring up peoples' speculative quotes from the past in bold if they end up inaccurate?

Just a question.

Particularly when that was the view of a minority and was rejected by most at the time anyway.

Oh RIGHT, maybe you should read the thread. You were on the "not enough goals" side, if I remember

[peterroyal76]

Quick question.

How mature is it to bring up peoples' speculative quotes from the past in bold if they end up inaccurate?

Just a question.

Particularly when that was the view of a minority and was rejected by most at the time anyway.

Oh RIGHT, maybe you should read the thread. You were on the "not enough goals" side, if I remember

[Platypuss]

Bang on right tonight.

[Arch]

Which part? Just the title or the run-on remark in the first post?

[Ian Royal]

Quick question.

How mature is it to bring up peoples' speculative quotes from the past in bold if they end up inaccurate?

Just a question.

Particularly when that was the view of a minority and was rejected by most at the time anyway.

Oh RIGHT, maybe you should read the thread. You were on the "not enough goals" side, if I remember

Actually I dismissed it as too simple and was on the poor distribution of goals combined with too many conceeded side.

The OP is wrong, it's not about not enough goals. It's about not enough consistently good performances, and not enough games where we had the chances converted into wins.

[Snowball]

The OP is wrong, it's not about not enough goals. It's about not enough consistently good performances, and not enough games where we had the chances converted into wins.

Reading FC ended up with 77 goals, better than Cardiff, Swansea, Forest & QPR


That's 9 goals scored more than last season, and 12 less conceded, a GD +21 goals better.

[Victor Meldrew]

The OP is wrong, it's not about not enough goals. It's about not enough consistently good performances, and not enough games where we had the chances converted into wins.

Reading FC ended up with 77 goals, better than Cardiff, Swansea, Forest & QPR


That's 9 goals scored more than last season, and 12 less conceded, a GD +21 goals better.

So if we had a proper left-back who could defend then we would have won the league?

[Ian Royal]

Why am I being quoted as if the number of goals we've scored has any relevance to a post about not converting enough games into wins? The only reason we made the play offs is because we pulled it together for 8 games and had a fantastic winning streak.

We did that by solving the problem we had and either scored enough goals to win even with the opposition scoring a goal (as they regularly have this season), or by managing to keep a clean sheet whilst also scoring. Something that prior to that run we'd managed 5 times in 34 league games, only one of which wasn't a "big" win.

[Snowball]

Why am I being quoted as if the number of goals we've scored has any relevance to a post about not converting enough games into wins? The only reason we made the play offs is because we pulled it together for 8 games and had a fantastic winning streak.

We did that by solving the problem we had and either scored enough goals to win even with the opposition scoring a goal (as they regularly have this season), or by managing to keep a clean sheet whilst also scoring. Something that prior to that run we'd managed 5 times in 34 league games, only one of which wasn't a "big" win.

No we ended up where we were because of the results of 46 games.

Because we had the third-best GD, only a single goal off second placed, Swansea and better than Norwich.

In fact the silly "blip" v Sheffield United cost us third place.