Burnley v Reading Match Thread

[Elmer Park]

A few observations on the game having only listened to a radio commentary and watched the highlights on TV.

It sounded like we played well and deserved the win.

I know I am biased when it come to referees decisions and so are the radio commentators but the foul on Long for the penalty was a red card offence and like all fans the Burnley fans and Management who have been moaning about the referee seem to have forgotten this decision went in their favour. It was definitely inside the box despite their protestations. Although I have seen them given I thought Mills won the ball on the incident which Burnley claimed a penalty and Iwelumo went over after that. I understand they also had another shout for one which I haven't seen. Cort's second yellow was justified although the referee was pressured into issuing it by several Reading players. In a way we shouldn't like to see that but it showed our lads were really up for this one.

Overall sounded like a pretty complete performance although two of our four goals were mishit. It was disappointing to see that Churchy's was an attempted cross and not the fantastic finish they said on the radio but I hope he can still take some confidence from getting a goal.

Although Tabb has been picked out as Man of the Match for his performance, which I am not arguing with as I wasn't there, Long sounded like he had a an excellent game although he once again missed a couple of opportunities. If we had a Cureton or Kevin Phillips type they would love to play alongside Shane. Superbly taken penalty too.

It also sounded a little as though McAnuff benefited from returning to the right wing and maybe I have overlooked the fact that some of his dip in form could have been down to being asked to play on the left, as well as the times he has played in other roles.

Nobody should get carried away with one very good performance and I hope we continue to look for a loan player but let's take some joy out of this win. That woman who called Radio Berkshire as well as a few posters on here seem almost angry that we won. The negative points may still be valid but there will be plenty of opportunities to discuss those during the season. Let's enjoy a win while we can.

[sandman]

Which genius decided that it wouldn't be a good idea to take extra players in case Kebe wasn't fit...oh yeah, McDermott.

Enjoying the Rodgers Revolution.

3rd, yep.

Funny how someone who accused Coppell of capitalising on a former manager's work at Reading can't see that Rodgers is doing the same thing at Swansea.

[Hoop Blah]

I was generally being facetious, but when I say forwards I don't mean the likes of McAnuff or Kebe, and I don't think that's what Zac meant by strikers either.

I knew exactly what you meant, and I didn't call either of those two strikers either.

The two wider players whoever they are, clearly are bring utilised as wing forwards.

Church and long are the two strikers I was referring

I still don't see how a penalty and one going in off a spooned cross supports the via that if we 'create the chances the strikers will score' though.

[Terminal Boardom]

Funny how someone who accused Coppell of capitalising on former manager's work at Reading can't see that Rodgers is doing the same thing at Swansea.

That is because Royalpee is completely bitter and twisted. He is completely blinkered and refuses to acknowledge that BR was the wrong appointment at the time. Anything that Reading achieve post BR is because of what BR did. Sadly, I can not see Royalpee changing his tune.

[SLAMMED]

Why does Royalee love BR so much?

[Terminal Boardom]

Why does Royalee love BR so much?

All I can suggest is that he is one of the following:

1. He IS BR
2. He is related to BR
3. He is a close friend of BR

[Svlad Cjelli]

Why does Royalee love BR so much?

I thought it was because he hates Coppell so much.

[Kitson12]

Why does Royalee love BR so much?

I thought it was because he hates Coppell so much.

And Madejski.

[ZacNaloen]

I was generally being facetious, but when I say forwards I don't mean the likes of McAnuff or Kebe, and I don't think that's what Zac meant by strikers either.

I knew exactly what you meant, and I didn't call either of those two strikers either.

The two wider players whoever they are, clearly are bring utilised as wing forwards.

Church and long are the two strikers I was referring

I still don't see how a penalty and one going in off a spooned cross supports the via that if we 'create the chances the strikers will score' though.

Because we created chances and the strikers scored?

[Hoop Blah]

A fluke and a penalty doesn't make for compelling evidence for me, but each to their own I guess.

