Reading (A) match thread - 20th Feb

[TJHValiant]

1 hour ago, valeparklife said:

I feel we keep saying a lot of games are "winnable".

Carlisle, Fleetwood, Reading, Cheltenham were all "winnable" and we lost them all.

Exactly and frankly to my eyes since Blackpool we have never looked like winning at League 1 level. There is also the reality that a lot of the lower end sides have picked up form, although some of that form in the case of Reading and Cheltenham was because of us. 

[Packmoor_vale]

2 hours ago, Doha said:

17 players left the club that summer when he came in.

You keep going on about this player turnover thing and it's just another stick for you to hit Clarke with, as per below.

Those "yes man" players got us promoted in their first season. The "soul" ripped out included Brisley, Mills and Guthrie.

The quotes below tell us what we need to know about your judgement. I note you couldn't bring yourself to comment after the Cheltenham result, remind me were they and us were in the league when he joined and where they and us are now?

 

 

And u say I’m stalking u 😂

[Granville]

36 minutes ago, Vale1995 said:

Why is Phil bowers no longer doing the post match interviews btw?

He still does one but just for Radio Stoke, the club do their own now by the looks of it.

[Granville]

30 minutes ago, ValeFanInBrum said:

Is there any point when he just gives them the answers anyway? Don't think the fella has ever learned what an open question is.

Always asks the same old tripe like "You must be disappointed with that performance" which is of course not even a question.

Not really true is it? Got to maintain a relationship with the people he's interviewing, and he does ask those questions that people want asking, for instance when Crosby went through his period of not playing strikers he asked him. He asked him if he was under pressure in his job. Sorry, but I know Phil and he puts a lot of time and effort into striking a balance between asking questions and being fair. He can't just go in and ask "why is Ryan Loft <ovf censored>?" because he'll be told not to come back again.

If you think he's bad, listen to the bloke who covers Stoke or McGarry at Crewe who want to be their manager's best mate.

[davehartshill]

4 minutes ago, Granville said:

Not really true is it? Got to maintain a relationship with the people he's interviewing, and he does ask those questions that people want asking, for instance when Crosby went through his period of not playing strikers he asked him. He asked him if he was under pressure in his job. Sorry, but I know Phil and he puts a lot of time and effort into striking a balance between asking questions and being fair. He can't just go in and ask "why is Ryan Loft <ovf censored>?" because he'll be told not to come back again.

If you think he's bad, listen to the bloke who covers Stoke or McGarry at Crewe who want to be their manager's best mate.

The fact that DF is ACTIVELY avoiding doing an interview with Radio Stoke says a lot. He’s avoiding because he knows they will ask awkward questions that he won’t have rehearsed podcast answers to. 

Edited February 21 by davehartshill

[ValeFanInBrum]

2 minutes ago, Granville said:

Not really true is it? Got to maintain a relationship with the people he's interviewing, and he does ask those questions that people want asking, for instance when Crosby went through his period of not playing strikers he asked him. He asked him if he was under pressure in his job. Sorry, but I know Phil and he puts a lot of time and effort into striking a balance between asking questions and being fair. He can't just go in and ask "why is Ryan Loft <ovf censored>?" because he'll be told not to come back again.

If you think he's bad, listen to the bloke who covers Stoke or McGarry at Crewe who want to be their manager's best mate.

Maybe it's just the clips that get posted online as Radio Stoke doesn't reach down here that don't do him justice. I do like him generally.

[smithie]

10 minutes ago, Granville said:

Not really true is it? Got to maintain a relationship with the people he's interviewing, and he does ask those questions that people want asking, for instance when Crosby went through his period of not playing strikers he asked him. He asked him if he was under pressure in his job. Sorry, but I know Phil and he puts a lot of time and effort into striking a balance between asking questions and being fair. He can't just go in and ask "why is Ryan Loft <ovf censored>?" because he'll be told not to come back again.

If you think he's bad, listen to the bloke who covers Stoke or McGarry at Crewe who want to be their manager's best mate.

Maybe that's the problem - McGarry has probably been his inspiration. 

I think the problem is the interviews/pally chats go on far too long - 10 minutes when two would do. So much waffle and labouring of points, and questions (?) like "You must be delighted with a win/clean sheet" etc.

What do we learn from that kind of stuff?  

 

[Granville]

15 minutes ago, ValeFanInBrum said:

Maybe it's just the clips that get posted online as Radio Stoke doesn't reach down here that don't do him justice. I do like him generally.

