MR. CYNICALMid Sussex Royal I read somewhere on X that we are the top away scorers in the league; if true, that's impressive given our general poor away form in recent years.
We must be near the top of away goals conceded in that case!
blythspartan LR is easily the best manager we’ve had since BM. We play like the 05/06 team, but without the pace and dynamism.
I love how for the first 20 minutes we lull opponents into thinking we’re shit and then we score against the run of play. It’s a great tactic and could win us a playoff final.
Elm Park Kid Reading all the Thomas Frank stuff got me thinking (dangerous, I know):
The standard response for fans is to blame any poor run of results on the manager. To say that someone else would get the team playing better and improve results. But - as fans are we saying that the 'average' manager would do better and that we're just unlucky to currently have a bad one? Or are we saying that the club needs a specific type of manager blaming the recruitment process for not finding them? Are we saying that it's just a numbers game and we need to keep chopping and changing until we find the 'right one'?
Is it ever the case that a poor run of results isn't the manager's fault? Is it ever the case that the team can look absolutely awful on the pitch and it has little to do with team select/tactics etc? Can you sometimes say the manager isn't doing great, but it's unlikely that things would improve if we changed?
And why do we have so much confidence as fans that we know what the problem is? Sure, losing games is an obvious sign that things are going wrong. But, patients dying on an operating table is a sign of something going wrong - it doesn't mean that I would feel confident telling the surgeons what they should have done instead. Why would anyone on here think that they understand team selection or tactics better than any of our managers? It's kind of ridiculous when you think about it.
Elm Park Kid Reading all the Thomas Frank stuff got me thinking (dangerous, I know):
The standard response for fans is to blame any poor run of results on the manager. To say that someone else would get the team playing better and improve results. But - as fans are we saying that the 'average' manager would do better and that we're just unlucky to currently have a bad one? Or are we saying that the club needs a specific type of manager blaming the recruitment process for not finding them? Are we saying that it's just a numbers game and we need to keep chopping and changing until we find the 'right one'?
Is it ever the case that a poor run of results isn't the manager's fault? Is it ever the case that the team can look absolutely awful on the pitch and it has little to do with team select/tactics etc? Can you sometimes say the manager isn't doing great, but it's unlikely that things would improve if we changed?
And why do we have so much confidence as fans that we know what the problem is? Sure, losing games is an obvious sign that things are going wrong. But, patients dying on an operating table is a sign of something going wrong - it doesn't mean that I would feel confident telling the surgeons what they should have done instead. Why would anyone on here think that they understand team selection or tactics better than any of our managers? It's kind of ridiculous when you think about it.
Elm Park Kid Reading all the Thomas Frank stuff got me thinking (dangerous, I know):
The standard response for fans is to blame any poor run of results on the manager. To say that someone else would get the team playing better and improve results. But - as fans are we saying that the 'average' manager would do better and that we're just unlucky to currently have a bad one? Or are we saying that the club needs a specific type of manager blaming the recruitment process for not finding them? Are we saying that it's just a numbers game and we need to keep chopping and changing until we find the 'right one'?
Is it ever the case that a poor run of results isn't the manager's fault? Is it ever the case that the team can look absolutely awful on the pitch and it has little to do with team select/tactics etc? Can you sometimes say the manager isn't doing great, but it's unlikely that things would improve if we changed?
And why do we have so much confidence as fans that we know what the problem is? Sure, losing games is an obvious sign that things are going wrong. But, patients dying on an operating table is a sign of something going wrong - it doesn't mean that I would feel confident telling the surgeons what they should have done instead. Why would anyone on here think that they understand team selection or tactics better than any of our managers? It's kind of ridiculous when you think about it.
Clyde1998Elm Park Kid Reading all the Thomas Frank stuff got me thinking (dangerous, I know):
The standard response for fans is to blame any poor run of results on the manager. To say that someone else would get the team playing better and improve results. But - as fans are we saying that the 'average' manager would do better and that we're just unlucky to currently have a bad one? Or are we saying that the club needs a specific type of manager blaming the recruitment process for not finding them? Are we saying that it's just a numbers game and we need to keep chopping and changing until we find the 'right one'?
