Back from the game , Swansea home,

[Royalee]

a witless performance - we lacked creativity and any real sense of urgency. We have got to get (at least) someone who can play up front. why do we play 1 up front at home?

At least we had creativity under Rodgers even if Madejski won't pay for a striker.

yes we had so much "creativity under Rodgers" in the first half of the season we needed some dreadful football and quite a lot of "goals" to avoid relegation and finish in the top ten.

You clown.

Easy to play safe and mix it up to heroically fail to make the playoffs only to stagnate the following season. The irony amongst our fans is hilarious.

[Maguire]

Basically LOL at all the h8ers. Firmly put in your place by Brendan today. Easily better than us.

[knobby_1871]

come on folks tell us drifters what it was like, sounded dire on BBC Berks, shot shy?

IMHO started first 20 mins well pressing well up the field, Swansea make a change and suddenley we look like the away team, no ideas, prob 2-3 attempts ontarget max

Griffin, Harte, Long, Feds played well Hunt looked hungry when he came on.

The rest, poor

As for Jobi did not look like he wanted to be there at all and def not a replacement for Gylfi in the hole. Also thought Amstrong and HRK were well below average

Swansea fans were in good voice and nice moment when Brenda responded to give us a wave chants

Are you fecking kidding me!!!!

The only players to come out with any credit were Karacan, Feds, Harte and Jobi. Jobi was all over the place trying to make things happen, Karacan was his usual busy self, feds was solid and harte was assured at the back (nothing he can do about being beaten by pace).

What game were you watching mate!!

The rest were dire. Griffin to a lesser extent.

I can only hope this is a fishing trip, Kracan was woeful with passing all over the place (bad day at office), Jobi went missing apart from one shot , you need a visit to specsavers mate

[Jackson Corner]

4-5-1 at home the 1 being a player who hasn't scored from open play in 11 games. You sell your best player and top goal scorer and replace him with a 33 year old left back. Two ageing full backs who only crossed the half way line at half and full time. Not rocket science, very much the same as the Ipswich game we got lucky there, we can expect a lot more of this dross between now and May.

[gazzer, loyal royal]

Well a dire performance that was.

An awful bit of defending for their goal from Griffin running a full 5 yards behind the other defenders to play Sinclair onside. The thing was he'd done it 5 minutes before as well. It was very harsh for Cummins to lose his place based on Griffin's performance.

HRK should have been taken off at half time. He did nothing, and I'm not sure how Brian Howard didn't get on the pitch.

There was no creativity again today, we rely so heavily on Kebe now and when his performance is flat so is ours. If we are going to play 4-5-1, which i have no problem with, we need a creative midfielder now.

[under the tin]

I just don't get the "we were outplayed" stuff.
First half, we played a good pressing game, high up the pitch, and Swansea were playing tippy tappy in their own half. I can only recall them getting into our final third three times, and one of those was the breakaway, caused by a slip at a vital time by Karacan, a good pass to their striker, and a good finish.
Kebe had a good opening 15 minutes, then faded. As everything of note that we created was coming through him, when he goes AWOL, we look toothless.

Second half, Brian obviously told them to start quickly, and a little bit of the pressing game discipline disappeared, resulting in Swansea being able to play their stuff in our half of the pitch. In a mad five minutes, we could have easily conceded another goal or two, but the discipline returned, and thereafter, Feds was largely a spectator.
We huffed and puffed, but Kebe's delivery was not what it could have been, and HRK has a penchant for running into blind alleys.

Seems to me that there is an element of predictability in our play, and the opposition are sussing out that the only true creativity we have is down the flanks, and if you cut off the supply at source........

I think that we need a threat for the opposition to worry about coming through the middle, a player who can carry the ball, and fall over an outstretched leg a, la SHunt, so we can utilise the dead ball firepower of the likes of Harte, for instance.
I'd go for Tabb or Khiz in this role.
Failing that, scrap the system, buy a striker, and go 442.

[Trainspotter]

So agree with the post above. Sometimes makes you woder which game people were at!
Kebe is our only unpredictable player, with Jobi to a lesser extent. When they don't function, neither do we. Swansea were typical Rogers - lots of passing with little end product. But so were we to a certain extent. What is the point of putting over even the best crosses if no one is there. Get two up front, one of which must be Hunt, and ideally, a loan player who isnt all just running.

[readingbedding]

2nd win ever for Rodgers at our ground.
He really has a thing going on doesn't he.

