Bristol City v Reading Match Day 11

[Mr Popodopolous]

4-4-2 with wingers is going to leave us undermanned in key areas- as the 2nd half especially showed.

However we started well enough- we should maybe have changed it sooner, when it was apparent that we were losing control.

[BS4 on Tour...]

1 hour ago, Robbored said:

Perhaps it’s worth considering why it was so dire at times........... Three games in a week.......A relatively young team with only three or four experienced players.

Reading were far better second 45. Obviously their manager had got into them but despite that they only created two  truly decent chances and City handled them pretty well I thought considering they were chasing the game.

Moore was excellent - what prospect he is and deserved MoM.

Fact is no team play scintillating football in every game but the bottom line is three points.

I agree with most of this Robbored - however, I disagree that we’ve only played ‘3 or 4 experienced players’ in the three games over the last week.

Rowe has over 400 games under his belt, Bentley over 270 games, Williams over 620 games, Baker over 220 games, Weimann over 280 games, Hunt over 300 games, Brownhill nearly 200 games and Fammy around 250 games - we’ve got a lot of experience in and around our squad ...

[Natchfever]

14 hours ago, Oops said:

First half was good, the second half was dire.

We went from 4-4-2 and dominant to 4-5-1 and happy to let them pressurize for 45 min's. 

Why not go 4-3-3 and seal the win with a few goals? Don't get me wrong, I'm happy with 3 points but the second half was awful

Defending a 1-0 lead at home, at half time, is asking for trouble.

I din't make it yesterday but did LJ get it wrong again, or were changes/tactics forced upon him ?

[Natchfever]

13 hours ago, BS4 on Tour... said:

I agree with most of this Robbored - however, I disagree that we’ve only played ‘3 or 4 experienced players’ in the three games over the last week.

Rowe has over 400 games under his belt, Bentley over 270 games, Williams over 620 games, Baker over 220 games, Weimann over 280 games, Hunt over 300 games, Brownhill nearly 200 games and Fammy around 250 games - we’ve got a lot of experience in and around our squad ...

Who in the championship doesn't play three games a week, and not many teams have the luxury of rotation so its usually the same players week in week out.

We do have a number of our best players out though so are doing very well results wise.

[Numero Uno]

3 minutes ago, Loon plage said:

I din't make it yesterday but did LJ get it wrong again, or were changes/tactics forced upon him ?

The one area of our team that cannot be rotated, due to injuries, is Centre Midfield. The one area of our team that looked physically ****** yesterday was Centre Midfield.........

[Numero Uno]

6 minutes ago, Loon plage said:

Who in the championship doesn't play three games a week, and not many teams have the luxury of rotation so its usually the same players week in week out.

We do have a number of our best players out though so are doing very well results wise.

How many 18 year old Centre Midfield players THROUGHOUT THE WORLD are playing three tough and physically demanding games per week at Championship level? I’ll answer - ONE.

[Natchfever]

4 minutes ago, Numero Uno said:

How many 18 year old Centre Midfield players THROUGHOUT THE WORLD are playing three tough and physically demanding games per week at Championship level? I’ll answer - ONE.

So playing Massengo every game is the reason why  the whole team is excused for being knackered ? I don't see that to be honest.

With respect you can't have any idea of how many 18 year olds are playing in comparable leagues THROUGHOUT THE WORLD but regardles of that, injuries or not, our 18 year old should be first on the team sheet until he definitely needs a rest, and I would like to think LJ would give him a break whether we have Nagy back or not if he needed it.

 

[Numero Uno]

4 minutes ago, Loon plage said:

So playing Massengo every game is the reason why  the whole team is excused for being knackered ? I don't see that to be honest.

With respect you can't have any idea of how many 18 year olds are playing in comparable leagues THROUGHOUT THE WORLD but regardles of that, injuries or not, our 18 year old should be first on the team sheet until he definitely needs a rest, and I would like to think LJ would give him a break whether we have Nagy back or not if he needed it.

 

If you read my earlier post I said that Massengo AND Brownhill were struggling physically yesterday compared to their usual high standards and with your Centre Mid only functioning at 90% I have no doubt whatsoever that affects the whole team. The biggest indicator of lack of sharpness is poorer touch than usual, I rest my case!!

[Natchfever]

1 minute ago, Numero Uno said:

If you read my earlier post I said that Massengo AND Brownhill were struggling physically yesterday compared to their usual high standards and with your Centre Mid only functioning at 90% I have no doubt whatsoever that affects the whole team.

OK fair point on the midfield.

My earlier post though asked if LJ got it wrong generally, or if tactics were forced on him during the game as some seem to be saying they couldn't understand his second half performance and he didn't take corrective measures until pretty late in the day . I had to give my ticket away so didn't make it so its a genuine question.

[Numero Uno]

1 minute ago, Loon plage said:

OK fair point on the midfield.