[ZacNaloen]

It's a stupid cliche, but if you want me justify it look at the recent match stats you can see that we usually have between 10 and 15 attempts at goal, but the problem with the last couple of games was that a lot of these ended up going off target. That wasn't the case yesterday, 10 were on target, this suggests then that the quality of the chance created was higher than we'd had previously, I have no doubt this was due to a more balanced midfield. If the average quality of the chance is higher, then the less you rely on wonder goals and the higher the likelihood one of the strikers will force penalties, get tap ins or in the case of church scuff it in. Either way we did a better job of getting the strikers in a position to do that yesterday.

Because both of them ended up on the score sheet.

[Snowball]

It's a stupid cliche, but if you want me justify it look at the recent match stats you can see that we usually have between 10 and 15 attempts at goal, but the problem with the last couple of games was that a lot of these ended up going off target. That wasn't the case yesterday, 10 were on target, this suggests then that the quality of the chance created was higher than we'd had previously, I have no doubt this was due to a more balanced midfield. If the average quality of the chance is higher, then the less you rely on wonder goals and the higher the likelihood one of the strikers will force penalties, get tap ins or in the case of church scuff it in. Either way we did a better job of getting the strikers in a position to do that yesterday.

Because both of them ended up on the score sheet.

Absolutely


No-one mentions how many of Gylfi's goals were pens or frees...


Long term the stats will say GOALS. End.

[Hoop Blah]

I've discussed the effect of set pieces on Sigurdssons goals a few times on here snowball, so pay attention!

As for creating more chances for the strikers and the respective quality of them, I didn't go to the game so couldn't really give a view, but I didn't get the impression that Long had many chances yesterday let alone a significant improvement on recent games.

[Snowball]

I've discussed the effect of set pieces on Sigurdssons goals a few times on here snowball, so pay attention!

As for creating more chances for the strikers and the respective quality of them, I didn't go to the game so couldn't really give a view, but I didn't get the impression that Long had many chances yesterday let alone a significant improvement on recent games.

He had better chances, the ball played forward in front of him

Got a pen, hit side netting, forced a good save.

The first chance, like at Bristol shows how (IMO) we should be playing him.


I still think (relatively) he is wasted as a target man in 4-5-1. He's "doing the job" but it's not his natural game

[ZacNaloen]

I've discussed the effect of set pieces on Sigurdssons goals a few times on here snowball, so pay attention!

As for creating more chances for the strikers and the respective quality of them, I didn't go to the game so couldn't really give a view, but I didn't get the impression that Long had many chances yesterday let alone a significant improvement on recent games.

Longs barely had any chances for weeks. And its partially his fault because he goes out wide a lot. but long is more likely to score from a cross or if he has a ball to run onto. he doesn't usually create his own chances back to goal but he did show of a Doyle style turn a couple of weeks ago, and he often runs out of ideas if there are defenders in front of him which are the situations he has found himself recently.

[Wycombe Royal]

but the problem with the last couple of games was that a lot of these ended up going off target. That wasn't the case yesterday, 10 were on target, this suggests then that the quality of the chance created was higher than we'd had previously,

We had 11 attempts on target against Bristol City, out of a total of 15.

[ZacNaloen]

I was referring to this system, we played 4-4-2 at Bristol iirc

[Snowball]

Shane is clearly down on his usual conversion rate, but with such a low goal tally
a goal or two would totally transform his figures. He's not guilty of some of the bad
misses Church has had. Note Harte's conversion rate!

1 in 03.00 03 shots for 1 goals Hal Robson-Kanu
1 in 03.50 07 shots for 2 goals Ian Harte
1 in 05.00 05 shots for 1 goals Michail Antonio
1 in 05.00 05 shots for 1 goals Alex Pearce
1 in 06.00 12 shots for 2 goals Gylfi Sigurdsson
1 in 06.00 12 shots for 2 goals Simon Church
1 in 06.25 27 shots for 4 goals Jimmy Kebe
1 in 09.00 09 Shots for 1 goals Matt Mills
1 in 10.50 21 shots for 2 goals Shane Long
1 in 15.00 15 shots for 1 goals Jem Karacan
1 in 23.00 23 shots for 1 goals Jobi McAnuff

05 shots for 0 goals Noel Hunt
12 shots for 0 goals Brian Howard