Is it ever the case that a poor run of results isn't the manager's fault? Is it ever the case that the team can look absolutely awful on the pitch and it has little to do with team select/tactics etc? Can you sometimes say the manager isn't doing great, but it's unlikely that things would improve if we changed?
And why do we have so much confidence as fans that we know what the problem is? Sure, losing games is an obvious sign that things are going wrong. But, patients dying on an operating table is a sign of something going wrong - it doesn't mean that I would feel confident telling the surgeons what they should have done instead. Why would anyone on here think that they understand team selection or tactics better than any of our managers? It's kind of ridiculous when you think about it.
Agree with this.
The one reason I've heard as to why managers get sacked is they're the easy option to get rid of. You're not going to sack the players and the ownership/leadership aren't going to take any responsibility for structural failings. As the manager is the public face of the club, sacking them allows the owner to make it seem like they're taking action without actually doing anything meaningful. This is especially the case now managers are often just glorified coaches in modern football.
tmesisClyde1998Elm Park Kid Reading all the Thomas Frank stuff got me thinking (dangerous, I know):
The standard response for fans is to blame any poor run of results on the manager. To say that someone else would get the team playing better and improve results. But - as fans are we saying that the 'average' manager would do better and that we're just unlucky to currently have a bad one? Or are we saying that the club needs a specific type of manager blaming the recruitment process for not finding them? Are we saying that it's just a numbers game and we need to keep chopping and changing until we find the 'right one'?
Is it ever the case that a poor run of results isn't the manager's fault? Is it ever the case that the team can look absolutely awful on the pitch and it has little to do with team select/tactics etc? Can you sometimes say the manager isn't doing great, but it's unlikely that things would improve if we changed?
And why do we have so much confidence as fans that we know what the problem is? Sure, losing games is an obvious sign that things are going wrong. But, patients dying on an operating table is a sign of something going wrong - it doesn't mean that I would feel confident telling the surgeons what they should have done instead. Why would anyone on here think that they understand team selection or tactics better than any of our managers? It's kind of ridiculous when you think about it.
Agree with this.
The one reason I've heard as to why managers get sacked is they're the easy option to get rid of. You're not going to sack the players and the ownership/leadership aren't going to take any responsibility for structural failings. As the manager is the public face of the club, sacking them allows the owner to make it seem like they're taking action without actually doing anything meaningful. This is especially the case now managers are often just glorified coaches in modern football.
Fans have just been conditioned now to think any downturn is results is unacceptable, and the manager should be sacked. New managers are expected to hit the ground running, improve results, and maintain that improvement, or they need to be sacked too. The minimum expectation rarely sees to tally up with the reality of a club's situation.
It's not just about sacking. If we are a goal down at half time, the team will be booed off. If they lose, they will be booed off. Fans have always booed, but it used to be reserved for very bad performances, not just every single disappointment.
so I suspect it will actually mean something up there.
Snowflake RoyalElm Park Kid Reading all the Thomas Frank stuff got me thinking (dangerous, I know):
The standard response for fans is to blame any poor run of results on the manager. To say that someone else would get the team playing better and improve results. But - as fans are we saying that the 'average' manager would do better and that we're just unlucky to currently have a bad one? Or are we saying that the club needs a specific type of manager blaming the recruitment process for not finding them? Are we saying that it's just a numbers game and we need to keep chopping and changing until we find the 'right one'?
Is it ever the case that a poor run of results isn't the manager's fault? Is it ever the case that the team can look absolutely awful on the pitch and it has little to do with team select/tactics etc? Can you sometimes say the manager isn't doing great, but it's unlikely that things would improve if we changed?
And why do we have so much confidence as fans that we know what the problem is? Sure, losing games is an obvious sign that things are going wrong. But, patients dying on an operating table is a sign of something going wrong - it doesn't mean that I would feel confident telling the surgeons what they should have done instead. Why would anyone on here think that they understand team selection or tactics better than any of our managers? It's kind of ridiculous when you think about it.
