Team at Reading

[Nick]

I've argued my Howard point with enough evidence. Your totally wrong though

Where as you just repeat this myth that he always wins arial battles, where did you get that from. This is the problem with some fan's mindset, they see Howard head the ball on at Cov to Waghorn once, and win a few headers here and there, and totally ignore the countless mis-timed headers in the box, the countless times he duffs shots and falls over, and the countless fouls he concedes, and the fact he's very slow.

He's scored 3 headers since he signed for us, and hasn't scored once all season. Fact. A player of his 'arial calibre' according to you would have scored 20 headers for us, and got some goals this season. You can't say he has arial ability and always wins headers, because the fact is he's hardly scored any headers for us. So clearly his arial ability must be shit.

He's tamely headed good crosses straight at the keeper, over the bar, wide, hundreds of times since he signed. And most of the time he's in completely the wrong place to even head the ball in the box.

He's crap.

And have a read of Valengra's post with actual statistics that mean something, that say Hammond, Dublin and De Vries were all much more accurate than Steve FOOKING Howard!

Again you fail to appreciate that winning headers is not directly equatable to scoring goals - eg Derby, 1st 40 mins he did not fail once to win a header from a goal kick. Nobody is arguing that he doesn't score goals. Nobody is saying that he is not playing well. All I am saying is that the fact team play is one dimensional has been down to the manger. Steve is performing a role a LONG WAY AWAY FROM THE GOAL MOUTH with no assistance in pace or support... (Waghorn and Gallagher may be an answer) Goals don't come without possession. Steve gives us possession.

You claim to have argued your point with evidence. This 'evidence' addresses only your own interpretations of your own opinion and does not begin to address wider reasoning for Pearson continuing to play Howard. I think we should appoint you manger right now and sack Pearson as clearly he is a bad judge of his players.

We only have one player up front who can head the ball and he's marked out of the game on every corner. I'm not in love with Steve Howard, I simply see no problem with him being given the first half with Gallagher and Waghorn. In the absence of any other player that can perform a role (that you have no understanding of) we are stuck with Steve. If Yann could do it better, he'de be doing it right now. Give the manger the time to make changes when there are replacements who are ready.

I'm not continuing to post any longer in this thread as you respond with hate and venom for Steve. This is not productive, for the players that read these boards or for any morale or team spirit. You fail entirely to see anything good about a role that Steve plays, as all you see is goals or no goals. You have no real footballing knowledge. I haven't rated Steve for a while, I'm sure Steve's not over the moon with himself either - but he is being asked to do a job by the manager in difficult circumstances.

I hope you are fourteen years old, if you are, I forgive your immaturity. If you are older than that, buy a book on football tactics and read it - you may learn something.

Maybe stop posting like a **** all day about nothing and have a run out and play a game of football, that could also help.

N.

[Tilley]

He's at university I think Nick.

[Nick]

He's at university I think Nick.

*weeps*

[caz123]

"Anyone who thinks Howard should start for LCFC for the next game at least is an idiot, simple"

-Maddog

Ever considered the fact that Howard won everything in the air in very physical battles and was often double teamed? That wore their defence down something rotten, so our young lads looked even pacier when they came on.

Howard has not delivered in a traditional sense as a striker this season. Fact. However, he rarely loses an arial battle and this means we stand a chance of getting some kind of possession possibilities when the ball is punted up by Weale as we don't have a player outside of the back line that can win a header.

Is it Howard's fault he plays just above the midfield and the ball is punted to him every time?

Do you not think it's the playing style rather than Howard being the problem? If we have two quick guys pushing forward eg Waghorn and Gallagher, it becomes harder for the opposition defence to mark all three.

Right now Howard and Fryatt are not quick and the plan is easy to read.

With more channel play and movement and defences needing to close down Gallagher and Waghorn, Howard will be able to both provide better service and maybe unleash a shot in front of goal that doesn't have 3 pairs of legs stood directly in front of it - ever thought about why that is?

Howard may play the next game, he may not. Suggesting anybody that suggests he should is an idiot, just to me makes you sound like all you do is post what you see without asking the questions as to why.... It makes you look like you don't understand football that well.

Like I said in an earlier post in the 'post-match thread', I think that Howard should be given the first half (with Gallagher and Waghorn) to wear down the defence and provide service to players with creativity and pace that Fryatt is lacking in form.

'Anyone who thinks Howard should start for LCFC for the next game at least is an idiot, simple"

-Maddog

I don't think I am an idiot, Maddog - though I do think your idea of strategy is simple and naive. And sorry mate but that appears to be a narrative running through much of the ongoing topics and rhetorical posts which you start and contribute to.

N.

WELL SAID NICK

[dimmerchant]

Weale

Neilson/Morrison Hobbs Brown McGivern

Wellens Berner King

Galagher

Kermorgant Waghorn

The lack of width wouldn't work in this I don't think. I think a basic 4-4-2 is the best formation for us.

