Reading vs Rovers

[Dagenham Rover]

Superspy wrote:

im pretty sure the 3rd goal was a direct free kick straight in, that reading should never had had in the first place, what can the players do about that.

sigh 4-3 reading.

Ball went out of play apparently Sod nearly sent to the stands doing his conkers with the officials

[VikingJames]

What does it matter whether it was a free kick or not? If we'd have defended properly for goals 1 and 2 then it wouldn't have been an issue.

So frustrating.

[goalkick]

obvious from start of season where we are lacking.cannot defend,good big c/h in middle needed.

[Filo]

mushRTID wrote:

Going on what the commentators have said and listening to the game myself......

SOD gets all the praise when things are going well but he must take the blame for this.

Oster was running the game, keeping the ball, making us tick. He goes off and we have barely touched the ball. Too eager to shut up shop when we are comfortable as we are.

Im gutted, its them poor fcukers who have gone all that way I feel sorry for. SOD has dropped a bollock.

 :angry:

He does it all the time, and then he bangs on in his interviews about doing the right things, well if you`re winning with 20 minutes to go, you must be doing the right things, why f**king change it! and invite pressure! we see it game in game out when we are winning!

We have thrown 3 points away today! angry is not the f**king word!

 :angry:  :angry:  :angry:  :angry:  :angry:  :angry:  :angry:  :angry:  :angry:

[donnypaul]

why folk moaning about sod taking oster of  ,, if you go to most games , he normally brings him of after 80  mins but you dont moan when we win

[DonnyNoel]

Gutting. Spoilt my evening already but that's football I guess and shows how we've changed at this level, I'm sure in that amazing spell in the first season we were much better at holding on to leads (although stats can obviously disprove that!). Can understand SOD trusting his defenders but I think it's becoming sadly the case that we lack the personnel (not just in defence) to be able to put men behind the ball and hold onto things. Maybe the constant enforced changes in defence over the course of the season haven't helped but with a couple of exceptions we just don't seem up to it at the back.

[nutwellrover of dublin]

like that 'one i was there' to the nil post of the year, what a waste of my reading time

[hoolahoop]

GUTTED and very ANGRY!!!!!

[i_ateallthepies]

mushRTID wrote:

Going on what the commentators have said and listening to the game myself......

SOD gets all the praise when things are going well but he must take the blame for this.

Oster was running the game, keeping the ball, making us tick. He goes off and we have barely touched the ball. Too eager to shut up shop when we are comfortable as we are.

Im gutted, its them poor fcukers who have gone all that way I feel sorry for. SOD has dropped a bollock.

 :angry:

I must add if Oster was injured i take it back, but it didnt sound that way.

But we weren't controlling the game by then were we?  Reading were dominating and a threat every time they went forward.  SOD had to do something, and Oster is subbed early every game so there must be a reason for that.

Frustrated though, we just don't have the personnel for defending at this level.

[DN5Rover]

hoolahoop wrote:

GUTTED and very ANGRY!!!!!

Think that about sums it up.

[Dutch Uncle]

Struggling to find a silver lining

Maybe Wolves beating Man C takes the pressure off McCarthy

[VikingJames]

If you take your playmaker off the field and no longer have someone who can put his foot on the ball and help to keep possession, then your ball retention is going to go down the pan and you end up losing the ball and under pressure. From that, it doesn't matter how many Centre-halves you put on because you'll be under constant waves of attack and eventually they're going to score with a defence as poor as ours. I can understand putting a defender on at 3-2 up considering that they threw 2 extra forwards on, but the wrong man came off it seems, as we completely lost the grip on the game from that point.

[Filo]

donnypaul wrote:

why folk moaning about sod taking oster of  ,, if you go to most games , he normally brings him of after 80  mins but you dont moan when we win

Excuse me! but i moan most times when he takes Oster off, and I think you`ll find it`s nearer the 70 minute mark when he takes him off. 20 minutes is too long to put pressure on your own defence, taking Oster off when he`s running the game is a massive, massive bollock!

 :angry:  :angry:  :angry:  :angry:  :angry:  :angry:

[mushRTID]

i_ateallthepies wrote:

mushRTID wrote:

Going on what the commentators have said and listening to the game myself......

SOD gets all the praise when things are going well but he must take the blame for this.

Oster was running the game, keeping the ball, making us tick. He goes off and we have barely touched the ball. Too eager to shut up shop when we are comfortable as we are.

Im gutted, its them poor fcukers who have gone all that way I feel sorry for. SOD has dropped a bollock.

 :angry:

I must add if Oster was injured i take it back, but it didnt sound that way.

But we weren't controlling the game by then were we?  Reading were dominating and a threat every time they went forward.  SOD had to do something, and Oster is subbed early every game so there must be a reason for that.

Frustrated though, we just don't have the personnel for defending at this level.

If thats the case il take it back. I thought we were but so much has happened in that game my timings may be out.

