Ignoring the usual end of thread debacle because a Binner comes on because he can't get any response on his own board, I think the differences expressed by supporters of the same club, namely us and the misgnomer of half full half empty, were summed up by listening to the two managers after the game. CH thought we had done enough to finish them off and basically blamed the strikers for missing chances and Adkins blamed his players for not stopping us from set pieces, something they had identified as our strength. The game I saw was exciting because of the crowd intensity and noise but a lot of the football was tame. Reading I mistakenly assumed would come at us as anything less than a win meant they could be relegated on Monday evening. But for much of the game they seemed content to knock the ball about in midfield nd not threaten us. Our willingness to sit 9 behind the ball when we defended and let them have it, meant a good half of the game was played 15 yards either side of the halfway line. Once we had scored, for 20 minutes, we looked a class above them and created many opportunities. Holt and Kamara pulled their back four apart and Snodgrass was able to roam where he liked. Personally, I would have loved to have seen Hoolahan come on at that stage, the chance for someone with flair to punish their overworked and ever increasingly facing their own goal midfield. Even the goal was from something out of nothing and despite the balls movement in the air, I'm sure a shot that Bunn should have kept out. Unfortunately, for the next 15 minutes we tried to just hold onto the lead. DM thinks we did it to keep our shape but Tettey had a complete mare and put us in trouble so many times that an attacking option in Hoolahan wold probably been a better defensive move in the long run. So a game that both managers saw differently and they are supposed to be the experts. So how the hell are we expected to agree among ourselves?
Good suggestion there were moments where Hoolahan would have exploited the space they gave us. We tried to break down the flanks a lot at times we had three or so players stuck there, a roaming attacking midfielder would of worked wonders.
Tettey overloaded the middle,not his fault. CH and his team made the wrong call and caused the problem. Pilks should have been a straight swap for Benno.and Jacko for Holt. We completely lost our shape in last 15mins,all down to bad subs
I still think Hoolahan could have started instead of Howson. Granted that's an incredibly attacking line-up with effectively 5 attack-minded players on the pitch, but Johnson was brilliant, and Reading were slow attacking so we frequently had 8 or 9 behind the ball anyway.
I still find it most amusing that a bitter binner keeps telling us how to run a football team/club - when we're on the verge of a third season in the top flight - and they are squeaking their way to a thirteenth (13th ) season in division two (2) Bring it on, wellyblue
Ipswich are on the verge of imploding, they are so far away from a philosophy for success. The club has been built on nonsense from an owner desperate to escape.
I do hope that that phrase doesn't refer to me! Despite the laughs and banter that I have with you lot on this board I don't think you'll find a post of mine wishing relegation on you. You could call me a lot of things and you might be right about most of them, but bitter about your success? No, not me mate!
In fairness this is true. He may hang around here all Saturday during the game like a lost puppy but his intentions are not malicious (normally)
Apologies in advance, but, I was fairlyhappy with the performance. In the first 5 mins we had 3 shots at goal and were attacking Reading constantly. Yes we got lost a bit at times, but the last 3 games have shown me a glimmer of our old style. Elliot Bennett ran at them and had a good game, the same goes for Howson, never seen him so far forward, a big improvement from him (it was needed). Now Holty..... why oh why are people still knocking him, just about every chance we made came through him, certainly both our goals we down to his commitment, effort and can do attitude. My glass is better than half full now, really enjoyed the atmosphere. Well done team and supporters!
Holty took a knocking in the first half as he appeared to be mostly ineffective and out of the game but in the 2nd half he was a different beast, can't take that away from him EB and JH have had a couple of more encouraging performances of late, might make CH's job harder if he is thinking about recruiting new players.
Sorry mate, we see eye to eye on most things City but I disagree about Holt. I think he is becoming a liability. He gave a way so many silly free kicks when we were under the cosh, through our own making, in the last 20 minutes that he just handed back possession. I think he is feeling the strain of not being the head honcho. I think his ego is such that he is frustrated. He has been brilliant for three years and nobody can deny that. But I just think the endeavour is not getting him through games. But the risks he is taking in his tackling could leave us with 10 men on the pitch if he isn't careful.
It's OK to disagree with me Redruth, no problem with that at all, but, YOU'RE WRONG of course!! Who would lead the team, who would overtake the midfield chasing back, who would create the chances in the box......etc, Answer we don't have anyone to do that apart from him! Ryan Bennett's goal came from Holts header, Elliot Bennets goal came from Holts challenge on the centre back and keeper, he also had at least 3 other opportunities to score, 2 headers just over the bar, his frustration at missing them was evident and shows his commitment! Playing up front as the lone striker is a thankless task, I hate it, it's not what I want to see, but he does it week after week because it's the way Hughton want's us to play, it's not his fault!! The handing back posession bit is a tad harsh, that's Hoolahan's job, he does it every week when he's playing.
Actually..............................NO, just a educated guess! That bit was tongue in cheek, of course. No offence meant!