Weale

Morrison

Brown

Hobbs

McGivern

Adams

King

Wellens

Dyer

Campbell

Gallagher

Don't use Howard as a starting player, use as an impact sub. Him playing, results in the 'Hoof' game being played.

[The Doctor]

A man who rarely loses an arial battle would surely get more headers on target and score a lot more headed goals.

He rarely wins an arial battle and when he does, the ball rarely goes to one of our players, and we rarely get possession from it.

The reason we play that style is because of Howard. We could hardly play it on the floor with him there could we, he can't kick a football cleanly without falling over, he's so slow he can barely run.

I still can't believe some people see him as a good player who does a good job for us, you saw the stats vally came up with, De Vries, Dublin, and even Hammond were all more accurate than Howard has been, and they were crucified while they were here.

Howard should be getting similar treatment, and he will certainly get it from me. We have never seriously tried a different tactic to playing Howard everygame and hoofing it. Kermo hasn't been given a good run of games yet, neither has Waghorn, we all know about Dj, Gallaghers a striker and he's been on the wing so Howard could play up front, and Fryatts played pretty much every game and hasn't scored now in 5 games.

Lets not forget, Howard was playing most games when we were in this division before and we got relegated.

Could that be because football has become a non contact sport by the looks of most refs, giving fouls against him every time he goes up in the air even whens it's blatently obvious he is the one being fouled? and besides you say he played most games when we got relegated but don't forget he signed in january and we had been in the shitter for a long time before that.

[marbelladave]

Some people really don't seem to get it, it's not all about Howard, it's about the way we play.

Putting it simply the Howard / Fryatt strike force is the classic 'big man / little man' set up designed for the 'direct' style we played most of last season. For this to be effective we need the ball to be got forward to Howard quickly and preferably from the flanks so that he can flick-on or otherwise play the ball to his strike partner(s) or to support players bursting from midfield.

Notice the problems with this?

None of our 'wingers' get forward and get good ball into Howard quickly enough and we do not get enough players forward to support him. When the ball does, eventually, go in to Howard he is well marked but still does not have enough players up in support, so more often than not possession is lost. Partly this is an issue with Pearsons conservative approach but mostly it is because we do not have the right players to make this system work.

So to move forward we really need to change the way we play. We are already developing a passing game in midfield but for this system to work it requires a different type of forward player. This time we need pace and guile up front, Gallagher has already shown that he could be the man to provide the guile and we have half a dozen players who can provide the pace.

Time for a change!

PS Sorry for all the shouting, the bold button is a bit stuck......

[Nick]

Some people really don't seem to get it, it's not all about Howard, it's about the way we play.

Putting it simply the Howard / Fryatt strike force is the classic 'big man / little man' set up designed for the 'direct' style we played most of last season. For this to be effective we need the ball to be got forward to Howard quickly and preferably from the flanks so that he can flick-on or otherwise play the ball to his strike partner(s) or to support players bursting from midfield.

Notice the problems with this?

None of our 'wingers' get forward and get good ball into Howard quickly enough and we do not get enough players forward to support him. When the ball does, eventually, go in to Howard he is well marked but still does not have enough players up in support, so more often than not possession is lost. Partly this is an issue with Pearsons conservative approach but mostly it is because we do not have the right players to make this system work.

So to move forward we really need to change the way we play. We are already developing a passing game in midfield but for this system to work it requires a different type of forward player. This time we need pace and guile up front, Gallagher has already shown that he could be the man to provide the guile and we have half a dozen players who can provide the pace.

Time for a change!

PS Sorry for all the shouting, the bold button is a bit stuck......

Dave, if it takes shouting and bold text to explain to maddog how football works that's fine.

[Miquel The Work Geordie]

Weale

Morrison Brown Hobbs Berner

Adams King Wellens Dyer

Gallagher Waghorn/Campbell

[Craig]

Weale

Morrison Brown Hobbs Berner

Adams King Wellens Dyer

Gallagher Waghorn/Campbell

Pretty much spot on.

[marbelladave]

Dave, if it takes shouting and bold text to explain to maddog how football works that's fine.

Someones got to do it

[Father Ted]

Weale

Morrison Hobbs Brown Berner

N'Guessan King Wellens Dyer

Gallagher Fryatt

Subs: Logan, McGivern, Oakley, Howard, Waghorn, Adams, Kermorgant.

[jimmer]

Wingbacks could be worth a shout......although I think Berner could cope, i'm not sure who would be better suited on the right for this formation. N'guessan doesnt seem to track back enough but could perhaps have it drilled into him, Adams maybe too light-weight to fill that roll and Neilson.....hmmmm jury is still very much out on him.