I still think he is too quick to throw on defenders though and i am still pissed off as much as i can ever remember at a result.

[I-was-there1976]

Rovers went defensive against Sheff U but they were that shocking they couldnt do anything about it.

Sod got the plaudits that day


Some you win some you lose

[Filo]

VikingJames wrote:

If you take your playmaker off the field and no longer have someone who can put his foot on the ball and help to keep possession, then your ball retention is going to go down the pan and you end up losing the ball and under pressure. From that, it doesn't matter how many Centre-halves you put on because you'll be under constant waves of attack and eventually they're going to score with a defence as poor as ours. I can understand putting a defender on at 3-2 up considering that they threw 2 extra forwards on, but the wrong man came off it seems, as we completely lost the grip on the game from that point.

Bang on!

 :angry:  :angry:  :angry:  :angry:  :angry:

[Boyhood dreams]

Filo wrote:

VikingJames wrote:

If you take your playmaker off the field and no longer have someone who can put his foot on the ball and help to keep possession, then your ball retention is going to go down the pan and you end up losing the ball and under pressure. From that, it doesn't matter how many Centre-halves you put on because you'll be under constant waves of attack and eventually they're going to score with a defence as poor as ours. I can understand putting a defender on at 3-2 up considering that they threw 2 extra forwards on, but the wrong man came off it seems, as we completely lost the grip on the game from that point.

Bang on!

 :angry:  :angry:  :angry:  :angry:  :angry:

True and we had 55% of possession, so it would have been even higher before Oster went off.

Sods dropped a bollock.

[Dagenham Rover]

VikingJames wrote:

What does it matter whether it was a free kick or not? If we'd have defended properly for goals 1 and 2 then it wouldn't have been an issue.

So frustrating.

It matters as yet again basic decisions are got wrong,
These are the decisions that cost managers there jobs, teams promotion and relegation and millions of pounds

Wether we were defending well or not, we would not have lost except for the referee and linesman getting a basic decision wrong.
and by what the commentators said the linesman went extremely red faced when the ref played on but didn't have the balls to do anything

[ScillyRover]

As much as I agree about everything said about John Oster, the more blatantly obvious is that we need to shore up that defence urgently.
JR has hinted that money can be found in the search for a temporary sub for Billy... why the hell isn't the money forthcoming for at least one good centre back. This weakness has been apparent for ages and is costing us dearly.

[Akinfenwa]

Wasn't the free-kick that led to our 2nd goal debatable?

[Boyhood dreams]

I-was-there1976 wrote:

Rovers went defensive against Sheff U but they were that shocking they couldnt do anything about it.

Sod got the plaudits that day


Some you win some you lose

I hate it when we sit back because we just cant defend. It just invites teams to come on heavy and it has cost us more times.

Shutting up shop should work if your players get a foot in but players run at us and usually straight through us!

[I-was-there1976]

there was also a query as to whether Rovers 2nd goal was a foul leading to the freekick


That came from Jaquie Oatley or whatever she s called on BBC

[VikingJames]

Dagenham.Rover wrote:

VikingJames wrote:

What does it matter whether it was a free kick or not? If we'd have defended properly for goals 1 and 2 then it wouldn't have been an issue.

So frustrating.

It matters as yet again basic decisions are got wrong,
These are the decisions that cost managers there jobs, teams promotion and relegation and millions of pounds

Wether we were defending well or not, we would not have lost except for the referee and linesman getting a basic decision wrong.
and by what the commentators said the linesman went extremely red faced when the ref played on but didn't have the balls to do anything

So let me get this straight then. We lost the game because the referee gave a soft free kick, and not because we were inept at the back and conceded three simple goals.

There's too much of a blame culture towards referees in football, when it's actually our own fault that we lost because we can't defend.

[I-was-there1976]

Akinfenwa wrote:

Wasn't the free-kick that led to our 2nd goal debatable?

Shabba !!

[Akinfenwa]

ScillyRover wrote:

As much as I agree about everything said about John Oster, the more blatantly obvious is that we need to shore up that defence urgently.
JR has hinted that money can be found in the search for a temporary sub for Billy... why the hell isn't the money forthcoming for at least one good centre back. This weakness has been apparent for ages and is costing us dearly.

I've been wondering this. I can't understand how its gone this long without us bringing a decent centreback in. Such an obvious weakness that has been apparent since the first game. Sod another striker, get a proper CB in.

[Standanista]

Filo wrote:

VikingJames wrote:

If you take your playmaker off the field and no longer have someone who can put his foot on the ball and help to keep possession, then your ball retention is going to go down the pan and you end up losing the ball and under pressure. From that, it doesn't matter how many Centre-halves you put on because you'll be under constant waves of attack and eventually they're going to score with a defence as poor as ours. I can understand putting a defender on at 3-2 up considering that they threw 2 extra forwards on, but the wrong man came off it seems, as we completely lost the grip on the game from that point.

Bang on!