My earlier post though asked if LJ got it wrong generally, or if tactics were forced on him during the game as some seem to be saying they couldn't understand his second half performance and he didn't take corrective measures until pretty late in the day . I had to give my ticket away so didn't make it so its a genuine question.

I felt he could have brought Palmer on 10 minutes earlier. In hindsight Watkins would have been a better option than Semenyo. Could have played a straight 5 in midfield the way the game was going with Brownhill in particular running on treacle.

[Natchfever]

3 minutes ago, Numero Uno said:

I felt he could have brought Palmer on 10 minutes earlier. In hindsight Watkins would have been a better option than Semenyo. Could have played a straight 5 in midfield the way the game was going with Brownhill in particular running on treacle.

Thanks - what Dave Fevs said as I recall about that 5 in midfield. Watkins is a specimen and would surely have given Reading more to think about so that sounds a good shout.

[Red7]

10 minutes ago, Numero Uno said:

I felt he could have brought Palmer on 10 minutes earlier. In hindsight Watkins would have been a better option than Semenyo. Could have played a straight 5 in midfield the way the game was going with Brownhill in particular running on treacle.

If Brownhill is knackered and not running about like a man possessed, he loses his main and only outstanding attribute, in my book.
 
 

[italian dave]

15 hours ago, BobBobSuperBob said:

How about the great save of Bentleys first half 

The two free shots their lad with the funky dreads had from inside box in quick succession

Goaline scramble second half

Far post missed easy looking  chance  second half

Numerous penalty box scrambles 

 

Thats just off the top of my head  !

And we missed two equally presentable chances, Massengo and Palmer: several scrambles in their box, and we defended well as in got bodies in the way when they were in our box. 

Think all @Wanderingred is saying is that we had that little bit extra and that's what won it, and I tend to agree with that yesterday. 

[BobBobSuperBob]

6 minutes ago, italian dave said:

And we missed two equally presentable chances, Massengo and Palmer: several scrambles in their box, and we defended well as in got bodies in the way when they were in our box. 

Think all @Wanderingred is saying is that we had that little bit extra and that's what won it, and I tend to agree with that yesterday. 

Palmers was a great chance , Massengo’s no more than a half chance at best 

I don’t think there keeper had a save to make did he ?

Puskas managed to miscontrol a ball in from of an empty net and Bentley made two great saves , one in each half

Ejiria had two s opportunities from inside box first half 

Added to the constant pressure in the second half particularly and I’ll stick with my view that we were very fortunate Dave  !

[DT The Optimist]

Anyone else notice the performance of No 14 for Reading.  EJARIA.   I admit  I never heard of him.  Reminded me a bit of  our Jet with his style when at his best and on his game.

Thought he was  a real handful all game.  Just googled him and seen they got him on a season long loan from Liverpool played in premier.  

[Chivs]

15 hours ago, BobBobSuperBob said:

How about the great save of Bentleys first half 

The two free shots their lad with the funky dreads had from inside box in quick succession

Goaline scramble second half

Far post missed easy looking  chance  second half

Numerous penalty box scrambles 

 

Thats just off the top of my head  !

How about the Eliasson whizzed cross that Fam just missed?  Or the Weimann (I think) header just over? Or the Massengo effort on the edge of the box?

How about the Palmer effort at the end?  Or the free kick at the end?

[BobBobSuperBob]

3 minutes ago, Chivs said:

How about the Eliasson whizzed cross that Fam just missed? 

What when he was offside and a free kick given ?

Or the Weimann (I think) header just over?

Nowhere close - Well high and wide

Or the Massengo effort on the edge of the box?

covered that - please read post

How about the Palmer effort at the end? 

covered that - please read post

Or the free kick at the end?

Did I miss something  ? close shave or great save ?  A free kick now a good chance ?

 

[Roger Red Hat]

17 hours ago, robin_unreliant said:

It isn't fair on a young player to play him if he isn't ready for this level yet. It would be much better for his development to play at a lower level where he could make more impact and grow in confidence.

I just think the club aren't doing him any favours putting him in the team at this point in time. He may be great in a few years but you need to give him the best chance of getting there. It doesn't look to me like he is making much progress playing in our first team, although obviously it is only a couple of months into the season.

I agree. He looked totally lost yesterday when he came on. I don't think that will do him any good.

[italian dave]

35 minutes ago, BobBobSuperBob said:

Palmers was a great chance , Massengo’s no more than a half chance at best 

I don’t think there keeper had a save to make did he ?

Puskas managed to miscontrol a ball in from of an empty net and Bentley made two great saves , one in each half

Ejiria had two s opportunities from inside box first half 

Added to the constant pressure in the second half particularly and I’ll stick with my view that we were very fortunate Dave  !