I listen to the full interview which radio stoke posts later. I think the video clip that gets posted is just a quick summation of the game.

[Granville]

6 minutes ago, smithie said:

Maybe that's the problem - McGarry has probably been his inspiration. 

I think the problem is the interviews/pally chats go on far too long - 10 minutes when two would do. So much waffle and labouring of points, and questions (?) like "You must be delighted with a win/clean sheet" etc.

What do we learn from that kind of stuff?  

 

If you actually listen to it parts of those interviews get used throughout the week on Radio Stoke. He told my son that sometimes they have to generate lots of material for multiple programmes and online stuff from the one press conference or post match interview so I can see why he does do longer interviews. 

As I say I know him as my son is trying to learn more about journalism and how to get into the industry and he's been nothing but helpful, and when he explains why he does some of the things he has to do you get a better understanding of it. Its easy to criticise when you don't have to do the job.

Lots of Mike Baggaley's stuff in the Valiant is lifted from Phil's interviews anyway so they can't be that bad. 

[Guitar Ray]

5 hours ago, Hitcher said:

Having listened to the DM post match interview it gives me a bit of hope.

They had 1 day and 2 classroom sessions to prep that performance. Think we looked more assured on the ball.

Also thought it was interesting in a DM pre matcher that he said trying new formations can suddenly breath life into different players. Not everything came off for Weir but it was the best I have seen him recently. Would also say the same for Mighten and Loft. Chislett can still be frustrating.

My only concern with 4 at the back is that we are even less will stocked at RB & LB. As others said the game turned when Jones came off.

Anyway a few green shoots. The three up top gives us more options for subs. Hopefully when Gore is fit he has an impact.

 

Whilst I agree with much of this I don’t agree that we looked more assured on the ball, I thought we looked dreadful in possession and our passing was if anything worse than ever, especially early in the game. Obviously nerves play a part and both sides seemed to both be as bad in this regard, equally both settled more as the game wore on until their goal sucked the life out of us.  Second half only one team was going to win it, in part helped by our subs making us weaker.  Yet again we were bullied.  Some of the finishing from either side was possibly the worst I’ve seen in a long long time given the number and quality of the chances.  Few, if any, positives for me, but Ripley definitely worth a shout out .

[ValeFanInBrum]

It must be hard when all the managers and no doubt players all have media training these days; it often just feels so sanitised and a bit of a waste of time, as a football fan.

[MBE]

34 minutes ago, Granville said:

He still does one but just for Radio Stoke, the club do their own now by the looks of it.

Is it a move to start paying for content in the future or perfectly innocent?

We've already got to pay for The Sentinel reporter.

Edited February 21 by MBE

[Vtid]

35 minutes ago, davehartshill said:

The fact that DF is ACTIVELY avoiding doing an interview with Radio Stoke says a lot. He’s avoiding because he knows they will ask awkward questions that he won’t have rehearsed podcast answers to. 

He’s hiding because he’s a coward. Nothing else, he’s good at knowing what to say at the right time 

[Sandyford_Lion]

4 hours ago, Diego Maradona said:

When Clarke came in (along with Flitcroft at the same time) didn't he point out that the squad of players that he inherited were one dimensional and only set up for 433 under Askey?

Three years on, history seems to have repeated itself under Flitcroft's watch. One dimensional:352.

IMO we were better last night playing 4231 but no full back in the squad means (until Mitch is back) square pegs in round holes. Jones was ok but always injured. Grant was awful (again) and Sang was full of mistakes. Out of his depth.

We also play with 6 at the back and three in midfield. All very narrow in the center which gives us no width and no creativity. As for goals, we havent had goals for two seasons now.

[Vtid]

14 minutes ago, Guitar Ray said:

Whilst I agree with much of this I don’t agree that we looked more assured on the ball, I thought we looked dreadful in possession and our passing was if anything worse than ever, especially early in the game. Obviously nerves play a part and both sides seemed to both be as bad in this regard, equally both settled more as the game wore on until their goal sucked the life out of us.  Second half only one team was going to win it, in part helped by our subs making us weaker.  Yet again we were bullied.  Some of the finishing from either side was possibly the worst I’ve seen in a long long time given the number and quality of the chances.  Few, if any, positives for me, but Ripley definitely worth a shout out .

Weir definitely looked a lot brighter in phases last night & Mighten looked a threat. I never think we keep the ball well away from home it’s always back to the walls stuff. Hopefully we can have more possession these next two games & find some confidence 👍🏻