Brighton (A) match thread

[RG7Fan]

We have 6 defenders on the pitch dont we?

[ROWY]

Still time to get beat

[Pandoras Box]

Fvcking waste.

[Gunny Fishcake]

Why is it only our poxy games have 50 plus minutes seconds halves , tossers

[skipper]

Norwich next. The team who have just beaten Millwall 6 - 1!!

And to think we only beat them at Carrow road last month...

[Royal_jimmy]

That felt like a defeat.

In ways I hope we get relegated! This club needs a proper kick up the backside, and we need to get rid of half this team.

[peterroyal76]

That felt like a defeat.

In ways I hope we get relegated! This club needs a proper kick up the backside, and we need to get rid of half this team.

[sandman]

That felt like a defeat.

In ways I hope we get relegated! This club needs a proper kick up the backside, and we need to get rid of half this team.

Come on now, anyone who has watched Reading since the early 90's knows that no matter what Reading team it is we just don't do 2-0 leads.

[Cureton's Volley]

Would always be happy to take a point away from home on Boxing Day, today is no different.

What strikes me is how over previous years both sets of fans have been bragging about the various virtues of their club over the other... but today both have been falling over themselves to slate the fùck out of their own instead

[Cureton's Volley]

The NSC match thread was priceless

[kwik-silva]

Drawing 2-2 to Brighton in stoppage time. There's some sort of irony there isn't there?

Going 2-0 up and blowing a lead, particularly losing a goal from a long throw, isn't really good enough. Pretty poor, but hey - another point.

[Ian Royal]

Fair enough, but by my reckoning, his 6 goals prior to today have been crucial in winning us the princely total of 1 pt. (v Wolves). How many have his misses cost us?

Significantly fewer than the defensive and midfield errors that see us conceding regular soft goals. And he'd have won us more but for those too.

[Royal_jimmy]

You get what you deserve when you only have league 1 standard defenders at best in your team

[Ian Royal]

Well, at least this is settling the argument that our problems were all Adkins tactics and the players not liking him.

FDTW: Murray has cost us way fewer points with his misses than defence and midfield have with the gosls we've conceded. If you rely on a striker scoring at 1 goal every 2 or fewer games to be successful then you're in dreamland unless you've got Ronaldo or Messi.

[blueroyals]

In the car.

How did we manage to conceeded from a cross with 4 full backs on the pitch?

Feds was the only reason we came away with a point.

Nick Blackman - find another club. Woeful.

[catfork]

Well, at least this is settling the argument that our problems were all Adkins tactics and the players not liking him..

No it isn't. Afterall with that sample size after 2 games Adkins would have been sacked.

[Millsy]

Well, at least this is settling the argument that our problems were all Adkins tactics and the players not liking him.

Whilst I don't disagree with the theory, I find it strange that a defeat followed by a draw against a relegation side (whilst losing a 2-0 lead, and with McCleary fit) can in any way suggest this, especially given the expected honeymoon boost in performance whenever there's a new manager.

So far I've noted nothing, except enthusiastic honeymoon performances, to suggest the theory.

In time though I'm hoping it will prove the players didn't like Adkins as it means less of an overhaul needed, but something tells me it's a bit naive to believe that's the main reason, especially with the massivrly depleted squad we have etc in defence.

In fact in writing this, it's a bloody ridiculous theory (but still maybe at least partially true) and is far from even slightly hinted at let alone proven. Was that a fishing trip??

[From Despair To Where?]

Well, at least this is settling the argument that our problems were all Adkins tactics and the players not liking him.

FDTW: Murray has cost us way fewer points with his misses than defence and midfield have with the gosls we've conceded. If you rely on a striker scoring at 1 goal every 2 or fewer games to be successful then you're in dreamland unless you've got Ronaldo or Messi.

Oh, Jesus Christ ian, the fish that just keeps biting. Get over yourself.

I've clearly said on a number of posts on the other thread that my case against signing Murray has nothing to do with his ability and everything to do with how much money we have to spend and where the squad needs strengthening most.

[Ian Royal]

Well, at least this is settling the argument that our problems were all Adkins tactics and the players not liking him.

FDTW: Murray has cost us way fewer points with his misses than defence and midfield have with the gosls we've conceded. If you rely on a striker scoring at 1 goal every 2 or fewer games to be successful then you're in dreamland unless you've got Ronaldo or Messi.

Oh, Jesus Christ ian, the fish that just keeps biting. Get over yourself.

I've clearly said on a number of posts on the other thread that my case against signing Murray has nothing to do with his ability and everything to do with how much money we have to spend and where the squad needs strengthening most.

i don't know what you've got your knickers in a twist about all of a sudden, you asked the question about how many points his misses had cost us. I answered. It's called a discussion board.

If money is your only objection, then don't talk about negative performance.

[RoyalBlue]

Not sure why people are arguing over the money that might be spent on Murray.

Come January we will be told that the money was available, that we did everything in our power to sign Murray but, for some reason outside of our control, failed to do so. Then guess what? The money that was supposedly there to sign Murray (and which we were going to use to sign him but for the reasons outside of our control) will have disappeared or we will be unable to spend it for fear of FFP!