Weale

-Morrison--Brown--Hobbs-

N'Guessan---------------------------------Berner

Oakley-------Wellens

Gallagher

Kermo-----------Waghorn

[Father Ted]

Wingbacks could be worth a shout......although I think Berner could cope, i'm not sure who would be better suited on the right for this formation. N'guessan doesnt seem to track back enough but could perhaps have it drilled into him, Adams maybe too light-weight to fill that roll and Neilson.....hmmmm jury is still very much out on him.

Weale

-Morrison--Brown--Hobbs-

N'Guessan---------------------------------Berner

Oakley-------Wellens

Gallagher

Kermo-----------Waghorn

I was thinking that and suggested it in the car on the way back from Palace but I would go with:

Weale

Morrison - Hobbs - Brown

Oakley --------------------------------Berner

King -- Wellens

Gallagher

Fryatt - Waghorn

[jonthefox]

no davids in the starting 11 then

[jimmer]

I was thinking that and suggested it in the car on the way back from Palace but I would go with:

Weale

Morrison - Hobbs - Brown

Oakley --------------------------------Berner

King -- Wellens

Gallagher

Fryatt - Waghorn

Good shout with Oakley, hes sure to have the experience to make that work. Still think you need a target man though for max options, Gallagher in the hole, Kermo/Howard & Fryatt or Waghorn.

Would really like to see Waggy get 90mins

[The Doctor]

-----------------------------------Weale

--------------Neilson-----Hobbs-----Morrison-----Berner

-----------------------------------Wellens

--------------------Oakley -------------------------King

-----------------------------------Gallagher

--------------------Kermorgant--------------------DJ

Subs:

Logan

McGivern

Brown

Clemence

Fryatt

Howard

Waghorn

Or if Davids signs

-----------------------------------Weale

--------------Neilson-----Hobbs-----Morrison-----Berner

-----------------------------------Wellens

--------------------Davids -------------------------King

-----------------------------------Gallagher

--------------------Kermorgant--------------------DJ

Subs:

Logan

McGivern

Brown

Oakley

Fryatt

Howard

Waghorn

[maddog]

Again you fail to appreciate that winning headers is not directly equatable to scoring goals - eg Derby, 1st 40 mins he did not fail once to win a header from a goal kick. Nobody is arguing that he doesn't score goals. Nobody is saying that he is not playing well. All I am saying is that the fact team play is one dimensional has been down to the manger. Steve is performing a role a LONG WAY AWAY FROM THE GOAL MOUTH with no assistance in pace or support... (Waghorn and Gallagher may be an answer) Goals don't come without possession. Steve gives us possession.

You claim to have argued your point with evidence. This 'evidence' addresses only your own interpretations of your own opinion and does not begin to address wider reasoning for Pearson continuing to play Howard. I think we should appoint you manger right now and sack Pearson as clearly he is a bad judge of his players.

We only have one player up front who can head the ball and he's marked out of the game on every corner. I'm not in love with Steve Howard, I simply see no problem with him being given the first half with Gallagher and Waghorn. In the absence of any other player that can perform a role (that you have no understanding of) we are stuck with Steve. If Yann could do it better, he'de be doing it right now. Give the manger the time to make changes when there are replacements who are ready.

I'm not continuing to post any longer in this thread as you respond with hate and venom for Steve. This is not productive, for the players that read these boards or for any morale or team spirit. You fail entirely to see anything good about a role that Steve plays, as all you see is goals or no goals. You have no real footballing knowledge. I haven't rated Steve for a while, I'm sure Steve's not over the moon with himself either - but he is being asked to do a job by the manager in difficult circumstances.

I hope you are fourteen years old, if you are, I forgive your immaturity. If you are older than that, buy a book on football tactics and read it - you may learn something.

Maybe stop posting like a **** all day about nothing and have a run out and play a game of football, that could also help.

N.

And your post isn't :laugh:

Glad i've only just discovered this due to the Davids story, because as Bert would say i cba.

Why don't you actually post the team you would choose for the Reading game, the whole point of the thread, rather than your smarmy posts.

[Nick]

And your post isn't :laugh:

Glad i've only just discovered this due to the Davids story, because as Bert would say i cba.

Why don't you actually post the team you would choose for the Reading game, the whole point of the thread, rather than your smarmy posts.

Now you have progressed to abusive Pm's.

Excellent - you are now on block with the other widely recognised idiots of the forum.

Read back through my posts and read what Marbella Dave wrote - including my review of the palace game.

Sticking a team up depends on the tactics we intend to employ and the ability and familiarity of the players with the system and the strengths and weaknesses of the team we are playing.

My posts directed at you may have come across as 'smarmy and pertaining to arseholeness' and you say I started this conflict.

