Reading manager Veljko Paunovic felt his side were the better team and deserved to beat Barnsley at

Discussion in 'Bulletin Board' started by Mark Stephenson, Apr 3, 2021.

  1. lk3

    lk311 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2016
    Messages:
    9,562
    Likes Received:
    7,776
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Style:
    Barnsley (full width)
    The fact the MoM was a defender and their front three was marked with a 2, 5 & 5 respectively by the local press says it all.
     
  2. Archey

    Archey Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2008
    Messages:
    26,065
    Likes Received:
    21,633
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    A big massive boat
    Style:
    Barnsley
    I had a little wander around the Reading forum. When I used to post on twitter, one of the things I took away from it is that Reading fans are the most blinkered and deluded in the football league (marginally ahead of Bournemouth and Brighton). So I half knew what to expect.

    In the match day thread, the discussion was predictably one sided throughout the game. My favourite comment was that they were dominating because they had the more chances (posted during the first half), and that possession had nothing to do with it. That's fair enough, and I agree. But after the match, the same guy was still banging the same drum, despite the fact that we were ahead in all of the stats, barring the final score line.

    There was all the usual comments about us being cloggers, and a long ball team, and no mention of course of them trying to buy fouls at every opportunity. No mention of the laughable yellow card for Woodrow, despite him being fouled.

    But then it got really silly. These are the best two things that were discussed post match on their forum:

    1) our penalty wasn't a penalty, because both Yiadom and Styles had been at it all over the pitch, and the ref had missed a couple of decisions in the previous 60 minutes.

    And the comment which made me close the page down:
    2) our winning goal was rightfully disallowed because GOALKEEPERS DON'T GET ENOUGH PROTECTION IN THE BOX!!! Are you kidding me???? One even suggested that attackers shouldn't be allowed in the 6 yard box on corners as it's "anti-football". I don't have too many complaints about the disallowed goal; you could argue Dike is standing his ground, but he is blocking the keepers movement. I think the keeper makes a meal of it and prays the decision goes his way, but to suggest goalkeeper's don't get enough protection, is laughable.


    Edit: Oh and the swear filter replaces the word fück with Oxford, which is a bit weird. It's the sort of thing you'd do when you're 13, accuse someone of swearing every time they say Leeds or Wednesday.
     

Share This Page