Its a good post, and criticisms do need to keep in mind that just because something does appear to be wrong doesn't mean something different will actually improve things.
But I do think it is quite possible for reasonably intelligent and engaged fans, with plenty of experience watching professional football, can spot things that are wrong. It would be ridiculous to say that's impossible. Of course we're not the right people to fix those things, but that doesn't mean that ideas on what should be fixed and broadly how are without value.
You've only to take examples from previous seasons. Many people could see that early on under Selles that things weren't working. The shape was harming us in terms of results and performances. It was said at the time. And then he made changes, that were along the lines of some suggested on here, and we dramatically improved.
Take a less clear cut case of Ince. He relied on mediocre journeymen, and appeared to give his son carte blanche to say and act how he wanted to the detriment of the team. Would playing more of our Academy players have worked better - in the short term at best slightly maybe, but longer term their development would have been better and they'd have been better placed to be released or contribute straightaway in L1. These were things said at the time.
stealthpapesSnowflake RoyalElm Park Kid Reading all the Thomas Frank stuff got me thinking (dangerous, I know):
The standard response for fans is to blame any poor run of results on the manager. To say that someone else would get the team playing better and improve results. But - as fans are we saying that the 'average' manager would do better and that we're just unlucky to currently have a bad one? Or are we saying that the club needs a specific type of manager blaming the recruitment process for not finding them? Are we saying that it's just a numbers game and we need to keep chopping and changing until we find the 'right one'?
Is it ever the case that a poor run of results isn't the manager's fault? Is it ever the case that the team can look absolutely awful on the pitch and it has little to do with team select/tactics etc? Can you sometimes say the manager isn't doing great, but it's unlikely that things would improve if we changed?
And why do we have so much confidence as fans that we know what the problem is? Sure, losing games is an obvious sign that things are going wrong. But, patients dying on an operating table is a sign of something going wrong - it doesn't mean that I would feel confident telling the surgeons what they should have done instead. Why would anyone on here think that they understand team selection or tactics better than any of our managers? It's kind of ridiculous when you think about it.
Its a good post, and criticisms do need to keep in mind that just because something does appear to be wrong doesn't mean something different will actually improve things.
But I do think it is quite possible for reasonably intelligent and engaged fans, with plenty of experience watching professional football, can spot things that are wrong. It would be ridiculous to say that's impossible. Of course we're not the right people to fix those things, but that doesn't mean that ideas on what should be fixed and broadly how are without value.
You've only to take examples from previous seasons. Many people could see that early on under Selles that things weren't working. The shape was harming us in terms of results and performances. It was said at the time. And then he made changes, that were along the lines of some suggested on here, and we dramatically improved.
Take a less clear cut case of Ince. He relied on mediocre journeymen, and appeared to give his son carte blanche to say and act how he wanted to the detriment of the team. Would playing more of our Academy players have worked better - in the short term at best slightly maybe, but longer term their development would have been better and they'd have been better placed to be released or contribute straightaway in L1. These were things said at the time.
Watching/reading Reading fans this season has put ‘reasonably intelligent and engaged’ sorely to the test.
Given what we’ve gone through, given that we’ve proof positive in taking the slower path and the rewards it can bring, both in recent history and more distant successes, this “want it all want it now” vibe that has pervaded this season has been insane.
It’s only going to get worse, isn’t it?
We can do “untrue truisms” on another thread, brought to you by “Nyambe and Roberts don’t cross the halfway line” and “just not sure what type of goals they’re trying to score”.
stealthpapesSnowflake RoyalElm Park Kid Reading all the Thomas Frank stuff got me thinking (dangerous, I know):
The standard response for fans is to blame any poor run of results on the manager. To say that someone else would get the team playing better and improve results. But - as fans are we saying that the 'average' manager would do better and that we're just unlucky to currently have a bad one? Or are we saying that the club needs a specific type of manager blaming the recruitment process for not finding them? Are we saying that it's just a numbers game and we need to keep chopping and changing until we find the 'right one'?