 :angry:  :angry:  :angry:  :angry:  :angry:

Yep  

[Filo]

VikingJames wrote:

Dagenham.Rover wrote:

VikingJames wrote:

What does it matter whether it was a free kick or not? If we'd have defended properly for goals 1 and 2 then it wouldn't have been an issue.

So frustrating.

It matters as yet again basic decisions are got wrong,
These are the decisions that cost managers there jobs, teams promotion and relegation and millions of pounds

Wether we were defending well or not, we would not have lost except for the referee and linesman getting a basic decision wrong.
and by what the commentators said the linesman went extremely red faced when the ref played on but didn't have the balls to do anything

So let me get this straight then. We lost the game because the referee gave a soft free kick, and not because we were inept at the back and conceded three simple goals.

There's too much of a blame culture towards referees in football, when it's actually our own fault that we lost because we can't defend.

We lost the game by heaping pressure on our already fragile defence, why stop doing the things that got you into a winning situation in the first place? We got away with it against Sheff Utd because their attack is shit!

[VikingJames]

Filo wrote:

VikingJames wrote:

Dagenham.Rover wrote:

VikingJames wrote:

What does it matter whether it was a free kick or not? If we'd have defended properly for goals 1 and 2 then it wouldn't have been an issue.

So frustrating.

It matters as yet again basic decisions are got wrong,
These are the decisions that cost managers there jobs, teams promotion and relegation and millions of pounds

Wether we were defending well or not, we would not have lost except for the referee and linesman getting a basic decision wrong.
and by what the commentators said the linesman went extremely red faced when the ref played on but didn't have the balls to do anything

So let me get this straight then. We lost the game because the referee gave a soft free kick, and not because we were inept at the back and conceded three simple goals.

There's too much of a blame culture towards referees in football, when it's actually our own fault that we lost because we can't defend.

We lost the game by heaping pressure on our already fragile defence, why stop doing the things that got you into a winning situation in the first place? We got away with it against Sheff Utd because their attack is shit!

I know, but blaming the referee for that defeat is just pathetic.

The truth hurts. We failed to defend properly and the manager seems to have got it wrong and that is why we lost. Not because the referee made a poor decision for one of the goals (particularly when he gave us a soft free kick for 2-1)

[Dagenham Rover]

VikingJames wrote:

Dagenham.Rover wrote:

VikingJames wrote:

What does it matter whether it was a free kick or not? If we'd have defended properly for goals 1 and 2 then it wouldn't have been an issue.

So frustrating.

It matters as yet again basic decisions are got wrong,
These are the decisions that cost managers there jobs, teams promotion and relegation and millions of pounds

Wether we were defending well or not, we would not have lost except for the referee and linesman getting a basic decision wrong.
and by what the commentators said the linesman went extremely red faced when the ref played on but didn't have the balls to do anything

So let me get this straight then. We lost the game because the referee gave a soft free kick, and not because we were inept at the back and conceded three simple goals.

There's too much of a blame culture towards referees in football, when it's actually our own fault that we lost because we can't defend.

Thats not what I was saying at all, yes we were poor defending, the point is that goal would not have been scored if the ref had called it correctly and the lino had the balls to flag after he realised the ref had not seen the ball go out of play. basic obvious decisions  wrong. according to the commentary  they reckoned the lino thought the ref was going to blow and was totally red faced afterwards.
Having said that we would probably have given our throw in away and conceded from that

[VikingJames]

Dagenham.Rover wrote:

VikingJames wrote:

Dagenham.Rover wrote:

VikingJames wrote:

What does it matter whether it was a free kick or not? If we'd have defended properly for goals 1 and 2 then it wouldn't have been an issue.

So frustrating.

It matters as yet again basic decisions are got wrong,
These are the decisions that cost managers there jobs, teams promotion and relegation and millions of pounds

Wether we were defending well or not, we would not have lost except for the referee and linesman getting a basic decision wrong.
and by what the commentators said the linesman went extremely red faced when the ref played on but didn't have the balls to do anything

So let me get this straight then. We lost the game because the referee gave a soft free kick, and not because we were inept at the back and conceded three simple goals.

There's too much of a blame culture towards referees in football, when it's actually our own fault that we lost because we can't defend.

Thats not what I was saying at all, yes we were poor defending, the point is that goal would not have been scored if the ref had called it correctly and the lino had the balls to flag after he realised the ref had not seen the ball go out of play. basic obvious decisions  wrong. according to the commentary  they reckoned the lino thought the ref was going to blow and was totally red faced afterwards.
Having said that we would probably have given our throw in away and conceded from that

Yes you were.

You said: \"We would not have lost except for the referee and linesman getting a basic decision wrong.\"

Lets face it, whether the decision was right or wrong, it is no excuse. To lose 4-3 after being 3-1 up with half an hour left is inexcusable.

I'd rather SOD concentrate his energies on the training ground and the transfer market than in complaining about the officials!