I posted in another thread that I would give Howard the first half at Reading with Waghorn up front and Gallagher pressing forward from the left, though would need the midfield to be more active in getting forward. You said "anybody that thinks about playing Howard is an idiot - simple." you then went on to make sweeping statements about "the problem of the mindset of most fans" -both deeply ignorant and offensive comments which I retorted to with the contempt they deserved, in yes, a smarmy arse-holeish fashion.

You then above go on to compare your retort to 'bert' saying "cba... etc...etc" - and then go on to retort further.

The difference between you and Bert is that Bert is a lovely humble guy. A guy who knows football and is respected on the forums and outside of them. A guy who doesn't fill threads up with nonsense. A guy that doesn't remind people every 5 minutes that if he started a thread that is more than 5 pages long, that he started the topic and wants a pat on the back. Bert is also a guy that has posted news and thoughts which I have learnt from and my footballing knowledge has expanded as a result.

You fall in to none of the above categories. And pertain to not one of the characteristics of Bert described above.

If you post all day long with no real substance, just blindly making statements for reaction, you'll get one and at some point, you'll fall over.

You fell over.

Get up and shut up and try and salvage some dignity.

Don't PM me again.

[Simi]

I was thinking that and suggested it in the car on the way back from Palace but I would go with:

Weale

Morrison - Hobbs - Brown

Oakley --------------------------------Berner

King -- Wellens

Gallagher

Fryatt - Waghorn

I think the chances of Pearson siding with this formation are pretty much zero, obviously it's personal opinion, but it just won't happen.

[Sparky]

Wingbacks have had thier day , opposition play with 2 quick forward thinking wide men then your fooked

[StanSP]

To all those who haven't got Oakley in their squad - like Pearson would drop him

[Father Ted]

I think the chances of Pearson siding with this formation are pretty much zero, obviously it's personal opinion, but it just won't happen.

Obviously.

That's just a team that I would love to see.

[maddog]

Now you have progressed to abusive Pm's.

Excellent - you are now on block with the other widely recognised idiots of the forum.

Read back through my posts and read what Marbella Dave wrote - including my review of the palace game.

Sticking a team up depends on the tactics we intend to employ and the ability and familiarity of the players with the system and the strengths and weaknesses of the team we are playing.

My posts directed at you may have come across as 'smarmy and pertaining to arseholeness' and you say I started this conflict.

I posted in another thread that I would give Howard the first half at Reading with Waghorn up front and Gallagher pressing forward from the left, though would need the midfield to be more active in getting forward. You said "anybody that thinks about playing Howard is an idiot - simple." you then went on to make sweeping statements about "the problem of the mindset of most fans" -both deeply ignorant and offensive comments which I retorted to with the contempt they deserved, in yes, a smarmy arse-holeish fashion.

You then above go on to compare your retort to 'bert' saying "cba... etc...etc" - and then go on to retort further.

The difference between you and Bert is that Bert is a lovely humble guy. A guy who knows football and is respected on the forums and outside of them. A guy who doesn't fill threads up with nonsense. A guy that doesn't remind people every 5 minutes that if he started a thread that is more than 5 pages long, that he started the topic and wants a pat on the back. Bert is also a guy that has posted news and thoughts which I have learnt from and my footballing knowledge has expanded as a result.

You fall in to none of the above categories. And pertain to not one of the characteristics of Bert described above.

If you post all day long with no real substance, just blindly making statements for reaction, you'll get one and at some point, you'll fall over.

You fell over.

Get up and shut up and try and salvage some dignity.

Don't PM me again.

Hardly an offensive pm, the only slightly offensive words were smarmy arsehole which you seem to have realised thats what you sounded like :laugh:

And what are you talking about, Bert has said can't be arsed before, i was hardly comparing myself with him.

You really love putting people down with your clear good use of words and writing don't you.

Well done sir

But i still stand by my original point, which is Steve Howard should be dropped for the next match at least.

And although i do post on here sometimes to get a reaction and wind people up, most of what i post is just light-hearted banter, and i get plenty of that from others on here. And yes i sometimes bump my optimeter poll threads to get more votes, theres no harm in that.

And i seem to have got a great reaction out of you, you still haven't posted the team in this thread, IF Howard is playing alongside Waghorn and Gallagher then perhaps it would work, as the bit of pace from Waghorn could lead to him getting too a few more Howard flick ons, and perhaps Howard COULD hold the ball up for Waghorn to make a run, then try and pass to him.

Perhaps the lack of pace from Fryatt is the reason for us not getting possession.

But i would still like to see us play flowing attacking football along the floor, and Howard doesn't come into that.

And he's shit

[Vlad The Impaler]

I'd love to see Adams given a chance, the lad can't possibly do anymore, he's impressed on all his sub appearances and played well in his only start in the cup, in which he also scored. He's a better RM than bloody Oakley or N'Guessan!!