Is it ever the case that a poor run of results isn't the manager's fault? Is it ever the case that the team can look absolutely awful on the pitch and it has little to do with team select/tactics etc? Can you sometimes say the manager isn't doing great, but it's unlikely that things would improve if we changed?
And why do we have so much confidence as fans that we know what the problem is? Sure, losing games is an obvious sign that things are going wrong. But, patients dying on an operating table is a sign of something going wrong - it doesn't mean that I would feel confident telling the surgeons what they should have done instead. Why would anyone on here think that they understand team selection or tactics better than any of our managers? It's kind of ridiculous when you think about it.
Its a good post, and criticisms do need to keep in mind that just because something does appear to be wrong doesn't mean something different will actually improve things.
But I do think it is quite possible for reasonably intelligent and engaged fans, with plenty of experience watching professional football, can spot things that are wrong. It would be ridiculous to say that's impossible. Of course we're not the right people to fix those things, but that doesn't mean that ideas on what should be fixed and broadly how are without value.
You've only to take examples from previous seasons. Many people could see that early on under Selles that things weren't working. The shape was harming us in terms of results and performances. It was said at the time. And then he made changes, that were along the lines of some suggested on here, and we dramatically improved.
Take a less clear cut case of Ince. He relied on mediocre journeymen, and appeared to give his son carte blanche to say and act how he wanted to the detriment of the team. Would playing more of our Academy players have worked better - in the short term at best slightly maybe, but longer term their development would have been better and they'd have been better placed to be released or contribute straightaway in L1. These were things said at the time.
Watching/reading Reading fans this season has put ‘reasonably intelligent and engaged’ sorely to the test.
Given what we’ve gone through, given that we’ve proof positive in taking the slower path and the rewards it can bring, both in recent history and more distant successes, this “want it all want it now” vibe that has pervaded this season has been insane.
It’s only going to get worse, isn’t it?
We can do “untrue truisms” on another thread, brought to you by “Nyambe and Roberts don’t cross the halfway line” and “just not sure what type of goals they’re trying to score”.
Clyde1998stealthpapesSnowflake Royal Its a good post, and criticisms do need to keep in mind that just because something does appear to be wrong doesn't mean something different will actually improve things.
But I do think it is quite possible for reasonably intelligent and engaged fans, with plenty of experience watching professional football, can spot things that are wrong. It would be ridiculous to say that's impossible. Of course we're not the right people to fix those things, but that doesn't mean that ideas on what should be fixed and broadly how are without value.
You've only to take examples from previous seasons. Many people could see that early on under Selles that things weren't working. The shape was harming us in terms of results and performances. It was said at the time. And then he made changes, that were along the lines of some suggested on here, and we dramatically improved.
Take a less clear cut case of Ince. He relied on mediocre journeymen, and appeared to give his son carte blanche to say and act how he wanted to the detriment of the team. Would playing more of our Academy players have worked better - in the short term at best slightly maybe, but longer term their development would have been better and they'd have been better placed to be released or contribute straightaway in L1. These were things said at the time.
Watching/reading Reading fans this season has put ‘reasonably intelligent and engaged’ sorely to the test.
Given what we’ve gone through, given that we’ve proof positive in taking the slower path and the rewards it can bring, both in recent history and more distant successes, this “want it all want it now” vibe that has pervaded this season has been insane.
It’s only going to get worse, isn’t it?
We can do “untrue truisms” on another thread, brought to you by “Nyambe and Roberts don’t cross the halfway line” and “just not sure what type of goals they’re trying to score”.
I put a lot of it down to social media. It encourages people to form opinions about topics they have little knowledge of quickly and doing so in as short a time as possible. You simply cannot have nuanced discussions with people. People don't have attention spans long enough to wait.
Also, people have access to social media all the time. There's no period where people can step back and reflect. Going back before smart phones, people had (at the very least) the period it took them to get home in order to digest what they'd just seen. People often put their opinions online during the game and stick with them. They may not even be watching the game fully because they're too busy on their phones too.
Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], Vision and 295 guests
