Well Beefy, I thought we were still throwing the kitchen sink at Reading even after our second goal. We could have been out of sight long ago if Kamara has his shooting boots on but I was at the game and it didn't look like we were backing off that much to me. Guess there is no pleasing some people though.
Kitchen sink maybe a tap and a plug for a wee while. If throwing the kitchen sink hiw can there be a yawning chasm between midfield and attack? We got the result, which is all that matters, but there was a good deal iif room for improvement
In fairness, KK had 3 cracking shots on target but was denied by McCarthy. At least the 2nd one led to the corner for the first goal, when Holt's cracking header was parried to Ryan Bennett. I thought it was a good attacking performance, but the mid-field passing could have been better at times. Hope Turner's injury isn't bad, but at least Ryan Bennett played well when he came on and scored the first goal to boot! At least Martin can play CB if need be.
No one is saying that there weren't good efforts and with a wee bit of luck that we could have been 3 or 4 up after 15-20 minutes of the second half, but then we sat back WHY? Alternatively, I'll just say we were fecking great and there is no way we could do better, but how defeatist would that sort of attitude be?
We sat back because at the end of the day, Reading want to win the game as we do and it is inevitable they will see some of the ball. If we only apply pressure from deep and hold our shape chance are we will be able to see out the win. If we put on really high pressure, Reading will find spaces and play through them and then we are at risk of conceding.
I agree they wanted to win the game but we had them on the ropes, if we got the third goal we could of put that game to bed that's all, there is no need for a load of tension having fans worrying and wishing for the final whistle.
Yes, but Reading want a goal just as much as we do. At the end of the day, the risk of conceding is far greater if we hold our shape then if we go for a third. So you can't blame Hughton for taking the option most likely to yield three points. Our players are limited by the fact that they are human, we can't just click our fingers and score a goal...
They were all over the place at the time just saying that I would of liked to of seen us capitalise on the ensuing chaos which was happening. The game would of been over at three. Yes, but nobody can deny there was a good chance we would of scored another, if we kept the tempo going and kept the ball on the deck like we did at the start of the halves.
why did we sit back for 45 minutes in total then, with no coherent shape or linkage between the defence and midfield, Sitting back is not about just hoofing it forward, and we have done it much much better than we did against Reading, such as against Man utd, held formation throughout, played to feet, moved and offered opportunities/outlets- that went missing for far too long in the match. BUT WE FECKING WON AND GOT 3 POINTS. but we were pretty poor for large segments of the game.
Reading were/are the already relegated bottom team in the Prem, you were at home against them, you were woeful, you scraped a painful win, Villa will beat you...
Yeah, there would have been a better chance of us scoring but as I have said, playing with defensive sensibility gives us more chance of winning the game, there is no need for a third goal if you are pedantic. Would it be more entertaining if we had? Yes, but I am happy I got my money's worth from that game anyway.
Well that's the first time I've had to ever use the ignore feature on any forum. But I can't really take bitter, immature people.
I'd actually love to see you lot relegate Villa, we've got a lot of history with them that goes way back before PL!
Wishful thinking he's brilliant entertainment. Having to make do with you chaps is seeing me through though.
He was quality though, one of the most entertaining posters I''ve ever seen on this site, possibly any football forum come to that!