[Snowball]

I just don't get the "we were outplayed" stuff.
First half, we played a good pressing game, high up the pitch, and Swansea were playing tippy tappy in their own half. I can only recall them getting into our final third three times, and one of those was the breakaway, caused by a slip at a vital time by Karacan, a good pass to their striker, and a good finish.
Kebe had a good opening 15 minutes, then faded. As everything of note that we created was coming through him, when he goes AWOL, we look toothless. // Second half, Brian obviously told them to start quickly, and a little bit of the pressing game discipline disappeared, resulting in Swansea being able to play their stuff in our half of the pitch. In a mad five minutes, we could have easily conceded another goal or two, but the discipline returned, and thereafter, Feds was largely a spectator.
We huffed and puffed, but Kebe's delivery was not what it could have been, and HRK has a penchant for running into blind alleys. // Seems to me that there is an element of predictability in our play, and the opposition are sussing out that the only true creativity we have is down the flanks, and if you cut off the supply at source........ // I think that we need a threat for the opposition to worry about coming through the middle, a player who can carry the ball, and fall over an outstretched leg a, la SHunt, so we can utilise the dead ball firepower of the likes of Harte, for instance. // I'd go for Tabb or Khiz in this role. //Failing that, scrap the system, buy a striker, and go 442.

Smack on. Good analysis, dealing with the actualities and not merely going with the score-line

What worries me is we push and hope more than have specific moves to open defences.

[RoyalBlue]

I thought the goal was Griffin's fault.
Long and Karacan were tireless, Kebe was OK, and 442 at the end got us close to an equaliser.
Mills was poor, Armstrong was anonymous and MacAnuff is better on the wing.

I thought the goal was a bit lucky. Karacan slipped at a vital moment, then Feds went to ground leaving Sinclair with an open goal... though someone should probably have stopped him a bit sooner.

Looked like Feds committed too early and made it easy for Sinclair. You're meant to stand big for as long as possible in 1 on 1 situations, something USA was good at. It's possible that Feds slipped and then had to commit, in which case it was pay back for the silly game of soaking the pitch before kick off!

Tip for the bald one. Rather than going to all the trouble of considering what effect the sprinklers can have on the pitch, you'd be better off concentrating on the effect your players can have on the green stuff!

[Svlad Cjelli]

I'd say that we were tactically outplayed in the way Swansea played the ball around at the back, tempting us to come forward and chase the ball, and as soon as they did they quickly moved it forward into the space in midfield we'd just given up. Clever play, but also fairly standard Brendan Rodgers tactics - except that the Swansea back four looked much better passing the ball around than ours ever did a year ago!

It looks like Brendan has had the good fortune to go to a team where the players are able to play his system - things went so wrong here because he tried to impose his system onto players who couldn't/wouldn't play it.

But surely we'd have known that a Rodgers team would do this? (I can't believe that every single copy of the "bumper book of tactics" was pulped last Dec). So sending out a team that was trying to man-for-man mark in midfield makes no sense to me. Swansea were all about keeping possession, and we couldn't man-for-man mark and chase the ball at the same time. As soon as the midfield broke ranks Swansea were behind us, but if they didn't break ranks we had nothing of the ball. Game, set and match to Swansea, especially once they scored.

[facaldaqui]

Well a dire performance that was.

An awful bit of defending for their goal from Griffin running a full 5 yards behind the other defenders to play Sinclair onside. The thing was he'd done it 5 minutes before as well. It was very harsh for Cummins to lose his place based on Griffin's performance.

They were ragged; the middle two were ahead of the outer two. If Matt and Zurab are going to push up like that they need to close down. No cohesion on that occasion.

[Millsy]

a witless performance - we lacked creativity and any real sense of urgency. We have got to get (at least) someone who can play up front. why do we play 1 up front at home?

At least we had creativity under Rodgers even if Madejski won't pay for a striker.

Managaing to drag a playoff team down into relegation certainly takes some, um, 'creativity'.

[Royalee]

a witless performance - we lacked creativity and any real sense of urgency. We have got to get (at least) someone who can play up front. why do we play 1 up front at home?

At least we had creativity under Rodgers even if Madejski won't pay for a striker.

Managaing to drag a playoff team down into relegation certainly takes some, um, 'creativity'.

We didn't have a playoff team, we finished mid table and we weren't in the relegation zone when Rodgers was sacked. Rodgers also wasn't able to sign the experience of Griffin and Zurab when he was here, although he did help the club make £7 million by doing what Coppell didn't have the bottle to do and blooding the youngsters.

[Millsy]

Brian lost that one. He was out-thought tactically by Rodgers, and we were outplayed until he finally realised that we needed to go 4-4-2.

Agree 100% about needing to go 4-4-2 and realising this FAR too latebut I'm not sure where to direct that criticism....

Whilst I claim "brian cost us" I do so for him not moving quickly enough to a 4-4-2 once we were losing at home.

Whilst I'm no fan of starting with one striker at home (when that striker is Long - eg Forster would've been fine!), my criticism there goes to Madejski for obvious reasons.

The lone striker system was looking ok and I lost count of the number of chances we had and then they go and nick one with total luck and completely against the run of play. Having said that perhaps we'd have done better starting 4-4-2 who knows.