Fair enough, and I get where you're coming from; at 20 mins it looked like we should be on course for a comfortable win. But that is never how football works. They tweaked it to cut off Eliasson's supply, and second half was always going to be a different game, not least because we came into the game on the back of two very tough away games in the previous 7 days (I was still exhausted yesterday from the journies and supporting, never mind playing!) while Reading had two home games and an extra days rest.

I just read this thread yesterday and couldn't help thinking back 3 years or so, when we were playing some decent football but losing, often not getting that bit of luck, rarely losing by more than a goal. In those days we were constantly getting told on here that fortune, margins of victory/defeat were irrelevant, what mattered was the score at 90 minutes and the league table. Now, we've won 1-0, and are 6th in the table, and apparently what matters is that we didn't play very well and we only won by the odd goal. 

Yes, we had experience in the side, but we also had a lot of inexperience, Moore, Massengo, Pereira, Semenyo. We had a back four with two young players in their first season at this level, a makeshift signing to cover injury and a player playing out of position. Yet we kept a clean sheet.

Missing our no 1 striker, Fam scored the winner, had a good game, and showed why he's got a better scoring record than most strikers at this level this season, and than many on here would like to admit.

And we DID still create chances; it's not fair of you to dismiss Weimann effort as "high and wide" but count their no 14s misses as evidence of the fact that we were lucky. They were high and wide too.

It wasn't always pretty, both sides had chances, we tired more than they did, but at the end of the day we had a player who could stick the ball in the net, and a keeper who could save the best they had to offer. We scored more times than they did, and we're higher up the table!! That's not just luck.

[BobBobSuperBob]

7 minutes ago, italian dave said:

Fair enough, and I get where you're coming from; at 20 mins it looked like we should be on course for a comfortable win. But that is never how football works. They tweaked it to cut off Eliasson's supply, and second half was always going to be a different game, not least because we came into the game on the back of two very tough away games in the previous 7 days (I was still exhausted yesterday from the journies and supporting, never mind playing!) while Reading had two home games and an extra days rest.

I just read this thread yesterday and couldn't help thinking back 3 years or so, when we were playing some decent football but losing, often not getting that bit of luck, rarely losing by more than a goal. In those days we were constantly getting told on here that fortune, margins of victory/defeat were irrelevant, what mattered was the score at 90 minutes and the league table. Now, we've won 1-0, and are 6th in the table, and apparently what matters is that we didn't play very well and we only won by the odd goal. 

Yes, we had experience in the side, but we also had a lot of inexperience, Moore, Massengo, Pereira, Semenyo. We had a back four with two young players in their first season at this level, a makeshift signing to cover injury and a player playing out of position. Yet we kept a clean sheet.

Missing our no 1 striker, Fam scored the winner, had a good game, and showed why he's got a better scoring record than most strikers at this level this season, and than many on here would like to admit.

And we DID still create chances; it's not fair of you to dismiss Weimann effort as "high and wide" but count their no 14s misses as evidence of the fact that we were lucky. They were high and wide too.

It wasn't always pretty, both sides had chances, we tired more than they did, but at the end of the day we had a player who could stick the ball in the net, and a keeper who could save the best they had to offer. We scored more times than they did, and we're higher up the table!! That's not just luck.

I’m really happy with three points and our current situation , and you aren’t 6th by luck, but that doesn’t also mean everything has to have to be viewed with bias

 but t I try and approach any assessment from a neutral point of view and yesterday Im sure we rode our luck

What we do have is some grit , and a fair few who will put their body on the line

I don’t know whether it was just a off day , tiredness, or quite what but i thought post 25-30 mins we were awful and don’t believe we will get away with that very often this season

r 

[Chivs]

Quote

How about the Eliasson whizzed cross that Fam just missed? 

What when he was offside and a free kick given ?

Or the Weimann (I think) header just over?

Nowhere close - Well high and wide

Or the Massengo effort on the edge of the box?

covered that - please read post

How about the Palmer effort at the end? 

covered that - please read post

Or the free kick at the end?

Did I miss something  ? close shave or great save ?  A free kick now a good chance ?

For @BobBobSuperBob, couldn't quote your reply...

Your post that I quoted didn't mention Massengo or Palmer at all.  Perhaps you mean you covered our chances in another post on this thread?

You are being one-eyed on this.  We were poor and Reading looked the more likely to score after 40 minutes.  However, you can't just ignore our chances.  You claim they had 2 free shots in the area but overlook our free kick (the clues in the name)!

Just looked up the stats: we had one less shot than them but the same number on target.

[Alex_BCFC]

2 hours ago, DT The Optimist said:

Anyone else notice the performance of No 14 for Reading.  EJARIA.   I admit  I never heard of him.  Reminded me a bit of  our Jet with his style when at his best and on his game.

Thought he was  a real handful all game.  Just googled him and seen they got him on a season long loan from Liverpool played in premier.  

I wouldn’t say he reminded me of JET but he was everywhere and looked class.