Poor old Brian made his clearest statement yet that he needs a striker by attributing the defeat to Swansea being able to buy a striker. Probably going to be struck of Madejski's Christmas card list for that cheeky hint.... Go figure!

[LoyalRoyalFan]

What happened in Y19 yesterday?

[Alan Partridge]

Basically LOL at all the h8ers. Firmly put in your place by Brendan today. Easily better than us.

So basically the same as Swansea have been for the last few seasons then really. Albeit not always in result but their play has been that much better. Swansea just needed a goalscorer, in Sinclair he seems to have found one. You do wonder why he didn't try and pick him up whilst he was Reading manager, instead going to Chelsea and giving them money for Shaun Cummings and signing Rasiak from Watford.

I don't agree Reading had 'creativity' under Rodgers. In fact that was the one thing his side didn't have, that and any sort of defensive disclipline. But mainly creativity. Didn't score a goal for the first 4 or so league games.

One thing is for sure with Brendan he must pinch himself at the opportunity he's got at Swansea. A stable side that's been together for 4-5 years, they play good football, they have played 'his' way (4-5-1/4-3-3) for the last 4 years, no unrealistic expectation and financially stable. If he fails there then he needs shooting.

He may have been the right man for the Reading job in 2-3 years time once the turmoil had gone, but at the time and has been proven it was the absolute correct decision to replace him with Heston.

[Millsy]

Managaing to drag a playoff team down into relegation certainly takes some, um, 'creativity'.

We didn't have a playoff team, we finished mid table and we weren't in the relegation zone when Rodgers was sacked. Rodgers also wasn't able to sign the experience of Griffin and Zurab when he was here, although he did help the club make £7 million by doing what Coppell didn't have the bottle to do and blooding the youngsters.

An inexperienced scout takes the same players from relegation to just outside the playoffs in less than a season... that's gotta be embarrassing.

Word of advice. When you were proven to be so horribly wrong about one manager, don't go attracting attention to the fact constantly and certainly don't go trying to defend yourself being even more horribly wrong about another! Some of what you say about other stuff is spot on, but judging managers is is certainly not your strong point.

[Alan Partridge]

At least we had creativity under Rodgers even if Madejski won't pay for a striker.

Managaing to drag a playoff team down into relegation certainly takes some, um, 'creativity'.

We didn't have a playoff team, we finished mid table and we weren't in the relegation zone when Rodgers was sacked. Rodgers also wasn't able to sign the experience of Griffin and Zurab when he was here, although he did help the club make £7 million by doing what Coppell didn't have the bottle to do and blooding the youngsters.

Why didn't he sign them then? Because nothing changed in terms of players out to finance those two buys.

Rodgers decided that Tabb at right back was good enough for CCC football, then he spent money on Cummings before going back to Tabb. He tried playing a season without a decent right back. He also thought Alex Pearce was 'the new John Terry' and made him captain.

It wasn't coincidence that as soon as Heston bought in 2 experienced proven defenders results picked up. If Rodgers had done that he may have turned things around.

LOL @ he made the club £7million. More a case of said players wanting out and the club moving them on. Whoever was in charge would have been forced into those moves. Rodgers had money to spend here, much more than a lot of CCC clubs.

[facaldaqui]

Basically LOL at all the h8ers. Firmly put in your place by Brendan today. Easily better than us.

So basically the same as Swansea have been for the last few seasons then really. Albeit not always in result but their play has been that much better. Swansea just needed a goalscorer, in Sinclair he seems to have found one. You do wonder why he didn't try and pick him up whilst he was Reading manager, instead going to Chelsea and giving them money for Shaun Cummings and signing Rasiak from Watford.

Well, he was trying to sign Tommy Smith. I'm sort of glad he didn't because Smith was overpriced and may not have made much difference to the results. In a way, Brian is now in a similar position to what Brendan was, because he tried to sign a striker in the summer and failed--meaning he lacks a piece in his jigsaw. Yesterday he said, "we lacked a cutting edge and we need to address that". I hope that means he will be allowed to borrow someone: there are good strikers swilling about waiting for a chance--Varney was an example till recently.

Sometimes you don't need to be a football expert to see what needs to be done. A football team without goalstriking forwards is a weird affair and even if it works sometimes isn't sustainable. The great thing about a real striker--a Chappell, a Quinn, even a Cureton--is that they suddenly get you a goal on their own initiative. We never poach a goal nowadays, though we at least poach penalties.

Another factor--though it's not something that need concern Brian in itself--is the sheer entertainment and charisma that a goalscoring forward brings to a club, like a lead singer brings to a band. It's so exciting when a club brings in a new forward, but it's so long since we've had that excitement. It's been made plain to us that Long and Church are the foreseeable future. I just find that depressing. Nothing against these two but I see them as good subs to have--third or fourth choice forwards at best. They're not prolific and never will be: it's only too obvious.